Does anybody knows if they approved the law of HR-4437...?
370116
Latest Major Action: 1/27/2006 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. \n\nTo amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to strengthen enforcement of the immigration laws, to enhance border security, and for other purposes.
284739
HR4437\nControversy has been sweeping all points south of the U.S.-Mexican border since\nimmigration reforms were proposed and HR4437 was passed in the House of Representatives. HR 4437 would make it a felony offense to be in the U.S. without proper documentation. If it passes the Senate, it would also criminalize U.S. citizens and legal residents who have routine contact with undocumented immigrants, require day laborer centers and other non-profit organizations to verify workers’ immigration status, gut judicial review of immigration courts, make detention of immigrants mandatory, give the government unfettered discretion to designate individuals as gang members and make immigrants deportable as members of supposed gangs even if they have never violated the law.
1174452
This separate "Memorandum" is an attachment to a R.I.C.0 Civil Action. The Memorandum provides irrefutable evidence that Titles 3, 18, 21, and 28 of the United States Code, and the Federal Magistrates Act, were not, nor ever has been enacted into law, or at least, law that applies to the sovereign people of the several States.   \n\nThe Courts and Prosecutors promote and rely on the general misconception that any statute passed by a legislature is valid and/or applicable to everyone equally. It is impossible for both the Constitution, and a law violating it to be valid; one or the other must prevail. \n\n The United States Code (USC) includes a raft of laws pertaining to production, distri­bution, purchase and use of marijuana, cocaine, and other commodities presently classified as controlled dangerous substances. If in fact, you were to read all fifty titles of the Code (USC) from cover to cover, you would find that some provision in the Code regulates nearly every aspect of life; the object obviously being to impose Federal authority over subject classes from cradle to grave. The Code clearly exceeds enumerated powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution. Therefore, we must conclude that at least some portions of the Code do not apply to the several States and the American people at large. Either that, or the Constitution has been pitched out the window.  \n\nNON-ENACTED STATUTES \n\n The United States Code -- Titles 3, 18, 21, 28, and others, were allegedly enacted into federal law on June 25, 1948; supposedly "positive law" enacted by Congress. However, by consulting the Congressional Record, Vol.94, Part 7 (covering June 15, 1948 to June 19, 1948, p.8229-9160), and Vol. 94, Part 8 (covering July 26, through December 31, 1948, p. 9353), it is found that Congress was not assembled in session on June 25, 1948. Thus, Congress did not enact these Code-Titles in question. \n\nRead the full Memorandum under "Articles" at the site referenced below. The RICO lawsuit against two judges is also there.
791561
uhhh...do they have that law?
598305
Library of Congress, All legislation is a mater of public record, but you sure have your work cut out for you. Pork spending is a day by day thing. The Senate passed a really fat bill today that President Bush has said he will veto. I hope he does. He sure hasn't done that yet. This time I hope he gets it right.
643623
Sensenbrenner KNOWS Exactly What He Is Trying To Do\nUnfortunately, The Senate WONT LET HIM\n\nThe Third Provision Of The Sensenbrenner Bill (HR4437) States:\n\nAnyone or any organization who “assists” an individual without documentation “to reside in or remain” in the United States knowingly or with “reckless disregard” as to the individual’s legal status would be liable for criminal penalties and five years in prison. This could include church personnel who provide shelter or other basic needs assistance to an undocumented individual. Property used in this act would be subject to seizure and forfeiture.\nhttp://www.justiceforimmigrants.org/HR4437.html\n\n5 Years In Prison Is A Big Deterrent\nNo Employer In His Right Mind Will Hire Illegal Aliens\n\nAnd This Provision Also Addresses\nRemoving ALL BENEFITS (Social Services) FROM ILLEGALS \n\nIf This One Provision Of The Reform Bill Is Passed, \nWithin a month there WILL be ten million (more or less) people lined up at the Mexican border trying to get out of the United States And Back To Whatever Country They Came From.\n\nNo Work = No Stay\nWe Wont Have To Deport Anyone,\nNo Deportation Costs \nTheyll Go Home Themselves\n\nNo Work = No Come Back\nWe Wont Have To Build A Fortress Wall On Our Southern Border \n\nThis Provision Is The EASIEST, \nMost COST EFFECTIVE Solution \nTo Our Nations ILLEGAL Alien Crisis\n\nNo Other Legislation Will Be Needed \nIf THIS PARAGRAPH Was Passed Into Law
316491
Are you asking me if I "whant" to know more about the immigration reform? No, I do not.:-P But for those who do.. http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/immigration/
425233
I sure hope so...\n\nAs a father of two small children, I think that laws like this are very important and definitely a step in the right direction.
484851
The Senate Bill is a really bad bill on so many levels. I could get behind a legalization provision of qualified illegals here if it were joined with real border security and were framed sensibly.  However, there are so many truly awful provisions I wouldn't know where to start to discuss them at this point. I am still absorbing it. Also, there were so many last minute amendments some of the section links still come up as blanks.\n\nI still am hopeful of the House. \n\nHowever, definitely I will vote against the Senators who voted for this.
208240
No.  It passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 238-182 and was referred to the Senate where it is currently located in the Judiciary Committee.
