Green Card Applicants Forced to Leave Country Per DHS Anonymous
05/23/26(Sat)05:06:00
No.
1516287
[Reply]
►
File: 1768780568357107.jpg (220.8 KB)
(�/�c��X�� �M'Q��~=i>�yf\=m��Tj=�Z
�������âr#�>��gYT46��h�ׯ�ϸ�p�?�S�{��yݿ���1qnn[�_���E��[�4E���I�r#����x�o��sL�������?��6���>�]�F���H(�D�CI }�a������ �:IiH GԈhY�P�v�$Y��,(7m�(,�K�"�wI{S �D qy � �|,���c��#�o���'jM�ty��F}kEp�VB�!�?Dq!B�I�?:re� y*�Mk{����<���itL}�t2�X#LI��$N{�hI�S����EXk��=�����X�[�c)���ir�^���̣��>�)H%�� 1*���z��̯0gu��n�� �'@y�9ʹ�w��H��2X}�zm�x�gd@����k=A#X�,)�9��<���=��|���F����sAQ�`�ȑ�ej13��� �$�дB"����ﻈ�Ԋ1�ȿ���/O�n��\�=���h-}���.C���B
Showing all 86 replies.
>>
>>1516287
People apply for green cards in two separate ways: by applying at a US consulate abroad, or by applying for a green card while already in the US, which is called an “adjustment of status”.
With the new USCIS policy, many green card applicants in the US will probably be required to leave while their cases are processed – particularly affecting mixed-status families nationwide by forcing green card applicants to leave jobs, homes and relationships for an unknown amount of time. The agency is already struggling with a backlog of visa and green card cases.
It is unclear how currently pending green card cases will be affected.
HIAS, an aid group that provides services to refugees, among other groups of immigrants, said USCIS was forcing survivors of trafficking and abused and neglected children to return to the dangerous countries they fled in order to process their applications for green cards granting them permanent residency in the US.
Friday’s policy change is the latest in a series of steps taken by Donald Trump over the last year to tighten immigration to the United States. Last year, the Trump administration moved to shorten the duration of visas for students, cultural exchange visitors and members of the media.
In January, the state department announced that it had revoked more than 100,000 visas in the second Trump administration. The administration has also attacked other immigrants with legal status in the US, like refugees and other protected immigrants.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>cultists of an orange thing they 'memed' into office now residing in trailers, consuming cheap food with red coloring in it, and never getting their Trump phones: living in pods, eating bugs, owning nothing and liking it
Live by the meme, die by the meme.
>>
>>
>>
>>1516364
It is though. By making it more difficult to marry a certain class of people, namely foreigners, it incentivises not marrying foreigners.
This will affect someone’s decision making on whom to marry, and whether that’s by design or not isn’t relevant because a future government may recognise it as such and apply further incentives and disincentives to manipulate the populace into government preferred marriages. After that preferred becomes allowed. I realise it’s a slippery slope, which is why I’m attempting to explain it in a logical manner and from a future perspective.
Everything can have an effect on what’s coming in the future, particularly with regards to government interference.
>>
>>1516492
>By making it more difficult to marry a certain class of people, namely foreigners, it incentivises not marrying foreigners
>this under the watch of that which married the First Whore - not an American, but an illegal - resulting in Barron the anchor baby
The duality of the hypocrite.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>it's okay for we of the right to marry foreigners
>Orange Hypocrite-in-Chief Trump & the First Whore: an illegal
>the not exactly saving the white race JD Weird and his wife & kids
>you'll make we of the right seethe if you who aren't of the right do the same!
So?
>>
>>
>>1516511
The government should stay out of people’s personal lives. Marriage is a religious institution, if people want to get married and it’s allowed according to their religion then the government should rubber stamp it if they need to recognize marriage for legal reasons. The government should make no impediments towards marriage, and that means if people want to marry a foreigner they should be neither dissuaded nor encouraged to do so by any government interference whatsoever.
This is the position of conservatives, libertarians, and liberals.
>>
>>
>>
>Marriage is a religious institution
Establishment Clause in the US Constitution means that religion has no right to exist in the law.
Point out in the US Constitution where it says verbatim the words 'God', 'Jesus' and 'Creator'.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
I'll wait.
And the Bill of Rights =/= US Constitution, before you try using that as an excuse for your religious retardation.
'I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature'
'There is more need for lighthouses in our country than churches.'
'But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.'
'Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear'
'I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.'
'Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man'
-Thomas Jefferson
'Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect'
'In no instance have... the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people'
'The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion'
-James Madison
Religion certainly never had the right to exist in US politics in the first place. Then, now or ever.
>>
>>1516523
>Point out in the US Constitution where it says verbatim the words 'God', 'Jesus' and 'Creator'.
Yeah it sucks that there wasn't years of letters and papers and a literal declaration of independence that alludes to these things
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1516526
>retarded reasoning
But enough about those who believe that a 'God' exists. You cannot spell 'Believe' without the word Lie.
>'I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature'
>'There is more need for lighthouses in our country than churches.'
>'But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.'
>'Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear'
>'I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.'
>'Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man'
>-Thomas Jefferson
>'Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect'
>'In no instance have... the churches been guardians of the liberties of the people'
>'The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion'
>-James Madison
I know whose reasoning is infinitely superior to that of actual retards.
>>
>>1516528
>NTA that's what's going on right now
But I thought MAGA was christofascists?
This is why you're retarded. Liberalism only works if you can appeal to a power that's higher than the law as a justification to do things. But when it does you just get angry that you're not in control.
>>
>>
>>
>>1516531
>But I thought MAGA was christofascists?
Yes fascists do not care about rights or documents detailing human rights. This is why you're retarded.
>Liberalism only works if you can appeal to a power that's higher than the law as a justification to do things.
