Immigration Equality

[Linus]

As a Canadian living in the US, I'm acutely aware of some of the challenges ahead of me. A lot of people suggest that I marry K so that I can get US citizen. Oh, if it were only that easy. Unfortunately, even if K and I got married in Canada (I'm still legally female) it would never be recognized by the US.

Please support the Immigration Equality Action and send a letter to your representative to help LGBTQ families be united. You can do so here: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5036/t/9164/signUp.jsp?key=1797

[Greyson]

Linus, welcome to this particular battle. I wish you and all the other Queers dealing with restrictive USA Immigration Laws all the best.

One thing I always mention in the progressive heterocentric Pro Immigration Reform Websites is what appears to be the lack of concern by much of the Pro Immigration Reform Movement for Queer people and their families that are torn apart by current immigration laws. I have yet to get one intelligent, coherent, response that is not steeped in homophobia.

In a similar vein, recently the Catholic church appointed José Horacio Gómez, a proven immigrant rights advocate, as the next archbishop of Los Angeles. Gomez was born in Monterey, Mexico. I am baffled as to how Gomez and the Catholic Church can be so pro immigrant rights, yet come out against human rights for LGBTQ people. I encourage you to research the future Los Angeles archbishop and read about his thinking and beliefs regarding LGBTQ matters.

When this announcement was made, Robert Garcia, a gay and Mexican American City Council Member for the City of Long Beach came out against the appointment of Gomez. (Long Beach is part of the greater Los Angeles Metropolitan Area.)

[Linus]

I'll have to check up on him when I get to L.A.

On a personal side note, I may be very lucky with the company I work for. I'm hearing grumblings of a new work visa (an H1-B to replace my soon to expire L1-B) and a green card in the distant future. :blink:

[Jess]

We have a Canadian friend dealing with her citizenship/ immigration/ work visa issues currently. She was living/ working here for years, fell in love, got married all legal then divorced and all sorts of issues heading at her.

Hoping the Feds will wake up and take action to make this process less painful for everyone involved.

Good luck Linus.

[Martina]

i don't know, but if you transition, don't you have a better chance?

i am so glad people are doing work on this, but i can't imagine it changing real soon. i hope i am wrong.

[Linus]

i don't know, but if you transition, don't you have a better chance?

i am so glad people are doing work on this, but i can't imagine it changing real soon. i hope i am wrong.


I am in transition. However, in order for me to get gender changed means I have to get surgery. Additionally, I haven't decided if I want the marker changed. (it's been beyond annoying just trying to get name changed)

[Soon]

dcD5eHsgHLY&feature=player_embedded#!




http://www.nyclu.org/immigrationreform

http://www.immigrationequality.org/template.php?pageid=49

[Soon]

House Dems Confident Immigration Reform Will Pass—With LGBT Equality (http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/2980/house_dems_confident_immigration_reform_will_pass_--_with_lgbt_equality/)

[Jess]

This site ( organization) might be helpful.

http://www.out4immigration.org/immigration/homepage.html

[Linus]

This site ( organization) might be helpful.

http://www.out4immigration.org/immigration/homepage.html


Yup. I'm on their mail list. They are a grass-roots group fighting for bi-national marriage equality.

[Jess]

cool :) .. I just discovered their work a couple weeks ago and am really impressed with some of the gains they have been able to make.

[Soon]

'Eat Pray Love' Author to Lobby for Gay Immigrants


WASHINGTON (Aug. 13) -- The author of the runaway best-seller "Eat Pray Love," whose foreign-born lover was barred from permanently living with her in the U.S., will go to Capitol Hill next month to lobby for changing immigration laws to allow gays and lesbians to sponsor their partners from other countries.

Elizabeth Gilbert, whose memoir was made into a film starring Julia Roberts that opens today, will announce today that she will join gay rights activists to push for passage of the Uniting American Families Act.

The measure would allow lesbian and gay Americans to sponsor their permanent partners for legal status under the immigration principle of "family unification." Under current law, only partners who are married to American citizens may apply for permanent residency. Although gay marriage is legal in five states and the District of Columbia, the federal government by law defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Evan Agostini, AP
Author Elizabeth Gilbert, seen here attending the world premiere of 'Eat Pray Love' at the Ziegfeld Theatre on Tuesday in New York, will head to Capitol Hill next week to lobby for a change in immigration laws to allow gays and lesbians to sponsor their partners from other countries.

According to the advocacy group Immigration Equality Action Fund, more than 36,000 gay binational couples, many of them in committed relationships for years, are affected by current immigration law. Nearly half of those families are raising young children.

"In addition to being unjust and cruel and unconscionable," Gilbert recently said in a speech to a gay rights organization in New York, "these laws are stupid because they are taking away some of the best and brightest minds and prospects out of the country."

Gilbert, who is straight, may seem an unlikely gay rights activist, but she came to the issue out of personal experience with the U.S. immigration system.

Her activism stems from the "Love" part of her memoir when she fell for a man she calls Felipe, a Brazilian-born citizen of Australia who was living in Indonesia when they met. Both had survived bitter divorces, and each had sworn off marriage. Yet they yearned to be together forever.

The couple moved into her suburban Philadelphia home and made do as Felipe left the country every three months to comply with visa restrictions. But then, as they returned from a trip overseas, Department of Homeland Security agents at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport told Felipe his constant coming and going violated visa laws, and he had to leave immediately. The simplest way for him to stay in the U.S., they said, was to get married.

Gilbert tells the story of their ensuing period of "exile" in Asia, and her research on the state of matrimony, in "Committed: A Skeptic Makes Peace With Marriage." In the end, the couple married and Jose Nunes -- Felipe's real name -- got his green card.

But that isn't an option for gay couples, whom Gilbert said "are forced to do nothing but fight for their lives. And they are in a fight for their lives. And I am proud to be part of that fight."

The author, who will appear on "The Oprah Winfrey Show" today, has her work cut out for her.

While the legislation has more than 100 sponsors in the House and more than 20 in the Senate, the move to link gay rights to the already volatile immigration issue is controversial. As the issue roils Arizona and spreads to other states, the bill has stalled in Congress amid concerns by advocates that it will scare away conservative lawmakers who might otherwise be swayed to support comprehensive immigration reform.

