最高法院一致裁决:“非法进入”美国不准授予绿卡

d
dvdhe
楼主 (北美华人网)



最高法院一致裁决:“非法进入”美国不准授予绿卡,40万非法移民绿卡梦破碎



最高法院9名大法官周一作出一项裁决,那些出于人道主义原因居住在美国的移民,没有资格申请绿卡成为永久居民。



这个裁决受到最高法院9名大法官的一致支持,自由派大法官卡根(Elena Kagan)在意见书中写道,《联邦移民与国籍法》通常要求寻求成为永久居民的人,必须经过“检查并获准”进入美国。
本案中的当事人,他们在美国有了合法的“临时保护身份”(TPS),但这并不能改变他们非法进入美国的实质。
小知识

什么是TPS?

“临时保护身份”(TPS)那些因家乡战乱或者自然灾难而不得不离开家乡讨生活,美国政府接纳这些“难民”,并且授于他们临时身份,他们在美国可以申请工卡和社安号,可以合法工作。

目前在美国一共有来自12个国家的约40万人拥有TPS身份,分别来自海地、洪都拉斯、缅甸、尼泊尔、尼加拉瓜、索马里、苏丹、南苏丹、叙利亚、委内瑞拉、也门和缅甸。



先上车后买票

两次非法进入美国


此案原告是一对来自萨尔瓦多的夫妇, 名叫何塞·桑切斯(Jose Sanchez) 和索尼娅·冈萨雷斯( Sonia Gonzalez),不过他们并不是在家乡发生灾难后才来美国的,而是在此之前4年就非法进入美国。

他们在1997年和1998年两次非法进入美国,不过在2001年萨尔瓦多发生飓风灾害后,时任总统小布什宣布给予萨尔瓦多居民TPS身份,桑切斯和冈萨雷斯此时已经身在美国,但也符合身份申请了TPS并获得通过,但是要转换成绿卡则面临困难。




2014年,他们申请转换绿卡被移民局拒绝,于是他们将移民局告上法庭,称已经在美国具有合法身份的人,包括获得TPS的人,都被视为已经合法接纳,可以申请永久居留权。 

去年,位于费城的美国第三巡回上诉法院判定他们败诉,于是他们又把官司一路打到最高法院。

焦点

申请绿卡必须是合法入境


此案的焦点在于,《移民与国籍法》确实规定在美国有长期合法身份的人可以申请绿卡,但也规定了申请绿卡的人必须是合法入境。



(最高法院9名大法官,后排左二位埃琳娜·卡根)。


因此,最高法院大法官埃琳娜·卡根写道:“TPS项目给予外国人非移民身份,但并不是允许他们入境,所以授予TPS并不意味着非法进入者有资格”获得绿卡。

因此,桑切斯和冈萨雷斯的上诉被驳回,他们可以继续在美国居住,但是没有资格获得绿卡。而按照美国法律规定,一旦家乡的环境得到好转,可以取消他们的临时保护身份,让他们返回自己的家乡。

最高法院的判决是终审判决,除非法律或者事实有根本性的变化,否则全美都需要遵照执行。拜登和民主党人正在进行的移民改革法案中,试图给1100万非法移民法绿卡,这就包括了桑切斯和冈萨雷斯这部分人,不管他们是合法还是非法进入美国的,一律发绿卡。这个法案在民主党控制的众议院中获得通过,但是很可能在在参议院被搁置,因为没有一名共和党议员会对不设门槛接纳非法移民投下赞成票。

卡根在意见书中也提及了这项法案,除非这项法案真的获得通过,否则类似于桑切斯和冈萨雷斯这个群体的人,终身不能转换成绿卡。




https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/bVdUcKRlO8w2SA9c5blEdg






U.S. Supreme Court Blocks Permanent Residency for Some Immigrants

The justices said immigrants with “temporary protected status” who entered the country without authorization may not apply for lawful permanent residency.

-The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to let immigrants who have been allowed to stay in the United States on humanitarian grounds apply to become permanent residents if they entered the country illegally, siding with President Joe Biden''''''''''''''''s administration.
The case, Sanchez v. Mayorkas, No. 20-315, could affect tens of thousands of immigrants. It was brought by Jose Sanchez and Sonia Gonzalez, natives of El Salvador who entered the United States unlawfully in the late 1990s.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-315_q713.pdf


The justices, acting in an appeal by a married couple from El Salvador who were granted so-called Temporary Protected Status, unanimously upheld a lower court ruling that barred their applications for permanent residency, also known as a green card, because of their unlawful entry.
The case could affect thousands of immigrants, many of whom have lived in the United States for years.
Biden, who has sought to reverse many of his Republican predecessor Donald Trump''''''''''''''''s hardline immigration policies, had opposed the immigrants in this case, placing the president at odds with immigration advocacy groups and some of his fellow Democrats.
A federal law called the Immigration and Nationality Act generally requires that people seeking to become permanent residents have been "inspected and admitted" into the United States. At issue in the case was whether a grant of Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which gives the recipient "lawful status," satisfies those requirements.
Writing for the court, liberal Justice Elena Kagan said that "because a grant of TPS does not come with a ticket of admission, it does not eliminate the disqualifying effect of an unlawful entry."
Foreign nationals can be granted Temporary Protected Status if a humanitarian crisis in their home country, such as a natural disaster or armed conflict, would make their return unsafe. There are about 400,000 people in the United States with protected status, which prevents deportation and lets them work legally.
The case involves Jose Sanchez and Sonia Gonzalez, who live in New Jersey and have four children.

The couple twice entered the United States illegally: in 1997 and 1998. After a series of earthquakes in 2001, the United States designated El Salvador as covered under the Temporary Protected Status program. The couple received protection under the program that same year.

U.S. officials rejected their 2014 applications for green cards because they had not been lawfully admitted. They sued in federal court, saying that those with lawful status, including Temporary Protected Status recipients, are deemed to have been lawfully admitted, and may apply for permanent residency. Last year, the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the couple.

Besides El Salvador, 11 other countries currently have such designations: Haiti, Honduras, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. Myanmar was the latest addition to the list, placed there by Biden''''''''''''''''s administration in the wake of a Feb. 1 military coup there.

The Supreme Court ruled in the case on a day when U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris visits Guatemala as part of the Biden administration''''''''''''''''s efforts to lower migration to the United States from that country as well as El Salvador and Honduras.


https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2021-06-07/supreme-court-rules-against-immigrants-allowed-in-us-on-humanitarian-grounds


Supreme Court Rules Against Immigrants Seeking Green Cards


WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday that immigrants allowed to stay in the United States temporarily for humanitarian reasons may not apply for green cards if they had entered the country unlawfully.

The case, Sanchez v. Mayorkas, No. 20-315, could affect tens of thousands of immigrants. It was brought by Jose Sanchez and Sonia Gonzalez, natives of El Salvador who entered the United States unlawfully in the late 1990s.

In 2001, after earthquakes devastated El Salvador, the United States made that country’s nationals eligible for the “temporary protected status” program. The program shields immigrants from parts of the world undergoing armed conflicts and natural disasters from deportation and allows them to work in the United States.

Mr. Sanchez and Ms. Gonzalez, a married couple, were granted protection under the program. In 2014, they applied for lawful permanent residency, commonly known as a green card. After their application was denied, they sued.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in Philadelphia, ruled against them, saying they were ineligible under a part of the immigration laws that requires applicants to have been “inspected and admitted” into the United States.

Temporary protected status, Judge Thomas M. Hardiman wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel, “does not constitute an admission.”

“As its name suggests,” he wrote, “this protection is meant to be temporary.”

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the Supreme Court on Monday, agreed, saying that two parts of the immigration laws operate on separate tracks. One part allows some people who have entered the country lawfully to apply for green cards.

