Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

US to stop deporting and grant work permits to younger illegal immigrants

page: 10
17
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
Hmm, but if someone is born in this country, but their parents "illegally immigrated", what should we do? The "child" was born and raised here, thus this is its home. Its American.


They can go back with their parents. Many countries base citizenship on that of the parents. There have been many threads on citizenship here that I have argued for clearing up the anchor baby loop holes. If the parents would not want to take their kids back, my plan from a couple post above stand.




posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7
Right. But they are not COMPARABLE.

They ARE comparable. They are both laws on the books. They both can be violated by a person and they both have elements of the crime that must be met in order to violate the law. They both can result in a person being arrested, charged and prosecuted and both can result in jail time.

The difference is in fact only the punishment and nothing more.



Originally posted by stanguilles7
You are engaging in hyperbole.

Actually I am not.


Originally posted by stanguilles7
Look it up if you need to.

I would suggest you do the same since you apparently are not familiar with the word -

Hyperbole

hy·per·bo·le
   [hahy-pur-buh-lee] Show IPA
noun Rhetoric .
1. obvious and intentional exaggeration.
2. an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “to wait an eternity.”


My comparison of jaywalking and murder is not an exaggeration. they are both laws, both can be violated and both can result in punishment.

Its not relevant how a person arrived in this country. If they fail to take action to comply with the law then they are violating it.

It really is that simple...

I still think we should mirror Mexico's immigration laws word for word.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
Hmm, but if someone is born in this country, but their parents "illegally immigrated", what should we do? The "child" was born and raised here, thus this is its home. Its American.

The immigration laws dont regulate that because of the US Constitution. Its one of the reasons this EO by Obama only deals with Adults - 18 and over up to I think 30 ubt I could be off on that last number.

The term is called an anchor baby, and the birth present a problem and legal loophole. Generally one parent who is illegal can be allowed to remain in the US to care for the child. Currently Congress was reviewing that and were discussing an amendment that would end automatic citizenship if the parents are not US citizens. At the time the constitution was drafted it did not matter what country you were born in. You automatically became a citizen of their country and not the one they were born in.



Originally posted by TsukiLunar
Personally, I believe that whoever considers themselves as an American is an American. Thats the kind of Idea I got about this country from my interpretation of its history and ideals.


I have no issues with that sentiment and like I said im all for immigration - so long as its legal. What I take exception to though are illegal immigrants making that argument, that they are American, without becoming one. Mexico is not a disctatorship and as such its citizens are able to come and go from the country anytime they choose. That means they can go through the process to become a US citizen.

We should not be rewarding people simply because Obama doesnt like the law and needs to firm up the hispanic vote for the elections.

If we are going to ignore the law for 800,00 illegal immigrants, where does it stop?



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd





So why should the children be punished for the actions of their parents?
edit on 16-6-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)
This may sound harsh to you but such is life and it's not always fair. If anyone should assume responsibility it should be their parents for pete's sake NOT me. I have to be responsible for my kids, my parents were responsible for me. Why do you think their parents should not be held accountable and why should I a US citizen be punished and bear the burdens and consequences of their parents criminal actions?:pus:
edit on 16-6-2012 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 

getting a bit off topic but I worked as a supervisor in a factory i was giving a list once or twice a month of employees to fire because they all had the same Social Security numbers and i mean up to 10 at a time even got into a argument with one because he paid $500 for his Social Security number.these are Hispanic.if they comite a crime to get here why should they obey any other laws



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Seems the President and Napolitano were wrong when they stated it only applies to those without criminal histories.

GOP, Democrats appear to disagree on allowing illegal immigrants with criminal pasts to avoid deportation


The section at issue states in part that young illegal immigrants eligible for the program must “not been convicted of a felony offense, a significant misdemeanor offense, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.”

The first news reports on the change stated those eligible could have no criminal history, but documents released later in day showed that to be incorrect.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, the first administration official to announce the plan, said Friday morning the policy change was an attempt to keep the agency’s enforcement resources focused on removing the most potentially dangerous illegal immigrants, including felons and repeat offenders.


According to Napolitano the reason for this was so they could free up resources and concentrate on the most serious illegal immigrants. The problem with that excuse is her next comment. I added the emphesis -


She also attempted to assure Americans by saying those eligible under the program must apply for a two-year suspension of deportation and a work visa, after which they can reapply for renewal. also said each applicant would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.


