Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comHotaru Ferschke wants to raise her 8-month-old son in his grandparents' Tennessee home, surrounded by photos and memories of the father he'll never meet.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
'Legendary' Beau Sancy diamond sells for $9.57 million at Sotheby's auction'We still need to live': Jaded Mexicans find distractions to horrors of violenceTeacher raises $10K, will shave her headU.S., Pakistan on verge of reopening supply linesUS-led imperative in peril as trained Afghans turn enemyNo-bake emotipopsChicago braces for violence at NATO summitPoliticsNation, Thursday, April 26, 2012Romney wins Nebraska presidential primary'King Tut' makes last stop in Seattle
Leave a Comment:
i see. we screw this marines widow but allow all the illegal mexicans stay because its the "right thing to do" what is this government getting to. insanity by popular vote
It's a real shame that those who rant and rave at the "Tea Parties" can't direct their energies toward some cause like this once in a while.
Why don't you rant and rave about all the illegal aliens that apparently seem to be ok with out government! Whats the matter, can't the unions get this person to sign up?
You are so right! They are afraid this child will grow up to have the same patriotic feelings toward his country as his Marine father! He won't vote for the Obama's of this country! The only exception's to the law we make in this country is for all those people that are likely to vote Democrat!
If they wanted to be married they should of been. We are not responsible for their stupid actions. Is the child theirs even. Apparently they did not think ahead. Maybe he wanted to have a "sleeping" partner. This is nothing about illegal aliens. The marine could of went to the legal council. It was a convenient for him. Not to take care of it. It is not our fault.
"The only exception's to the law we make in this country is for all those people that are likely to vote Democrat!"
Please provide the documentation that supports your statement. Put your money where your mouth is.
These people need to contact their Senators and Reps (repeatedly.. usually a Senator has an aide who is an immigration expert). There is always a solution when the Pols can argue equitry. Immigration never "bends" a rule but the Pols can and do. Appropriately so.....
First thought - have we lost all compassion as a country? Why does it take an act of Congress - literally in this case - to make a reasonable and honorable decision? I agree with the posts that we can allow illegal immigrants to stay but we won't let this woman?!?
Second thought - I realize it's hindsight, but why didn't the couple consider getting married BEFORE they started trying to have a baby? Did he only plan to marry her IF she got pregnan? What screwed up planning.
Regardless, she should be allowed to stay and her baby is obviously a US citizen.
This is a joke. This couple signed a document stating that they were married (I do not care if they were on separate continents.) They have a baby together. The baby has a right to be raised in the country his father gave his life to defend. This is just wrong!
I completely agree, it is obvious that law makers do not care about these soilders and marines as long as their children do not have to go to war and it does not effect thier families.
immigration laws are anal to start with. there are people who meet online, and fall in love, but to be together costs thousands of dollars im not talking like 1 or 2 thousand, im talking close to 10K and thats the cheap end of it. thy eforce you to fly out a minimum of 2 times to another country, have a bunch of photos taken and so on. by the time my friend was done he had spent close to 25K in flights, legal fees and so on. retarded! but as long as you cross the border illegally, you have np...wth kind of nonsence is that?
she should just ditch her visa and sign under the Nobama plan, and poof instant american! wont even need military bennies...lol btw, since when does the militaary reconise something the civilian gov doesnt? truly this is a first in history, and should be documented to tell your great grand kids about!
bibol-too bad your sorry a$$ doesn't get deployed
Once again - just goes to show that this country right now has its priorities screwed up.
IT'S "SHOULD HAVE" AND "COULD HAVE", NOT "SHOULD OF" OR "COULD OF"!!! JESUS CHRIST, DON'T YOU PEOPLE EVEN HAVE A SIMPLE GRASP OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE??? TYPICAL TEA BAGGERS!!!
realitystinks101
You are so right! They are afraid this child will grow up to have the same patriotic feelings toward his country as his Marine father! He won't vote for the Obama's of this country! The only exception's to the law we make in this country is for all those people that are likely to vote Democrat!
You "realitystinks101" are so wrong! My husband served 23 years in the United States Air Force and we are Democrats and we did vote for President Obama. Republicans do not own patriotism!
Do you want the simple answer? Because for far too long the people (you and me) have been letting the federal government into areas of our lives where they simply don't belong.
Understand this: Anytime, ANYTIME, you give the federal government this level of authority over your life they're not going to be able to write legislation that is going to work for everyone. ANYTIME. EVER.
The founding fathers knew this when we were a much smaller country with a lot simpler problems. Why is it that we keep turning to government for everything?
Americans NEED to wake up at this point. Please stop putting stock in the idea that government is going to come through with fair and just laws that work for everyone.
Frankly, I don't see the need for the government in marriage at all. Marriage is a bond between people, not between government forces.
Ok, first I'm reading some simply stupid comments here such as the one that Republicans are the only patriots, and my personal favorite, the one that asks if this baby is even theirs. Huh??????
But, I have to agree, illegals stay and we pay for their education, medical, housing and food, but in this case, someone who is legally married to a US Marine, will not be allowed to stay do to some stupid outdated law.
Time to change!! Let's focus on getting this situation fixed and allowing this woman who lost her love, the father of her child, the opportunity to stay in the good ole USA and allow her son to grow up as the patriot his father was!
Well said, Buf...amazing. We let every filthy illegal in, we feed and cloth them, give them free healthcare, let them burden our legal system...and want to (AGAIN) give them amnesty...but a wife and child of one who gave his life for this country, is being denied residency...how F-ing hypocritical is that ?
realitystinks101
The law was passed 57 years ago, President Obama was not even born at that time, so please don't blame him for this, or your stupidity.
This has nothing to do with todays government, I sure they have not even heard about this, it is a department following department rules and laws, which is what you want tham to do, trouble is sometimes it takes a bit of thinking outside the box.
This will be fixed, you watch.
Wait a friggin' minute, Gungho and Reality Stinks, Obama isn't the one who has left our borders unguarded for an 8 year presidency like Bush did! President Obama, if he knew about this before the press got wind of it, I'm sure would not allow it! This woman deserves all the rights and privileges she deserves and I'm sure will get. Why don't you start a letter writing campaign to the President or whoever could help this woman to request that they intervene and do right by her instead of shooting off your mouths to put him down. Do something constructive with your time instead of trying to malign a person who knows nothing about this. Get over yourselves. Do right by this woman and help her out. Stop all your nonsense about Obama. He's trying to help you and you're too friggin' stupid to see that.
Well said robby!
Up Uranus wins the dumbest post of the day award.
Oh goody! I WIN, I WIN!!!! :) :) :)
Here's another case of an illegal taking advantage of our system.
I would have had no problem with her getting benefits, if she had married the soldier before he was deployed.
Asian women are well-known for manipulating horny young soldiers in order to get a free pass to America.
Now we have one more unemployed illegal sucking up our hard-earned tax dollars.
COH, COH, COH, I must remember the COH... must try not to flame this JERK.
...sorry, my bad.
The government at its best--NOT.
Poster #1. That was my sentiment exactly. We allowed this woman to marry a man we told to go to war and die for your country then we screw his family - his loved ones. This man fought and died for his coutry. TAKE CARE OF HIS FAMILY. He paid the ultimate price for his country. His country should be bending over backwards to do the right thing and bend a 57 year old OUTDATED law from an bygone era.
