U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-21-2012, 09:01 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
But I thought that "Mexican" was always used here in the context of being an illegal alien. Why worry about clarity in terminology, remember? I can easily think of a dozen times you and I degenerated a topic into a specific argument about it.

Not that I intend that this become another to the count, just trying to point out that you and others have stated the exact opposite to your opinion above before...
Mexican is technically a citizen of Mexico but could be extended to mean anyone whose primary allegience is to the country of Mexico.

Vicente Fox spoke of the Mexican diaspora -- even though they would gain US citizenship so they could completely access everything in the USA, they would remain Mexicans. US citizenship for the big easy money but still Mexican in every way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-21-2012, 09:03 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,131 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Errmm, what?...

Not really sure how an illegal alien is on a non-immigrant visa and able to switch over to another non-immigrant category. Sure, an I-129F would have been a path (if the sponsor is a U.S. citizen, not an LPR) from the beginning, but I am referring to relationships, typically marriages, that have started and exist right now within the United States. Mixed-status (LPR-to-illegal alien) couples are common enough, and have no relief (otherwise) until the LPR naturalizes.
Some illegals are visa overstays, hence the 539 and still the 129F. If you are talking only of EWI's then its a whole other ball of wax, they must live with the consequences of their actions, as the EWI is fully aware that being caught means deportation. An LPR/IA marriage means the LPR can choose to go with the loved one (or the marriage really isn't worth being in) as it was easy enough to relocate in the first place. A job can be had anywhere.

Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 06-21-2012 at 09:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2012, 09:08 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
There is an estimated two million people that are in a U.S. citizen-to-illegal alien relationship...

Probably more than that in a mixed-immigration (Legal Permanent Resident-to-illegal alien) relationship...

Do you define those marriages (and possible families) as "illegal" or "legal"?...
The illegal alien is still an illegal alien. These families certainly had the choice to do things the right way -- it's easy enough to apply for a fiance visa.

Marriage and childbirth shouldn't be just ways to get around immigration laws -- plenty of people manage to abide by the laws. There should be no rewards for those who think they're too cute and believe they are special and don't have to follow any law that doesn't suit them.

It's stupid that someone would marry an illegal rather than sponsor this person the right way and then think they should automatically be exempt for the laws.

The only thing is that so many of these are sham marriages, there needs to be some tightening up of the laws. For example there's requirement that the sponsored immigrant isn't going to be a burden on the public, but the ONLY taxpayer handout that counts are the cash handouts. Medicaid, food stamps, WIC, even Section 8 housing doesn't count at all -- therefore the sponsor is not required to provide a good health insurance plan for his/her immigrants, or feed and house them.

It's incredible that someone can sponsor and bring in indigent immigrants who end up getting Medicaid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2012, 09:18 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
Does the law recognize them as legal marriages? There lays you answer.

As for individuals in a mixed relationship that has nothing to do with what their status is in this country. You either have authorization to be here or you don't aka legal or illegal.
Yes, in every reference that I am talking about marriage, it would be "legal" for the area they reside in. I'm not sure what "answer" that provides, marriage to even a U.S. citizen does not convey immigration status on its own. It's a conundrum, a bond recognized by law, when one of the partners is not.