If its to free up resources, then how can she state case by case basis?

Again this whole mess is nothing but a political issue in order to gain support in the Hispanic community for election day. The 2 year "suspension" they are referring to will place this issue squarely in the middle of the mid-term elections in 2014. A time when people are trying to get re-elected, which also supports the political ploy accusation.

If Obama were serious about this then he would tell the Democrats and Republicans to put together a comprehensive plan and do it now. Since the States, as well as DHS / Government connsider this topic to be part of national security (going after the worst of the worst) then Obama should state this problem falls under Article 2 section 3 of the Constitution -


Section 3.

He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.


Don't use an EO to bypass Congress... Use the Constitution, force them back into session and tell them to resolve it now.

The Immigration law in place makes absolutely NO provisions to single out a specific block of people from a larger group of the same type and selectively apply the law. The legal implications, since foreigners are allowed to use our court system as if they were citizens, a person who is facing deportation could argue he is being discriminated against via selective enforcement.
edit on 16-6-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
I wish obama could see my old hometown. It use to be nice. Now its little mexico and run into the ground. Oh wait! He lived 45 minutes away, so he probably has seen it! Its deserted, and depressing. Oh well. At least our Mexican friends get what they want, that's what is really important here. Right?

I feel for all my Euro/Canadian/Indian/Asian/African friends in Chicago that are jumping through hoops of fire to stay here. B.S.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You might remember a conversation we had some time ago, in which I told you that in regards to immigration laws that US Citizen does not have a "right" to live with their spouse in the US.

Well just in time for this controversial issue of providing assistance for certain undocumented aliens (youth)

Check out how much compassion US Citizens are afforded when legally following requirement of our immigration system

Legal US Citizen following the legal path of immigration for a spouse....Worth less than dirt



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





The term is called an anchor baby, and the birth present a problem and legal loophole. Generally one parent who is illegal can be allowed to remain in the US to care for the child. Currently Congress was reviewing that and were discussing an amendment that would end automatic citizenship if the parents are not US citizens. At the time the constitution was drafted it did not matter what country you were born in. You automatically became a citizen of their country and not the one they were born in.


Ah yes, I know what the law is. That was my point. A child can be born here, and be considered a citizen. However, a child cant grow up here, consider this home, and be considered a citizen until he "passes proper procedure" which is, most of the time, a ridiculous merry go round that may or may not ever stop.

What is wrong with granting some kind of leeway that makes it easier for those who consider America their home, to make it there home? Obama seems to want to make another path for "illegals" to become "legal", of which we can both agree there is nothing wrong with making new laws to accommodate circumstances.

So if this concept was a "law" put forth by whoever would you support it?

edit on 16-6-2012 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pixiefyre
You might remember a conversation we had some time ago, in which I told you that in regards to immigration laws that US Citizen does not have a "right" to live with their spouse in the US.

To be honest I am not remebering the thread. However a person has a right to reside with whomever they wish. The only time the government can get involved deals with criminal or civil issues and in those cases, the denial is based solely on the case and not the residency status.

Not only is that codified in Federal Law as well as State Laws, its been affirmed in several US Supreme Court cases. Specifically at the State level the status is further protected under Domestic violence laws as well as civil laws dealing with "established residency in a dwelling".

If you are referring to a US citizen and a non us citizen here illegaly the denial is based on immigration laws. If I am missing something from the thread you are refering to let me know so I can go back and read the info.



Originally posted by Pixiefyre
Well just in time for this controversial issue of providing assistance for certain undocumented aliens (youth)

This situation deals soley with adults age 18 to 30.



Originally posted by Pixiefyre
Check out how much compassion US Citizens are afforded when legally following requirement of our immigration system

Legal US Citizen following the legal path of immigration for a spouse....Worth less than dirt



As far as the mistake they made - have yu talked to an immigration lawyer about it and if so what did they say?



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I provided all of the information that was sent to USCIS first to my Congressional Representatives office and they assured me that everything was in order and her investigation confirmed this issues on their behalf. We don't think they read the information we provided.

I've now been married for 10 years next month, been stranded in the immigration system for 6 years and this is without any complications regarding criminal records or any other ground for inadmissibility. They have determined that he is admissible....

