Trace Bates 3

[asta]

As some have mentioned they could homeschool in Austria. But the children have to take a test at the end of every school year and if they fail, that's the end, no more homeschooling. 

[käsekuchen]

I wonder whether Trace, Lydia and Ryker will move to Ireland until Lydia's visa for the USA is sorted. They'd be allowed to homeschool (if the process takes longer/she's banned from entering the country for some time*) and Trace would not have to learn German.

*I'm not too clear on that, I've read both that she'd be banned from entry for some years and that she wouldn't.

[medimus]

5 minutes ago, käsekuchen said:

I wonder whether Trace, Lydia and Ryker will move to Ireland until Lydia's visa for the USA is sorted. They'd be allowed to homeschool (if the process takes longer/she's banned from entering the country for some time*) and Trace would not have to learn German.

*I'm not too clear on that, I've read both that she'd be banned from entry for some years and that she wouldn't.

Oh god, I don't want them here, thanks!

Though they might get on well with the Burke family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burke_family_(Castlebar) They are a mad evangelical family.

[noseybutt]

5 hours ago, Smash! said:

Yet Lydia and Trace are adults. They knew she doesn‘t have permanent residence. Probably they thought marrying would solve that. But that goes for so many people who think they can just stay with their American boyfriend/girlfriend after the 90 days are over. When they get married an run into problems with immigration the tone is usually „you should have informed yourself how immigration works before deciding to stay here“. 

Yes, Lydias parents made a horrible decision but she is an adult.

See, I think it's a lot more complicated than that. (For Lydia, but a thousand times more so for the more "typical" Dreamers.)

Her family was given a deferred status, which as I understand did not grant right to work as an employee--but could, for example, legally be allowed to start a business. It was basically an agreement they could stay in the US and not be be deported, but it was clear from the get-go that there was no path to a green card or citizenship. It complicates everything from university admission, access to student aid, health insurance, employment, etc. (Less so in California which has intentionally created programs to assist Dreamers and keep them here.)

Lydia had to have known how precarious all this is/was.

The traditional routes to legalization for a foreign spouse involve applications in the home country. Which, with her deferred status, would not have been an immediate option. Once she left the country, there was no legal path to return. Because of the high profile nature of her family, I am guessing most immigration attorneys would have been very nervous about this.

I don't recall her exact age when she left Germany, but Lydia is not educated at even the high school level in her native country. She effectively has limited options there if she were to return--she is not education or acculturated, even less so than she is here in the US.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not saying this as Poor Lydia. The girl has money and access to attorneys and an American husband and a thousand other things that more typical asylum seekers and Dreamers DO NOT HAVE. She is also from a family and culture that is downright hateful towards any asylum seeker that does not look like them or believe like them. Horrible people.

I'm just pointing out that US immigration is hecka more complicated and draconian than most people realize. Personally, I think parents and spouses should always be kept together. It makes no sense to grant a baby immediate citizenship but deport the mother. The whole idea that conservatives truly believed in "parental rights" (as if there is such a thing) is completely bogus if you look at how they write immigration policy.






 

4 hours ago, CarrotCake said:

And the countries in Europe that permit homeschooling are the mainly Catholic countries while the Protestant countries mostly have more restrictions.

Yes, this is a very interesting trend. I am guessing it goes to the social contract/social welfare state of many of the Northern European and Scandinavian countries. 

Back in 2013, the UK was a possible exception to this. My understanding is that they were quite open to homeschoolers and would also have been a logical choice for the family. But then Brexit...

[käsekuchen]

1 hour ago, medimus said:

Oh god, I don't want them here, thanks!

Though they might get on well with the Burke family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burke_family_(Castlebar) They are a mad evangelical family.

Holy shit, mad indeed. I think I need to google them some more.

[Hasunah2]

18 minutes ago, käsekuchen said:

Holy shit, mad indeed. I think I need to google them some more.

It's hilarious because the guy is trying to serve life as martyr for a civil contempt .

