Pulitzer Prize winner: illegal immigrant

[Ranb]

Jose Antonio Vargas was sent to the United State by his mother to live with his grandparents when he was 12. It was only later when he tried to obtain a driver's license that he found he was in the USA illegally.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/22/pulitzer-prize-winner-im-an-illegal-immigrant/?hpt=hp_t2
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/m...ocumented-immigrant.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

Vargas has gotten by with his illegal SSN and knows that the right thing to do is return to the Philippines and try to re-enter the USA legally, but it appears he has no intention of doing so yet.

Ranb

 

[Beady]

He will eventually be deported. While he is otherwise the kind of person we want to keep, he has not only knowingly committed identity and other kinds of fraud, which are crimes by any definition, he has also made himself a high-profile case. It will now take a presidential pardon and/or an act of Congress to get him out of the normal "proceedings." Once out of the U.S., he faces a minimum five-year ban on returning; this is in addition to any incarceration he might face before expulsion (although I doubt he'll get any that isn't related to administrative purposes).

My money is on Voluntary Departure and a 5-year ban. BTW, "voluntary departure" means he puts himself on a plane, rather than having someone else put him there.

 

[TraneWreck]

Yes, we must keep the dirty illegals out of the country. As a 12 year old, he should have realized what he was doing was wrong and demanded that he be sent back.

This is America. How dare this foreigner think he could exchange his talents and work for a fair wage.

 

[Beady]

Yes, we must keep the dirty illegals out of the country. As a 12 year old, he should have realized what he was doing was wrong and demanded that he be sent back.

This is America. How dare this foreigner think he could exchange his talents and work for a fair wage.

sigh. What happened when he was 12 isn't an issue. What he has done as an adult, in full knowledge of his status, is an issue.

BTW, what's so bad about being sent back to his native land?

 

[monoman]

sigh. What happened when he was 12 isn't an issue. What he has done as an adult, in full knowledge of his status, is an issue.

BTW, what's so bad about being sent back to his native land?

America is his "native land". Imagine if you were dispatched off to the Philippines.

 

[WildCat]

America is his "native land". Imagine if you were dispatched off to the Philippines.

He was 12 when he was sent to he US, not a baby. He was fully immersed in his native culture and language.

How does it work in Bulgaria? Can anyone just move there without restrictions?

 

[stokes234]

sigh. What happened when he was 12 isn't an issue. What he has done as an adult, in full knowledge of his status, is an issue.

BTW, what's so bad about being sent back to his native land?

What he has done as an adult is stay in the country he spent his formative years. That's exactly what i'd have done. Maybe you'd have abandoned your friends, your job and your home in the richest country in the world and forked out the cash for a plane to a 3rd world country, but perhaps we're just different like that.

 

[WildCat]

What he has done as an adult is stay in the country he spent his formative years. That's exactly what i'd have done. Maybe you'd have abandoned your friends, your job and your home in the richest country in the world and forked out the cash for a plane to a 3rd world country, but perhaps we're just different like that.

Can you list the countries that have no restrictions on immigration, or have no penalties for those who violate the restrictions?

How does it work in your country stokes? Can anyone just move there?

 

[Beady]

America is his "native land". Imagine if you were dispatched off to the Philippines.

No, the Philippines is his native land. And in his particular case, I imagine he'll have a pretty good life no matter where he is.

And, as others have said, I'll bet you can't name a single nation on the planet that doesn't have immigration laws. Well, maybe Somalia; are you going to hold that up as a shining example?

 

[stokes234]

Can you list the countries that have no restrictions on immigration, or have no penalties for those who violate the restrictions?

How does it work in your country stokes? Can anyone just move there?

No, but if someone had moved here at 12 and we didn't find them in the 6 years it took them to reach 18, I wouldn't want them deported. That's too much of your life to just up and leave behind. And expecting him to do it of his own accord? Just seems silly.

 

[WildCat]

No, but if someone had moved here at 12 and we didn't find them in the 6 years it took them to reach 18, I wouldn't want them deported.

Unless you are the dictator of your country, what you want is completely irrelevant.

What will your government do?

 

[stokes234]

Unless you are the dictator of your country, what you want is completely irrelevant.

What will your government do?

Actually, I could adopt them before they reach 18. Then they'd get citizenship in my country. Otherwise, admittedly, my country would most likely deport them.

