Patel V. Quality Inn South

There is an assessed 11 million illegal aliens that are living United States, and this population is projected to upturn by 500,000 yearly. Once a year, about 1 million people that are considered to be aliens are detained when they make the attempt to come in the United States unlawfully. Even though most of these foreigners arrive the United States for financial chances and family reunification, or they are avoiding civil trouble and political unrest, some are offenders, and some could possibly be terrorists. Every one of them is disrupting the United States' immigration laws. With that said, this paper will involve the case study of immigration enforcement and the circumstances around the issue.

Within the confines of this essay lies the argument against the mass amnesty of the millions of illegal immigrants. This conclusion came to fruition through the use of the many sources at the disposal of anybody who can use a database. The topics that will be touched upon will include the evidence regarding the diversion of tax money and the amount of tax revenue that would be returned to the United States by the newly welcomed migrants, the costs of educating their children, the influx of crime caused by these individuals, a review of constitutional law and the ways in which it is involved, and a surprising, yet humanitarian angle to the side against amnesty regarding the methods of detainment used by the current centers that are in place and the inhumane treatment contained within those walls. A fair but firm criticism of the opposition will be taken as the major points behind their argument are systematically taken apart and discussed in length, yet, near the end, those points will be shown in a light that will not validate, but show these points to noble in their aim and explain why these points, while noble, are incapable of producing the results that the opposition would like to obtain.

Facts: On January 19 1990, Mr. Anthony Lomonaco began a “marathon” gambling session at the Claridge Casino in Atlantic City, New Jersey. By the time the casino had closed at 6:00 AM the next morning Mr. Lomonaco had lost $5,000.00 in cash and had signed $45,000.00 in markers. According to Chapter 16 in the textbook (Hotel, Restaurant, and Travel Law) states that a marker is a credit transaction, “in a credit transaction, the casino agrees to extend credit to the patron to enable [them] to gamble” (Cournoyer, 654). At the reopening of the casino at 10:00 AM, Mr. Lomonaco approached the pit boss and explained that he was hopping to recoup his losses; by 3:00 PM that day he had lost a total of $105,000.00. At 3:00 PM the plaintiff left the Claridge hotel and went to the Sands Hotel and Casino. He was greeted by several servers and dealers who knew him. When asked how he was doing, Mr. Lomonaco explained that he had been gambling all night and had lost $105,000.00. In less than one hour at the Sands, plaintiff had signed markers for an additional $50,000.00. The plaintiff states that during the time he was in the Claridge and the Sands he became very abusive, cursed, accused the dealers of cheating him, threw cards, smashed an ashtray and made a spectacle of himself. After losing more money at Sands he demanded that the dealer be replaced, when his request was not met he left and went across the street to

The ruling of the California Court of Appeals invalidated the portion of California’s Industrial Welfare Commission or IWC Wage Order No. 5. This particular portion allows non-exempt health care employees to waive their second meal break in shifts that are over 12 hours. It was seen as a landmark decision

The US Constitution (Article I Section 8 Clause 3) gives Congress the power to regulate both interstate and intrastate commerce. Normally, only the Federal government interferes with business activity within a state while one would expect Congress to deal with the larger interstate matters. As in the article, Congress’ powers extend to any matters of commerce within the state that collide with regulations of interstate trade. Otherwise, the clause would contradict itself in allowing commerce within the state to somewhat go against rules and regulations governing commerce among the states.

Unlawful immigration has been a generally examined topic in legislative issues in the US. Some argue that immigrants are important as they take the employments Americans don 't wish to take, and that they later ought to be offered authorization to remain in the nation. Others nonetheless, are of the sentiment that they ought to be extremely punished seeing as what they are doing is illicit, arguing that the illegal workers are taking endlessly occupations from Americans and not paying their duties. In spite of the fact that there are arguments supporting the claim that undocumented immigrants ought to be punished, there are numerous counterarguments for why they ought to be permitted to remain. Illegal migration movement has achieved such

Unlawful immigration has been a broadly inspected subject in government issues in the US. Some deal with the fact that foreigners are fundamental as they take the occupations Americans don 't wish to take, and that they accordingly ought to be offered consent to remain in the nation. Others in any case, are of the assessment that they ought to be extremely turned down seeing as what they are doing is unlawful, contending that the illegal workers are taking ceaselessly occupations from Americans and not paying their expenses. In spite of the fact that there are contentions supporting the claim that undocumented foreigners ought to be rebuffed, there are numerous counter

