Connect With Us

FacebookTwitterRSSYoutube

Final Round for Same-Sex Couples & Green Cards: DUMP Immigration Equality

Melanie Nathan March 31, 2011

Suspect Tiven and Congressman Nadler -Think IE had some Lobby going here?

So Guess who is asking for more support for the same thing they screwed bi-nationals over and  over again previously?  Yes, It is Immigration Equality. They need your grassroots effort and/or money so you can get screwed yet again  – so they can mess with  our UAFA again and again and again – The question is this time do they plan on advocating for it or advocating for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, the past modus operandi; the latter previously touted as the only way to achieve these rights.   But it did not work and now what crazy path will they explore with your hearts risking your soul mates?  Do they plan on placing UAFA and Binationals, same-sex green cards ahead of the DREAM ACT this time – because the latter may happen to include some gays and lesbians?

Julie Kruse, Policy Director has put out a call for you to tell your stories and to support UAFA!   Time warp 2009! Julie what have we been doing for ten years?

Buyer beware- what is wrong with this picture?

Kruse”s letter states “In just a few weeks, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) will reintroduce the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) — a critically important bill that would provide much-needed relief to LGBT families facing separation and exile under our discriminatory immigration laws. Will you help us build the support we need to ensure UAFA’s reintroduction is a success?”

AND WHY I ASK?

She continues ” As you know, UAFA would allow lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans to sponsor our foreign-born partners and children for residency in the United States. UAFA’s passage would immediately help all families with foreign-born partners. For families whose relationships aren’t recognized by state or local law – and for families currently living in exile — UAFA offers the only permanent solution for remaining together. ”

I have a feeling this jargon was copied from an email back in 2009 – c heck it OUT!  That said – when I was in DC with Shirley Tan, the lesbian mom saved from deportation under Private Bill #867, by Senator Feinstein two things did not occurred:-

1. Julie Kruse told us not to waste our time telling Republicans in Congress Shirley’s story – BUT now the Republicans have a majority and so should we still keep our stories from them Julie Kruse?

2. I informed Rachel Tiven and Julie Kruse in June 2009, after speaking with the Senator’s senior legislative staffer,  that the only way to get Senator Feinstein to sponsor and push  UAFA would have been for IE to acknowledge that the UAFA does not provide enough defining language demanding a CONTRACTUAL NEXUS between partners; and that mere evidence would not be enough to satisfy the Senator.   Understanding law the way I do the Senator’s requirement made complete sense to me.  But Immigration equality representatives fobbed me off.

a.  UAFA Language must change to  define Permanent Partner as someone who can prove a contractual nexus, via a DP or marriage document from a Jurisdiction or a written contract defining the relationship – beyond mere evidence of joint check accounts and rental agreements.   The impediment to UAFA has always been – not fear of fraud- per se- but rather the lack of provable contractual relationship or connection.  Roomates can share a bill but cannot a contract defining their relationship.

The language can and must work around this.  Immigration Equality basically told me I was wasting my time because and I quote “Senator Feinstein does not care about the  LGBT community.”  That was a horrible myth perpetuated by another organization which I care not to name as well as by Immigration equality.

b.  Senator Feinstein absolutely cares about gays  (LGBTI) and when I repeated that comment to a staffer in the Senators office two years ago, I was told it would break the Senator’s heart because she did care so much.  I believed that Senator Feinstein does care and did then and I deplore the fact that Immigration Equality failed to truly engage her office to provide the legislative solution for her sponsorship.

So much energy spent on fighting for so called immigration reform when all we wanted is equality.

c. Senator Feinstein is correct to go full out for the Repeal of DOMA at this point.  To split our advocacy once a repeal is on the table for DOMA is pure waste of of unity and advocacy time.    At this point IE should be asking for special visas and Private Bills to prevent deportations of a class to be named – pending the repeal of DOMA.   Instead they are trying to roll back the clock and hedge UAFA’s enactment  against DOMA’s repeal.

Yes Tell your stories and tell your representatives why you want your Federal benefits such as immigration. Tell them your stories.   But how can we do it in the name of UAFA which Immigration Equality may again hi-jack for their own invisible purposes.  Do it in the name of DOMA repeal.

Kruse  states then in her e-mail bvlast Help us honor those families by ensuring we have a strong coalition of lawmakers supporting UAFA in the new Congress.”  Yes, Julie Kruse, Rachel Tiven and Steve Ralls – et al – how are you going to regenerate support for UAFA in a Republican Congress when you failed in a Democratic one and took all binationals for the biggest ride of their life…. down CIR road to nowhere.   Do you plan on touting UAFA and switching to Comprehensive immigration Reform YET AGAIN?