Despite the uphill battle, Gilbert plans to visit lawmakers along with activists from the Immigration Equality Action Fund when they hold a lobby day on Sept. 30.

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/eat-pray-love-author-elizabeth-gilbert-to-lobby-for-gay-immigrants/19589327

[Sparkle]

from the Boston Globe yesterday 16 October 2010

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/10/16/gay_couples_take_on_an_immigrant_divide/?page=1

[Linus]

from the Boston Globe yesterday 16 October 2010

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/10/16/gay_couples_take_on_an_immigrant_divide/?page=1

That will be interesting to watch as it may be the impetus to get same-sex marriage approved in the US.

[Sparkle]

That will be interesting to watch as it may be the impetus to get same-sex marriage approved in the US.


It may make headway towards overturning the Defense of Marriage Act anyway...it will be interesting to see which (if either) approach gets through first...

The Immigration Reform Bill with provisions for same-sex couples OR the crumbling of DOMA, creating the possibility for federal rights being extended.

[Sparkle]

Yesterday's announcement that the Obama Administration will no longer continue to defend DOMA offers a (little) ray of hope for bi-national couples who wish to live together in the United States.

A round up of some of the information that is flying around out there:

http://out4immigration.blogspot.com/2011/02/obama-administration-finding-doma.html

/snip
DOMA has stood in the way of immigration reform for LGBT families. DOMA has meant that each state in the nation chooses whether the institution of marriage can be opened to LGBT couples – and whether that state recognizes the legal union formed between two people of the same sex in other states or abroad. Getting rid of DOMA will open the way for US immigration law to acknowledge marriages between binational same-sex couples.

The "tipping point" in the demise of DOMA seems to be Edith Winsor’s lawsuit. When her Dutch-born wife Thea Spyer died, after a partnership spanning 44 years, the government sent Edith a large tax bill for Thea’s part of their shared property. Edith went to court demanding their relationship be recognized as family, in which case the state would not tax her. On reviewing the case, Obama recognized blatant anti-gay discrimination and announced he was not willing to defend DOMA.

/snip

http://prernalal.com/2011/02/what-should-same-sex-bi-national-couples-do-since-obama-is-no-longer-defending-doma/

/snip

Immigration Equality has forever opposed the idea of same-sex couples filing I-130 claims and adjudicating their cases in court. They have good reason to believe that federal judges will defer to DHS. For the most part, they are right since you are unlikely to win your claim and your partner may end up in removal proceedings.

But there is a better way to deal with this. Forget listening to advocacy organizations and lawyers. Stop sitting on your laurels. Ideally, I would like to see some 36,000 couples filing I-130 “Petition for Alien Relative” petitions with USCIS. Just imagine the mayhem that would cause. USCIS has to go through each claim. It will take them eons to reject them. You can file appeal upon appeal and backlog them further. You probably don’t even need to take to the streets or the courts. Start talking to the media about how President Obama is keeping you apart from your partner. Under immense pressure, Congressional leaders will have to start holding hearings. Sooner or later, DOMA will be repealed in the courts or by Congress. Even without that, DHS has to issue a memo allowing your partner to live and work legally in the country (deferred action) and Congress has to take action and pass the Uniting American Families Act.

The system is denying you equal rights so screw with it. Give them hell. Shut them down. Go all out for reverse attrition through enforcement. It’s a whole lot more fun than sitting around doing nothing.

/snip

I think this is a strategy that is well worth pursuing, particularly for undocumented immigrants who have overstayed their original visa (ie. those with the least to lose and the most to gain).

This is very similar to what happened in the UK pre-1997 (when the Blair government created an "exception to the rules" that allowed unmarried foreign partners to apply if they met certain criteria, the precursor to the immigration parity options they offer now). Prior to the Labor government coming to power bi-national couples flooded the immigration service/system with applications that remained in litigation for years until there was a legally viable process. It was a long and painful process, but worth it in the end.

With the DOMA on its way out, we should hope to be able to chip away at the iceberg of legal inequities bit by bit. Immigration may be towards the top of that list.

http://out4immigration.blogspot.com/2011/02/rachel-maddow-breaks-down-obamas-doma.html

"there's still more work to do"
"Same-sex couples are still treated unequally under federal immigration law."
Prof. Tobias Wolff

[Sparkle]

from sfweekly.com

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2011/02/obamas_stance_on_doma_could_be.php

[Soon]

Dear J,

I wanted you to be among the first to know. Our legal team is planning to file an historic lawsuit on behalf of our families.

Following the Obama Administration’s recent announcement that it believes the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional — and its refusal to defend that law in court — we are preparing to challenge DOMA in federal court, on behalf of families who face separation because of discriminatory immigration laws.

For the first time, the U.S. government has declared that Section 3 of DOMA, which prohibits married LGBT Americans from sponsoring their spouse, is unconstitutional. The end of that law will mean a new beginning for LGBT Americans married to non-citizens. Immigration Equality is seizing this tremendous new opportunity and is bringing litigation to end the discrimination those families face.

Soon, we’ll be announcing the families who will be part of our suit, and the prestigious pro bono partners who will help us fight in court. We are assembling the very best team to wage this battle and to ensure we have the best possible chance at dismantling DOMA. The Justice Department has taken a major step forward in refusing to defend the law. We intend to cross the finish line and end it once and for all.

All of us at Immigration Equality will continue to fight for our families in Congress, too.

While the end of DOMA would help many families, passage of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) remains critically important as well. Many states continue to discriminate against LGBT couples through state-level DOMAs. Families in those states still need a legislative victory so they don’t face separation or exile, too. While our work will expand as part of this new court challenge, our commitment to UAFA — and to ending discrimination for all families as quickly as possible — will not waiver.

This is an immensely significant moment for LGBT families, and Immigration Equality is uniquely positioned to take on this fight. With your help, we will succeed and keep our families together.

Look for more news about our lawsuit soon.

