Just because you have a green card

[scotty 0]

Hi, Please check out this article from CBS-5

http://cbs5.com/30minutes/local_story_266005518.html

this is a perfect example in the debate of should you get citizenship or not.

Regards Scotty

[*julez* 124]

very sobering! The 2 examples of deprtation are exactly why the laws need to be reviewed and amended.

[rebeccajo 14]

Now that makes sense. Deportation order for an 82 year old raisin farmer.

Family based petitioners need to be paying close attention to any immigration reform passed this year in Congress. There are many VJ members who, because they are trying valiantly to bring their loved ones here legally, staunchly oppose any reforms that have even the vaguest whiff of forgiveness for those who crossed over in any manner other than 100% bonafide USCIS approval.

Unfortunately, whatever legislation that may get wielded against 'amnesty' could very well be used against family based cases if the laws are not written properly.

WHATEVER your postition on immigration you need to pay attention to what's happening in Washington and make your voice heard.

One of the bills considered in the 109th Congress contained wording which made the harboring of an illegal entrant a felony, which was of concern to those of us whose spouses are caught in the 'namecheck' blackhole. Without a greencard, those people who have not successfully adjusted status could be considered illegal if the laws are amended improperly. Which in turn could have made the USC spouse a felon for 'harboring' that immigrant. Fortunately, that provision was struck even before the bill died.

Edited February 5, 2007 by rebeccajo

[meauxna 15]

“I would say to people who have green cards, if you want to become a U.S. citizen, and you're eligible, do it immediately. The law can change tomorrow and suddenly subject them to deportation based on grounds that didn't exist today.”

Spot on.

This has been happening more and more since the Patriot Act was revved up. A woman from Oregon was removed under this same sort of scheme. The scariest part is that they have made the rule retroactive, so that even if your offence was not a removable one when you commited it.. you can be removed NOW for that same offence (even when it's in your distant past).

Plus the fee is going up a lot later this year---time to apply, folks!

[scotty 0]

These Immigration and custom enforcement guys are just cold hearted b@#%!rds who don't give a toss about the American families involved in these deportation cases.

quote from http://cbs5.com/30minutes/local_story_266005518.html

Shouldn't there be some discretion,” asks Anna Werner, “in the case of a man who is over 80 years old, runs a successful business, contributes economically to the community, and had a very, very minor charge where he was trying to protect himself years and years ago and paid the penalty for it?”

Answers DeMore: “Your age, your financial situation, if you're wealthy, shouldn't protect you from the same laws that govern the rest of the people.”

“What about being, in essence, a good citizen?” asks Werner.

“If you want me to say he shouldn't have been removed or he shouldn't be in removal proceedings, I'm not going to say that. I mean, that is the law,” says DeMore.

“But if he loses in the end, that's the way it is?

[Dr_LHA 3]

To be fair, it wouldn't be right for the ICE officer to give his opinion on a case that hadn't yet gone in front of a judge. Its his job to enforce the law as its written, its up to a judge as to whether the guy actually gets deported, that's how the legal system in this country works. I don't see the ICE guy as cold hearted, he's just doing his job.

[scotty 0]

hhmmmm, well thats your opinion.I think in all essence it's the old scenario of does the penalty fit the crime, and perhaps it's the lawmakers who are at fault.

Regards Scotty

[Dr_LHA 3]

hhmmmm, well thats your opinion.I think in all essence it's the old scenario of does the penalty fit the crime, and perhaps it's the lawmakers who are at fault.

Regards Scotty

I agree. The point is the ICE officer is not the lawmaker, he's the enforcer. The problem lies with the judges and politicians that allow this stuff to happen.