I have to admit I am just gutted,



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
Ah yes, I know what the law is. That was my point. A child can be born here, and be considered a citizen. However, a child cant grow up here, consider this home, and be considered a citizen until he "passes proper procedure" which is, most of the time, a ridiculous merry go round that may or may not ever stop.

A person born in the United States is a US citizen. That child maintains that citizenship until the age of 18 where they can decide if they wish to remain a US citizen or if they wish to take their parents nationality status. For this issue we are dealing only with 18-30 year olds.


Originally posted by TsukiLunar
What is wrong with granting some kind of leeway that makes it easier for those who consider America their home, to make it there home? Obama seems to want to make another path for "illegals" to become "legal", of which we can both agree there is nothing wrong with making new laws to accommodate circumstances.


First - What do you tell those who are going through the process to legally come to the US and become a US citizen that people who bypassed the process, committed a crime by illegally entering and remaining in the US, that they are somehow more important and should get special treatment? Talk about opening the flood gates and undermining all immigration laws?

Secondly and most importantly -
If they consider America their home then one would think they would take the necessary steps to become what they want to claim - to be a US citizen. Why, if these people want the "American dream", are they still illegal immigrants after all these years?


Originally posted by TsukiLunar
So if this concept was a "law" put forth by whoever would you support it?

Nope - i am an advocate of adopting Mexicos immigration laws word for word. If people want to come to this country at all costs what does it say about them that the first thing they do is break US law by illegally entering, then further breaks the law by not paying the same in taxes citizens do, by not taking steps to resolve their residency status etc etc.

Here is some info -
Mexican President: U.S. criminal deportations fueling violence in Mexico- October 2011

TUCSON (KGUN9-TV/AP) – Mexican President Felipe Calderon accused the United States of dumping criminals at the border because it is cheaper than prosecuting them – adding that the practice has made Mexico’s border towns more dangerous.

Calderon made the comments at an immigration conference Thursday, on the heels of U.S. officials reporting a record number of deportations for the 2011 fiscal year.

Among the deportees “there are many who really are criminals, who have committed some crime and it is simply cheaper to leave them on the Mexican side of the border than to prosecute them, as they should do, to see whether they are guilty or not,” Calderon said. “And obviously, they quickly link up with criminals on the border.”


So because these people broke US laws, Mexico thinks they should be prosecuted and sent to jail. Apparently the term hypocritical is not in their vocabulary.

US-Mexico governors conference languishes - Sept 2011

.............Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer canceled last year's gathering in Phoenix after Mexico's border governors boycotted the event because she had just signed a tough law against illegal immigration. .......


Mexico criticises US border plan


Mexico complains that illegal aliens now feel "uncomfortable" in Tucson - October 2010

Last week, Juan Manuel Calderón Jaimes, head of the Mexican Consulate in Tucson, spoke out against what he sees as the mistreatment of Mexican nationals living in the country illegally by Tucson police.

Jaimes says that illegal aliens in the city are now afraid to report crimes or have any contact with local police out of fear that they will be deported. He also complained to the Arizona Daily Star about local officers inquiring into the immigration status of people stopped for traffic violations, saying: “In some ways, SB 1070 has been enforced in Tucson for many years.”


U.S. Worsens Mexican Violence by Returning Criminal Aliens to Border Cities, Mayors Say

A coalition of Mexican mayors has asked the United States to stop deporting illegal immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes in the U.S. to Mexican border cities, saying the deportations are contributing to Mexican border violence.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
pulled this from the EL Paso times,read into it what you will but its not just poor ol farm hands that is sending the money not up here in INDIANA Its factory workers making $10-$15 per hr that is sending this money


(The amount of money migrants sent home to Mexico increased by nearly 7 percent in 2011, according to Mexico's central bank.

It is the first increase in remittances reported by the Banco Central de Mexico since the U.S. recession in 2008, the bank reported on Wednesday

Remittances last year totaled about $22.7 billion, compared with $21.27 billion in 2010. Remittances to Mexico had dropped 15.5 percent between 2008 and 2009.)

link www.elpasotimes.com...

edit on 16-6-2012 by deadcatsrule because: edit for spelling,dc



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeker808
To anybody saying "c'mon man they had no choice to come here"
let me ask you something...Do you know the difference between a reason and a excuse?