How many times you take our community for suckers.

The Letter goes on to say: – “Ask your lawmaker to cosponsor UAFA, and add your personal story to your letter. Your story is the best, and most powerful, way to let Congress know how critical passage of UAFA is for our families.

In case you were unaware OUT4IMMIGRATION has been doing just that since long before you let go of your grassroots respect and telling actual stories for UAFA.  But now its time to tell them our stories for the repeal of DOMA which will give same-sex spouses the same rights as gay spouses.

“We finished the last Congress with record support for UAFA.”   say Kruse with ultimate chutzpah – then why did you bandwagon and scurry after Immigration Reform and failed alliances?

“Help us begin this Congress by setting a new record again. With your help, we can take action to ensure LGBT families won’t be torn apart by unfair immigration laws.”    Does that sound familiar – like a pre immigration reform rewind?  A most disingenuous statement – do not expect support – we the grassroots are better off without your strategy mess ups and your inability to take responsibility – what you need to do is to be transparent.   This letter is another example of such lack of transparency , ignorance and the presumption that we are all a bunch of idiots.

UNLESS Immigration Equality shows the truth – and  tells same-sex couples what their FULL strategy and plan is – they have no place asking for Bi-national f support because same-sex couples who have been waiting for years and who you turn away when in need, do not trust Immigration Equality any longer.

What is Immigration Equality’s plan in the broad scheme of things? How is it addressing the repeal of the Defense of marriage Act  DOMA now that has strong support and has been introduced already – is UAFA a bey hedged against the repeal of DOMA and if it is what guarantee do we have that Immigration equality will not hijack the legislation yet again?

Will Immigration equality  chase the DREAM again or work for UAFA fully – or  CHASE comprehensive immigration reform with our UAFA stories and pleas for help.

Julie Kruse , If we want UAFA will you offer CIR  – again?    No one should follow this group without a fully transparent plan of intent and one that they honor.  No one should follow this group until they provide a financial disclosure of how money was spent over the past few years and how they plan to budget and allocate resources at this time.

Immigration equality-  the big glaring lie – is the offer that UAFA will provide a quick remedy. No it will not. It is simply not possible.   The only quick remedy will be a executive order by the President or some creative form of  Sunset Special Binat -VISA or Protocol to provide for the immediate relief suffered by our binational / same-sex couples – limited to those who are married – because marriage is now a relatively easy option, according to State and Foreign Laws.

Grassroots I ask you – are you going to allow your selves to be used again – like lambs to the slaughter ?

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-

NOTE:-  An Aside: Who can depend on IE: If you have stories to tell please e-mail me – at nathan@privatecourts.com:

I recently sent an asylum seeker to Immigration equality who is within the small window of opportunity with a winning Asylum case.  They were excited to receive the case, my source informs me.   I then went to South Africa for a month and just arrived back – only to hear that the young person who is in great physical danger if returned home, is still waiting for a post interview call back.  She is panic stricken and under time constraints for filing.  It is a simple case to file and all they need is to find her an attorney to fill out the forms.

————————————————————————————–


By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
Facebook Melanie
twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

————————————————————————-

For quite some time I have been writing about creative alternatives – I would like to see the organizations getting your money doing some of the creative out od the box work!!!!

Here is the Body of my Past work on this subject

http://lezgetreal.com/page/2/?s=Binational

http://lezgetreal.com/2010/12/same-sex-green-cards-the-case-for-a-presidential-executive-order-2011/

REPEAT  -  I WROTE THIS BACK IN DECEMBER,……   WRITTEN BEFORE INTRODUCTION OF REPEAL OF DOMA

Melanie Nathan, Dec 30, 2010. At the federal level of government in the United States, laws are made almost exclusively by legislation. Legislation originates as an Act of Congress passed by the Congress of the United States; such acts were either signed into law by the President or passed by Congress after a presidential veto.

Legislation is not the only source of regulations which have the force of law. There is also judge-made common law and constitutional law. The President can issue executive orders pursuant to a grant of discretion from Congress, or under the inherent powers that office holds to deal with certain matters of foreign policy.

When it comes to immigration matters, the standing law is that covered by the Immigration and Naturalization Act of the USA.  This law cannot be changed, without the involvement of Congress through an amendment process.  However I believe that when it comes to the regulations to effect the intent behind the law or something that unexpectedly and detrimentally impacts the law, the President of the USA can provide an executive order to adjust the circumstances, so impacted.

