Thread: Supreme Court eases rules for those who overstay visas

From what Laura Ingrham has said on her new show on Fox today that they circumvented written law. It seems that Congress can make a specific law stating that what they decided is unlawful. Then the court may not have a way of getting around it. I bet Sessions, Vitter, and Inhofe are on it already.

THIS IS A CROCK OF BS! That means that ANYONE ILLEGAL can enter into a sham marriage and receive the right to remain in the country?! PLEASE TELL ME I AM INTERPRETING THIS WRONG.

I just sent an email to Judicial Watch to see if they will clarify this in their newletter they send out. If I get info I'll put it on Alipac.


Laura Ingraham just had a Sheriff and Radio guy from the Border area discussing the Operation Streamline. They say that the border crossings in their area and crime have decreased because of it. They are going to increase OS to other areas. So we have the boots on the ground going one way and the SC going another.

Originally Posted by Gogo

I just sent an email to Judicial Watch to see if they will clarify this in their newletter they send out. If I get info I'll put it on Alipac.

THANK YOU Gogo!

The Supreme Court steps in to help illegal alien visa overstayers
By Michelle Malkin • June 16, 2008 11:41 AM

Whether Obama or McCain becomes president, I think we can look forward to more of this open-borders activism on the Supreme Court. La Raza, the ACLU, and AILA are high-fiving each other today over the ruling in Dada v. Mukasey (opinion here):

The court ruled 5-4 Monday that someone who is here illegally may withdraw his [voluntary] agreement to depart and continue to try to get approval to remain in the United States.

…Samson Dada, a Nigerian citizen, stayed beyond the expiration of his tourist visa in 1998. He married an American the following year and soon began trying to obtain a visa as an immediate relative of a citizen. But Dada and his wife apparently failed to submit some documents, causing immigration officials to deny the visa.

Dada has been trying again to obtain the visa, but immigration authorities meanwhile have ordered him to leave the country.

He agreed to leave voluntarily, which would allow him to try sooner to re-enter the country legally than if he had been deported.

The marriage, you’ll not be surprised to learn, was a sham.

-----

click below link to read comments (53 so far)

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/16/th ... erstayers/

Press Trust of India
India's Premier News Agency

US top court eases rules for foreigners seeking legal status

Washington, June 17 (PTI) In a development that could ease up immigration rules, the top court in the US has ruled that foreigners who overstay their visas can continue to remain in the country to seek legal status.

Under "some" circumstances, people could withdraw their voluntary agreement to leave the US and continue with an application for lawful status, the top court said in a verdict yesterday.

The ruling, jurists have pointed out, would particularly benefit those married to American citizens.

The federal government had earlier taken a position that intending immigrants who left the US would no longer be eligible for a "green card" and if they stayed in the US longer than authorised, they would be disqualified.

"The Supreme Court rejected the government's hard-line approach to immigrants and to lawful immigration options," said Nadine Wettstein, legal director of the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF), which filed a "Friend of the Court" brief in the case.

"The Court correctly held that immigrants' rights under the law must be respected," Wettstein added.

"This decision should send a message to the government," added Beth Werlin, AILF's Litigation Clearinghouse Attorney and co-author of AILF's Amicus Curiae brief.

"The government should have reached this conclusion on its own years ago, rather than fighting through the courts." The decision resolved majority of visa-related conflicts in the lower courts and involved two parts of the immigration law. One allows people to avoid being deported by agreeing to leave the country voluntarily and the other allows immigrants ,who overstay their visas, make their case to immigration officials. PTI

http://www.ptinews.com/pti%5Cptisite.ns ... enDocument

Here's Rush Limbaugh's take on this:



Liberal Supreme Court Justices Green-Light Illegal Immigration
June 16, 2008

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: "The Supreme Court" this morning just prior to the program starting "made it easier ... for some foreigners who overstay their visas to seek to remain in the United States legally." The Supreme Court today 5-4, the same bunch that voted the issue last week with Anthony Kennedy writing the opinion, has just green-lighted illegal immigration. "The court ruled 5-4 that someone who is here illegally may withdraw his voluntarily [sic] agreement to depart and continue to try to get approval to remain in the United States," while still here. "The decision essentially embraced a proposed Justice Department regulation governing the treatment of similar cases in the future. Samson Dada, a Nigerian citizen, stayed beyond the expiration of his tourist visa in 1998. He married an American the following year and soon began trying to obtain a visa as an immediate relative of a citizen. But Dada and his wife apparently failed to submit some documents, causing immigration officials to deny the visa.

