Could Homeland Security be Setting Precedent for All Criminal Defense Cases?

What if I intentionally broke into your house, ate your food, used your personal possessions and even took over your job and income.  Would that make me a criminal?  Yes and I would be prosecuted and punished accordingly.

Or what if I knowingly trespassed onto your land took free advantage of the products of your hard work.  Wouldn’t that make me a criminal? Yes and I would be prosecuted and punished accordingly.

So what if someone knowingly entered the US illegally, took advantage of free benefits that even US citizens don’t get, took a job that could have gone to a US citizen.  Doesn’t that make them a criminal for violating federal law?  Not according to the Department of Homeland Security.

I just read where the Department of Homeland Security will be starting a nationwide training program for enforcement officers and prosecuting attorneys to help them expedite deportations.  In the process, the DHS is going to start reviewing all deportation cases so as to halt the proceedings against illegal immigrants without a criminal record so that they can speed up the hearings and deportations of those with criminal records.

Someone please explain to me how the term ‘illegal’ immigrant and ‘no criminal record’ go together?  If you violate a federal law which constitutes the use of the term ‘illegal’ immigrant as opposed to ‘legal’ immigrant, does that not define you as a criminal?

The DHS has been willfully overlooking the violation of one federal crime while not overlooking others.  If this is the case, then could this not be used as precedent for a defense of violating any other federal law?  The judicial system is supposed to be one of uniform consistency but it obviously isn’t.

As a US citizen, I will be arrested, convicted, punished and labeled a criminal if I violate any federal law.  However, if I was an illegal immigrant who knowingly violated federal law by coming over the border without proper permission, I not only won’t be arrested or persecuted, but I also won’t be labeled a criminal and I will be given rewards for my illegal actions.

I’m just waiting for the day that a criminal lawyer uses the precedent set by the Department of Homeland Security as grounds for the dismissal or acquittal of one of their clients and to tell you the truth, if were sitting on the jury, I may have to acquit based upon that precedent.  After all, fair to one, fair to all.