Mexican President Calderon says Arizona Immigration Law is Discriminatory

[nobs]

From the Mexican Constitution ----


4-5, 9: Article 33: "Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country." (See also Article 35 listing the prerogatives of Mexican citizens.)

5: Article 32: "In order to belong to the National Navy or the Air Force, and to discharge any office or commission, it is required to be a Mexican by birth. This same status is indispensable for captains, pilots, masters, engineers, mechanics, and in general, for all personnel of the crew of any vessel or airship protected by the Mexican merchant flag or insignia It is also necessary to be Mexican by birth to discharge the position of captain of the port and all services of pratique and airport commandant, as well as all functions of customs agent in the Republic."

5: Article 55: "The following are the requirements to be a deputy:
I. To be a Mexican citizen by birth, in the exercise of his rights;"

Article 59 extends makes the requirements to be a Senator the same as a deputy, except for age. Article 82 require the President to be " Mexican citizen by birth, in the full enjoyment of his rights, and the son of Mexican parents by birth". Article 91 states that to be a secretary, you have to be a Mexican citizen by birth, too. Article 95 extends the requirement of Mexican citizenship by birth to ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice. Article 115 requires governors to be Mexican citizens by birth. Article 130 limits ministers of any religion in Mexico to Mexican citizens by birth.

8: Article 27: "Only Mexicans by birth or naturalization and Mexican companies have the right to acquire ownership of lands, waters, and their appurtenances, or to obtain concessions for the exploitation of mines or of waters. The State may grant the same right to foreigners, provided they agree before the Ministry of Foreign Relations to consider themselves as nationals in respect to such property, and bind themselves not to invoke the protection of their governments in matters relating thereto; under penalty, in case of noncompliance with this agreement, of forfeiture of the property acquired to the Nation. Under no circumstances may foreigners acquire direct ownership of lands or waters within a zone of one hundred kilometers along the frontiers and of fifty kilometers along the shores of the country."

“In brief, the Mexican Constitution states that:

• Immigrants and foreign visitors are banned from public political discourse.
• Immigrants and foreigners are denied certain basic property rights.
• Immigrants are denied equal employment rights.
• Immigrants and naturalized citizens will never be treated as real Mexican citizens.
• Immigrants and naturalized citizens are not to be trusted in public service.
• Immigrants and naturalized citizens may never become members of the clergy.
• Private citizens may make citizens arrests of lawbreakers (i.e., illegal immigrants) and hand them to the authorities.
• Immigrants may be expelled from Mexico for any reason and without due process."

HYPOCRITE MUCH ?

[nobs]

Does Mexico even have any immigrants ? I mean, even the Mexicans dont want to live there.

[exstatman]

The president of Mexico, like the president of the United States, constitutionally must be a citizen by birth, but Article 82 of the Mexican constitution mandates that the president’s parents also be Mexican-born citizens, thus according secondary status to Mexican-born citizens born of immigrants. So based on that, if the USA had the same rules, Obama would not be eligible to be President. And Obama is cowering to these people?

[pavyracer]

I believe if 12 million Americans illegally go to Mexico and try to get a job for 5 pesos an hour the Mexican Congress will amend their constitution.

[nobs]

no, their constitution doesnt allow it now

[nobs]

This was written by a Mexican defending this.

Employment “rights”? Why do Americans think they have a right to work in Mexico? As in most countries you need to get a work permit, and here they tend not to be issued if you are going to take work away from a Mexican. Perversely, Mexico does not believe that it exists to employ gringos. Gosh.

[nobs]

Response from a Mexican


“Basic property rights”? These are what a particular country says they are, not what the United States thinks they ought to be. Things are a tad complex here for historical reasons – the ejidos, land reform for the indigenes and so on. The practical fact is that if they could, Americans and American corporations would buy up, for example, all the best beachfront land. They don’t, because Mexico won’t let them, which is exactly the right policy. (There are complex trusts that let foreigners pretty much own land near the beaches, and many do this.)
From my attorney in Mexico: “Until recently, foreigners could not buy land in Mexico unless the title was placed in a Trust (Fideicomiso). Now a foreigner can purchase a home or vacant lot in his own name, except for property located within 50 kilometers of the coast, or national border. A home in Puerto Vallarta or Nuevo Laredo would still need to be purchased in the name of a trust.”

Employment “rights”? Why do Americans think they have a right to work in Mexico? As in most countries you need to get a work permit, and here they tend not to be issued if you are going to take work away from a Mexican. Perversely, Mexico does not believe that it exists to employ gringos. Gosh.

If you want to live here, it’s easy. You get a tourist **** for 90 days when you land (try that in the US), and with no hassle you can then get FM-3 residence status (try that in the US), provided you can demonstrate an income of $1000 a month. (You are welcome, but Mexico isn’t going to support you. Why should it?) The government hassles you far here less than does the government up north. But also no, you are not going into politics and, if you do something adequately undesirable, you will be chucked unceremoniously out. And why not?

“Due process”? You aren't a citizen. (Read the Patriot Act, by the way.) Behave or go away. Mexico is much less a police state, much less watched, tapped, bugged, cross-referenced, data-based, regulated, intimidated, regimented and politically corrected than the US, which is a major reason why people come here.

Now, Americans will say, “But Fred, all these Mexicans come into the US and get welfare, school for their kids, driver’s licenses and medical care, and don’t pay taxes, and who knows what all. It isn’t fair.”
To which I respond: “All true. But why is it Mexico’s fault? You practically invite them. Mexico has no obligation to keep its citizens in, though the United States has the right to keep them out. If you folks up north choose to let in poor Mexicans, don’t be surprised when you have poor Mexicans.”
Note that the immigration problem is entirely of America’s making. Laws, decisions in the courts, amnesties, interpretation of the Constitution, and policy all encourage illegal immigration. What the US does is to say to impoverished and desperate people, “See this river? Don’t cross it. If you do, we’ll give you all sorts of privileges, and jobs, and a chance to advance in life and give your kids a good future. Now, don’t cross it, you hear?”

Keeping immigrants out would once have been easy, but you didn’t do it. You could have fined employers a thousand dollars a day for hiring illegals, half of it to go to whoever turned the employer in; denied them all services, and deported them instantly. Today, taking things away from people who have lives in the States and kids in the schools would be brutal. (You are going to forcibly deport millions of people? That will be pretty.) And of course they soon come to have the votes to make deportation impossible. But it wouldn’t have been in the beginning. Don’t blame Mexico for having an immigration policy more sensible than yours.


This was written by someone else, not me. I agree with it all. What I dont agree with is how it becomes "discriminatory" when Arizona passes a similar law. The Galling hypocrisy of some people.