Over the years, laws have been put into place to handle issues dealing with immigrants and the law. Immigrants are still held responsible for their actions regardless of their legal status in the country. The Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRAIRA) was established to define the consequences of laws that are broken by immigrants. The laws that are analyzed are ones that would result in deportation and or possibly detention. IIRAIRA may have limited the scope of immigration-related litigation in the United States is that it frequently puts immigrants in the same category as criminal defendants, which most likely influences how they are viewed by courts and by policy makers. Indeed, this conflating of the criminal and the immigrant has had its own subconscious negative effect on the view of immigrants (particularly those from Mexico and Central America) within the judiciary and, one would

In this paper, I would like to discuss the Arizona Immigration Law and show how the Arizona Immigration Law might violate the principle of equal treatment under the law.

There has been debate regarding whether it was right for the Obama administration to allow amnesty for illegal immigrants or not. Various researchers and scholars have voiced their opinion regarding this subject, with some supporting the government decision. Many, however, have opined differently and are against this decision. This treatise will carry out an argumentative analysis that will justify how the pitfalls of amnesty surpass the benefits from the same.

In the March 9th article written by Katie Benner and Jenifer Medina the issue of immigration laws is raised following the lawsuit against California over 3 laws the state has enacted regarding immigration and deportation. The sanctuary laws that have been put into place provide protections for undocumented immigrants. One law the California Values Act, limits sharing information with federal agents about criminals unless they have been convicted of a serious crime. The second forbids employers from cooperating with immigration agents who comduct worksite enforcement operations. Finally, the third law requires the state to inspect the detention centers where gederal authorities are holding immigrants. The DOJ claims these laws are unconstitutional and are keeping the federal government and ICE from doing their job. This lawsuit by the DOJ has brought the increasing tensions between local and federal officials to a crescendo.

The author also discusses how states have enacted laws designed to make life more difficult for undocumented immigrants and how this is not right and that they are not thinking about the benefits immigrants could bring to the country.

The U.S. Constitution provides no direction to any branch of government on “immigration,” although it does invest the power of “naturalization” in Congress Historically, the U.S. Supreme Court has taken a hands-off approach when asked to review the political branches’ immigration decisions and policy making. Ever since immigration became an issue of political significance more than 100 years ago, the political branches have been able to exclude and deport aliens or deny certain benefits according to political, social, economic, or other considerations, largely without being second-guessed by the judicial

Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the analyst at Fox News Channel emphasis that all persons consist of areas of human behavior for which we do not need and will not accept the need for a government permission slip and clarifies that the immigration- the right to travel is a natural right, even though it was not until 1969 that the Supreme Court recognized it as such. Further, he demonstrate that the immigrants, either documented or undocumented has been protected by the Fourteenth Amendment ensuring at least a significant measure of constitutional equality and fair treatment. The author of this article also explained that the US government must take measures to prevent individuals or third parties, such as employers from interfering in any way with foreign employees’ right to live. I will use this article to answer various questions like ‘Do immigrants constitutionally protected?’ , ‘How are Human Rights related to the Rights of Immigrants in the US?’

Discrimination is a root issue in which perpetrates wage theft for the non-worthy. The fact that President “Donald Trump argues that undocumented immigrants drain the economy, drive down wages and take jobs from US-born workers” makes this problem not a worthy’s issue (Hamilton, 2017). New bills and policies have come to exist, but they still do not attempt to approach the fear of many undocumented workers. Though former President Obama created the MOU mentioned above, the former Labor Department official declared that the ICE agents do whatever they want. Many immigrant activists are worried that Trump revoke that MOU, but the ICE agents are already ignoring that MOU. In addition, this action violates the law of the FLSA, since it was declared in the 1938 that if somebody works, they should get paid, at least the minimum wage. Though this has always been a problem for day laborers, after the election of President Trump the issue has become clearer. Employers now feel freer to ignore the laws and hire more undocumented workers, not pay them, and save on labor costs (Cortellessa, 2017). Illegal immigrants are covered by federal employment laws and they have the right to get paid for their work, yet this does not mean that they will not be detained or deported by immigration for being illegal and working illegally in the country (The Warshawsky Law Firm, 2013). Employers are also less willing to imply with the laws because of the discrimination and hatred that Trump has