That first part “imposes an admission requirement twice over,” she wrote. It says that applicants for green cards must have been “inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States.” And it adds that people who had worked in the United States without authorization, as Mr. Sanchez had before he was granted temporary protected status, are eligible only if their presence in the United States was “pursuant to a lawful admission.”

The other relevant part of the immigration laws, Justice Kagan wrote, allows immigrants, whether they entered the country lawfully or not, to apply for temporary protected status, or T.P.S.

“The government may designate a country for the program when it is beset by especially bad or dangerous conditions, such as arise from natural disasters or armed conflicts,” she wrote. “The country’s citizens, if already present in the United States, may then obtain T.P.S. That status protects them from removal and authorizes them to work here for as long as the T.P.S. designation lasts.”

The two tracks can sometimes merge, Justice Kagan wrote, if the recipient of temporary protected status entered the country lawfully. But she added that people who entered without authorization do not become eligible for green cards thanks to temporary protected status.

“Lawful status and admission, as the court below recognized,” she wrote, “are distinct concepts in immigration law: Establishing one does not necessarily establish the other.”

“On the one hand, a foreign national can be admitted but not in lawful status — think of someone who legally entered the United States on a student visa, but stayed in the country long past graduation,” Justice Kagan wrote.

“On the other hand, a foreign national can be in lawful status but not admitted — think of someone who entered the country unlawfully, but then received asylum. The latter is the situation Sanchez is in, except that he received a different kind of lawful status.”

“Because a grant of T.P.S. does not come with a ticket of admission,” she wrote, “it does not eliminate the disqualifying effect of an unlawful entry.”


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/07/us/supreme-court-rules-against-immigrants-seeking-green-cards.html





k
kwirky
好事,就是告诉大家非法移民不要来了
吃鸡蛋
政匹完蛋了?
hellokittypeggy
政匹完蛋了?
吃鸡蛋 发表于 2021-06-07 14:54

很多政庇是合法进入美国的吧?比如旅游签证
ChristinaW
Roberts还是很讲究的,一切决定都要尽量unamimous~不知道以后会怎么样~~
Kissohkiss
Roberts还是很讲究的,一切决定都要尽量unamimous~不知道以后会怎么样~~
ChristinaW 发表于 2021-06-07 15:03

有他还有希望
yanle
挺好的。
chwlbaby
那大把的非移不能审绿卡啦?懂的高人说说
dan1313
有什么不对吗??
chenhechun
这是问题的一方面,然而,另外一方面。西方讲媒体过度放大,坏的(历史)一面,其结果吹毛求疵,纠缠不休,媒体无限放大自己的问题,鸡蛋里面挑骨头,甚至于颠倒黑白,到最终到彻底否认欧洲现代文明的先进性和进步性。产生了“取消白人文化”,与白人的肤色天生的罪恶的意识形态(1619计划),并且加以纵容,使得大行其道。而让全世界最垃圾,最野蛮,最愚昧的非洲黑人文化在欧洲,北美洲泛滥成灾。用非洲裔黑人的涂鸦是好的(满大街,满地的BLM),断垣残壁,废墟是好的(街道两边的玻璃窗都要被钉上木板),打砸抢偷烧,强奸,零元购,杀人放火都是“好的”,犯罪没有“警察”追究是好的。大麻合法,吸毒贩毒合法无罪”都是“好的”,一出生就因为肤色获得一大笔“赔偿”,黑人一辈子钱都用不完“是好的”,犯罪,违法乱纪,杀人放火,强奸没有人管(废除警察,无边境,废除移民局),只要是能够满足自己的下体需要,肉体需要,就能够为所欲为,随时随地(这种极端扭曲的病态心理,例如想去女性更衣室,厕所窥视,而毫无尊重妇女的隐私)逐渐成为了现代文明人类文明的价值观的新文化主流。用全人类最愚蠢,最野蛮的欲望和文化来引领美国和引领未来人类现代文明吗?