If the military recognizes the marriage, so should our government.
OOOH!!! And my original comment was collapsed too! Wow! I'm on a roll here!
These laws have been on the books for years; Some of of you have seen old war movies of Japanese war brides, and the hardship they had getting over here to America, that is factual. Obama and most of the democratics weren't even born then, so how in the HELL can they be at fault here??????? Stop being so damn ignorant; it is getting to be just plain disgusting, and evil. I know you are not a bunch of racist A$$ holes, you just disgree with health care...Right...... Please, give me a break, a blind person can see where this is coming from and why... You will continue to disagree for 4 years, while we l sink farther and farther in to a recession, and all the while you will cry, we are not racist and just because we disagree with his plan, it isn't his color that's motivating us..... LIARS!!!! I've disagreed with a lot of presidents but I'll be damn if I would sabotage my country to show my displeasure. One sees quite a few presidents in 70 years;, and there were only five worth mentioning, but I'm still proud to be an american and I serviced my country. America is my home, I was born here and Ill die here, so I know I'm not leaving besides I'm half native american so this is my land, my country and my story.
citizenship or permanent residency bestowed by a private bill. Private bills are, on rare occasions, used to provide relief to individuals, often in immigration cases, and are also passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. One such statute, granting Elian Gonzalez U.S. citizenship, was suggested in 1999, but was never enacted. Just be patient Hotaru Ferschke theres so much more pressing issues Of course our wonderful demorat and repubelicken run congress will fix there mess up. but as of now there are all tied up They are fighting over A liar being called a Liar by a liar who lied when he apologized for calling the liar a liar So all of the liars got together and wanted to spank the liar who called the liar a liar.
If they wanted to be married they should of been. We are not responsible for their stupid actions. Is the child theirs even. Apparently they did not think ahead. Maybe he wanted to have a "sleeping" partner. This is nothing about illegal aliens. The marine could of went to the legal council. It was a convenient for him. Not to take care of it. It is not our fault.
what planet do you come from Bibol? are you an illegal? if you are GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM. This situation exemplifies the messed up state of immigration in this country. This woman and her child should not have to go through this ordeal. A DNA test on the child should be ample proof that the marriage was consummated - it should be US Immigration instead of the FBI that is investigated for torture. Shame on you "Homeland Security".
Mary
Why all the negativity? This has nothing to do with "color"! I think we are doing much better economically since BO took office. We have finally hit bottom and are now on our way back up.
I'm figuring we'll be right around 2007 numbers, just in time for the next election.
This time, however, I won't be voting Democratic. To much hysteria with Dems in office. They support too many social programs and America is not in a position [right now] to have so many social programs [health care reform, etc.].
We need to get the country out of the big fat [deficit] hole created by BO before we go around handing out charity to foreigners having children with our soldiers out of wed-lock.
It's just that simple.
Auzziegirl, you are truly pathetic. This woman is NOT an illegal. She was legally married to an American soldier and citizen, despite the INS not having the brains to realize this. She also is here for the time being on a LEGAL temporary visa. So for you to call her "illegal" is completely ignorant - almost as much as your racist comment about Asian women.
By the way - since your screen name is Auzziegirl, I'm assuming that YOU are not a natural-born U.S. citizen either. One would think you would be more sympathetic to a fellow immigrant.
for starters im shocked she actually got a visitor visa... the standard reply for a wife/husband who wants a visitor visa to most western countries... is we do not believe you will leave the country... hint hint nudge nugde (apply under the spousal visa)..if she didnt get a visitor visa she wouldnt be in the country and this wouldnt be news...
as for the story... what a doofuss... hey im going to use this little used rule to deny you but hey I feel really bad about it... well do something to change it then
Buffalo Bob - I could not agree more (by the way, my family lives near Buffalo NY).
I am a COMPLETE OPPONENT to illegal aliens and illegal immigration.
These two people LOVED EACH OTHER and had a child. I support her and the baby living in the U.S. with the family of their slain loved one.
Maybe we should all write to Obama because Obama's aunt got to stay in this country even though she was supposed to have been deported back to Kenya.
Obama's aunt was NOT MARRIED TO A MARINE.
NOTAVOTER
You're not a reader of the Constitution either. The acts you are suggesting are UNCONSTITUTIONAL as they do not pass the due process of law test.
LAWS AFFECTING ONE PERSON OR ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE ARE CALLED UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ARE THROWN OUT BY THE COURTS. (the exception being - if the law passes strict scrutiny of judicial review and none of these suggested acts do)
You may recall FL passing a law affecting Terry Schiavo (lady in coma for 20+ years).
It was ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL because it was passed for the benefit of Schiavo ONLY.
That would have not done any good, as the US Military recognizes the Marriage, it is the US States that do not. Just like some States do not recognize a US Military Identification as a form of valid Identification yet they will accept anybodies Drivers License (easily forged).
Straight from the horses mouth. August 2009.
I don't know why he is hesitating, that would insure him 23 Million Votes. See post 1.49 where the number came from. http://world-news.newsvine.com/_news/2009/08/10/3137503-three-amigos-join-forces-in-swine-flu-fight#comments
Those previously Illegal Immigrants, 23 Million, might forget who made them Legal and vote for the wrong Candidate. So if he "tackles" this problem, just prior to the next Election, you know why. Which would become a "causative fact" versus a current "opinion". Just wait and see what he does to prove his own guilt or innocence. (DON'T SAY I DID NOT WARN YOU).
See above.
No but in April 2009, The US President promised to the Mexican President that the US Military would not be used on the US Borders. However under the February 2009 revised Insurrection Act the US Military can be used in the US against US Citizens under the Command of US NORTHCOM.
For the uneducated.
See above. It is called a double standard. With the illegal immigrants protesting Nationwide illegally in the US and not being arrested. 2006. When US Congress was going to pass a tougher Illegal Immigrant Act based on 1994 California Proposition 187. California Proposition 187, "the Save Our State initiative", would have prevented Illegal Immigrants from using any taxpayer (they do not pay income tax) based services.
So as stated by someone that knows, YOU LIE.
Joe Wilson went public because no one would listen to him about all the versions of H.R.3200. Just like General McKiernan went public about his new Plan to win Afghanistan because the Politicians did not want to listen (and still are not, resulting in more unnecessary deaths, so much for "Listening to his Commanders on the Ground").
