Judge bans “illegal” and “aliens” from courtroom
Prediction: It won’t be long before this is an official Obama policy as well.
La Raza powers…activate:
Arizona’s Supreme Court Justice has agreed to enforce the Hispanic Bar Association’s demands of banning the terms “illegal” and “aliens” in all of the state’s courtrooms.
Claiming that the terms are inflammatory, the president of Arizona’s Hispanic Bar Association, (known as Los Abogados) has asked state Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth McGregor to stop using them at trials or hearings because they create perceptions of judicial bias.
In a strongly worded letter to the chief justice, Los Abogados’ president says attaching an illegal status to a person establishes a brand of contemptibility, creates the appearance of anti-immigrant prejudice and tarnishes the image of courts as a place where disputes may be fairly resolved.
It further points out that no human being is illegal and that a national Hispanic journalism association has roundly criticized the reference for dehumanizing a segment of the population. The letter goes on to criticize the state’s High Court for using the term “illegals” in at least two opinions and the term “illegal aliens” in dozens of others.
It concludes with a list of acceptable and unacceptable terms relating to illegal immigration. Among those the group wants banned are; immigration crisis, immigration epidemic, open borders advocates, anchor babies and invaders. Among the acceptable terms are foreign nationals, unauthorized workers and human rights advocates.
Here’s the banned words list via Judicial Watch:
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- JABbering Stooge :: Blogging while hopped up on Hillbilly Heroin :: November :: 2008
- Criminal’s Advocacy Group Wants ‘Illegal Alien’ dropped (Arizona) « Zipline Conservative
- Michelle Malkin: Judge bans “illegal” and “aliens” from courtroom | Illegal Illegals
- Illegal And Alien Banned From Courts In Arizona » Pirate’s Cove — Avast, Sea Dogs!
- Banned From The Courtroom: Words Illegal And Alien : Stop The ACLU
- Diggers Realm
- Whatever Happened To Freedom Of Speech? | Pirates! Man Your Women!
- ChooseTheHero.com » Blog Archive » Thuggish Reactions to the Passage of Prop. 8
- Wochenend-Schaschlik « abseits vom mainstream - heplev
- JABbering Stooge :: Demagogue, police thyself! :: November :: 2008
- We The People.ORG » Blog Archive » Judge bans “illegal” and “aliens” from courtroom
- There's My Two Cents
- First Amendment may go by the wayside in AZ as speech police make inroads with High Court « Seeing Red AZ
- Disorder in the Courts « Seeing Red AZ
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Immigration
Pundit & Pundette
» Westboro haters have enough to go around for everyone
Pundit & Pundette
» Guess what? Hasan frequented strip clubLegal Insurrection
» Pelosi's Abortion Land Mine ExplodesStop The ACLU
» Hasan Tried To Contact al Qaeda. Sounds Like A Jihadi To MeEd Driscoll
» Go Flag Yourself, Mr. President!JustOneMinute
» Stay Classy, Ezra!protein wisdom
» Quote of the Day [Darleen Click]
Continued job security for Border Patrol and ICE.
That figures. The Stalinization of the country is on track. Judges and “lawmakers” re-writing laws, the Constitution, and history to suit their whims. We will soon follow the Russians in revising our Constitution for The One as well. Check it out: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,447946,00.html
Over the next four years we may be reduced to communicating with grunts and clicks.
Uno de Mayo ‘09 – AMNESTY DAY – the new liberation day for all illegal immigrants.
Passed nearly unanimously by Congress and eagerly signed by Presdent Obama eager to add millions of new voters to the Democrat rolls.
It will become a new Federal Holiday to replace Columbus Day. We must not have any holidays celebrating dead white men.
“I am John McCain and I approve this message.”
No, but their presence IS illegal. That is the point, moron. And you people are lawyers?
Language police, thought police, whatever. Didn’t we all become citizens of the world after the Elevation of the One?
Well that depends on what the meaning of “IS” is.
This is a freaking upside down world…
As long as there is still a first amendment, I am free to use any and/or all of the proscribed terms when referring to those who have entered this country illegally. That may be considered racist, but so what? I have my own opinions, and they can’t stop me from speaking – yet – or thinking, ever!
you’ll find the first amendment is whatever 5 judges of the supreme court say it is…
and what do you think Obama’s judges will say it means?
