Immigration Reform Needs to Come from Congress

   Will my president -- our president -- enact new immigration standards so far-reaching as to allow those illegally to remain if they have close family who are citizens?
   That's one of the rumored things he might use his executive power to do as he seeks to overhaul our immigration system. It is said when we speak of executive power, President Obama is going to stretch to the limits and make a move that may define his presidency.
   I would like bold changes, real reform -- but not by executive power.  I would love to see more of the poor coming here allowed to remain here. But not by executive decree.
 

The Child Goes Through All This, Only to be Deported?

   'Tis late, and I do not have time to study on this, but am wondering about the T Visa, which, I believe, is the visa that allows some child immigrants to be in the U.S. If I understand correctly, you have to be a victim of human trafficking, and you have to help prosecute the coyote who brought you across.
   I'm just wondering how many kids fit that category.
   Now, if I understand it correctly, the children, in most cases, are be turned over to Health and Human Services within 48 hours of their being apprehended, and then follows a process to determine if they shall stay. So, most all are legal to be here for as long as they are in the process.
   My fear is, if they don't meet the Coyote Rule (as I shall call it), then all is eventually for not and they will be deported. They have braved crossing Mexico and the border, and been subjected to detention camps (I thank those who care for them and am sure most make it as loving of an environment as possible, still, they remain, technically, detention camps) in the U.S., only to be tossed on their ears right back to their countries of origin.
   Hope I'm wrong. We can't treat children this way.

Only About 2 Percent Were Not Allowed to Stay in Days of Ellis Island

   "I have nothing against immigration, just do it legally," so many say. They point to the days of Ellis Island, when immigrants came legally and were welcome.
   The borders were largely open borders in the early days of Ellis Island, so most everybody was legal. I, too, wish for the days of Ellis Island -- I wish we would make it as easy for people to come as we did back then.
   In the very first days of Ellis Island, I don't know if there were any restrictions. Maybe so. I do know that by 1907, there were restrictions against criminals, those who had diseases, those who had work contracts, political radicals, prostitutes, the insane, the feebleminded, and those judged likely to end up on public welfare. Ellis Island was there to weed those out. But, even at that, it was largely a matter of showing up, being processed, and staying. Only about 2 percent of those who showed up were denied.
 

Is Mockery of Obama Justified?

   "Is there one among you that doth make a mock of his brother, or that heapeth upon him persecutions?"  So we are asked in the LDS scripture Alma 5:30.
   I wonder how we might think this scripture does not apply to our condemning of political leaders. I think of the continual mockery of President Obama, not that the mocking between Democrats and Republicans does not go both ways.
   I will, though, wonder if some mockery is okay. I think of Elijah mocking the priests of Baal when they could not call down fire from heaven. "And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked" (I Kings 18:27).
    Where do we draw the line, in when our mocking is justified and when it is not? I must give that some thought.

Maybe Here's Why Immigrant Child isn't Quickly Going to Mom and Dad

   Ever wonder why we don't here stories about the child immigrants being reunited with their parents? Ever wonder why we aren't hearing anything about the custodian rights of the parents? Well, I think I found the answer for you tonight while I was reading the law.
   Government, as government often is wont to do, created a process.

   Yes, that 2008 law Bush signed that we are hearing so much about might license the children to be here, but it also makes it a process before they can be reunited to their parents -- or placed in any foster home at all.

   No such thing as whisking them right up the street to Mom and Dad.

   The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 says the child shall be turned over to Health and Human Services within 48 hours. You know that part. 

  But it is once Health and Human Services gets involved that the process gets involved. HHS must determine the suitability of the proposed custodian, even if the custodian is to be the parents. It suggests the parents might be "not viable due to abuse, neglect, abandonment or a similar basis."

   Me? I like the idea of whisking them right up the street to Mom and Dad, first, and then judging whether the parents are worthy, afterwords. And, I don't like the idea of being too critical of Mom and Dad. If there is not clear reason to keep the children from their parents, they should be with them.

   Maybe some of the children are quickly reunited with their folks. Maybe I am wrong in thinking they are not. But, from reading the law, it does appear to me it does not facilitate a quick reunion with Mom and Dad. In fact, the law questions whether the child should be reunited with the parents, at all. 
   Maybe there is other reason I've not heard (to my memory) about a child being reunited with its folks. After all, for as long as this has been going on, it does seem that even if there is a drawn-out process, some would be with their folks by now.

http://www.state.gov/j/tip/laws/113178.htm