The General McKiernan example of the current Administration not listening.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/11/eveningnews/main5007510.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody
General McKiernan (who listened to his Commanders on the Ground, US Military Experience) in his Plan that was later renamed the Obama War Plan (no US Militaryu Experience) stated that Afghanistan was Asymmetrical Warfare and wanted more US Special Warfare; not the Conventional US Military Forces from Iraq. Historically, Asymmetrical Warfare versus Conventional Warfare; Conventional Warfare loses. This is an unpopular view in Congress because Asymmetrical Warfare does not require the high priced Cold War Era designed US Military Equipment of the US Air Force and US Navy; like 1990s F-22 and Aircraft Carriers, which Congress tried to force on the US Military.
http://www.cbsnews.com/1770-5_162-0.html?query=f-22&tag=srch&searchtype=cbsSearch
The other understated problem is the cause of the high domestic problems and suicide rates in the US Military. Many times this is because the Civilian spouse (male or female)(including boyfriends, girlfriends) stole everything leaving the US Military Service member broke like a joke while the spouse (male or female) ran away with Jodie (male or female)(double standard US Military would be tried for Adultery under UCMJ). Then the spouse (male or female) sells everything to hire high priced Lawyers to get the rest in divorce court. The US Military Staff Judge Advocate cannot get involved in Civil Matters. So the US Military personnel are receiving Divorce Papers awarding the former spouse everything as they could not attend the Divorce Court Hearings, could not afford high priced Lawyers, and the US Military cannot Legally represent them; but, will punish them if they are in debt under the UCMJ. Many States Divorce Courts are completely ignoring the Serviceman's and Sailors Act. So many US Military Commanders dread the arrival of the US Mail and I have advised my subordinate Commanders to watch everyone (including each other) after the US Mail arrives, so that I will not find anyone with the back of their heads blown off in the latrine and divorce papers at their feet.
To all of the posters here that live in Illegal Immigrant Harbor States. How about taking care of your problem so that we (US Taxpayers) are not Collectively Punished by having to Bailout your States like:
As an example of how much it is going to cost to pay for all the formerly illegal immigrants (made legal according to President).
With Bankrupt California spending over 10 Billion USDs a year of their 85 Billion USD Budget on Illegal Immigrants. This 10 Billion USDs becomes not available for Firefighting, Law Enforcement, Social Programs for US Citizens, Irrigation (current droughts), Public Works Projects, Infrastructure, Education, Health Care, etc..
example:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32664068/
This is also directly responsible for the Bankrupting and closing of Medical Facilities, that cannot write off the use of fake names (Bankruptcy Court, documents, Security Video/Photos of Hispanics).
Illegal Immigrants do NOT pay Income Taxes so that the IRS do not report the Illegal Immigrants to the INS, ICE, etc. as they are also paid in cash under the table. To further hide their previous criminal activities they continue to do other illegal criminal activities to pay for being smuggled into the US, drug mules for coyotes, forgery, theft, identity theft, fraud against the Citizens of US and conspiracy to commit fraud (anchor babies, as encourage by Mexican internet sites), etc..
Like I said before the President of the US got caught telling a white lie. Unless you dispute what he said at the documented meeting with the Mexican President April 2009 and August 2009.
There is more like the President of US promising the Mexican President that the US Military will not be used on the US Borders, this became US Policy as of April 2009. This is despite the fact that the Mexican Military has shoot to kill orders on the Mexican southern border to take care of their (Mexican) illegal immigrant problem with Guatemala. My comment to this is what are you going to do with all the US Military after we leave Iraq, throw them on Unemployment? You cannot and should not send them here to Afghanistan as this is a Guerrilla War not a Conventional War, meaning you will be sending them here to get killed, especially following Conventional Rules of Warfare, cannot shoot until shot (if you survive being shot you can fire back).
These Illegal Immigrant Harbor States are also filing Bankruptcy, and requesting Federal Funding, this is called Collective Punishment for all US Citizens (Taxpayers) for these Illegal Immigrant Harbor States.
Also get the screwed up idea that Insurance Corporations have anything to do with the Medical Profession (Health Care) out of your head.
Insurance Corporations = Cancer.
H.R 3200 (ALL VERSIONS) IS ABOUT INSURANCE NOT HEALTH CARE.
Solution that works since the 1930s.
Co op Health Care.
Decreases cost 80% (last part of video) by Doctor David Ores, New York.1:45
August 17, 2009 4:11 PM
As Republican and Democratic lawmakers continue to debate the Obama administration's public health care option, Nancy Cordes reports that a co-operative plan may serve as an effective compromise.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5247963n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Good post sdpaulson: http://politics.newsvine.com/_news/2009/09/08/3237904-clock-ticking-on-bipartisan-health-compromise#comments?r=693382232
Everyone needs to copy sdpaulson post and send to and keep sending until you get a response.
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
You believe that Insurance Corporations/Companies/Providers are part of the Medical Profession (Health Care). Then H.R.3200 all versions is payback for Campaign Contributions (near Billion each, as to why the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was not adhered to). With all versions of H.R.3200 indicating that Insurance would be Manditory, meaning millions of new customers (suckers) for the Insurance Corporations/Companies/Providers required by Law. (note how are you going to pay for Manditory Insurance with Tax Credits if you have no money).
Even the President in his speech stated that the Insurance Corporations/Companies/Providers were to blame. So get rid of the cause of the problems in the Medical Profession, specifically the Insurance Corporations.
SO THE BIGGEST LIE: Medical Profession = Insurance Corporations.
"If they wanted to be married they should of been."
They WERE.
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
wonder of wonders..illegals can snick into this country and stay for years...here someone is trying to come legally and is getting run over,,,,so much for justice.
Illegals can have a child here and stay with it and collect welfare for it...which until that child was old enough to come here on its own should be sent by where the parents came from.
My husband and I started trying for a baby before getting married. We were engaged, but the trying to concieve came first, the pregnancy came a little before the marriage. So what. It's NOT the 50's anymore and baby doesn't always come after marriage.
Karen in Los Angeles
In the United States, private bills were common between 1817 and 1971. Now federal agencies are able to deal with most of the issues that were previously dealt with under private bills as these agencies have been granted sufficient discretion by the United States Congress to deal with exceptions to the general legislative scheme of various laws. The kinds of private bills that are still introduced include grants of citizenship to individuals who are otherwise ineligible for normal visa processing; alleviation of tax liability; armed services decorations and veteran benefits.
It's unfortunate that this couple didn't marry prior to the depoyment.
Seems to me this family has been through enough heartbreak. It's time our government give them all a break and let this family move on with their new grandson. He is the one redeeming factor in this sad story.
unfortunately most military marriages work one way...meet someone, get married immediately and then don't get to stay together as family because you get deployed...sounds like they had a plan and unfortunately it did not work. the fact that these two people found love and went with it is beautiful...let her become an american citizen. she's the child's legal guardian anyway, being the mother, I'm glad the grandparents are now taking care of it but a child needs it's mother.
She's there too, for now!!
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
That law is ancient, and someone ought to realize the stupidity of it and get rid of it.
That woman and her child should be allowed to live here if they want to. Her husband died for our country, and his son deserves to be with his grandparents, and live here if he wants to.
There are many immigration laws in this country that do not make sense. This is one of them. I do not undertsand why immigraiton authorities cannot handle certain things case by case basis, especially when military does recognize this marriage.
Im sure with the situation she and her family find themselfs in laws do allow her to stay and become a citizen herself.
She has a family that will sponsor her so i don't see the big deal.
The law isn't "ancient", it is modern and was intended to stop a wave of illegal immigration in which women (and some men) advertised themselves in catalogs as "mail order brides" and preyed on older men with fantasies of a young wife and lonely men to obtain permanent residency status through proxy marriage. There were even American citizens marrying multiple people in return for money to get them their green card. They even made a movie about such a situation called Green Card.
