Hazleton, PA has passed a law making it illegal for landlords to rent to illegal aliens and allowing for convicted landlords to be fined up to $1000. Prospective renters would have to register at City Hall and pay for a residency permit. This would enable the city to make background checks on prospective tenants. How is this a bad idea? Landlords have a method of verifying their tenants’ status.
How is this a bad idea? Easily. Even those here legally might object to the idea of having to “register at city hall and pay for a residency permit.” That sounds like something that would be required in the old Soviet Union, not something I’d expect to have to do in a free society.
I’m sure we’re all up for that.
The law has been at least temporarily restrained, while court cases proceed.
What is the point of this law? What good could it possibly confer on the City of Hazelton?
In Singapore the government very much does punish landlords for renting to “illegal aliens”
The process is very simple - check citizenship / work permit / visitor papers, call immigration department to make sure they are not forged and voila. If you do not do it - you are prosecuted. But then, in Singapore you must carry your identity card with you at all times and it is compulsory to have one :mad:
As to a central registry at city hall - this seems to be a spectacularly bad idea.
Positive cash flow for one.
Knowingly renting to “illegals”- maybe. But the way they are going about it, I don’t like the smell.
How does it matter one bit whether my tenants are illegal or not? Seriously, this stinks.
I really don’t like where I see this country going…
Got no problem with it personally.
How does this work?
I don’t think this will be a money-maker for the city, when they are charging $10 for the permit, which this city only gives after a background check.
I don’t think a landlord is ever going to be prosecuted for renting to a non-Hispanic without a permit.
An AP news story from last week said that the town has seen a large number of new Hispanic in the past few years, and that some (even some who are here legally) are leaving because of the law. The article doesn’t give specifics, but describes the loss of business among the Hispanic stores in the town. So the law appears to have accomplished what they wanted, even if it’s not upheld on appeal.
IMNSHO having people with little to no understanding of immigration law and which documents, or combinations of documents, make a person “legal,” is a spectacularly bad idea as well. In my experience even people who have undergone extensive trainig, including quite a number of those who work for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, make frequent mistakes; the possible combinations are numerous and change frequently. On top of that, a number of legal statuses which have expiration dates allow for the person to remain legally in the U.S. as long as an extension was filed before the expiration of the previous term, but the person may have a significant delay (at least a month, and sometimes several months) in obtaining documentary proof of the filing of the extension, let alone the approval of the extension (several months or more).
Plus, a significant proportion of families with at least one member without legal status in the U.S. also have family members who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents (.pdf: see p. 13 in particular, though the rest of the report is quite informative as well). How do the proponents of this crap legislation intend to allow some members of a family from living in an apartment, but not others? And how do they intend to prevent families who aren’t able to rent an apartment in town from living with friends or relatives? Or is this really all a big, fat case of NIMBY?
The answer is right there in your question. They are here ILLEGALLY. And you might not have noticed, but there a re 12 million or so people here illegally.
I’m not sure I follow you. Do you think that the country should not enforce its own laws? If you prefer thet days of yore, prior to the '70s or so, our imigration laws were actually enforced.
But is it the responsibility of a landlord to verify the residency status of a prospective tenant?
If it is, what about other businesspeople? Should a plumber, auto mechanic or restaurant be responsible for verifying the residency status of their prospective customers?
Why should I, as a landlord, be the one bearing the brunt of enforcing the laws? Should a grocery store verify that someone is not an illegal alien before selling them food? How about a movie theater before selling tickets? Gas station before selling fuel?
Why am I responsible for doing anything more than deciding whether or not I wish to rent to the folks who wish to rent from me?
QtM, Landlord.
IMENSHO, at any given point in time, people are here legally or illegally. If there is a way for someone here legally to extend his stay the burden is on him to start the process early enough so there is no lapse. If that is not possible. He simply needs to leave and come back.
I do agree that if such a burden is put on landlords, that the city has to give them the tools to determine status.
What is so hard? Legal, allowed. Illegal, not allowed. If my girlfriend is illegal and I’m legal, well, that’s my problem. Personal or familial relationships shouldn’t allow someone to break the law.
Now if the landlord rents to someone legal, and then, unbeknowst to him, someone illegal stays in the apartment as well, they should not be held responsible. But if can be shown that the landlord did know, smack him with the fine. I think this will all work itself out rather smoothly, after they provide the tools to determine legality.
This is a great question. I’d say “no”, because it would be impratical and overky burdensome to have someone prove legality every time they by a soda. It would also be redundant. If this law is enforced, and expanded, it should pretty much solve the problem. Putting the burden on employers and landlords should be all you need.
Let’s put it another way.
I don’t really care for City Hall to require me, a citizen of this country, born and raised here, to register with them, and apply for a permit to live within the boundaries of their town. Nor do I really want them to decide that I can or can not live in their town on their own whim, nor do I wish them to charge me ten bucks for the privilege. Finally, I don’t really want them to compile a registry of where, specifically, I live. What business is it of theirs?
I answered this above. But there are different burdens put on different businesses all the time. I can’t get a special kind of key made for the front door of my building before I prove ownership. Only them am I granted the privilege of paying $100 for it. Liquor stores have the burden of approving age. Same thing for bars. Gun shops have burdens, as well. Now if this burden, or any of the others mentioned are viewed as overly burdensome, oyu can always choose to make money through other means: a grocery store, bowliing alley, resaurant, flower shop. clothing store, etc.
The answer yto the last part is that you are a member of a community and a society. If that community feels that this is helpful, and it is legal, you are obliged to do your part, no?