"Dada has been trying again to obtain the visa, but immigration authorities meanwhile have ordered him to leave the country. He agreed to leave voluntarily, which would allow him to try sooner to re-enter the country legally than if he had been deported. The court's task," and once again, this is the Associated Press, "was to decide whether he could withdraw his voluntary agreement to leave the country and continue to try to adjust his status while in the United States. Immigration authorities recently ruled that Dada had entered a 'sham' marriage in order to stay [here], but that finding was not part of the court's consideration. Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, joined by his four liberal colleagues. The four conservative justices dissented. Justice Antonin Scalia said, 'The court lacks the authority to impose its chosen remedy.'"

And that's it in a nutshell. Once again, the Supreme Court of the United States is micromanaging an area left to another branch. In this case, the Constitution explicitly leaves it to Congress to regulate immigration. This is not what judging is supposed to be about. These judges on the left are no more than political hacks now, imposing their own personal policy preferences rather than interpreting the law. It's been going on a long time. You know, if they want to be politicians then their conduct has been exposed and questioned. It's the same thing with their attitudes and their motives. This is not what judging is supposed to be about. The Constitution does not countenance this kind of behavior on the part of judges. The court, I doubt that it will be, but it would be great if it became a major focus of the presidential campaign now that it's out. The problem we hear again, I don't know. I haven't heard what Senator McCain said about this, but he probably agrees with it. He came out stridently against the Guantanamo Bay ruling last week, but he probably...

I don't know, but if he understands this as an encroachment on congressional authority, then he's got to oppose this. The Supreme Court just told Congress, "You can't do what you did. We're going to write the immigration laws, not you." Now, just last week, the Supreme Court of the United States bestowed constitutional rights to foreign-born terrorists. The ruling last week is a chilling demonstration along with this ruling today of the American divide between conservatives and liberals. Four liberals on the court, aided and abetted by Justice Kennedy, used the Guantanamo Bay case as a power grab. Their decision overturned precedent since our founding that placed the prosecution of war squarely within the executive branch. Naturally, Democrats last week and this week are celebrating the ruling, celebrated amid warnings that it will cost American troops their lives. But this decision, the Guantanamo Bay decision last week and this decision on immigration this morning, both have even broader implications.

Because in short order -- in just seven or eight days -- the Supreme Court of the United States and its liberal judges have turned American law upside down. And let's look back further to the past to see just how they've also done this. They have stripped voters of free speech rights, limiting production and participation in political debate. The Supreme Court of the United States has stripped homeowners of rights to their own property should politicians decide to seize it for developers. That's the Kelo decision. And I have a friend who lives in Connecticut. He sent me a note last week, or it might have been the week before last. He said, "Do you know that the property that they seized in Kelo is still undeveloped?" The woman that they kicked off her own property is gone. They took it, seized it, kicked her off. She's gone. The property is gone. They haven't done anything to develop it? It's blank; it's barren. And yet this was a case where there was a specific developer who was to go in and do specific things that was going to generate more and more tax revenue for this local community and it hasn't happened, but the woman got kicked off of her property nevertheless.

The Supreme Court of the United States has stripped homeowners of rights to their own property in more ways than just Kelo, by the way. The Supreme Court of the United States has stripped parents of the right to discipline their own kids. The Supreme Court of the United States is in the process of defining the very definition of marriage. They have ruled against legal immigration. They've ruled illegal immigrants must be accorded the same protection as citizens, and American taxpayers must support them financially. They have pushed God from the public square. They have used junk science to place the interests of animals above the prosperity of people -- and the Supreme Court of the United States has stripped the most sacred protection, the right to life, from infants in the womb. Whatever power that liberals cannot achieve at the ballot box they seize through the courts. This is the change that Barack Obama and his fellow liberals have been waiting for. And the America they are creating and want to create is not the America we know, nor is it an America that most of you will even want to know.

END TRANSCRIPT

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/ ... guest.html

Update
Supreme Court Ruling Lets Voluntary-Departure Aliens Back Out of their Deal

Updated Monday, June 16, 2008, 3:07 PM

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that deportable illegal aliens can back out of their agreement to voluntarily depart the country and get another opportunity to make the case to immigration officials that they should be allowed to adjust their status.

The case (Dada v. Mukasey) involved a visa overstayer whose case to remain in the country had been denied. Existing law allows individuals who are judged deportable to continue to fight deportation or to voluntarily depart within 60 days. This voluntary departure deal, which Dada agreed to, allows the person to: avoid detention pending involuntary deportation; select his own country of destination; leave according to his own schedule (within the prescribed period); and avoid restrictions on readmission that accompany involuntary departure.

Two days before the deadline for his promised voluntary departure, Dada filed a motion with the Board of Immigration Appeals seeking to back out of the deal. The Board denied that motion, stating that “an alien who fails to depart following a grant of voluntary departure . . . is statutorily barred from applying for certain forms of discretionary relief.â€

I just called Sessions office to see if they have any reaction and to see if they are going to trying and put through legislation to overcome this decision.

We'll get a lot more of this if Obama gets in.