Colman: MUZZLED IN MONTANA

Until the Federal government gets control of the border, stupid incidents like the one mentioned below will continue.  Until State and local governments stop giving aid, support and protection to illegal alien’s incidents will continue to happen.  While the pandemic has caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs, people from other countries, here illegally, hold jobs.  At a time when the Guv and local government is trying to release as many criminals back on the streets—Newsom even gave a pardon to three illegal aliens, in prison for murder, so they could not be deported. 

The Federal officials that detained the two women for speaking Spanish were punished and the government paid a settlement for their mistakes.  Did Newsom pay a settlement for all the illegal aliens that committed crimes after he protected them from ICE and deportation?  Why not.  Is Mayor Garcetti or Breed paying for the crimes of illegal aliens in their city—protected by them while making innocent citizens victims.

Government is wrong to detain people for speaking Spanish.  It is wrong to protect criminals.  If government pays for one wrong, why not for the crimes committed by illegal aliens, protected by government?

MUZZLED IN MONTANA

By Richard Colman, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views,  12/1/20

Freedom of speech is enshrined in the American Constitution.  But the State Montana may be an exception.

In May 2018, a federal government official detained two American women, in a small Montana town, for speaking Spanish.  They were in a convenience store located about 35 miles from the Canadian border.

When a U.S. Border Patrol agent heard the two women speaking Spanish, he detained them.  He asked each woman to identify herself.  The two woman complied by showing their respective state-issued drivers’ licenses.  One woman was born in El Paso, Texas; the other was born in El Centro, California.

Authorities of the Border Patrol said the two women would not have been detained if they had been speaking French.

The two women filed a law suit against the Border Patrol.  Eventually, they received a monetary settlement from the American government.  The dollar amount was not disclosed.

A full account of the women’s detention can be found in The New York Times (Nov. 26, 2020).

Does the federal government have the authority to detain American citizens who are speaking Spanish (or any other language)?

If the federal government has the authority to treat Spanish-speaking American citizens differently from other citizens, how far can government go in abridging Constitutionally protected freedoms?  Can the government penalize American citizens for speaking Chinese, Japanese, or Yiddish?

Is the next step a government requirement that Spanish-speaking Americans have to wear the letter “L” (for Latino) on their clothing?

Such government action is not unprecedented.  In Nazi Germany, Jews were required to wear yellow badges bearing the letter “J.”  The “J” stood for “Jude,” the German word for Jew.

America is not — and must not — interfere with Americans who want to speak freely in any language.  There is no room for governmental totalitarian behavior in America.

The Montana incident may have been propelled by a governmental desire to determine if the two women were illegal aliens.  Even if the women were in the United States illegally, there are, or should be, procedures for government agents to handle the detention of individuals who have entered the nation illegally.

Constitutional protections exist largely to prevent government from abridging citizens’rights.

In America, is it appropriate for law enforcement officials to ask someone for identifying documents?  An exception can be made for citizens who have licenses to drive motor vehicles and are asked by police to show a driver’s license. 

An American citizen should be able to travel anywhere in the United States without being asked, by law enforcements officials, for identifying documents.  Again, an exception can be made for Americans driving motor vehicles.

Asking someone for his identity papers conjures up images of old movies in which a law enforcement office asks a person:  “May I see your papers?”  Americans do not need someone from government asking an American citizen to prove his identity.

The United States must avoid having some centralized database to keep track of individuals.  (Suspects arrested for — or convicted of — a crime are a different matter.)

The ugly specter of fascism in Germany and Italy was crushed in World War II.  There is no need to have fascism come to America.

About Stephen Frank

Stephen Frank is the publisher and editor of California Political News and Views. He speaks all over California and appears as a guest on several radio shows each week. He has also served as a guest host on radio talk shows. He is a fulltime political consultant.

Comments

  1. What about the American Indian? They speak their own languages. They were here first! The Government is getting too big for its britches! This unfairness has got to stop before there is a REVELUTION! There might be one coming anyway! I am proudly part American Indian!

  2. Richard Wahl says

    So are we now saying that cops cannot ask for ID during “probable cause” events? If a policeman confronts a burglar; someone committing assault;; a rapist; drunk and disorderly conduct; the cop cannot ask for ID? Really? Sounds like more of the same Blue State – do nothing attitude.

  3. “…there are, or should be, procedures for government agents to handle the detention of individuals who have entered the nation illegally.”

    I assume there are legal procedures to be followed when the Border Patrol finds a few Spanish speakers, with wet clothing, a few hundred yards north of the Rio Grande.
    Why would these procedures not obtain in a small Montana town?

Speak Your Mind

*