Friday, July 29, 2011

U.S. Follows Another Foreign Govt. Order Regarding Illegal Alien

In what could be a dangerous trend, the Obama Administration has for the second time in a few weeks followed the orders of a Latin American nation demanding intervention on behalf of an illegal immigrant living in the United States. 

Earlier this month President Obama asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the execution of an illegal alien convicted of bludgeoning, raping and murdering a Texas girl after receiving a written mandate from Mexico. The Mexican directive requested the administration’s “full-fledged support” to obtain a stay of execution and specifically asked for a Supreme Court appeal on behalf of the murderer. Texas blew off the request and executed him anyways. 

This week Argentina’s government asked that an illegal immigrant in south Florida be spared deportation and the administration obliged, according to news reports. The case involves a 23-year-old man brought to the U.S. as a teenager. As a student at a Miami college, the illegal alien (Miyen Spinelli) got arrested near the Canadian border for not having proper identification while traveling to a youth soccer championship and was earmarked for removal. 

Argentine diplomats in Miami intervened this week, urging U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) not to deport Spinelli, who is described as a model student and athlete. Argentina’s Consul General actually requested that the illegal alien from his country be granted permanent U.S. residency, although the consul claims to be “respectful of American regulations.” It didn’t hurt that the South American official held a press conference to make the appeal.
A day later, ICE caved into the Argentine demand by suspending Spinelli’s imminent deportation. “ICE has reviewed the case and will be extending the previously issued stay of removal for an additional year,” ICE said in a statement that was published by local newspapers. “ICE will review the case and circumstances again prior to the expiration of this stay to determine the benefits of an additional stay of removal.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.