Thread: United States deports Australian Tracey Washington over scho

United States deports Australian Tracey Washington over school squabble
March 03, 2010 8:09AM
102 comments

Tracey Washington, her son, 5, and her husband Charles. Tracey Washington and her 13-year-old son, not pictured, are facing deportation to Australia after the child was charged with punching a classmate and taking 46 cents from him.

AN AUSTRALIAN woman is being deported from the US because her son punched a classmate and stole 53 cents.
Tracey Washington and her two sons, aged 13 and 5, will be kicked out on Friday under a controversial San Francisco policy that forced the city's juvenile authorities to turn the elder child over to federal US Immigration and Customs officials.

Mrs Washington moved to San Francisco from Melbourne in February last year to marry Charles Washington, 42, whom she met on holidays six years ago.

However, Mrs Washington and the boys were declared illegal immigrants in May after she missed the cut-off to apply for a green card. Mrs Washington claims immigration officials gave her the wrong deadline.

The problem only came to light after her 13-year-old son was arrested on suspicion of assault, robbery and extortion after a schoolyard incident in January.

San Francisco's hardline policy followed criticism the city was a sanctuary for illegal immigrants because it refused to report juveniles who were arrested on felony charges and suspected of being illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

The family's lawyer, Angela Chan, said the punch had been a joke, the other student was unhurt and the boy had apologised. The other student's parents had called police.

Mr Washington is unable to follow his new wife because of a custody agreement with his former wife for the care of their 12-year-old daughter.

The Australian Government has refused to intervene in the deportation.




http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/ ... 5836354012

Family's deportation illustrates why Campos' amendment is needed
03.02.10 - 5:08 pm | Sarah Phelan

The case of MUNI bus driver Charles Washington, whose wife Tracey and her 13-year old son face deportation on Friday after the boy tried to take 46 cents from another kid, helps illustrate why Sup. David Campos spent over a year working with local immigration experts to figure out a way to amend the city's sanctuary policy. Under the Campos amendment, which Mayor Gavin Newsom has refused to implement, kids like Charles Washington's 13-year-old stepson would only be referred to US immigration and Customs Enforcement after a juvenile justice determined that they were actually guilty of a felony.

Unfortunately, the city's juvenile probation department, under Mayor Gavin Newsom's orders, and running scared of rightwing nuts who have unsuccesfully tried to sue the city, has refused to implement Campos amendment. Campos, who spent over a year working with immigration experts to develop a measured and legally defensible amendment, has called a hearing to determine why juvenile probation is refusing to implement his amendment, which a super majority of the Board supported last year,thereby overriding Newsom's mayoral veto.

And now, with the face of the Washingtons all over the local media, city officials are either rushing to clarify their positions, or avoiding reporters altogether, as the Washingtons fight to keep their family intact--and in San Francisco.

Sgt Tomioka of the San Francisco police Department left me a message this morning to clarify that the SFPD doesn't refer immigrant youth to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

"That is not a function of the SFPD," Tomioka said in a voice message.
And she's right. That job is left to the city's probation officers. But the city's probation officers are required, under Newsom's policy, to refer kids to ICE if the arresting SFPD officer charges them with a felony. So, in that sense the SFPD is involved in the ICE referral process, albeit indirectly.

As the SFPD's Sgt. Wilfred Williams explained, SFPD officers make the arrests, write up the charges and transport suspected juvenile felons to the Juvenile Justice Center.

And it's at the Juvenile Justice Center that members of the city's Juvenile Probation Department are required, under Newsom's orders, to pick up the phone and refer kids to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) when kids they suspect of being undocumented are booked with felony charges.

In the case of Charles Washington's skinny 13-year-old stepson, the kid was arrested by the SFPD on Jan. 25 and charged with felony assault, extortion and robbery. I haven't seen a police report of the incident, yet. But Washington said it was based on what the other kid's family told the police, and that there were no witnesses to the incident. And felony charges are all that's needed, under Newsom's current policy to require a probation officer to refer a kid to ICE.

And once juveniles are in the hands of ICE, a nightmarish Catch 22 kicks in, in which local protections no longer apply, and ICE's deportation orders can trump any legal immigration application, including green card applications.

In the case of the Washingtons, the family was applying for green cards--applications that cost thousands of dollars. And US Citizenship and Immigration Services had agreed to review their case. But then came their son's arrest by the SFPD who charged him with three felonies and transported him to Juvenile Probation, whose officers were required to refer him to ICE. And ICE, according to Washington, then used his son "as bait" to get his wife to show up at their office, where they slapped an electronic monitoring device on her ankle and gave her and her son their deportation marching orders.

Angela Chan, staff attorney at the Asian Law Caucus, and the lawyer helping the Washingtons' negogiate their way through this immigration nightmare, clarified that USCIS isn't refusing to consider their case, because of the stepson's referral.
Instead, the problem is that USCIS won't be able to finish that process before Friday, when the Washingtons are due to be deported.

