Eric Holder Booting German Homeschoolers Out Of The Country

[MondoBongo]

If this country can't survive without illegal immigrants making slave wages, then we're fucked.

And yet reality says that's exactly what is happening. In my area, they don't even bother to advertise for pickers in English - necessitamos piscadores.

 

[buckeye45_73]

If this country can't survive without illegal immigrants making slave wages, then we're fucked.

And yet reality says that's exactly what is happening. In my area, they don't even bother to advertise for pickers in English - necessitamos piscadores.

That's why the min wage is sooo awesome! It's funny that the people that love the min wage somehow love having illegals make less under the table......I guess the min wage arguments dont work for illegals

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

The title and premise of this thread is grossly misleading and little more than another attempt to blame the Obama administration for everything the OP doesn't like.

Eric Holder isn't "booting" anybody out of the country. Immigration laws as they are currently written are doing that and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals is merely upholding the law, as it's supposed to do.

Here's the opinion of the court and a phrase from it which sums up the whole case:

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/13a0137p-06.pdf

"...Congress might have written the immigration laws to grant a safe haven to people living elsewhere in the world who face government strictures that the United States Constitution prohibits. But it did not..."

The Justice Department and the office of Attorney General are tasked with enforcing laws as they are written. It is not tasked with creating law out of thin air or ignoring the law whenever they choose, even for "good" motives. In short, the AG and his department are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing and doing it legally through the court system. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone who claims to love this country and our Constitution could find fault with that.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how the Attorney General and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the law is a bad thing.

Hogwash. The Administration's statist iattitude is on display here, as it yours. There is nothing in the law that would compel the Justice Department to challenge this family's request for asylum either. A conservative administration would not have made an issue over this.

The court disagrees with you. But tell you what....look up our Request for Asylum policies and show us where foreigners can request asylum based on educational persecution (not being allowed to home school).

You need to read my post again. I didn't object to the court's decision or its reasoning as such. My problem isn’t with the appeals court at all. I objected to the unnecessarily hostile action on the part of the Justice Department. You even underlined the essence of my disgust.

The hostility of Germany’s government to this fundamental human right of parental consent and authority is obscene; the Administration has the power to grant this family asylum via an executive order. I repeat: a conservative administration (classical liberal) would not have gone after this family.

Holder is a two-bit-punk statist thug.

 

[High_Gravity]

Would Holder have went after them if they were Mexican? I don't think so.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

May 14, 2013 06:51 PM EDT
German Homeschool Family Loses Asylum Case; Home School Legal Defense Association Will Appeal

By Napp Nazworth | Christian Post Reporting

(Photo: Home School Legal Defense Association)


A U.S. appeals court sided with the U.S. Justice Department on Tuesday and denied asylum for the Romeikes. They fled from Germany after they were threatened with the possibility of losing custody of their children when they decided to homeschool and refused to send their children to the German public schools.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the Justice Department, in Romeike vs. Holder, that the freedom to homeschool one's children is not among the fundamental rights protected for asylum seekers. The Home School Legal Defense Association, which represented the Romeikes in the case, said it will appeal the decision.
"We believe the Sixth Circuit is wrong, and we will appeal their decision," said Michael Farris, HSLDA founder and chairman. "America has room for this family, and we will do everything we can to help them."
According to an HSLDA press release, the court recognized parents have the right to direct the education of their children under the U.S. Constitution, but also noted that asylum is not granted to every victim of unfair treatment.

German Homeschool Family Loses Asylum Case; Home School Legal Defense Association Will Appeal

"....in Romeike vs. Holder, that the freedom to homeschool one's children is not among the fundamental rights protected for asylum seekers."

Did anyone tell Eric Holder that wanting to improve one's economic situation is ALSO not among the fundamental rights protected for asylum seekers.

Seems he didn't get the memo regarding the millions of illegal aliens that are here that also DON'T deserve to stay in the US.

So...you support this family coming as illegal aliens.

False. You leftists are the only ones incessantly misleading folks on the actuality here.

They didn't enter this country illegally. They entered this country via official channels and formally requested asylum. The President has the power to grant it under these conditions. The Administration's legal challenge based on the formal terms of asylum along these lines tells us all we need to know about it. The legal challenge is merely a cover for what the administration wants to happen anyway. Holder is a statist bootlick. Not only are many of you statist bootlicks too, you’re politically naive or obtuse.

 

[mudwhistle]

then the OP should be talking about THAT...which I will agree with wholeheartedly. The illegals SHOULD be sent packing. And I don't care if their anchor kids stay behind or not. Too bad.

But....this family applied for asylum for conditions that asylum is NOT granted for...ergo...asylum denied. Doesn't get any clearer than that.

They are suffering from religious persecution. One of the original reasons this country was founded.

The government in their country is threatening to take their kids if they don't put their kids in their government schools.

How would you like it if you had adopted children that the government was threatening to send to foster homes because they've decided your lifestyle was a bad influence on the kids?

How is it religious persecution?

Something to do with the parents wanting to teach their kids about God during the homeschooling. German schools don't do that.

 

[Oldguy]

The title and premise of this thread is grossly misleading and little more than another attempt to blame the Obama administration for everything the OP doesn't like.

Eric Holder isn't "booting" anybody out of the country. Immigration laws as they are currently written are doing that and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals is merely upholding the law, as it's supposed to do.

Here's the opinion of the court and a phrase from it which sums up the whole case:

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/13a0137p-06.pdf

"...Congress might have written the immigration laws to grant a safe haven to people living elsewhere in the world who face government strictures that the United States Constitution prohibits. But it did not..."

