Latest info re immigration from Trump

[ML]

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/315974-trump-expected-to-take-executive-action-on-immigration-in-the-coming

Just one sentence from the article:

"According to Reuters, one of Trump's executive orders will issue restrictions on refugees and is expected to include a multi-month ban on status admissions."

What are 'status admissions'?

[ML]

Just been doing some searching around, and it doesn't look good.

From what I am understanding . . . Status Admissions covers exactly what we are doing.

i.e.  Because of the gal's situation after marrying citizen of USA . . . she gets to start, continue or finalize her process of coming legally to USA because of her STATUS.  Status Admissions.

Let's hope I am wrong in this interpretation.

http://www.hplct.org/assets/uploads/files/Library%20Services/Immigration/BLOGS/INS_CLASS_of_Admissions.pdf

[ML]

WOW, hard to believe the lack of interest in this, a topic which is 100% more important to many members here than most all other long winded discussions.

Today's orders didn't add any new info to this topic.
More supposed to come tomorrow Thursday, 26th January.

[GQBlues]

The status admission's multi-month suspension is only for the seven cited nations until a better vetting process is established.

For example, if a German legal resident, who carries a Syrian passport, applies for status admission to the US, it will be denied until the suspension is lifted. Don't confuse this with 'visa' application since visas are technically use for entry to the US only, and not status-based - e.g. A fiancée enters the US via a *K-visa* (a misnomer) and carries a conditional order (marries in 90 days - the applicant's responsibility). Once condition is met (marries) status is adjusted. As soon as entry is made, visa becomes insignificant and *status admission* 'automatically' governs the person's status, with it's conditional responsibility, while in the US.

The phrase had been used loosely for so long that it confuse most everyone. Most will say, "I'm here on a student visa". When it should be, "I'm here on a student status admission!"  Again, visa is issued only to give an applicant permission to enter the US e.g. Single entry, multi-entry visas.

DJT's executive order is directed to refugee admission and the suspension of admission from countries known to harbor terrorist elements. DHS just didn't openly say 'Muslim' countries.

Unless your SO is either a refugee or from the countries called out on the EO, no need to lose sleep over this for now.

The suspension is temporary. Hope this helps. It was hell typing on an iPhone.

[ML]

Thanks for the comments GQ.
I suppose this will all be further clarified in the days to come.

Over on the Visa Journey forum, this issue is driving many people insane with worry.

[GQBlues]

There's a legitimate concern for the folks at VJ. The majority members are petitioners seeking partners in the Philippines. Duterte keeps up with his present day show of contempt towards USA, it won't take much for inclusion and taking the 8th spot.

[msmob]

One UK Citizen who has previously said 'Tramp's' ( love how the Russians say it) ,  remarks on Muslims “divisive, unhelpful and wrong” has been admitted for an audience.

A pity she will try to bury what she said, before as 'we' need a friend - having pissed off our neighbours and biggest trading partner

Heck, let's suck up to America, now and we can be the 51st State and you can get a Royal Family and some heritage ...

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21715652-leaving-european-union-means-country-has-less-not-more-control-over-its

[msmob]

Man-handling British PM, next !

[tfcrew]

   

    A K-1 is not an immigrant visa.

[2tallbill]

Just been doing some searching around, and it doesn't look good.

From what I am understanding . . . Status Admissions covers exactly what we are doing.

i.e.  Because of the gal's situation after marrying citizen of USA . . . she gets to start, continue or finalize her process of coming legally to USA because of her STATUS.  Status Admissions.

Let's hope I am wrong in this interpretation.

http://www.hplct.org/assets/uploads/files/Library%20Services/Immigration/BLOGS/INS_CLASS_of_Admissions.pdf

I think (but don't know for an absolute fact) that if your girl was from Syria,
Iran, Iraq etc then you would have an issue, but the FSU is not on the list.

[BillyB]

There were a few guys from certain Muslim countries that had work visas and were denied entry into USA. Anyway, a federal judge blocks Trumps immigration ban and is allowing people in.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/federal-judge-blocks-trump-immigration-ban-nationwide/ar-AAmml8l?ocid=spartanntp

[ML]

The judge's order was very limited.  It only said they could not be immediately sent back.

They will be held in detention.

- - - - - - - - - -

A federal judge blocked part of President Trump’s executive order on immigration on Saturday evening, ordering that refugees and others trapped at airports across the United States should not be sent back to their home countries. But the judge stopped short of letting them into the country or issuing a broader ruling on the constitutionality of Mr. Trump’s actions.

[wallm]

Probably a tree hugger appointed by fellow tree hugger to the bench.

[fathertime]

There's a legitimate concern for the folks at VJ. The majority members are petitioners seeking partners in the Philippines. Duterte keeps up with his present day show of contempt towards USA, it won't take much for inclusion and taking the 8th spot.

