As far as the dreamers are concerned I could see making an exception..
that's as much of a bleeding heart you'll get from me..
so what about the parents..
t's unfair to put people who have broken the law ahead of those who are trying to become citizens legally,
so you find sponsors..but deport the parents.

Now that's sad I agree but a situation that the parents made and as a parent at least your children
will have a better life and are taken care of until they obtain legal status..
by going thru proper channels..How's that for a happy middle line..
But still what do they say about ignorance of the law

why? What has that do do with what is being discussed?

I know of many older than 18 being deported.
I know that deportation happens if you dont have documents,
I can only imagine a typical 18 year old would not risk deportation
by admitting to not being documented BY THEIR PARENTS.

thank you, it is a good suggestion

I agree that once they are grown and they have not broken laws
THEMSELVES (as adults) there should be some exceptions to deportation.
When they are still the responsibility of the adults, I understand keeping
the family together throughout the deportation process, with perhaps an
exception if a reasonable sponsor will take responsibility of the child.

me too, just in certain places.
One thing for sure, the border has been open too long.

You speak as if you have knowledge that no one else has.

really? Prey tell, you wouldn't have an example of what THAT looks like, would you?

I really am curious how my posts are ANY DIFFERENT than others in these threads?

Don't have all day, just give us one example of what you speak repetitiously.
You know poor kids being deported. Which one do you know?

no one else here is held to always speak from some personal experience,
why insist that I be?

what I speak is researchable information, just try it.

Well, you said that you knew of many older than 18 being deported.
Who are they?

look it up, this is a distraction and waste of space ...
DREAMER bill was about this very issue, so it is OBVIOUSLY happening
often enough to need legislative/executive action

expecting some list of names doesnt change that.

Oh, so you don't actually know of any only just what you read.
I see.

lol,, yeah, imagine that, I know because I READ ... silly me.

and you expect everyone else to believe what you read?

I will provide this for the readers to show how many applied for DACA which requires you to have been brought before the age of 16 to the US

DACA Statistics, FY2016 Q3

repealing DACA would subject them to deportation without any type of review.

I feel that is vindictive and wrong.


Now, back to the wall ...

Being in the United States illegally is against the law.
Not should be, could be, will be or was...IS. Period.

The INS agent doesn't need to know Riccardo. all he needs to know is if he 'IS' here legally or not.

The law doesn't state that he can be here illegally if...
He either IS or ISN'T here legally.

While I do agree that some laws need to take in the circumstances of each case, where is that line to be drawn?
Personally, I think that line should be drawn at citizenship.
Tolerances can be given to United States citizens in some cases.
But, the line needs to be firm when considering foreigners here without permission.

I also believe that children of immigrants that are deported should have first dibs to the process of citizenship 'after' being deported.
Considering they already have life experiences within our nation.
This all is pertaining to immigrant families that are here legally in the first place.

Anyone here illegally, family or not, is not supposed to be here, including any children they carry along. They are ALL here illegally.
The parents decided to put their children in an unlawful situation.

emphasis on PARENTS chose ...

once they are legal adults, they arent tied to their parents choices anymore, or shouldnt be ...

Right, so their choice to stay in this country illegally is entirely on them,
I agree. Otherwise, during their 17th year, they would make their own way
back to their own country so when it becomes a legal issue at 18, when they
become responsible for themselves, they are not breaking the law.

if they grow up here, it IS their country, to them, as much as any child growing up here.

Once they are adults, and they did not break the law that a child cannot break, there should be a way for them to gain 'legal' status without deportation is all I'm saying. Otherwise, it is more of a symbolic punishment of their parents by way of the child who had no choice in the parents actions.

The reasoning you are using is unrealistic.
Change the application and we both know that type of reasoning can't work.

My family comes for a visit in your house. We live there for a period of time. One day you come home and find we have changed your house around and have thrown out your music collection. To us, we are living there so its our house.


There is.
Legal immigrants do it all the time.


Did you actually read what you wrote?
The fact that they are adults means the laws they break is because they are adults. They are no longer children. The child grace period has expired, no longer applies.

Most people, including aged teens, are not oblivious to the things that matter in life. Mostly.
If you are 16 or 17 you are going to question your legal status.
You're going to find out what it takes for you to be a citizen when you do reach suffrage. You're going to ask your legally immigrated parents or guardians about it. Its not going to be a birthday surprise.
We're not talking 8 year olds, we're talking high school graduate age. Simple reasoning and deduction is usually not a mystery.

Those are not the people with problems.
The people with problems are the ones that think they can ignore it and it will go away. Or they believe they have some kind of special power that allows them to break those laws unpunished.
When they get caught, they get deported.
As they should be.

One is honest, responsible and reasonable.
The other is dishonest deceit.