The Justice Department and the office of Attorney General are tasked with enforcing laws as they are written. It is not tasked with creating law out of thin air or ignoring the law whenever they choose, even for "good" motives. In short, the AG and his department are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing and doing it legally through the court system. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone who claims to love this country and our Constitution could find fault with that.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how the Attorney General and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the law is a bad thing.

Hogwash. The Administration's statist attitude is on display here, as is yours. There is nothing in the law that would compel the Justice Department to challenge this family's request for asylum either. A conservative administration would not have made an issue over this. Period.

So..a "conservative" administration would have ignored the law and shirked its Constitutional duties and that would be alright with you?

What other laws do you think we shouldn't enforce?

 

[mudwhistle]

The title and premise of this thread is grossly misleading and little more than another attempt to blame the Obama administration for everything the OP doesn't like.

Eric Holder isn't "booting" anybody out of the country. Immigration laws as they are currently written are doing that and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals is merely upholding the law, as it's supposed to do.

Here's the opinion of the court and a phrase from it which sums up the whole case:

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/13a0137p-06.pdf

"...Congress might have written the immigration laws to grant a safe haven to people living elsewhere in the world who face government strictures that the United States Constitution prohibits. But it did not..."

The Justice Department and the office of Attorney General are tasked with enforcing laws as they are written. It is not tasked with creating law out of thin air or ignoring the law whenever they choose, even for "good" motives. In short, the AG and his department are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing and doing it legally through the court system. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone who claims to love this country and our Constitution could find fault with that.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how the Attorney General and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the law is a bad thing.

Hogwash. The Administration's statist attitude is on display here, as is yours. There is nothing in the law that would compel the Justice Department to challenge this family's request for asylum either. A conservative administration would not have made an issue over this. Period.

So..a "conservative" administration would have ignored the law and shirked its Constitutional duties and that would be alright with you?

What other laws do you think we shouldn't enforce?

The DoJ is being extremely discriminatory and prejudice against this family, clearly because of their religion.

Your problem here is you take everything this dishonest administration says at face-value. You need to learn to question everything they say and also question their motives. When all of the stories about this and other scandals become public in the coming weeks you might not look so foolish.

Just a little friendly advice.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

The title and premise of this thread is grossly misleading and little more than another attempt to blame the Obama administration for everything the OP doesn't like.

Eric Holder isn't "booting" anybody out of the country. Immigration laws as they are currently written are doing that and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals is merely upholding the law, as it's supposed to do.

Here's the opinion of the court and a phrase from it which sums up the whole case:

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/13a0137p-06.pdf

"...Congress might have written the immigration laws to grant a safe haven to people living elsewhere in the world who face government strictures that the United States Constitution prohibits. But it did not..."

The Justice Department and the office of Attorney General are tasked with enforcing laws as they are written. It is not tasked with creating law out of thin air or ignoring the law whenever they choose, even for "good" motives. In short, the AG and his department are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing and doing it legally through the court system. I can't for the life of me understand how anyone who claims to love this country and our Constitution could find fault with that.

Perhaps you'd like to explain how the Attorney General and the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the law is a bad thing.

Hogwash. The Administration's statist attitude is on display here, as is yours. There is nothing in the law that would compel the Justice Department to challenge this family's request for asylum either. A conservative administration would not have made an issue over this. Period.

So..a "conservative" administration would have ignored the law and shirked its Constitutional duties and that would be alright with you?

What other laws do you think we shouldn't enforce?

Still failing to understand the thrust of my observation, eh?

Stupid or depraved?

 

[rightwinger]

Homeschoolers are political refugees?
Cut me a fucking break

If they were Mexicans fighting to homeschool their kids, would Conservatives fight to provide them asylum?

 

[Oldguy]

Hogwash. The Administration's statist attitude is on display here, as is yours. There is nothing in the law that would compel the Justice Department to challenge this family's request for asylum either. A conservative administration would not have made an issue over this. Period.

So..a "conservative" administration would have ignored the law and shirked its Constitutional duties and that would be alright with you?

What other laws do you think we shouldn't enforce?

Still failing to understand the thrust of my observation, eh?

Stupid or depraved?

I understand perfectly. Like so many on the right, you're suggesting the rule of emotions, rather than the rule of law. Doing what you consider as "right" is more important than the law.

Of course, the fallacy of that argument is that if you can ignore a law because you don't happen to like it, so can I and so can everyone else. In other words, the law would be totally meaningless and our Republic based upon the rule of law rather than individual whims would be dead.

What never ceases to amaze me is just how little the "patriotic" right understands about the great principles upon which this nation was founded. Your post is a classic example of that.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

So..a "conservative" administration would have ignored the law and shirked its Constitutional duties and that would be alright with you?

What other laws do you think we shouldn't enforce?

Still failing to understand the thrust of my observation, eh?

Stupid or depraved?

I understand perfectly. Like so many on the right, you're suggesting the rule of emotions, rather than the rule of law. Doing what you consider as "right" is more important than the law.

Of course, the fallacy of that argument is that if you can ignore a law because you don't happen to like it, so can I and so can everyone else. In other words, the law would be totally meaningless and our Republic based upon the rule of law rather than individual whims would be dead.

What never ceases to amaze me is just how little the "patriotic" right understands about the great principles upon which this nation was founded. Your post is a classic example of that.

Right. Clearly, you are depraved then. No one could possibly be so stupid, so badly misinterpret what I have told you. You, like the other leftist pagans who thanked you, are a pathological liar.

And my understanding of the history and the political philosophy of this nation's founding, an entirely different topic altogether, in no way, shape or form touched upon here, is light years beyond yours. It's not even close.

You’re dismissed.