Administration now deporting LEGALLY MARRIED gay immigrants

[Bluebear]

The President has a choice when it comes to defending and enforcing bigoted laws, as we've been saying all along, and as most experts now admit when it comes to DADT, but much of the same logic applies to DOMA as well. It's just the apologists and the folks wanting to work in the administration who are still defending Obama's defense of DOMA and DADT. And now that defense is forcing legally married gay couples to be literally ripped apart by the Obama administration.

ABC News:

Joshua Vandiver, a Colorado native who is earning his Ph.D. in politics at Princeton University, said he is the studious type who has rarely embraced activism. But now, just months into his legal marriage to Venezuelan Henry Velandia, he is fighting to save his husband from being deported.

Had the couple been straight and not gay, Vandiver would have been allowed to apply for permanent residence status for Velandia, who could then later apply for citizenship.

But their dream to build a life together is been derailed by the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as between a man and a woman under all federal laws, including immigration.

Mind you, the President decided to ignore a federal law requiring him to kick out the not-yet-American-citizen spouses of deceased Americans. They get to stay. But gay spouses? No such empathy from the Obama administration and the apologists. Suddenly it's all "we simply MUST obey the rule of law."

No they mustn't. And no they haven't. They simply pull out this excuse when it's time to bash the gays.

http://gay.americablog.com/2010/11/administration-deporting-legally.html

[Aramchek]

1. it's obvious. Obama hates Gays and Immigrants.

:sarcasm:

[Cronus Protagonist]

6. No, it's obvious Obama does not have civil rights for all Americans at the top of his agenda

Your reframing by exaggeration is unwelcome and enabling.

[Prism]

25. Hatred is unnecessary. Indifference can wreak just as much damage.

And therein lies the problem. If you idly sit by while lives are destroyed even though it is within your power to prevent it, you might as well have pulled the trigger yourself.

Which is precisely what this President has done on too many LGBT issues.

[readmoreoften]

38. +1

[Bluebear]

44. +

[ThomCat]

52. +1

[Smashcut]

29. It's obvious. You don't give a crap about either.

(no sarcasm)

[Divine Discontent]

69. exactly. no sarcasm needed. that sounds like the honest truth!

[QC]

33. The opposite of love is not hate. It's indifference, which is, come to think of it,

this administration's attitude toward many traditional Democratic constituencies.

[ThomCat]

53. Is that sarcasm tag supposed to mean that it can't possibly be true?

Obviously it is true to at least some extent.

[xchrom]

2. Recommend -- it's fucking outrageous. Nt

[ScreamingMeemie]

3. How long are we going to make apologies for decisions like this?

:(

Happy to recommend. Thank you Bluebear, for all of the work you do.

[HereSince1628]

13. Apparently, not any longer.

As is appropriate.

[Heidi]

4. Recommended.

:kick:

[atreides1]

5. Ever notice....

....how this administration is all about enforcing the laws that those on the Right like?


And yet, they won't allow an investigation into possible war crimes that may have been authorized by the previous administration.

[EFerrari]

8. Sure. Like decrying Citizens United while sending millions of dollars

to influence elections in Latin America.

[indepat]

9. Could it be you are on to something?

:shrug:

[WillParkinson]

7. But they're not 'legally' married...

After all, the United States Government made sure of that. While they may be legal in their home state they remain, unfortunately, 'friends' in the eyes of most of the government and other states.

(I hate this because Paul and I are in the same boat.)

[foxfeet]

10. K&R

[EFerrari]

11. Free Speech TV runs a documentary about three gay couples

in this situation. It's insane and literally pulling families apart.

[mitchtv]

12. Just another piece of straw

on the camel

[David Zephyr]

48. Worse, it's straw to a match.

And LBGT Americans must again sacrifice themselves and their most fundamental rights so the boat is not rocked to much.

What is sickening is seeing self-proclaimed liberals remain silent and avoid threads like these. Why is that?

It makes them too uncomfortable. That's why.

It's not a tidy thing that fits into their paradigm of liberalism where they can feel smug about how good they are.

