This is terrible for the wife for sure. Who could ever imagine seeking help from our President would put your partner in jail committing NO crime at all. Well, anyway I'm still glad that the story of the family didn't end so terrible. At least, he has been granted the work permit.

your right about the insults, im sorry, i forgot this is gothamist the online rag for intellecuals.

"immigration officials acknowledged that their actions in the case seemed to violate their standard practice of not using letters seeking help from elected officials as investigative leads."

which means you should call ICE and let them know they are wrong.

"The handling of the case also conflicted with the Obama administration’s stated policy of arresting deportable immigrants only if they have criminal records."

which means Obama would announce any day now that our new policy contradicted with the wishes of an anonymous commenter named gothamdiva on a POS news outlet called gothamist, we are terribly sorry, potsmoker made a good argument but I changed my mind...

if anybody has any other policies or issues that affect our planet please post em on gothamist the source for good public policy.

They handed themselves over to the government on a silver platter!

I'd be pissed if anything but this happened.

OF COURSE they went and got him!

Just FYI, there's not a single word in the NY Times story, or any aspect of this incident that has anything to do with the Census.

Exactly. There's no connection. The Census Bureau is prohibited by law from releasing individual information to other agencies. The paranoia about that was misplaced; fortunately most of the enumeration is now complete so this kind of bullshit implication won't have much effect.

But, that's exactly what it is. Really, what's the goal in attempting to connect this to the census? It's simply baseless idiocy.

even through the potsmoke...

the main problem is you should not be subject to arrest and deportation by seeking to petition the government for a redress of grievances..its called the FIRST AMMENDMENT morons.

"immigration officials acknowledged that their actions in the case seemed to violate their standard practice of not using letters seeking help from elected officials as investigative leads. The handling of the case also conflicted with the Obama administration’s stated policy of arresting deportable immigrants only if they have criminal records."

on the paranoid note, the Census Bureau is prohibited by law from releasing individual information to other agencies...

sure except if your compiling a list of japanese americans to fill up your american concentration camp,

or unless you need to check where all those dubious German Americans are living, and of course who'll cry for the Muslims and Middle Easterners except those lilly livered liberals when the time comes.

The story contradicts known policy...

"Under the Bush administration, the agency had a record of portraying its raids as carefully planned hunts for dangerous immigrant fugitives, while instead going after easier targets.

John Morton, who leads the agency under the Obama administration, recently said that it would no longer seek out immigration violators without criminal records, and that it was focusing its resources “on identifying and removing the most serious criminal offenders first and foremost.”

Dude, change your name so people don't associate your dumb ass with other people who smoke pot.

GOTHAMIST POST OF THE YEAR!

Please understand that freedom of speech and the first amendment. Freedom of Speech applies to prohibit the government from censoring private citizens speech in certain cases. So its freedom from censorship from the government. There is a big difference between freedom of speech and freedom from consequences. If you confess or inform an official of something that you may be penalized for, please note that there can still be consequences. One may be granted immunity if the person in question (or their legal reps) negotiate some sort of immunity or an agreement not to prosecute. Its seems as if the government has a general policy of not using these kinds of letter against people but its a policy and is not really codified anywhere.

The government did not censor this woman's right to write the letter. Therefore the government did not violate this citizens 1st amendment right.

Your first amendment argument is not applicable in this case.

when you learned about the first ammendment in the third grade you learned that it meant freedom of speech,

but the entire law is

freedom of speech, freedom of the press, religious freedom, freedom of assembly, and right to petition to seek redress of greivances.

the issue is not that she was censored from writing the letter, violating her first ammendment right to free speech,

he was arrested because she wrote the letter, violating his

right to seek reddress from the government. Showing up at ICE for a hearing etc and getting deported is one thing,

but writing to a politician seeking assistance with their ICE issue is another and a clear violation of their rights.

policy or not codified of not, it was announced and stated.

you loose....the first ammendment is applicable in this case, you just dont know the entire contents dummy

and sorry, im no obamist, all politicians are liars, theives and charlatans, obama included.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

First, the 1st amendment isn't a law, its an amendment to our Constitution to be precise.

Second, I didn't insult you. No need to call my knowledge of the law third grade.

I just wanted to let you know that freedom of speech, as you stated in your argument, was inapplicable. What you are citing in one of the 5 freedoms under the 1st amendment and what you stated in your argument was freedom of speech and not the right to petition which also does not apply in this case.

That right allows citizens to express their views, complain about government action and also allows them to sue the government for certain types of grievances. This freedom means you can complain about health care, for example, write to the government or get signatures and not be killed for it. But you have to understand, this right is not absolute.

Doesn't apply here. This woman outed her husband. Her husband was denied a greencard and didn't leave the country, he just stayed her illegally. Just because you do not agree with a judgment does not mean that you will be free from consequences when you violate the ruling. The proper avenue would have been to appeal and get attorney and exhaust your remedies that way. I'm not an immigration attorney but I really doubt that the proper avenue would be writing the President.

Lastly, there is a way to debate different opinions without being overly rude and insulting. I learned that in the third grade. That's just my two cents.

"the main problem is you should not be subject to arrest and deportation by seeking to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

"Hi, I am breaking the law, can you please address my gieivance?! I need more free services paid for by legal Americans!"

Øbamunists = fools.

your argument is irrelevant: the wife petitioned the president, but her husband was arrested for being in the country illegally.

no one was arrested for petitioning the govt. had the wife been arrested your argument would be on target.

the question that is not being addressed is why is ICE so hot to deport one person with a valid and legal connection (ie. "long-term marriage") to a legal american citizen which would otherwise justify his legally legitimate continued residence in the country, while totally ignoring the hundreds of thousands of intentionally illegal immigrants (from mexico, ireland, africa, etc.) with no recognized reason for being in the country other than to obtain employment?

this guy, married for 5 years to an american who wants him to stay has to go while your Starbuck's barrista from Ireland in the USA on an expired student visa says because ICE is too lazy to make the effort to find her?

I can go to lunch in midtown on any day and find at least 10 illegal aliens within an hour, but ICE has to wait for an idiot reading the president's email to point them to the ethically questionable case?

Becuase ICE is run by the Øbamunist Janet Incompitano.

(and I don't go to starbucks).

i noticed that too. then i was thinking "Waidaminit. what the hell, did she actually list an illegal she was harboring on the census form?!"

should have known it was gothamist "editorial"

Gothamist is so stoned they didn't realize their lede encouraging illegals to NOT fill out the census...

No No, It's just Jaya...

Apparently there is now such a thing as the "Expose Yourself to the Media" Presidential Amnesty. There's that little girl that talked to the Michelle Obama and said her family was here illegally; they'll never be deported. Obama's aunt, here in a a brazenly illegal fashion; not deported. Now this. The guy gets arrested but now an apology will be forthcoming as to how that letter was used to enforce the law as it should.

It reminds me of the Mexican crying out because a rock throwing illegal was shot. That was the same week that Mexican cops were arrested for the murder of 45 youths, which, they killed and framed as drug cartel operatives.

A world turned upside down.

Yeah, what's the confusion? I've lived in other countries. Tried to stay longer. They said no. Go home. After I staid past my Visa limit. I was BREAKING THEIR LAW. Me go bye bye.

wait, so someone came in on a temporary business visa (which i assume is not considered a gateway to citizenship, if anyone else here has ever dealt with gaining citizenship in another country) stayed anyway illegally, and now is getting deported because he doesn't have correct paperwork......

so where's the confusion here?

i couldn't just marry my girlfriend in australia and magically stay in the country either. its called immigration law.

aka, "too bad, so sad"