• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Goldman Lawyer's General Advice: Devour Senators' Time | Main | Apple Sued Over Touchpad Technology at ITC »

April 26, 2010


S. Pritikin

Mr. Buckley your comments are emotional but not at all logical. Breaking the law deserves punishment---but not LIFE IN PRISON for immigration violations as the prosecution is recommending. In this case, the recommended punishment does not come anywhere close to fitting the crime. Even violent criminals--murderers get less than 25 years.

Those of us who have been following this case consider the DOJ's attitude (refusal to grant bail for a non-violent first time offender) and obscene sentencing recommendations a gross miscarriage of justice. Contrary to your statement, no one has asked for special treatment for Sholom Rubashkin because of his religion or for any other reason. They have merely asked for the sentence not to exceed those of defendants in similar cases--which would be approximately 6 years.

Keep in mind, if the Feds were acting responsibly, Sholom Rubashkin would not have received the overwhelming support he has from all corners of the globe. But, this has not been the case which is why the prosecutor and judge have been inundated with letters and phone calls demanding fair (NOT SPECIAL) treatment.

Whether low-level workers were prosecuted or not has no bearing on this particular case. If prosecuted, they would be facing charges for other criminal behavior such as falsifying legal documentation--which would have a different punishment.

The bottom-line is that the lives of the ALL of the employees, not just the illegal immigrants were severely impacted, not by Agri or Rubashkin but by the federal government who cannot decide whether to enforce immigration laws, amend them or give everyone amnesty. The federal commando style raid shutting down the plant was an over-reaction that caused much pain and suffering by all involved and someone in the federal government should be held responsible for that SNAFU.


Buckley: The undocumented workers profited from a salary thanks to Rubashkin that they could not receive in their native country. Rubashkin should not be punished because the Feds ruined their lives and are sending them back. Even the Feds removed the immigration charges from Rubashkin's case. He doesn't deserve even six years; he should go home today!


Rubashkin is in no way popular. In fact, he is very unpopular which lead to this crazy sentence recommendation (which led to subsequent outrage).


So if you're popular, it's OK to steal millions?


G. M. Buckley:

You go from site to site posting your hatred against this man, just because it was your relative who was the low level employee that was charged it does not mean it is Rubashkins fault.

Do you think the owner of coca-cola knows who is working down in the plants and in the cleanup crew?

G. M. Buckley

Mr. Rubashkin deserves far more than the 6 years suggested by his friends in the government. The federal government destroyed the lives of hundreds of hard-working immigrants and chose to prosecute only the low and midlevel employees for the immigration and child labor violations. Mr. Rubashkin profited from the labor of undocumented workers and children for years, but was not even prosecuted for those crimes. He should not receive special treatment due to his religion - the largely Catholic workers who have been removed back to their home countries after a gross miscarriage of justice certainly did not receive preferential treatment due to their religious beliefs.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad