Looks like obama has screwed us all

[Krikit 1,165]

And, for the record, you are asking to bring someone into a country in which they have no "right" to live in. There are nutjobs out there, with ill intent, who managed to get here through the faster and simpler process. Yes, please, for the love of God, spend a little time and make sure those nutjobs stay the hell out. You should spend your time constructively. Read up on the next steps. Prepare for her arrival. This first step is just the beginning. The hard part comes when she gets here. Do you know what the next steps are? Do you know what documents she needs to ensure a smooth transition during the next phase? Because you need to know now.... not when she gets here. Because then it will be too late and her opportunity will have passed.

The nice thing about time is that it passes. Use it wisely.

[Karee 4,190]

"Petition" does not mean approved. And approved does not mean it will be an easy process. The parents were adults when they entered and/or remained here illegally.... and now they're on record. I don't think it will be as straightforward as you seem to think.

No of course it wont be easy under the current rules. As we've seen, those rules can be changed with the stroke of a pen. Executive order I think they call it.

[Karee 4,190]

If legislation is passed paving the way to residency, and then citizenship, then they will file the appropriate forms and pay the appropriate fees.

What legislation? There was no legislation required for this Deferred Action program.

[Love's JAA 100]

What legislation? There was no legislation required for this Deferred Action program.

from: http://immigrationimpact.com/2012/08/13/why-deferred-action-is-not-amnesty/

Long before President Obama announced his plan on deferred action for childhood arrivals, immigration restrictionists were arguing that any exercise of prosecutorial discretion benefitting undocumented immigrants was equivalent to “amnesty.” Consequently, it’s no surprise that one of the biggest myths supporters of the program have had to address is that deferred action is a type of amnesty.

Although no uniform definition exists, “amnesty” generally refers to government initiatives that officially pardon or absolve individuals who have broken the law. There are tax amnesties, parking ticket amnesties, even library fine amnesties. The concept of amnesty implies forgiveness without obligation. In the immigration context, amnesty has never been a good word to describe legalization. For example, President Reagan signed legislation in 1986 that allowed farmworkers and other undocumented immigrants to obtain lawful permanent residency, a prerequisite for obtaining U.S. citizenship, albeit in exchange for meeting certain costs and requirements.

Under that definition of amnesty, deferred action is far from it. Immigrants who are granted deferred action are neither placed on a path to citizenship nor given any formal immigration status. They have no legal “right” to remain in the country, even though the government has temporarily pledged not to deport them. They cannot sponsor family members to come to the United States; may not travel abroad without receiving advance permission from the government; and will not receive a “green card” or any other document evidencing a legal right to be in the country. Nor is it correct to equate deferred action with “immunity” from deportation. Because it is a purely discretionary form of relief, a grant of deferred action may be revoked at any time by this or any future administration.

The only tangible benefit that accompanies a grant of deferred action is the ability to obtain a federal work permit. But in the paradoxical world of immigration law, the right to work in the United States does not necessarily entail a right to be in the United States. Under federal regulations, for example, immigrants with outstanding removal orders can receive work permits in certain circumstances—such as when they cannot legally be deported because they are likely to be tortured in their home countries. Indeed, far from bestowing lawful status, the issuance of a work permit in such situations merely reflects the commonsense idea that the government should not prevent immigrants from supporting themselves while officials are unable or unwilling to deport them.

In all likelihood, the true reason that opponents of the initiative refer to deferred action as “amnesty” is to spread the false impression that immigrants who are in the country illegally will be permanently forgiven and placed on a path to citizenship. In truth, as President Obama himself has said, deferred action is merely a stopgap measure intended to give Congress space to enact legislation—i.e., the DREAM Act—that would provide such a permanent solution. Restrictionists may object to any measure that allows undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States, even temporarily, but calling the deferred action initiative an amnesty simply does not make it so.

[Sarah Elle-Même 660]

from: http://immigrationimpact.com/2012/08/13/why-deferred-action-is-not-amnesty/

Long before President Obama announced his plan on deferred action for childhood arrivals, immigration restrictionists were arguing that any exercise of prosecutorial discretion benefitting undocumented immigrants was equivalent to “amnesty.” Consequently, it’s no surprise that one of the biggest myths supporters of the program have had to address is that deferred action is a type of amnesty.

Although no uniform definition exists, “amnesty” generally refers to government initiatives that officially pardon or absolve individuals who have broken the law. There are tax amnesties, parking ticket amnesties, even library fine amnesties. The concept of amnesty implies forgiveness without obligation. In the immigration context, amnesty has never been a good word to describe legalization. For example, President Reagan signed legislation in 1986 that allowed farmworkers and other undocumented immigrants to obtain lawful permanent residency, a prerequisite for obtaining U.S. citizenship, albeit in exchange for meeting certain costs and requirements.

Under that definition of amnesty, deferred action is far from it. Immigrants who are granted deferred action are neither placed on a path to citizenship nor given any formal immigration status. They have no legal “right” to remain in the country, even though the government has temporarily pledged not to deport them. They cannot sponsor family members to come to the United States; may not travel abroad without receiving advance permission from the government; and will not receive a “green card” or any other document evidencing a legal right to be in the country. Nor is it correct to equate deferred action with “immunity” from deportation. Because it is a purely discretionary form of relief, a grant of deferred action may be revoked at any time by this or any future administration.

The only tangible benefit that accompanies a grant of deferred action is the ability to obtain a federal work permit. But in the paradoxical world of immigration law, the right to work in the United States does not necessarily entail a right to be in the United States. Under federal regulations, for example, immigrants with outstanding removal orders can receive work permits in certain circumstances—such as when they cannot legally be deported because they are likely to be tortured in their home countries. Indeed, far from bestowing lawful status, the issuance of a work permit in such situations merely reflects the commonsense idea that the government should not prevent immigrants from supporting themselves while officials are unable or unwilling to deport them.

In all likelihood, the true reason that opponents of the initiative refer to deferred action as “amnesty” is to spread the false impression that immigrants who are in the country illegally will be permanently forgiven and placed on a path to citizenship. In truth, as President Obama himself has said, deferred action is merely a stopgap measure intended to give Congress space to enact legislation—i.e., the DREAM Act—that would provide such a permanent solution. Restrictionists may object to any measure that allows undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States, even temporarily, but calling the deferred action initiative an amnesty simply does not make it so.

All very good points. I said this earlier on the thread but you can't educate people who simply cannot comprehend facts. There's a lot of them trolling on here.

Gary's posts are always spot on, too. If your significant other isn't worth the aggravation then marry the girl next door. No one is forcing you to marry a foreigner. You do it because they are worth the frustration and aggravation. Immigration isn't a right and neither is petitioning for an immigrant. Nor should it be honestly. It is a PRIVILEGE. Even childhood arrivals need to apply for deferred action. They are not automatically given it.

Important to note also that other advanced nations such as Canada or European countries also have a complicated process to petition for foreign nationals. Even developing countries can make it difficult sometimes. For instance for a foreigner to marry and live in Yemen (where my fiance is from) they must go get permission from several government ministries and petition a judge for that *right*. In the meantime you can't rent a house or stay in a hotel room together because you're not considered married. Nice, right?

Edited January 18, 2013 by Sarah and Adnan

[Karee 4,190]

from: http://immigrationim...is-not-amnesty/

Long before President Obama announced his plan on deferred action for childhood arrivals, immigration restrictionists were arguing that any exercise of prosecutorial discretion benefitting undocumented immigrants was equivalent to "amnesty." Consequently, it's no surprise that one of the biggest myths supporters of the program have had to address is that deferred action is a type of amnesty.

Although no uniform definition exists, "amnesty" generally refers to government initiatives that officially pardon or absolve individuals who have broken the law. There are tax amnesties, parking ticket amnesties, even library fine amnesties. The concept of amnesty implies forgiveness without obligation. In the immigration context, amnesty has never been a good word to describe legalization. For example, President Reagan signed legislation in 1986 that allowed farmworkers and other undocumented immigrants to obtain lawful permanent residency, a prerequisite for obtaining U.S. citizenship, albeit in exchange for meeting certain costs and requirements.

Under that definition of amnesty, deferred action is far from it. Immigrants who are granted deferred action are neither placed on a path to citizenship nor given any formal immigration status. They have no legal "right" to remain in the country, even though the government has temporarily pledged not to deport them. They cannot sponsor family members to come to the United States; may not travel abroad without receiving advance permission from the government; and will not receive a "green card" or any other document evidencing a legal right to be in the country. Nor is it correct to equate deferred action with "immunity" from deportation. Because it is a purely discretionary form of relief, a grant of deferred action may be revoked at any time by this or any future administration.

The only tangible benefit that accompanies a grant of deferred action is the ability to obtain a federal work permit. But in the paradoxical world of immigration law, the right to work in the United States does not necessarily entail a right to be in the United States. Under federal regulations, for example, immigrants with outstanding removal orders can receive work permits in certain circumstances—such as when they cannot legally be deported because they are likely to be tortured in their home countries. Indeed, far from bestowing lawful status, the issuance of a work permit in such situations merely reflects the commonsense idea that the government should not prevent immigrants from supporting themselves while officials are unable or unwilling to deport them.

In all likelihood, the true reason that opponents of the initiative refer to deferred action as "amnesty" is to spread the false impression that immigrants who are in the country illegally will be permanently forgiven and placed on a path to citizenship. In truth, as President Obama himself has said, deferred action is merely a stopgap measure intended to give Congress space to enact legislation—i.e., the DREAM Act—that would provide such a permanent solution. Restrictionists may object to any measure that allows undocumented immigrants to remain in the United States, even temporarily, but calling the deferred action initiative an amnesty simply does not make it so.

Again, there was no legislation for deferred action. It was an executive order that allows for people that came here illegally, that met certain requirements to obtain a lifetime of renewable 2 year EADs. Obama simply said I'm going to direct my Attorney General not to enforce certain laws. Period. It would be one thing to say "I'm not going to enforce this law against people that go to school and join the military and are between a certain age etc. etc. etc." But you see, he went one step further. He granted them an immigration benefit as well.

Now why can't Obama turn around and grant these people a green card or citizenship down the road? He was able to give them an EAD without congressional approval. I totally agree that on paper it is not FULL amnesty now. But seriously, do you think these people are going to live the rest of their lives in the U.S. with renewable 2 year EADs? Of course not. And what does that say to people thinking about coming here illegally? It says come here when you're young, wait it out a few years without getting caught. Keep your head down, don't break any laws, and it will all work out in the end.

Why not say to the parents, you broke the law bringing these children here through now fault of their own. If you self deport, we'll give your children a path to citizenship I know everyone will say that's cruel and inhumane etc. etc. But hey, what better way for the parents to step up and and make amends for bringing their children here illegally?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

This thread should be moved to P&R, since it has little if anything to do with the K-1 process. Reported as such.

[Karee 4,190]

This thread should be moved to P&R, since it has little if anything to do with the K-1 process. Reported as such.

That'll make it go from 8 pages to 20 in no time at all.

[Scott65 27]

Hey whatever it takes to get more registered democrats.

Really?? Republicans have a bill in the works right now. I think more to get these people paying taxes and contributing "legally" to the good ole USA!

[Karee 4,190]

Really?? Republicans have a bill in the works right now. I think more to get these people paying taxes and contributing "legally" to the good ole USA!

What is this Republican bill? I'm sure Republicans have lots of bills pending in Congress.

[Scott65 27]

And, for the record, you are asking to bring someone into a country in which they have no "right" to live in. There are nutjobs out there, with ill intent, who managed to get here through the faster and simpler process. Yes, please, for the love of God, spend a little time and make sure those nutjobs stay the hell out. You should spend your time constructively. Read up on the next steps. Prepare for her arrival. This first step is just the beginning. The hard part comes when she gets here. Do you know what the next steps are? Do you know what documents she needs to ensure a smooth transition during the next phase? Because you need to know now.... not when she gets here. Because then it will be too late and her opportunity will have passed.

The nice thing about time is that it passes. Use it wisely.

Said well... Besides, staying positive through the whole process is better than gain an ulcer, worrying and going through life miserable.

[JohnR! 5,495]

And what do you think will happen next?

These kids will continue their education and hopefully have a better life than their parents. Isn't that the reason people have been coming to our shores for centuries?

[Krikit 1,165]

As requested, moving from K-1 Progress to P&R.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I see you've been waiting for five whole days...my condolences.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

FYI wait times are long from a combination of factors, not just this new program. It is mostly because USCIS has laid off half their employees and dramatically cut funding in the last 2 years. That you can thank Congress for.

You mean budget cuts have consequences? Reducing the federal workforce has consequences? Really? Who would have thought...