Mexican woman may be first person deported under new Trump order

Image result for Guadalupe García de RayosA Mexican woman who has been in the United States for more than 20 years has been deported, making her one of the first undocumented workers to be removed from the United States under a new executive action by President Trump.

Guadalupe García de Rayos, 36, a mother of two, was taken into custody Wednesday by immigration agents during a check-in at the Phoenix offices of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

ICE confirmed that Rayos had been deported to Mexico on Thursday morning, saying in a statement reported by local media that her case "underwent review at multiple levels of the immigration court system, including the Board of Immigration Appeals, and the judges held she did not have a legal basis to remain in the U.S."

The case surrounding Rayos, who left Mexico at the age of 14, had earned national attention because she had been in the United States for so long, because she has regularly been checking in with a local Immigration and Customs Enforcement office for the last eight years, and because she appears to be the first person effected by the Trump order. 

Rayos was caught at her workplace in a raid using a fake Social Security number, and had been checking in with the ICE office since 2008. A judge had issued a deportation order against her in 2013, but she was not sent back to Mexico because the Obama administration prioritized removing people deemed to be threats to U.S. safety.

Since Rayos had not committed any serious felony offenses, she was not seen as a threat.

Under an order issued by Trump, undocumented workers who have committed chargeable criminal offenses are prioritized for deportation. The fake Social Security number used by Rayos is a criminal offense.

read more:

Views: 541

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I agree with my President, if you are here illegally you must be sent back from which you came. They steal or money and send it back to their country of origin and it takes money out of our economy .

We have Laws to obey.I do feel for the children.The people in Mexico need to see that the law will be enforced. Then they will stop coming into the country and come in the correct war.We need to issue worker passes and keep up with the people that come into and go out of the country y. Have a fee for each pass to pat for the program.

During WWII we had a good temporary workers pass program with Mexico. Canada has a good one today. We should again follow suit as you say.

Shes been in this country for 20 years and made no attempt to become a legal citizen? Unfortunate, but she's brought this on herself. The law is the law.

I don't want to hear any crap about how we're breaking up families.  She can take her kids with her if they want to stay together, if not then THEY chose to split up the family.

Awwww. I feel so bad for her. All she did was commit some identity theft. It could happen to anybody. We all do that from time to time. Right?

Throw her out!

I agree with you but does her crime go to the children also.

Sins of the father or this case mother shall be laid at the feet of the children. There's a legal path to citizenship perhaps this time she can be a role model worth following. This chain must be broken.

SHE dragged the kids into it.  I have NO guilt....she committed the crime, FINALLY she's paying for it.

Well YEAH.......I have a whole stack of SS cards in the fire safe......doesn't everybody?

She committed fraud. Because of people like her people have to sign up for life lock. To prevent identity theft. I am not shedding any tears for this thief. If any American has done what had done and especially a black person they would be doing serious time.,

DAMN RIGHT.  How many people in this country have had to dish out thousands of dollars because their SS cards and identities were stolen?  So....who's the father?  Is he here too?  Is he legal?




Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service