Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 24 posts

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#11

Post by saalweachter »

jbob2000 wrote: post #7
kumarm wrote: post #2

[Currently, immigration law dictates that only 7 percent of the green cards issued each year can be given to residents of any one country. Mr. Yoder noted that between 230,000 and two million Indian workers are in line for a green card, which means that they could be waiting for decades, if not longer.] It really puts Immigrants from populous countries like India and China at disadvantage. Personally I waited for 12…

This is a good thing. You end up with cultural ghettos if too many people from one culture move to a place too quickly.

Yeah, the Midwest's culture was irreparably damaged by the large numbers of Germans and Scandinavians who moved there all at once.

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#12

Post by seabta »

It sounds like it put her at risk of losing her visa, not at risk of being deported. If she lost her visa, and then made the decision to break our laws by staying, only then would she be at any risk of being deported.

Saying she was at risk of being deported makes it sound like she was already here illegally.

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#13

Post by anigbrowl »

moneytalks wrote: post #4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_cases_make_bad_law The situation sucks and you can't help but feel terrible for her, but please let's not change the law based on this. And if we do, let's deport the murderer to the middle of the Pacific ocean. Immigration laws need to change, but not in response to this.

LEgal change shouldn't be based off specific cases, but under title 8 the attorney-general and his designates has very broad discretion to intervene in individual cases, partly because of the difficulty of crafting one-size-fits-all solutions.

Incidentally, when you hear immigration hardlines talking about how DACA was unconstitutional, I suggest you take that with a big pinch of salt. The previous administration essentially systematized the same criteria they were using for prioritizing individual enforcement decisions and while this was the administrative equivalent of a giant band-aid on an annoying political problem, I don't think there was any legal barrier to their doing so as it did not create any ew powers or positions in the executive branch that would have required congressional approval.

Unfortunately, because immigration law is so complex, arbitrary, and politicized, and because those subject to it are generally ineligible to vote, the quality of information in the media and public debate are abysmal. I don't blame the public for its ignorance of the topic; I've seen practising criminal lawyers' jaws sag open at the discovery that there is a essentially a parallel custodial system whose rules they knew nothing about. Most people aren't aware, for example, that someone picked up on an immigration violation can be detained for up to 6 months without a hearing - and that 6 months is not written anywhere in the law, but was the interim choice of a court faced with a law that doesn't provide for hearings in some cases, and a constitution that requires them.

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#14

Post by joshAg »

moneytalks wrote: post #4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_cases_make_bad_law The situation sucks and you can't help but feel terrible for her, but please let's not change the law based on this. And if we do, let's deport the murderer to the middle of the Pacific ocean. Immigration laws need to change, but not in response to this.

There is already law for this.

There's already a visa for victims. It's temporary, but it's called a U Visa.

There's already a visa for skilled workers like her. It's called an H1b Visa.

If her husband had an h1b visa that allowed both him and her to work in the US, which seems to be the case since the story indicates that she was employed as a software engineer too, why shouldn't she be able to assume that visa if her husband dies or chooses to leave the US, assuming she qualifies on her own for the same visa. Really, what about this case is extreme wrt to immigration? If you consider this an extreme case that pattern matches /hard cases make bad law/, then what would average circumstances look like and how would they differ from this?

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#15

Post by anigbrowl »

megous wrote: post #8
moneytalks wrote: post #4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_cases_make_bad_law The situation sucks and you can't help but feel terrible for her, but please let's not change the law based on this. And if we do, let's deport the murderer to the middle of the Pacific ocean. Immigration laws need to change, but not in response to this.

> And if we do, let's deport the murderer to the middle of the Pacific ocean. Why should other countries care for or suffer your country's criminals? Of course, unless you meant some uninhabited island or dropping him in the water... Other than that, keep him.

I read this as meaning he should be set adrift on a lifeboat or somesuch. I do feel a proxy anger towards the murderer, but I'm not a fan of making legally annoying people just disappear because that quickly becomes the go-to solution in tough times.

Another reason that I don't want to just forget about that guy is because he's not a bizarre exception, but partly the product of xenophobic nationalism churned out by some political actors over decades for fun and profit. Immigrants can be conveniently scapegoated for issues as diverse as unemployment, national security, industrial policy, and abortion. The increasing fragmentation of media consumption eventually results in epistemological detachment.

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#16

Post by calvinbhai »

eanzenberg wrote: post #6
kumarm wrote: post #2

[Currently, immigration law dictates that only 7 percent of the green cards issued each year can be given to residents of any one country. Mr. Yoder noted that between 230,000 and two million Indian workers are in line for a green card, which means that they could be waiting for decades, if not longer.] It really puts Immigrants from populous countries like India and China at disadvantage. Personally I waited for 12…

I mean that limitation makes sense when optimizing for diversity.