Yours in the fight,

Rachel B. Tiven, Esq.
Executive Director

P.S.: For information on how DOMA might impact your family, please visit our FAQ page, online here. And, if you are thinking of getting married, or are already married and thinking of filing papers with Immigration, or have already done so, please contact our legal department. Then, to make a gift in support of our litigation challenging DOMA, visit the Immigration Equality website.

http://www.immigrationequality.org/

[Sparkle]

http://bit.ly/gv2gvk


"This morning, Monica Alcota and Cristina Ojeda, became the first married, same-sex, binational couple to successfully argue that deportation proceedings should be adjourned until their marriage-based immigration case had been fully adjudicated. The Immigrations and Customs Enforcement attorney and the Immigration Judge agreed that the couple should be given an opportunity to fight for a green card on the basis of their marriage and generously adjourned proceedings accordingly."

[Julie]

http://bit.ly/gv2gvk


"This morning, Monica Alcota and Cristina Ojeda, became the first married, same-sex, binational couple to successfully argue that deportation proceedings should be adjourned until their marriage-based immigration case had been fully adjudicated. The Immigrations and Customs Enforcement attorney and the Immigration Judge agreed that the couple should be given an opportunity to fight for a green card on the basis of their marriage and generously adjourned proceedings accordingly."

I have been watching their story!
This is AMAZING and wonderful news.
So happy for them.

[Soon]

Is this for real!?!?! I am still waiting for an official press release or some information on the Gov't website for Immigration.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/30/headlines/us_to_accept_green_card_bids_from_same_sex_couples

U.S. to Accept Green Card Bids from Same-Sex Couples

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has announced it will no longer deny green card applications to married, bi-national, same-sex married couples. The decision means bi-national LGBT couples with recognized marriages will now be able to apply for citizenship while Congress decides whether to repeal or modify the Defense of Marriage Act.

[Soon]

U.S. immigration service will no longer accept green card applications from bi-national same sex couples

http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2011/03/u-s-immigration-service-will-no-longer-accept-green-card-applications-from-bi-national-same-sex-couples/

A victory scored by married bi-national same sex couples this week turned out to be only temporary.

After only one day, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) said it would no longer accept green card applications from gays and lesbians with spouses from abroad.

“The guidance we were awaiting… was received last night, so the hold is over, so we’re back to adjudicating cases as we always have,” Christopher Bentley, a USCIS spokesman, told Metro Weekly.

The Obama administration announced last month that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court.



The administration said, however, that the law would continue to be enforced until Congress decided to repeal or modify it.

When asked if USCIS would also continue to deny green card applications to bi-national same sex couples, Bentley said, “Correct, based on the enforcement of DOMA.”

Steve Ralls, director of communications for Immigration Equality, told Raw Story that the USCIS decision was disappointing.

“Our government should be in the business of keeping families together, not tearing them apart,” he said. “The Department of Justice has said it believes DOMA is unconstitutional. Immigration Equality agrees, and we believe it is inappropriate to use that unconstitutional law to separate American citizens from their loved ones.”

“We reiterate our call for the Administration to respect our families and halt the denial of green card applications,” Ralls added. “At the very least, DHS should wait for the courts to settle DOMA‘s constitutionality before removing spouses who would immediately benefit if the law is struck down.”

Last week Immigration Judge Terry A. Bain gave hope to bi-national same sex couples when he halted deportation proceedings against Monica Alcota, a citizen of Argentina, while her wife, Cristina Ojeda, moves forward with a green card petition on her behalf.

[Soon]

http://immigrationequalityactionfund.org/blog/breaching_the_wall_and_staying_the_course/

[Peach]

We would consider moving back to the US, if they allowed me to immigrate, so I could work there. Until then, Canada is for us!

[Soon]

1KL8WWd6938

[Soon]

-_6wHis6-ws&feature=player_embedded#at=39

[Soon]

MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Atty General Eric Holder Makes “Extraordinary” Move Towards Ending Deportation of LGBT Spouse (http://www.queerty.com/breaking-atty-general-eric-holder-makes-extraordinary-move-towards-ending-deportation-of-lgbt-spouses-20110505/)s

[UofMfan]

MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Atty General Eric Holder Makes “Extraordinary” Move Towards Ending Deportation of LGBT Spouse (http://www.queerty.com/breaking-atty-general-eric-holder-makes-extraordinary-move-towards-ending-deportation-of-lgbt-spouses-20110505/)s



This is HUGE! Thanks for sharing HSN.

[Julie]

This is HUGE! Thanks for sharing HSN.

I am really confused. What does this ACTUALLY mean?

[UofMfan]

I am really confused. What does this ACTUALLY mean?

Well to me, #1 that the President has discretion and can use it to stop deportations, if they wanted to, and #2 that they are standing behind their initial announcement regarding DOMA and not defending it, even in immigration court.

To me it means that the Obama administration is at least trying to protect Gay and Lesbian bi-national couples and that is a huge step in the right direction. Right now it affects mainly those who are facing deportation but it is a huge sign on behalf of the administration that may affect other bi-national couples who are not necessarily facing deportation or even married, yet.

[Sparkle]

I am really confused. What does this ACTUALLY mean?

It is breaking news because The Attorney General has intervened in a specific case and urged the immigration authority to reconsider its deportation decision.

For a legal figure, so high in stature, to intervene and take a very public stand - it is a sign of a major shift in thinking on this issue, from the highest echelon of the government.

This could be a sign that legal change will come on the immigration front regardless of the outcome of DOMA battle.
The Attorney General cites their civil union as just grounds to stay the deportation, civil unions do not have legal parity with marriage; which means that the Attorney General's is urging the Immigration Authority to expand it's definition of family. Which could also be indicative that there is some sense of inevitability to repealing DOMA *or* it could indicate that the administration is willing to tackle LGBT rights one piece at a time. And it is a strong indicator that legal change as regards same-sex immigration could happen before DOMA is repealed or more states in the US offer same-sex marriage.

And of course, it means one couple (maybe even a whole lot of couples) could be given another reprieve from the deportation chopping block, in the interim while this potentially huge political shift become legitimized.

[Julie]

So does this mean that Henry and Josh will be okay? That the deportation will be stopped?

This could be amazing.

[UofMfan]

So does this mean that Henry and Josh will be okay? That the deportation will be stopped?

This could be amazing.

No one knows for sure at this time, but to me it looks like it will be stopped.

[Julie]

God... I hope so!

[UofMfan]

God... I hope so!