The key to this story is that the Marine Corps approved of and recognizes the marriage. The military has strict procedures on marrying foreign nationals in order to protect young men (and women) from predatory relationships. This young woman was undoubtedly checked out by the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) prior to the young man's commander giving his permission for the marriage. Obviously the Marines and the young man's family are on board with this.
It would be a simple matter to accept military rulings as legally "superior" in cases like this (which will be few and far between.) My guess is that this story will attract sufficient attention that multiple Congressmen will intervene to fix it.
A staffer could spend a minimal amount of time to create an amendment to any bill that comes along that grants citizenship to the young lady as a "hardship" situation. The whole amendment would be just one sentence unless it also wishes to add the country's condolences for her loss. Total time spent, maybe 15 minutes since boilerplate amendments for such situations already exist and it only requires a "cut and paste" to write them.
You are wrong "Not a repub". But regardless, even if she does find a way to become "sponsored" like any immigrant, she can bring over every direct and indirect relative who can live tax free for 7 years! This break allows them opportunities to open businesses that natural citizens don't have. Talk about land of opportunity (for everyone else!). I'd sure love to live tax free for 7 years. When their 7 years run out, they simply bring over another relative, move them in and sell them the business for a dollar and continue to take advantage.
exactly, the grandparents shuold fight if possible to have that law revoked--get on it obama-do something good for this country, the baby's father died fighting a war that isn't ours to fight! this just broke my heart
clickit45,
You are entirely wrong. You didn't get a single fact right! For the immigration rules, I refer you to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Through_birth_abroad_to_one_United_States_citizen
Everyone who receives income in the Unites States is subject to taxation, both Federal and State (local taxes are considered State taxes.) Only citizens can sponsor others. There are specific exceptions for spouse and children and some additional humanitarian considerations that can be applied for for parents.
That's the kind of ill-informed, hate-filled, pack of lies that are killing honest debate in this country. You are a sad example of exactly what ios wrong with this country.
Your rant is just garbage and lies.
Yeah Clickit45, umm no one can come here and live tax free for 7 years if they are making an income. And only citizens can sponsor others. My husband is an immigrant, became a citizen, joined the US Army, THEN sponsored his mother (after his father died). Either we had to support her or she had to get a job and pay taxes.
I do know that the military will bring Iraqi Interpeters and families over, if their lives have been threaten ( and it can be proved and goes through the chain of command) and they are allowed 6 months of tax free benefits. That is the only time I have ever heard of anything tax free for immigrants.
1- She has to be a Citizen first before she can bring anyone over.
2- It can only be direct relatives, meaning her children and siblings and maybe her elderly parents.
3- She has to be a Citizen for 3 years to request her children unless they are minors. She has to be a Citizen for 10 years before she can request her siblings or her parents.
Unless they are children nobody lives in the US tax free specially small businesses.
Phoenix,
I would point out that siblings are seldom allowed unless there are some sort of extenuating circumstances (and medical or financial reasons are not allowable.) Parents are also usually denied unless they are elderly (defined as one or both are over 60.)
Just being able to apply does not mean automatic approval except in the case of minor children. And the sponsor must be able to show that they can provide financial support (including medical care) without any assistance from the State or Federal government. That pretty much limits applications for many immigrants who come here under country quotas.
The ones who usually bring over members of their families are highly-educated H1B holders who apply for and receive permanent residency then citizenship then begin bringing over as many family members as they can show support for. This is a long process that takes many years.
Ok, you've all set clickit right. Thanks.
But, Chris, this is an outdated law. It's a 59 year old law that was set to curb marriage fraud. When was it last revisited? When was it last modified? I'm going to guess, 59 years ago. It's one of those that gets used so often it doesn't get updated or changed until something of this magnitude happens.
In this case, there needs to be change. This woman and her child need to be with her in-laws in the US!
The last time I know of that Congress tried to correct some of the problems was the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 (passed in 2001.) And I think that is part of the problem. Congress keeps changing the rules and creating as many loopholes as they close.
I think that Congress should 1) grant expedited citizenship to this young lady by a one-sentence amendment to the next bill to come along, and 2) do some serious consideration of amending the 14th Amendment to be more specific. IMHO
Where was the baby born????? Can you say 'Anchor Baby' for their sake I hope it is....
When I applied for a K3 visa for my wife and children. I was told that if she was pregnant, the Visa would be denied. The Visa application took over a year prior to her being eligible to travel to the USA. That process cost over $10,000.00 and another $2,000.00+ plus 6+ months is required to receive a Green card & SS#.
While waiting for her to become eligable for a SS#. I could use her as a tax deduction, but the children have to be in the USA, to be tax dependents.
There were many times I thought about flying her into Central America and walking across the boarder. Then spending several hundred dollars to buy a SS card and ID. The USA Immigration laws cost lots of money and time. You almost HAVE to retain a lawyer which just adds to the cost........
Just as an item of curiosity, AC, was this prior to 2/27/2001? I thought this sort of situation has been cured by the Child Citizenship Act of 2000? (That was certainly the intention of the legislation.)
Chris,
It was 2007.........
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
wow bob your nuts
support you country
I think you need to go back and reread hs post! I think he is supporting his country.
I don't think blaming OUR President for our immigration woes is being supportive. As if we had no problems with illegal immigration before Obama became President. Sheesh. Any chance the Right gets to bash the President. Wow. This article has nothing to do with OUR PRESIDENT and yet, instead of commenting on the issue, you choose to spew lies and anger. Get a grip.
A lot of our immigration problems go back to Reagan. (And don't think this is any sort of attack against Reagan or Republicans because it isn't.) Reagan had lots of experience in dealing with illegal immigration issues as Governor of California. And he could see both sides of the problem ---- the need for certain types of casual, especially seasonal, labor and the use of state facilities by the undocumented. As President he tried to handle this by giving amnesty to the undocumented immigrants who had been here for at least five years and setting them on the path to naturalization. He thought of the power of government as vested in taxation (both for and against) and one of his major concerns was getting them on the tax roles. There were only an estimated 3 million illegals at that time. But there was also supposed to be immigration reform. But immigration reform was opposed by ConAgra and ADM and Armour and Perdue and other big businesses and Congress (both Democrats and Republicans) refused to act.
This caused a huge increase in illegal immigration. People came here and thought that if they could remain here undetected for 5 years that they, too, would be granted amnesty. But neither amnesty nor reform came. The "official" estimate is that there are just short of 12 million illegals here today. The actual demographic is probably closer to 20-23 million. All this debate about "census sampling" is about counting the 8-11 million or more illegal immigrants that are unaccounted for. If completely counted, it could dramatically shift the number of seats in the House of Representatives.
Reagan did what I think he thought was a reasonable course. But Congress dropped the ball. But now the problem is just about like the health care problem, some of the problems with our military, problems with financial institutions, etc. They have been allowed to fester for so long that they have become much, much larger and many times more complex. The immigration issue is hundreds of times more complex than it was in Reagan's day. And the blame has to go pretty much equally between both Houses of Congress and all intervening Presidents.
Once problems become too large and complex, the politician's normal response is to duck and cover and pass it along to the next bunch. That just doesn't hack it any more and I think that conservatives, moderates and progressives (and a few neo-cons and liberals and libertarians) would agree.
