<<<
She didn’t mess up. She made a little tweet to friends about her accomplishments and her heritage,
<<<<
Suppose that she did believe that she was tweeting only her friends, that seems like an odd tweet to friends. Wouldn’t they already know she’s Val, going to UT, has great legs, and so forth?
I think she knew it was a tweet to the world.
How do you know they cut the line? They applied and are waiting. And DACA status allows the other to be here temporarily.
And as far as the tweet, I doubt she expected it to go viral and is regretting it. I suspect she put way less thought into it then we are. She’s not the first teen (or adult for that matter) to say something controversial, brag, make a bad joke (legs), say something that doesn’t go over well. She does have DACA status/not undocumented. Now she has learned what a landmine she has stepped in. Won’t be her first lesson.
“They’re big winners after their parents cut the line.”
Hmmmmm…if they continue on the same trajectory they are on now, we are all winners.
The parents are the law breakers…NOT the students.
i don’t see how you can separate that. If my friend steals two peaches and gives me one and I eat it with pleasure knowingly, I am complicit in the theft, ain’t I?
Seriously Igloo? If you steal two peaches and give your 4 year old one, is he a criminal for the rest of his life? Or only when he’s 4? Or not until he’s 18? Or only if he wants an education?
And GMT, if the people to whom you are referring have a line to get into, then they are applying to RENEW their status.
Which line would you like undocumented folks to get into?
A more apt analogy is if I stole an apple and my 8 year old child saw. Is the child equally culpable? I don’t think so.
@Iglooo that’s the point of DACA basically. To not penalize children for their parents actions. The children didn’t have a choice. Now they are trying to make the best of their situations and have worked extremely hard. There are no federal laws prohibiting admissions to undocumented students. One has DACA status which allows her to be here legally temporarily. The other has applied for citizenship. These are exactly the immigrants I am rooting for. They will make productive USA citizens and I hope it works out for them. Good for them, Yale and UT.
Are you saying if parents brought their kids illegally, only parents are illegal immigrants and the kids legal immigrants? They can’t be separated and termed differently. Both parents and kids are illegal immigrants. You may have different opinions on what to do with illegal immigrants but not on that they are illegal immigrants.
DACA status means she is here legally, and yes applies to children.
I don’t think so. The D A stands for deferred action, meaning that deporting the person is deferred. Maybe it can be deferred indefinitely, I don’t know.
DACA means deferred action for childhood arrivals. It is renewable.
It is renewable for now. With a change in administration, who knows?
Deferred action doesn’t make it legal. If it’s legal, you wouldn’t need any action deferred or not. This is just absurd word play It is something cooked up to deal with a difficult situation. They came illegally both parents and kids.
@Iglooo according to law DACA status makes it legal for her to be here. And there are no federal laws prohibiting admissions to college. You are flat out wrong on that point. Now whether you want to question whether it should be legal is different, but it is. She has not been granted nor guaranteed a path to citizenship and that means she is at risk should her DACA status not be renewed.
Then this is ridiculous. If she is here legally, why is she saying she’s “undocumented?” How can she be “undocumented” when she has a legal document - a SSN?
“Are you saying if parents brought their kids illegally, only parents are illegal immigrants and the kids legal immigrants?”
I’m saying the parents committed the crime and if anyone should be punished, it is the adults. NOT the innocent children.
By your logic, we should criminalize all children who benefit financially from their parents’ illegal activity.
“DACA status means she is here legally”
No it absolutely does NOT mean that. Unbeknownst to a lot of folks, the Obama administration has aggressively deported more undocumented immigrants than any other president. (which is one of a few reasons why the Mexican immigration rate is now net negative) The DACA program does NOT make the kids residency status legal. It ONLY Defers their deportation orders–with the hope/plan that during the deferment Congress would find a way to provide a path to legal status for the children. However, many politicians are threatening to cancel the program/status and there is already an injunction in place which has prevented expansion of the program.
Yes it defers and with that her presence is legal/not unlawful although her status is not that of a legal citizen and there is no path to citizenship. It is renewable and as long as she has DACA status the government allows her to stay and legally work here.
http://immigrationhadley.com/green-card-adjustment-for-daca-applicants/
Thanks twice. It appears there are a lot of complicated semantics involved.
“Q1: What is deferred action?
A1: Deferred action is a discretionary determination to defer a removal action of an individual as an act of prosecutorial discretion. For purposes of future inadmissibility based upon unlawful presence, an individual whose case has been deferred is not considered to be unlawfully present during the period in which deferred action is in effect. An individual who has received deferred action is authorized by DHS to be present in the United States, and is therefore considered by DHS to be lawfully present during the period deferred action is in effect. However, ** deferred action does not confer lawful status upon an individual, nor does it excuse any previous or subsequent periods of unlawful presence.**”
Not true at all. If my kids were residing in our present overseas country of residence with an expired residency visa, they would be law breakers.
You’re either in a country legally, or you’re not. Why is that so hard to understand?
Not hard to understand. I get what the legal status is. I’ve said several times the kids are not here legally and DACA doesn’t change that (though I get from the posts above that there are some technicalities there).
And, is your statement true? I’m skeptical. If you take minors to another country without the required documentation, are the children criminals, or is it the adults who were responsible for the paperwork who are the law-breakers?
You said the young children were complicit in a crime. I will never understand the thinking that says a 4 year old brought here by his parents is complicit in a crime, nor that they should be held accountable for that crime.