# 16 illegal immigrants sue Arizona rancher **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 11, 2009, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334 "2009-02-11T05:17:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/1 "2009-02-11T05:17:18Z")
[Link](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/09/16-illegals-sue-arizona-rancher/). > [@](#): > > An Arizona man who has waged a 10-year campaign to stop a flood of illegal immigrants from crossing his property is being sued by 16 Mexican nationals who accuse him of conspiring to violate their civil rights when he stopped them at gunpoint on his ranch on the U.S.-Mexico border. It seems to me that Roger Barnett performed citizen’s arrest of people who were in the act of breaking laws; specifically: illegally entering the country, and trespassing on private property. The complaint seems to be that he was threatening and abusive. Does a person (specifically under Arizona law) have the right to apprehend trespassers on his property? Is it legal for a person to hold another person or other persons until authorities arrive? (The article states he summoned Border Patrol agents.) Or does that constitute false imprisonment? Does it make a difference that these people were apprehended on private property, as opposed in inside of a dwelling? What civil rights are alleged to have been violated? I suspect this will be a debate, which is why I’m putting it here; but it’s really a GQ at this stage. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/2 "2009-02-11T05:34:43Z")
Things like this are why illegal immigrants are a problem. They aren’t guaranteed the rights of citizens so -what- their rights are is up in the air. If you assume them to have all the same rights as Americans, then you might as well make them citizens. If you say they have no rights, then any American would be free to abuse and torture them. You’d have to set congress to creating an entirely new set of laws to decide the middle ground, every day for the next twenty years to get anything resolved, but that’s not really their job since we’re talking about non-citizens. But on the other hand, that leaves it up to the courts to create that law, which is again not their job. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/3 "2009-02-11T07:59:36Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Things like this are why illegal immigrants are a problem. They aren’t guaranteed the rights of citizens so -what- their rights are is up in the air. If you assume them to have all the same rights as Americans, then you might as well make them citizens. If you say they have no rights, then any American would be free to abuse and torture them. > > You’d have to set congress to creating an entirely new set of laws to decide the middle ground, every day for the next twenty years to get anything resolved, but that’s not really their job since we’re talking about non-citizens. But on the other hand, that leaves it up to the courts to create that law, which is again not their job. WTHeck are you talking about. What “you” thinks is irrelevant and the only thing that counts is what the law says. You seem to be under the impression that the law is unclear or non-existent which is totally false. In general terms all laws apply to everyone on American soil without regard to nationality. All persons enjoy the same rights except those specifically related to citizenship as are the right to reside and the right to vote. That is true in every civilized country I know. I do not know why this canard is repeated so often in these boards and it bothers me. It bothers me that American citizens would think it is OK that other nationals would have no rights. It is not true as it could not be true in any civilized nation and anyone who thinks it would be OK is, aside from a bad person, totally ignorant. Does anyone think there is any country on earth where it is legal to shoot foreigners on sight? What kind of stupidity is this? ---
**Author:** ![Jayn\_Newell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Jayn\_Newell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jayn_Newell)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/4 "2009-02-11T13:11:11Z")
Things get confusing with illegal Mexican immigrants not so much because of rights issues, IMHO, but because as a society, we can’t seem to decide if we want to treat them like criminals or refugees. Technically, of course, they’re the first, but I have to say that I can’t really blame them for their actions either. Because the public can’t come to a consensus on how to treat them, the government can’t either. I would say that this particular situation is probably one of the easier ones to tease apart. Stuff dealing with living or working conditions get weirder. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/5 "2009-02-11T15:03:22Z")
WHO is funding this nonsense? Chances are it is the US taxpayer. talk about stupid! The guy who owns the land has the right to be free of trespassers-particularly illegal aliens, ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/6 "2009-02-11T15:16:11Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > WHO is funding this nonsense? Chances are it is the US taxpayer. talk about stupid! The guy who owns the land has the right to be free of trespassers-particularly illegal aliens, I can’t see what your point is. What’s your point? ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/7 "2009-02-11T15:19:12Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > WHO is funding this nonsense? Chances are it is the US taxpayer. talk about stupid! The guy who owns the land has the right to be free of trespassers-particularly illegal aliens, Why does it matter to him that trespassers are illegal aliens? Doesn’t he just have the right to be free of trespassers, with their immigration status irrelevant to him? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/8 "2009-02-11T15:32:17Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Why does it matter to him that trespassers are illegal aliens? The only reason they are trespassing is to try to get into the US illegally. > [@sailor](#): > > I can’t see what your point is. What’s your point? His point is that the owner of the land has the right to keep trespassers off his land, especially illegal aliens. > [@](#): > > Mr. Barnett said some of the ranch´s established immigrant trails were littered with trash 10 inches deep, including human waste, used toilet paper, soiled diapers, cigarette packs, clothes, backpacks, empty 1-gallon water bottles, chewing-gum wrappers and aluminum foil - which supposedly is used to pack the drugs the immigrant smugglers give their “clients” to keep them running. The litigants have admitted that they were illegally on the land - > [@](#): > > In the lawsuit, MALDEF said Mr. Barnett approached the group as the immigrants moved through his property His assumption that the lawsuit is funded by the taxpayer is incorrect, sort of. > [@](#): > > The immigrants are represented at trial by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) which is a 501(c)3. Donations to MALDEF are tax-deductible ([cite](http://www.maldef.org/donate/index.cfm)), so the taxpayer isn’t on the hook directly. MALDEF is getting the same kind of deal that churches in the US get, so if you argue that religious organizations are receiving special treatment, then so is MALDEF. Did you need anything else explained to you? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/9 "2009-02-11T15:32:42Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > Why does it matter to him that trespassers are illegal aliens? Doesn’t he just have the right to be free of trespassers, with their immigration status irrelevant to him? Pretty much where I come down on it, with the caveat that he can use _appropriate_ force to protect himself, his family, and his property. He can also use appropriate force to apprehend trespassers and hold them until relevant LEOs arrive to take custody. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/10 "2009-02-11T15:54:13Z")