[rebeccawriter01]

3 hours ago, käsekuchen said:

I wonder whether Trace, Lydia and Ryker will move to Ireland until Lydia's visa for the USA is sorted. They'd be allowed to homeschool (if the process takes longer/she's banned from entering the country for some time*) and Trace would not have to learn German.

*I'm not too clear on that, I've read both that she'd be banned from entry for some years and that she wouldn't.

So the banning question - I have dealt with this with a family member in a marriage situation like Lydia and Trace. 

At this moment, Lydia is left with two choices:

1. She self-deports. This would mean she leaves on her own, at her own expense, waives the right to appear before a judge, and signs that she overstayed her visa or whatever ICE claims. With no judge involvement and no criminal activity, she would be free to apply for residency - green card, visa, etc. from Germany or wherever she landed. This would be immediate and without risk of a ban from re-entry.

2. If she doesn't self-deport, she is due a hearing before a judge and can plead her case. However, this isn't about an emotional plea that many think. This is about whether she is legally allowed to remain in the country based on the law and the law alone. In appearing before the judge, they (the judge) would determine when she would be deported, if she would be held in detention until then (unlikely but possible if they think she might run and hide), and if she so blatantly overstayed that she should be banned. It is unlikely given the facts as we know them, but personally I would not risk that. Upon deportation she could apply as mentioned in number one to return and re-unify with her husband. If the judge was in a bad mood or if she/Trace made comments about hiding, there was evidence that she was to have been deported earlier but lied, etc. - all hypothetical - then she could be banned between usually 3-10 years.

I use banning as an example of why she and her family should stop the petitioning and fighting. I get that her parents want to raise the younger two in the US. But at this point they and their supporters are trying to argue that all five of the German born children are needed in the US with their parents and siblings. To me this is an opportunity to do things permanently and legally. It's not so much a punishment but an opportunity. 

I am a big proponent for a path to citizenship for Dreamers. I think there should be options. However, I can't quite reconcile the Romaine family in the same boat. The grown children were done dirty by their parents in terms of preparing them for the future. However, that is a different issue from immigration. 

[klein_roeschen]

3 hours ago, noseybutt said:

Yes, this is a very interesting trend. I am guessing it goes to the social contract/social welfare state of many of the Northern European and Scandinavian countries. 

Back in 2013, the UK was a possible exception to this. My understanding is that they were quite open to homeschoolers and would also have been a logical choice for the family. But then Brexit...

Historically, the protestant rulers where the first ones to implement compulsory schooling for the children in their kingdoms/ dukedoms/ etc. Having educated citizens was seen as a feature in the beginning of industrialisation, because a citizen able to read could be better trained instead. Ernest the Pious  was the first german ruler who implemented schooling for every boy and girl in his dukedom, in freaking 1642.

The Anglican church is an interesting exception to that and has much more roots in catholicism than the mainland protestant churches. But maybe thats the difference between I do away with the catholic church so I can divorce my wife and marry my mistress and I do away with catholic church because I like and believe the new ideas of that Martin Luther guy.

3 hours ago, noseybutt said:

See, I think it's a lot more complicated than that. (For Lydia, but a thousand times more so for the more "typical" Dreamers.)

Her family was given a deferred status, which as I understand did not grant right to work as an employee--but could, for example, legally be allowed to start a business. It was basically an agreement they could stay in the US and not be be deported, but it was clear from the get-go that there was no path to a green card or citizenship. It complicates everything from university admission, access to student aid, health insurance, employment, etc. (Less so in California which has intentionally created programs to assist Dreamers and keep them here.)

Lydia had to have known how precarious all this is/was.

The traditional routes to legalization for a foreign spouse involve applications in the home country. Which, with her deferred status, would not have been an immediate option. Once she left the country, there was no legal path to return. Because of the high profile nature of her family, I am guessing most immigration attorneys would have been very nervous about this.

I don't recall her exact age when she left Germany, but Lydia is not educated at even the high school level in her native country. She effectively has limited options there if she were to return--she is not education or acculturated, even less so than she is here in the US.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not saying this as Poor Lydia. The girl has money and access to attorneys and an American husband and a thousand other things that more typical asylum seekers and Dreamers DO NOT HAVE. She is also from a family and culture that is downright hateful towards any asylum seeker that does not look like them or believe like them. Horrible people.

I'm just pointing out that US immigration is hecka more complicated and draconian than most people realize. Personally, I think parents and spouses should always be kept together. It makes no sense to grant a baby immediate citizenship but deport the mother. The whole idea that conservatives truly believed in "parental rights" (as if there is such a thing) is completely bogus if you look at how they write immigration policy.

The reason their parents became the poster family for the HSDLA was they refused to send their kids to school in Germany. They moved through the courts for years and the kids back then payed the price. Both by only going to school when the police came to their home and escorted them to the school and by being made the center of their parents fight. So whatever education she got back then was very likely sketchy and they where put in a very bright spot by being escorted to school by police, an effective way to make you an outcast in class. Than the family came to the US, again being put in a spotlight. But that was years ago and they knew they where in danger of being deported. They still thought and think they are extra special and should be handed a greencard on a silver platter. Good that they now have to face some legal backlash. It may be another way to fuck over their children, but most of them are now adults and it's time for them to lift themselves up by their bootstraps. Or whatever their political idols tell them about the immigrants, well the bad immigrants not the white fundie ones.

[HereticHick]

I'm disgusted that their Congresswoman has introduced a private bill on their behalf: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr5423/BILLS-118hr5423ih.pdf 

Although it is comforting that she has no cosponsors so far, https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5423 (not even Rep. Daniel Webster has signed on!), and the chances of this private bill making it into law are low: https://www.congress.gov/private-laws/118th-congress

Still, it isn't impossible. Congress passed 3 private immigration laws in the 117th Congress: https://www.congress.gov/private-laws/117th-congress 

Edited September 26, 2023 by HereticHick

[Jasmar]

They’ll get away with it somehow. They always do. I really really, really hope I’m wrong but I doubt it.

[AussieKrissy]

On 9/23/2023 at 12:12 AM, HereticHick said:

I'll come sit next to you. I want their entitled white asses deported.

take pics so us not able to be there can live vicariously lol 

[rebeccawriter01]

5 hours ago, HereticHick said:

I'm disgusted that their Congresswoman has introduced a private bill on their behalf: https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr5423/BILLS-118hr5423ih.pdf 

Although it is comforting that she has no cosponsors so far, https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5423 (not even Rep. Daniel Webster has signed on!), and the chances of this private bill making it into law are low: https://www.congress.gov/private-laws/118th-congress

Still, it isn't impossible. Congress passed 3 private immigration laws in the 117th Congress: https://www.congress.gov/private-laws/117th-congress 

The bill was referred to the Judiciary Committee, which has no scheduled meetings this week or next so far. Most of the things they have been voting on lately are dealing with Hunter Biden. There were three in the 117th, but that was a Democrat controlled House that claimed to want to work on immigration reforms. So it is not a surprise this is a first in this congress. Many elected officials won't touch immigration issues with a ten foot pole. My bet is that she simply introduced it to shut people like the Bates and Romeikes up and say that she tried to help. It would have to pass both chambers (getting out of committee on each) and be signed by the president. 

If Trace's story is right that they have to reappear in October before ICE, there isn't time for that to go through.

The woman who introduced it is a piece of work.  

[noseybutt]

The 3 private immigration bills mentioned by @HereticHickare super interesting. Two are high profile disabled adults who need to remain in the US for medical care. One is an overseas adoption never finalized correctly, woman left essentially stateless and unable to rectify the situation even with an active duty military husband.

It’s like a rabbit hole of the weird and dysfunctional immigration laws.

[medimus]

18 hours ago, käsekuchen said:

Holy shit, mad indeed. I think I need to google them some more.

Yep, utterly mad family with massive entitlement and persecution complexes 

[gobucks]

13 hours ago, rebeccawriter01 said:

Many elected officials won't touch immigration issues with a ten foot pole. 

