http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/03/military.deportation/index.html It is absolutely heart-breaking that our government has spent so much time raiding factories and posturing about fences, yet cannot THINK to put a coherent set of immigration guidelines for its residents. No no no, that would make them seem weak on immigration! Any thoughts on immunity for those who enlist?
This seems like horseshit to me. Her mom was granted legal status and she wasn't because she had gotten married six weeks too soon? And now you got that jackass Mark Krikorian saying letting her stay would be amnesty for illegals? Bullshit. Let her stay, let her refile for legal status, and grant her legal status just like it would have been granted to her had she not gotten married. Then, concentrate on deporting people who actually need to be deported, not a Navy wife and mother. Now, I wouldn't say give blanket immunity to anyone who enlists in the military, that could create all sorts of problems. Not to mention there's something that just kind of seems dirty about the "come to our country, fight our war and we'll make you a citizen" concept.
I think she should be allowed to stay even if her husband wasn't in the military. She's been here legally since she was 5. Her mom was allowed to stay- it's just seems like a silly technicality that her application under her mom wasn't processed just because she got married (to a U.S. citizen!- Oh, I was wrong, he wasn't a citizen then. But, he is now. I don't see the problem.).
That mushroom cloud just north of my office is apparently Michelle Malkin's pea-sized brain exploding.
The story was correct and Gonzalez came to the US and stayed in the US legally. But a technicality is all they need to deport someone. What is sad is there Mildred has a status change from single (even if under care of her mother) to married, which moved her from the front of the line to somewhere farther on down.
What do you expect from the people who brought us the US tax code. Anything that can be easily understood will take jobs away from lawyers and accountants. Considering how many lawyers are in Congress and how much the legal profession donates to political campaigns, I cannot see any policy ever being simplied.
I would not go that far. I remember back in the early 80s there was a thing about korean nationals marrying GI's to get to the states. then as soon as they were state side they would get divorced and was able to stay in the country. Some of the military guys were getting money just marry these girls and some of the girls were just using the men and taking them for everything once they were stateside. I seem to recall some guys getting kicked out of the service for this. Any way, I would be in favor of some sort of fast track citizenship for spouse of "DEPLOYING" military members, after a back ground check
You can't enlist unless you're either a citizen or legal resident anyway (officers have to be citizens). And i'm about 90% sure that foreign nationals who enlist and serve honorably for a given amount of time are given citizenship, or at least a fast track for it. I also have heard of several foreign nationals who were killed in Iraq/Afghanistan being posthumously awarded citizenship, although I'm not sure if that's a blanket policy (if it isn't, I would support making it one).
The comment by Krikorian was comic genius! What a dope. Let the wife stay. After reading the article, this ought to be an open-and-shut case where she should be let in. It is absolutely ludicrous that this hasn't been settled. Hopefully the involvement of the press will help. This is exactly the kind of governmental idiocy that the press should be revealing.
If the Armed Forces enlistee is an illegal alien; then his debt to society and crime could be forgiven through such service or duty and his spouse and dependents should be shielded from deportation. After such duty, he should be free to apply for citizenship, for himself and family. The honor of military duty should be a credit to his citizenship application, and he should be highly favored for such duty in citizenship, but not a guarantee for such. The problem, however, should be addressed long before the draftee enlists. Any potential draftee in the Armed Forces should be screened for citizenship. A database of all those in our nation, would assist the Recruiter determine citizenship before it becomes an issue. It can then be accounted, so that if the draftee has dependents their status can be tracked.
Service in the US Armed Forces does not grant citizenship but has the potential to lead to expedited citizenship. Permanent residents serving in the Armed Forces can apply for citizenship in three years of service, rather than five years of residence. Not a huge bonus, I grant you. There are other rules for serving in times of war, however per 8 CFR 329.2, Iraq and Afghanistan don't yet apply. Also, there are over 37,000 non-citizens serving as of four years ago. I am sure someone can find more updated numbers. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31884.pdf
I think anyone who serves in our Military should be given citizenship. That this is even up for debate is a joke. Especially if we here it from a chickenhawk.