ADVERTISEMENT

Half a million immigrants could eventually get US citizenship under a sweeping new plan from Biden

Good. Republicans should be applauding Biden helping families stay together. America needs more stable families, and workers. It’s a win / win.
Maybe we should start rebuilding the family dynamic the democratic party has destructed since the early 60s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RicoSuave102954
No. He’s changing an existing law to grant them citizenship. Only congress is supposed to be able to do that.
I do not believe Biden is changing immigration law, he appears to be using existing law that allows for "humanitarian parole".
The law's language is vague, so parole could be granted under that existing part of immigration law while claiming it is Humanitarian or provides a significant public benefit.

From a political standpoint, it seems like an unnecessary risk to announce as immigration is such a hot-button issue on both sides of the aisle.


U.S. immigration law allows the executive branch to grant “humanitarian parole” to certain people who otherwise lack a lawful basis to enter or remain in the U.S., when the government determines that a grant of parole would satisfy urgent humanitarian reasons or provide a significant public benefit. Humanitarian parole allows beneficiaries to temporarily enter or remain in the United States for a defined period, which can be anything from a few days to several years. Individuals who are granted parole are able to apply for work authorization if necessary to support themselves while in the United States. When humanitarian parole is granted to people who are already inside the United States, it is known as parole-in-place.

Biden's new immigration policy

Parole Immigration Law
 
There's already a way to do this, he's just expanding who's eligible.

People who are against this don't know what is in US Code already. Hundreds of thousands of people who don't currently have a status are able to adjust now.
Ummm…I went through the process with my wife. He’s eliminating the need for them to leave the country to apply for legal status.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk
Guess I don't understand why that was ever a requirement to be honest.
You’re supposed to apply for an immigration visa from your country of residence. Once granted you can enter the country and complete the process which is basically getting issued your card.


The system is too slow and you basically have to apply to 3 agencies. State department, homeland security and customs and border patrol. Took my wife almost a year to complete.

The folks Bidens helping entered illegally.
 
He's just pointing that the family dynamic you want to bring back...wasn't as great as you'd like us to believe.
It's unfortunate that some of the liberal minded here had males in their lineage that were deviant wife beaters... I'm not surprised though.

It's pretty much fact that a child will become much successful in life in a traditional father/mother household than a single parent household which means a high probability that the father is not in the picture. LBJ killed that with the "great society". What was it that he said...?
 
You’re supposed to apply for an immigration visa from your country of residence. Once granted you can enter the country and complete the process which is basically getting issued your card.


The system is too slow and you basically have to apply to 3 agencies. State department, homeland security and customs and border patrol. Took my wife almost a year to complete.

The folks Bidens helping entered illegally.
So you would have liked this for your wife but are mad others are getting it. Sounds like a republican
 
  • Like
Reactions: This_Hawk_Abides
Sorry this happened but you know this is not what was meant.

Yeah, and it happened far more than anyone wants to admit. Making easier for women to walk away from that was a great thing for them and the families (ie the kids).
 
Ummm…I went through the process with my wife. He’s eliminating the need for them to leave the country to apply for legal status.

There's already a number of immigrant and non immigrants that don't have to leave the country to do that.
 
It's unfortunate that some of the liberal minded here had males in their lineage that were deviant wife beaters... I'm not surprised though.

It's pretty much fact that a child will become much successful in life in a traditional father/mother household than a single parent household which means a high probability that the father is not in the picture. LBJ killed that with the "great society". What was it that he said...?
I don't think anyone's trying to argue that two-parent households are more likely to have stable kids. But it's also true that that also was a product of a society that was far more limiting if you weren't the head of the household.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gohawks50
For folks that entered the country illegally?

Yes. It's covered in US Code. Adding and subtracting certain classifications has happened numerous times in the last, oh, 150 years.

And entering "illegally" (which isn't a legal term) doesn't mean someone is inadmissible. Admissibility (if they would be admissible upon inspection) is what drives everything related to adjustment and naturalization.
 
  • Like
Reactions: binsfeldcyhawk2
There's already a way to do this, he's just expanding who's eligible.

