Deportee's case may hold fate of thousands

[joej 0]

I thought this was interesting.

http://www.sltrib.com/search/ci_3626674

Deportee's case may hold fate of thousands

U.S. Supreme Court: Can a ban on hearings be applied retroactively to immigrants?

WASHINGTON - In a case that could affect hundreds of thousands of immigrants and their families, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments today about whether a longtime Utah resident and businessman was illegally deported.

There is no question that Humberto Fernandez-Vargas, a 53-year-old Mexican native who made his home in Utah for decades, was in the United States illegally. But the issue before the high court today is whether Fernandez-Vargas, and thousands like him, should have had the right to court hearings before being deported.

In 1996, Congress passed a law that did away with such hearings for those arrested after previously being deported.

The U.S. government says the law, which went into effect in 1997, can be applied retroactively to people like Fernandez-Vargas, who was deported in 1981 and illegally re-entered the United States the next year. His attorneys argue the law can't be applied to an act that happened before the law existed.

"That's a lot of years," says Nadine Wettstein, legal director of the American Immigration Law Foundation, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Fernandez-Vargas. "People wouldn't want things that they did 20 years ago to come back to haunt them when they've established a life, done what they should be doing and are trying to get their papers in order."

Fernandez-Vargas, who owned a trucking company in Ogden, was attempting to gain legal status in 2003 when he was arrested at a routine hearing for a green card. Two years earlier, he had married his longtime girlfriend, Rita, a U.S. citizen, with whom he has a 16-year-old son, Anthony.

Immigration officials exercised a previous deportation order against Fernandez-Vargas and sent him back to Mexico without a court hearing. The U.S. government says Congress in 1996 was clear that it wanted standing deportation orders to be reinstated if someone re-entered the country.

Federal circuit courts have split on the question, with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals - the one overseeing Utah - agreeing with the government that it acted correctly, but others, the 9th and 6th circuits, saying the law couldn't be applied retroactively.

"The bottom line is that in 1996 Congress was concerned about people crossing and re-crossing the border and they specifically attempted to create a disincentive for re-entering the country illegally, which is perfectly reasonable," says David Gossett, a Washington attorney for Fernandez-Vargas.

The problem, Gossett says, is that the government applied the law to say that anyone who re-entered the country before 1996 could be arrested and deported for breaking a law that didn't go into effect until 1997.

"It's simply cruel to apply this law retroactively," Gossett says. Fernandez-Vargas' wife and son, who plan to be at the hearing today, are struggling to make ends meet in Ogden without their breadwinner. The family almost lost their home last year to foreclosure until anonymous donors came forward to pay off their mortgage.

The U.S. Solicitor General's Office, which will argue the government's case today, did not return calls seeking comment. In court filings, the office says Congress was clear in its intention for the law to be retroactive.

The court's decision in the case will affect thousands of people in situations like Fernandez-Vargas', his attorneys say. But the case also could affect the current debate in Congress over immigration-law reform.

"This case kind of demonstrates that our current immigration laws are not sane," says Seth Stodder, a lawyer with the Los Angeles firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, and the former director of policy and planning for U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

"He's clearly come here, had a good life here, is a productive person in America. If the '96 law applies to him, he's out of luck. [if the law applies retroactively, it] is going to require the total disruption of his family and disruption of the economic impact this guy makes."

tburr@sltrib.com

An immigrant's timeline

* 1969: Humberto Fernandez-Vargas entered the United States illegally.

* 1969-1981: Fernandez-Vargas was deported and re-entered the United States an unknown amount of times.

* October 1981: Fernandez-Vargas was deported to Mexico.

* January 1982: Fernandez-Vargas again entered the United States illegally.

* 2001: After his marriage to a U.S. citizen, Fernandez-Vargas applied for a green card, the first step to becoming a legal resident.

* November 2003: Fernandez-Vargas was arrested and, after a year in jail, deported to his native Mexico.

[almaty 19]

interesting..

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

You really want your dirty mudslinging today, don't you?

[Jenn! 918]

I find it disconcerting that government time and energy is going into deporting this man, while nothing is being done about the millions of illegal immigrants in this country who came here AFTER '97.

Edited March 23, 2006 by jenn3539

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

You really want your dirty mudslinging today, don't you?

