The point is, one must be physically in the US to apply for asylum.
No they can't. Here's two examples of what US Embassies in Italy and Poland say:You are Wrong ... back in their home country they can apply at any Embassy or Consulate
90% of Asylum Seekers NEVER show up for their court date ... what the want is to get caught, get a court date and then disappear into the country never to be seen again
this is why there is a RISE in AFRICAN Economic Migrants coming from Mexico it easier to slip in the southern border than apply for Asylum in their home country ... because they are not fleeing violence and persecution, they just want a better job
https://pl.usembassy.gov/visas/politica-asylum-and-refugees/The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States considers asylum only for aliens who are physically present in the United States.
https://it.usembassy.gov/embassy-consulates/rome/sections-offices/dhs/uscis/refugeesasylum/The United States does not grant asylum in its diplomatic premises abroad. Under U.S. law, the United States grants asylum only to aliens who are physically present in the United States.
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/obtaining-asylum-united-statesTo obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States. You may apply for asylum status regardless of how you arrived in the United States or your current immigration status.
According to DoJ stats for FY17, asylum seekers showed up to court 89% of the time. You have it backwards.Can I Still Apply for Asylum Even if I Am in the United States Illegally?
Yes. You may apply for asylum with USCIS regardless of your immigration status if:
- You are not currently in removal proceedings
- You file an asylum application within one year of arriving to the United States or demonstrate that you are within an exception to that rule.
you sure as hell do not have to FLY Across the Atlantic into Ecuador and walk to the US or travel 1500 miles from GuatemalaI'm sure they do. Is that a requirement of seeking asylum?
As I said, they fly to Ecudaor because a Visa is not required. This is contrary to Mexico.you sure as hell do not have to FLY Across the Atlantic into Ecuador and walk to the US or travel 1500 miles from Guatemala
also Asylum Seekers are SUPPOSED To seek asylum in the 1st country they come to in this case MEXICO
Asylum Seekers can be bared if they can be 'returned to a safe 3rd country'
On recent Saturday in Tijuana, there were 90 Cameroonians lined up to get on a waiting list to request asylum that has swelled to about 7,500 names. Also on the waiting list are Ethiopians, Eritreans, Mauritanians, Sudanese and Congolese.
https://www.apnews.com/429f04067c38428ba0d06749b53e6df0Cameroonians generally fly to Ecuador because no visa is required and take about four months to reach Tijuana.
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/obtaining-asylum-united-statesIf your case is not approved and you do not have a legal immigration status, we will issue a Form I-862, Notice to Appear, and forward (or refer) your case to an Immigration Judge at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). The Immigration Judge conducts a ‘de novo’ hearing of the case. This means that the judge conducts a new hearing and issues a decision that is independent of the decision made by USCIS. If we do not have jurisdiction over your case, the Asylum Office will issue an I-863, Notice of Referral to Immigration Judge, for an asylum-only hearing. See ‘Defensive Asylum Processing With EOIR’ below if this situation applies to you.
Affirmative asylum applicants are rarely detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). You may live in the United States while your application is pending before USCIS. If you are found ineligible, you can remain in the United States while your application is pending with the Immigration Judge. Most asylum applicants are not authorized to work.
Those that are referenced here, that 89%, are the true asylum seekers. Those that, if forced to return, would most likely be killed upon return, or live a life on the run.According to DoJ stats for FY17, asylum seekers showed up to court 89% of the time. You have it backwards. They fly from their country (full of violence and persecution) to Ecuador because there's no Visa required. They then treck through Central American and Mexico.
I always find this thought process....intriguing.As I said, they fly to Ecudaor because a Visa is not required. This is contrary to Mexico.
I know you want the answer to be something else, but you don't get to decide how they arive here, just that US law requires them to physically apply in the country.
As I said. Hijinx is wrong and you folks are, in fact, bitching about people coming here legally.I always find this thought process....intriguing.
Conditions in their home country are SO bad that they are fleeing vice trying to fix their situation. They're just horrible, and they KNOW that the United States is NOT like that. They KNOW that they'll be given a fair shot in the United States - otherwise, why would they choose the United States as the country to which they flee?
So, we know home = bad, US = good. What is the logical thing to do? Fly to the United States, or take a bus, or a boat, or a train, or even (God forbid) just walk if your conditions are SOOO bad.
And, many do that. It would seem the ones under discussion are the ones who walk.
So, do they walk to the nearest point of entry? No. Do they walk to a legal point of entry at all? For the most part, no.
What do they do?
They go to the farthest part they can, and try to break in illegally.
There's no logical reason for this. They travel much further than they need, and then don't seek asylum legally - they just enter illegally. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever if you believe that their goal is the United States because it is better, more honest, a safer place to live and a safer place to live is their goal! How is it safer if you MUST avoid the law, when your case is so good that you NEED to come here, you have an actual good reason to leave home, and all you have to do is walk up to the border and throw yourself on the mercy of a great nation you CHOSE because you know it is GOOD???!!!???