Bingo!

http://stopthedeportations.blogspot.com/2011/05/victory-for-josh-henry-judge-halts.html?spref=fb

[Sparkle]

Immigration Judge Postpones Deportation Proceedings For Two Years, Allowing Married Gay Binational Couple to Remain in U.S.

Directs Government Attorneys To Act on Request for Termination of Deportation Proceedings Within Sixty Days

SAN FRANCISCO, CA – This morning in San Francisco, Doug Gentry and Alex Benshimol -- a married same-sex binational couple -- appeared before Immigration Judge Marilyn Teeter for a deportation hearing and were permitted to remain in the country despite the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the law that prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriages by the federal government. This is the latest in a series of recent court rulings that have demonstrated the inequality that DOMA forces same-sex couples to live under.

Specifically, the judge laid out two options. She gave the government 60 days to decide whether it will agree to drop deportation proceedings against Alex -- a Venezuelan citizen -- altogether. If the government elects not to drop proceedings, the same judge will revisit the case again in September 2013, ensuring that Doug and Alex are protected from deportation for at least two more years allowing them to return to building a life together with their family, including Alex's two step-children.

"Today the Immigration Judge demonstrated compassion and understanding for Doug and Alex as a married binational couple, granting them a reprieve from deportation by postponing further proceedings to September 2013," said Lavi Soloway, lawyer for Doug and Alex, and founder of Stop the Deportations. "The Judge also gave the government 60 days to inform the court whether it will agree with our request to terminate these proceedings pursuant to prosecutorial discretion guidelines issued June 17 by Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton. We will continue to advocate for termination of these proceedings and a moratorium on all deportations of spouses of lesbian and gay Americans."

"Today's hearing was one more step in the march toward full federal equality for LGBT Americans and those they love," said Robin McGehee, executive director of GetEQUAL. "Doug and Alex's courage to stand up for their family and the tens of thousands of other families facing deportation from this country is nothing short of inspirational. We will continue to work on cases like these that highlight the lived discrimination that LGBT folks in this country face, and will not stop until we can rest our heads at night knowing that we are fully equal under the law."

"We are pleased with the progress that this case demonstrates." said Mickey Lim, Vice President of Out4Immigration. "However there are thousands of same-sex binational couples who are still living with uncertainty because of the Defense of Marriage Act and many more that have already been exiled or separated by this unfair discriminatory law. We applaud Doug and Alex's courage to put a face on the issue and will continue to work towards securing equal immigration rights for same sex couples! We look forward to the day when we can welcome all of our friends and families back home!"

Alex came into the U.S. 12 years ago from Venezuela and overstayed a tourist visa, an immigration violation that straight binational couples can easily remedy once married; as a gay married couple, Doug and Alex do not have that option. Many same sex binational couples are legally married like Alex and Doug, but they are still treated as legal strangers in the eyes of the federal government. There is only one reason Doug and Alex faced deportation proceedings at all — the Defense of Marriage Act, a law that the President and the Attorney General have both determined to be indefensible and unconstitutional.

To support the couple and to show widespread public support for their right to remain together, legally, in the United States, many organizations working for full federal equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans held a rally outside the courthouse in San Francisco where the hearing is scheduled to take place. Organizations leading the rally efforts include GetEQUAL, Marriage Equality USA, Out4Immigration, and Stop the Deportations.

These organizations launched a petition drive last week to show public support for Doug and Alex, garnering close to 17,000 signatures of individuals who are supportive of assigning all the same rights and responsibilities to same-sex binational couples as to heterosexual binational couples.

Organizations supportive of the couple and the rally include API Equality, API Legal Outreach, Asian Law Caucus. Asian Pacific American Legal Center, Central American Resource Center, Chinese For Affirmative Action, Equality California, Immigration Equality, Love Honor Cherish, National Center For Lesbian Rights, National Immigration Justice Center, San Francisco Immigrant Legal And Education Network, and the San Francisco LGBT Center.

Representatives Mike Honda (D-CA) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) have also been actively supportive of the couple, and provided written statements that were read at the rally. Rep. Lofgren's statement included a passionate plea for binational families, including the excerpt below:

"Legally-married couples are being torn apart today in America because our laws unconstitutionally discriminate against same-sex marriages. Each and every day, American spouses are being forced to make unacceptable choices: live their lives separated from one another by thousands of miles, abandon their lives in this country and move someplace else, or break the law and go into hiding. This is a heartbreaking situation all across the United States. I believe the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional and that the government should respect legally-married same-sex couples. I am confident that DOMA one day will not be law. The whole country will look back and understand it was simply discrimination."

Speakers at the rally included Bevan Dufty (Former San Francisco Supervisor), Phil Ting (San Francisco City Assessor/Recorder), Vincent Pan (Chinese for Affirmative Action), Ross Mirkarimi (San Francisco Supervisor), Lavi Soloway (Attorney for Doug & Alex), Heidi Li (API Legal Outreach), Ming Wong (National Center for Lesbian Rights), Ana Perez (CARECEN), Annette Wong (SFILEN), Dusty Araujo (National Immigrant Justice Center), and Judy Rickard (Author, “Torn Apart: United By Love Divided By Law”).


VISIT THE O4I BLOG TO READ ABOUT OUR WORK AND ACTIONS TO END DISCRIMINATION AGAINST SAME-SEX BINATIONAL COUPLES.

[AtLast]

No one knows for sure at this time, but to me it looks like it will be stopped.

Yes, this sounding better and better for them. Plus, I am thinking that with these kinds of decisions going the way of marriage equality, there is a building of legal opinions mounting that might have positive effect on all of us eventually.

Every little bit, helps!

[Sparkle]

Victory for Monica & Cristina! Government Closes Deportation Case Against Married Lesbian Couple in New York

http://www.stopthedeportations.com/blog/2011/12/victory-for-monica-cristina-government-closes-deportation-case-against-married-lesbian-couple-in-new-york.html

/snip

This is the first time the government has asked an immigation court to close removal proceedings against the gay or lesbian spouse of an American citizen since the formation of an inter-agency prosecutorial discretion working group began its work on November 17 with the goal of finding and closing all “low-priority” deportation cases.