I do not believe that it was ever the intention of the Defense of Marriage Act to deny the de facto relationships of same-sex couples. I believe President Clinton who signed it into law would attest that it was never his intention to cause American citizens and Residents in same-sex relationships to have to exile the USA to pursue their Constitutional right to happiness. However Americans in the USA, in same sex relationships are denied the possibility to sponsor a partner for a green card.

Accordingly I believe that President Obama has the power to effect an Executive Order on behalf of same-sex couples who are specifically excluded by DOMA, from participating in the US Immigration laws.   This  quest would specifically denote a right by way of process to an American (citizen or resident) and not a right to an immigrant; the right of the American to Petition for a same-sex partner to reside in the USA, that is currently excluded via laws that simply fail to include the de facto situation, thereby causing extreme  hardship to American Families.

I do not believe the Immigration law needs to change for this to happen in the short term; I do not believe that this reflects in any way shape or form on the marriage equality debate.  It does not seek to change DOMA and nor does it impact the Immigration Act as we know it, at all.

There have been many early executive orders during all Presidencies;  the State Department began numbering executive orders in the early 20th century, starting retroactively from President Abraham Lincoln’s Executive Order Establishing a Provisional Court in Louisiana issued in 1862. An executive order is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government, generally to staff of the executive branch and not to the citizens of the country. Article I, Section 1 of the US Constitution specifically reserves all federal legislative authority to Congress, not the president.

However here what would occur would be the President ordering the inclusion of same-sex partners under existing law, based on the de facto existence of relationships, the anomaly caused by State law that endorse such relationships, while the Federal government fails to secure the right of the American to remain at home in a relationship of their choice.

Examples of prior Immigration related executive orders -

  • Employment of aliens under Federal contracts: EO 12989
  • Grenada; revocation of naturalization exemptions: EO 12913
  • Persian Gulf conflict participants; expedited naturalization: EO 12939

The Case for an executive order is easily made:

Urgent Need; Immediate Harm;

Without the passage of a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act the exclusionary legislation that caused the harm, or the passage of the Uniting American Families Act, (UAFA) the pending Legislation – which would fix the problem, there is little else that can happen to right this immeasurable harm in the near future.

Same-sex couples have been watching the introduction of legislation come and go for the best part of 15 years to no avail

Americans are living in exile to be with partners – separated from extended families, children etc.  Some are getting ready to leave the USA as I write this; some partners have not seen each other in years- partners are deported, living  jobless in hiding; the expense to maintain an international relationship is prohibitive and I can go on….

The Dream Act failed – Do you think Republicans will give a damn about gay and lesbian couples?

Now that DADT is repealed Military also need to a mechanism to bring home foreign born partners after serving abroad.

Now I have never written an Executive Order or anything similar before and so please do not take this as my expectation of what one would really look like or entail. In fact I may even be coming at it from the wrong angle – there may be a more direct way to do it than to Order a Special Board charged with a duty as I have done below.   I thought of doig it that way so that the ORDER would not be a blanket order, but would have built in measure for responsible actions, where evidence and contractual nexus helm the process.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

PREAMBLE:- Same Sex couples are a de facto part of American Society. The Defense of Marriage Act. specifically excludes Same-Sex partners from being included under the Immigration & Naturalization Act of 1952.

Some de facto same-sex relationships impacted by the Law include children who suffer hardship if parents are forced to separate or leave the United States;

No US citizen should be forced into exile or to leave their homes, careers and countries to be able to pursue a relationship with a same-sex partner;

The intention of the Defense of Marriage Act was define marriage as between a man and a woman only. In No way does this order derogate from that concept nor does it attempt to re-define marriage;

Predicated on the fact that DOMA was never intended to divide unmarried couples (who did not have the legal option to marry in accordance with the Federal definition established by DOMA)  and families or prevent them from living together.

It remains the policy of this Administration to enforce the immigration laws to the fullest extent, for all cases that do not conform to this Order;  including the detection and deportation of undocumented aliens.


IT IS ORDERED:-

I. Establishment of Emergency Board, to be led by personnel appointed by the President of the USA and office of the Department of Homeland Security for the purposes outlined as follows:-

I. Investigating the separation of same-sex partners whose relationships are excluded from immigration rights and privileges under the Immigration and Nationality Act of  1952 as amended ; with the specific purpose of providing remedies and urgent relief to specific couples and through general regulations and remedies for couples at large:-

a. To establish a Special Visa Program (similar to Fiancé Visa/ R1 Visa) to facilitate the reunification of same-sex partners in relationships where a contractual nexus can be proved within six months of entry by foreign partner into USA; and to to provide a path to citizenship upon conditions to be determined.

b. To provide a mechanism for the adjustment of Status for same-sex foreign partners who are currently in the USA undocumented, whose Visa has expired, who enter into same-sex relationships while in the USA, including those in Asylum or deportation proceedings, or under ten year re-entry ban, where other is a US Citizen or Legal US Resident, who can prove a contractual nexus;

c. To define contractual nexus (I have prepared my own)


d. To define and detail evidence required to prove contractual nexus:- (I have prepared a list)

II. Circumstances to Investigate:

  • circumstances of American citizens forced leave the USA to be in relationship
  • and live with a foreign born partner, where there is proof of contractual nexus;
  • to review immigration cases of foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US
    Citizen or  legal US Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
  • to review deportation cases involving foreign same-sex partner, where other is a
    US Citizen or Legal US Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
  • to review asylum cases foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US Citizen and
    Resident,  who can prove a contractual nexus;
  • to review Visa Applications

III Moratorium:

Immediate moratorium on all deportations involving foreign same-sex partner, where other is a US Citizen or Legal US Resident, who can prove a contractual nexus;  to include a retroactive waiver of 10 year ban on re-entry to USA.

The Power shall be vested in the Board and All Regulations stemming therefrom shall be subject to the oversight of a duly appointed Staffer and ratification by the President of the USA.

—————————————————————————————————————-

CONCLUSION:

Maybe this is a pipe dream and I have written about this over a year ago – I hope to join with other advocates in the New Year to push for a creative remedy for the unconscionable and reprehensible inequity to same-sex couples and their families, immediate and extended.  This international community cannot wait any longer – not even for what it will take to repeal DOMA, Enact UAFA.  This is not an immigration reform issue – it is an immigration equality – as in parity- issue. Hence the bi-national same sex community which advocates, waits and prays for remedies should not be expected to wait any longer while an anti-immigrant weighted Congress plodders along with Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

A note from J. Bachelor  3/31/2011 : I had passed this on to others in the past, but the person to target is Obama and here is why:

A new strategy for helping out immigrants is outlined in a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) memo from last year. In that memo, staff members for USCIS catalogued the various options that are open to the President.

“USCIS can extend benefits and/or protections to many individuals and groups by issuing new guidance and regulations, exercising discretion with regard to parole-in-place, deferred action and the issuance of Notices to Appear (NTA), and adopting significant process improvements,” the memo reads.

The text of the memo asserts that USCIS’s discretionary power to use deferred action is unlimited. In order to suppress opposition to the flexing of this muscle, the USCIS staffers who wrote the memo suggest that deferred action be used to exempt “particular groups” from being subject to removal proceedings. In this memo, they explicitly admit that “deferred action” — or using prosecutorial discretion not to deport someone — would be “a non-legislative version of ‘amnesty.’”

Fox News notes that deferred action is a “suspension of deportation hearings for illegal aliens. With “deferred action,” illegals are allowed to apply for employment authorization cards,” (http://nation.foxnews.com/amnesty/2010/06/23/obama-granting-amnesty-executive-order).

The President has the power to sign an executive order to exempt “particular groups”, such as gay binational couples who are married, from being deported. This would not make them legal, but would allow them to remain in the country with their significant others.
- http://www2.nationalreview.com/memo_UCIS_072910.html

Comments

comments

Share This Post

16 Responses to Final Round for Same-Sex Couples & Green Cards: DUMP Immigration Equality

  1. Rob

    February 1, 2012 at 6:47 pm

    Melanie,

    I’m reading your article in a little bit of shock – I am in a same-sex binational relationship for 5 years (living in two countries with visits as often as we can afford) and we have been trying to navigate the legal and activist landscape that comes with our situation. We discovered IE a few years ago, we’ve given them money to support their efforts, and they have helped give us direction in the form of pro-bono legal advice, and how to tell our “story” to our reps in Congress, etc.

