Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 82
Thanks Tree21Thanks

Thread: Session - Says Domestic Violence Is Not Grounds for Asylum

  1. #11
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,853
    Thanks
    3131

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    No it does not and I have asked you several times to knock it off with the Ms.

    Last warning.
    HayJenn,

    Why so angry? I though we were having a nice discussion.

    And yes it does.

    If you had read the article, you would have seen that Attorney General Sessions had removed the blanket asylum category for domestic violence and made it on a case by case basis.

  2. #12
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,915
    Thanks
    36470

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    What does domestic violence here have anything to women and children fleeing violence from Central Amercia from mostly drug gangs?? Raping and killing them.

    Ask a victim of domestic violence or the target of a gang whether their fear was real. Whether the danger they were in was real.

    And now immigration judges have to to Session's bidding?

    This looks more like a crackdown on LEGAL immigration - a la Miller and Sessions.

    It's shameful.
    I don't think so. This is a legal question, and it has to do with a portion of the asylum law that allows for asylum to be granted to a number of categories like race, religion, and nationality, if those qualities cause someone political persecution in their own country. Another category is "membership in a particular social group." That's what all this hinges on. It's a very vague term, and was designed to allow consideration for LGBT or other minority groups that might be persecuted.

    What "particular social group" do these people belong to, who are victims of ordinary civil violence like gangs or domestic battery? I can't think of one, unless we say that all women or all mothers have legitimate asylum claims.

    It's a tragedy and shameful that these women have reason to flee violence in their own countries, but it's not shameful for us to say they don't suffer from political violence or other oppression.
    Thanks from Kallie Knoetze

  3. #13
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,915
    Thanks
    36470

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallie Knoetze View Post
    HayJenn,

    Why so angry? I though we were having a nice discussion.

    And yes it does.

    If you had read the article, you would have seen that Attorney General Sessions had removed the blanket asylum category for domestic violence and made it on a case by case basis.
    A case by case basis? Then that makes the situation WORSE. The whole point of making this pronouncement is to discourage others from seeking out our borders. If they have hopes of being accepted on a case by case basis, why should they stop? It's the vagueness in the law and uncertainty of decision making that creates the problem.

  4. #14
    Under Protest excalibur's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    10,907
    Thanks
    3470

    From
    The Milky Way
    Quote Originally Posted by Minotaur View Post
    Shameful and never ending outrages.


    Why? We have an obligation first to the American people. There are plenty of Latin American nations where these folks can get asylum.

  5. #15
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,915
    Thanks
    36470

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
    Why? We have an obligation first to the American people. There are plenty of Latin American nations where these folks can get asylum.
    We should encourage and help their local governments quell violence in their own countries. We've been doing that in Afghanistan for 15 years--we must have learned something, and at least those Central American countries share a lot more cultural affinity with us--there's no Taliban, for example.

  6. #16
    Self Banned Mister B's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    1,723
    Thanks
    1246

    From
    DS9
    Quote Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
    Why? We have an obligation first to the American people. There are plenty of Latin American nations where these folks can get asylum.
    Said no American Indian in 1610 ever.
    Last edited by Mister B; 11th June 2018 at 03:56 PM.

  7. #17
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    52,640
    Thanks
    40511

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I don't think so. This is a legal question, and it has to do with a portion of the asylum law that allows for asylum to be granted to a number of categories like race, religion, and nationality, if those qualities cause someone political persecution in their own country. Another category is "membership in a particular social group." That's what all this hinges on. It's a very vague term, and was designed to allow consideration for LGBT or other minority groups that might be persecuted.

    What "particular social group" do these people belong to, who are victims of ordinary civil violence like gangs or domestic battery? I can't think of one, unless we say that all women or all mothers have legitimate asylum claims.

    It's a tragedy and shameful that these women have reason to flee violence in their own countries, but it's not shameful for us to say they don't suffer from political violence or other oppression.
    In 2014, the Board of Immigration Appeals found that married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationships are eligible for asylum in the US. It opened the door for some domestic violence victims to seek safety in the United States.