446008
I believe the question was for legislative information, as opposed to current statutes and regulations.  You can find that at:\n\nhttp://thomas.loc.gov/
278751
I have an article by Wikipedia that could be an assistance for you to understanding HR 4437.
824908
Are you sure you have the right bill number.  I looked it up and HR 187 was about agriculture.  Check the links below if you get the right number or is it a state bill rather than a us congressional bill?
592045
House Bill number 3347.\n\nIf you want to know what the house bill is, google it.
35636
Below is a list of many new laws for the new year, from the Los Angeles Times:  \n\nHere is a selection of the laws that take effect today: \n\nBaby-sitters — Allows foster parents to hire a baby-sitter to watch a foster child for less than 24 hours without the health screening, fingerprinting and background checks usually required of foster-child caregivers. (SB 358 by Sen. Jack Scott, D-Altadena)\n\nBatteries — Requires stores that sell rechargeable batteries to take them back for recycling, reuse or safe disposal starting in July. Grocery stores and stores with less than $1 million in annual sales are exempt. (AB 1125 by Assemblywoman Fran Pavley, D-Agoura Hills)\n\nBoat fees — Increases boat registration fees, due every two years, from $10 to $20. (SB 255 by Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch)\n\nBody piercing — Makes it an infraction, punishable by a $250 fine, to pierce the body of someone younger than 18 without the consent of a parent or guardian. (AB 646 by Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster)\n\nDogs — Allows local governments to pass ordinances regulating breeding, spaying and neutering of specific dog breeds. (SB 861 by Sen. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough)\n\nDomestic partners — Allows registered domestic partners to transfer property from one to the other without triggering a reassessment that could increase property taxes. (SB 565 by Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco)\n\nDriving — Bans people who are at least 16, but younger than 18, from driving between 11 p.m. and 5 a.m. for the first year they hold provisional driver's licenses. (AB 1474 by Assemblyman Bill Maze, R-Visalia)\n\nHealth insurance — Requires health insurers to explain in writing why they have denied an individual coverage or granted coverage at a rate higher than standard. (AB 356 by Assemblywoman Wilma Chan, D-Alameda)\n\nHuman trafficking — Makes trafficking of people for forced labor or services a felony punishable by up to eight years in prison. Would also allow victims of human trafficking to sue for damages. (AB 22 by Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View)\n\nIncest — Amends a 1981 law so that people who sexually assault family members younger than 14 are treated the same as those who assault children who are unrelated. The old law allowed child molesters to avoid prison time if their victim was a family member. (SB 33 by Sen. Jim Battin, R-La Quinta)\n\nInternet hunting — Outlaws the remote killing of animals over the Internet, as well as businesses that offer the shooting of live animals via computer. (SB 1028 by Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey)\n\nHomeowners associations — Requires the state's more than 41,000 homeowners associations, which collect maintenance fees from residents in many condominium, mobile home and gated subdivision developments, to use secret ballots for elections, starting in July. (SB 61 by Sen. Jim Battin,\n\n\nMedical records — Requires hospitals and clinics to note a patient's primary spoken language on medical records. (AB 800 by Assemblyman Leland Yee, D-San Francisco)\n\nADVERTISEMENT \n   \nMexican trucks — Requires commercial, heavy-duty trucks crossing into the state from Mexico to meet U.S. emissions standards. (AB 1009 from 2004 by Assemblywoman Fran Pavley, D-Agoura Hills)\n\nNational Guard — Guarantees that disability benefits for California National Guard members injured on active duty will be equal to those for federal soldiers. (AB 980 by Assemblyman Tom Umberg, D-Anaheim) Allows Guard members called to active duty to cancel cellphone contracts without penalty, get credit for college tuition, waive state bar fees and get an extension on utility bills. (AB 1666 by Assemblyman Dario Frommer, D-Glendale)\n\nOcean ships — Bans ships of 300 gross registered tons or more from incinerating garbage on board within three miles of the California coast or dumping sewage sludge, oily bilge water or other hazardous waste into state marine waters or marine sanctu
388014
They defeated a motion to proceed in the Senate.  It got 38 votes, I think, and needed 60.  Now Repubs and Dems are accusing each other, again, of not making headway on this issue.\n\nThe bill would have allowed another round of amnesties for people who had been here from 2-5 or more years and had not committed serious crimes.  They would have been allowed to apply for green cards, permanent residency, and so on.  In other words, they would have been rewarded for breaking the law, as has happened several times since 1986.  Back then, Reagan signed a bill allowing for the first modern amnesty of this sort.\n\nAs it stands now, our immigration laws do not have current provisions for ongoing amnesties, though some illegals who have not registered MIGHT be able under older laws to apply for residency.  They'd need to check with an immigration attorney on that one.\n\nI say we deport them all en masse, which is permitted under our Constitution, laws, and the doctrines of national sovereignty.  Given the ability, the USA would do just that, I think, but I have read lots of articles about manpower shortages at ICE and what are still porous borders...
463944
Look here:\n\nhttp://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us&oi=newst\nA tough immigration bill passed by the House is now before the Senate. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Menomonee Falls, co-sponsored the House bill, which would make it a felony to immigrate illegally or help someone ...