    I am far from an expert on the entire political history that has caused organizations like Out4Immigration and Immigration Equality to develop different (and perhaps mutually exclusive) strategies on how to allow our families to stay together. Until I read your article, I had no idea that there was so much divisiveness in trying to (ostensibly) reach the same end goal. I was under the (naive?) impression that Out4Immigration and Immigration Equality and to a lesser extent, HRC and Change.org and Prop8TrialTracker and other organizations were *generally* trying to achieve an immigration status for same sex couples and/or federal rights under marriage by repeal of DOMA. I am NOT so naive to not realize that these organizations compete for the dollars of ‘desperate’ bi-national couples like us, nor that actually achieving the end goal (full immigration/marriage equality) might signal the end of these organizations as well.

    Can we assume that these organizations are at least similar in the sense of trying to enable rather than prevent the end goal of immigration/marriage rights? If so, it sounds like your frustration with IE (which I appreciate, as it is a wake-up call for me) has to do with strategy more than anything else. I can see from your article that your efforts to work with IE on revising *their* strategy has not been well-received. What I’m struggling to understand is that it appears that you see IE as THE threat… on par with a NOM or Focus on the Family, or any of many Republicans in Congress who are anti-gay everything.

    If your goal is to raise awareness that IE may have made some big blunders and to engage our community to call them on it and work on developing a better organized more cohesive strategy amongst all the pro-immigration/pro-marriage organizations, I’m all for it. However, if your goal is knock off organizations like IE until Out4Immigration is the last one standing, I just don’t get it. Let me be clear on my goal: to advocate and support ANY of these organizations that help me to bring my partner to the states. I really don’t care if it’s UAFA or a civil union or marriage, nor do I care if it’s Out4Immigration or IE or someone else leading the charge. I greatly appreciate your passion, and I’m going to try to learn more about the motives of these organizations and make better decisions on my own strategies. I also hope we as a community want nothing more than to have our partners by our sides learn to work together and solve our differences.
    With respect, Rob

  2. Greta

    April 16, 2011 at 10:17 am

    IE=bunch of idiots or one might want to call them “parrots” since they always repeat what the grassroots have put out there and on top claiming all the credit undeserved! Mel, congratulations on your article, you are one “hell of a woman” speaking in the tongue of truth! My wish for the future: IE must resign.

    • Melanie Nathan

      April 16, 2011 at 12:50 pm

      Greta, Thanks coming from you that means a great deal

  3. Janice

    April 3, 2011 at 9:16 am

    Well, my comments were posted on IE. Still no answer from them! A few people have challenged their reasoning, but for the most part the comments are full of “thank you so much IE for everything you do” and “we think you’re wonderful.” I’m sick of reading them. One guy said that we should have gone the route of others like the U.K. and brought in domestic partnerships, same-sex immigration rights, and civil unions before tackling the sensitive area of marriage. I’ve often thought that, but I believe you should push for your rights from many different angles. One has work surely? 

    • Melanie Nathan

      April 16, 2011 at 12:58 pm

      Thanks Janice for being a relentless soldier on the front. Paste this and my newer article on their FB and web pages

    • Jeremy

      April 18, 2011 at 12:43 pm

      I kind of agree with that guy. As marriage is obviously the final goal, what do we do in the meantime? It would have been great if the Federal Government during the Dem. reign could have passed some sort of federal “civil union registry” which would give any gay couples who are married in the US or in a civil union federal benefits. Sure, you’d be married at the state-level and civil-unioned at the federal, but I think we’d rather be receiving the federal benefits and staying together with our loved ones!!! then holding out for marriage, all the meanwhile couples are being split apart. This sort of bill would have been pushed for by all the gay rights group, rather than just the limited support UAFA got. And “civil unions” seem to have no problem passing in democrat held states, so why would they in a democrat controlled Congress? Furthermore, why has a bill like this never even been proposed!!!

  4. Janice

    April 2, 2011 at 10:52 am

    Mel,
    Have you seen the latest from IE?
    Rachel Tiven is now telling couples to get married??? One guy in particular has criticized her for giving out this irresponsible advice when everything is still up in the air. I’ve left a couple of comments….let’s see if they’re posted! I’m sick of them talking about only one binational situation. I asked them “What about everyone else?” Not everyone has the same exact story to tell, and yet we are all being cruelly hurt by DOMA. I told them that we have donated money to them many times in the past, so just what are they doing to justify that money, and how can they ask for more?  

    • FAEN

      April 2, 2011 at 1:01 pm

      Get married? But that would put us all in jeopardy right?