    Countless women who are the victims of domestic violence in Central America flee north (some with their children) because the police in their home countries are unable to protect them. They are also terrorized by gang violence - constant death threats to them and their children.

    But Jeff Sessions thinks these women aren't eligible for asylum because their husbands are only violent to them - not all women.

    The original case he is overturning - Matter of A-R-C-G- - correctly pointed out that women who can't leave their relationships do have characteristics that make them unique in society.

    Read the entire thread here

    https://twitter.com/karalynum/status...71217127624704

    Have to say I'm rather surprised on your stance on this. You can have both - political persecution /violence towards women. Sessions is totally co-oping his OWN DOJ.

    And I stand by my original statement - this looks like an overt try to limit LEGAL immigration.
    Last edited by HayJenn; 11th June 2018 at 02:40 PM.

  8. #18
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    52,640
    Thanks
    40511

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by excalibur View Post
    Why? We have an obligation first to the American people. There are plenty of Latin American nations where these folks can get asylum.
    Really? You do know that most governments in Central America are corrupt right?

    As we are a nation of immigrants, it's deplorable that we turn our backs on these people.

  9. #19
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    64,915
    Thanks
    36470

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    In 2014, the Board of Immigration Appeals found that married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationships are eligible for asylum in the US. It opened the door for some domestic violence victims to seek safety in the United States.

    Countless women who are the victims of domestic violence in Central America flee north (some with their children) because the police in their home countries are unable to protect them. They are also terrorized by gang violence - constant death threats to them and their children.

    But Jeff Sessions thinks these women aren't eligible for asylum because their husbands are only violent to them - not all women.

    The original case he is overturning - Matter of A-R-C-G- - correctly pointed out that women who can't leave their relationships do have characteristics that make them unique in society.

    Read the entire thread here

    https://twitter.com/karalynum/status...71217127624704

    Have to say I'm rather surprised on your stance on this. You can have both - political persecution /violence towards women. Sessions is totally co-oping his OWN DOJ.

    And I stand by my original statement - this looks like an overt try to limit LEGAL immigration.
    I disagree. It's hardly a settled question because some oversight board (appointed by a president) made a decision. Something done under one president can be undone by another administration.

    In point of fact, it's just not workable to offer asylum to people whose oppressive conditions are clearly not political.
    Last edited by Rasselas; 11th June 2018 at 02:58 PM.

  10. #20
    "Mr. Original". the watchman's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    81,397
    Thanks
    43900

    From
    becoming more and more

    Jeff Sessions Orders Judges to Stop Granting Asylum to Victims of Gang Violence, Dome

    The Trump administration is taking more steps to inhumanely respond to immigrants looking for refuge in the U.S. According to the Los Angeles Times, Attorney General Jeff Sessions is ordering immigration judges to stop granting asylum to victims of domestic abuse and gang violence.

    This comes on the heels of strict enforcement of the practice of separating families at the border, a move the United Nations has dubbed as a "serious violation," and moving ICE detainees to federal prisons. The new order would block thousands of people, especially women, from reaching asylum after fleeing violence in their home countries.

    Judges will be required to take Sessions ruling into account when decided on asylum cases. Sessions issued this decision under the precedent that domestic violence is a “private” matter and does not make anyone eligible for asylum in the U.S.

    “Generally, claims by aliens pertaining to domestic violence or gang violence perpetrated by non-governmental actors will not qualify for asylum,” Sessions said in his ruling. “The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes—such as domestic violence or gang violence—or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim.”


    https://www.complex.com/life/2018/06...domestic-abuse

    so , what happens if the judges tell Sessions to go piss up a rope?

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Decriminalizing domestic violence
    By The Man in forum Sexuality
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 3rd December 2017, 03:20 PM
  2. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 1st March 2017, 10:43 AM
  3. NFL: New Domestic Violence Consequences
    By boontito in forum Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 31st August 2014, 08:28 PM
  4. Domestic Violence
    By Gypsy in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 22nd September 2010, 04:17 AM
  5. On Domestic Violence in the US
    By MisterE in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 24th May 2007, 03:42 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed