- Administrative Law
- Appeals and Writs
- Bankruptcy
- Business and Corporate
- Constitutional Law
- Consumer Protection
- Criminal Defense
- Elder Law
- Entertainment and Sports
- Environmental Law
- Estate Planning and Probate
- Family Law
- General Practice
- Immigration
- Immigration Law Practice
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- Labor and Employment
- Maritime and Admiralty
- Personal Injury
- Property and Real Estate
- Public Interest
- Taxation Law
- Workers Compensation
Y Así de Rápido Boom! Exploto la Dinamita!
Tan pronto me queje por la falta de progreso en lo que respecta a la reforma de inmigración (de hecho, me fui al extremo dellamarlo un ”debate silencioso”), y que el presidente Obama lanza una tremenda bomba: abra un anuncio importante de lareforma migratoria que se espera para esta semana. Eso es esta semana mi gente. No hay más tiempo para el debate desi esto debe suceder, sino más bien, ¿cuándo ocurrió?
El Presidente se ha reunido ya con el Caucus Hispano del Congreso la semana pasada y, a partir de lo que estoy leyendoen mis medios de noticias favoritos, cualquier proyecto de reforma inmigratoria tendrá un camino a la ciudadanía.
Un camino hacia la ciudadanía para los, aproximadamente, 11 millones de inmigrantes indocumentados en los EstadosUnidos se considera un aspecto ”no negociable” para muchos demócratas y defensores de los inmigrantes, que sostienencualquier otra cosa (que no sea un camino a la ciudadanía) daría lugar a un enorme grupo de personas de segunda clase.
Mientras tanto, la postura del Partido Republicano en materia de inmigración, ya ha quedado claro: No a la ciudadanía, sinouna promesa del gobierno de “no deportación” siempre y cuando el inmigrante ilegal no cometa un delito.
A modo de logística, el Presidente y el Comité Hispano del Congreso probablemente lanzará un ”conjunto de principios” en febrero, con un proyecto de ley poco después (probablemente en marzo). Después de eso, probablemente vamos a teneruna votación en el Senado y una votación en la Cámara (suponiendo que no haya un filibustero) y luego el Presidente firmará el proyecto para convertirlo en ley.
Hablando de filibustero, no creo que el Partido Republicano sería tan estúpido como para obstruir este proyecto de ley?Esta nueva “reforma migratoria” esfuerzo fue impulsado en gran parte por la creciente influencia de los votantes hispanos que fuertemente respaldados presidente Obama y otros demócratas de vuelta en las elecciones de noviembre.
And just like that … “boom” goes the dynamite
No sooner did I lament about the lack of progress in regard to immigration reform (in fact, I went so far as to call it a “silent debate”), than President Obama drops a bomb-shell: Major immigration reform announcement expected this week. That’s this week folks. No more time for debating whether this should happen but rather, when will it happen?
El Presidente has already met with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus this past week and, from what I am reading in my favorite news outlets, any such immigration reform will have a pathway to citizenship.
A pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States is considered “non-negotiable” for many Democrats and immigrant advocates, who argue anything else (other than a path to citizenship) would result in a huge group of second-class citizens.
Meanwhile, the GOP’s stance on immigration, has already been made clear: No citizenship, but a promise from the government of “no deportation” so long as the illegal immigrant does not commit a crime.
By way of logistics, the President and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus will probably release a “set of principles” in February, with a bill soon thereafter (probably March). After that, we’ll probably have a vote in the Senate and a vote inthe House (assuming no filibuster) and then the President will sign the bill into law.
Speaking of filibuster, you don’t think the GOP would be so stupid as to filibuster this bill? This new “immigration reform” effort was spurred in large part by the growing influence of Hispanic voters who strongly backed President Obama and other Democrats back in November’s election.
La Reforma Migratoria se ha Convertido en un Debate “Silencioso.”
Es casi como si la ”reforma migratoria” es la promesa olvidada del presidente Obama … o tal vez simplemente no ha tenido tiempo de trabajar todavía en ella. Pero el debate sobre la pregunta: “Como será la Reforma Migratoria?” Va y viene como olas en el mar.
Apenas la semana pasada, Harry Reid, dijo que la reforma migratoria tendrá un camino a la ciudadanía o no abra reforma. Los demócratas controlan el Senado, Harry Reid, es el líder de los demócratas en el Senado; por lo tanto él tiene el título “Líder Mayoritario del Senado “Así que lo que el dice es un indicador importante.
Mis lectores recordarán que antes mi opinión era de que el Partido Republicano iba a estar de acuerdo en reformar el sistema de inmigración del país, pero no ellos no están de acuerdo en ofrecer camino a la ciudadanía. El plan del Partido Republicano es una especie de promesa de gobierno de no deportar a un individuo, siempre y cuando ese individuo no haya cometido algún delito.
