As I stated on numerous occasions, going after the crooked contractors who hire illegals is the only thing that makes any common sense and I'm glad Putnam tackled this subject although there is MUCH more to the subject. Although my plate is becoming full again with new stories, increased writers, and a major re-design for this site, hopefully I'll be able to follow-up on this topic (which is being overlooked) at a future date.
While I've been critical of the paper in the past (and will probably criticize the paper when needed in the future), I really hope the paper is recognized for the work they put into this series. You can tell that a lot of effort was put into these articles which is refreshing as well as informative. I encourage everyone (especially those of you who read this blog who are from out of state) to give these articles a read as it gives you a rare look into what's happening in Danbury which I haven't seen in other newspapers.
If there is only one critique (and it's a small one), I wish the paper would make a special section on the frontpage of their website and provide links to all the articles on the so people could easily read all the pieces without having to search for them. If your going to do s series, it's better to have the showcase it on the frontpage rather than providing links to the other articles from within the individual stories. It's just a simple difference between print and electronic media and a case where newspapers need to adjust the way they present information online.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