It is closer to the 23 Million as of 2006. See post 1.49 where the number came from. http://world-news.newsvine.com/_news/2009/08/10/3137503-three-amigos-join-forces-in-swine-flu-fight#comments
This does not include the thousands (1000s) of anchor babies that are being born everyday. As stated based on Historical Perspective (when the 14th Amendment was written) prior to Congress in 2006 attempting to pass stricter Illegal Immigrant Laws prior to the Nationwide Illegal Protests (no permits) of Illegal Immigrants, the US Supreme Court was asked about "anchor babies" and the 14thAmendment (Constitutionality of new proposed Law). The result was a Historical Perspective opinion that the 14th Amendment pertained to Slaves Involuntarily brought to the US and "indentured servants" (English debtors (from English Debtor Prisons, Irish, and later Chinese (another ruling, East West Railroad)); not "anchor babies" as this was a Conspiracy to commit Fraud, and Fraud against the Citizens of the United States. This Fraud continues today as stated in Mexican Websites that suggest that expectant mothers go to the US to have their children, with these expectant mothers being used as drug mules by coyotes to pay for being smuggled into the US.
The 23 Million does not include those Illegal Immigrants that did not want to draw attention to themselves.
This type of Historical Perspective was used earlier to apologize for Americans of Japanese Ancestry for Executive Order 9066 in relation to the Legal Citizenship Status, 14th Amendment. In that like the Chinese (Indentured Servants) the Japanese (Indentured Servants) should have also been included in the US Supreme Court ruling of the Chinese (brought to US as Indentured Servants (treated like Slaves) to build the East West Railroad, with many being promised to be returned to China (a lie)). With Americans of Japanese Ancestry either volunteering for US Military WWII or remain in Concentration Camps (not "internment camps", as many were left to die during the Small Pox outbreaks, with Small Pox being researched as a possible Biological Weapon (FOIA, USAMRIID), while the Small Pox vaccines were in warehouses "just outside the barbed wire".).
The US Supreme Court also used the "Historical Perspective" to defeat the D.C. Gun Laws as Unconstitutional. Being that the "Minutemen" (shopkeepers, merchants, farmers, no uniforms, Guerrilla Warfare) not the "well regulated organized Militia" (uniforms, Conventional Warfare) fought the British until the Continental Army could be formed. As the "well regulated organized Militia" was already defeated when General Cornwallis and Henry Clinton (ancestor of Bill) had seized the "well regulated organized Militia's" armories, and the British Loyalists and Bounty Hunters were hunting them. The "well regulated organized Militia" fled to Pennsylvania along with all the "rebels" (forefathers). After the War of Independence (War at the Colonies) the British Loyalists fled to Nova Scotia. It took the forefathers many revisions with the separation of a comma being important as the forefathers knew the "Minutemen" (Individuals, no uniforms, Guerrilla Warfare (first document US use of Asymmetrical Warfare) and "well regulated organized Militia" (would be National Guard today (as forefathers did not believe in large "standing Army", Uniforms, Conventional Warfare) as two distinct separate entities.
Wasn't there also a case recently of a soldier's wife being deported because someone in govt. screwed up the paperwork? In that case, the soldier is alive and fighting to keep his wife here, but that incident started over her reporting a crime to the police. Another moment of absolute genius. Perhaps someone else has the rest of the details, I haven't seen any updates on that one. To everyone chanting 'support our troops' for the last 6 years: sorry to tell you it hasn't happened. :(
that sounds about right for the states, only criminals and bad people can get in, the people that really have a right to be there have trouble to get in.
LMAO.so now you foreigners know more about us than we do?You're jealous,or you wouldn't be commenting.
Actually, foreigners that go thru the immigration process and their american spouses usually know a whole lot more about immigration laws than citizens that have never dealt with immigration. DUH, they have to! I don't know that much about immigration laws in my home country, b/c I never tried to immigrate there, obviously. And what is Fusseltier jealous about? The treatment Hotura receives? US immigration laws? Your knowledge of them?
If the Freshke's can't just sponsor Hotura, maybe they could adopt her instead?
Adopt her? I don't think you can adopt someone who is over 18. If so, I'm going to see if Bill Gates or Trump would be willing to adopt poor lil old me. :)
There is no age limit for adoption. Truth. Its why you read every once in a while about some elderly person adopting their caretaker for example. Then the rest of the heirs cry 'undo influence'. Kind of off subject, but thought it would help to clarify.
Sounds like a no brainer. Find a way to make here a legal US citizen. It isn't a shame as so many are but the right thing to do.
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
the kid is automatically a US citizen because the father is american, but the mother isnt, she has to live there for 3 yrs with him to be a citizen.
but if they were married, and have a kid, that is common sense and the government can make special allowances for those things if they want.
they let any other garbage in, why not the ones that deserve to be let in?
No, the kid is only automatically a US citizen if they are born on American soil! The immigration laws are very complicated in cases like this. There are plenty in her situation as a result of viet nam. I know of many cases of such war babies .
The child is a citizen but can be deported with the parent and the child can only return at age 18. This is called a "humanitarian deportation" and was demanded by the anti-immigrant faction, supposedly to keep from separating families. It's odd, when you think about it --- allowing the deportation of an American citizen for humanitarian reasons.
The problem here is the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which states: "1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
What is needed is an Amendment to the Constitution that says that the 14th Amendment that basically changes paragraph I to read "1. All persons born in the United States, its Possessions or Sovereign Territories, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof and born of naturalized or permanent resident parents are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside...."
This would clear up two issues: One would be legitimate legal technicalities surrounding the birth of Obama in Hawaii and McCain in the Panama Canal Zone and Jindal's parental status. These technicalities result from the vague wording of the Amendment. The second would be to make the children of illegal immigrants, tourists, and foreign workers and students who do not have permanent residency status would not be automatically granted citizenship. It would allow the children of permanent residents (green card holders) who are presumably on track to become citizens to have their children become citizens automatically.
Such an Amendment would fly through both Houses of Congress and would be quickly ratified by a two-thirds majority of each State. While there might be some opposition from Latino groups, it would be minor since it only applies to illegal immigrants in the future and does not address any person who gained citizenship between 1868 and the present through the old 14th Amendment.
This is not a Democratic or Republican issue, but rather making the Constitution more specific in a way that probably 90% of American citizens would agree with.
I disagree Chris. The child is only a citizen if the child is born on US soil. As you include above: "born or naturalized in the United States". This child is neither.
My daughter was born overseas and is an American Citizen. We had to file a form with the American consulate A "Report of an American Citizen born Abroad". I would think this would be the case for this child too.
That being said, This mother should be allowed to stay and raise her son in America. If the Marine Corp recognizes their marrige as legal, shouldn't that be good enough for Immigration?
clickit45,
Once again you did not read. I also stated, "... its Possessions or Sovereign Territories ..." that includes all military bases, embassies, consulates, as well as all our Possessions and Territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, etc." I also stated "... born of naturalized or permanent resident parents ..."
This is simple stuff. You are so venom-filled and bent on disagreement that you don't even read what you are disagreeing with. You are full of crap. As well as a continual liar.