Por el contrario, aseguro Harry Reid, que esto no es suficiente: “No habrá nada aprobado en mi Senado sobre la reforma migratoria sin un camino a la ciudadanía”.
Cuando se refiere a “mi Senado”, (yo pensaba que pertenecía al pueblo? que tonta soy), Harry Reid ha hecho una promesa fuerte. Pero, ¿ayudara a la reforma o la perjudicara?
No pretendo adivinar lo que los extranjeros ilegales creen o no creen, pero sospecho que la mayoría de ellos quieren vivir en paz, ganarse la vida honradamente y criar a sus hijos sin el temor de la deportación en cualquier momento. Estoy segura de que hay una gran cantidad de inmigrantes ilegales que quieren ser ciudadanos de los EE.UU., pero que tan es tan crítico es esto para ellos? Sinceramente, no lo sé.
Lo que sí sé es que el Partido Republicano se enfrenta a una decisión difícil: aceptar la población inmigrante en los Estados Unidos o lentamente nominarse fuera de la oficina electoral durante la próxima década o más. Por este motivo, es difícil para el Partido Republicano tomar cualquier tipo de postura anti-inmigración. Bien podría ser que “la reforma migratoria ‘incluya un camino a la ciudadanía. O tal vez no. Hasta que el debate entre en calor, realmente no hay manera contundente de saber si este tema es relevante o no.
Lo que yo si se, sin embargo, es que Marco Rubio, senador por Florida, quien es de origen cubano, dijo que “este país necesita un sistema de ciudadanía legal que funcione.” Aparentemente no niega lo que Harry Reid, dijo, pero no ofreció mas detalles tampoco . Y así, el “debate silencioso” sobre este tema continuará.
Si usted necesita o tiene preguntas para un abogado de inmigración, o si usted tiene un problema de inmigración y necesita asesoramiento jurídico, no dude en ponerse en contacto con la abogado de inmigración en Atlanta Adriana Perez, hoy mismo.
Immigration Reform has turned into the ‘silent debate’
It’s almost like ‘immigration reform’ is the forgotten promise of President Obama … or maybe he just hasn’t had time to get to it yet. But the debate over the question “What will immigration reform look like?” comes and goes in bits and pieces.
Just last week Harry Reid stated that there will be no immigration reform bill without a path to citizenship. The Democrats control the Senate, and Harry Reid is the leader of the Democrats in the Senate; therefore he has the title ‘Senate Majority Leader.’ So what he says matters.
Readers will recall that I earlier proffered my opinion that the GOP will agree to reform the country’s immigration system, but will not offer citizenship. The GOP’s plan is more like a government promise not to deport you so long as you do not commit a crime.
By contrast, according to Harry Reid, that isn’t good enough: “There will be nothing done in my Senate on immigration reform without a pathway to citizenship.”
The “my Senate” comment aside (I thought it belonged to the people? silly me), Harry Reid has drawn another line in the sand. But will it help or hurt?
I don’t pretend to know what illegal aliens believe or don’t believe, but I suspect the majority of them want to live in peace, earn a living, and raise children without the treat of deportation at a moment’s notice. I am sure there are a lot of illegal aliens that want to be a U.S. citizen, but is that critical to them? I honestly don’t know.
What I do know is that the GOP is facing a tough decision: embrace the immigrant population in the United States or slowly vote yourself out of office over the next decade or so. Therefore, it is tough for the GOP to take any sort of anti-immigration stance. It might well be that ‘immigration reform’ includes a path to citizenship. Or maybe it won’t. Until the debate heats up, there is really no telling which way this issue might go.
I do know, however, that Marco Rubio, the senator from Florida, who is of Cuban decent actually said “this country needs a legal citizenship system that works.” So he didn’t dispute what Harry Reid said, but he didn’t offer any more clarity, either. And so the ‘silent debate’ on this issue continues.
If you need or have questions for an immigration attorney, or if you have an immigration issue and need sound legal advice, feel free to contact Atlanta immigration lawyer Adriana Perez today.
Lo que los chavistas no entienden: se acabo el show
Lo que los chavistas no entienden: se acabo el show
A menos que Obama gestione la reforma migratoria en las próximas semanas, no tengo mucho temas sobre los cuales comentar. Pero, sin embargo, siempre tendremos a Venezuela.
A menos de que vivas debajo de una roca, sin duda has escuchado que Hugo Chávez, presidente de Venezuela, está enfermo y moribundo. De hecho, el esta tan mal, que la gente lo cree, de no ser por la maquina de respiración artificial, muerto. Para aquellos de ustedes que se mantienen al día con los asuntos exteriores, ya saben que cuanto menos un gobierno dice acerca de un problema, peor el problema es. Créanme, si la salud de Chávez estuviera mejorando, sonaría mas que una canción de Pitbull . Sin embargo, poco se dice acerca de su salud, porque la noticias son del todo negativas.