There are far more mixed-status relationships (defined as a Legal Permanent Resident married to an illegal alien) than between U.S. citizens and illegal aliens. I know it won't get any compassion here, but the couple leaving the United States will often lose their ability to come back, as an extend stay (a year or more) outside the country will invalidate legal residency status. These can be long-term relationships, with U.S. citizen children for the family to be in flux for decades.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2012, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Some illegals are visa overstays, hence the 539 and still the 129F. If you are talking only of EWI's then its a whole other ball of wax, they must live with the consequences of their actions, as the EWI is fully aware that being caught means deportation. An LPR/IA marriage means the LPR can choose to go with the loved one (or the marriage really isn't worth being in) as it was easy enough to relocate in the first place. A job can be had anywhere.
It doesn't really work that way. A visa overstay is out-of-status, and cannot simply switch to a non-immigrant (presumably 'K'-Class) visa type. A K-1 is single-entry, and invalidated if the couple is already married. I've already addressed an LPR losing residency to fully follow their spouse out of the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2012, 11:21 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,131 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
It doesn't really work that way. A visa overstay is out-of-status, and cannot simply switch to a non-immigrant (presumably 'K'-Class) visa type. A K-1 is single-entry, and invalidated if the couple is already married. I've already addressed an LPR losing residency to fully follow their spouse out of the country.
Actually it can work that way. A visa overstay can file for an Adjustment of Status, hence the 539 (and 129F if they are not married yet, and fiance is in the USA), they could also file the 130 and the 485 with the 539 (if already married and in the USA). As for an LPR leaving the country, like I said it is a choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2012, 07:28 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,711,508 times
Reputation: 22158
If the marriage is sincere, there is no reason that the US citizen or LPR wouldn't want to live with their spouse in another country. Love doesn't just happen in the USA, it can exist in other countries -- if it's real.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2012, 08:57 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,011,547 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Actually it can work that way. A visa overstay can file for an Adjustment of Status, hence the 539 (and 129F if they are not married yet, and fiance is in the USA), they could also file the 130 and the 485 with the 539 (if already married and in the USA). As for an LPR leaving the country, like I said it is a choice.
An I-129F used to petition for a Fiance(e) Visa can only be used by a U.S. citizen sponsor, not an LPR, and it is primarily for the single-entry to marry. Typically if the fiance(e) is already present, the couple would just marry, and try to adjust status afterwards. As also stated before, the act of marriage is "immigrant intent", and an applicant can't qualify for a non-immigrant visa once they are "qualified" (by their marriage to a U.S. citizen) for an Immigrant Visa.

The only scenario I have seen for a potential immigrant (by marriage to a U.S. citizen) to remain as a non-immigrant classification is a K-3. An I-130 has to be filed, but the applicant doesn't proceed to set up later appointments, and extends the K-3 through the I-539 petition. This is done because there may be LPR requirements (like immunization) that the applicant can't qualify for (but they can comply with the terms of the K-3), or there may be a need to have an extended stay outside the United States.

Any derivative K-4 (for a minor child of the K-3) is bound to its coattails (and cannot process to legal residency independently), but will eventually age-out if the K-3 is extended long enough...

Romney's recent proposal was more interesting, because it offered to loosen immigration in the case where the sponsor was only an LPR (to bring them to the level of U.S. citizen sponsorship) and loosening work visa qualifications...

In actuality, a larger danger to the American workforce than what President Obama put in effect...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2012, 06:34 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,131 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
An I-129F used to petition for a Fiance(e) Visa can only be used by a U.S. citizen sponsor, not an LPR, and it is primarily for the single-entry to marry. Typically if the fiance(e) is already present, the couple would just marry, and try to adjust status afterwards. As also stated before, the act of marriage is "immigrant intent", and an applicant can't qualify for a non-immigrant visa once they are "qualified" (by their marriage to a U.S. citizen) for an Immigrant Visa.

The only scenario I have seen for a potential immigrant (by marriage to a U.S. citizen) to remain as a non-immigrant classification is a K-3. An I-130 has to be filed, but the applicant doesn't proceed to set up later appointments, and extends the K-3 through the I-539 petition. This is done because there may be LPR requirements (like immunization) that the applicant can't qualify for (but they can comply with the terms of the K-3), or there may be a need to have an extended stay outside the United States.

Any derivative K-4 (for a minor child of the K-3) is bound to its coattails (and cannot process to legal residency independently), but will eventually age-out if the K-3 is extended long enough...

Romney's recent proposal was more interesting, because it offered to loosen immigration in the case where the sponsor was only an LPR (to bring them to the level of U.S. citizen sponsorship) and loosening work visa qualifications...

In actuality, a larger danger to the American workforce than what President Obama put in effect...
LPR's don't' fall under the same class as citizen and shouldn't be granted benefits the same as a citizen, hence the lesser ability to apply for 129F. It can be used they way I showed for citizen sponsors. One can come over on the VWP and decide to stay, Aos to 129F, or even straight to 130/485.

Romneys proposal is more of an amnesty then what Obama has simply done through policy, hence why I am in line with what Obama did on this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2012, 06:45 PM
 
Location: Lower east side of Toronto
10,589 posts, read 10,320,497 times
Reputation: 9271
Don't crack down on what for all intent are refugees. Crack down on the super evil drug armies that are butchering people. The pricks that are shipping in tons of coke that are ruining families and taking the food our of the mouths of children,

You are not going to get rid of working illegals....let them take the dirty jobs- and be ambitious yourself and take the better jobs....create an elite and a ruling class if you must- don't tell me you really want Jaun's job cutting the grass in the park...cos you don't.

If you are white and your family has been in the nation for generations- you already have a huge head start- don't blame some illegal for your lack of drive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 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, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top