Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Guest

South African family gain refugee status in the US!!!!

Recommended Posts

Calling BS on this video:

- Posted here by a GUEST in entirely the incorrect  topic. 

- The person speaking uses the terms 'granted amnesty in America' 'granted refugee status in the USA,  'asylum visa' interchangeably. and the statements just don't add up.  The person speaking claims to be very involved in this sort of thing - so surely they should know the difference.  Amnesty, by the way, is forgiveness for a crime.........

- The big claim is that this South African family crossed the US border on Thursday 07 Feb, were detained until Saturday 09 Feb, and then immediately granted refugee status in the USA - per the headline of the video  This just isn't how it works.

- Refugee status must be applied for from outside of the USA - and under USA law, a refugee is someone who is located outside of the USA.  So, having entered the USA, they could not, here apply for refugee status - so where does this big celebration of their instant granting of refugee status come from?

- Asylum status can be applied for from within the USA or at the point of entry - there is no 'asylum visa' as claimed in this video.  You apply for this status - it isn't a visa , and it can take a long time to be adjudicated - certainly not 2 days while you are in detention, and then you are instantly granted 'refugee status' - which is a status only valid outside the USA.

In addition, the YouTube channel etc is filled with hate speech - mostly from the followers, which is not the fault of the channel - except that they should evict people spewing such racist drivel!
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t looked at the video but asylum claims take months to years to adjudicate here, so it’s clearly BS if the claim was 2 days. 

So sad that our beautiful country manages to produce such hate-filled people amongst all the good ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

The family is being assisted by an immigration lawyer, working pro bono, who stated:

"I am happy to report that a white South African family was allowed to enter the US to apply for asylum after approaching the southern border to ask to apply. They had first flown to Mexican on Mexican visitor visas and then went to the border. US officials held them for three days while determining whether their case was strong enough for a possible asylum claim. They passed the credible fear test and were paroled into the country."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes more sense, but makes nonsense of the claim in the title of the video "South African family granted refugee status in the US" , and verbal claims that they have been 'granted amnesty' and  given an 'asylum visa'

So, they, like many others have been TEMPORARILY paroled into the USA, where they can now APPLY FOR Asylum.  Their application will be considered by the authorities and may or may not be granted.  Similar applications have failed in the past.  

Video is misleading at best.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, highly misleading video if that’s the case.

“As of July 2018, there were over 733,000 pending [asylum] immigration cases and the average wait time for an immigration hearing was 721 days.”

https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-u-s-asylum-process/

They have moved to a last-in-first-out type process for asylum hearings due to the upsurge in frivolous applications in the last couple of years, so their case will probably take somewhere less than average.

Hopefully we’ll be kept updated on the outcome of this one - I can guess at what the basis for the asylum claim will be. As malamute says, many cases have been denied. The same source linked above notes just under 62% of asylum cases denied in FY2017.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Quest

One should show compassionate towards South Africans such as this family that have been through such a lot.   South African farmers have been tortured and murdered the last few decades.

Let's not nitpick here.  Scott is not an immigration expert.  He has compassion for the plight South Africans are in and is trying to help, so he might inadvertently use the incorrect terminology.  He isn't deliberately misleading anyone.  My previous posting quoting the actual immigration attorney clarifies the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sure everyone here has the utmost compassion for all victims of violent crime, no matter their race. It’s one of the main reasons for emigration. 

Edited by SJ272

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2019 at 7:51 AM, SJ272 said:

I’m sure everyone here has the utmost compassion for all victims of violent crime, no matter their race. It’s one of the main reasons for emigration. 

Indeed, compassion is needed for all victims of violent crime, and unfortunately there is a lot of that in South Africa - yes, the farmers, but also gang violence in the townships, gender-based violence etc - all too pervasive in SA society - no individual or group is immune.  We don't know the particular set of circumstances  of this family that sets them apart from that, which would give them claim to asylum.  

That said, the current Attorney General released a ruling in January last year stating: "The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes - such as domestic violence or gang violence - or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim."

It is not unusual that this family was paroled into the USA - it appears to be pretty common, but the burden of proof that they have claim to asylum is on them, and the court will decide the merits of their claim, although their day in court is probably some years away.  In 2017, only 20% of those claiming asylum were granted - so there is a high bar of proof, and a high refusal rate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an update - thanks SJ272 for pointing out the change to a 'last in, first out' policy which means that this family's case should get heard in court within months and not years.  That is a good thing, not only for this family, that will know one way or another whether they can build a life here in the USA, instead of waiting for years to hear whether or not they will be placed in deportation proceedings, but also for others considering this route, to hear quickly what the outcome could be.  Of course, each case is unique.

There are plenty of South Africans - and South African families - that have claimed asylum - so this case isn't a 'first'.  Most of those are waiting - some for years - for their hearing, and with the 'last in, first out' policy, they could wait several years more, meantime, living and earning in the USA on work permits.  I imagine it would be very hard on many of them to be told - years later - that they must leave.

I see the lawyer representing this family has also posted some videos, and I was shocked at how uniformed they seemed to be about the situation in SA, when taking on a family claiming asylum, not to mention racially fixated.  They quote 'a politician' (Malema) as a data point in the case for 'South African white farmers' to claim asylum (The EFF has only 25 of the 400 seats, and is not even the official opposition in SA), as well as the 'fact' that their farm is being taken away - they have been inventoried, and cannot sell anything.  The consititution has not yet been changed to permit land expropriation, and neither is it likely to be, before the elections.  The President has stated many times that the intent is not to have a land grab of going concerns, but to take vacant, unused land for distribution.  If she is going to represent them, I hope she has more than these flimsy bits of information, as the burden of proof is on the asylum seekers.  The lawyer herself states that it is very easy to pass the 'credible fear' interview - and she quotes that 95% of asylum seekers do.........but the hearing in front of a judge is a whole different matter.  As SJ272 states, the majority of asylum applications are actually denied at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×