The news media is reporting that Faisal Shahzad, the suspected Times Square bomber, was became a naturalized citizen in April 2009. He is reportedly married (married in 2008 to Huma Mian) and has two small children.
Assuming that his wife and children are not US citizens, should they be deported?
What is more likely is that his wife is not a citizen and his children are. Does that change your opinion about deporting his wife? If you believed that she and the children should be deported.
Why in the world would this question even occur to anyone? I mean, whether or not these folks are citizens - if they’re here legally, and weren’t involved in Shahzad’s crimes (and the children certainly weren’t), why would deportation be even a possibility?
We don’t practice collective punishment in this country. My father’s crimes will not land me in prison. Nor will mine lead to his incarceration. Why should we change that here?
ETA: To be very clear: Merely being married to a criminal, or the child of a criminal, is not a deportable offense.
Agreed. It’s an odd question. Punishing people for the crimes of others is not okay.
Just yesterday, a coworker argued that immigrants come here illegally and have children so that they have a claim to citizenship, so we should remove the “born here=citizen” rule and thus remove that motivation.
I used your argument to counter him. No matter what the parents do, the kid is born here. This is his home. This is his country. He’s got as much right to it as anyone else.
So, no, we shouldn’t deport the family. There’s no reason to, and we have no right to.
Isn’t there something in the Constitution about no conviction shall promote corruption of blood, or some such phrase?
If this guy’s family is here legally, and they have done nothing wrong, then punishing the family for this guy’s actions is downright anti-American.
Assuming she’s here legally… no, of course not.
Assuming she’s here illegally… yes.
What her husband did is of no relevance.
I, too, find it appalling this is even a question.
First of all, the man is a SUSPECT - he has NOT be convicted. Yes, there seems to be compelling evidence of wrongdoing, but he is not yet tried, much less conicted.
Second - WTF did his wife do? If she is party to the crime then yes, deportation should be on the table but if she had no part in the crime she should NOT be punished! If she is here legally and has committed no crime then no, she should not be deported.
Third - the children will have to follow the parents, of course, but even if the parents are guilty there should be no stain on the children, no “deportation” for them, just an exit from the country if their parents leave. No black mark on their record, and if one or all are citizens then citizens they remain.
Since his wife (and presumably his kids) are in Pakistan, isn’t this a non-starter?
I understand your point. I still disagree. You can’t entirely remove the effects of the parents on the children. I don’t believe in rewarding the parents for doing something we said was illegal like that. They then do it on purpose so the child is a citizen and they’re extremely unlikely to be deported (the parents).
I thought I read that his wife was born and raised in Colorado…
Here’s a quote from the top of page 2 of this article
If they’ve already got the kids, then they’ve already won. If you want them to stop moving here and having anchor children, then you need to stop them BEFORE they have the kid. You’ve got to have a better defense, not move the goal post.
I used to work in immigration and I never ever heard of any undocumented immigrant NOT being deported because they had US citizen children.
ETA: Having US citizen children is not, on it’s own, enough of a hardship, legally, to qualify you for a waiver.
Further, IIRC, the US citizen child cannot petition for their parents until they are 18. Assuming that the parents have been in the US for their child’s entire life, they would under current law, be forced to return to their country of origin for 10 years before they’d even be able to apply to become Legal Residents.
The notion that you can’t be deported if you have a minor child who’s a US citizen is nonsense. Parents of US citizens are deported all the time.
If you want to stop people from moving here and having anchor children, wouldn’t it make more sense to stop them from moving here in the first place?
Removing birthright citizenship ain’t going to stop people from crossing the border, now is it? All it means is that we’ll define their kids as illegal immigrants too, and ship them back to Mexico. And what’s the point of expelling someone who’s lived their entire life here in the US?
It has been practiced. In Japan under the Tokugawas, Christianity was forbidden. If a person was found to be practicing that religion, iirc, they were punished, also their family, also the families that lived in the five adjoining houses. The ones on either side, the one across, and the ones on either side of that.
A lot of things have been “practiced” over the years that we don’t want to emulate.
I don’t know how immigration works, but if the wife was let into the country only because the husband was a law-abiding citizen, with no prior convictions, then would it be ok to deport her if he’s found guilty?
Cool story, bro.
No.
(Immigration actually doesn’t work that way. So, not is it only morally wrong that scenario is not legal.)