I think there would be a big uproar if people from the Philippines or Mexico were put in the same category as the other 7 countries.  I don't think Trump will feel the need to take it that far. 


Fathertime! 

[BillyB]

They will be held in detention.

They're detained for a short time and allowed to leave the airport. Many are legal permanent residences.

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us/refugees-detained-at-us-airports-prompting-legal-challenges-to-trumps-immigration-order.html

Probably a tree hugger appointed by fellow tree hugger to the bench.

Judge appointed by Obama but she does have a point that we can't discriminate by nationality. Trump would have to prove a lot of terrorism comes from those countries that affect America. The problem is Trump left off Egypt and Saudi Arabia off the list which proves he's giving some countries where lots of terrorist live a pass when creating his list. Jimmy Carter banned and deported Iranians for a time when the going was tough with Iran so Trump may have a case to continue what he wants to do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/28/us/refugees-detained-at-us-airports-prompting-legal-challenges-to-trumps-immigration-order.html

[wallm]

Judge appointed by Obama but she does have a point that we can't discriminate by nationality.

A tree hugging bimbo. We have the right to not allow refugees into this country. Where in the constitution does it say we must allow refugees to come in, regardless of us cherry picking where we ban from? I don't agree with not allowing green card holders to come in. They earned the right to be here unless they are known terrorists or shady characters. There are other ways to protect citizen from those people. I do not want one refugee to come in here from anywhere. Go to Russia. I am sure that thug will welcome them with open arms.

[ML]

The problem is Trump left off Egypt and Saudi Arabia off the list which proves he's giving some countries where lots of terrorist live a pass when creating his list.

Actually the list was compiled by Obama's State Department.

Plus, I heard on news that Egypt, Saudia Arabia and Turkey are 'cooperating' with USA regarding terrorism.

[BillyB]

Where in the constitution does it say we must allow refugees to come in, regardless of us cherry picking where we ban from?

The Constitution doesn't tell us all the laws we have in this county. There is a law that bans immigration discrimination. Trump is walking a fine line between what is legal for the protection of this nation and discrimination by allowing other nations that have citizens that would commit terrorist acts against America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

Actually the list was compiled by Obama's State Department.

This is Trump's list. The list he decided on. The buck stops with Trump.

Plus, I heard on news that Egypt, Saudia Arabia and Turkey are 'cooperating' with USA regarding terrorism.

Saudi had the most terrorists in 9/11. Recent terrorist attacks came out of Egypt and the most major terrorist attacks last year were in Turkey. Doesn't matter if they're cooperating, they can't contain the terrorists within their own nations. Through a spokesperson, Trump's goal is to reduce risk of harm to America. It is apparent, he's giving some nations a pass instead of reducing the risk further. He is going to have a hard time convincing the high courts he cares about the safety of this nation when he's leaving certain nations off the list making it look like discrimination. Trump has business interests in the nations he left off the list.

[msmob]

Well, THersa eventually - asked about 'Tramp's' latest lunacy -  THREE times in Turkey - declined to answer - FINALLY got around to stating that she 'didn't agree' ..Britain's lapdog leader has raised a measly woof in protest!

A TORY MP [that's her and Maggy T's right of centre Party ]  - born in - Kurdish Iraq - now a UK citizen representing Stratford-on-Avon  - is now on the dreaded list..

He has two sons at Princeton..

Imagine flying to the States to learn that during your flight - your status became 'refusing entry' ... Well done the US Fed Judge for staying deportations.

[GQBlues]

Judge Donelly halted *deportation of detained travellers until which time the higher courts can hear her argument. She's basing her judgment on the argument that *arriving travellers shouldn't be deported* since they were already granted permission for entry prior to the executive order. She wasn't challenging the EO, the detention or the temporary ban.

She have a legitimate grounds for this order. However, that is all she can do since she has absolutely no constitutional power to oppose the POTUS's EO. Checks and balances are provided for in the creation of the 3 branches of our government.

All the uproar are previously planned by the liberal press and politicians shooting for the 2018 election. This recent temporary 'ban' is NOT unprecendented. It's been done before - 1979 & 2001 comes to mind. Any 'counter points' they make out of this, no matter how small, will be trumpeted as huge accomplishment in their 'staged' opposition against Trump's administration. You can all thank George Soros for that.

The Iraqi who was 'released' was a decade long 'employee' of the United States State Department have a much better understanding and appreciation of this recent policy than the usual (indoctrinated/ignorant) liberal idiot.

[msmob]

All the uproar are previously planned by the liberal press and politicians ...

Any 'counter points' they make out of this, no matter how small, will be trumpeted as huge accomplishment in their 'staged' opposition against Trump's administration. You can all thank George Soros for that.