[Celtic Raven]

59. I'm a Liberal

Have always been a Liberal, and becoming more Liberal as I age.

Not all of us avoid threads like BB's, but since I'm straight I don't just assume that my 2 cents are all that necessary to the discussion. I read what everyone has to say, and learn some new things that maybe I didn't come to on my own since I don't have to deal with the discrimination LGBTQI DUers do.

[ThomCat]

62. I'm glad you decided to join in the thread.

I hope you'll doing something to help us fight this.

Next time you write to your congressperson again mention this in your letter. Say that it's an outrage and that it has to be opposed.

Tell other straight people to do the same.

Write to the White house, and tell them too! Tell Obama that it's not just the LGBTQI community that is upset about this. Tell him that we aren't the only people angry with him over this.

We need to know that straight people care about our issues, so we want to hear from you on our threads. But most of what we hear is the equivalent of a supportive pat on the back, and that's the sole extent of the support we get. We need to hear that people support us enough to DO SOMETHING!

Sign a petition. Write a letter. Oppose homophobia publicly. Even the subtle and socially "cool" forms of homophobia. ESPECIALLY the subtle and socially "cool" forms of homophobia!

Then come here and join the conversations as much as you want. Be welcome! If you're helping us, you're one of us. :)

[Celtic Raven]

64. Thanks for the welcome.

I've been writing to my reps for years, and began writing to the WH when Obama let Rick Warren take the stage. Each step of the way I've been alternately horrified, incredulous, and enraged by what is being done. My letters have reflected that.

And FWIW I don't agree with the STFD & STFU, wait your turn attitude I've seen advocated. No one ever gained anything from doing that decade after decade. Silence implies consent.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

15. actually the law is crystal clear on deceased spouses

if the spouse dies before you get citizenship back you are supposed to go. But we aren't enforcing that crystal clearly written law.

[David Zephyr]

47. Word.

:thumbsup:

[demmiblue]

17. "Everything isn't about "teh gay". Sorry to tell you, you're not the center of the damn world."

What the fuck is wrong with you?

:wtf:

[bobbolink]

27. I think it is politely called "sociopathology". Impolitely I'm not allowed to say.

Recommended.

[Starry Messenger]

16. recommend.

[treestar]

18. I'm all for amending that law

But in the meantime, it is the law.

Just blaming Obama for a law that has existed for years gets you nowhere.

[dsc]

19. so is the law on deceased spouses

but that one he isn't enforcing. The fact is for heterosexuals whose spouses die he is saying, we will ignore the law, you can stay. For gay couples he is saying, fuck you, you go home.

[treestar]

20. No gay couple has ever been given a green card before

You think he can just suddenly grant petitions for that, when they law has not been changed to give him the go-ahead?

Again, just blaming Obama for this is really shallow. Going all out to blame Obama for the sins of society for the past several centuries.

Some posters seem to be actively looking for new ways to be offended, most of which involve a shallow understanding of the legal system and what a President can do with it.

[dsc]

23. the law on widows was changed by his administration

or more accurately ins't being enforced by his administration. On the other hand he is enforcing the law against us. It doesn't get clearer than that. He could, if he chose, grant amnesty to any and all gay spouses. He isn't.

[treestar]

28. The law on widows was changed by Congress

That's how the laws are made in this country. :banghead:

Geez does no one on DU plan to do anything constructive, like lobby their Congress person to change this law? What good does it to to blame Obama for the current state of history? Why is President 44 the scapegoat for the entirety of history?

[dsc]

32. not until after he stopped enforcing it

and since you in essence called me a dumb ass liar here is the link to back me up.

http://www.nwpr.org/07/HomepageArticles/Article.aspx?n=5702

The widows’ and widowers’ plight came to the attention of Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano within days of her taking office. That according to her spokesman Matt Chandler. He says broader immigration and border policy has proven quite complicated. But this was something Napolitano decided to take an early stab at.

Matt Chandler: “There were some sad cases there. We had a responsibility to not only enforce the laws of this country as they are written, especially as it pertains to immigration. But we also have a responsibility to do so in a practical and commonsense way.”

