Dream Act Supporters: Bill-Killing Filibuster Was Unconstitutional - Page 2

Originally Posted by Demise

The bill's lower threshold was always 12 years old at time of passage, always, they (12+) could apply once finished with high school, kids 0-11 would be left out but no one ever talks about them.

Problem right now is that every version of DA released is more and more watered down.
2001 - Green card, 6 yrs to finish 2 yrs of college or do 2 years of military, access to pell grants and work study, 6 years to get citizenship, ages 12+
2007 - Green card, 6 yrs to finish 2 yrs of college or do 2 years of military, access to work study, 6 years to get citizenship, Ages 12-35, retroactive provision
2010 - Visa + employment authorization, 6 yrs to finish 2 yrs of college or do 2 years of military, 13 years to actually get citizenship. Ages 12-30, No retroactive provision.
Rubio's planned act - Visa + employment authorization, ? yrs to do ? years of college or military service, unknown if renewable, no direct path to citizenship, indirect paths via marriage, work, green card lottery, military, etc. Unknown ages, likely no retroactive provision.

I'd love to see CIR pass but let's be realistic here, Rubio's contraption will have alot of difficulty passing (I really don't think it will get through the house) despite all the limitations, DA likely won't (really only shot we have now would be for courts to declare the filibuster of DA2010 unconstitutional and declare that the act de facto passed the senate, yes the one that would leave you and most of the long time dreamers out). Don't expect any actual legalization act to pass until 2015. Only other options would be an executive order, stealth provision in some act or USCIS moving the registry date forward.

Originally Posted by DA User

15 and under is what that matters. Where do you see the threshold of 0-11 being left out? You are telling me that someone who came to USA when they were 11 and under would be disqualified? You mean once a 11 year old turned 12 and then they could apply?
//My mistake, I looked over the bills and 12 years or older applies only to deportability, meaning that a potential beneficiary 12yrs or above cannot be deported while going to school, 5-11 do not have such protection but would benefit regardless, again my mistake. (younger than 5 at time of passage can't benefit under it as it's technically impossible for them to be in the country for over 5 years...)
The only watered down bill has been in the lame duck which leaves people out. Rubio's proposal does not leave anyone out, not according to what has been talked about. No one knows the age caps and the cut-off ages.
//I hope you're right, but for now let's wait and see.
Retroactive has always been there except the 2010 lame duck.
35 was always there until 2010 lame duck.
//True, but as political climate gets more and more shitty the harder it gets to pass a broader bill
2001 House DA did not have a maximum cap though.

2010 had a direct path to USC. It was a Democrat bill.

CIR should pass early next year.
//Seeing how most senate seats up for grabs this election are democratic the chances of them getting a high majority again are low, maybe if they managed to hang onto what they have now and filibuster gets struck down and they retake the house then maybe we could have CIR, chances of all that happening <1%.

Originally Posted by Demise

Responses in red.

Originally Posted by 1Up

Oh hey guys, back on topic of OP.

How does anyone think suing the Senate is going to help?

"A 52-page complaint filed on Monday by nonpartisan lobbying group Common Cause asks the U.S. District Court to declare the filibuster rule unconstitutional because it violates the principle of majority rule"

So all that will ultimately do is get rid of the filibuster? But stuff that happened in the past, that won't change would it? The Dream Act got a majority vote in the Senate, but not the 60 votes it needed to get passed during the filibuster. So, does that mean somehow, everyone would go back and it would somehow be "passed" in the Senate from way back then? I'm pretty sure that's a no, so what's the point of doing all this...?


Oh, and about what u guys were arguing about, I wish that all of us could get something out of this, and if I was one of the people who have been waiting for the Dream Act to pass since 2001, and suddenly I couldn't get it because I was pass the age limit, I would be so bitter. So yeah, respect for the older people around here. I hope something works out for all of us, so one day we can get outta this horrible situation we're in, and finally start enjoying all the "opportunities" people come looking for here.