If there's a power higher than law then your law means fucking nothing, it will just get subverted every time like how there's a orange orangutan right now bombing Iran with full support of his backers because "MUH JEEZUS SAYS THIS BRINGS THE END TIMES". Literally proving your ideology doesn't work.
>>
>>
>>
>won't let men use the women's restroom
https://i.postimg.cc/xCrhBG1T/trump-massie.png
Trump: 'Thomas Massie is a terrible congressman. He voted against men in women's sports. He voted against transgender for everybody - the mutilation of your children. He voted against open borders.'
Trump's no longer hurting the feelings of liberals.
>>
>>
>>
>>1516535
>If there's a power higher than law then your law means fucking nothing
Only if the law doesn't comport with that higher power, which you insist shouldn't happen. Retard.
>Literally proving your ideology doesn't work.
My ideology does work. It was subverted by retards like you that prefer to kill yourselves over materialism and self-worship rather than facing hard realities. That's why you're a tranny.
>>
>a religionist doesn't comport with the law because it exists, unlike the religionist's deity, otherwise it would appear in a court of law/Capitol Hill to argue the toss. Every second said deity doesn't argue the toss in said establishments here & now, the concept of a 'higher power' never existed in the first place
>a religionist's 'ideology' that has a nonexistent 'higher power' never works, or the world would be exactly as the religionist wishes it to be
A religionist's ideology never worked in the first place, it kills itself by self-subversion in the face of reality & facts which proves its 'ideology' eternally wrong - otherwise the country it resides in would the the Talibangelist Theocracy of Godsville - especially when said religionist is reduced to projection by immaturely calling others 'tranny'.
Accusations are Admissions
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1516625
That's only because western culture is 100% built on Christianity.
Therefore what you believe to be secular is usually abstracted Christianity so deeply ingrained in you, you believe it's secular
Have you seen a doctor about being a faggot?
>>
>>
>>1516625
No, it’s religious. Every religion has marriage, irreligious people getting married are either hypocrites or doing it for cultural reasons, and if you want secularism you should keep the government out of religious matters. If the government needs to know who’s married they can have a registration process that’s perfectly acceptable, but the government should otherwise stay out of it and forcing people to leave the country in order to get their marriage registered is bullshit
>>
>>
>>
>it’s religious
'Marriage'. Via a religion in which a deity - via the Holy Spook - put Mary in Le Club Pudding before her husband Joseph had so much as touched her. Mary: an underage child bride-to-be.
Thus said deity had committed the sin of Adultery. And the infinitely worse sin of Pedophilia. One can see where - and why - 'Christian' Republicans refuse to make illegal child marriages in certain states. That's their 'morality': if their 'Ultimate Arbiter of Superior Morals' can put a bun in the oven of an underage girl, why shouldn't they follow their deity's example...? Ergo, the GOP: Gang Of Pedophiles.
At least many secular societies only allow marriage at 18 and over.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>1516287
completely retarded. The entire reason we were letting people apply within the US is because it made no sense for them to apply abroad when the system is so backed up and it can take anywhere from months to over a decade depending on your specific situation. Why build a life paying taxes abroad when you are trying to build a life as an American and have already successfully lived here for a while??
This is dumb. It's complete nonsense made to appeal to people that want 0 immigration as a matter of principle. And those people should be ignored precisely because they're unreasonable and intellectually unmovable. Content having boisterous and indefensible ideas on subjects they know nothing about.
>>
>>1516671
Every religion has marriage not only Christianity. There’s no need for you to go on a diatribe about it, if you want to change the laws around age of consent it has nothing to do with marriage being a religious institution
>>
>diatribe
>what was said by two or the Founding Fathers
>what has been said in this thread by that which is 'religious': yet only demonstrates how religionism can only be inferior to superior secular states
>one particular religion is due to what is basically pedophilia
>In this instance, age of consent has more than everything to do with how vile that which some... thing 'claims' to be outside of the law: religion
>Religionist Republicans refusing to make child marriages illegal in certain US states: QED
>'Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man'
Christianity is a dire tribe indeed.
>>
>>1516652
>No, it's religious... cultural reasons....
So it's always religious... except when it isn't.... so what about this person:
>>1516670> or financial, I save so much money on taxes....
But wait... you're telling me marriage saves money on taxes.... like some kind of contract with the government.... and secular people get married. And people from different religions get married, so it clearly isn't a useful, culturally ubiquitous concept, it's a religious ceremony where only Christians buy a wife from her father and nothing else.
Makes sense.... No wait, the other thing, that's fucking retarded. You're right. People shouldn't have to leave the country to get married. I guess even a broken clock is right twice a day.
>>
>>
>>1516645
>Western culture is 100% built on Christianity....
Our deist founding fathers who admired Greek philosophy would probably disagree.
>what you believe to be secular...
No, see, I don't think faggots like you should be stoned to death, and that's one example of hundreds of my morality being kinder and gentler than the authors of your stupid book.
>Have you seen a doctor about being a faggot.
Why? Are you recognizing some of your symptoms in me, or does fantasizing about me being a faggot just make you hard? Better go pray about tha
>>
>>
>A true secularist would be against any sort of tax relief for married couples
As a true secularist, I'd be fine with tax relief for married couplesas long as those couples were married in a secular way, by, say, a justice of the peace. Those married religiously, no tax relief for you
>>
>>
>>1516739
>No True scottsman fallacy. Retarded bullshit.
Applying for a marriage license is a secular act. Various faiths and those without all have to do this, and get certain rights as a result. This is a legal marriage.
Many couples also choose to have a non legally binding ceremony based on their culture. We can call this a cultural marriage.
You are trying to confuse and conflate these two concepts. That's deceptive and disingenuous.