GQBlues

Right of centre UK politicians and representing middle England voters aren't fodder for the likes of Soros.. any more than are the people of Ukraine ...  Now I whilst I CAN understand some tabloid loving readers being influenced ...Such suggestions are - in general -  'bollox'



It's a little boring to be told one is a 'liberal' ( or why even that would be an insult ) or gullible when it may well be one is to the right of losing reason..

Someone put up a UK petition to prevent Donald Trump from coming on the basis of an official State Visit



"Donald Trump should be allowed to enter the UK in his capacity as head of the US Government, but he should not be invited to make an official State Visit because it would cause embarrassment to Her Majesty the Queen.


Donald Trump's well documented misogyny and vulgarity disqualifies him from being received by Her Majesty the Queen or the Prince of Wales. Therefore during the term of his presidency Donald Trump should not be invited to the United Kingdom for an official State Visit."


http://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

It has had 350K signatures in hours and it must now be discussed in the House of Commons

When he raised the issue of banning Muslims( before being elected by an minority) - he got twice that in a few days and the govt. weaselled their way out of banning him on the grounds of stirring racial hatred..

'Mrs' Moby was born of a Muslim father in an officially former state of the USSR - but has a Russian Passport and wears a Cross around her neck .. I know Christian folk - who were refugees from some of the banned  nations - to whom the UK and Cyprus granted political asylum and they are now pillars of the community..  Wack jobs  - claiming to act in the 'name of Allah ' from within the USA, UK and former USSR states have committed / tried to commit crimes on US soil.. 'Interesting' how 'fussy' your President is...

This legislation - no matter how temporary - is SO damaging to the 'land of the free' .. and suggesting the likes of Soros influences people like me .. who know people from such nations and are good citizens .. Well, it's just insulting and EXTREMELY short-sighted ..

I'd even suggest it is playing into the hands of the very organisations we seek to curtail...

My opinion is mine and based on experience of UK govts. acting in a way that  appealed to voters - 'strong' on terrorism - but ultimately made violence worse in Ireland..

Restricting the majority - to curtail the few - DAFT ...




 

[tfcrew]

Ah the liberal congress 

Funny how some senator [say]  that has been sitting across the aisle from them for [say] 6 years has to be extremely examined and scrutinized but...someone they have never saw before can waltz into the country unquestioned and unchallenged.

Screwed up optics there.

[2tallbill]

Liberals Prove Their IGNORANCE Of American History By Opposing Trump Refugee Ban

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act includes language — clause 212(f) — giving the president full power to ban "any aliens or any class of aliens"

"Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

In layman's terms, Trump can indeed ban or create entry restrictions against any immigrant at any time₁"

Former President Barack Obama used the authority six times while in office.₂

Former President George W. Bush used the executive powers six times as well, and Bill Clinton did twice,

George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Jimmy Carter instituted bans using their
executive powers a combined seven times.₃

1. http://mic.com/articles/166800/is-donald-trumps-executive-order-banning-muslims-even-legal-you-wont-like-the-answer#.Yl2AOffst

2. http://washingtonfeed.com/liberals-prove-their-ignorance-of-american-history-by-opposing-trump-refugee-ban.html

3. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obama-immigration-ban-muslims/2016/06/16/id/734234/

[fathertime]

Liberals Prove Their IGNORANCE Of American History By Opposing Trump Refugee Ban

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act includes language — clause 212(f) — giving the president full power to ban "any aliens or any class of aliens"

"Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

In layman's terms, Trump can indeed ban or create entry restrictions against any immigrant at any time₁"

Former President Barack Obama used the authority six times while in office.₂

Trump may have legal authority to do what he has done, I don't know..In reading your article, what Obama did was measured, and targeted specific small groups of individuals related to terrorism or the like... Very different than the blanket ban that Trump has instituted.  I hope he remains calm and doesn't blow things up any further than it already has. 


Fathertime!

[BillyB]

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act includes language — clause 212(f) — giving the president full power to ban "any aliens or any class of aliens"

"Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

In layman's terms, Trump can indeed ban or create entry restrictions against any immigrant at any time₁"

That's old news and not even an argument on this current issue. I linked the amended version used in court from 1965 which doesn't let our government discriminate. In the old days, those in charged favored immigration from Europe over Asia and Africa.

The Democrats will go to court over this and Trump will have a hard time proving he cares about the safety of this nation but refuses a ban on other Muslim countries that hold more terrorists than some of the ones he banned. Also the Dems will point out Trump has interests in certain Muslim nations that he didn't add to the ban. It's safe to say Trump doesn't want his buildings and businesses trashed over his actions.

I'm all for allowing immigration to those who will embrace and love the American way of life. Doesn't make sense to allow people into your homes that want to enjoy the benefits but hate you and your way of life. Most immigrants are good people that like this country. Trump should have put more thought into this ban. He should've left those who are already allowed to come here alone and called for better background checks on people who are now applying to come here.