In yet another example of the rule of law being cast aside whenever it suits our courts, identity theft appears to be acceptable if you are one of those hard working pillars of society known as the “undocumented immigrant.” Now if you or I tried it, there would be a serious problem, but in today’s justice system, judges seem to be interpreting law based on their personal feelings and ideology.
An example of this development comes from a Supreme Court decision (May 2009), where they decided the defendant was ignorant to what he was doing:
The U.S. Supreme Court decision was unanimous. In it, the justices found that an immigrant using an unknown person’s SSN to obtain work authorization did not “knowingly” use information that belonged to another person, as required by the statute.
The suspect in the case, Ignacio Flores-Figueroa, presented a Social Security card with his name but a false SSN — the number turned out to belong to a minor — so he could work at a steel plant in East Moline, Ill. He was convicted of immigration offenses and aggravated identity theft and given a 75-month jail sentence, including a two-year enhancement for the federal ID theft charge. His success in the Supreme Court reduced his sentence by 24 months. He is still subject to deportation when he finishes serving his time.
A recent case in Colorado came to the same conclusion:
The most recent judicial body to take on the issue, the Colorado Supreme Court, ruled last month that a man who used his real name but someone else’s Social Security number to obtain a car loan was not guilty of “criminal impersonation,” overturning convictions by lower courts.
Once again, legal citizens of this country are giving up their rights and protections in the interest of the “undocumented immigrant.” We are to believe that these hard working innocents have no idea that they might be using someone else’s number, and it has all just been a terrible mistake. We surely cannot enforce the law in such a circumstance, can we?
Of course, using that logic, anyone at any time could use someone’s Social Security number and claim ignorance. How will a judge decide who is worthy of his/her personal compassion? Does a judge have the right to decide when to apply the law in any case?
Let’s take a look at how this type of ruling affects the legitimate owners of those SS numbers. One woman has found that it harmed her ability to get a job, travel, and even involved her in a felony charge:
What started as a hassle turned into a major headache earlier this year when she sought work through a temporary agency that learned her Social Security number had been used by a woman in Texas two years earlier. The agency could not hire Schmierer for more than a month while the situation was clarified.
‘How do you prove that you are you?” Schmierer said. “It’s like you are guilty until proven innocent.’
While returning from a trip to Mexico with her husband last year, Schmierer was detained for four hours in a Dallas airport by immigration officials. The reason: a woman using her Social Security number was wanted for a felony.
This type of ID theft can affect people’s lives in many devastating ways. What about suffering caused by a record of mortgage defaults and bankruptcies as a result? From the New York Times:
‘It’s clear that it is a different intent or purpose than trying to get someone’s MasterCard and charge it up, knowing they’re going to get the bill,’ said Richard Hamp, an assistant attorney general in Utah. ‘But it has some similarities. It goes on the other person’s credit record. Illegals are filing for bankruptcy, using someone else’s number.’
‘I had one 78-year-old with three defaults on houses she never owned.’
Despite the undeserved problems it can cause legal citizens for years to come, this practice continues to be defended and even enabled. Marti Dinerstein, from the Center for Immigration Studies, explains it this way:
Falsely using a Social Security number is a felony. Our own federal agencies are working against those laws. The IRS says privacy laws prevent them from sharing information. So we know who the guilty employers are, ‘Dinerstein said. ‘The IRS knows who the guilty employees are. And nothing’s being done about it.’
In the same article, the assistant attorney general in Utah continues:
‘This use caused problems even when the person using the number led a financially responsible life,’ said Hamp, the assistant attorney general. ‘I’ve had families denied public assistance for their children or disability payments because records show somebody is working in their Social Security number,’ he said.
As if this disregard for the law was not enough, an advocacy group in New York is actually helping “undocumented immigrants” to get tax refunds from paying on those stolen Social Security numbers.
Verenda Smith, interim executive director of the Federation of Tax Administrators, notes that stealing a Social Security number is not a victimless crime. ‘The person whose number is stolen ends up not being able to file a return, not being able to file electronically – getting notices from the IRS that you have unreported income. … It’s a massive headache,’ Smith said.
Many would say that they deserve a refund for overpayment, but this is missing the point. By doing this, we are taking the blatant disregard for the law even further. They are not supposed to be working here illegally in the first place and they are not supposed to be filing under someone else’s number. These are the actions that are causing them problems; not our lack of compassion, but their lack of respect for the law. When things like this are a concern, and the current law is not working, it is the current law that must be changed. We can’t simply continue to pick and choose among the laws we don’t like and apply them differently to different people. If that advocacy group really wants to help, they should start working on the best options for assisting hard working people with becoming legal citizens, not teaching them how to circumvent the laws of this country.
The Dream Act currently being pushed by Harry Reid is another example of the disregard for the legal citizens of this country in deference to “undocumented immigrants.” Rather than working together on a fair and equitable solution to immigration, it grants an indirect amnesty with no regard for the devastating effect it would have on everyone else.
Todays’ political environment would brand us “haters” for daring to question this blatant disregard for the protection of our own citizens and our demand for the rule of law to apply to all. Yet this is not a matter of “hate.” This is just one example of the growing trend towards a disregard for enforcing our laws fairly across the board. These actions are eroding the confidence of the people and can lead to anarchy when taken too far.
The great statesman, Daniel Webster, summed it up best.
Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.
This country was never meant to have “masters” but by continuing to allow disregard of the law, the people will be ruled by masters much sooner than they might think. And as for our “undocumented immigrant” friends? I don’t think you’re going to find those masters nearly as compassionate when you no longer serve their purpose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