My original point was more an objection to the idea that he should have deported himself, rather than advocating open borders the world over.

 

[cwalner]

For me, this is the kind of case where some leniency would have been warranted, had he brought the issue up as soon as he found out. The cost of not doing the right thing up front, however, should be the 5 years away from his home (yes, the USA is his home now).

It also reminded me of friend I had in college. He is the son of a Lebanese diplomat to the US, so entered the country under his father's diplomatic visa. However, when he turned 18, he did not realize that he was not still covered by that Visa. When he found out (he was a Freshman or a Sophomore, so not more than 2 years after his 18th birthday), he turned himself into INS and had a hearing (which allowed him to stay and fix the oversight of getting an education visa in his own name). He was embarrassed by this and did not tell his friends until after the hearing. We all had a good laugh, because none of friends even knew he was foreign born (I had assumed he was born to immigrant parents) because he was completely acculturated and as an English Lit major spoke the language better than most of us native born folk.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Identity theft is not something you want to happen to you, trust me. Rewarding someone for it is ridiculous. If its just some dead guy's social security and he wasn't funneling the money away from a widow or causing some other nastiness which identity thieves so often do, then maybe he should be allowed to apply to become a citizen legally.

OTOH, there are quite a few thousand people who are trying to do it the right way, and who have NOT stolen someone's identity that I would put ahead of him

 

[TraneWreck]

If this guy can support himself and pay into our system, what's the problem?

In the least, employment should=citizenship (and yes, we can deal with all the stupid hypotheticals people are concocting after reading that--propose them, we'll solve them).

People who contribute to the American system should be Americans. The majority of illegal immigrants pay income tax (citizenship papers aren't required for tax ID #'s), almost all pay payroll taxes (only don't if the employer is trying to **** they system), and every one of them pay sales taxes.

Illegal immigration is a net financial loss for the states (merely in terms of services used vs. tax dollars pays--those calculations don't consider the economic activity generated by the workers), but at the federal level it's a surplus. They pay social security tax but don't receive benefits, for example.

If we're going to deport anyone, why don't we ship our deadbeat native-borns? Just getting **** out of a vagina in the right zip code isn't really that impressive of an accomplishment.

 

[AvalonXQ]

If this guy can support himself and pay into our system, what's the problem?

Do you advocate an open border policy?

Because, if not, then we are going to have a line people have to stand in to get into the country.

If we agree that there needs to be a line, then people are going to either stand in it or try to jump it.

Allowing those who jump the line into the system without any consequences encourages more people to jump the line, and makes it impossible to maintain any sort of controls over who gets in and who does it.

Punishing those who jump the line encourages respect for the line, and incentivizes those who are willing to stand in line.

 

[cwalner]

If this guy can support himself and pay into our system, what's the problem?

I would tend to agree with you, if he had resolved this when he first found out about his status. Instead he chose to commit further crimes, including identity theft to avoid the issue. He consciously made some very bad choices. He should suffer the consequences of those. 5 years ban before he is allowed to return does not seem too extreme for what he did.

 

[stokes234]

I would tend to agree with you, if he had resolved this when he first found out about his status. Instead he chose to commit further crimes, including identity theft to avoid the issue.

Any evidence that his crimes had victims?

 

[Quad4_72]

Do you advocate an open border policy?

Because, if not, then we are going to have a line people have to stand in to get into the country.

If we agree that there needs to be a line, then people are going to either stand in it or try to jump it.

Allowing those who jump the line into the system without any consequences encourages more people to jump the line, and makes it impossible to maintain any sort of controls over who gets in and who does it.

Punishing those who jump the line encourages respect for the line, and incentivizes those who are willing to stand in line.

Correct. I never understood some people's mentality of "Well if you didn't get caught breaking the law by illegally crossing the border and beat the system, you should be allowed to stay!" Makes no sense whatsoever. It shows complete disregard for the law and encourages crime. That is exactly like saying "Well if you rob a bank and didn't get caught in the process of robbing it, but were caught later you should not be punished! You beat the system!"

 

[Quad4_72]

Any evidence that his crimes had victims?

This is the most irrelevant question in the thread, and probably one of the most irrelevant questions in the forum right now. Really is that how the law works? If there were no victims then it is ok to commit the crime? Please explain the relevance of whether or not there were any victims. This should be good.