Napolitano has ordered deportations of surviving spouses and their children deferred for two years. That gives Congress time to fix the law if it chooses to.

In Portland, immigration attorney Brent Renison has championed the widows’ cause for more than five years. The work, all pro bono. He says Congressional action offers the quickest resolution. But Renison also recognizes the poisonous politics around immigration. So he has a case that’s ripe to take to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Brent Renison: “We are receiving this attention because there is a fundamental miscarriage of justice going on and people can see it right away. I guess I was hoping maybe a little bit too much from the new administration. We got half of what we asked for which was to stop the madness of deportations.”

Back in Dallas, Oregon, the members of the Scrabeck household say they now have hope. The immigrant widow still can’t work, go to school, or even get a drivers license. She and her mother-in-law garden a lot.

Sound:

What they no longer fear is a knock at the door with a one-way ticket out of the country.

end of quote

http://immigrationlawiowa.wordpress.com/tag/widow-penalty/

In all the frustration we experience every day with the immigration system, it is nice to report a positive development. The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act for FY2010 included a provision expanding the rights of immigrating survivors when the petitioner or principal alien dies during the immigration process.

The immigration law has long provided survivor benefits for widows and widowers of U.S. citizen sponsors if they had been married two years or more before the sponsor’s death. However, many egregious injustices resulted from this arbitrary two-year cut off.

In the last year or so, courts in several jurisdictions held that this “widow penalty” was unenforceable, making what should have been a consistent rule different depending on the State in which the widow(er) lived.

Congress finally fixed the problem, and surprisingly fixed some other problems at the same time, including providing survivor benefits under employment-based applications in some instances.

end of quote

Note that the stop in enforcement occured in 09, the fix in 10. 10, in case you don't recall your math, comes after 09. That means the law was changed after the President, or more accurately his agent, decided all on her own, not to enforce it. The words you are looking for is sorry I didn't know what the fuck I was talking about when I called you a dumb ass liar.

[laughingliberal]

40. "Napolitano has ordered deportations of surviving spouses and their children deferred ..."

"...for two years. That gives Congress time to fix the law if it chooses to. "

What!!???!!! The administration acted unilaterally to stop the deportations BEFORE Congress acted to change a LAW???

but....but....but....people on DU said the administration CAN'T do that and they MUST defend ALL laws, regardless of their personal preferences.

[Bluebear]

45. :crickets:

[crikkett]

51. Hi! Honestly this story sounds like a Supreme Court challenge to DOMA

I think there's precedent for the fed to recognize states' legal marriages, dating back from the days of overturning miscegenation laws.

[Bluebear]

65. Wow!

I conjured you up! (Crickets lol!) :hug:

[crikkett]

66. I couldn't pass it by, now, could I?

;)

[ThomCat]

54. "...for two years. That gives Congress time to fix the law if it chooses to. "

Gee, isn't that exactly what we asked for regarding DADT?

We wanted DADT suspended with an executive order to give Congress time to act. But we were told that Obama didn't have the power to do this. Here, apparently, he did have that power.

He could also have suspended enforcement of DOMA, allowing these couples to stay together, while congress worked on repealing it.

But apparently, only Straight people are allowed to benefit from these presidential powers. :(

[Bluebear]

56. At least you understand.

'apparently, only Straight people are allowed to benefit from these presidential powers.'

[Fumesucker]

31. Torturing is also against the law, quite clearly so..

Indeed, Japanese who waterboarded Allied POWs during WWII were executed for those acts after the war.

And yet I've seen no prosecutions for torture.. :shrug:

[Prism]

21. You're so inflammatory, BB

Why can't you be calm and civil and polite when our government participates in the destruction of LGBT lives?

You're a terrible, uppity gay!

God love you for it.

[Bluebear]

46. ===

:rofl: and :hug:

[Ignis]

61. Yeah, way to shit all over Hand-Clapping Day, BB.

:hide:

[druidity33]

22. Glenn Greenwald has had a few posts on this.

He faces the same issues with his Brazilion partner, but i guess he spends half the year there. He admits he's very lucky he can do that... but he's written about the deportations before. Tragic stuff.

