Reply With Quote
What does the vast left-wing conspiracy have to do with this?
Did they set this girl up from birth?
He's a good one. Because of the illegal immigration issue, there is an adopted teen girl facing deportation to a country she never knew, because the state ed up her paperwork. Just another thing they do to make people fear enforcing immigration. Seems to me adoption should be difinative. She is a legal child of a US family, right?
Adopted Vancouver teen faces deportation because no one did the paperwork
Catt was placed with American foster parents when she was 5 and adopted by them at 8. Her first inkling of trouble began when she was 16 and tried to get her driver's permit. Driver and Motor Vehicle Services told her she'd need a Social Security number under her adoptive name. When she went to the Social Security Administration, she was told she needed proof of citizenship.
As the months wore on, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services got back to her with the news: She wasn't a citizen.
Catt's mother filed residency paperwork for her daughter. Next began a nearly two-year process of paying fees and waiting. Last month, Catt's mother consulted with immigration attorneys and learned even worse news. Because her daughter was 18, she was subject to a three-year ban from the U.S. because she immigrated here illegally. When she turned 19, she faced a 10-year ban before she would be allowed to apply for residency and return.
Immigration officials say the ban applies only to those 18 and older without legal residency, and minors aren't penalized.Catt's suit names as defendants DHS, two caseworkers who were assigned to the case, a juvenile attorney who was assigned to Catt while she was a ward of the state and an attorney who oversaw Catt's adoption.
The suit claims that DHS employees had tried to file residency paperwork with immigration officials before Catt was adopted. But the filing failed for reasons that aren't clear, Kramer said. It was DHS' responsibility, the suit claims, to tell Catt and her mother that the filing had failed. If DHS had refiled and the paperwork had gone through, the Child Citizenship Act of 2000 would have automatically made Catt a citizen, the suit alleges.
The suit also claims that DHS wrongly told Catt and her mother that her May 1999 adoption automatically made Catt a U.S. citizen. The suit also faults the attorneys for not advising Catt or her mother that they needed to file residency papers for her to live in the country legally.
What does the vast left-wing conspiracy have to do with this?
Did they set this girl up from birth?
Looks like a procedural mishap. Did you ask everyone involved if they're all lib s?
DHS workers in Oregon are.
I don't understand how ST continues to function with that whole Irresistible force paradox goin on. You and boutons should've reached critical mass along time ago.
I guess we're posting on borrowed time.
I find that Wild Cobra lacks integrity.
wonder if the attorney handling the adoption is a member of the dem party too. That would explain his mistake! Probably planted by the dems at the time!
WC, I think you are on your way to wearing...
Tin Hats.
Did you ask them?
Silly Cobra....thinking they play immigration tricks on kids.
This was a GREAT trick!
They don't care about or deport known illegals who abuse the public services and violate law, then want to deport one who is legally adopted? Who's parents did everything asked of them by DHS?
What's wrong with this picture?
So you support letting anchor babies stay in the US?
I bet it's cause she's white. Liberals want to deport all white people out of America.
I say this under the assumption that she is white, having not opened or read the article. It's reasonable to assume, though, given that this was done by liberals and liberals hate white people. Ergo, she is white.
On the surface, I agree that it's a bad picture.
How is this a trick by the left? What's the ultimate goal here? Who exactly is involved?
@WC:
If the adoptive family was ignorant of what was legally required for adoption and failed to fill out the necessary paperwork, the authorities might have very little choice about deporting, legally speaking.
The law can't be set aside every time there's an inequitable result. On the contrary: officeholders swear to execute it faithfully. You seem to be asking them to set their oath aside, because you think the law should be otherwise than it is.
This isn't an anchor baby, but a child legally adopted. Overpaid government employees ed up, and now she may be deported.
Technically speaking she isn't a citizen...these are the people you want to shoot coming across the border!
It should be definitive, but obviously isn't. This is an example of someone affected by an illegal immigration law, rightly or wrongly.
Programs like Oregon's DHS are leftist tools. I will admit to some hype, but not by much. I think the article spells this situation out rather good. Ignore my views shaped by my hatred for the left if you like, and read the article. Make up your own mind.
What's wrong is your claiming "they" don't deport any illegal immigrants.
I disagree. I will argue her legal adoption makes the rest null and void.
Then there would be nothing but flaglots and stalking.Ignore my views shaped by my hatred for the left
Based on your vast knowledge of adoption and immigration law?
That's up to the courts to decide. If it's found that it's DHS's responsibility, they'll probably let her stay. If the court finds it's the parents' responsibility, then she'll probably be deported until they can get her paperwork done.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
