Trump's published Immigration policies MEGATHREAD

[Lemonslice 4,922]

4 minutes ago, AstroCanada said:

At this point, if you're not from one of the 7 listed countries, there's no need to worry.  I'm quite surprised it extends to GC holders, but it seems to.   The president has pretty obvious authority to block visa holders from entering, but GC holders have more rights.

 

If you are currently in the US and from one of the 7 countries, do not leave under any circumstances.  

 

Having just had my partner get his visa yesterday, my heart really goes out right now to those of you that are affected by this and may not be able to be together soon.  I'm sorry for the behavior of my country.

To the contrary, I see a lot of reasons to be worried.  

[MrsBurgz 104]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/legal-challenges-mount-for-trumps-travel-ban-from-7-muslim-countries-192009501.html

[Michael Lombardi 9]

9 minutes ago, Lemonslice said:

To the contrary, I see a lot of reasons to be worried.  

I agree, this is a clear signal that long term it is not safe for green card holders from any country of origin to leave the US. Practically for some countries the chance of trouble may be low, but this move sets enough precedence that it makes the risk non-zero even if it's still low. These people had no warning, no grace period, nothing. They have US lives, and might have been visiting friends and family.

 

The ones I'm really wondering about are people who were visiting a country other than their country of origin. They might not have enough ties to their country of origin to go there (remember the countries on this list often refuse to take back people), and if they were just visiting a country they likely wouldn't be able to go back to where they are visiting. So what happens then, are we just going to jail these people who are in all other ways US citizens and did nothing wrong?

Edited January 28, 2017 by Michael Lombardi

[llcoolmg 20]

21 minutes ago, Transborderwife said:

Temporary or not, the flag is in the system.  What's to say that it doesn't get extended?  People will likely lose jobs because of this.  Then what?  Is the government going to look after that for them?

The whole point is to extend it. But to extend it into a more formal permanent vetting process, which Trump has described as "extreme vetting". People may lose their jobs, but does the US government owe visitors guaranteed employment or something?

 

 

Edited January 28, 2017 by llcoolmg

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Just now, llcoolmg said:

The hole point is to extend it. But to extend it into a more formal permanent vetting process, which Trump has described as "extreme vetting". People may lose their jobs, but does the US government owe visitors guaranteed employment or something?

 

 

LPR's are visitors now?

 

also say you're a family of 4, went on a cruise to oh let's say Mexico.  Where do you go now?  Your kids who are supposed to be in school?  Your apartment that you pay for monthly?  Then what?

[yuna628 9,687]

4 minutes ago, llcoolmg said:

The hole point is to extend it. But to extend it into a more formal permanent vetting process, which Trump has described as "extreme vetting". People may lose their jobs, but does the US government owe visitors guaranteed employment or something?

 

 

LPRs are not visitors. They are taxpaying individuals who have lives, homes, jobs, and bills to pay. Some of the individuals detained today were people who worked on behalf of our government, to help keep our soldiers safe, and were nearly murdered for their efforts - and this is how you think we should repay them? Furthermore officials at JFK were intending on holding some of them indefinitely without access to council.

Edited January 28, 2017 by yuna628

[llcoolmg 20]

4 minutes ago, Transborderwife said:

LPR's are visitors now?

 

also say you're a family of 4, went on a cruise to oh let's say Mexico.  Where do you go now?  Your kids who are supposed to be in school?  Your apartment that you pay for monthly?  Then what?

Research scholars are. Which is what the Iranian visitor the nytimes is crying about, likely is. So far the only job affected.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Just now, llcoolmg said:

Research scholars are. Which is what the Iranian visitor the nytimes is crying about, likely is. So far the only job affected.

Not the point

[Mollie09 1,543]

 

[Suss&Camm 2,213]

 

[yuna628 9,687]

 

 Is this Trump's new ''scientific'' polling method? To detain LPRs to ''ask'' under duress how they feel about him?

[Transborderwife 4,666]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

 

 Is this Trump's new ''scientific'' polling method? To detain LPRs to ''ask'' under duress how they feel about him?

That is disgusting.  Heil Drumph

[databit 328]

News: Now US CITIZENS cannot visit Iran! This is from Iran, not the US. Maybe the other countries cited will follow?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/middleeast/iran-will-ban-us-citizens/

[yuna628 9,687]

Absolutely horrifying.

[m&zCAIRO 29]

To refuse entry to greencard holders who have ALREADY been through the vetting process and have their lives, families and jobs here........this is DISGUSTING and UNAMERICAN,  This is not what America stands for, I have no words.............