Posted on 05/30/2016 8:44:18 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
CHICAGO (WLS) -- A group of veterans left for Washington, D.C., Sunday on a mission.
Two brothers who served in Vietnam are among those now fighting deportation. On Memorial Day, they will take their battle to stop the deportation of all veterans to the nation's capital.
A federal law allows the government to deport non-citizens who have committed crimes, even misdemeanors. Military families and veterans are not exempt.
The Valenzuela brothers served in Vietnam. Valente, a Bronze Star recipient, was a soldier in the Army. Manuel, was a Marine, while they fought for their country. The brothers are now waging a war against the policy after the Valenzuelas received deportation notices in 2009.
Years ago, the Valenzuelas pleaded guilty to misdemeanors. Manuel pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. Valente pleaded guilty to domestic violence. The brothers were born in Mexico to a U.S.-born mother. They moved to America as toddlers. They were always told they were U.S. citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at abc7chicago.com ...
It’s ABC news so their “facts” must be checked very carefully.
It depends. Mother married or not? Father a citizen or not? How long did the mother live in the US (at least 10 years, at least 5 after age 14)?
Answer those questions, and you should be able to figure out their citizenship.
Well, it says disturbing the peace AND resisting arrest. Yes, it’s criminal. And wife beating (’domestic violence’) certainly is.
Why don’t they just move to SF problem solved!!!!!
Hardened convicts I’m sure.
Good question. From the whole Cruz/NBC issue I learned the law says anyone born to an American citizen, even abroad, can maintain American citizenship provided the proper paperwork is completed, and there is no specific time frame to complete it. IIRC if either of these guys have passports, or valid SS numbers then they fulfilled the requirements for someone born abroad to claim their citizenship.
Years ago I would have assumed that smoke equals fire. Now, given how I feel about the “justice system” in general, I would need to know the details of those misdemeanors before I passed judgment.
required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status;
made it illegal to hire or recruit illegal immigrants knowingly;
legalized certain seasonal agricultural illegal immigrants, and;
legalized illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language.
Oh I’m sure. But in 1986 they became citizens by virtue of Reagan’s amnesty.
But without doubt they are American citizens.
Maybe. Depends on mother's actions regarding their CRBAs.
But if they served in the US military, especially combat, they should be given special consideration for residency status. They probably would be under a real President.
It is probably known that they have espoused conservative causes.
Which is also real questionable.
Hold your horses...How can they be deported?
Hold your horses...did the mother declare them to be US citizens? Do you know that to be a fact?
The amnesty act was NOT automatic - those seeking to avail themselves of its provisions had to file the paperwork, take the written citizenship test, attend a personal interview, and get sworn in by an appropriate official. (And of course, pay fees at several steps.) If these dudes never did the paperwork, they aren’t citizens, they are illegals. And they need to take their drunken brawls and domestic violence to the other side of the wall.
We are a country where citizenship is conferred by blood and not by location. That was on purpose to break with England’s and probably other European countries practice of birth by location (and ownership by the King). The U.S. has had a variety of restrictions over the years of a mother conveying that citizenship by blood, whereas the father could always convey it. A legacy of society, property, etc.
Sounds like a great policy change for Trump. Give women the same capability to confer citizenship on her child as a man. Also highlights the blood and not location issue. Sounds like an amendment that would fly through the system with some panicked resistance from the democrats that gets buried.
You’re right. We should treat men who have risked their lives for this country the same as petty thugs. No credit should accrue to the former for their sacrifice. </sarc>
So if serving in the military trumps criminal laws, do you want to honor Tim McVey or Nidal Hasan first?
In the country for 40+ years and never got their citizenship???
Why do I feel there is more to this story...
1 instance each, and misdemeanors at that. Domestic violence charges in many instances are totally unjustified.
Did you serve in the military? They did, and nothing ever came up that said they were not citizens. Only foreign born citizens, which had to come up during the enlistment process, with green cards are allowed to serve. If they had been required to produce green cards then they would have learned then of their true status, if indeed they were not citizens. Look, I am against all illegal immigrants being here, but these men have at least paid a price that deserves further consideration.
Why didn't they become citizens then?
If you want to be consistent, you either need to adopt the Obama position and bring in all the Dreamers, or you need to keep out all illegal alien criminals. Engaging in situational ethics is not a principled position. You can either have the rule of law, or the rule of the favored classes. And you are opting for the latter.
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.