I resent that allegation. Just because I think illegal immigrants don't deserve the freedoms you and I enjoy, and just because I think they deserve to be used as cannon fodder for the cause of American expansionism overseas, does not mean I deserve to be spoken to that way.

[mercuryroad 0]

I find it disconcerting that government time and energy is going into deporting this man, while nothing is being done about the millions of illegal immigrants in this country who came here AFTER '97.

And what should be done with them?

[rbhigday 0]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

With or without body armor?

Oh wait our troops don't have any either!!!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I find it disconcerting that government time and energy is going into deporting this man, while nothing is being done about the millions of illegal immigrants in this country who came here AFTER '97.

And what should be done with them?

Read above.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

With or without body armor?

Without.

If they feel they need it, let them grow a thicker skin.

[rbhigday 0]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

With or without body armor?

Without.

If they feel they need it, let them grow a thicker skin.

Got to love compassion

[almaty 19]

Any illegal arrested should be drafted into the armed forces and sent into the Sunni triangle.

With or without body armor?

Without.

If they feel they need it, let them grow a thicker skin.

let them walk down the streets of iraq ..in front of our troops in their humvees...saves american lives..and expensive humvees..

[joej 0]

I find it disconcerting that government time and energy is going into deporting this man, while nothing is being done about the millions of illegal immigrants in this country who came here AFTER '97.

I agree. I'm not saying I agree with letting illegal immigrants come and go, but the system seems backwards in this case. In his case he is being subject to a law that came into effect like 20 something years after he entered the US. It looks like he is not even fighting for the right to be here, yet just wants some kind of a hearing. His request seems small when compared to the hundreds of illegal immigrants that live here, work under the table, get free healthcare and other government support without questions asked.

Ok people be nice to me. It's just an opinion.

[peejay 327]

An immigrant's timeline

* 1969: Humberto Fernandez-Vargas entered the United States illegally.

* 1969-1981: Fernandez-Vargas was deported and re-entered the United States an unknown amount of times.

* October 1981: Fernandez-Vargas was deported to Mexico.

* January 1982: Fernandez-Vargas again entered the United States illegally.

* 2001: After his marriage to a U.S. citizen, Fernandez-Vargas applied for a green card, the first step to becoming a legal resident.

* November 2003: Fernandez-Vargas was arrested and, after a year in jail, deported to his native Mexico.

Really? Screw this guy! This clown was here in 1986 and could have applied for the last (undeserved) amnesty provided by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. So bad, so sad...maybe he was too busy to file or his many arrests disqualified him.

There is a lot more to this story than meets the eye.

The bottom line is that, yet again, this is not an "immigrant" story. It is another story about illegal aliens that believe that laws don't apply to them. These people do not have "migration rights". Another reason to pass HR4437 into law that includes making illegal entry into the USA a felony. Maybe a little dose of jail time before deportation will serve as a deterent? I noticed that he hasn't decided to re-enter again illegally after a year in jail.

"This case kind of demonstrates that our current immigration laws are not sane,"...

Isn't that the truth. Already there are more amnesty bills being proposed and considered in the Senate. It seems that the key to permanent US immigration residency is to break as many laws as possible...illegal entry, visa violations, document fraud, employment violations, etc., etc. Why should scofflaws and absconders get to be the ones to immigrate? Talk about insanity!

As the old saying goes...if we do what we always did we will get what we always got. Isn't it about time to get tough on illegal immigration and quit playing games with the lunatic fringe and their supporters? No wonder there is no credibility in immigration and employment law enforcement. No wonder we can't control our borders. No wonder US immigration policy is a joke outside the USA.

[almaty 19]

I find it disconcerting that government time and energy is going into deporting this man, while nothing is being done about the millions of illegal immigrants in this country who came here AFTER '97.

I agree. I'm not saying I agree with letting illegal immigrants come and go, but the system seems backwards in this case. In his case he is being subject to a law that came into effect like 20 something years after he entered the US. It looks like he is not even fighting for the right to be here, yet just wants some kind of a hearing. His request seems small when compared to the hundreds of illegal immigrants that live here, work under the table, get free healthcare and other government support without questions asked.

Ok people be nice to me. It's just an opinion.

good post joe j...