Is Obama's Admin Right in not Upholding the Law?

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
LIMA, Peru – Seven-year-old Daisy Cuevas, thrilled to see herself on television with U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama, didn't quite understand the predicament in which she had innocently placed her undocumented Peruvian parents


"My mom says that Barack Obama is taking away everybody that doesn't have papers," Daisy told the U.S. first lady on May 19 at the New Hampshire Estates Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland.

"Well, that's something that we have to work on, right, to make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers," Michelle Obama replied.

"But my mom doesn't have papers," said Daisy, a U.S. citizen by virtue of her birth.

The color immediately drained from her mother's face. She ran crying to call her parents in Lima, then went into hiding, fearful of being deported.

These are tense times for people like Daisy's mother, a maid who arrived in the United States with her carpenter husband when she was two months pregnant with Daisy.

Daisy's parents are fearful of U.S. anti-immigrant sentiment, which for many Latin Americans is epitomized by an Arizona law taking effect in July that gives police the right to demand ID papers of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has said it is not pursuing Daisy's parents. Immigration investigations, it said in a statement, "are based on making sure the law is followed and not on a question-and-answer discussion in a classroom."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100531/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_peru_girl_immigration
 
Yurt said:
LIMA, Peru – Seven-year-old Daisy Cuevas, thrilled to see herself on television with U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama, didn't quite understand the predicament in which she had innocently placed her undocumented Peruvian parents


"My mom says that Barack Obama is taking away everybody that doesn't have papers," Daisy told the U.S. first lady on May 19 at the New Hampshire Estates Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland.

"Well, that's something that we have to work on, right, to make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers," Michelle Obama replied.

"But my mom doesn't have papers," said Daisy, a U.S. citizen by virtue of her birth.

The color immediately drained from her mother's face. She ran crying to call her parents in Lima, then went into hiding, fearful of being deported.

These are tense times for people like Daisy's mother, a maid who arrived in the United States with her carpenter husband when she was two months pregnant with Daisy.

Daisy's parents are fearful of U.S. anti-immigrant sentiment, which for many Latin Americans is epitomized by an Arizona law taking effect in July that gives police the right to demand ID papers of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has said it is not pursuing Daisy's parents. Immigration investigations, it said in a statement, "are based on making sure the law is followed and not on a question-and-answer discussion in a classroom."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100531/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_peru_girl_immigration
Click to expand...

I would like to know what parent tells their 7 year old, that they don't have papers!! :palm:

I guess I"m missing something with my dinner table conversations.
 
why is the obama administration not upholding the law? on purpose....isn't that part of being the president and a member of the state bar?
 
I'll try and play devils advocate here. Since all they to go on at the moment is the words of a minor, wouldn't that be inadmisseble as evidence in criminal proceedings? I'm not a lawyer or anything, but it seems to me that just because a little girl said something, doesn't make it arrest worthy.
 
Yog-Sothoth said:
I'll try and play devils advocate here. Since all they to go on at the moment is the words of a minor, wouldn't that be inadmisseble as evidence in criminal proceedings? I'm not a lawyer or anything, but it seems to me that just because a little girl said something, doesn't make it arrest worthy.
Click to expand...

Don't give up your day job~

Investigating the allegation is certainly the purview of ICE. If a little girl says someone is molesting her they get investigated.
 
Sounds to me like a trumped up story with the purpose of demonizing legislation and actions which are designed to enforce immigration law.
 
Yog-Sothoth said:
I'll try and play devils advocate here. Since all they to go on at the moment is the words of a minor, wouldn't that be inadmisseble as evidence in criminal proceedings? I'm not a lawyer or anything, but it seems to me that just because a little girl said something, doesn't make it arrest worthy.
Click to expand...

no...in fact, this is enough probable cause to get a warrant...parents have been searched/arrested for comments just like this (abuse etc..)
 
why do you doubt the comment? it was on multiple news sources, the press cites they have talked to the mother and the president of their home country spoke about what this girl said...and obama's admin said they weren't pursuing it, not that the comment was never made
 
Yurt said:
no...in fact, this is enough probable cause to get a warrant...parents have been searched/arrested for comments just like this (abuse etc..)
Click to expand...
Well, I gave it a shot. That's why I can't be a lawyer. I can't argue effectively for something/someone I don't really believe in.
 
Yurt said:
why do you doubt the comment? it was on multiple news sources, the press cites they have talked to the mother and the president of their home country spoke about what this girl said...and obama's admin said they weren't pursuing it, not that the comment was never made
Click to expand...
Me? I don't doubt it. Just trying to play the opposite side of your argument.
 
Yurt said:
why do you doubt the comment? it was on multiple news sources, the press cites they have talked to the mother and the president of their home country spoke about what this girl said...and obama's admin said they weren't pursuing it, not that the comment was never made
Click to expand...
Because I seriously doubt the girl's parents would have said anything to her about not having papers.