Several comments I have seen have been that they need to get Alyssa's FIL on it. He is NOT interested politically in any way. I would be shocked if he even spoke publicly on their case. 

[llucie]

37 minutes ago, gobucks said:

Several comments I have seen have been that they need to get Alyssa's FIL on it. He is NOT interested politically in any way. I would be shocked if he even spoke publicly on their case. 

Isnt his whole thing being a champion of homeschooling. Seems like he should be interested in their case.

[Coconut Flan]

Even he knows a dead loss when he sees one.

[arareyeah]

I wonder if Taliban Dan refused to touch their case even as lip service only, would it cause a huge rift within the family? Probably won't affect Alyssa as she lives in FL and nowhere near her family members except for Erin, but perhaps during the holidays the tension will be high, especially with Josie because she and Lydia are friends?

[GreenBeans]

1 hour ago, arareyeah said:

I wonder if Taliban Dan refused to touch their case even as lip service only, would it cause a huge rift within the family?

Why would it cause a rift? Wouldn’t he be speaking up in favor of Lydia’s family?

Edited September 27, 2023 by GreenBeans
EDIT: Ignore my comment, I misread.

[arareyeah]

17 minutes ago, GreenBeans said:

Why would it cause a rift? Wouldn’t he be speaking up in favor of Lydia’s family?

I mean, if Taliban Dan refused to touch it at all. Not lobbying, not even speaking up for the Romeikes. If he stayed silent and refused to lift a finger regarding this matter, I guess it would cause a rift?

[gobucks]

1 hour ago, llucie said:

Isnt his whole thing being a champion of homeschooling. Seems like he should be interested in their case.

I meant more the deep rooted hatred of illegal immigrants by certain Republicans/Proud Boys/etc. 

[GreenBeans]

24 minutes ago, arareyeah said:

I mean, if Taliban Dan refused to touch it at all. Not lobbying, not even speaking up for the Romeikes. If he stayed silent and refused to lift a finger regarding this matter, I guess it would cause a rift?

Sorry, I misread your comment. You are right, it could be that they expect everyone lobbying for Lydia’s family in any way possible. Most other Bates siblings and the official Bates family account have shared the petition.

[JDuggs]

If her father-in-law doesn’t want to take up this cause, it’s not the fault of Alyssa and John, so I don’t think anyone can hold it against them. Every decision a congressman makes is probably based on what his advisors say and how his constituents are polling on the issue. Homeschooling is a somewhat innocuous issue, but immigration could cause him to lose votes.

[noseybutt]

26 minutes ago, gobucks said:

I meant more the deep rooted hatred of illegal immigrants by certain Republicans/Proud Boys/etc. 

This.

The complexity here is fascinating.

Per immigration law, US allows for asylum based on persecution according to any of the following: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.

The Romeike's could not apply based on religion since Christians are not persecuted in Germany. Instead they alleged that their persecution was because of their "membership in a particular social group"--with that group being "Christian homeschoolers."

The thing is, defining who belongs to a "particular social group" and which groups should qualify has been a super thorny issue for the immigration courts. LGTBQ people often qualify. Battered women sometimes qualify. Someone who runs afoul of the cartels may or may not.

In other words, any politician who agrees to expand the "particular social group" definition to include Christian homeschoolers is, in effect, putting themselves in a position where they will pressured to accept other obviously endangered "particular social groups" that they don't want to accept.

The irony is delicious.

There is also the stone cold reality that Christian homeschoolers, while a vocal group, are not sufficiently large enough in numbers to win elections. And there is often tension within mega-churches and other faith communities between those who homeschool as part of their faith and those who do not. 

[Hasunah2]

41 minutes ago, noseybutt said:

In other words, any politician who agrees to expand the "particular social group" definition to include Christian homeschoolers is, in effect, putting themselves in a position where they will pressured to accept other obviously endangered "particular social groups" that they don't want to accept.

 

It would also mean that they have to accept Christian homeschoolers who are not the right kind of Christian homeschoolers.