Can they realy do this?

[Northwood_DK]

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-4/107476738625540.xml

I think this is scary. What is next?

[albionmoonlight]

This story raises one of my pet issues--the loss of discretion in the executive and judicial branches. Whenever an officer exercises discretion in a way that people don't like (i.e. an immigration official deciding to let someone slide who then ends up committing a crime that's all over the 6 O'Clock news, or a judge sentencing someone to the low end of the guidelines and that person ends up commiting another crime) they get angry and pass laws that limit the discretion of judges and officers. Then, when there is a situation where it seems clear that someone deserves a break, but that that person cannot get a break because the law is very explicit that there is zero opportunity for judges and officers to apply common sense--then people bitch that the system is too harsh.

You can't have it both ways, people. (not directed at you, obviously, Northwood).

It is a darn shame that the smart, hard working, dedicated public servants that we have chosen to enforce and interpert the law for us are slowly but surely becoming nothing more than ministerial actors.

If you do not like a judge or officer, then don't re-elect that person. Don't change the law so that there is less common sense in the system for the next guy.

[albionmoonlight]

dola--

this discussion reminds me of this other, similar, pet peeve of mine

http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showthread.php?t=14273

[QuikSand]

Jungwirth said growing marijuana was the biggest mistake of their lives, but they've learned their lesson and paid their debt to society.

I'm rather certain that this really translates to:

Jungwirth said getting caught growing marijuana was the biggest mistake of their lives, but they've learned their lesson and paid their debt to society.

[Ksyrup]

It's all about not wanting to be on the hook for a decision.

On a less traumatic level, I see this kind of decision-making all the time. I represent people and entities before state agencies, and on a number of occasions, rather than making a decision based on what's fair (and justifiable under a reasonable interpretation of the law), the agency will simply pass the buck to the judicial branch, and let a judge force them to make a decision that the agency doesn't want to get blamed for making on its own.

[yabanci]

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-4/107476738625540.xml

I think this is scary. What is next?

I think next comes imprisoning people for a year and fining them $4000 for selling a dildo. .....oh wait, that's already happening.

[Desnudo]

"They run an herb and seaweed harvesting business"

Lol, only in the Northwest.

[MacroGuru]

So wait, let me get this straight. INS is wanting to deport for an offense that occured over 10 years ago?

Sounds like someone was a little upset she didn't share her gardening secrets with them.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Sorry, I'm having a hard time getting worked up over the deportation of a criminal.

[Easy Mac]

wait, I saw the local indian guy working at the 7/11 not walking across the street in the designated area... I need to call the Feds and have them get rid of him...

[Glengoyne]

In some ways I am more bothered that nothing was done 10 years ago, than I am that they are deporting her now. If I were living in a foreign land, I think I would tread lightly on their laws. I also don't think a lot of people would be urging the government to take pity on me. Deporting her now seems to serve little purpose though. There are children in the picture. It doesn't seem like they have continued to break the law. I would pretty much think the statute of limitations for deporting her had expired. If the incident had just happened I wouldn't have any trouble resolving that punishment.

[MacroGuru]

See Glen, thats exactly how I feel.

10 years ago, do something, not now, with a business and children.

[albionmoonlight]

This woman might very well deserve deportation (discussion of why she might will not make it into the newpaper article talking about how bad it is that she is being deported). It is a shame, though, that no one gets to make that call. I would argue, and I think people would agree, that laws are better if they are enforced with justice, mercy, and common sense. Fear, however, causes us to make laws that have no room for those values.

They should take "Under God" out of the pledge--not because of church and state separation--but because, as a country, we are quickly losing the right to make that claim. Be gone, all 'ye sinners--there is no mercy for you here.

[Ksyrup]

Sebastian Janikowski better tread lightly. Lucky for him, his juries were in Tallahassee.

[tucker342]

That is terrible for several reasons:
1) Marijuana should be legalized
2) The crime was commited 10 years ago, if you're going to deport her why wait 10 years
3) Since she commited the crime, she hasn't done anything illegal
4) She has two children
5) it's the judges job to sentence a person, not the governments

[sabotai]

Aside from what everyone else has said in this thread, I hope I'm not the only one who is overjoyed that my tax dollars are helping to fund this case. Not like there's anything better they could be doing with the money they take from me...

[chinaski]

i live in Oregon, i watch the crappy local news programs and read our local rags, and ive never ever heard of this story. Thats sad.

[Glengoyne]

That is terrible for several reasons:
1) Marijuana should be legalized
2) The crime was commited 10 years ago, if you're going to deport her why wait 10 years
3) Since she commited the crime, she hasn't done anything illegal
4) She has two children
5) it's the judges job to sentence a person, not the governments
5) I am not sure it is the government itself, I believe there is someone or some group at the INS that would handle appeals to the deportation process.
4) I hear ya. Deportation is a bit strong considering her family are all citizens.
3)Well we really don't know that. In fact given that she runs a business collecting seaweed and selling "herbs", I find it a little hard to believe she isn't still toking.
2)preaching to the choir.
1)I would disagree, but then again so would most people.

[Peregrine]

In a similar vein (immigration policies gone overboard) I read an article in the New York Times the other day that just disgusted me. It talked about how people that come to this country in search of asylum from repression in other countries are "detained," basically thrown in jail, for up to several years while their cases are reviewed. The article had specific examples of two democracy advocates in the former Soviet Union who fled beatings and discrimination to start a new life in the US, only to be tossed in jail for two years to wait for the gears of bureacracy to make a decision on their asylum plea. In another case, a woman fleeing the Taliban was also immediately tossed in jail when she arrived here. I can understand the need for us to make sure that these people are who they say they are, for security reasons, but since when does it take several years to do this?

Found the link...http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/15/nyregion/15asylum.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1074837234-+yu2ebDiVFZyD8eDIWz/Tw

[cuervo72]

Another related story:

http://home.att.net/~gazarcher/gigi/nhr_20040117.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4028175/ (scroll about 2/3 down)

Basically an Italian man who has lived in the US for about 40 years was at risk of deportation because of a drug related offense in 1985. He is married to a citizen and has 5 kids. There was a story on the nightly news as well about him, but I can't find the transcript.

[albionmoonlight]

Also worth noting, since this issue seems to be grating a lot of people the wrong way--there are groups out there lobbying Congress on both sides of this issue--find them and see if they are worth joining. There is strength in numbers.

At the very least, you can personally write your Congressman and let him know that you (1) are happy with current policy, or (2) are unhappy with current policy and expect him to work to change it.