/snip

"We are thankful to Immigration & Customs Enforcement and to Immigration Judge Terry Bain for closing this case and stopping the deportation of Monica Alcota. Although the Department of Homeland Security has declined numerous requests in recent months for specific, LGBT-inclusive guidance on deportation cases, this action demonstrates that existing guidelines that weigh “family relationships” and “ties to the community” can be properly applied to protect married lesbian and gay binational couples. After a courageous battle, Monica and Cristina have arrived at the end of a long journey that began when Monica was pulled off a Greyhound bus in July 2009 and held in an ICE detention facility for three months while we fought for her release. That nightmare ends today. Monica and Cristina can now turn to the business of building a future together without living in constant fear of deportation."
- Lavi Soloway, Attorney, Founder of Stop the Deportations

This is good news.
Now to the business of making this the rule, not the exception.

[Novelafemme]

Victory for Monica & Cristina! Government Closes Deportation Case Against Married Lesbian Couple in New York

http://www.stopthedeportations.com/blog/2011/12/victory-for-monica-cristina-government-closes-deportation-case-against-married-lesbian-couple-in-new-york.html

/snip

This is the first time the government has asked an immigation court to close removal proceedings against the gay or lesbian spouse of an American citizen since the formation of an inter-agency prosecutorial discretion working group began its work on November 17 with the goal of finding and closing all “low-priority” deportation cases.

/snip

"We are thankful to Immigration & Customs Enforcement and to Immigration Judge Terry Bain for closing this case and stopping the deportation of Monica Alcota. Although the Department of Homeland Security has declined numerous requests in recent months for specific, LGBT-inclusive guidance on deportation cases, this action demonstrates that existing guidelines that weigh “family relationships” and “ties to the community” can be properly applied to protect married lesbian and gay binational couples. After a courageous battle, Monica and Cristina have arrived at the end of a long journey that began when Monica was pulled off a Greyhound bus in July 2009 and held in an ICE detention facility for three months while we fought for her release. That nightmare ends today. Monica and Cristina can now turn to the business of building a future together without living in constant fear of deportation."
- Lavi Soloway, Attorney, Founder of Stop the Deportations

This is good news.
Now to the business of making this the rule, not the exception.


This is excellent news! Thank you for sharing, Linus!!

[Linus]

Ryd1-xco9cg

So I saw this yesterday and it made me go :blink:

So now we want to eliminate the legal path into the US as well? Really? I already have an issue with the way that the US treats undocumented individuals and not providing a path for those who have been here for a while to become documented. Now we want to make it even harder for legal immigrants from coming in?

Looking at this report ( http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/immigrants-us-labor-force ) , there is an interesting comment:

As other, more detailed analyses (http://immigrationpolicy.org/special-reports/untying-knot-series-unemployment-and-immigration) have confirmed, this suggests that immigrants and natives are filling different niches in the U.S. labor market and are therefore not in direct competition with each other for most jobs.

[greeneyedgrrl]

Ryd1-xco9cg

So I saw this yesterday and it made me go :blink:

So now we want to eliminate the legal path into the US as well? Really? I already have an issue with the way that the US treats undocumented individuals and not providing a path for those who have been here for a while to become documented. Now we want to make it even harder for legal immigrants from coming in?

Looking at this report ( http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/immigrants-us-labor-force ) , there is an interesting comment:

thanks for sharing, i haven't seen it up here yet. it makes my heart hurt... but i'm not surprised...when things suck target the most vulnerable populations, don't address the actual issues right?? :| i wonder who funds this group....

[Kätzchen]

Hi, Good morning!

I just had a private conversation with another member here about the political climate surrounding Immigration Law and how it's being construed in the US state of Georgia.

I have a series of questions this morning, since learning that Georgia has been aggressively rewriting or over-writing current law at a state level in Georgia:


How is it that lawmakers in Georgia are getting away with doing this?
Would you say the process is isomorphic in that currently construed law mirrors the will of the people of the state of Georgia?
Are people in positions of power there that hateful?
Who's feeding their coffers that enables and allows this type of social injustice?
I ask these questions on behalf of my Femme friend, Vlasta. She is suffering dire consequences to the structure of her family life and the life of her sons' very existence. She and her family stand to suffer significantly if the state of Georgia is successful in ousting her son from the face of the population in Georgia. I worry for my friend and what options she is able to exercise on behalf of her son's best interest. I fail to see how the state of Georgia is allowed to exercise this type of authority and power in coercive and racially motivated ways.

Vlasta's son has a new court date in early January (I believe it occurs on the 9th) and I am making inquiries here to see if other members are able to supply information they might hold about how matters of Immigration are handled in the state of Georgia. I recently learned that rules now on the books will be obsolete by the week of Vlasta's sons' court appearance and I worry that the tidal wave of change will snuff out the life of her son, and his small family (their plight) and Vlasta's life.

The questions I have listed above are important to me but the most important question I have right now, is this:

Who can a person turn to, as an advocate - other than a lawyer who specializes in Immigration Law - whose legal voice will empower them past this mine field of hate?

If anyone knows who has the power to overturn the wheels of hate in Georgia, will you please post a message here or send me note via the PM system here. The current window of time is limited to two weeks. Also, I wonder if there is a powerful lobby who advocates on behalf of those who are caught up in the web of misuse of power, such as this case that is transpiring in the state of Georgia?

Thank you in advance for any insight or help you are able to offer.

~D

[Linus]

Katzchen (sorry, I don't know how to add the two dots above the A),

You or Vlasta may want to check out http://www.immigrationequality.org/ and/or http://imeq.us/ to get some help or get resources that could help.

As for Georgia, I think that it will be interesting to see what happens in regards to Arizona and the changes they made. If the courts agree, they'll likely say that the states don't have the right to enforce immigration issues.

[Kätzchen]

Thank you Linus!

I'd be upset like Vlasta too if none of my lady friends came to my side to help me during this time of tragedy that my friend Vlasta is going through.

Thank you for the leads this morning.

~D

[Greyson]

My heart goes out to Vlasta. This entire Immigration thing is a bone of contention for me. I have had contact with Immigration Equlity Now. They were supportive and as helpful as they legally could be.

I know you are aware the US Supreme Court has recently agreed to hearing a case regarding the State of Arizona Immigration laws. This case will be watched very closely. It is suspected it will be ruled on by the November 2012 Presidential election. The crux of it is about States vs Federal law regarding the enforcement and interpretation of Immigration Law.