    • Melanie Nathan

      April 2, 2011 at 4:10 pm

      Good Janice. I really want to know how much of your money went to promote the DREAM ACT during lame duck session. They must be held accountable. I have tried to see how transparent they are – but unlike many other NGO’s they are not!!! But we will get to see their expending soon you will see. That said Marriage is important from one angle only that is true …. and people have to always discern whether or not they are willing to be activists first and citizens second because the latter may be at risk when all take a protest type role and fore sake their individual cases. But each person MUST make individual decisions fully aware of risks involved. Remember if uncertain its never too late to marry if the law goes our way. However ultimately marriage is important because it will be the only way to satisfy the contractual nexus requirement fully and it is available to us in a few states.

  5. Dennis

    April 1, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    I agree, I have been counted on Immigration Equality, and donated some money and thought they can helped to pass the UAFA. However, it just gave you the false hope. I know it’s a difficult job, but Immigration Equality always gave the false information to mislead people thought it will be passed soon.

  6. Janice

    March 31, 2011 at 10:16 pm

    I can see it Faen.
    For some reason the comments keep coming and going. Mine has appeared twice, disappeared, and appeared twice again…..all in a few hours lol

  7. FAEN

    March 31, 2011 at 7:54 pm

    Oy my comment seems to have vanished

  8. Janice

    March 31, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    Sorry for the double post……the site started acting strange!

  9. Janice

    March 31, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    Welcome back Mel!
    I am sick of IE….have been for a long time now! I really don’t think they have anything but their own interests at heart. I am sick of them asking for money, when all they have done in the past is waste time. Think about it……if UAFA passes or DOMA is repealed, what will keep IE going? Of course there are other LGBT immigration issues, but you will have slashed most of their reason for being out from under them.I really wonder if the reason they didn’t get UAFA passed when the Democrats had control was because they didn’t want to. Cynical me?  Hell yes!This is a cruel roller coaster that we binationals are being made to ride day in and day out, and it isn’t just those in power that are making us ride it.I have uploaded our story many times to IE’s website over the last year, but they still haven’t posted it. I contacted them to ask why not. Did I get a reply?……of course not!They also just want to focus on their pet cases, while the binational situation has many variations. We’re not all married, we’re not all here in the U.S. together, we’re not all illegal, we’re not all in a position to jeopardize our temporary legal status by getting married thus showing immigrant intent. Where’s the protection or help for all those who don’t fall under IE’s pet category of what they consider to be the binational situation?I am sick of them and of all this……….in fact it does make you sick.

  10. Janice

    March 31, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    Welcome back Mel!

    I am sick of IE….have been for a long time now! I really don’t think they have anything but their own interests at heart. I am sick of them asking for money, when all they have done in the past is waste time. 
    Think about it……if UAFA passes or DOMA is repealed, what will keep IE going? Of course there are other LGBT immigration issues, but you will have slashed most of their reason for being out from under them.
    I really wonder if the reason they didn’t get UAFA passed when the Democrats had control was because they didn’t want to. Cynical me?  Hell yes!
    This is a cruel roller coaster that we binationals are being made to ride day in and day out, and it isn’t just those in power that are making us ride it.
    I have uploaded our story many times to IE’s website over the last year, but they still haven’t posted it. I contacted them to ask why not. Did I get a reply?……of course not!
    They also just want to focus on their pet cases, while the binational situation has many variations. We’re not all married, we’re not all here in the U.S. together, we’re not all illegal, we’re not all in a position to jeopardize our temporary legal status by getting married thus showing immigrant intent. Where’s the protection or help for all those who don’t fall under IE’s pet category of what they consider to be the binational situation?
    I am sick of them and of all this……….in fact it does make you sick.

  11. FAEN

    March 31, 2011 at 5:57 pm

    Mel: I got the same e-mail from IE and while I glazed over it I thought ‘if you can’t get the UAFA passed when the Dems had the House, the Senate, and the WH, how in hell are you going to get it passed when the House is in Teabagger control? Youre not. Youre not going to come close’. I think as painful as it is, we should just quit trying to push the UAFA and focus a LOT more on getting rid of DOMA. I believe it is the only way now. While I think an EO from the President is a great idea I don’t expect it for two reasons. One, he won’t touch it until after the election and two, can’t an EO be over written by another President? Now on that point I am in need of guidance because I clearly am not a lawyer.

    I also have some other questions. How long do you think it will take for the DOMA cases to make their way to SCOTUS? If they do deem it unconstitutional how long would it be before we could apply for residency? What happens if god forbid, SCOTUS deems DOMA as constitutional? What happens to all of us then?