4 ms·

> Part of what people like the author are trying to do is to help people who made the documented -> undocumented transition to complete their undocumented -> do

> Part of what people like the author are trying to do is to help people who made the documented -> undocumented transition to complete their undocumented -> documented transition before ICE an export them somewhere. Can you provide an example of such transition (for the context of the discussion)?

vel0city 1y ago
As an example, sometimes the time it takes for things to be processed can be longer than the timeframe one has to actually submit extension paperwork. This can lead to gaps where one loses their status temporarily and may have several months where its illegal for them to work in the country. This is true of a lot of workflows in USCIS.
- reliabilityguy 1y ago
  > This can lead to gaps where one loses their status temporarily and may have several months where its illegal for them to work in the country. What status do they loose? Right to work (i.e., having a valid EAD card) and immigration status are two different things. > This is true of a lot of workflows in USCIS. Their workloads increased significantly over the past 3-4 years due to various factors, unfortunately.
  - vel0city 1y ago
    > Right to work (i.e., having a valid EAD card) and immigration status are two different things They're extremely intertwined and often practically the same thing. They become an "illegal migrant" for continuing to work to pay for groceries and rent while not having a lawful status allowing such activity. A deportable offense, correct? > Their workloads increased significantly over the past 3-4 years due to various factors, unfortunately. Good job showing your true colors. Issues like this have existed for decades. I know of people that struggled in this exact scenario in the 90s and 2000s, and I was only a child at the time. Maybe we should have passed that bipartisan immigration bill the orange man said no to which would have actually funded processing the workload. In the end though this administration doesn't want these people, they want to send them to prison camps. You can tell by watching what they do, raiding people showing up to their court proceedings, sending them to hellhole detention facilities without any due process, and ignoring court decisions.
    - reliabilityguy 1y ago
      > They're extremely intertwined and often practically the same thing. Well, no? You can have a valid status but without right to work. For example, B1/2 or F-2 visas. > They become an "illegal migrant" for continuing to work to pay for groceries and rent while not having a lawful status allowing such activity. This is not true. Working without authorization is simply that: unauthorized employment. By itself it does not lead to become an illegal immigrant. However, it can jeopardize future changes in status, etc. > Good job showing your true colors. What? > I know of people that struggled in this exact scenario in the 90s and 2000s, and I was only a child at the time. Which are what? > Maybe we should have passed that immigration bill the orange man said no to which would have actually funded processing the workload. Biden could have done it during his term in 2020-22: he had both the senate and the house. Yet, he didn’t. It’s extremely naive to think that lack of reform is due to Trump. No party is interested in changing the status quo. Especially, if you consider how anti illegal immigration the Democratic Party was pre 2021 or so (enough to watch Bernie’s interviews pre 2020).
      - vel0city 1y ago
        Working without authorization is being an illegal migrant being an "illegal immigrant". They're doing things here not allowed by any kind of visa or authorization they may or may not have. Kind of one of the problems with the term, you'll define it one way while others will define it another. You're showing your true colors suggesting this issue happened during Biden's term, and now you're both sides-ing the issue. One side's solution was passing an immigration reform bill and hiring more judges and administration to handle the influx in applications. The others is to send people to CECOT and other prison camps with no due process (even those with legal status) and ignore the courts. They're not the same.
        reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > Working without authorization is being an illegal migrant being an "illegal immigrant". No. Illegal immigrant is someone who entered without inspection, or someone who overstayed their visa (e.g., B1 tourist admitted for 90 days, and who failed to leave the US). See here, for example, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/illegal_immigrant https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/illegal_immigrant In contrast to that, the same individual on B1 visa admitted for 90 days who decided to work without authorization, and caught, will not be considered illegal immigrant, because they are in the country legally even though they violate some terms of their visa. Of course, when caught they probably will be deported, which again won't make them illegal immigrants. I do not know why can accept that these are two different definitions. I personally know F-2 visa holders who had to not work between EADs. It did not make them illegal immigrants, because they had a valid status. > You're showing your true colors suggesting this issue happened during Biden's term, and now you're both sides-ing the issue. One side's solution was passing an immigration reform bill and hiring more judges and administration to handle the influx in applications. The others is to send people to CECOT and other prison camps with no due process (even those with legal status) and ignore the courts. They're not the same. I am sorry, but I do not plan to engage in emotions and hypotheticals as it is not constructive and leads nowhere.

