Undocumented persons in New York can now be issued with drivers licenses.Getty
New York undocumented, including thousands of Irish, will be eligible for driver’s licenses after a bill passed the New York State legislature
Thousands of undocumented Irish will be among the 250,000 undocumented in New York State who can now legally get a driver’s license.
Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the bill into law after receiving assurances that immigration authorities could not access the license information. It takes effect in six months.
“We are glad to see that Gov. Cuomo ultimately did the right thing by quickly signing the Green Light NY bill into law,” said Steve Choi, Executive Director of the New York Immigration Coalition.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.
“Our New York State elects have sent a message — that while Donald Trump and his cronies look to scapegoat immigrants, the Empire State will protect them. We’ve done that with by restoring driver’s licenses to 250,000 New Yorkers, and we’re just getting started.”
The number of Irish undocumented who will avail of the new law is unknown. “This is very good news for those Irish who have to drive without insurance and indeed, for all drivers,” said Ciaran Staunton, Chairman of the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform, which has long lobbied for licenses and is part of the Immigrant Coalition. He estimated about 5,000 Irish could benefit.AdChoicesADVERTISING
”For waitress and nannies for construction workers and bar employees this is very good news,” he said.
“You can’t register a car you can’t get insurance when you are undocumented. You take your life into your hands and the lives of fellow drivers when you drive without insurance.”
Ciaran Staunton, Chairman of the Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform.
The Daily News reported that “Cuomo has repeatedly expressed support for the bill — but raised last-minute concerns Monday about whether the information about undocumented immigrants gathered by the state DMV could be obtained by federal officials and used for immigration enforcement.
“You create a driver’s license for undocumented people, you just have to make sure you do it in a way that the feds don’t come in the next day and access that database with the exact opposite intention,” Cuomo told WAMC, an Albany radio station.
Twelve states, in addition to Washington DC, already have driver license laws that allow undocumented to apply.
In New Mexico, uninsured drivers fell from 24 percent to nine percent. In Colorado, increased numbers of cars registered brought significant extra revenue to the state. Oregon also pronounced the scheme a major success.
New York signs into law the “Green Law” which will allow undocumented to apply for driver’s licences.
Supporters say the so-called ‘Green Light’ bill will make more than 265,000 people eligible for licenses and improve road safety by making non-citizens who drive take road tests and get insurance and annual vehicle inspections.
“Today’s vote shows that we as New Yorkers are committed to the dignity and safety of all our community members, especially the most marginalized among us,” said bill sponsor Senator Luis Sepulveda (D-Bronx).
“We are taking a stand for the rights of immigrants in the time when their livelihoods are being threatened and degraded to extreme degrees.”
The Daily News reported that a Siena College poll last week found that 53% of New Yorkers oppose the bill and about 41% support it. That’s a drop in opposition from a March poll that found 61% of voters were against the measure.
KAREN Bradley has been forced to call off a Stormont drinks reception today after her invite was snubbed by all the main parties.
The cancellation, which came just 24 hours ahead of the event, is the latest embarrassing setback for the secretary of state, whose performance has been widely criticised over recent months.
Sinn Féin first signalled on Sunday that it wouldn’t be attending what the Northern Ireland Office described as a “cross-party discussion event” for all MLAs.
The remaining four main parties all confirmed last night that their MLAs would not be accepting Mrs Bradley’s invitation.
The cancellation comes amid growing speculation that the current talks process, which began in early May, is to be wound down over the coming days and parked for the summer.
Last week, Alliance leader Naomi Long told The Irish News that a breakthrough in the negotiations was unlikely before the end of this month.
When the two governments reviewed the process a fortnight ago they identified a “narrow window of opportunity” to reach a deal.
Ian Knox cartoon 18/6/19: Channel 4 stages a debate for Tory party leadership hopefuls which Boris doesn’t attend. Karen Bradley organises a drinks party to bring parties together which nobody attends
Ulster Unionist leader Robin Swann said last night that the talks appeared to be “stuck in no-man’s land”.
“The secretary of state may have been intending to help the talks move to a more meaningful stage by getting all the MLAs together, but that boat has now sailed,” he said.
“It’s time to get political leaders together for some hard political graft instead.”
An SDLP spokesman said the public wanted politicians to working to return to government rather than attending a drinks reception, while an Alliance spokesman said the party’s MLAs would concentrating on the work to restore the institutions.
A DUP spokesman said the event was “unhelpful”.
A British government spokesman said Mrs Bradley believed it would have been valuable to bring together MLAs for “an informal event alongside the ongoing talks process”.
“The secretary of state respects that the parties have concluded they are not ready for this yet,” the spokesman said.
PSNI Launch A Supreme Court Assault On Press Freedom
By AM
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
Share
Tweet
Share
Share
EmailJamie Bryson argues that the PSNI is launching a Supreme Court assault on press freedom as they seek to narrow protections for journalistic material.
PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton has launched a full-frontal assault on press freedom as he seeks to restrict the protections for journalistic material under the Police and Criminal Evidence Order 1989.
In my recent Judicial Review challenge the High Court ruled that in the event that the PSNI had corporate knowledge that a person may be in possession of journalistic material, then the enhanced protections apply- even if the police are not seeking journalistic material- and as such they would be precluded from procuring standard warrants under Article 10 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Order 1989 (PACE).
This judgement meant that regardless of whether the alleged offence being investigated related to journalistic material or not, the PSNI would still have to go through the more rigorous procedure of applying to a County Court judge in order to obtain a search warrant. This judgement, the significance of which was denied by the PSNI at the time, broadened the scope of protection of journalistic material and set a significant precedent.
On Friday the PSNI Chief Constable lodged an appeal, claiming that the precedent set by the judgement raised a matter of public importance and as such his legal representatives submitted a question to the United Kingdom Supreme Court.
The Chief Constable’s application (below) if successful would mean that PSNI could seize journalistic material- which falls under ‘excluded and special procedure material’- under the pretence of investigating any offence and the only remedy for the subject of the seizure would be a ‘seize and sift’ procedure whereby PSNI would wade through all seized items, themselves assessing what is journalistic material and what isn’t.
This was confirmed by affidavit evidence provided by the PSNI during my High Court case; the officer claimed it wasn’t practical to have any independent assessment of seized material, claiming that it was for investigators to decide what may be covered by journalistic privilege.
The danger of this, especially for all those who may investigate police corruption, is obvious. The police could seize all the journalistic material, wade through it for intelligence purposes and then themselves – without any independent scrutiny – decide what they feel deserves journalistic protection, and what does not.
The PSNI attempt to narrow the protections for journalistic material comes only weeks after the Chief Constable lost another High Court challenged brought by two journalists. It was his second defeat in as many weeks after also losing the challenge I brought earlier in May.
I have alerted the National Union of Journalists to this application by the Chief Constable, which could affect journalists right across the United Kingdom given the Supreme Court decision will be binding.
There may be large sections of the NUJ that despise me, which causes little more than light amusement, but if they look past the person and take a quick look at what is at stake they may realise that the PSNI Chief Constable is launching a full frontal assault on the statutory legal protections for journalistic material.
This assault isn’t a minor little scuffle in a lower court – he is going to the United Kingdom Supreme Court.
The full text of the question the Chief Constable is seeking to be adjudicated upon by the UKSC is as follows:
Is it unlawful to seek a warrant pursuant to Article 10 of the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 in circumstances where a constable does not seek access to special procedure and/or excluded material but where there is a corporate knowledge of a realistic possibility that the materials on the premises may contain special procedure and/or excluded material given the facility for searching and sifting provided by sections 50 and 51 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 and the statutory obligation to return excluded material under section 55 of the 2001 Act?