Note that the playback of the student interaction does NOT include the girl's supposed statement of her mother not having any papers. All it includes is the question about Obama kicking out people who don't. So WHY DOES IT CUT OFF?

As far as the Obama administration not refuting that the statement was made - it is in their interest to make this thing a big deal - to try to shame those who support stricter enforcement of immigration law.

If anyone has a link that shows the girl making the statement, I'll have to admit I'm wrong. But as of now, they way they fade it out without waiting for the girl's supposed statement, but DO present the question about deportation, it makes me think that the fishy smell doesn't come with chips and a coke.

Okay - I was wrong, The girl said it while the first lady was still talking, so I missed it.
 
Last edited:
Good Luck said:
Because I seriously doubt the girl's parents would have said anything to her about not having papers.

Note that the playback of the student interaction does NOT include the girl's supposed statement of her mother not having any papers. All it includes is the question about Obama kicking out people who don't. So WHY DOES IT CUT OFF?

As far as the Obama administration not refuting that the statement was made - it is in their interest to make this thing a big deal - to try to shame those who support stricter enforcement of immigration law.

If anyone has a link that shows the girl making the statement, I'll have to admit I'm wrong. But as of now, they way they fade it out without waiting for the girl's supposed statement, but DO present the question about deportation, it makes me think that the fishy smell doesn't come with chips and a coke.

Okay - I was wrong, The girl said it while the first lady was still talking, so I missed it.
Click to expand...


I saw the original news clip and the girl definitely said her mom had no papers.
 
The executive has the right to enforce the law as it sees fit. There is no appropriate amount of enforcement or non-enforcement, and enforcement may very well be set at nothing. There is nothing wrong with this. Obama is a wise man for doing this wonderful gesture, and anyone who disagrees should be declared nonhuman and disposed of as we would a common pest.
 
Yurt said:
LIMA, Peru – Seven-year-old Daisy Cuevas, thrilled to see herself on television with U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama, didn't quite understand the predicament in which she had innocently placed her undocumented Peruvian parents

"My mom says that Barack Obama is taking away everybody that doesn't have papers," Daisy told the U.S. first lady on May 19 at the New Hampshire Estates Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland.

"Well, that's something that we have to work on, right, to make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers," Michelle Obama replied.

"But my mom doesn't have papers," said Daisy, a U.S. citizen by virtue of her birth.

The color immediately drained from her mother's face. She ran crying to call her parents in Lima, then went into hiding, fearful of being deported.

These are tense times for people like Daisy's mother, a maid who arrived in the United States with her carpenter husband when she was two months pregnant with Daisy.

Daisy's parents are fearful of U.S. anti-immigrant sentiment, which for many Latin Americans is epitomized by an Arizona law taking effect in July that gives police the right to demand ID papers of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has said it is not pursuing Daisy's parents. Immigration investigations, it said in a statement, "are based on making sure the law is followed and not on a question-and-answer discussion in a classroom."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100531/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_peru_girl_immigration
Click to expand...

I checked out the article.

(Excerpt) These are tense times for people like Daisy's mother, a maid who arrived in the United States with her carpenter husband when she was two months pregnant with Daisy............

While Daisy has automatic U.S. citizenship and lives full time with her parents, her 9-year-old sister, July, has not been so lucky. July was left behind with her grandparents when her parents moved to the United States to escape poverty.

The two sisters met for the first time last year when Daisy spent a month visiting her grandparents in the working-class San Juan de Lurigancho district of Lima.

But July misses her parents, who are unlikely to visit Peru because of their illegal status in the U.S. (End)

Let's take a closer look. Daisy's parents have been here for 7+ years. That would mean her sister, July, was 2 years old when her parents left "to escape poverty" while leaving their two year old daughter, July, to live in poverty.

Obviously, the parents had no intention of returning for their daughter. It would be different if they came here to make money for a year or two and then return but considering Daisy's mother has gone into hiding it means she has no intention of ever returning to the daughter she abandoned 7+ years ago.

So, I ask, "Is that the type of person one would want in their community, their country? Is a man or a woman who would abandon their two year old child for personal financial gain, for a better life for themselves without their daughter, the type of immigrant one would want?

As for all the cries of sympathy could someone tell me to whom the sympathy is directed? If it's towards Daisy let's not forget it's her mother and father who put her in the current situation. While abandoning their 2 year old daughter, July, seven years ago in order to get into the US should we now allow them to use their 7 year old daughter, Daisy, as a pawn to facilitate their citizenship?
 
Mr. Spite said:
The executive has the right to enforce the law as it sees fit. There is no appropriate amount of enforcement or non-enforcement, and enforcement may very well be set at nothing. There is nothing wrong with this. Obama is a wise man for doing this wonderful gesture, and anyone who disagrees should be declared nonhuman and disposed of as we would a common pest.
Click to expand...

great...so the president is not required to uphold the law if he doesn't want to

you're deranged
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top