Before we fry David Ballard- I hope he will come in and give us his thoughts on this.

This was more than a vulgar act. Had Samples read the old commssion meeting minutes he would have known he was seeking to overturn a resolution the Commission passed in Feb of 2003.

(link...)

And for those of you just joining us, this goes with this post (link...)

Was Samples seeking to overturn the Bill of Rights?

Blount County PASSED a resolution SUPPORTING every Blount County Citizen's rights. This was presented in Feb 2003 and passed!

(link...)

in part but well worth reading the entire resolution.

BE IT RESOLVED, that this Blount County Commission affirms that the collective Oath of office of its members, and its strong opposition to terrorism, but also affirms that any effort to end terrorism not be used as a pretext to Infringe upon God given rights and liberties of the people of Blount County, Tennessee recognized in the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

Mr. Erickson,

Are you willing to pay for all the services the illegal immigrans require? It is not about the color of person's skin. This country has grown up enough to understand that the color of a person' skin does not determine their worth. They are speaking towards immigrant status.

I do beleive you are wrong about judging someone on their immigrant status. It does not shame this country. Now please hear me out on this one, if they are in this country illegally, they are breaking the law (no doubt about it). We can judge someone based on a set of laws. That is how we judge people in the first place. If is not, then what is the point of the laws. Think about it for a just one second. If the are illegal, we should judge them. That is only logical, anything else is irrational.

We (you and I) as law-abiding, taxpaying citizens of the United States have to pay for the illegal aliens in this country. I for one do not want to pay.

Now, I will say something else. I am not questioning anyone's heart. I do think the United States is the best country in the world. I have had the opportunity to work a man from Latin American descent. He was the hardest working man I ahve ever seen. It wasn't till after I left that I found out he was illegal. It is a hard situation. However, there are laws that specify how to become a legal citizen. If you are in this country and have not followed the law to become a citizen, you are ILLEGAL!

As for Judge Young and this situation, I would have to agree with the majority of the commission. I need to know the facts as to whether or not this woman is a legal immigrant. Listen just because the DT says she is legal doesn't mean she is. I understand there is an investigation into this situation. I will wait to hear the results from that.

Although I will add this question, what was the status of her greencard?
Does anyone know?

Thanks and God Bless!

a) If Young or anyone else has evidence that she is here illegally, wouldn't the proper course of action be to have her arrested and turned over to ICE for deportation proceedings?

b) I believe the point has been made, even in the MDT, that all persons have basic civil rights, including the right to due process, in U.S. courts when they are on U.S. soil, regardless of immigration status or anything else (which is why we have Guantanamo -- to create a quasi-legal environment for bypassing the Constitution).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the US Congress give sweeping amnesty to illegal immigrants in the mid to late 1980s? They failed to provide any firm provisions in this deal to punish businesses willing to pay for cheap, illegal labor under the table, thus in multiplying numbers in the years since, migrant workers (some legal, some not) have poured across the borders to fill this labor pool.

This is a simple example of our supply and demand economy.

Now ask yourself this question: Why are "we" here?

"We" excludes the Native Americans who actually settled this country and the African Americans who weren't given a choice in the matter.

Our forefathers and ancestors came here in search of a better life. Can you blame them or anyone for that?

The question of legal status in this country applies to all who seek to come here, and I don't pretend for a minute that is doesn't.

However, what burns me the most about all this illegal immigrant spin is that the first step to fixing the problem is not to send them all back, but to put a stop to what is attracting them.....jobs! And you don't think there is a heavy handed, back door lobby by big business to not find a solution to all this mess.

Now that they have you all worked up and distracted over this, they "casually" start moving the good paying jobs you and I are seeking, overseas to Asia and calling it "globalization". As the news stirs up about how these jobs are pouring over the borders out of the country, the conversion is spun to what is visually quantified in our everyday life, the increasing number of “illegal” immigrants pouring in to the country.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain....

Correct me if I'm wrong

Sounds about right. Corporations have been exploiting cheap immigrant labor for decades. Now their conservative supporters and beneficiaries are the ones crying the loudest over the very situation they created.

The U.S. Constitution gives the right to due process to every person on US soil, regardless of his or her status, race, or any and everything else. Whether the woman at the center of this is here "legally" or not is not relevant and no judge has the right to deny due process to anyone.

The petitioner was asking for something she is absolutely entitled to, that is, to be heard and treated fairly by the judge. She does not have the right to get a protective order just by asking, but she sure has the right to petition the court and be heard...the right to due process.

Apparently not even the commissioners who voted to table this obnoxious motion understand that the woman's legal status does not have anything to do with her right to be protected by the due process of the legal system.

The anti-immigrant (and almost always racist) mob is usually the same bunch braying about law and order. Adherence to basic principles of the US Constitution is about as law and order as it gets.

I think we all understand most of the conservative agenda is hypocritical wingnut stuff in the first degree, however...

Can we please leave the plight of the immigrants (from whatever country for whatever reason) to another conversation. The issue at hand here is the actions of Judge Young. Period. The issue is whether his actions were prejudicial or not. Did facts and the law guide Judge Young's actions ? If the facts as presented by the DT are accurate then I believe a case can be made that Judge Young's actions were guided by his own personal beliefs rather than fact and law. And if that's the case... a bigger question may be how will the judicial review process handle a case of prejudicial judgement from a sitting judge in the state of Tennessee ?

STR8UP

>you want to quote the pledge of allegiance but you go and change the wording to fit your anti-god beliefs. not under god but under constitutional. so go be it. you can change what our fore fathers made but then you go and change what you wanted. I may not believe every single line that the DT prints, since it is edited to change someone's comments to start controversy. Instead of what was tried to be done at the commission meeting, the court case should haved been recessed to clear the illegalities of it. check to see the status of her AND his citizenship. Furthermore, it was also stated that she has filed for protection before. well even judge judy would tell her that she was an idiot and wasting courts time for even going back to him. so who is dumber there?

I find it interesting that nothing was mentioned about the County Commission officier elections this same night...

Maybe I'm not progressive enough for this site, but isn't someone innocent until proven guilty? I'm speaking of Judge Young here, ladies and gentlemen. Isn't anyone concerned about all the conflicting stories about what happened that day?

Immigration is a touchy subject these days, so it's possible that this story has gotten blown out of proportion. I prefer to wait until everything is investigated until I advocate deporting someone or stripping Judge Young of his duties.

I don't know Judge Young personally, but I met him several years ago when my ex-husband and I were finalizing issues concerning our son. I found him to be professional, respectful and concerned. This was my one and only interaction with him, but since he's being painted black, I think it's important for people to hear this. When I read the original DT story, I was shocked. Based on my own experience, and the fact that Judge Young has served Blount County for years without a hint of scandal, I have always held him in the highest regard. Since that first story, there have been enough conflicting accounts circulating that I think it's prudent and rational to wait on the results of the investigation before calling for Judge Young's head. Don't you?

Did you notice that no place in the Hickman LTTE did he ever say anything about Rick Laney's article being false?

Think about it. He was there, he heard and he never said in the LTTE that these things did not happen. Oh, he did go on to make Ana look like she was at fault for not responding to the divorce complaint but he never, ever said there was anything wrong with the original Laney article.