Skip to comments.
Group Reports 1996 Immigration Law Separated 1.6 Million from Families (Major sob story alert)
Associated Press via Fox News ^
| Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Posted on 07/18/2007 11:39:22 PM PDT by Daralundy
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
To: twonie
It was an obtuse reference to ‘Brother Where Art Thou’.
To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3pools; 3rdcanyon; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; ..
To: Daralundy
Fortunately for me,
nothing that Human Rights Watch thinks or say means squat.
Why is this "News"?
Every "separated" illegal has the option to follow their illegal family back home.
Any "separation" is self-imposed.
23
posted on
07/19/2007 9:36:14 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
To: gubamyster
I hate to admit that I’m not wimpering or sniffling. The only place I can locate sympathy for these folks is in the dictionary.
24
posted on
07/19/2007 9:50:09 AM PDT
by
B4Ranch
( "Freedom is not free, but the U.S. Marine Corps will pay most of your share.")
To: Niteflyr
"How do you explain to a child that her father has been sent thousands of miles away and can never come home simply because he forged a check?"You don't.
You just forge another check, buy a coupla tickets and go join him!
Just saying.
25
posted on
07/19/2007 9:53:17 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
To: rpgdfmx
The article focused on illegals and deportees, but this is a bigger problem then people realize. Despite what youve seen in the movies, marriage (or being engaged to) a U.S. citizen doesnt give you an automatic right to stay in the country, and the bureaucracy even for those playing by the rules is byzantine and moves at a snails pace. Total BS!
It may be today but from first hand experience I know this was not the case just a very few years ago, before the illegal flood became too large to ignore.
Any negative changes to the system in the last 5 years Has been the direct result of the massive abuse of the system by the illegals themselves.
Just saying.
26
posted on
07/19/2007 9:57:57 AM PDT
by
Publius6961
(MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
To: Daralundy
DAMN!....
Where’s my violin?? :)
27
posted on
07/19/2007 10:01:20 AM PDT
by
gimme1ibertee
(If not Fred, who?....If not now, when?)
To: Daralundy
Another 10.4 million to go?
To: Daralundy
No, choosing to break the law separated those families.
29
posted on
07/19/2007 10:39:51 AM PDT
by
LexBaird
(PR releases are the Chinese dog food of political square meals.)
To: rpgdfmx
The article focused on illegals and deportees, but this is a bigger problem then people realize. Despite what youve seen in the movies, marriage (or being engaged to) a U.S. citizen doesnt give you an automatic right to stay in the country, and the bureaucracy even for those playing by the rules is byzantine and moves at a snails pace. Because the article was about those deported for aggravated felonies. Those convicted of such are not "playing by the rules". The people you give as examples are not committing felonies, are they?
30
posted on
07/19/2007 10:44:32 AM PDT
by
LexBaird
(PR releases are the Chinese dog food of political square meals.)
To: goldstategop
NO! Criminal aliens who deserve to be deported.There problem with the 1996 law and who is considered convicted. Someone may commit a misdemeanor, but, depending on the crime, the 1996 law can interpret that misdemeanor as an aggravated felony. Secondly, a foreigner may be arrested and charged, but then the charges are dropped or the case is dismissed can still be considered convicted by immigration. All it takes is a vindictive spouse to claim domestic violence and unless the alleged perpetrator is acquitted, the foreigner is at risk for deportation.
In other words, somone who is convicted in criminal court can still be found to be convicted by immigration. That is an example of a broken immigration law.
31
posted on
07/20/2007 6:44:19 AM PDT
by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: LexBaird
Because the article was about those deported for aggravated felonies. Those convicted of such are not "playing by the rules". The people you give as examples are not committing felonies, are they? See my previous post. What the states and the feds don't consider as aggravated felonies, the 1996 immigration laws may be considered aggravated felonies by the immigration system. I you got 1 year and 1 day probation for a misdemeanor, you have committed an aggravated felony in the eyes of immigration.
32
posted on
07/20/2007 6:48:34 AM PDT
by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: doc30
33
posted on
07/20/2007 6:49:10 AM PDT
by
doc30
(Democrats are to morals what an Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
To: doc30
If you got 1 year and 1 day probation for a misdemeanor, you have committed an aggravated felony in the eyes of immigration. Examples of misdemeanors carrying that penalty? Are you talking of things such as DWI? If that is the type of misdemeanor you are talking of, I won't weep for their deportation.
Immigrating here is a privilege. If you can't keep clear of lawbreaking long enough to earn it, I don't particularly want you here. If that means you need to choose to leave your family behind or bring them back with you, tough; you should have thought about that before engaging in illegal behavior.
34
posted on
07/20/2007 2:15:53 PM PDT
by
LexBaird
(PR releases are the Chinese dog food of political square meals.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-34 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson