-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-admin-refusing-to-enforce.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
- Like we miss Cholera
- The Hill: 'Cracks are beginning to show in Emanuel’s once-impregnable political armor'
- Gibbs just flashed crib sheet on palm at WH briefing, included 'eggs, milk, bread, hope and change.'
- Lieutenant Dan Choi back on military drill duty
- AP photo shows Palin cheated, read notes off her hand at Teabagger conference
NOW the real question is, will ANY of the sycophantic news people ever bother asking Obama (not Gibbs) to explain why he can justify not obeying or enforcing the law word-for-word in one case, while claiming his hands are tied in any case related to gay rights?...
It's like he's still trying to sell himself to the Sarah Palin crowd or something.
It destroys trust & makes you wonder what and WHO
will he sell out next?
How come when we get a Konservative president, he is completely rigid and uncompromising, but we get a supposed "Liberal-leaning"" guy and he just has to equivocate, compromise and YIELD,
on point after point.
My heart yearns for a REAL liberal who supports single-payer, tries to cut the frikkin' military budget, tells southern dixiecrats to fuck themselves, AND supports gays unequivocally, all-of-the-time?
Unfortunately, Howard Dean ain't president.
Want to keep your commenting privileges?
(1) The senior officials in this Administration have a total blind spot about gay issues and see no irony in any of their decisions, or (2) The senior officials in the Obama Administation are as stupid and incompetent in governing as they were brilliant and competent in campaigning.
I don't like either choice.
I think it is a combination of the two. Running a political campaign and running an extremely large bureaucracy are two very different things.
I've hit the same point with the Obama administration. There is no 20 dimensional chess game, they're just clueless idiots about some things, and they're not willing to learn from their mistakes.
Gay equality or health care?
Gay equality or "national security"?
Gay equality or the economy?
Guess what, it is possible to have them all !!!
And to everyone who doesn't like articles about the gay community......don't read them !!!!
What other reason could there be? I think it's a fantasy-chase after the some of the Palin crowd's votes.
If it's not that, what else could it be?
Talk about a vain quest!
He's "reaching across the aisle" strictly for votes. And he's selling out every position he "stood for" to do it.
Nobody wants to contemplate that -- but it's a very real possibility.
He should really just be honest that he hates us.
Don't promise us you are our "fierce advocate" and then screw us at every turn. We are higher educated, financially more stable and more humane than those knuckle dragging righties you so often try to court. Let's see you win re-election next time around if you screw your friends every chance you get.
Where is all the righteous indignation, for those that have suffered and are still suffering SEVERE hardship, separation, EXILE, financial devastation and most of all BOLD FACE DISCRIMINATION by not allowing any LGBT use the Immigration system.
Thousands of your brothers and sisters would LOVE to be able to join the fight for equality but most are too concerned with having their family ripped apart.
Granted the DOMA repeal would help Bi-National but the facts are that the UAFA and Reuniting Families act (RFA) are way further along than the DOMA repeal.
WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE 77 Senators asking for a STOP ORDER by the President on RAIDING our Citizens homes, like Shirley Tan or allowing exiles to return, like Mayor JW Lown ?
The Right for Gays to utilize the Immigration System in the same manner as straights do IS A VERY BASIC CIVIL RIGHT- to be able to be w/ the person you love.
And for those not effected- don't be too sure, many of your same-sex couple bi-nationals are afraid to discuss -even to their closest friends.
Besides we are ALL effected when Civil Rights are UNEQUAL.
It's long overdue that the leader of democracy move into the new Millenium along w 19 of our closest allies that make provision for same sex Sponsorship. Most of these Countries DO NOT offer Gay Marraige but realize not to offer Immigration Equality is INHUMANE!!!!!
For those wanting to help - or just throw a couple of those DNC bucks @ - www.immigrationequality.org - they do a great job, with this issue as well as lifting the HIV ban.
Just remember, if things had turned out differently with that wonderful man you met from Brazil or that special person you met while traveling through France - The UAFA would be your # 1 priority ;-)
PLEASE HELP OUT!!!!!
Many will remember Ms. Tan's Testimony June 3rd before the Senate Judiciary Committee - which was compelling to most except, of course to the ever hateful - Jeff Sessions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/05/jeff-s...
Speaking of wing nuts in Alabama -Surely most here know that Alabama finally repealed their Anti-Inter-Racial Marraige laws in NOV 2000!!!!!!!!! and the vote was 60-40 - yikes!
Yeah let the masses decide your civil rights - state by state.
btw, that also gives me ZERO confidence about their ability to navigate all the international crises in 2009 with a 1994 mind-set....
What's up with this?
Rahm wants to be a thug - I don't know what he wants to prove. Perhaps he had a gay experience and somehow he now has to do everything in his power to live down that 1 experience to ensure to himself that he is straight?
Seriously, any phycholgists out there who can explain the behavior of these 2 "straight" dudes by the names of Obama and Emmanuel?
You see, you can get a green card through marriage ONLY if it's "opposite marriage".
The federal government, which issues visas, wouldn't recognize the marriage of the Iowan and the Kenyan.
So, since the Kenyan man's visa status COULD NOT have anything to do with his marriage to the Iowan man, the death of the Iowan man couldn't have an affect (on the visa status) either.
I'm in a LTR with a non-American citizen, but luckily he already has his green card.
Still, we've been advised not to get married (we live in Mass.) until he gets his citizenship, which is about 3 years away.
This general issue is why we need the Uniting American Families Act passed, but given the lack of movement on DOMA, DADT, ENDA... I'm not holding my breath.
We are just a slice of extra percentage points for votes and a few extra dollars...I want FULL equality now!
Why can't I sponsor my partner for green card!? We want to move back to California, but cannot....why!?! Because we are gay and therefore the US government will continue to discriminate against us...
I don't know how many sleazy men I met overseas who went looking for young wives who spoke little English but were desperate to go to America and would wait on them hand and foot like a "traditional wife." But my boyfriend and I are threats to family values. Fuck that. And fuck this administration.
I am furious about the DOMA DOJ brief and DADT, but you, who seems to have contacts, seem to be just be about complaining and not acting. What actions have you taken? We get it, you hate Obama and think he is against the gay community. That is not calling the White House, that is not calling members of Congress, who have even more power, calling the Department of Justice who wrote the brief, contacting HRC and other Organizations for the community. Enough complaining about Obama and just take some action.
Chill man! John is a "fierce advocate" for full equality for the LGBT community and has done more to promote our rights than just about anyone. The president chooses which items will move through the congress by using his bully pulpit. Congress does not operate in isolation. Leaders lead, the president is not doing this so we have to lean on him!
What have you done lately?
Um, DUH....
Informing us is action.
( You were joking about your question I hope, cause it really is one of the stupidist things I've seen posted on the internet in the last week or two)...even stupider then cat playing the piano. )
Then go elsewhere. Is someone holding a gun to your head, forcing you to visit this site?
Differing opinions are welcome, but please write your objections without vitriol to the blog host.
This is just sick. I don't see how anyone can think this administration is going to do jack shit for us without a fight.
They aren't our friends, they aren't even neutral; they hate us, but their hate is cowardly - through inaction and omission.
I still can't understand how The Democratic Party and Obama can be so dismissive of such a large voting blog with lots of time and $$$ money.
Can we say One Term President?
All John is doing is using it as an example to prove that Obama has been lying when he says his hands are tied because he has to follow the letter of the law.
Did you complain in January when Obama took time away from healthcare and the economy to issue an executive order on stem cell research? No, why not?
How about any of the other non healthcare issues that Obama has dealt with, did you bitch about that? No? why not?
Correct mooresart...
Roosevelt was handling 2 wars...Europe and Japan
Differing opinions are welcome, but please write your objections without vitriol to the blog host.
or, put better, the Democrats we'll have to BLAME!
Then don't come to this site.
buh bye.
How HORRIBLE for you!
There's that word again.. shrill. What's next.. "you people" ?
You must either be a heterosexual male who cannot comprehend the idea that, under the law, all men are not created equal OR a naive homosexual that has yet to experience inequality.
Ever the optimist, me ...
it's another version of the "he's so smart/savvy and has everything figured out and has a secret plan that will make everything wonderful for everybody if we would only just STFU" argument. i'm not buying.
If they don't act on our behalf now, they never will.
This is COMPLETELY different from DADT and DOMA
In the case of DADT and DOMA, the law on the books is absolutely clear in what it prohibits.
In the case of immigration law, the "widow's penalty" is not explicit in the statute, it arose as a result of a rule-making interpretation. Thus, it is entirely appropriate for this administration to reverse a previous adminsitration's executive decision that "immediate relatives" of US citizens do not include their widows and widowers.
The interpretation that says widows must be deported is extremely inconsistent with the fact that the "status adjustment" process at the end of the two year period explicitly contemplates the possibility of bereavement and explicitly makes an exception to allow widows and widowers to gain full permanent residency.
From the relevant law, 8 CFR 216:
A conditional permanent resident is an alien who has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence within the meaning of section 101(a)(20) of the Act, except that a conditional permanent resident is also subject to the conditions and responsibilities set forth in section 216 or 216A of the Act, whichever is applicable, and part 216 of this chapter. Unless otherwise specified, the rights, privileges, responsibilities and duties which apply to all other lawful permanent residents apply equally to conditional permanent residents...
(section 216A refers to entrepreneurship-based immigration, and is not relevant to the widow's penalty)
Section 216.3 (a) establishes the procedure for the revocation of conditional permanent residency:
§ 216.3 Termination of conditional resident status.
a) During the two-year conditional period. The director shall send a formal written notice to the conditional permanent resident of the termination of the alien's conditional permanent resident status if the director determines that any of the conditions set forth in section 216(b)(1) or 216A(b)(1) of the Act, whichever is applicable, are true, or it becomes known to the government that an alien entrepreneur who was admitted pursuant to section 203(b)(5) of the Act obtained his or her investment capital through other than legal means (such as through the sale of illegal drugs).
...
The burden of proof shall be on the Service to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that one or more of the conditions in section 216(b)(1) or 216A(b)(1) of the Act, whichever is applicable, are true, or that an alien entrepreneur who was admitted pursuant to section 203(b)(5) of the Act obtained his or her investment capital through other than legal means (such as through the sale of illegal drugs).
As I said, 216A is not relevant here, so let's look at 216(b)(1):
(b) Determination of fraud after two years. If, subsequent to the removal of the conditional basis of an alien's permanent resident status, the director determines that an alien spouse obtained permanent resident status through a marriage which was entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws or an alien entrepreneur obtained permanent resident status through a commercial enterprise which was improper under section 216A(b)(1) of the Act, the director may institute rescission proceedings pursuant to section 246 of the Act (if otherwise appropriate) or removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act.
Hmm, they're only supposed to remove people if there's a preponderance of evidence which suggests that the marriage was entered into for the purpose of evading the immigration laws. That's not the same thing as the US citizen dying.
But wait, there's more. If you remain in the country to the end of your 2-year period of conditional residency, you have to file to have the conditions removed. Here's the section of the law on that filing:
§ 216.4 Joint petition to remove conditional basis of lawful permanent resident status for alien spouse.
(a) Filing the petition—(1) General procedures. Within the 90-day period immediately preceding the second anniversary of the date on which the alien obtained permanent residence, the alien and the alien's spouse who filed the original immigrant visa petition or fiance/fiancee petition through which the alien obtained permanent residence must file a Petition to Remove the Conditions on Residence (Form I–751) with the Service. The petition shall be filed within this time period regardless of the amount of physical presence which the alien has accumulated in the United States. Before Form I–751 may be considered as properly filed, it must be accompanied by the fee required under §103.7(b) of this chapter and by documentation as described in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, and it must be properly signed by the alien and the alien's spouse. If the joint petition cannot be filed due to the termination of the marriage through annulment, divorce, or the death of the petitioning spouse, or if the petitioning spouse refuses to join in the filing of the petition, the conditional permanent resident may apply for a waiver of the requirement to file the joint petition in accordance with the provisions of §216.5 of this part. Upon receipt of a properly filed Form I–751, the alien's conditional permanent resident status shall be extended automatically, if necessary, until such time as the director has adjudicated the petition.
