4 ms·
TL;DR: rules are being restored to what they were almost 3 years into the Obama administration. Phony hypothetical cases are presented to criticize this. Plus,
by masonic 8y ago
TL;DR: rules are being restored to what they were almost 3 years into the Obama administration. Phony hypothetical cases are presented to criticize this. Plus, he overstates its effects to "all non-citizens", falsely implying that Permanent Residents are at risk (they aren't unless they committed fraud to get PR status and the government can prove that).
- eesmith 8y agoHuh. I didn't get that at all from the piece. I think what you wrote isn't a "TL,DR" summary, but a criticism. For example, you write "he overstates its effects to "all non-citizens", falsely implying that Permanent Residents are at risk". Where does that occur in the text? The title is "A quiet change in US policy threatens immigrants who apply for a change in status" and the specific claim of the change is (emphasis mine in both cases): > On June 28, USCIS announced that non-citizens who apply for a “benefit”–such as an extension or change of status, a green card, or citizenship—would be placed in deportation proceedings if that benefit is denied. I see nothing which suggests or implies "all non-citizens." I think you also overstate things with your statement "rules are being restored to what they were almost 3 years into the Obama administration." At the surface level, for example, the linked-to policy memorandum points out the effect of Yith v. Nielsen, so it's not exactly the same. I have not been able to find Policy Memorandum No. 110, Disposition of Cases Involving Removable Aliens, dated July 11, 2006, which was the previous policy memorandum on the topic. Could you point me to it? In any case, I don't think the US deportation policies under Obama or Bush were all that just.