Proud American,
This obviously was the case since it is a military requirement prior to paying survivor benefits. It would only be the mother who is in question and the military has obviously already decided that she is qualified to receive survivor benefits as well.
A child born of an American is an American - regardless of what country's "soil" the birth was on. John McCain was born to military parents in Panama. He is still an American by right. My brother-in-law's sister was born in Japan to a military parents - she is an American. (Japan does not allow Japanese citizenship to gaijin by birthright anyway.)
addiem,
You are correct. But there is a requirement that unless the person was born actually on a military base, embassy grounds, etc, that they file a "Report of an American Citizen Born Abroad" prior to the child's 5th birthday. This document must be accompanies by supporting document from the place of birth.
Actually John McCain was born in a Panamanian hospital near Coco Solo NAS (which is in the Canal Zone --- but the hospital he was born in was in Panama.) His mother apparently did not like the military hospital there. His parents neglected to file the file the above mentioned report. That was the source of the technicality that effected him. In his defense, his parents probably did not know of the legal requirements and that should not effect him since both parents were American citizens. But technically, he falls into a category of "undocumented American citizens born abroad."
Exactly. The baby is an American citizen regardless of where he was born. The mother should be allowed to naturalize. It seems simple to us, but we are talking about bureaucrats who are notoriously good at "red tape".
Proud American,
The reason is a little more complex than that. While the 14th Amendment is vague about citizenship, it does specifically give Congress the right to establish "uniform immigration laws." The catch is "uniform" which means basically "no exceptions." Everyone seems to think that if an immigrant comes across the border illegally and has a child in the U.S. or on a military base, or whatever that the child is an American citizen automatically. This is not true.
"For persons born on or after November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true:
The child in the article qualifies, but the vast majority of children of illegal immigrants do not qualify. I would point out also that from 1868 until 1986 (when it was changed by Reagan's Immigration Reform Act of 1986) it was 10 years residency and 5 years after the citizen's 14th birthday.
You can read lots about it --- and you will find that much of what is stated about illegal immigrants and citizenship is simply untrue. The idea that immigration rules must have no exceptions is the problem.
Congress has tried and tried to fix the exceptions to naturalization and citizenship to catch these cases that slip through the cracks, by making new rules but has obviously failed. My personal feeling is that it is time to make some simple rules and enact them as an amendment to the 14th Amendment.
I'm not disputing any of this and was merely commenting about this case and obviously this child qualifies. I think the information you state here is pretty simple and clear, makes this case clear and simple IMHO.
Chris, I just wanted to let you know what a joy it has been to read your posts. They are intelligent, reasoned, and provide both information and some creative suggestions. I think that your suggested change to the 14th Amendment is excellent. Maybe if everyone who has posted here would write to their congressional representatives and suggest those specific changes, something might be done to prevent situations like this in the future.
I would also like to attest to the fact that even if both parents are U.S. citizens, a child born overseas is not automatically a citizen. My older brother was born in a non-military hospital in Germany and, as indicated above, my parents had to file the "Report of an American Citizen Born Abroad" paperwork.
The baby is an American ONLY if he is born within the United States.
Those of you who said it is obvious that their marriage was consumated...true, but the law on the books intended it to mean that it was consumated AFTER the vows were taken, which this wasn't. Stupid law, I agree, but that is what the law meant, not did they ever have sex.....
However, in a case such as this, where the couple married legally in military law, and have a child, the child definitely should be allowed to be raised here. Immigration is very complicated and difficult to navigate. It is not simply a matter of you marry an American and everything is roses after. I went through it with my husband, and one of the "upper honchos" in immigration had the nerve to ask my why I had to "import" a husband. How insulting,...but now it's 33 years later and we're still together. I wonder if he's still with his wife? Well, good luck to this family.
Nope, that's not how citizenship by birth works. His child has met every requirement to be an American citizen.
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
Also if you like Chris-537131 proposed changes to the 14th Amendment include them too.
You do NOT have to be born within the United States to be a citizen. If that were true then all the children born to military personnel while living at overseas bases wouldn't be citizens (they don't have to be born on-base to qualify, either). To further confuse some people: Sen. McCain, since he was born on the Panama Naval Base, is a US Citizen, and most likely elegible to be President since US military bases are considered US territory. However, someone like Mitt Romney, who was born in Mexico to US citizens, is a citizen, but not eligible for the Presidency since he wasn't born on US soil. Its the difference between being a naturalized citizen or not. If at least one parent is a US citizen, either married or the paternity is established, the child is a citizen. The Constitution is simple, its the messing with it by Congress that makes it complicated. Although I do recognize the need to protect military personnel from being used and abused, its rather draconian.
Yes, BUT their parents were MARRIED not by proxy, and consumated the marriage after....read all the facts before commenting. This child did not meet all the requirements because his parents didn't ... not his fault, not what his father intended. He SHOULD be allowed to stay, and every baby needs their Mom, but don't confuse facts of others' births, who WERE born after following all the rules set forth by the law, with this child's situation.
This child met all the requirements.....his mother could have had a one night stand with an American citizen, and never even been to the US herself and the child would still qualify.
Come on now, this is kind of a unique situation. Really, how often is something like this likely to happen? It is very, very unlikely this young woman and her AMERICAN son will be forced out of the country. She already has a temporary visa and a Congressman is inolved so let the system work. She is here and hasn't been threatened with deportation so the system is working and she is being supported. From another angle you can see this as a good thing, it is things like this which cause updates to old laws, otherwise our laws would stagnate forever. And don't blame the poor guy who had to turn her down. He has to live by the law, the last thing you want to have is public workers ignoring the law when they feel like it. Sure in some situations that would work out but in others it would be a mess.
Sorry for this families loss....
See post above. There are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of similar cases from Viet Nam. Google "war babies".
"There are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of similar cases from Viet Nam. Google "war babies". Nope, most weren't products of a marriage and the law this article is talking about does not apply. However, other laws do in those cases so there is help for Vietnam War babies as well. The problem for most Vietnam War babies is getting the help they need.
Actually, she IS facing deportation. Unless the private bill goes through, as soon as her temporary visa expires, she will be forced to return to Japan. And then she will have to make an incredibly painful choice - whether to take her son with her, or leave him with his grandparents.
The government agencies need to pull their head out of their collective butts and do the right thing. This woman wants to live with her husbands family and they want to see their grandchild grow up. How tough a call should this be? The government can't keep track of the money they give away to big banks but they can focus on one war widow!
We don't want executive branch officials deciding what the law is. If the marriage is clearly invalid under existing immigration law, then the law needs to be changed. To say that an immigration official should ignore the law because it seems like the right thing to do will eventually lead to unfair and unequal rulings based on personal feelings.
This situation is a travesty and should be rectified. But, the solution needs to be legal and consistent, not arbitrary.
Barry-NJ we lost "legal" when:
Lawyers that by their training are trained to win their briefs, orations, arguments by any means possible with truth being "irrelevant" and "errors of omission" (lies) as acceptable truths.
Yet, all of these people continually elect these Lawyers turned into professional Politicians. With Lawyers claiming to use the Socratic Method as a final jab/stab against their mortal enemies, Philosophers that used the Socratic Method as a teaching tool and to learn "ultimate truths"; and not for personal gain like the Politicians and Lawyers.