Entonces, ¿dónde deja esto a la gente de Venezuela? Si “Chávez es el pueblo”, entonces, ¿qué le sucede al pueblo si Chávez se ha ido?
Como ha sido durante miles de años, cuando el rey muere, los príncipes luchan por la corona. Y así será en Venezuela. Seamos realistas gente: los días de los ”chavista” están llegando pronto a su fin.
El vicepresidente, Maduro, quiere estar a cargo. Pero él no fue elegido. Diosdado Cabello, presidente de la Asamblea Nacional, también quiere estar a cargo. Pero él tampoco fue elegido. Ninguno de los dos tiene la capacidad de ser el próximo Hugo Chávez. En su interior, ellos lo saben. Chávez pensó que era más grande que la vida misma, pero su repentina partida significa que el renacimiento del socialismo en Venezuela y la llamada “Revolución Bolivariana” están llegando a su fin.
Las únicas personas que no creen que hay un problema son los chavistas, los partidarios acérrimos de Chávez, que piensan que la fiesta continuará para siempre, para que alguien nuevo pueda caminar en los zapatos de Chávez y mantener sus políticas en marcha. No va a suceder.
Así como Fidel Castro una vez le dijo la famosa frase a Hugo Chávez: “¿Dónde estabas tu hace 40 años?”
Traducción: Existe una brecha de 40 años entre tú y yo.
¿Significa eso que podemos esperar que el próximo Fidel / Hugo, aparezca en digamos 2039?
Venezuela va a estar bien. No va a haber una guerra civil. Habrá un movimiento lento pero creciente hacia la democracia y el capitalismo de libre mercado. Los venezolanos podrían ser rico si sólo vendería petróleo en lugar de regalarlo. Las ruedas del cambio se mueven lento, pero se mueven. La salida de Hugo Chávez, sin duda, afectará a Venezuela en los tiempos que vienen, pero las políticas que él instituyó y la visión que él tenía para Venezuela poco a poco se desvanecerán.
The ‘chavistas’ don’t get it: The show is over.
Unless Obama moves on immigration reform in the next couple of weeks, I might run out of things to talk about. But alas, we’ll always have Venezuela.
Unless you live under a rock, you’ve no doubt heard that Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela, is sick and dying. He is so ill, in fact, that it’s widely believed that, but for a respirator breathing for him, Chavez would, in fact, be dead. For those of you who keep current with foreign affairs, you know that the less a government says about an issue, the worse it is. Believe me, if Chavez’s health was improving, we’d never hear the end of it. But we hear very little about his health, because the news is all bad.
So where does this leave the people of Venezuela? If “Chavez is the people,” then what happens to the people if Chavez is gone?
As it has been for thousands of years, when the king dies, the princes fight for the crown. And so shall it be in Venezuela. Let’s face it, folks: The days of the ‘chavista’ are soon coming to and end.
The Vice President, Maduro, wants to be in charge. But he wasn’t elected. Diosdado Cabello, head of the National Assembly, too, wants to be in charge. But he too wasn’t elected. Neither one has the ability to be the next Hugo Chavez. Inside, they know it. Chavez thought he was larger than life but his sudden departure means that the renaissance of socialism in Venezuela and the so-called “Bolivarian Revolution” are coming to an end.
The only people who don’t think there is a problem are the chavistas, the die-hard supporters of Chavez, who think the party will go on forever; that someone new can step in the shoes of Chavez and keep his policies going. Not going to happen.
As our friend Fidel Castro once famously said to Hugo Chavez: ”Where were you 40 years ago?”
Translation: There was a 40-year gap between me and you.
Does that mean we can expect the next Fidel/Hugo in say, 2039?
Venezuela will be fine. There won’t be a civil war. There will be a slow but growing movement towards democracy and free market capitalism. Venezuelans could be rich if they’d only sell oil instead of giving it away. The wheels of change move slow, but they do move. The departure of Hugo Chavez will no doubt affect Venezuela for the times to come, but the policies he instituted and the vision he had for Venezuela will gradually fade away.
The NRA and I don’t speak the same language …
So I rarely “sound off” on an issue. At least I like to think I don’t. But when I read about the NRA’s press conference today in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook School Shooting, I completely lost it.
Is the NRA speaking English? I have a feeling they are not. That must be the reason cause I don’t even understand a word the NRA is saying anymore.
