Thread: Obama's Illegal Alien Uncle

ooops....Obama's uncle was arrested for a DUI and it was discovered he's an llegal alien. oooops.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...5215452f441fc2

So does he need a path to legal immigration or should he get a ride out of the country?

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

ooops....Obama's uncle was arrested for a DUI and it was discovered he's an llegal alien. oooops.

The Associated Press: Obama uncle held in US by immigration officials

So does he need a path to legal immigration or should he get a ride out of the country?

He should be removed IMO. The half-uncle might, however, be granted an asylum stay on the same grounds that the aunt was permitted to stay by an immigration court along the same grounds the article cites: "Onyango made headlines last year when she won the right to stay in the United States after an earlier deportation order. She came to the U.S. from Kenya in 2000 and was denied asylum by an immigration judge in 2004." That's up to the court, though, and his situation as opposed to hers just got more complicated by the arrest.

As the article correctly states, an ICE detainer is usually issued to anyone in custody with pending criminal charges who is illegally present and/or has a deportable offence charged against them. If the person is illegally present or the person is convicted of a deportable offence, standard practice is to turn the person over to ICE once the charges are resolved pursuant to the detainer.

DUI, standing alone, is not a mandatory deportable offence in the US. It can be deportable if aggravating circumstances exists, such as driving without a licence when DUI, someone is injured or killed, etc. That said, he's still here committing offences and he's presumably illegally here. The article states the following: "In a court document, ICE said he had an earlier deportation or removal order."

The article also states the following accurately: "The president's administration announced this month that it would allow many illegal immigrants facing deportation the chance to stay in the U.S. and apply for work permits and would focus on removing convicted criminals and people who might be national security or public safety threats." (bolding added). If convicted--and DUI cases are very hard to beat on the merits--he would be a convicted criminal and an illegally present individual. Even though DUI is not a mandatory deportable offence, he's still charged with a criminal offence and illegally present. It's the present practice to focus on deporting people like him.

As for his relationship with Obama, I highly doubt the White House will get involved with this case just as it didn't with the aunt. The person is only a half-brother of his absent father and he has little or no relationship with his paternal side relatives and they don't with him. Moreover, it's contradictory to his own policy. It's also very bad politics to get involved in a case with these facts. It's also improper to misuse his office to unduly interfere with the legal process. Anything he would do, if anything, would and could be no different than a relative would or could do in a private setting for an arrested friend or relative.

That's unsurprising, given that he also had an illegal alien aunt, Aunt Zeituni, who famously declared that the United States had an "obligation" to make her a citizen. Her quote, as reported on ABC, was "if I come as an immigrant, you have the obligation to make me a citizen." She was a "public health advocate," which matches Obama's "community organizer" background.

Obama's Aunt Zeituni Onyango Says US Is Obligated to Make Her Citizen - ABC News

A family of douchebags all around.

Originally Posted by O'Sullivan Bere

He should be removed IMO. The half-uncle might, however, be granted an asylum stay on the same grounds that the aunt was permitted to stay by an immigration court along the same grounds the article cites: "Onyango made headlines last year when she won the right to stay in the United States after an earlier deportation order. She came to the U.S. from Kenya in 2000 and was denied asylum by an immigration judge in 2004." That's up to the court, though, and his situation as opposed to hers just got more complicated by the arrest.

As the article correctly states, an ICE detainer is usually issued to anyone in custody with pending criminal charges who is illegally present and/or has a deportable offence charged against them. If the person is illegally present or the person is convicted of a deportable offence, standard practice is to turn the person over to ICE once the charges are resolved pursuant to the detainer.

DUI, standing alone, is not a mandatory deportable offence in the US. It can be deportable if aggravating circumstances exists, such as driving without a licence when DUI, someone is injured or killed, etc. That said, he's still here committing offences and he's presumably illegally here. The article states the following: "In a court document, ICE said he had an earlier deportation or removal order."

The article also states the following accurately: "The president's administration announced this month that it would allow many illegal immigrants facing deportation the chance to stay in the U.S. and apply for work permits and would focus on removing convicted criminals and people who might be national security or public safety threats." (bolding added). If convicted--and DUI cases are very hard to beat on the merits--he would be a convicted criminal and an illegally present individual. Even though DUI is not a mandatory deportable offence, he's still charged with a criminal offence and illegally present. It's the present practice to focus on deporting people like him.

As for his relationship with Obama, I highly doubt the White House will get involved with this case just as it didn't with the aunt. The person is only a half-brother of his absent father and he has little or no relationship with his paternal side relatives and they don't with him. Moreover, it's contradictory to his own policy. It's also very bad politics to get involved in a case with these facts. It's also improper to misuse his office to unduly interfere with the legal process. Anything he would do, if anything, would and could be no different than a relative would or could do in a private setting for an arrested friend or relative.

