Break the law, expect to be punished

While needed immigration reforms must be a top priority for a new president and Congress in January, let's not lose sight of the fact that we are still a nation of laws and those now on the books that deal with all aspects of illegal immigration must be enforced.

That's why the U.S. Supreme Court took the proper course of action Monday when it agreed to decide whether people picked up on immigration violations also can face charges of identity theft if they use Social Security and other identification numbers that belong to others.

Of course they should, and the high court can do a real service to make that abundantly clear. It's disturbing that lower courts have split in their interpretations of what seemingly should be a slam dunk.

The Associated Press reported that federal prosecutors have increasingly been bringing the more serious identity theft charges against undocumented immigrants, including many who were arrested in raids on meatpacking plants.

Defense lawyers have argued that their clients should not be charged with stealing someone else's identity because the immigrants only were seeking documentation that would allow them to work. They didn't know if the numbers were merely fictitious or actually belonged to someone else, their lawyers say.

Well, they certainly knew going in that they didn't belong to them. The fact remains that when workers in the country illegally opt for phony identification, they certainly know they're not applying for original numbers in their own names. If the numbers belong to someone else, that's identity theft. If they're fictitious, then we would call that identity fraud, which though not theft, still calls for punishment under the law.

The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in St. Louis, has upheld the conviction of Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa, a Mexican national who worked at a steel plant in East Moline, Ill. Originally, he worked there under an assumed name, with false Social Security and alien registration numbers. In 2006, he told his employer he wanted to be known by his real name and submitted new identification documents.

This time, though, the Social Security number belonged to someone else, and his green card number was that of yet another person. Suspicious, the employer contacted immigration authorities, who arrested Flores-Figueroa.

Little wonder that the five-count indictment against him included two counts of aggravated identity theft. If criminal intent to assume someone else's identity isn't at play here, what is? And if that's the intent, it should be treated as a crime.

Federal appeals courts based in Atlanta and Richmond also have ruled in the government's favor in similar cases, while the appeals court in Washington, D.C., has sided with defendants.

Hence the Supreme Court's decision to settle the matter.

That, too, is an indictment of failure to enact meaningful immigration reforms. Until that happens, these types of incidents force continued handling of all the ramifications of illegal immigration by case law, rather than a long-overdue comprehensive approach to needed changes.

Congress, not the courts, needs to handle and clarify that challenge.

* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins, Bill Lee and Karen Troianello.