So I guess simply they will be referred as, Not-American-living-off-our-tax-money-while-foreclosing on homes they were never suppose to be able to get-defaulting-on-medical-bills and not caring. I am so tired of this. If you cross the border and don’t have a visa, nor citizenship, you are simply a CRIMINAL and If I get in office one day, I’ll be the first liberal to say that. Liberalism doesn’t mean stupidity and I am all for an open party, but no freeloaders. If you don’t put into this country, it shouldn’t be paying out to you. Anger. Anger. Is what I feel right now.
The use of select words in the legal process is of paramount importance. Individual words and phrases have been defined, refined, and generally messed with by lawyers and the courts for centuries. But, they do have specific meaning and usage in the law and legal precedence. What this ruling does is tilt the scales toward one side and away from the other. Once more the activists have changed language to suit their needs while excluding the balance needed for “fairness” to both sides.
Fixed it.
SIEG HEIL!!!
What about the 1st Amendment?
I think a conservative dictator may be the only way out of this mess… the election process is not the answer anymore.
Unfreaking believable! Did anyone check the status of the lawyer who filed? How about the status of the good people that work at Arizona’s Hispanic Bar Association, (known as Los Abogados)? The answer to my questions might be enlightening.
Can you say, “convicted felons, fugitives, and immigration violators“?
Hawkeye54. I actually got relieved from my duties in Denver from a certain group that worked with a certain campaign because I fired 2 people who were assisting us from ACORN. They were doing some things that were unethical. An Election is one by the voice of the people, not by the wrongdoing and fraud of those who are suppose to be helping the election.
This is only the beginning . . . the last election negated all of our constitutional liberties. Thank you voters, you are rally a bunch of brilliant people.
Ohhhh! I get it. All we had to do all along was ban a few words, and the problem is solved. Wow, Why didn’t I think of that. It’s so simple.
What shall we ban next? Bank robber? Murderer? Gangsta? Thug?
Another outright false post by Michelle Malkin. Nowhere do these letters indicate that the words will be “banned from the courtroom,” only that the judge herself has agreed not to use them. Given the prejudicial nature of these loaded terms, it makes perfect sense for any fair arbiter to refrain from using them so as to keep from swaying the jury. There’s no reason a judge can’t say “unlawful resident” rather than “illegal alien.”
So, who here expects George W Bush to slither out of office without pardoning Compean and Ramos?
(Raises Hand.)
RedStateSkeptic:
There’s no reason a judge should have to.
By the way, there is no evidence of an actual order that would enforce these requests. The chief justice in question is an appellate judge and never sets foot in a jury trial.
I guess you didn’t get the memo that THUG is RACIST!
I’m no constitutional scholar but I think under President Obama, babies born alive during an abortion will probably be “illegal.”
Step 1: Identify business that employ illegals, publish who they are and boycott them.
People ALWAYS have the right to vote with their feet.
Another “politically correct” (read stupid!) failure to call a spade a spade–using the old bridge term. Kindov like calling a debate on the 50 million plus dead “fetus’s” (read babies!) a “choice” (read abortion!) issue. Kindof like picking vanilla over chocolate ice cream. Nothing of importance being discussed here!
Call them like you see them–like Michelle Malkin does. Welcome to the new U.S.S.A–brought to you by the “liberals” (read “stupids”–or “tontos”) if you prefer it in Espanol.
John Bibb
Um… duh. Illegal behavior is contemptible, you PC idiot. Please take your lame euphemisms and shove them up your nose.
Speak the truth plainly or GTFO!! Absolutely no more capitulation to cry-babies, idiots, or law breakers!!!
I’m going back to “wetbacks”.
The biggest problem I have is that the “acceptable words” are themselves not descriptive.
if you do not like a particular term, fine. However, you need to select an alternate term that is accurate in its description.
As worded several of these “acceptable phrases” are false assumptions. Therefore they are of no legal value and need to be discarded.
Thoughtcrime! Off to Room 101 with you!
There clearly is. Part of a judge’s job is to be impartial as possible, and given the choice of two terms that mean the exact same thing, he or she should always use the one without an undue connotation. A prosecutor on the other hand can say whatever he or she wants, and contrary to the falsities in this post, he or she still can.