(my bold).
What's that? A widow or widower may apply for a waiver that lets them stay even though their US citizen spouse is now deceased? Tell me more...
§ 216.5 Waiver of requirement to file joint petition to remove conditions by alien spouse.
top
(a) General. (1) A conditional resident alien who is unable to meet the requirements under section 216 of the Act for a joint petition for removal of the conditional basis of his or her permanent resident status may file Form I–751, Petition to Remove the Conditions on Residence, if the alien requests a waiver, was not at fault in failing to meet the filing requirement, and the conditional resident alien is able to establish that:
(i) Deportation or removal from the United States would result in extreme hardship;
(ii) The marriage upon which his or her status was based was entered into in good faith by the conditional resident alien, but the marriage was terminated other than by death, and the conditional resident was not at fault in failing to file a timely petition; or
(iii) The qualifying marriage was entered into in good faith by the conditional resident but during the marriage the alien spouse or child was battered by or subjected to extreme cruelty committed by the citizen or permanent resident spouse or parent.
OK this is where the confusion comes in. Looks like Congress screwed up when writing this law, since they explicitly allow widows to seek a waiver, but do then specifically exclude "marriage entered into in good faith but terminated by death" as a reason to grant a waiver. Looks like the bill got screwed up by amendments. This is reinforced by the actual application for removal of conditions, I-751 (PDF), which includes a checkbox to request a waiver of the joint filing requirement because "My spouse is deceased." The instructions (PDF) to the form specify:
If you are filing to waive the joint filing requirement due to the death of your spouse, also submit a copy of the death certificate with your petition.
So it looks like whoever wrote that form and its instructions believed that a waiver to the joint filing requirement should be granted to widows/widowers, as long as they could demonstrate that the marriage was entered into in good faith.
The "widow's penalty" therefore really does seem to be a rule-making decision based on a too-literal interpretation of one section of the law that is seemingly contradicted both by a different section of the same law and by the forms resulting from that law. It is the subject of ongoing lawsuits.
They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.
________________
The admin isn't choosing not to enforce (0 / 0)
immigration law.
It is making a different executive interpretation of an ambiguous and self-contradictory statute than the previous administration.
The executive is entirely within its rights to make a reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute.
It is entirely not within its rights to willfully ignore a clear directive from Congress. That's one of the main reasons we disliked the previous administration so much.
Then we have the "legal claim" that the administration just has to support DOMA in court. But of course, they don't. Even one of the two pro-Obama apologist gay lawyers finally admitted that Obama could oppose DOMA if he said that he thought it was unconstitutional. He's already said he thinks it's discriminatory, and abhorrent. Are we to believe that our fierce advocate constitutional law professor does NOT think our civil rights rise to the level of a constitutional question?
Again, apologize all you want, but stick to the facts. This administration has chosen to avoid our community when it comes to the major campaign promises that were made. They had a choice, and their choice was to get away from us as quickly as possible.
It is entirely within Obama's legal rights to suspend enforcement of DADT NOW, without congress.
DAMN, we are entering it in 5,4,3......
I'd say he did rather well for his base, unlike Obama who sells out his base every chance he gets.
I hope this is not true, but it's looking more and more like so. For HHS to lift the ban shouldn't be taking so long, the part that takes long was already done the Bush adminitration, and it was done much faster, all this administration has to do is to take out one line in the HHS regulation, and the president has full power to ensure it happens swiftly, unfortunately, he's not doing that.
So the message he sends out seems to be, gay issues are not important, and worse, sometimes he seem to lean toward the anti-gay biased group, as in his position with DOMA. This is not good. We have to speak up and get our voice heard!!
Take time to look at today's frontpage and any other day's frontpage before writing such nonsense as Gay right's issues are covered 100% of the time in every single post.
sheesh
It is keeping my heterosexual husband out of the US as well.