An Interesting Illegal Immigrant Case

[RJ 17]

The first isn't accurate at all, while not specifically his fault, he has lived in this country with no documentation; which is a criminal offense.

Please provide which specific statute of federal or Florida state laws he has broken.

Just because his immigration status is open to deportation does not actually imply any broken laws.

There's a specific reason why government publications and communications have stopped using the term "illegal immigrant" and instead use "undocumented immigrant": because it doesn't lead people to falsely conclude that laws were automatically broken to attain that state.

Actually, and I think I mentioned this before, but being an illegal immigrant itself is a crime. It's only a misdemeanor, not a felony or anything, but it is indeed a crime. Hence the term "illegal" in "illegal immigrant". This would be found somewhere in the federal immigration code which I've no desire to go digging through.

And actually, now that I think about it...I should go ahead and put an update in my OP.

 

[GrandmaFunk]

I guess your lack of desire to do research to back up your assumption with actual facts is the same reason you glossed over my pointing out that "illegal immigrant" is not an accurate term and has been deprecated by the federal government for that very reason.

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

So, my fellow Escapists, should an illegal immigrant who - as far as we can tell - has done nothing wrong (other than having been brought to the US when he was a child) be eligible to obtain a license to practice law?

... In what possible universe could that matter? Legally, I mean.

Are we really worried about him going back to Mexico with a shiny piece of paper that allows him to practice law in the United States... WHERE HE'S NOT ALLOWED TO BE?

I'd say, give him the license. He passed the bar exam, that's difficult. He knows his stuff, he earned it. Then, go ahead and deport him, and let him get in line with all the legal immigrants. If that law degree helps him to get into the US legally, I have no problem with that personally.

It's much like any other illegal immigrant. If we find them after they've lived and worked here for four years, we don't demand all the money they've made back in one fell swoop... that'd just be cruel. Sure, he's illegal. However, he did fine work and didn't bother anyone, so he's entitled to the wages he earned... in this case, the law degree.

how hard is it to become a citizen?

From what I've heard, it depends entirely on what skills you have. If you're a world-renowned scientist, you'll be welcomed with open arms. Fry cook, not so much.

Being a lawyer may actually give him a leg up that he wouldn't have had if he hadn't entered the country illegally, but again, I can live with that.

 

[Tiger Sora]

You say he was brought to the US as a child. Isn't it something like 5 to 10 years living in the US you can be granted citizenship? Take the test, pass, and bam you get your green card. So, if thats so, he should of gained permanent resident status. Than become a lawyer.

 

[Greni]

Wow, a lot of people want to, and I quote: "deport his ass" and send him to a country he doesn't really know at all, let alone have any friends or relatives. Ouch.

PS. It's would/should have! Where did this 'would of' nonsense come from?

 

[RJ 17]

I guess your lack of desire to do research to back up your assumption with actual facts is the same reason you glossed over my pointing out that "illegal immigrant" is not an accurate term and has been deprecated by the federal government for that very reason.

For starters, I wasn't the one that you were even talking to originally when you asked for proof.

Secondly, if it's that important to you, I just googled "illegal immigrant misdemeanor" and found this:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_illegal_immigration_a_misdemeanor_or_a_felony
So to answer you're "Where is it?" question: Title 8 Section 1325

The term "illegal immigrant" still applies because the person is breaking a law just by being here. "undocumented immigrant" is a term the left devised to be more politically correct when addressing the issue of illegal immigrants.

 

[Nuke_em_05]

That's great for him, that he came here and made something of himself.

What about the kid whose parents played by the rules, who is still stuck in Mexico, or entered much later than this guy? What about the future kids who will have a harder time coming in legally as more and more illegals being caught herald more and more restrictions?

The simple fact is: his family came here illegally, he came here illegally, and he needs to go through the proper channels.

If you break into my house, I'm kicking your ass. Even if you only broke in to sweep the floors, fold my laundry, do the dishes, and fix a hole in my roof; I am still kicking your ass because you broke into my house. I didn't ask you, I didn't want you to do it. If you had come to me legitimately and asked if you could do those things, for free or for a wage, that would have been fine with me, but since it is all prefaced on a violation, you still have to answer for that violation.

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

I guess your lack of desire to do research to back up your assumption with actual facts is the same reason you glossed over my pointing out that "illegal immigrant" is not an accurate term and has been deprecated by the federal government for that very reason.

For starters, I wasn't the one that you were even talking to originally when you asked for proof.

Secondly, if it's that important to you, I just googled "illegal immigrant misdemeanor" and found this:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_illegal_immigration_a_misdemeanor_or_a_felony
So to answer you're "Where is it?" question: Title 8 Section 1325

The term "illegal immigrant" still applies because the person is breaking a law just by being here. "undocumented immigrant" is a term the left devised to be more politically correct when addressing the issue of illegal immigrants.

Damn, beat me to it...

More info can be found here; http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Immigration ...which goes into differences between State and Federal levels of immigration involvement. However, any quick google search in general will start yielding results fairly quickly.

GrandmaFunk, I might suggest doing some personal research of your own prior to accusing others of... "inaccuracies".

 

[GrandmaFunk]

For starters, I wasn't the one that you were even talking to originally when you asked for proof.

Doesn't really matter since you repeated an equivalent statement, my reply still applies.

Secondly, if it's that important to you, I just googled "illegal immigrant misdemeanor" and found this:
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_illegal_immigration_a_misdemeanor_or_a_felony
So to answer you're "Where is it?" question: Title 8 Section 1325

The entry clause of Title 8 Section 1325 doesn't apply to minors and there's no proof that he's eluded inspection by immigration officers since his entry.

 

[RJ 17]

The entry clause of Title 8 Section 1325 doesn't apply to minors and there's no proof that he's eluded inspection by immigration officers since his entry.

And that doesn't really matter since you were making a general statement of "illegal immigrant" is an invalid term since they're not doing anything illegal. You asked for proof that it was a crime, and I delivered it to you.

 

[GrandmaFunk]

And that doesn't really matter since you were making a general statement of "illegal immigrant" is an invalid term since they're not doing anything illegal. You asked for proof that it was a crime, and I delivered it to you.

Hum, No. I originally asked what specific crime(s) Jose Manuel Godinez-Samperio had personally committed, since his case is what is being discussed.

My comments regarding the validity of using the term "illegal immigrants" was simply trying to correct the assumption some had that attaching that label to him implied that Mr. Godinez-Samperio had in fact broken a law.

 

[RJ 17]

And that doesn't really matter since you were making a general statement of "illegal immigrant" is an invalid term since they're not doing anything illegal. You asked for proof that it was a crime, and I delivered it to you.

Hum, No. I originally asked what specific crime(s) Jose Manuel Godinez-Samperio had personally committed, since his case is what is being discussed.

My comments regarding the validity of using the term "illegal immigrants" was simply trying to correct the assumption some had that attaching that label to him implied that Mr. Godinez-Samperio had in fact broken a law.

Alright, then it's your turn. Show us the part of the code that says Title 8 Section 1325 doesn't apply to minors.

 

[Bebop]

He hasnt been a law abiding citizen his whole life, hes an ILLEGAL immigrant. Therefor he has been breaking the law his whole life.

 

[Lucem712]

Alright, let's lay down some information. Illegal immigrants do pay taxes. Sales, property and income. (Because if they are working, they are doing so under a fake SS #)

I compiled the following information to
education both myself and others about the process/cost
of naturalization in the united states.​

Spoiler: Requirements to be eligible to request Citizenship/Naturalization

[li]You must be 18 years of age to apply for citizenship/Naturalization[/li]
[li]You must be a legal resident* for 5 years before applying for citizenship[/li]
[li][sub]During this time, you may not leave the US for more than 30 months or you are disqualified[/sub][/li]
[li][sub]You must also be a resident of your state for at least 3 months[/sub][/li]
[li][sub]You must be of 'good moral character'[/sub][/li]
[li]Males must have registered to the 'Selective Service'[/li]
[li][sub]Or submit a form of why they have not registered[/sub][/li]
[li]You must have a basic/intermediate knowledge of English[/li]
​

[sub]*Legal Residency refers to a 'green card'[/sub]

[source] [http://www.uscitizenship.info/ins-citizenship-process.html]

Spoiler: Citizenship/Naturalization Process

1. Submit Your Complete Application

Complete and print your U.S. Citizenship application form on USCitizenship.info
Obtain two approved passport-sized photos
Collect all required supporting documents
Ensure each of these documents is properly completed and/or translated
Mail your application package to the correct USCIS location
Apply for U.S. Citizenship

[HEADING=1]Citizenship Finger Print[/HEADING]​

2. Get Fingerprinted

Receive an acknowledgement letter from the USCIS that they received your application
Go to the fingerprinting location specified in the letter from the USCIS on the scheduled date and time to get your fingerprints taken
Send any additional documents to the USCIS that they may have requested in the letter

[HEADING=1]Citizenship Interview Exam[/HEADING]​

3. Attend USCIS Interview & Take Tests

Receive an interview appointment letter from the USCIS
Go to the interview location specified in the letter from the USCIS on the scheduled date and time for the interview
Bring identification and any additional documents that the USCIS may have requested in the letter
Answer interview questions about your application and background
Take the English & Civics Tests
Await a decision from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Get U.S. Citizenship Test & Interview Guide

[HEADING=1]USCIS Citizenship Oath[/HEADING]​

4.Take the Oath to Become a U.S. Citizen

Receive a ceremony date letter from the USCIS
Check in at the ceremony location specified in the letter from the USCIS on the scheduled date and time
Return your Permanent Resident Card
Answer questions about what you have done since your interview
Take the Oath of Allegiance
Receive your Certificate of Naturalization
Enjoy your new life as a United States Citizen!