Unfortuanately, politically it is a very bad time for immigrants, legal or illegal. Here in California, there have been a few documented cases of American born Latino Citizens being detained for days to be deported.

I know nothing about Georgia law. I would also recommend that Vlasta bring clergy with her to the courtroom and/or letters from clergy and community leaders that speak favorably of her son and his contribution to the community.

I am ashamed when I hear my country, America is doing this to a veteran. Honorably discharged veterans should not have to go through this. I don't care where they were born. If they served honorably in the US military they should be given the opportunity to become a citizen and live here.

[Sparkle]

Thank you Linus!

I'd be upset like Vlasta too if none of my lady friends came to my side to help me during this time of tragedy that my friend Vlasta is going through.

Thank you for the leads this morning.

~D

My heart goes out to Vlasta and her family. And it is so lovely of you to reach out and to support her.

I've been on the sharp end of immigration law myself; as have soooo very many of my friends. It is painful and frustrating and soul altering, and I'm sorry they are suffering.

I used to sit on the board for an LGBT Immigration Rights group in the UK and as a former volunteer & Board member & immigrant:
it is vital that they get sound legal advice from a professional.

No one here should be giving advice (unless they are an immigration lawyer). The law changes so quickly, it is very complicated and the consequences for incomplete or incorrect information are severe.

[note: this is not meant as a lecture, no one has given legal advice here to date, but I think it is incredibly important that this is stressed. just as we shouldn't look for medical advice on message boards we should absolutely not rely upon legal advice. I heard too many tragic stories from families - to not say this.]

The links that Linus shared are a great starting point. They will help her find someone local who can help and they will be a sympathetic and supportive.

The new laws that some states are enacting are hateful and discriminatory and unconstitutional, end of story. It winds me up to the point of rage in about .02seconds. Time will tell how the Supreme Court responds.

This is a good article about some states (Arizona, Alabama, Georgia) attempting to override federal immigration law enforcement.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristian-ramos/the-next-chapter-in-the-d_b_1149479.html

Wishing Vlasta and her family peaceful holidays and a successful resolution.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Our family went through something similar with my brother, you have to listen to an Attorney that *specializes* in Immigration law in that particular state.. Luckily for us my brother was not arrested, only detained until an interpreter came in and helped him explain things then he hired an Immigration Attorney to deal with the rest of the fall out which is still not fixed.

I too am have hit some difficulties as of late with my card luckily I can fix mine without hassle other than aggravation and paper work. I'll be honest Georgia is a scary state and it's fucked up with the way they are changing and toying with things it's pretty racist, gross and profiling.

[AtLast]

Katzchen (sorry, I don't know how to add the two dots above the A),

You or Vlasta may want to check out http://www.immigrationequality.org/ and/or http://imeq.us/ to get some help or get resources that could help.

As for Georgia, I think that it will be interesting to see what happens in regards to Arizona and the changes they made. If the courts agree, they'll likely say that the states don't have the right to enforce immigration issues.

I think the US Constitution is clear that what so many states have been trying to pull, is unconstitutional. So are all of the voter suppression actions going on in some states.

As Greyson pointed out, the Supreme Court will be ruling on legislation like what was passed in AZ. I always want to believe that our high court is actually not political (as it is defined as in the very same Constitution)- that our system of "checks & balances" does work, but, I don't know any more. After the Citizens United decision, I am just not the believer I used to be in our judicial branch.

[Vlasta]

Hi, Good morning!

I just had a private conversation with another member here about the political climate surrounding Immigration Law and how it's being construed in the US state of Georgia.

I have a series of questions this morning, since learning that Georgia has been aggressively rewriting or over-writing current law at a state level in Georgia:


How is it that lawmakers in Georgia are getting away with doing this?
Would you say the process is isomorphic in that currently construed law mirrors the will of the people of the state of Georgia?
Are people in positions of power there that hateful?
Who's feeding their coffers that enables and allows this type of social injustice?
I ask these questions on behalf of my Femme friend, Vlasta. She is suffering dire consequences to the structure of her family life and the life of her sons' very existence. She and her family stand to suffer significantly if the state of Georgia is successful in ousting her son from the face of the population in Georgia. I worry for my friend and what options she is able to exercise on behalf of her son's best interest. I fail to see how the state of Georgia is allowed to exercise this type of authority and power in coercive and racially motivated ways.

Vlasta's son has a new court date in early January (I believe it occurs on the 9th) and I am making inquiries here to see if other members are able to supply information they might hold about how matters of Immigration are handled in the state of Georgia. I recently learned that rules now on the books will be obsolete by the week of Vlasta's sons' court appearance and I worry that the tidal wave of change will snuff out the life of her son, and his small family (their plight) and Vlasta's life.

The questions I have listed above are important to me but the most important question I have right now, is this:

Who can a person turn to, as an advocate - other than a lawyer who specializes in Immigration Law - whose legal voice will empower them past this mine field of hate?

If anyone knows who has the power to overturn the wheels of hate in Georgia, will you please post a message here or send me note via the PM system here. The current window of time is limited to two weeks. Also, I wonder if there is a powerful lobby who advocates on behalf of those who are caught up in the web of misuse of power, such as this case that is transpiring in the state of Georgia?

Thank you in advance for any insight or help you are able to offer.

~Dthank you for everything my friend , your support means so much to me so other kind people .

love ya always <3

[Kätzchen]

My heart goes out to Vlasta and her family. And it is so lovely of you to reach out and to support her.

I've been on the sharp end of immigration law myself; as have soooo very many of my friends. It is painful and frustrating and soul altering, and I'm sorry they are suffering.

I used to sit on the board for an LGBT Immigration Rights group in the UK and as a former volunteer & Board member & immigrant:
it is vital that they get sound legal advice from a professional.

No one here should be giving advice (unless they are an immigration lawyer). The law changes so quickly, it is very complicated and the consequences for incomplete or incorrect information are severe.

[note: this is not meant as a lecture, no one has given legal advice here to date, but I think it is incredibly important that this is stressed. just as we shouldn't look for medical advice on message boards we should absolutely not rely upon legal advice. I heard too many tragic stories from families - to not say this.]