"Unfortunately, the mother and her child will be deported by ICE well before their greencard application can be processed by USCIS, which can take months," Chan said.

Further compounding the Washingtons' legal problems is the fact that their 13-year-old is supposed to appear before a juvenile justice on Monday (March to review the charges against him.Chan said it's likely that a juvenile justice would review the boy's case and reduce the charges, probably requiring him to do six months informal probation. In other words, the felony charges that led to his referral to ICE likely wouldn't be upheld in court.

Now, under the amendment that Sup. Campos authored and the Board approved last fall, but Newsom is refusing to implement, the boy's probation oficer would not be required to refer him to ICE if the felony charges aren't upheld. In which case, the boy would go free, his parents could continue applying for green cards, and the family could remain intact

But since ICE want to deport Washington's stepson before his March 8 hearing, the boy won't have his day in court. Even worse, he will likely be slapped with a bench warrant by the juvenile justice department--the kind of Catch 22 detail that will play havoc with future attempts to apply for green cards from outside the US.

I asked Lori Haley of US ICE what's the big hurry to deport the Washingtons by Friday.
"They overstayed their visas," was all Haley would say, along with the comment that "We don't confirm when someone is going to be deported."

Asked who was responsible for telling the Washingtons that they needn't rush to apply for green cards, which is what Charles Washington said happened, Haley referred me to UC CIS, whose spokesperson Sharon Rummery said it was impossible to ascertain if a contractor with the US government misinformed the family.

'I can't say that it's true or not, because it was a private conversation between one of the operators who works on our customer service line," Rummery said. "Our operators are highly trained and are backed up by our trained officers," Rummery continued, confirming that the operators are contractors, not US CIS staff.

Rummery offered that folks who are deported to their native country can file for a waiver of deportation and also a waiver of a ban on reentering the country.

"They have to demonstrate that an immediate relative, who has legal status, in this case the husband, will suffer severe hardship," Rummery said. "When they are sent away, then they can apply for a waiver and return with a green card."

But Rummery said she could not provide a reliable time estimate as to how long all this would take, nor did she know how the stepson's felony charges and possible bench warrant would impact the family's chances of getting a green card through this process.

So, I called Sens. Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and President Barack Obama's press office to see if any of them are aware of this case and whether they would consider a private bill. As the Asian Law Caucus' Chan explained to me, earlier today, "A private bill is when a bill is passed to grant immigration relief for an individual. It doesn't change SF's policy or the way the feds are bullying us, but it may help this family.

No one in Boxer, Feinstein, Pelosi or Obama's press offices was aware of this case when I called, but they all said they'd look into it,and the folks in Feinstein's office sounded horrified that a kid could be deported thanks to a schoolyard fight over 46 cents. So, maybe there is hope after all.

To date, Mayor Gavin Newsom's new media spokesperson Tony Winnicker hasn't returned my calls.

But I did read that Winnicker had told the Chronicle that it was "'an unfortunate situation for the family, and we're sympathetic to it."

"But [Winnicker] said the mayor is actually protecting 'hard-working, law-abiding residents of this city, including undocumented residents' by reporting youths after felony arrests," the Chronicle continued.

Somehow, I don't think that Charles Washington, a hard-working law-abiding resident of San Francisco, would agree that anybody is protecting him by deporting his wife and her two kids. Especially since the 13-year old hasn't even had his day in court to determine if he is even guilty as charged.

And while the Chron wrote that Washington "hopes to visit them in Australia," the Chron's reporter must have left the press conference by the time Washington explained how often he is likely to get to visit Australia. As Washington noted, if you are deported, you typically have to wait 3-10 years to visit the US again.
"So, if it's a 10-year ban, I'll get to visit them 3 times, and if it's a 3-year ban, I'll get to visit them once," Washington, who drives a MUNI bus, said.

"I refer to them as my sons, because I'm still going to be their dad," continued Washington, who is praying for a miracle.

In the meantime, Sup. David Campos is holding a March 4 hearing before the Board's rules committee to explore why the City's Juvenile Probation Department has refused to implement Campos' amendment to Newsom's sanctuary policy. Up unitl now, Newsom's office has claimed that taking this extra precaution would violate the US Constitution. I wonder how many families like the Washingtons are going to have to be destroyed before someone in the Mayor's Office decides that it's time to revaluate their position and prevent local families from get ripped apart, simply because their kids, green cards or not, insist on acting like kids.


http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2010/03/02 ... ent-needed

Yeah, and what if the boy and his mother were from south of the border? Nothing. The boy who was attacked would probably have been dragged through the mud for being a racist. And the ACLU would have been trying to sue his family for racial slander.

FedUpinFarmersBranch

United States deports Australian Tracey Washington over school squabble
March 03, 2010 8:09AM
102 comments

Tracey Washington, her son, 5, and her husband Charles. Tracey Washington and her 13-year-old son, not pictured, are facing deportation to Australia after the child was charged with punching a classmate and taking 46 cents from him.