He seems to have a license and a social security card for the past 19 years meaning he lied on government documents which ask if he is a citizen. Would this not be a felony?

Originally Posted by CSA

He seems to have a license and a social security card for the past 19 years meaning he lied on government documents which ask if he is a citizen. Would this not be a felony?

I'm going on general assumptions here because I don't have the specifics of his case, but without specifics, I can definitely say not necessarily so, and probably less likely so given how long he's been in the US.

The trend of states enacting laws or policies requiring their licensing agencies to require proof of lawful status is a new trend within the past few years. This arrest happened in MA and from what I've read about him, he's lived in MA for a very long time. MA now asks for proof of lawful residency as follows when I looked at their driver's licence agency forms online:

For most transactions, including license conversions, applicants over the age of 18 must present three forms of ID which include:
• Proof of date of birth • Proof of signature • Proof of Massachusetts residency Applicants under 18 years of age must only provide proof of date of birth. The parent/guardian must sign the certification on the back of this application.

IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS
You must also produce your social security number (SSN) that the RMV can verify with the U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) as having been issued to you. If you do not have an SSN, an acceptable written denial notice not more than 60 days old, from the Social Security Administration (SSA) is required. You must also provide proof of an acceptable visa status, an I-94, and a current non-U.S. Passport.

http://www.mass.gov/rmv/forms/21042.pdf

And they will also do so if you try to renew your licence online:

Social Security Information:*
Social Security Number (SSN):
- -
I do not have an SSN

If you do not have an SSN, please enter
your non-U.S. passport number:

If you do not have an SSN, you will be required to present the following at your Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) branch visit:

Denial Notice issued by the Social Security Administration that is no more than 30 days old

Valid non-U.S. Passport with proof of visa status and I-94

https://secure.rmv.state.ma.us/Prest...formation.aspx

But given how long he's been here, presumably he first received his driver's licence back when such things weren't asked at all. Moreover, illegal immigrants were far more easily able to get Social Security Numbers like anyone else awhile back, especially ones that are restricted to 'not valid for employment.'

With these things in mind, I presume he received a Social Security number like other illegal immigrants back when he could do so, and he's simply been using his validly issued SS number since then for answering questions like that on such forms, all of which answering truthfully if you read such questions. He might have received one if he filed for asylum back then but only later was rejected.

Many state licensing agencies ask the question as MA does, using the SS number as verification for their purposes. If an illegal immigrant who has been here for many years already has a valid SS number from previous times when they could get one, they can slip through and are able to keep renewing their driver's licences if the questions aren't tailored correctly. That's a loophole problem with reliance on SS numbers rather than asking direct questions when it comes to long time illegal residents.

And I'm sure that state agencies ask the question in the manner they do so that the loophole may be taken. It's intentional.

Originally Posted by C-B-M

And I'm sure that state agencies ask the question in the manner they do so that the loophole may be taken. It's intentional.

That's too sceptical IMO. I deal with such agencies all the time...if it's the law, then it's the law and they'll follow it. It's just that they choose manners of reliance depending on others who don't have fullproof methods in place. SS numbers are one of them given past practices and even some loopholes now. The feds issue those numbers and are responsible for them insofar as purging people who no longer should have them. I'm not a big fan of accepting driver's licences as proof of lawful residency standing alone for reasons like that. 'Enhanced driver's licences' (EDLs) that allow passport-free land border travel between the US, Canada and Mexico are more reliable, e.g.,

http://www.nydmv.state.ny.us/broch/C159.pdf

Actually, that's not the case. There was a relatively recent furor over the expose of workers in welfare offices counseling people posing as illegal aliens and so forth how to game the system to get benefits. It happened this year, I'll find it if you want.

I've also dealt with government agencies. They're quite good at enforcing the law if they want to, I agree. They're also, I assure you, quite good at following technicalities to ignore parts of the law they want to ignore.

Originally Posted by O'Sullivan Bere

If convicted--and DUI cases are very hard to beat on the merits--he would be a convicted criminal and an illegally present individual. Even though DUI is not a mandatory deportable offence, he's still charged with a criminal offence and illegally present. It's the present practice to focus on deporting people like him.

Is that the case in Mass?

I know that in NJ DUI is charged as a motor vehicle violation, not a crime, and that even if it were charged under the criminal code there's a distinction made between a "disorderly persons" offence (violations for which the maximum jail time penalty is less than 6 months) and "crimes" (violations for which jail time maximum excedes 6 months).

If this had occured in NJ Mr. Obama would not have commited a crime nor would he have a criminal record as a result.

Is Mass different?

This has nothing to do with the president btw, and I dont hold it against him we all have some shitty family members.