Once again, ill repeat that this discussion shouldnt be about the dilemma of young illegals(although this is an issue, no doubt)Instead we should be questioning the POTUS decision itself.
Like why of all things was this his new epiphany.Since were still in the midst of the worst recession since the depression.

i would have had no qualms with this decision if this was the clinton era.
Or to say when we had a surplus(however big it actually was)

edit on 16-6-2012 by truthseeker808 because: (no reason given)

ok imagine you're parents forced you into a foreign country as a child, you grew up there, went thru the school system, learned their way of life, all of a sudden one day, you are deported to a country you know very little about, they don't speak your language, and you need to find a job.

what would you do? oh yeah that's right you'll make up some excuse won't you? or you'll be the "tough guy" and deal with it.

If they grew up here, and all of a sudden their blacklisted from ever getting a job, guess what? they'll be committing crimes and we'll be paying the price anyways as they'll eventually end up in prison



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavalryscout
One thing I have to say is an illegal is the best neighbor in the world!!!

Why? Well because they don't want to draw attention to themselves and they sure don't want the police around!

Don't believe all the crap the media feeds you about all the crime caused by illegal immigrants.

The cartels cause problems of course but not the average person looking for a better life.


I worked with many illegals. The women had husbands working under the table and they claimed they were a one income household and collecting welfare, got healthcare, cheap housing etc. They blantantly break the law at every turn, wether it is by stealing an identity, over staying a visa, or using fraudulent documents.

We all want a better life, it doesn't mean we're going to get it. And to get a better life by displacing a citizens is wrong. We have too many people struggling to care for their families.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by deadcatsrule
 


Is sending money to other countries illegal?

Now that these people will become legal they will have to pay their federal, state and medicare taxes.



posted on Jun, 16 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux
As an everyday American, I am happy for them.

it's not their fault that their parents took a risky gamble with their lives as infants.

that's 800,000 young adults that can testify to the world about how America is the greatest nation to ever exist upon Earth.

800,000 young people can say to themselves, even though past generations of immigrants from various places raised children that are now at war against the American system, we can give those obnoxious traitors a smackdown and take their place.


so while American students are paying real cash dollars for their education, who exactly is footing to bill of education? of these young, not citizens class not immigrants, not legal either people.

give me a break, I dont need their civil war

Go Home!!! and can I come with you, but go home, will you feed me there? Go Home!
edit on 16-6-2012 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 
Why do you keep pushing this ???

This situation deals soley with adults age 18 to 30.
that's total BS ... this EO applies to all illegal immigrants from age 5 to a max of 30, so long as they arrived before their 16th birthday.
that is not solely adults, so why the misdirection ??

what i find odd about the whole thing is why it specifically excludes the youngest and most innocent, the infants and toddlers ??
they are the ones who really have no voice and no option in the matter, yet, they aren't included in this program?

just in case you think i'm "picking" like you often accuse me, here's the quote

www.nytimes.com...
Under the change, the Department of Homeland Security will no longer initiate the deportation of illegal immigrants who came to the United States before age 16, have lived here for at least five years, and are in school, are high school graduates or are military veterans in good standing. The immigrants must also be under 30 and have clean criminal records.
not sure where you got age 18 or solely adults as some kind of limit but that is totally wrong.
yes, i know the clean criminal record part was not true but why exclude the children who are newborn through age 5 ?? what is that about ??

no, i am not in favor of this action but considering the purposeful exclusions, i'm really curious about the true intent behind it.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   

ok imagine you're parents forced you into a foreign country as a child, you grew up there, went thru the school system, learned their way of life, all of a sudden one day, you are deported to a country you know very little about, they don't speak your language, and you need to find a job.

what would you do? oh yeah that's right you'll make up some excuse won't you? or you'll be the "tough guy" and deal with it.

If they grew up here, and all of a sudden their blacklisted from ever getting a job, guess what? they'll be committing crimes and we'll be paying the price anyways as they'll eventually end up in prison


If I were that kid, I'd be upset with my parents for putting me in such a position. I would not blame the country that my parents brought me to. Countries have laws for a reason and must be followed or we pay the consequences.

It is very sad that these kids are in the situation that they are and I feel for them, but they have no one else to blame but their parents. You can't just go around making demands of another country when you wern't supposed to be here in the first place.

We do not need thousands of kids taking jobs away from citizens who need to support their families and are being displaced. We have people coming here through proper channels and you can't just cut to the front of the line because you feel entitled.





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join