Especially when it comes to stuff like this: ”"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun . . . .” Whoa there, Mr. NRA, so you’re saying that if a bad-guy has bad-guy thoughts, the only way to stop him is with a bullet to the head? Are you saying there is no way to curb such violent behavior so let’s just all buy AR-15 Bushmaster Assault Rifles? (look at this thing, how can it do anything else but kill?)
wtf!?
The NRA then went on to blame video games, music videos, and violent culture for the recent killings. Video games? Really? So a crazed killer plays a violent video game, then goes out into the real world, but somehow can’t distinguish between fantasy and reality, and therefore keeps shooting? Canada, the U.K., most Asian countries, and Australia all play the same video games as U.S. kids yet don’t have shooting massacres. What am I missing here?
What was the NRA’s next idea? Let’s put armed guards at every school in America. So we need more guns and more people carrying guns? Is this dude for real or is one of those dead-pan comedy acts?
Then, like the coward he is, the NRA spokesperson leaves without taking questions. Of course he does … because he doesn’t want to actually try and justify the nonsense that just came out of his mouth.
But maybe I have myself to blame: he isn’t the first 60-something white guy republican who is out-of-touch with America these days … remind you of someone else you know?
And so I repeat: What language is the NRA even speaking anymore? I don’t understand what they mean when they say “music videos” add to gun violence. Do they have any proof of that? Or are they just making it up?
What the NRA really wants to say is “we like guns and the 2nd Amendment protects our right to own guns, so regardless of how lethal these guns become, we will never even so much as consider curbing their usage.”
But look, the simple truth is that the majority of Americans now believe that the 2nd Amendment on the right to bear arms is outdated and was, in fact, passed in a different time with different needs. The same belief holds true for the 3rd Amendment. What’s the Third Amendment, you ask? The right to say “no” to soldiers who come by your house and want a place to sleep and something to eat. Yeah, outdated.
Of course, amending the Constitution is always a possibility but it requires almost 100% nationwide agreement on an issue. First, both the House and Senate have to pass the Amendment by a 2/3 vote, which we’re no where close to (from 2008-2010, the DNC had a “super-majority” at 60 votes; still 6 short). Then, once passed by Congress, 3/4 of all States would have to ratify the Amendment … that’s 38 of 50. Again, not going to happen.
So if it is time to curb back gun usage and ownership in the U.S., how do we do it?
My 2 cents: Regulate the ammunition. The 2nd Amendment protect “arms,” but no where does it say – and no where has the U.S. Supreme Court said – that there is any right concerning “ammunition.”
So, let’s regulate it. Let’s let all the hundreds of millions of guns out there collect dust while ammo is only dispersed to individuals with a valid license. Ammunition purchases of 6,000 rounds – like that psycho in Aurora, Colorado ordered over the internet – would trigger an investigation by the FBI or ATF or by local authorities.
I do think there was a so-called “sea change” in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook School Shootings. There are millions of us who are simply sick-and-tired of hearing the nonsense the NRA spoke of at the press conference today. We want the guns gone, or at least some of them gone. Look, you may not be able to remove the violent people from society, but you sure-as-hell can make them less lethal. By regulating the ammunition industry; by banning assault rifles; by banning high-capacity ammo magazines; we take the FIRST steps to stopping the violence.
A little levity never hurts:
Lawyers Arrested in False Asylum Crime Ring
You know, I’d say I am surprised but frankly I am not. This week the New York Times reported that 26 people were arrested in New York City, including 6 lawyers, for helping Chinese immigrants submit false asylum claims in an effort to stay in the United States.
The scam involved a small army of paralegals, office managers, translators, and even a church official, who – according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office – conspired to dupe immigration officials by inventing stories of political and religious persecution for their clients.
Let me stop there and just say that this is nothing new. Inventing stories to stay in the U.S. via an asylum petition has gone on for years unchecked.
Some clients who sought asylum on China’s one-child policy were even instructed to watch Chinese soap operas to they could describe the experience of a forced abortion.
Wherever there is a dollar to be made, people will take advantage of the system. Immigrants can apply for asylum within one year of arriving in the U.S. and may qualify if they have been persecuted or if they have a “well-founded fear of future persecution” on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
Can you believe this? What is most-shocking is that the Feds targeted the immigration lawyers too. That’s a good thing, if you ask me, because so many times the ones who get caught are the ones low on the conspiracy ladder. It’s obvious from reading the Indictment that the lawyers are the ones who set everything into motion by coaching the clients as to what to say. I’m sure this will send a so-called “chilling effect” to the rest of the immigration lawyers and attorneys out there who are practicing the same type of nonsense.
For many immigrants, the right to seek asylum is a savior to those who have been persecuted. And in the asylum cases that our Atlanta-based immigration law firm has seen, the candidates truly fear returning to their respective home countries.