K&R for visibility...


:(

[QC]

24. Those legally married gay couples never really loved him anyway!

:cry:

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ScreamingMeemie]

34. Kick

[redirish28]

35. Has this country gone insane. FIRST deporting a LEGALLY BORN citizen

to Mexico (Person was mentally challenged.) NOW this bull crap.

[MountainLaurel]

70. You act like that's happened to just one person

With the expedited deportations created by Bush and continued by Obama, U.S. citizens are sent to Mexico every day.

[BlueIris]

36. Disgusting. nt

[struggle4progress]

37. Still more wedge-driving by the Aravosis gang. It is not at all unknown

for spouses of citizens to face deportation, as anyone interested in immigration issues knows. Moreover, a student citizen spouse of someone applying for residency is not always the sponsor-of-choice, as (again) anyone interested in immigration issues knows

I happen to think DOMA violates the full-faith-and-credit clause of the Constitution -- but, given the lengthy list of states that restrict gay marriage, it's unclear to me how SCOTUS would rule on the issue. And in any case, DOMA was intended fifteen years ago as a firewall against a constitutional amendment restricting gay marriage -- and (like it or not) it may still serve that purpose

Aravosis, of course, used to work for Ted Stevens, and I think his gang is about as crazy as the Teabaggers

[dsc]

49. you are just plain wrong

as I linked above the Obama administration stopped all such deportations and then got the law changed.

[struggle4progress]

55. You mean Aravosis didn't work for Ted Stevens? Or are you arguing with me

about some immigration issues that I've had a bit of personal experience with?

Clear thinking really matters -- and having spoken with you in person I am quite sure you are capable of it. On the other hand, your response is not actually a response to anything I said

[ThomCat]

63. It means, "Aravosis" shouldn't be a pavlovian trigger-word

for you to try to shut down a thread.

Can you deal with an OP evaluate it rationally without attacking the source? Attacking the source is a classic logical fallacy. Try to get beyond that.

[struggle4progress]

67. Aravosis just did what he could do suppress progressive turnout

I'm sure we'll all enjoy trying to fend off the anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendment that NC's Republican General Assembly will float here in the next long session

Thanks, ever so very much, folks

[ThomCat]

68. Bullshit.

Attacking the messenger again.

[Safetykitten]

39. And this is surprising how?

[laughingliberal]

41. K & R nt

[VMI Dem]

42. Obama's personal views on homosexuality shapes his policy decisions.

See DADT.

[Behind the Aegis]

43. Hmmm...maybe now some of our "allies" will realize that Marriage isn't "just a piece of paper."

Unlike our Constitution :eyes:

Real lives, folks, not hypotetical lives, are at stake!

[terrya]

50. This is just plain cruel.

There is no other word to describe this.

Staying home in 2012 is more and more of an option for me. And anyone who peddles that "Good luck with President Palin" crap can shove it up their asses.

[mitchtv]

57. I am now waiting for congress and the Admin

to squander the lame duck session. Then it will be just about the end of our progress for a long while.

[Celtic Raven]

58. K&R

I don't care which high muckity-muck makes the decision -- cherry picking who gets to stay based on their sexual orientation is wrong.

[TriMera]

60. Kick n/t

[CommonSensePLZ]

71. Another point against the "sanctity of marriage" assertion

So many real-world things about marriage that negate the Disney fantastic ideal the 1 man+1 woman is a holy event and not a puffed up, exploitable legal action where the parents are sure to honestly love each other more than a gay couple could, supposedly raise a family better than a gay pair could, are certain to stay in love forever without a 50% divorce rate or be entered into for insidious reasons.

Looks like this is another one, although they don't like heterosexuals using naturalization like this either. What are they calling them, "anchor bottoms"? Lol sorry for that.

[Renew Deal]

72. Have they considered moving to Venezuala and getting married there?

http://www.queerty.com/welcome-back-ru-hugo-chavez-supports-the-gays-but-not-their-marriages-20091120/