View Single Post
Old 07-06-2019, 05:13 PM   #44
boof
Senior Member
 
boof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,620




Rep Power: 21316668
boof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant futureboof has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by uh-oh View Post
i see that.

seeking asylum isn't illegal. entering the country illegally is. you can be an illegal immigrant and lawfully apply for asylum from within america. which is what they are trying to do.

its not the seeking asylum that most people have a problem with, its the illegal entry

and even if they are granted asylum, (after being able to prove that they would be persecuted in their home nation) that doesn't make them a citizen, its literally a temporary status.

so let's break this down real nice and clear so we're all on the same page

when you refer to someone as an illegal immigrant, you are implying they've broken an immigration law of ours.

the immigration laws in america state you can legally seek asylum by showing up at a port of entry. so, if you show up at a port of entry, which is in america, and apply for asylum.. you are traditionally(and by our current immigration laws) given a court date to make your case, once your case is made and you are granted asylum, you can then apply for citizenship. you are correct this is a temporary status.

at no point during this journey has the theoretical migrant broken any laws, and therefore it would be inaccurate and misguided to label them as an illegal immigrant.

do we agree so far?
boof is offline   Reply With Quote