Path to citizenship is for those that weren't caught. A way to get them out of the shadows so to speak.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
The President Trump Immigration Thread
- Thread starter ArcadiaGP
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
I don't know about that. Sounds like an incentive not to get caught. If we're going to deport the ones caught, and reward those who evade, that doesn't sound like a coherent policy. If we're going to have a consistent policy, in my thinking we should either have an ongoing policy of departing people who aren't here legally, or we allow some kind of temporary status which would allow them to live here and apply for citizenship, and go through the process of naturalization. Also, I don't think we should have one policy for Hispanics entering the US from the Southern border, and a different policy for everyone else. If there's a deportation policy, it's the same policy for any nationality of illegal immigrants, no matter how they got here. If there is any special status given to people who are here illegally, it shouldn't be "special" to certain people. So I think for coherency, I'm leaning more to Kut's way.
The problem with the easy answers I'm hearing lately either seem to forget that things actually tend to be more difficult in reality and can often have repercussions which in the end can very well affect us in a negative way.
Easy answers come from the common person I am sure the "elites" will over complicate the situation.
Possibility creating a new department of Interior of Alien affairs !
The "path to citizenship" would have to be fair and not just target the Hispanic population.
The overstaying of VIsas must stop way to many come in the country and stay with families and are never found again.
Did you know that many illegals work in the US for years then go back to there home countries in order to draw social security!
Possibility creating a new department of Interior of Alien affairs !
The "path to citizenship" would have to be fair and not just target the Hispanic population.
The overstaying of VIsas must stop way to many come in the country and stay with families and are never found again.
Did you know that many illegals work in the US for years then go back to there home countries in order to draw social security!
In Before......
[video=youtube;3qwU1LQZA5g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qwU1LQZA5g[/video]
Yep. I think they got the ruling right. It should not matter what was said during the campaign. It should only matter what the order says. It can't be religious discrimination if it doesn't single out particular religions.
So I'm curious - isn't the SCOTUS grafting language into the EO that it does not contain: this idea of "bona fide relationship"?
Trump travel ban injunction partly lifted by top US court - BBC News
I thought INGO didn't like judicial legislation (or, as in this case, executive-order-drafting). Or is it ok in this instance, because Trump?
Trump travel ban injunction partly lifted by top US court - BBC News
I thought INGO didn't like judicial legislation (or, as in this case, executive-order-drafting). Or is it ok in this instance, because Trump?
halfmileharry
Grandmaster
Sure helps when it's your deck of cards and you get to choose some of the players in the game.
I think the EO doesn't differentiate bona fide relationships vs not, so it seems legit to say what's not enforceable. That's really not the same thing as, say, John Roberts rewriting the principle component of Obamacare to be a tax, just to make it constitutional. I'd have been okay with Roberts saying that Obamacare, as written, is not constitutional unless the mandate penalty is specifically a tax.
Stacks don't get more decked than the 9th Circuit.
In a dep on my phone.... inaccuracies result.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Approaching legislation? I would say that it amounts to pulling s**t out of thin air.
Site Supporter
Members online
- Ingomike
- Indyhd
- 6mm
- hopper68
- paintman
- model1994
- bstie
- eric001
- Brandon
- den57
- X3r0h0uR
- stale_ranch
- Snapdragon
- carsgunsandgirls
- sig-man
- DoggyDaddy
- indiucky
- bowhunter_1978
- rbhargan
- ComeJesuscome
- way2good4u95
- Indianajeff
- Tradesylver
- pmbiker
- 55fairlane
- chuckp
- BeDome
- Demoderb1989
- indyblue
- 4sarge
- Talkinghalls
- sp3worker
- efd1295
- gunsnrose
- BluePig
- Slow Hand
- patience0830
- barber613
- kotaoz
- Old Dog
- klausm
- jedi
- FredMcIntire
- maceace
- devildog178
- Gaffer
- Corncrete
- Titanium_Frost
- mike45
- tjh88