We lost "Common Sense Laws" when common sense became rare and was legalesed out of Law. Also best Justice (Lawyers) money can buy, you think if she was a Billionaire this would be a problem.
I am sure that the father would of wanted his child to be raised in the USA. This needs to be fixed.
It's the same idiots that wrote these amendments to the original law that are writing these new stupid "we the government" laws. I know how she feels, believe me. Back in 71' I had orders to the P.I./Vietnam and was married to a foreigner, but we had a child born in the US Air Force Hospital at Andrews AFB and they MADE ME SEND HER (a foreigner married to a Serviceman) AND OUR US CITIZEN CHILD BACK TO HER HOME COUNTRY AS SHE WAS IN THE USA UNDER THE MINIMUM 5 YEAR LIMIT FOR CITIZENSHIP RIGHTS. Which is worse, both stink, and noboby cared!! It took me one year and a Senator to get my family back to the US to stay with my parents until I had a home in the P.I. for them to come to. BUT the ILLEGALS can stay, get medical care, housing, and education, on my money - but ones family is treated like scrap by their own government when your a Service member!!!
What a terrible ordeal for you and your family. I am thankful you prevailed.
I agree that this is pretty accurate. Thank you for your service.
If another country recognizes the wedding then let it be. The question is does Tennesseerecognize the wedding. If it does then the Fed should also recognize the states rightful power to grant said ceremony. Federal law or not the right belongs to the state not the Fed as long as it is not discriminatory.
Let's just consider this the young man taking care of his family and let her stay.
Irvmani that War about "States Rights" versus "Federal Government" (aka Federalist Union (Republican Party)) was already fought and the "States Rights" (aka (Democratic Party) Confederacy) lost.
This is one of those cases that needs to be pushed through ASAP so the family can put both this, and their marine relative, to rest. Amazing how these outlier laws get put into play for someone trying to do things the legal way, yet, illegals trample all over the laws.
It's unique circumstances when the father was KIA. Do testing to ensure the child is the Marine's child (which I'm sure it is) and then let her become a citizen and let his parents have a part of their son home. Haven't they sacraficed enough?
We can let Mexicans sneak across the border at 9 months pregnant, have their baby on taxpayers money and the baby is automatically an American and therefore able to stay in the country and that family able to get benefits to support that child... yet, this child DOES have American blood in him and we dare to even contemplate turning him and his mother away? Pathetic. I love our country. Not so sure of standards at the moment though.
Jen,
Your statement about the pregnant mother is not correct. It is an urban myth at best and a venomous untruth at worst.
For persons born on or after November 14, 1986, a person is a U.S. citizen if all of the following are true:
Where did you get your facts. They are woefully incorrect. You are misapplying standards from births outside the US to births on US soil. Anyone born on US soil is a citizen unless their parents are recognized diplomats to the USA.
The problem is, the legal case that established U.S. citizenship for any baby born within the United States, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, was decided back in 1898, at a time when there was really no differentiation between legal and illegal immigrants. It offered a very broad interpretation of the first clause of the 14th Amendment. One requirement stated under the decision was that the parents must "have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States". Notice that it does not specify a legal residence. Since the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the issue, the widespread assumption is that children born in this country to illegal immigrants are indeed U.S. citizens. My interpretation of the original case would be that this is NOT true; but apparently many would disagree.
Constitution's 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868. Section 1 of that amendment, drafted with freed slaves in mind, says: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States."
and in an article from AIC:
Monday, July 27, 2009 - 10:54 AM
Birthright Citizenship Weakens Immigration Control
A vexing problem for immigration control is the so-called birthright citizenship policy, which grants automatic citizenship to the children of illegal aliens who are born on U.S. soil. The policy supposedly derives from the 14th Amendment to the Constitution which states that people born in the United States, “under U.S. jurisdiction,” are citizens. Significantly, the authors of the amendment did not define everyone in the country as being under our jurisdiction. Specifically excluded were Indian tribes, which were regarded at time as separate nations.
Illegal aliens, as foreign nationals, are not under U.S. jurisdiction anymore than those tribes were. Therefore it is not proper to make the children of illegals citizens on the basis of the 14th Amendment. Birthright citizenship indeed is simply a custom not based on law. As Washington correspondent David Whitney stated in the Sacramento Bee, “Although Congress has never passed a law saying so, no president has ever ordered it, and no court has ever ruled on the issue, each of these babies [born to illegal aliens] automatically becomes a U.S. citizen when it takes its first breath.”
Many illegal aliens understand this policy quite well. They come to the U.S. and have their citizen children. Those children are entitled to all welfare benefits that any other citizen may receive, and at age 21 that citizen child can petition for his parents to become legal residents.
Some U.S. congressmen have introduced legislation to end birthright citizenship, but their efforts so far have not come close to success. A state level approach now under way in California is the California Taxpayer Protection Act, an initiative supporters are trying to place on the ballot by gathering petition signatures. The measure would allow only citizens and permanent legal residents to receive public benefits, including non-emergency and prenatal care.
The immediate goal would be to save money for the state of California, now near bankruptcy, in no small part because of costs related to illegal immigration. But just as important, say supporters, is bringing the issue of birthright citizenship to the courts, so the issue can be resolved. If the children of illegals cannot get public benefits, legal action is a certainty.
More??? Okay, here you go, article on Birthright Citizenship dated Sept 18, 2009:
Birthright Citizenship is guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution and serves as the cornerstone of American citizenship and civil rights. The Fourteenth Amendment states that:
With very few exceptions, everyone born in the U.S. is a U.S. citizen by birth, whether the child’s parents are citizens, legal immigrants, or undocumented immigrants. Only the children of diplomats and invading armies are exempt from birthright citizenship.
For over 140 years any child born on US soil, even an illegal immigrant, has been given American citizenship. There have been numerous bills and debates to change the 14th Amendment. As far as I've seen it has yet happen. It is nethier an urban myth nor a venemous untruth, but a sad fact.
No sweat. Just fly her into Mexico and then she can walk across the boarder without a problem and then she can buy fake ID's and socials so she can collect foodstamps, welfare, and various other freebies. Don't forget to tell her to help herself to our free healthcare (it's free courtesy of US taxpayers). So, there you have it! Problem solved.
Marissa--- BRAVO!!!!!! My feelings exactly!!!!
Idiotic post If I ever read one.
"Idiotic post If I ever read one."
I agree.
You are right on the money there Marissa. My wife was born in mexico. It took me 8 years and thousands in legal fee's to bring her in LEGALLY. Now she is a patriotic naturalized citizen after another 5 years of hard work. Never on unemployment, never on welfare or foodstamps and never recieved any free medical care. It would be easier to just sneak in with the governments blessing and line up for the free handouts and acorn sponsored housing. I know hundreds if not thousands here in Az do it everyday.
uh...idiotic post ?
I notice that you didnt say it was untrue.
It is idiotic, unless you have gone through the convoluted process to immigrate legally.
While working construction, I have worked with people that have done both. Guess which one is used the most. Ha! Ha!
