Hillary 2016: It's Offical. - Page 6

besides Reagan, Obama has been the only to take action towards benefit us (allowing the 2012 DACA memo to go through)

There's bigger fish to fry - take a look at this. The whole DAPA lawsuit debacle can go a way with a simple notice to comment, and this is questioning why the administration won't issue one. They issued one for the spouses of H1B holders, so they will go ahead and be able to affirmatively apply next month.

Well I can't recall who said it, but DACA is a direct result of dreamers putting pressure on the President. So sometimes actions do result in positive change. I really want DACA/DAPA to go through already my sister was too old for DACA by months and she really wants and needs this.

it is? I remember USCIS bringing Obama a memo actually obama never issues an executive order, did he?

http://www.archives.gov/federal-regi...ders/2012.html

Well, I think borders exist, but that doesn't change the fact that all the problems with the immigration system are simply rooted in far-right anti-immigration groups successfully demonizing the undocumented for the last thirty years in order to make it as difficult as possible to come to this country legally. The whole rationale behind the I-9, the 3 and 10 year bans, and all of the rest of enforcement ideology is to make it really difficult to legalize and/or to come here legally. The end result has actually been to encourage illegal immigration more than to "fix" the problem. Of all the people I know without papers, there is not one that would not have preferred to have come "illegally" than to come "legally" if they could have possibly done so.

Moreover, the whole notion of a person being "illegal" because they entered without inspection or overstayed a visa makes no sense. Nobody calls Americans that commit any number of more serious crimes "illegal" simply because they did something illegal--even if it were a felony or a violent crime or drunk driving. Moreover, while there is a statute of limitations on many other crimes, breaking immigration law is permanently held against a person because the Congress and the presidents have not been able to raise the census date as was the regular practice in American history up to the last couple decades. If Congress would simply do what has regularly been don in the past--to raise the statute of limitations on the crime-- to about 15 or 10 years prior to the current year, there would be no immigration "problem." To those that say this is impossible or I am expecting too much, you should do some homework and read up on the history of immigration law; this was the very normal and regular practice until 1996 when the xenophobes took over and have not let anything happen since. Considering all this, I don't see how it makes sense to permanently hold against somebody the fact that they once committed a misdemeanor by coming into the country without inspection.

I've said as much many times about Billary in the past and was attacked for it. I've also been really critical of Obama for being so weak in advocating for immigration reform in the past. At this point, however, there is not really much of an option but to support the Democrats. Even if all they are giving is some measly two-day old scraps of used food by the back door, at least they are not chasing you away with a shotgun just because you're hungry.

In regards to fixing the broken immigration system, there needs to be a distinction between those who came with inspection and those who did not. The end result is the same: we all failed to obey the law whatever the excuses were. However, 40% of us did come the right way and that needs to be taken into consideration.

I actually don't mind the term "illegal". If that's what Americans want to call us, then so be it. The idea about statute of limitation is interesting, though.

There already is one major distinction between visa overstays and those who are EWI and that is that if you have a means to adjust you can do so from the confines of the U.S. However, if you don't have a legal entry you have to go through a dreadful I601a or I601 process that is not only invasive, but highly subjective. Unless you are like some dreamers who have been able to successfully use AP. In regards to being treated differently under any CIR package I tend to disagree. If CIR ever passes I feel that those EWI and visa overstays should be processed accordingly, all other things beings equal and both have the merits to qualify.

Since '96 immigration law has not only become more difficult, but it is not conducive to the type of society and economy we have become. It is a shame that even family based immigration is so difficult, and there are republican presidential candidates who seek to only continue this trend by making it based more on merit than family. Don't get me wrong you should be able to adjust based on merit, but family immigration is vital.

If you are talking about marrying a USC, then yes that's the only option for visa overstays to adjust. There are no other ways as far as I know. So, unless you want to take the marriage route, there isn't much distinction between EWI and visa overstay.

Regarding CIR, the idea about a distinction between EWI and visa overstay was mentioned by a republican congressman Trey Gowdy when he was recently asked about CIR. CIR is not going to happen anytime soon, but I agree with that idea. Not everything can be treated equally like age cap (original DACA), 5-year residency requirement, etc. And what about the official language of this country? It's time they established that as well if that helps republicans.

There is no doubt 1996 immigration law made everything worse. 10 yr bar is the only reason I haven't gone back to my home country. Otherwise I could've applied for a new visa come back. Clinton signed that law only because republicans threatened government shutdown.

I havet to tell you that being ewi and visa overstay in adjustment of status is a huge advantage even if it's just through marriage. I guess I don't see the merits of treating visa overstays in a CIR context differently than ewi's because at the core of it a conscious decision was made to stay. Some people who are ewi consciously came and others were brought here, that's the same with visa overstays who consciously stayed. When you start treating some groups differently than others it heavily divides the immigrant community and pins one group against.

It's been the case that some groups are indeed treated differently from others. That's why I mentioned age cap and 5-year residency requirement. No one is trying to pin one group against another. I also said that the end result of EWI and visa overstay are the same; we all broke the law. But at least some people came here the right way and tried to do the right thing.

I knew my thoughts are not popular on this forum, but I just had to throw that in. There is no one-size-fits-all kind of CIR.