The problem isn’t the terms used to describe them, but the fact that they are here illegally and the chaos they are creating. Words can’t change that. Illegal alien didn’t even have much of a negative connotation until 15 million flooded across our borders to have babies, steal jobs and demand citizenship rights.
In the end, speech codes won’t work and people adapt, even if the language changes. For example, people used to call worthless drunkards living in the street bums. Over time in the name of politcal correctness that was changed to homeless. However everbody, even the PC crowd, still knows they are worthless drunken bums. Anther example is unthinking, left wing zealots used to be called liberals. Liberal began top have a negative connotation in the 90’s so the preferred label became progressive. But everybody still knows that progressive means unthinking, leftwing zealot.
Where in the letter does it say anyone has agreed to these restrictions? From my quick reading of the actual letter from the judge, it seems like she thanks the group for their concerns and says she will pass along their request. I don’t see any hint of a policy change. If I’m wrong, please feel free to point it out and correct me. But if I’m correct, then both this post and Judicial Watch’s post are very misleading.
Sorry to hear about your experience. You should realize “ethical” to the Dems means ANYTHING that will get their candidates elected or legislation passed.
They have their own interpretation of what is “truthful”, “lawful”, “ethical”, and “moral”. “Logic” and “Reason” are not in their lexicon.
Do NOT attempt EVER to contradict them.
You will lose – every time.
.
Odd, I thought he already HAD slithered quitely out of office when he and Laura invited the Obamas to the White House. : )
Unlike Clinton’s pompous departure, we will probably see a fleeting glimpse, if that of the Bush’s departure in January as all attention will be upon THE ONE.
Criminal illegal invader identity theft scumbags.
I guess that’s out as well?
I didn’t see “Foreign Invader” on that list, so I suppose that can still be used.
For the time being.
I don’t see how this can stick, as certain meanings and distinctions have certain terms in law. But it is a very bad sign of trying to win by hobbling language. And, I fear, only the first of a long series of attacks on using limitations on terms to prevent debate.
Wasn’t it Plato who said something to the effect that “Governments carry their basic principles to excess….In a democracy the list of ‘rights’ grows until even domesticated animals stand on their hind legs demanding their rights. Before long, the people will be willing to give it all up to anyone who can restore order.”
A dictator is due soon. I sometimes think we just elected him, but on the other hand, I think his social agenda is the recipe for more chaos, and may be his ultimate undoing.
Doesn’t that violate Freedom of Speech?
Censorship at its finest.
I interpret MM’s point as being that this judge is setting a precedent (de facto citizenship-/rights) – a dangerous precedent that establishes procedural changes in our courts, and may become a baseline of qualification for Obama court appointees.
In short, it’s a backdoor to US citizenship through our courts – and Obama will only encourage it.
The terms Rapist, Child Molester, Robber and Thief are also dehumanizing.
My Arizona? Sad day. Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth McGregor is a whore.
—
That everyman be armed-you too ladies.
Democrat voting blocs
hawkeye54
I was just amazed at the serious of their Obamamessiah complex. It was seriously sick. They think overnight CHANGE will happen. Yet, when I ask other Dems what this change is, they go you know Change and stuff.
There is nothing more sick than ignorant sheep following one another off the side of a cliff. I am afraid I have done more damage to this country by what I though was righteous action turned out to be a falsity of victory, when in fact it was masked defeat for what America is, What it stands for, and the sad reality of what it is to become.
what has happened to this country in the last few years? OMG we are in deep deep trouble…this can’t continue without dire consequences….
A single AZ SC Justice unilaterally deciding that the terms used throughout thousands of pages of US immigration law/statutes no longer applies… Hmmmm, what is wrong with this picture?
Any time you wish to submit your resignation Justice McGregor feel free to do so.
Time for Orwell quotes:
“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. ”
“In our time political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.”
“Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. “
I just hope we don’t find out that Orwell was an optimist.
Yes, but. I think the passing of the letter with that phrasing is significant, and an indication of direction. If the judge had a contrary view, I think her letter would have implied something to that end.
I think it is also significant in that we have a professional group trying to inhibit debate by changing terms and limiting the ability of their opposition to argue.
Interesting that a court has declared simple logic improper: the people in question are not here legally so they are illegal aliens. Its amazing what people can do to delude themselves into correctness. And these are lawyers, image what normal people do.
So I guess we have to start referring to the people who are not here legally as non-legal aliens?
Okay. How about just “People who shouldn’t be living here.” Will that do?
They forgot the word non-legal
Not can, have.
From the first banning of the N word the camel has gone from its nose under the tent wall to the kitchen and has since torn the tent to pieces.
All the gov. had to do was allow a passerby to sue for damages.
What makes you think they’ll have to be from an abortion?
We must save the planet from human influence.
Expect quotas, its for our own good.
Can we say’
Immigrants without legal status
Can we say,
1 People. prohibited by law.
2. People prohibited by official rules
3. People who are defiant of law;
This judge banning words reminds me of a joke I once heard:
A man took time off from work to go to court to fight a traffic ticket. The judge, having a bad day, declared a recess until the next day.
“That’s stupid!” the man yelled.
“Contempt of court! $20 fine!” the judge declared, pounding his gavel.
The man took our his wallet and began thumbing through it.
“You don’t need to pay it now.” the judge said, calming down some.
“It’s not that,” the man said, “I’m just seeing if I have enough here to pay for 2 more words!”
“Words…just words!!” - Senator Barak Obama 2008
Okay, let’s play…we need some new, innovative xeno-specific words to engage our would-be masters from the Southwest. Any suggestions?
I’ll start….
Brown droppings? (With apologies to california Supreme Court Justice Bird.)
Illegal alien. There, im now a racist xenophobe.
Soon there will be no jobs. No jobs = no illegals. Before you know it, they’ll start moving back….unless that fence goes up to hold all of us in.
Another outright false post by Red State Skeptic. Ruth McGregor is the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court. She sent the list to the other justices and all the judges in the Arizona Courts of Appeal. How long do you think it will take for judges all the way down the line to get the hint that use of “them words” will get a ruling overturned?
ECS
Another very stupid judge with a very stupid agenda. To be heard soon in an Arizona courtroom: “Your honor, we have here today Jose Hernandez, a law-circumventing temporary visitor to our state without proper authorization”.
You are correct. However, this is another example, as Speakup says, of the camel’s nose under the tent. This is only the beginnig. Next these groups will be demanding it be made the law of the land. Once they get that, they will then determine these terms are derogatory and must be further softened to something like “world citizen” or some other nonsense. History has shown the demands will not stop. Next will be other groups demanding the same thing (gays, muslims, child molestors….). Before long, it will be all but impossible to tell who is the accused from the transcripts. The word ILLEGAL ALIEN is perfectly acceptable and is part of the immigration statute. And if you think these groups are doing this just “stop prejudice”, think again. They believe the law is wrong and wnat to sway opinion to their favor as much as possible. It is also a test run at what else they can attack in order to advance thier OPEN BORDERS supporting agenda. And as usual, the PC worshiping libs alway say, “what will it hurt” and relent without considering the ultimate conclusion of this trojan horse. Time to say enough and call a spade a spade. Don’t want your feelings hurt? Then don’t come here ILLEGALLY.
Newspeak
How about criminal immigrant?
Sarge
I wonder if this will carry over to include any future alien abduction lawsuits. To be heard soon in Arizona courtrooms: Your honor, we have here Cratt Borgon, a law-circumventing temporary visitor who has folded space in a law-circumventing manner from the planet Ogg without proper authorization”.
Talk to me when it happens. No matter your surmise, every word I have said is the truth, whereas MM’s title is a bald-faced lie.
Doesn’t this violate “freedom of speech”? Just asking in case we still have such a thing.
Um, isn’t naming a group “Los Abogados” in an English-speaking nation divisive in itself yet they’re blaming us for causing divisiveness?
Just like, why is there a “Hispanic Caucus” or a “Black Caucus” in Congress? They’re the ones causing the divide, and it never fails to amaze me that supposedly the “educated” people in Congress and in groups like Los Abogados cannot see this logic.
(I’ve worked in a law-related field for 12 years and speak with lawyers every day. In getting to know alot of them, you’d be shocked at how many feel like Los Abogados do. It is beyond sickening what political correctness has done to this country.)
RSS
“Unlawful Resident” can mean a squatter living illegally in a summer cottage of someone..
“Illegal Alien” describes what the person is..
Words mean things..
LOL…..so latino “doublespeak” raises it’s ugly head again….
I’ll use any word or phrase I want….
If “Illegal Alien” is so bad, then why is “La Raza” (trans. The Race) allowed???
You meant to say bold-faced lie, right? This would be the correct way to address her assertion. If you heard her speaking the title, then “bare-faced” would be the correct term…not “bald-faced.” Just FYI.
First Amendment, what’s that?
Komrade disapproves.
NO! Mexico doesn’t want ‘em back. If swarms of illegals start moving back – Mexico will build its own fence, quick! And the Federales? will be firing at will(or Juan
) if the fence doesn’t compeltly work : )
for good measure….
“illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens” “illegal aliens”
Well I find terms like “Undocumented Worker” and “Amnesty” to be inflammatory as they ignore my right to expect our laws to be enforced and our sovereignty to be protected.
Anyone notice that this is Arizona?
Remember Arizona? Yeah, THAT Arizona.
The one that gave us John McCain.
Why would this then surprise anyone?
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
And what it will become, or has become, is a third world santuary. Citizen leaches, Obamnesty, continued illegal immigration, massive legal immigration, asylum seekers, etc. will wreck havoc on this nation. It will, I believe, fracture eventually under the strain.
Communism never disappeared nor gave up. It bided its time, infiltrating education, law and government until it could safely, and without a war, take this nation from within.
It appears it may be just on the verge of succeeding. No Republic lasts forever.
I say we figure out some alternate language then…
Trespasser on American Soil
Invader
Stealer of American Jobs
Tax evader
ID Thief
…any others?
Wouldn’t it be great if conservatives could actually meet out in the real world, and not just anonymously on a web page?
Have a HUGE rally like the liberals did.
While i would point out no human being is illegal (though i could think of a few that should be…), i would point out that human beings breaking the law in fact make them violators of said law, and thus their immigration status is illegal.
Call this stuff what it is. And red state, i dont find fault with what MM put here.
And make it easier for the
geheime StaatspolizeiObama’s Civilian Security Force to round us up for the re-education camps?Can’t say “illegal” in a courtroom? Even in a criminal courtroom?
Heh heh. That’s silly.
Good Grief! We are so screwed in our once great United States of America.
I wonder if patrolling the borders will count as community service?
I noticed “Criminal Invaders” isn’t on the banned list
Uzis cruel rightwingrocker #79, cruel I say; accurate and that is what is cruel.
I weep for my once Great State of Arizona, but we have a precinct/district meeting Saturday. Housecleaning I does hope, I does.
Arizona also has the Uber Lesbian Governor Janet Napolitano. Idaho I go? North to Alaska? No, I stand where I was born. Perhaps He Who Has Come will be nice to us. Achtung!( or in Street: wats happn bro)
Go to your precinct committee meeting and take back the Party. If that does not work quit the Party and help form a new one. There is nothing sacred about it-as the Whigs went so can the Republican Party. What is sacred is your Heritage as a Free Citizen of the Republic.
–
That Every Man Be Armed–You Too ladies
Next we’ll stop trying murderers, because they’re “pro mortality enforcement-rights activists”
Tiredofit08 said:
We’ll be Europe on steroids.
Sorry, little off topic, but not. Bush can’t rectify his presidency with giving pardons to Capeon and Ramos, 2 men that should have never been in prison in the 1st place. Bush has to be 1 of the very worst presidents we’ve had…and don’t tell me we haven’t been attacked since 911. The boarders are wide open, no telling how many illegal Moslem’s are in the country waiting…they’ve shown tolerance to time in the past. How many years between the 1st twin towers bomb and 911?
If you want to control the debate, control the language.
Kevin K.:
I agree with you that it seems likely the judge is supportive of this idea. However, the fact remains there is no indication than any action has been taken yet, contrary to the posting.
As Red State Skeptic has correctly pointed out, this post is dishonest. It’s one thing to be concerned that a request like this is even being considered; it is another to distort the facts to fit an agenda.