The answer is clear and obvious - your goal is not what you claim your goal is, your problems are NOT a good reason to leave in accordance with law, and you simply are trying to scam the country to which you have travelled. Your chances of being accepted in are not reasonable based on your problems at home, so you hope to enter and go undetected until you've been there so long some politician will plead your case for you as someone who should be allowed to stay because you've been here so long. You hope to knock out a baby or two to anchor you into the country.
In short, you are an entirely undesirable person to be here.
Chris, tell me that you can see this. Tell me that you are merely playing MidnightSpanker and utilizing the letter of the regulation and not the intent of it, the hair being split so finely even the best shampoo will never fix it. Tell me that you are not as stupid as your position makes you sound, but merely playing devil's advocate to the law and order crowd that say, "the tax laws are the problem, not the tax evaders" and you're just trying to prove that point with immigration law.
No, what makes you sound stupid is saying they are coming here legally.As I said. Hijinx is wrong and you folks are, in fact, bitching about people coming here legally.
The intent of the law is that people apply for asylum in person, physically within the United States. Instead of arguing that, you all want to argue people who may be gaming the system, or why they shouldn't have taken a particular route, or whatever other reason you can come up with.
If simply pointing out the laws makes me sound stupid, then there's not much else to say.
They are following the asylum law which tells them they must be here physically.No, what makes you sound stupid is saying they are coming here legally.
They are NOT coming here legally.
They may be seeking asylum within the bounds of the law, but they are NOT coming here legally. They are here ILLEGALLY, and then seeking asylum when caught being here illegally. They are not seeking asylum immediately upon entry to a legal port of entry, legally entering the country.
That's what makes your position sound stupid.
here's the thing - seeking asylum is different from entering the country. If they walk up to a port of entry, they are in the United States and can seek asylum, entering the country legally with that asylum claim. That's called Affirmative Asylum processing. They are allowed to seek asylum even if they entered the United States illegally.They are following the asylum law which tells them they must be here physically.
Asylum seekers are coming here legally.
Again, if pointing out the laws sounds stupid, that's not my problem.
So you admit that applying for asylum requires no actual citizenship (per the law) and entering the USA to apply for asylum means they are not here illegally. Good.If they walk up to a port of entry, they are in the United States and can seek asylum, entering the country legally with that asylum claim.
If they are in fact subject to defensive asylum claims then a judge looks it over and can have them removed.Individuals are generally placed into defensive asylum processing in one of two ways:·
- They are referred to an Immigration Judge by USCIS after they have been determined to be ineligible for asylum at the end of the affirmative asylum process, or
- They are placed in removal proceedings because they:
- Were apprehended (or caught) in the United States or at a U.S. port of entry without proper legal documents or in violation of their immigration status,
- Were caught by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) trying to enter the United States without proper documentation, were placed in the expedited removal process, and were found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture by an Asylum Officer. See Questions & Answers: Credible Fear Screenings for more information on the Credible Fear Process.
No one, ever, said you have to be a citizen of this country to apply for asylumSo you admit that applying for asylum requires no actual citizenship (per the law) and entering the USA to apply for asylum means they are not here illegally. Good.
You can choose to argue until you're blue in the face about it, but the law is the law. You don't have to be a citizen of this country to apply for asylum. In order to apply for asylum you must be physically in the country.
I generalized nothing, I posted a link with a clip from the page.You are one again moving the goal posts and generalizing all defensive asylum claims under one sub-section of eligibility.
If they are in fact subject to defensive asylum claims then a judge looks it over and can have them removed.
It's a good argument. I have to wonder if the rule that says you can seek asylum as an illegal alien is a law or a regulation. If it is a regulation, it should be changed immediately. If it is a law, it should be changed in a presidentially-called emergency session of congress - called for just that purpose.Again, the law is the law. Don't like it, change it.
I mean, if that's okay for your argument against marijuana legalization, why can't it work here?
They can apply for refugee status if outside the US.No they can't. Here's two examples of what US Embassies in Italy and Poland say:
Here's what the US Citizenship and Immigration Services website says:
According to DoJ stats for FY17, asylum seekers showed up to court 89% of the time. You have it backwards.
Again, they can't apply in their home country. They fly from their country (full of violence and persecution) to Ecuador because there's no Visa required. They then treck through Central American and Mexico.
The United States recognizes the right of asylum for individuals as specified by international and federal law. A specified number of legally defined refugees who either apply for asylum from inside the U.S. or apply for refugee status from outside the U.S., are admitted annually
Asylum has two basic requirements. First, an asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution in their home country.Second, the applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or particular social group.
One does not have to enter the US illegally to request asylum, typically they are here legally. In fact those crossing the border from Mexico, if not Mexican citizens, must apply for asylum in MEXICO.To avoid abuses, European law, the Dublin Regulation, requires that asylum seekers have their asylum claim registered in the first country they arrive in, and that the decision of the first EU country they apply in, is the final decision in all EU countries.