U.S. sailor: Don't deport my wife

C

CrazyIvan007

New member
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/03/military.deportation/index.html


I am torn on this story. If she is truely illegal, send her home. But, if the husband became a citizen in 2005, and she is married to him, doesn't she then become a citizen as well???

The husband is not only fighting in the name of the freedoms we have in this country, but he is fighting in support of the laws we have in this country as well.

Were I in his shoes and they deported my wife, I would leave the country and move to be with my wife. If I really wanted to live here, I would apply for a visa or citizenship for my wife.

In my opinion, they shouldn't expect us to bend our laws in order to accomodate them because of their righteous behavior. It's like when you were 5 and some other kid said: "OOOH! Can I have a candy? PLEAAASE! I'll be your best friend..."

What do y'all think?

In contrast, here is another vet upset about the illegal immigration problem:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/10/03/krnv.mex.flag.flap.krnv

Which one is right? I'll support this vet and our sovereignty myself thanks....


EDIT: Oops, I posted in wrong forum, can you move to political please? Sorry. :(
 
Nothing is automatic. If they didn't apply for an "adjustment of status" then she's just a plain old illegal. Once she's deported she can apply for admission as a wife. That's the simple explanation. There's a lot more in the details.
 
I think the immigration laws need reform, that's what I think.

In Gonzalez's case, his wife, Mildred, came to the United States with her mother in 1989 when she was 5 years old. They were granted political asylum because of their status as war refugees from Guatemala.

In September 2000, Mildred's mother applied for legalization and included her daughter in that application. Her mother was granted legal status in July 2004, according to Gonzalez.

However, six weeks earlier, Gonzalez and Mildred got married, canceling Mildred's ability to apply for legal status through her mother because she was no longer an unmarried daughter under the age of 21. As a result, her legal status still remains in jeopardy.
Click to expand...

See, she was a legal immigrant until she married her husband. Then, because the laws are so screwed up, she became an illegal immigrant. At any rate, marrying a foreign national does not make that person a U.S. citizen or even a legal resident. Marrying a U.S. citizen used to be a common scam to get a green card, so the law was changed.

Personally I do not believe in automatically deporting every illegal immigrant. We should treat the violent felons as illegal combatants/terrorists (they don't wear uniforms and they attack people in the U.S., seems clear cut to me what they are doing here), deport the ones with misdemeanor criminal records, and have the ones that only broke the law to get here but have otherwise been law abiding residents pay for background investigations, hefty fines for breaking the immigration laws, sign a document denying them welfare benefits indefinitely, and add an extra 5 years to their residency requirements for citizenship. If they don't wanna give Uncle Sam a big wad of cash and agree never to accept cash from Uncle Sam, deport 'em. I think that would nicely streamline the process as well as generating a new source of revenue.
 
"...if the husband became a citizen in 2005, and she is married to him, doesn't she then become a citizen as well???"

No. She has status for a green card, but is NOT made a citizen 'by marriage'.
Even if soneone born in the US marries a foreign national they are not granted citizenship, just the opportunity to enter the US on a green card as a spouse.

I have a guy working for me who is naturalized, but is waiting for his wifes paperwork to get finished.
 
I believe we are seeing stories reported in the media about illegal aliens in special circumstances that make them look pitiful, in an attempt to make us feel bad about illegal immigration laws. I believe the media, along with the pro-illegal alien politicians in Washington are systematically giving these stories as much attention as possible.

Watch the news carefully. In the last month, I have seen several stories like this. The father of a US soldier was deported, for example.

The media is attempting to manipulate public opinion regarding our immigration laws.
 
See, she was a legal immigrant until she married her husband.
Click to expand...

That’s not what the information you quoted seems to say. If she and her mother were here legally in 1989 why would the mother apply for legal status for her and her daughter in 2000, granted in 2004?

It would seem Mildred’s predicament is a result of her not waiting until after she gained legal status to get married.
 