You are right.

Only thing that needs to be changed is instead of taking population of a country as a metric, should consider race, language, and particular god the applicant believes in as a metric, if it is truly "optimizing for diversity".

The way it stands, all Caucasian, Jesus believing (or not believing) europeans or the Arabic, Allah believing (or not believing) middle-eastern populations have no line, but wide variety (language, god / religious belief, race) of people from India have a long line, because its been "optimized for diversity"

Its just an "Indians and Chinese Exclusion Act" similar to Chinese Exclusion Act under the garb of "Diversity".

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#17

Post by calvinbhai »

jbob2000 wrote: post #7
kumarm wrote: post #2

[Currently, immigration law dictates that only 7 percent of the green cards issued each year can be given to residents of any one country. Mr. Yoder noted that between 230,000 and two million Indian workers are in line for a green card, which means that they could be waiting for decades, if not longer.] It really puts Immigrants from populous countries like India and China at disadvantage. Personally I waited for 12…

This is a good thing. You end up with cultural ghettos if too many people from one culture move to a place too quickly.

Totally agree with you.

Based on your logic, Charlottesville would never have happened, if there were fewer white people in the US

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#18

Post by anigbrowl »

joshAg wrote: post #14
moneytalks wrote: post #4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_cases_make_bad_law The situation sucks and you can't help but feel terrible for her, but please let's not change the law based on this. And if we do, let's deport the murderer to the middle of the Pacific ocean. Immigration laws need to change, but not in response to this.

There is already law for this. There's already a visa for victims. It's temporary, but it's called a U Visa. There's already a visa for skilled workers like her. It's called an H1b Visa. If her husband had an h1b visa that allowed both him and her to work in the US, which seems to be the case since the story indicates that she was employed as a software engineer too, why shouldn't she be able to assume that visa if h…

You ask some good questions, but the basic problem is that you're thinking of a visa as being similar to a transferable property interest. It isn't, and the administrative, temporal, and fiscal costs of adjusting immigration status are pretty high for an individual.

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#19

Post by joshAg »

anigbrowl wrote: post #18
joshAg wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is already law for this. There's already a visa for victims. It's temporary, but it's called a U Visa. There's already a visa for skilled workers like her. It's called an H1b Visa. If her husband had an h1b visa that allowed both him and her to work in the US, which seems to be the case since the story indicates that she was employed as a software engineer too, why shouldn't she be able to assume that visa if h…

You ask some good questions, but the basic problem is that you're thinking of a visa as being similar to a transferable property interest. It isn't, and the administrative, temporal, and fiscal costs of adjusting immigration status are pretty high for an individual.

Oh I know that's not the case today, but I'm asking OP to justify why law shouldn't be created/modified to handle this sort of situation.

Re: Killing in Kansas Bar Put Victim’s Widow at Risk of Deportation

#20

Post by nucleardog »

saalweachter wrote: post #11
jbob2000 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a good thing. You end up with cultural ghettos if too many people from one culture move to a place too quickly.

Yeah, the Midwest's culture was irreparably damaged by the large numbers of Germans and Scandinavians who moved there all at once.

I get the knee-jerk reaction to anything like this is to shout "THAT'S RACIST" and get on with life, but this is definitely a thing that's happening. Whether it's damaging or not is a separate question.

My partner is, for the sake of argument and to remove emotion, let's say Romulan. She came here from Romulus over 10 years ago to attend school. Her parents have started coming here in the past year or two on and off.

In the couple years I've been with her, I've come to discover there's an entire shadow society of Romulans operating within the city I live in that doesn't operate by the laws or regulations that the rest of society operates under. Admission is granted on the basis of being Romulan.

None of these people, including my partner for the first decade she was here, really have or had any incentive to participate in the existing society. It's much less effort to only associate with other Romulans. They have more immediately in common with them, and fewer barriers. And they can get everything they need from the other Romulans.

I have no wish for these people to give up their culture. Our existing culture is described as a "cultural mosaic" - many people's own cultures getting along. I think that's just fine. And I appreciate getting to experience everyone's culture (within the bounds of some basic ideals such as our stance towards human rights and equality).

The isolation does concern me. If there's no effort to intentionally cohabitate except in the sense of physical proximity - to just generally understand each other - I can see an issue of empathy arising. I can see some pretty destructive divides forming or deepening, as in the case of the current xenophobia.

I don't think that's sustainable long term.

Post reply on HN