The links that Linus shared are a great starting point. They will help her find someone local who can help and they will be a sympathetic and supportive.

The new laws that some states are enacting are hateful and discriminatory and unconstitutional, end of story. It winds me up to the point of rage in about .02seconds. Time will tell how the Supreme Court responds.

This is a good article about some states (Arizona, Alabama, Georgia) attempting to override federal immigration law enforcement.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kristian-ramos/the-next-chapter-in-the-d_b_1149479.html

Wishing Vlasta and her family peaceful holidays and a successful resolution.

Hey Sparkle, you are such a sweetheart too. Thanks for your post and yes, it's important to have authentic, professional advice from a highly specialized attorney in Immigration Law or any other specialized law (ie, marriage, business, estate, criminal, anti-trust, etc.). I so know what you mean about going from zero to rage in less than 2 seconds! Thank you for the article you provided too - will read it in a few. Snow, was sorry to hear you were having difficulties too but that in your case, it is not too hard to fix. Greyson, I hear you on feeling disappointed in the lack of fair treatment extended to veterans in good standing. I couldn't help but feel Vlasta's sadness and frustration and trying to resist heartbreak when you know the war has only half begun. I am blessed with close lady friends who are wonderful friends with loving, supportive hearts. I'm so lucky they care about me and my sons and have helped me through all kinds of ordeals (friends here, too) and we survive and thrive because there's people who care about what's going down (on our permanent records, I guess you could say).

Thank you Linus for the links to explore for extra help for Vlasta (and anyone else who could use this information too)!!!

You're welcome Vlasta.

:moonstars:

[UofMfan]

The article below is a perfect example of how important it is to choose your Immigration lawyer wisely.

During times like these, there are many "ambulance chasers" taking advantage of undocumented individuals, as well as those who are documented but are facing the backlash of the harsh and unfair 1996 Immigration Law.



In a Study, Judges Express a Bleak View of Lawyers Representing Immigrants (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/nyregion/judges-give-low-marks-to-lawyers-in-immigration-cases.html?_r=1&src=rechp)
By KIRK SEMPLE, The New York Times

They are often poorly prepared or make incoherent arguments in court. Some fail to present key evidence or witnesses. Others simply do not show up.

The performance of many lawyers who represent immigrants facing deportation in New York has long been considered mediocre. But in a new report that seeks to measure the extent of the problem, immigration judges themselves step forward and offer a scathing assessment of much of the lawyering they have witnessed in their courtrooms.

Immigrants received “inadequate” legal assistance in 33 percent of the cases between mid-2010 and mid-2011 and “grossly inadequate” assistance in 14 percent of the cases, the judges said. They gave private lawyers the lowest grades, while generally awarding higher marks to pro bono counsel and those from nonprofit organizations and law school clinics.

The study was conducted by a group of lawyers and researchers under the auspices of Robert A. Katzmann, a federal appellate judge in New York City. A year ago, they began sifting through government data and surveying immigration judges in an attempt to measure the quality and availability of legal representation for immigrants facing deportation.

Their report will be published this week in the Cardozo Law Review, a publication of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in Manhattan.

“We began this effort with an intuitive sense of the scale of the problem,” the report says. “The numbers sadly bear out that intuition in the starkest form.”

Judge Katzmann blames predatory lawyers who are not familiar with immigration law for much of the poor representation. The immigrants who hire them often do not speak English and are unfamiliar with the court system, making them particularly vulnerable.

“They are easy prey for ambulance-chasing-style lawyers who do not adhere to the highest standards of responsibility,” said the judge, who for several years has been pushing for better legal representation of immigrants in New York.

For the judges’ survey, researchers polled judges in five immigration courts — three in New York City and two in the northern suburbs — about the representatives who appeared before them. All but 2 of the 33 sitting judges at the time participated in the investigation.

While much legal representation in New York immigration courts is shoddy, the report found that many immigrants do not have representation at all. (Unlike in criminal courts, respondents in immigration courts are not entitled to court-appointed lawyers.)

Immigrants in 27 percent of cases between October 2005 and July 2010 appeared in court without a legal representative, according to the report. For detained immigrants, 67 percent appeared alone before a judge.

The report found that immigrants’ fate can depend largely on whether they can find legal representation: About 67 percent of all immigrants with counsel during that five-year period had successful outcomes in their cases, while only 8 percent of those without lawyers prevailed.

Where detainees were held also appeared to make a considerable difference in their cases. Nearly two-thirds of those detained in New York are sent to detention centers out of state, often as far away as Louisiana and Texas. Yet only 21 percent of detainees transferred out of New York between October 2005 and July 2010 received representation, the report said.

Even a short transfer to New Jersey can have a considerable impact, the researchers found. Among immigrants transferred to Newark, only 22 percent had representation.

Judge Katzmann’s study group said this was a significant finding because immigration authorities were expanding detention capacity in Newark to hold detainees from around the region.

“It’s hard to get New York lawyers to go to New Jersey and do those cases,” said Peter L. Markowitz, a clinical associate professor at the Cardozo law school and chairman of the research team that produced the report. “To take a day to go do a case out in Newark is just disruptive to their practice and not worth it to them.”

The Obama administration has acknowledged the problem of inadequate representation. In 2009, immigration officials announced plans to overhaul the detention system, including providing more detention capacity in and around cities with large immigrant populations, like New York, so detainees are closer to their families and lawyers.

While immigration officials recently closed a detention center in Lower Manhattan, they are planning to double detention capacity in Newark. The study group’s report, however, did not address the potential impact of these proposed changes.

The report also did not consider the potential impact of a new Obama administration plan to review all pending deportation cases in the immigration courts and to train enforcement agents and government lawyers in the use of new prosecutorial guidelines. The plan is intended to unclog the immigration system and to focus the government’s deportation efforts on convicted criminals.

“I’m somewhat skeptical still of that process,” Mr. Markowitz said. “Skeptical but hopeful.”

He added: “Meaningful prosecutorial discretion on the front end is something that could have a real impact.”

Judge Katzmann’s group is currently in the midst of another project: to develop a system that would guarantee competent legal representation for all immigrants facing deportation. The group hopes its project will provide a model for the rest of the country.