That’s not what the information you quoted seems to say. If she and her mother were here legally in 1989 why would the mother apply for legal status for her and her daughter in 2000, granted in 2004?
Click to expand...

See, and maybe somebody who knows the immigration system better can clarify...because it sounds to me like the "legal status" she was applying for was to be granted a status other than refugee; in other words, I'd wager, to work toward citizenship.

But it states they were granted political asylum when they came, suggesting they weren't here illegally before this time.
 
It is my understanding that when a person is considered a refugee, they are only allowed in the US for as long as it takes for whatever country they came from to enter into a time of peace. Then, the refugee becomes illegal and must return to their home country. Asylum is granted to people who can prove they are in immediate and immenent danger if they continue to stay in the country they are coming from. Asylum can be permanent or temporary. It is a case-by-case basis.

This woman would have only been legal were she granted amnesty, which can be the result of being a refugee or being under assylum. But, this is not always the case.
 
But, if the husband became a citizen in 2005, and she is married to him, doesn't she then become a citizen as well???
Click to expand...

In my case - I wish that were true. After I was married, it took 18 months for my wife to get a US visa to come to the USA. Many people I Know said the same thing U just did. But no. There are a whole host of things U must do, and time U must wait.
 
My first wife was from England, and it was a lot of paperwork even back in 1980.

Just because the papers highlight certain stories does not mean those stories aren't true. All regulations have unintended consequences, and punishing the innocent or helpless is often one of those consequences. That's why we need to have human beings with actual decision making power in place.

This reminds me a bit of what happens when politicians mandate prison sentences instead of letting judges and prosecutors make those decisions based on the in depth and complicated circumstances of that particular case.
 
This reminds me a bit of what happens when politicians mandate prison sentences instead of letting judges and prosecutors make those decisions based on the in depth and complicated circumstances of that particular case.
Click to expand...

Off topic - but what about these looney Judge's that let the child molesters go with 60 days in jail - this has happened in Vermont and other places. So, sometimes minimums are a good thing.
 
Nope, it is never a good idea to let a politician who isn't familiar with the specifics of the case decide the sentence before there is even a case. Do judges intimately involved with the case make mistakes, of course, but not as many as politicians who don't even know the facts.

I suspect that the facts are quite different than what one might suspect by reading the press. I knew a guy who spent time in prison and got labeled as a sex offender because he had sex with a 16 year old trollop when he was 22. She had a fake ID that said she was 21 and he met her in a bar where they served alcohol, but hey, the rules are the rules so now he has to tell everyone in his neighborhood that he is a convicted sex offender.

Nothing is ever as simple as it seems on the news, all causes are over determined.
 
I suspect that the facts are quite different than what one might suspect by reading the press. I knew a guy who spent time in prison and got labeled as a sex offender because he had sex with a 16 year old trollop when he was 22. She had a fake ID that said she was 21 and he met her in a bar where they served alcohol, but hey, the rules are the rules so now he has to tell everyone in his neighborhood that he is a convicted sex offender.

Nothing is ever as simple as it seems on the news, all causes are over determined.
Click to expand...

I could respect your opinion if you were informed - but it seems that you have NOT been following some of these outrageous sentencings of sex offenders molesting young children. It was NOT a teen/fake age issue.

Sorry - I support mandatory sentencings in certain cases.
 
I was in the USAF and was hell bent on marring this Irish Girl. I was carrying a clearance at the time and had to receive the commanders permission to marry her. I Did and He Did and they did a background check on her prior to me receiving permission. We did and I wish I Didn't She Tuned out to be a Animal of different color! It took another 1" of paper work to obtain a green card and after she got to the states took of! It took me five years to get over that one. I ended up as a single parrent and now have a son flying helocopters in Afganistan. Haaaaa!
 
now have a son flying helicopters in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Homefires,

Please send your son my thanks for his service.

Whatever I think of the CIC that sent him overseas, or what I think of the reason, I will always fully support our men and women in uniform for their sacrifices.

May he come home to you quickly and intact.

All the best,
Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top