> [@ExTank](#): > > Pretty much where I come down on it, with the caveat that he can use _appropriate_ force to protect himself, his family, and his property. > > He can also use appropriate force to apprehend trespassers and hold them until relevant LEOs arrive to take custody. Whatever actions he may take against tresspassers are the same regardless of the nationality of the tresspassers. Whether they are illegal aliens is irrelevant and he would not know it anyway. On the other hand living by the border and complaining about this is like complaining about noise if you live near an airport or busy highway. Maybe the guy should think of moving elsewhere? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/11 "2009-02-11T15:57:59Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > On the other hand living by the border and complaining about this is like complaining about noise if you live near an airport or busy highway. Maybe the guy should think of moving elsewhere? So if some homeless guy shits on your doorstep, you should just move? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/12 "2009-02-11T16:58:54Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > Whether they are illegal aliens is irrelevant and he would not know it anyway. As I implied in the OP, I see this as two different issues: First, the people were trespassing. Does the property owner have the right to apprehend trespassers and hold them for authorities? Second, the people were in the country illegaly. As they were committing a crime, does a person have the right to place them under citizen’s arrest and hold them for authorities? ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/13 "2009-02-11T17:12:59Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > Second, the people were in the country illegaly. As they were committing a crime, does a person have the right to place them under citizen’s arrest and hold them for authorities? I understand that illegal entry to the US is a misdemeanour, and not a felony, and that under US law you can only make a citizen’s arrest for a felony. So I suspect that he does not have that right. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/14 "2009-02-11T17:36:39Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > In general terms all laws apply to everyone on American soil without regard to nationality. All persons enjoy the same rights except those specifically related to citizenship as are the right to reside and the right to vote. Presumably this includes the right to the quiet enjoyment of your property, without people invading it. And the “right to reside” is specifically at point here - the people on his property had no right to be in the country at all, let alone any right to be on his property without permission, nor the right to trash it on the way thru. > [@](#): > > I do not know why this canard is repeated so often in these boards and it bothers me. It bothers me that American citizens would think it is OK that other nationals would have no rights. It bothers me that American citizens are presumed not to have the right to live on their own land without being disturbed. Those who are trespassing on his property are criminals twice over - they have no right to be on his land, and they have no right to be on American land at all. Yet they are the ones suing. > [@](#): > > I understand that illegal entry to the US is a misdemeanour, and not a felony, and that under US law you can only make a citizen’s arrest for a felony I am going to need a cite on that. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/15 "2009-02-11T17:45:59Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Did you need anything else explained to you? Yes. If you run into someone who knows what they are talking about, tell them to post here. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/16 "2009-02-11T17:50:18Z")
I’d be curious to learn what are the specific civil rights that the plaintiffs are alleging the defendant conspired to violate. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/17 "2009-02-11T17:53:59Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > So if some homeless guy shits on your doorstep, you should just move? Personally, I don’t give a flying fuck if it is a homeless person who shits on my doorstep or a drunken frat boy. You might differ, though. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/18 "2009-02-11T17:56:53Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > > [@Giles](#): > > > > I understand that illegal entry to the US is a misdemeanour, and not a felony, and that under US law you can only make a citizen’s arrest for a felony. So I suspect that he does not have that right. > > I am going to need a cite on that. [Wikipedia on “Illegal entry”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_entry): > [@](#): > > It is illegal to enter the United States without inspection or authorization from government officials. The illegal entry of non-nationals into the United States is a misdemeanor according to the Immigration and Nationality Act … [Wikipedia on “Citizen’s arrest”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest): > [@](#): > > United States > Each state with the exception of North Carolina permits citizen arrests if the commission of felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/19 "2009-02-11T18:00:22Z")
Not sure if this passed or not (still Googling): > [@](#): > > 13-407. Justification; use of physical force in defense of premises > > A. A person or his agent in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in threatening to use deadly physical force or in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent that a reasonable person would believe it immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises. > > B. A person may use deadly physical force under subsection A only in the defense of himself or third persons as described in sections 13-405 and 13-406. > > C. In this section, “premises” means any real property and any structure, movable or immovable, permanent or temporary, adapted for both human residence and lodging whether occupied or not. [http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00407.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS](http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00407.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS) ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2009, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334/20 "2009-02-11T18:01:29Z")
Okay, got some answers, tentatively. Per [Wikipedia, so take it for what it’s worth:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest#United_States) > [@](#): > > [edit] United States > Each state with the exception of North Carolina permits citizen arrests if the commission of felony is witnessed by the arresting citizen, or when a citizen is asked to assist in the apprehension of a suspect by police. The application of state laws varies widely with respect to misdemeanors, breaches of the peace, and felonies not witnessed by the arresting party. American citizens do not carry the authority or enjoy the legal protections of police, and are held to the principle of strict liability before the courts of civil- and criminal law including but not limited to any infringement of another’s rights.[23] More study will be needed to determine whether Arizona allows citizens’ arrests for misdemeanors. When we find that out, we might also learn whether the citizen’s arrest requires the arrestor to deliver the arrestee to the authorities, or allows him to summon them. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/16-illegal-immigrants-sue-arizona-rancher/485334.md?page=2)