So what's going on? We deport Austrailians and NOT illegal Hispanic/Latino's? (which ever is the proper PC name.)

We also don't seem to deport the Muslims when they KILL our people, like what happens here in Maine, in Portland. Not to mention this corrupt Marxist Whitehouse seems to enjoy having the FBI named terrorists in the terrorist organization CAIR! Funny how that is huh?
P.s. Our corrupt Justice department under Eric Holder just hired 7 or 9 lawyers for the terrorists in GITMO! Funny how that happens too..........

Deport ALL illegals and ALL Refugees which come here and refusing to follow America's laws!

Originally Posted by Hylander_1314

Yeah, and what if the boy and his mother were from south of the border? Nothing. The boy who was attacked would probably have been dragged through the mud for being a racist. And the ACLU would have been trying to sue his family for racial slander.

Your exactly right! The powers that be are trumping up this case in an effort to get the law overturned, in which the substantial majority of those who would benefit are from south of the border.

But since ICE want to deport Washington's stepson before his March 8 hearing, the boy won't have his day in court. Even worse, he will likely be slapped with a bench warrant by the juvenile justice department--the kind of Catch 22 detail that will play havoc with future attempts to apply for green cards from outside the US.

Can you imagine them trying to deport an illegal invader from south of the border before his day in court! la raza, aclu and a host of other pro-invader organizations would be outraged!

AN AUSTRALIAN woman is being deported from the US because her son punched a classmate and stole 53 cents.

Nope, that's not why she is being deported. She is being deported, along with her child, because they are illegal aliens. Let's keep the facts straight.

Funny how we can deport illegal Aussies and Euros no problem, but yet we have a problem deporting illegal hispanics, Mexicans and Middle Eastern Muslims.

Originally Posted by dman1200

Funny how we can deport illegal Aussies and Euros no problem, but yet we have a problem deporting illegal hispanics, Mexicans and Middle Eastern Muslims.

It's no large wonder..hispanics will work for less than Aussies or Euros. You all should know that by now..as racist as it is.

Originally Posted by MW

AN AUSTRALIAN woman is being deported from the US because her son punched a classmate and stole 53 cents.

Nope, that's not why she is being deported. She is being deported, along with her child, because they are illegal aliens. Let's keep the facts straight.

She married an American. I don't know those laws, is she still illegal?

In answer to your question, WorriedAmerican:

Excerpt:

I am engaged to a US citizen. When we get married, will I automatically get dual citizenship?
No. Marriage to a US citizen does not automatically confer US citizenship under current US law.

At one time, long ago, it was common practice that a woman who married a foreigner, and set up residence with her new husband in his country, automatically acquired his citizenship (and frequently lost her native citizenship too). However, this has not been the case in US law for many years.

What marriage (or engagement) to a US citizen does generally do is to allow the alien spouse or fiancé(e) an opportunity to apply for immigration to the US as a non-citizen permanent resident (what is commonly referred to as getting a "green card"). The alien spouse can then apply for US citizenship after living in the US for three years (note that most "green card" holders must wait five years before becoming eligible for citizenship).

Unfortunately, immigration via marriage is often trickier than it might seem. Totally sincere spouses or fiancé(e)s may find themselves subjected to skeptical inquiries by US officials on the lookout for people seeking a fast, fraudulent way into the US through a "sham" marriage (as portrayed, albeit in jest, by the 1990 movie Green Card). Couples may find themselves separated for months while the non-citizen's application is being processed by the USCIS -- since US law prohibits most aliens seeking permanent residence in the US from entering the US in any sort of non-permanent status while their immigration application is pending.

Anyone contemplating immigration to the US by virtue of marriage or engagement to a US citizen would be well advised to seek competent advice from a lawyer who is experienced in handling such cases. (Sorry, but I am not in a position to offer referrals to immigration lawyers; please don't ask.)

Once a non-citizen spouse is ready to apply for US citizenship -- normally after three years of lawful permanent residence (so-called "green card" status) -- his or her situation is basically the same as anyone else seeking US naturalization. Whether or not he/she will end up with "dual" citizenship depends on the other country's attitude toward naturalization in the US. The US naturalization oath contains a mandatory renunciatory clause, but the new citizen's "old country" may or may not recognize it, and under current policies, the US doesn't care or mind if a naturalized US citizen's country of origin insists on hanging on.

http://www.richw.org/dualcit/faq.html#marriage

You know, it actually sounds like some of you folks are defending the lady simply because her skin is not tan. I hope that is not the case. Remember, a very large portion of our illegals are Latino - that is why they seem to get the most attention and why we hear so much about them. I would suspect that, percentage wise, there are a lot more Hispanics being deported than are folks from Australia.

Personally, I'm for the deportation of ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS, regardless of their skin color.