Most people DO NOT have the $12,000.00+ and several years to wait............ Or a US Citizen willing to sponsor them........
what amazes me is that inmates in prison (at least in Washington State) can marry by proxy and get all the perks thereof, but in this case they choose to invoke an archaic law which has no bearing at all in today's society. Ridiculous!!!
Buffalo Bob "i see. we screw this marines widow but allow all the illegal mexicans stay because its the "right thing to do" what is this government getting to. insanity by popular vote."
I am in total agreement. Here we have the widow and child of an American Serviceman and that man paid the supreme price of his life in the pursuit of freedom for others. And, more importantly, being a retired serviceman myself I can reassure you, this youngman believed that his family would be taken care of should something happen to him. However, as one can readily see, there is without question an pandemic infection of idiocy among our bureaucrats and politicians within our government agencies. This is like Vietnam, were we had illegal aliens from Mexico in the military service who were good enough to serve and to die for this country, but they weren't good enough to be allowed to reenlist or to be given American Citizenship in return for their service. Yet, today, the Democrats under Obama as they did under Jimmy Carter, are willing to give anything and everything to illegal aliens such as a free education, amnesty, free medical and, of yes in return the illegals, now eligible to vote, will reassure the Democrats remain in power. Yet we can't or won't take care of young mother and child whose father died in the service of our country.
What a friggin system of justice and equality we now have in this country. It makes me sick!
This one seems simple enough to fix: pass a new law to amend the current statute to allow for other means of proving that consummation occurred, including DNA tests.
At this point, the Armed Services Sub-committees in both houses of Congress should get off their political stools and modify the applicable laws so as to inject some degree of common sense. Is that too much to ask? I hope not.
Reason they can't is they are full of stools.
If Obama,whose Kenyan Grandma swears he was born in Kenya,is a citizen,then these two are also citizens.
Obama's grandmother did not claim he was born in Kenya.
Idiot...where do you get your information? I suppose you're one who believes his birth certificate is falsified? Yep...that many years ago Obama's mommy decided that her son would one day be president so she helped falsify his birth certificate so he'd be able to. Genius!
Come on, tell the truth, who are you Curious? Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck? You know, with your lies you spew, even though you know them to be lies. Absolutely pathetic.
Denise .. you forgot that his parents planned ahead and also "planted" his birth announcement in a Honolulu paper just in case a black man could ever be elected president.
Those Democrats are so tricky.
Denise,
You also forgot that the 14-year-old who "punked" the birthers has said that there were 40 errors in the birth certificate that a 5th grader could find. I am sorry to say that I could only find 32. LOL
If you want your own fake Kenyan birth certificate, you can go to:
http://kenyanbirthcertificategenerator.com/
Fools and their common sense (along with their money) are soon parted. ROFL
Chris, please tell me you're referring to the supposed Kenyan birth certificate! I had never heard about the 14 year old finding all those errors - if you have a link to any information about that, would you please post it?
"A number of immigration laws passed in the 1940s made it easier for brides of American GIs to immigrate, but a consummation requirement passed in 1952 for proxy weddings was designed to curb marriage fraud."
Thats an old law, one that should be looked into. kinda makes you wonder what they were trying to protect when they enacted this law. We have hundreds of such laws here that should be gone, why? because they don't fit the times. This is what can happen when you don't keep up with a fast evolving world, you stumble and fall by the way side.
One would think that the baby is proof enough of consummation in this case, but then we are talking about government here and they have a hard time with things that make sense. :o)
The baby was conceived before the marriage, so it isn't proof of sex (consummation) after the ceremony.
merely semantics IMHO, any questions of this child's parentage could be cleared up through DNA quite easily.
The consummation has to take place AFTER the wedding. Actually many states have the same requirement as do the Catholic, Anglican, and Lutheran Churches (and maybe others.) In the cases of the states and the churches, the consummation requirement is that the two people to be considered married must have COMPLETED sexual intercourse. This is generally spelled out in great detail in the grounds for annulment. Too much drinking at the reception has kept a number of marriages from becoming legal for at least a day. LOL
The INS requirement for consummation is much more lenient. It only required that the couple have actually met face-to-face AFTER the wedding. That's the technicality that caught this couple.
Their is somthing wrong about this whole issue. As a vet, I find the actions of the employees of the government driven by a law that should have been removed from the books years ago, the same set of laws that allow an illegal to stay here if they happen to give birth here. What are we doing to do about it? Let the poor girl get on with her life and raise her son.
FYI, if an illegal immigrant gives birth in the US, that does not entitle the mother to stay. Only the kid. And no American citizen can be deported - if non-citizen parents are deported, the child can stay if the parents make arrangements for the care of the kid.
Perfect example. My husband, not a US citizen, is now working outside the US. Should something happen to me, we have arranged for guardians to take care of our kids for however long it takes to get him into the country LEGALLY to LEGALLY stay with the kids. This is what caring parents do - provide for their children. Which this marine did not do, by the way. He was shacking up with this woman and didn't bother to marry her until AFTER the kid was born.
Why don't they kick out one of the 200,000 illegal aliens in Arizona to make room for her?
You first.
Has the family suffort enough? Can we (The American People) allow this Marines last wish to be destroyed. Were are the Congress & President. The child is the son of a fallin American hero. The mother is a Gold Star mother. The wife is a grieving widow. These used to be among the most important ingrediants in the American Way of Charity and Hope.
God Bless them! For God and Country - Veteran Joe M.
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
What a crock of BullS**t as usual from our governemnt. Idiot congressmen and the great messiah president wont do a thing about our physical border, federal prosecutors like johnny sutton allow drug dealers and other criminal scumbags in with free pass's. The moronic left democrats and worthless repubs want immigration reform so thousands of freeloading welfare leeches can further deteriorate our economy all with the backing of our illustrious government, yet the widow of a brave US Marine gets the shaft. Maybe she should get the same lawyer Odumbo's aunt uses, they dont seem to be in a hurry to deport her back to his native kenya huh??? Where is Lee Harvey when you need him?
Semper Fi and thank you Marines, despite what our worthless government thinks about you there are still americans left that support you.
I could say it better myself. Semper Fi!!
I am an independent who voted for President Obama. I just sent an email to my senator urging him to expedite the citizenship of Hotaru and Michael Ferschke III. I will also send one to the White House. Now, all you whingers and whiners what have you done? az' and st geo you are a disgrace to this country and to a military uniform if you ever had the stones to wear one. You are not only illiterate as shown by your inability to accurate spelling, grammar, and syntax, you display your ignorance of the historical context of the problematic laws. You must also be deficient of arithmatic skills as well. If you could do simple sums you would understand these laws were passed before the President was born.
Now, if you want to spew more venom you may do so at me. I am a Viet Nam era widow and more that capable of standing my ground whatever vulgarities you toss my way.
AZ, are you advocating assaniation of the President over a law passed before he was born? I'm a Marine, a democrate and a liberal, I say she should be accepted with open arms. This is probably just a red tape snafu that will be resolved, and she and their child can stay.
Everybody is acting like this is a done deal, when infact it 's just coming to light. Give it a week and it will be over.
How about this; everyone that is for the widow of the Marine and Child being US Citizens email:
president@whitehouse.gov
All Congress including the subcommittees.
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/