“Having the data means that we can think sensibly about how to address this dire crisis,” the judge said.

[Vlasta]

The article below is a perfect example of how important it is to choose your Immigration lawyer wisely.

During times like these, there are many "ambulance chasers" taking advantage of undocumented individuals, as well as those who are documented but are facing the backlash of the harsh and unfair 1996 Immigration Law.



In a Study, Judges Express a Bleak View of Lawyers Representing Immigrants (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/nyregion/judges-give-low-marks-to-lawyers-in-immigration-cases.html?_r=1&src=rechp)
By KIRK SEMPLE, The New York Times

They are often poorly prepared or make incoherent arguments in court. Some fail to present key evidence or witnesses. Others simply do not show up.

The performance of many lawyers who represent immigrants facing deportation in New York has long been considered mediocre. But in a new report that seeks to measure the extent of the problem, immigration judges themselves step forward and offer a scathing assessment of much of the lawyering they have witnessed in their courtrooms.

Immigrants received “inadequate” legal assistance in 33 percent of the cases between mid-2010 and mid-2011 and “grossly inadequate” assistance in 14 percent of the cases, the judges said. They gave private lawyers the lowest grades, while generally awarding higher marks to pro bono counsel and those from nonprofit organizations and law school clinics.

The study was conducted by a group of lawyers and researchers under the auspices of Robert A. Katzmann, a federal appellate judge in New York City. A year ago, they began sifting through government data and surveying immigration judges in an attempt to measure the quality and availability of legal representation for immigrants facing deportation.

Their report will be published this week in the Cardozo Law Review, a publication of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in Manhattan.

“We began this effort with an intuitive sense of the scale of the problem,” the report says. “The numbers sadly bear out that intuition in the starkest form.”

Judge Katzmann blames predatory lawyers who are not familiar with immigration law for much of the poor representation. The immigrants who hire them often do not speak English and are unfamiliar with the court system, making them particularly vulnerable.

“They are easy prey for ambulance-chasing-style lawyers who do not adhere to the highest standards of responsibility,” said the judge, who for several years has been pushing for better legal representation of immigrants in New York.

For the judges’ survey, researchers polled judges in five immigration courts — three in New York City and two in the northern suburbs — about the representatives who appeared before them. All but 2 of the 33 sitting judges at the time participated in the investigation.

While much legal representation in New York immigration courts is shoddy, the report found that many immigrants do not have representation at all. (Unlike in criminal courts, respondents in immigration courts are not entitled to court-appointed lawyers.)

Immigrants in 27 percent of cases between October 2005 and July 2010 appeared in court without a legal representative, according to the report. For detained immigrants, 67 percent appeared alone before a judge.

The report found that immigrants’ fate can depend largely on whether they can find legal representation: About 67 percent of all immigrants with counsel during that five-year period had successful outcomes in their cases, while only 8 percent of those without lawyers prevailed.

Where detainees were held also appeared to make a considerable difference in their cases. Nearly two-thirds of those detained in New York are sent to detention centers out of state, often as far away as Louisiana and Texas. Yet only 21 percent of detainees transferred out of New York between October 2005 and July 2010 received representation, the report said.

Even a short transfer to New Jersey can have a considerable impact, the researchers found. Among immigrants transferred to Newark, only 22 percent had representation.

Judge Katzmann’s study group said this was a significant finding because immigration authorities were expanding detention capacity in Newark to hold detainees from around the region.

“It’s hard to get New York lawyers to go to New Jersey and do those cases,” said Peter L. Markowitz, a clinical associate professor at the Cardozo law school and chairman of the research team that produced the report. “To take a day to go do a case out in Newark is just disruptive to their practice and not worth it to them.”

The Obama administration has acknowledged the problem of inadequate representation. In 2009, immigration officials announced plans to overhaul the detention system, including providing more detention capacity in and around cities with large immigrant populations, like New York, so detainees are closer to their families and lawyers.

While immigration officials recently closed a detention center in Lower Manhattan, they are planning to double detention capacity in Newark. The study group’s report, however, did not address the potential impact of these proposed changes.

The report also did not consider the potential impact of a new Obama administration plan to review all pending deportation cases in the immigration courts and to train enforcement agents and government lawyers in the use of new prosecutorial guidelines. The plan is intended to unclog the immigration system and to focus the government’s deportation efforts on convicted criminals.

“I’m somewhat skeptical still of that process,” Mr. Markowitz said. “Skeptical but hopeful.”

He added: “Meaningful prosecutorial discretion on the front end is something that could have a real impact.”

Judge Katzmann’s group is currently in the midst of another project: to develop a system that would guarantee competent legal representation for all immigrants facing deportation. The group hopes its project will provide a model for the rest of the country.

“Having the data means that we can think sensibly about how to address this dire crisis,” the judge said.

you know what ? this article it's absolutely correct . I am getting pissed off as time goes on . The immigration lawyers are sorry and so are judges . They have they own rules and in addition they change them on daily bases .

You don't know who to trust as an attorney , yes they have 20 years of experience , take your money and don't know much about your case . We already paid so much money for the crap, that even president of the USA has done the same thing .

I am disgusted with this system right now . How about invest more energy in a people that committed a real crimes , sexual predators , murderers and much more ?

God help me to stay sane and objective .

thanks for posting this .

[Soon]

DENIED: Obama Admin Immigration Decision Puts Couples in Limbo
(http://www.advocate.com/Politics/Officials_Deny_Broad_Immigration_Relief_to_Gay_Bin ational_Couples/)
The Advocate has learned of a high-level meeting with LGBT groups where the administration rejected a hold on deciding gay couples' green card petitions.

/snip/
Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, said that despite her group’s extensive arguments as to why the administration has the power — and, given the president’s position that DOMA is indefensible, the duty — to act on behalf of binational gay couples, officials summarily rejected their request to hold green card applications in abeyance.

“We wanted to make clear to the administration that this is a priority for us, that it’s a new big ask of the LGBT community,” Tiven said of the coalition of LGBT groups at the January 30 meeting. “In many, many meetings over the past six months, with different players and different agencies, [the administration] has been quick to say, without hesitation, that our legal arguments are quite sound. So it’s frustrating to hear this idea from them that it’s basically no big deal for individuals to fall out of lawful status.”