vel0city 1y ago

As an example, sometimes the time it takes for things to be processed can be longer than the timeframe one has to actually submit extension paperwork. This can lead to gaps where one loses their status temporarily and may have several months where its illegal for them to work in the country. This is true of a lot of workflows in USCIS.

reliabilityguy 1y ago
> This can lead to gaps where one loses their status temporarily and may have several months where its illegal for them to work in the country. What status do they loose? Right to work (i.e., having a valid EAD card) and immigration status are two different things. > This is true of a lot of workflows in USCIS. Their workloads increased significantly over the past 3-4 years due to various factors, unfortunately.
- vel0city 1y ago
  > Right to work (i.e., having a valid EAD card) and immigration status are two different things They're extremely intertwined and often practically the same thing. They become an "illegal migrant" for continuing to work to pay for groceries and rent while not having a lawful status allowing such activity. A deportable offense, correct? > Their workloads increased significantly over the past 3-4 years due to various factors, unfortunately. Good job showing your true colors. Issues like this have existed for decades. I know of people that struggled in this exact scenario in the 90s and 2000s, and I was only a child at the time. Maybe we should have passed that bipartisan immigration bill the orange man said no to which would have actually funded processing the workload. In the end though this administration doesn't want these people, they want to send them to prison camps. You can tell by watching what they do, raiding people showing up to their court proceedings, sending them to hellhole detention facilities without any due process, and ignoring court decisions.
  - reliabilityguy 1y ago
    > They're extremely intertwined and often practically the same thing. Well, no? You can have a valid status but without right to work. For example, B1/2 or F-2 visas. > They become an "illegal migrant" for continuing to work to pay for groceries and rent while not having a lawful status allowing such activity. This is not true. Working without authorization is simply that: unauthorized employment. By itself it does not lead to become an illegal immigrant. However, it can jeopardize future changes in status, etc. > Good job showing your true colors. What? > I know of people that struggled in this exact scenario in the 90s and 2000s, and I was only a child at the time. Which are what? > Maybe we should have passed that immigration bill the orange man said no to which would have actually funded processing the workload. Biden could have done it during his term in 2020-22: he had both the senate and the house. Yet, he didn’t. It’s extremely naive to think that lack of reform is due to Trump. No party is interested in changing the status quo. Especially, if you consider how anti illegal immigration the Democratic Party was pre 2021 or so (enough to watch Bernie’s interviews pre 2020).
    - vel0city 1y ago
      Working without authorization is being an illegal migrant being an "illegal immigrant". They're doing things here not allowed by any kind of visa or authorization they may or may not have. Kind of one of the problems with the term, you'll define it one way while others will define it another. You're showing your true colors suggesting this issue happened during Biden's term, and now you're both sides-ing the issue. One side's solution was passing an immigration reform bill and hiring more judges and administration to handle the influx in applications. The others is to send people to CECOT and other prison camps with no due process (even those with legal status) and ignore the courts. They're not the same.
      - reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > Working without authorization is being an illegal migrant being an "illegal immigrant". No. Illegal immigrant is someone who entered without inspection, or someone who overstayed their visa (e.g., B1 tourist admitted for 90 days, and who failed to leave the US). See here, for example, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/illegal_immigrant https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/illegal_immigrant In contrast to that, the same individual on B1 visa admitted for 90 days who decided to work without authorization, and caught, will not be considered illegal immigrant, because they are in the country legally even though they violate some terms of their visa. Of course, when caught they probably will be deported, which again won't make them illegal immigrants. I do not know why can accept that these are two different definitions. I personally know F-2 visa holders who had to not work between EADs. It did not make them illegal immigrants, because they had a valid status. > You're showing your true colors suggesting this issue happened during Biden's term, and now you're both sides-ing the issue. One side's solution was passing an immigration reform bill and hiring more judges and administration to handle the influx in applications. The others is to send people to CECOT and other prison camps with no due process (even those with legal status) and ignore the courts. They're not the same. I am sorry, but I do not plan to engage in emotions and hypotheticals as it is not constructive and leads nowhere.