People who are against this don't know what is in US Code already. Hundreds of thousands of people who don't currently have a status are able to adjust now.
Why wouldn't their status be identified as an "illegal" since currently they are in this country "illegally"?
 
I'm not sure where Biden, or his handlers, think they get the authority to do this.
 
You’re supposed to apply for an immigration visa from your country of residence. Once granted you can enter the country and complete the process which is basically getting issued your card.


The system is too slow and you basically have to apply to 3 agencies. State department, homeland security and customs and border patrol. Took my wife almost a year to complete.

The folks Bidens helping entered illegally.
Are you saying all of the spouses being helped by this entered the US illegally?
 
Are you saying all of the spouses being helped by this entered the US illegally?
It's a combination.

This is directed toward "undocumented" spouses.

Most likely a combination of entering illegally and overstaying visa's. Haven't seen a comprehensive breakdown.

Either way, since they're "undocumented" they don't have legal status.

 
50% approval on the spouse of an American citizen should be allowed to stay in the country?

If that's the case than we have a lot of pyscho-paths in this country with no ability to feel sympathy for anyone other than themselves.
Well, there's actually a legal pathway for those spouses. Return to country of origin and apply there.

Overall I don't have a beef with this exception other than questioning the Presidents authority to do it.
 
It's a combination.

This is directed toward "undocumented" spouses.

Most likely a combination of entering illegally and overstaying visa's. Haven't seen a comprehensive breakdown.

Either way, since they're "undocumented" they don't have legal status.

OK - good. Now, given that these people have been in the US for over 10 years, are married, productive in society, etc. - what is the benefit to our country to make them leave the country and go through a lengthy/costly process to come back and assume their place in our society?
 
OK - good. Now, given that these people have been in the US for over 10 years, are married, productive in society, etc. - what is the benefit to our country to make them leave the country and go through a lengthy/costly process to come back and assume their place in our society?
None. Which is why congress should pass an immigration law to give them a pathway.

I just question Joes authority to do it through executive action.

In addition it just encourages more spouses to circumvent the system and wait for another action like this.
 
None. Which is why congress should pass an immigration law to give them a pathway.

I just question Joes authority to do it through executive action.

In addition it just encourages more spouses to circumvent the system and wait for another action like this.
But you claimed it's unconstitutional. As usual you are all over the board.
 
But you claimed it's unconstitutional. As usual you are all over the board.
That's addressed by my "I just question Joes authority to do it through executive action." comment dipshit.

I don't think Joe has the authority to do this through executive action because of the constitution. That's usually the basis for overturning questionable executive actions if you haven't been paying attention.
 
That's addressed by my "I just question Joes authority to do it through executive action." comment dipshit.

I don't think Joe has the authority to do this through executive action because of the constitution. That's usually the basis for overturning questionable executive actions if you haven't been paying attention.
LOL - nice backpedal. You call the measure unconstitutional, then say legislation should be passed to enact it (even though it's unconstitutional) and then try to claim Biden issuing an EO is what is unconstitutional. Quite the spin.

There's nothing unconstitutional about Biden issuing an EO.
 
I'm not sure where Biden, or his handlers, think they get the authority to do this.
It has been the plan all along.


They can't lie to the democratic voters anymore and sell giveaways that never pan out. They are not replacing republican voters, they are replacing democrats.
 
LOL - nice backpedal. You call the measure unconstitutional, then say legislation should be passed to enact it (even though it's unconstitutional) and then try to claim Biden issuing an EO is what is unconstitutional. Quite the spin.

There's nothing unconstitutional about Biden issuing an EO.
I think it's unconstitutional for the President to do it through executive action.

It's the purview of the legislature to pass laws addressing these matters.

Are you being purposely obtuse?
 
I think it's unconstitutional for the President to do it through executive action.

It's the purview of the legislature to pass laws addressing these matters.

Are you being purposely obtuse?
It's not - the President has the Constitutional right to issue EOs. He's doing it because the legislature has not.

Are you purposely suggesting I am being obtuse as an overused effort to deflect once again?

So predictable.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT