Immigration attorney: The nine Dreamers pushed it too far - Page 2

IamAman · 03:08 PM

That's what I've been saying. If you're already breaking the rules and are here, don't make it worse. If someone throws you a lifeline like DACA, and you still break the rules, then you get absolutely no sympathy from me and I hope you enjoy your life in Mexico. If nothing else, nobody there can tell you to "go back home" because you're already there and you did it on your own. Nobody to blame this time - not the laws, not the parents, just yourself. You sure made a point though- for those who are against immigration reform.

dtrt09 · 07-27-2013, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAman

That's what I've been saying. If you're already breaking the rules and are here, don't make it worse. If someone throws you a lifeline like DACA, and you still break the rules, then you get absolutely no sympathy from me and I hope you enjoy your life in Mexico. If nothing else, nobody there can tell you to "go back home" because you're already there and you did it on your own.

I agree with you, employment authorization changes your life completely. I don't have it, so I'm stuck for the time being and it really, really..sucks to put it colloquially.

But people, they are already back in U.S. soil!

And if they entered illegally the first time, they were never admitted under current law. So, what they are doing is asking for parole in place based on humanitarian grounds, which are based on discretion, not eligibility.

They already have DACA which is official discretion to live and work here so they can ask for official admission to the country which cures their illegal entry and will allow them to adjust status if they qualify through current channels. Oh, my God, I just had an epiphany - how can the federal government deny your stay when the feds already gave you permission to stay?

Pianoswithoutfaith · 07-27-2013, 03:53 PM

because they left already? It was very clear to us that if you leave the country with out A.P you lose your protected status? Do you not understand what deferred action is?

You brake the laws by entering here once, fine, heres your DACA but then you do it again and bring people with you (essentially turning you into a "coyote"

come on man

dtrt09 · 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianoswithoutfaith

because they left already? It was very clear to us that if you leave the country with out A.P you lose your protected status? Do you not understand what deferred action is?

You brake the laws by entering here once, fine, heres your DACA but then you do it again and bring people with you (essentially turning you into a "coyote"

come on man

You do not understand parole.

They submitted their request for readmission at the border as they were supposed to do. Advanced parole is meant for waivers, so that you have advanced permission to re-enter based on eligibility. They aren't eligible for anything; they are asking for discretion. This is different. They did not come here of their own volition the first time; this time they are requesting their parople on their own. They presented themselves at a point of entry and presented themselves for inspection and admission. No, they are not coyotes and they did not sneak in.

Pianoswithoutfaith · 07-27-2013, 04:02 PM

Granted but brining people with them this time like that?

dtrt09 · 07-27-2013, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianoswithoutfaith

Granted but brining people with them this time like that?

I understand, but it is very hard to judge unless you've walked in that person's shoes. I too have conflicted feelings because I do not condone going around breaking any possible law just because you can. But if they have legal representation pro bono, the possibility of a procedure being available within existing law must be present, I assume.

Dreamer X · 07-27-2013, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtrt09

How so? I ask you in good faith, I think your posts are thoughful and honest for such a young person.

Did John Lennon push it too far with deferred action? He had a drug conviction, I think.

These are still individual cases with individual circumstances and just because those involved have public figures, we don't know all the details of their stories. Even their attoneys might not know every little thing or circumstance that when pieced together over the narrative and timeline would make their cases compelling. The activists have never been in deportation proceedings before, right? Except for the one woman who had been deported seven years ago and re-entered with the group.

So, the government doesn't have a case file for them that would be as detailed and comprehensive as that of an individual with a case in proceedings and appeal. I don't think these will be the equivalent of class-action cases but the unknown and the possible is what's at stake here.

I don't exactly see myself as young, but I think it's pushing it too far because being here illegally is already difficult enough to argue and could jeopardize CIR even more cause it defeats the argument that we're already here in the US and might as well make us productive members of society. They also look like they're enforcing the whole "illegal invader" image. It just makes me cringe. Honestly, I wish they could come back but from a native born American's perspective I'd see it as deserting your roots. If you let them come back, it opens a whole nother can worms. It just makes it much more complicated that just puts CIR in a far greater risk of not passing.

Pianoswithoutfaith · 07-27-2013, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtrt09

I understand, but it is very hard to judge unless you've walked in that person's shoes. I too have conflicted feelings because I do not condone going around breaking any possible law just because you can. But if they have legal representation pro bono, the possibility of a procedure being available within existing law must be present, I assume.

See there you go getting all sentimental and emotional. One persons family it's bog worth the risk of getting bad press for everyone.

ItsKdC · 07-27-2013, 04:52 PM

Morons...all of them.

IamAman · 07-27-2013, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dtrt09

I understand, but it is very hard to judge unless you've walked in that person's shoes. I too have conflicted feelings because I do not condone going around breaking any possible law just because you can. But if they have legal representation pro bono, the possibility of a procedure being available within existing law must be present, I assume.

lol WE ALL have walked in their shoes. You don't think I'd like to go to a European vacation and see family members and get away? These guys overplayed their cards. As far as the law is concerned, entry without inspection is an unforgivable sin. They knew this but they wanted to be loud and make a point that they didn't care about the law and wanted to change it. They had no idea how big of a break they got with DACA and pretty much threw it away.

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30

They need you!

Forum links

Resources

Join our list

National calendar of events

April

Immigration attorney: The nine Dreamers pushed it too far - Page 2