Tomorrow .... The Battle is Joined!! Lawsuit Filing

[Admin]

I just received notice from the folks at ODR that tomorrow, Valentine's Day, a lawsuit seeking to overturn aspects of VAWA will be filed in U.S. Court!

Here is an advance copy of the Press Release:

ROY DEN HOLLANDER
Federal lawsuit charges parts of the Violence against Women Act are unconstitutional.

Attorney Roy Den Hollander filed on Valentine’s Day, February 14th, a suit in the U.S. Southern District Court of N.Y. attacking sections of the Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) and other U.S. statutes for violating the Constitutional rights of American men who marry alien females.

The defendants are the United States of America, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Executive Office of Immigration Review.  Roy Den Hollander is the sole plaintiff.

The VAWA infringes American men’s rights to freedom of speech, freedom of choice in marital relationships, right of access to deportation proceedings, procedural due process, and equal protection under the law in violation of the First and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

The unconstitutional statutes, enacted at the behest of the feminist lobby, create a fast track to permanent U.S. residency and citizenship for alien wives or ex-wives of American husbands whenever the alien female alleges abuse.  Once she mentions the magic words “battery” or “extreme cruelty”, the Government institutes secret, “Star Chamber” immigration proceedings to determine whether the citizen husband is responsible, and, if yes, grants the alien female permanent U.S. residency.  The American husband or ex-husband receives no notice of the proceedings, has no opportunity to defend his name, and the Government’s findings of abuse are based almost exclusively on what the alien female says.

The feminist lobby created the statutes in order to deter American men from looking overseas for wives.  If a man’s marriage to his foreign wife doesn’t workout, the alien female can accuse him of “battery” or “extreme cruelty” and he will have no opportunity to prove his innocence.  The husband is barred from the proceedings that are conducted behind closed doors and any evidence that the Government might receive from him is discarded.  So not only is the husband presumed guilty, but he’s not even allowed to prove differently.

The feminists didn’t create these statutes out of bleeding hearts for alien wives but to intimidate American men into shopping at home for wives.  If an American wife accuses her husband of abuse, he at least gets his day in court and the abuse has to fit specific legal definitions.  But under the VAWA, a husband can be found guilty of “battery” and “extreme cruelty” for anything from an “offensive” remark to felony assault.   
 
While the VAWA wouldn’t send an American man to jail or fine him—not yet anyway, his rights are violated with impunity and his reputation destroyed.  Both his alien wife or ex-wife and certain feminist groups can release what happened in the secret proceedings, and in New York State, the husband will have no recourse to a defamation, false light or prima facie tort cause of action no matter how false or harmful the accusations against him.
       
Even terrorists have more rights than American men accused of abuse by their alien wives.

As you probably know, IMBRA was an attachment to VAWA. Once the filing is made public, we shall see if it attacks IMBRA as well.

- Dan

[William3rd]

They can offer to send us all to Gitmo so we can get the same rights as terrorists. . . . .

Unfortunately, the widespread use of DV claims to influence custody of minor children will continue regardless of what happens here in this case.

[Ronnie]

IMBRA was attached to VAWA in the dead of night with no discussion by Maria Cantwell, feminist Senator for Washington.  It's the brainchild of Layli Miller-Muro, Director of the Tahirih Justice Center based in Washington, DC www.tahirih.org

Miller-Muro used statistics from several orginizations but the most damning were from a group call AYUDA www.ayudainc.org
AYUDA's statistics on violence inflicted on foreign born women did not distinguish between whether they are illegally present or not (mostly not) and living with foreign-born men (albeit citizens) or native.  Clearly, such women who are married to Latino men or Muslim/Hindu men are going to suffer violence.  They bring that with them to American.  Yet Miller-Muro cites a few high profile cases where the American man was deranged from the get go and by combining the misleading stats with the high profile nut cases where a marriage broker may have been involved build a false case that there is something inherently dangerous about an international marriage.

I believe that criminal background checksshould be done at the visa stage (and it is) but to do it at the initial contact stage goes too far. 

One feminist organization in Oakland agreed and blasted IMBRA as making it appear that American men, above all others, were more violent to women.  Of course the opposite is true and that feminist group knew it and for once stood up for American men.  It was a shocker, to be sure.  I wish I could find the article.  (Maybe it's been withdrawn from the internet 

[BC]

  Clearly, such women who are married to Latino men or Muslim/Hindu men are going to suffer violence.  They bring that with them to American.  Yet Miller-Muro cites a few high profile cases where the American man was deranged from the get go and by combining the misleading stats with the high profile nut cases where a marriage broker may have been involved build a false case that there is something inherently dangerous about an international marriage.

One thing to remember is that these laws are valid for all groups you mentioned, not only for Caucasian in USA for at least two generations seeking RW.

Think there is a chance in hell that law will be passed barring a Muslim, Hindu or Latino USC from filing for a K visa??

Clearly, spousal abuse is present in every level and ethnicity.  Even taken in context with your remarks I evidenced in bold, which I think are a good bit overboard, you should actually be agreeing that this law is probably the best solution overall.

Like even the best medicine, law will always have some side effects that just have to be risked.


 

[Ronnie]

I agree with the need for criminal background checks.  But they are already done without IMBRA.  If the high profile nut jobs had no past criminal background (an thus were approved for the NVC) then how the heck will IMBRA weed them out? 

The problem with IMBRA is is presupposes that a high percentage of American men who seek a relationship with an international correspondent are violent and thus the law further feeds the Mail Order Bride myth...in fact...the myth is the foundation of the law IMHO.

[Al_C]

The concept of the law is good, but its implementation is flawed.  Surely we should not force the foreign bride to choose between deportation or living with an abusive spouse, but if the guy truly is an abuser, why can't he be part of the proceedings and be given an opportunity to defend himself?  A change like that would make the law better for both parties.  The man could defend himself and beat back false accusations, and the truly abused woman, who now has to prove a valid case to get the relief she is seeking, is less likely to be accused by others of being a gold digger and a liar.  And as for the gold diggers and liars, they get what they deserve:  A boat ride back to their native countries.

[Admin]

I am attaching a copy of the Amended Complaint filed in US District Court today seeking class action certification.

Makes for some interesting reading.

- Dan

PS - here is the closing paragraph, offering an indication of what can be found throughout the motion:

In practice and intent, the Violence Against Women Act and certain sections of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act and Immigration and
Nationality Act create a process by which the constitutional rights of American men who
take foreign wives are violated in order to rectify the feminists’ inability to make American
men love them.

[BillyB]

Even if VAWA violates men's constitutional rights, it's going to take a strong judge to overturn it especially if he/she has any political ambitions. If overturned, the judge will be marked by political parties who voted for it and women's advocate groups. Hopefully a judge will do the right thing and then the politicians can go back and draft more reasonalble language in there.

[Jet]

I don't know...
I read through all 29 pages and came away with the impression that because the wording is SO redundant as to seem almost superfluous, this thing will probably be tossed out as a frivolous filing. Some of the demands for injunctive relief border on nonsensical, as well:

k.  this Court require that feminist advocacy and any other advocacy groups that
participate in the VAWA process take affirmative action to expand their client
base to include a nearly equal number of foreign men married to U.S. citizen
females or have their federal funding stopped.

 

[Ronnie]

I have read that men are abused by their spouse more frequently that women by theirs.  The problem is that men are embarrassed about it so seldom, if ever, report it until they end up dead of a hitman's gunshot wound or flat on their face with SUV tire tracks on their back.