[source] [http://www.uscitizenship.info/ins-citizenship-process.html]

Spoiler: Cost of Citizenship

[HEADING=3]Green Card[/HEADING]​

$365. (Add $85 biometric fee for a total of $450, where applicable.)

[HEADING=3]Filing Fee[/HEADING]​

Most applicants for U.S. citizenship pay $595 when filing Form N-400, the application for naturalization.

[HEADING=3]
Biometric Fee[/HEADING]​

In addition to the basic fee, applicants under 75 years of age must pay a biometric fee, which covers the cost of fingerprinting and other expenses. This fee comes to $85 as of December 2010. Adding $85 to the filing fee, your total due comes to $680.

[HEADING=1]Total
[sub][sub][sub][sub]with Green Card[/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub][/HEADING]​

[HEADING=2]$1,130[/HEADING]​

[sub]*Exemptions are made for current/former military members[/sub]

[source] [http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=dd346d26d17df110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD&vgnextoid=dd346d26d17df110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCRD]

[source] [http://www.ehow.com/info_7752668_much-cost-become-citizen.html]

 

[manic_depressive13]

I generally think immigration laws are bullshit. Becoming a citizen is an expensive, lengthy process, and in many cases impossible. My teacher claimed to have a friend who adopted a child from overseas but was not allowed to bring him into the country because he had a hair-lip and our government didn't want to pay for it.

I also have a family friend who used to work for the immigration department. His job was to go to people's houses and say "Sorry, you have to go back to your country now." In many cases these were people who had either come here as children or as young adults and had basically lived their whole lives here. As far as they were concerned, this was their country. But nope, apparently living here for thirty five years, obeying the laws of the country and paying your taxes isn't enough to make you a citizen. My friend ended up quitting because he couldn't deal with the guilt.

 

[solemnwar]

Bah, to me, immigration laws seem silly, although I suppose there's a point to them, in that we don't want to have a fuckton of homeless people... but once upon a time there wasn't really any sort of law against people packing up and leaving to go to another country, was there? I think the only thing stopping people would be language barriers and not wanting to risk being homeless...

I don't know, I'm not really well-versed in immigration laws. I just know that immigration is all that's keeping the population of Canada (where I live) up since our birthrate is technically in the negatives at last check.

Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I can tell me more about immigration laws.

 

[Guardian of Nekops]

Bah, to me, immigration laws seem silly, although I suppose there's a point to them, in that we don't want to have a fuckton of homeless people... but once upon a time there wasn't really any sort of law against people packing up and leaving to go to another country, was there?

Once upon a time, people were owned by their feudal lords. You weren't even allowed to leave your town without permission, let alone your country.

Of course, if you go back before government of any sort that's a different story, but taxes and tarrifs on people moving around go back rather a long way.

If you have a population that pays taxes and is entitled to certain rights as a result, you as a government have a vested interest in knowing who is in your country so that you can collect those taxes. If one of those rights you provide is safety, you have a vested interest in knowing more about these people... being sure they aren't spies for hostile powers, being sure they aren't murderers or other sorts of criminals fleeing other states, etc. As a result, people have been keeping track of immigration for a while.

Now, if what I've learned in Economics is correct, the situation between the United States and Mexico is unfortunate and was avoidable. Basically, recent treaties between our nations simultaneously destroyed the profitability of agriculture in Mexico (previously their main export to the United States and other places) and the profitability of the manufacturing industry in America, which was a major source of US wealth. Various corporations are mainly profiting, are responsible for lobbying for the treaty, and have therefore displaced large numbers of citizens of both countries, resulting in the immigration problem.

However, our problem is systematic, and it needs a systematic solution... no amount of subverting our current system on a case-by-case basis will resolve anything.

 

[Schadrach]

UPDATE: Kinda on a side-note, but I felt like updating my OP with it. But according to the way the oral arguments went in regards to the controversial Arizona immigration law, the supreme court seems to be siding with the state on the most controversial part: police being able to ask to see someone's documents if the police have good reason to believe that the person is in the country illegally.

See, I have a problem with police being able to do that for a simple reason -- if one is born a citizen, then one is not required to carry any proof of that fact, nor are they required to carry ID on their person at all times. So, this becomes a law to target brown people with no ID on hand, rather than illegal immigrants. To compare, I have a family member who is a German immigrant, and I somehow doubt they would bring him in under this law if he was without ID.

If he doesn't have any family member or an employer willing to sponsor him (and good luck finding legitimate employment as an undocumented immigrant), it's pretty much impossible to become a permanent resident, much less a citizen.

I really hate whoever came up with "undocumented immigrant" being a better word to describe these people than "illegal immigrant." It's a word choice made specifically to make it sound like a case of misplaced paperwork, rather than a matter of having violated the law. It's f%&*king NewSpeak.

What's next, when someone commits a home invasion can we just start calling them "unexpected guests"? Burglary as "visitation by an undocumented acquisitions specialist"?