#U.S. born children custody

[legallotus]

How Temporary Custody Petitions Can Help Immigrant Parents Facing Deportation in Florida

Immigrant parents in the U.S. constantly fear deportation, especially when they have U.S.-born children. If a parent is detained or deported, their greatest worry is often what will happen to their children. Temporary custody by a trusted family member provides a vital legal solution to protect these children and ensure they remain safe and cared for in the U.S. This arrangement lets parents…

[mariacallous]

President Donald Trump has targeted transgender and nonbinary people with a series of executive orders since he returned to office.

He has done it with strong language. In one executive order, he asserted “medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex.”

That’s a dramatic reversal of the policies of former President Joe Biden’s administration — and of major medical organizations — that supported gender-affirming care.

American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Sruti Swaminathan said that to be put into effect, provisions of the orders should first go through federal rulemaking procedures, which can be years long and include the chance for public comment.

“When you have the nation’s commander-in-chief demonizing transgender people, it certainly sends a signal to all Americans,” said Sarah Warbelow, the legal director at Human Rights Campaign.

Things to know about Trump’s actions:

Recognizing people as only men or women

On Trump’s first day back in office, he issued a sweeping order that signaled a big change in how his administration would deal with transgender people and their rights.

It questions their existence by saying the government would recognize only two unchangeable sexes: female and male.

The stated purpose is to protect women. “Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being,” the order says.

The document calls on government agencies to use the new definitions of the sexes, and to stop using taxpayer money to promote what it calls “gender ideology,” the idea broadly accepted by medical experts that gender falls along a spectrum.

Federal agencies have been quick to comply. Andrea Lucas, the acting chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, for example, announced this week that she would remove identity pronouns from employees’ online profiles and disallow the “X” gender marker for those filing discrimination charges.

“Biology is not bigotry. Biological sex is real, and it matters,” Lucas said in a statement.

On Friday, information about what Trump calls “gender ideology” was removed from federal government websites and the term “gender” was replaced by “sex” to comport with the order. The Bureau of Prisons stopped reporting the number of transgender incarcerated people and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed lessons on building supportive school environments for transgender and nonbinary students.

Researchers have found less than 1% of adults identify as transgender and under 2% are intersex, or born with physical traits that don’t fit typical definitions for male or female.

Requests denied for passport gender markers

In the order calling for a new federal definition of the sexes, Trump included some specific instances in which policy should be changed, including on passports.

The State Department promptly stopped granting requests for new or updated passports with gender markers that don’t conform with the new definition.

The agency is no longer issuing the documents with an “X” that some people who identify as neither male nor female request and will not honor requests to change the gender markers between “M” and “F” for transgender people.

The option to choose “X” was taken off online passport application forms Friday.

The ACLU says it’s considering a lawsuit.

Transgender women moved into men’s prisons

Trump’s initial order called for transgender women in federal custody to be moved to men’s prisons. Warbelow, from Human Rights Campaign, said her organization has received reports from lawyers that some have been.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons did not immediately respond to requests for information about such moves.

There have been at least two lawsuits trying to block the policy. In one, a federal judge has said a transgender woman in a Massachusetts prison should be housed with the general population of a woman’s prison and continue to receive gender-affirming medical care for now.

Opening the door to another ban on transgender service members

Trump set the stage for a ban on transgender people in the military, directing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to come up with a new policy on the issue by late March.

In the executive order, the president asserted that being transgender “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life.”

Trump barred transgender service members in his first term in office, but a court blocked the effort.

A group of active military members promptly sued over the new order this week.

Defunding gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth

Trump called for halting the use of federal money to support gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth under 19 years old.

The care in question includes puberty blocking drugs, hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgery, which is rare for minors.

If fully implemented, the order would cut off government health insurance including Medicaid and TRICARE, which serves military families, for the treatments.

It also calls on Congress to adopt a law against the care, though whether that happens is up to lawmakers.

Twenty-six states already have passed laws banning or limiting gender-affirming care for minors, so the change could be smaller in those places.

Some hospitals have paused some gender-affirming care for people under 19 following the executive order while they evaluate how it might apply to them.

Barring schools from helping student social transitioning

Another executive order this week seeks to stop “radical indoctrination” in the nation’s school system.

It calls on the Education Department to come up with a policy blocking schools from using federal funds to support students who are socially transitioning or using their curriculum to promote the idea that gender can be fluid, along with certain teachings about race.

The order would block schools from requiring teachers and other school staff to use names and pronouns that align with transgender students’ gender identify rather than the sex they were assigned at birth.

Some districts and states have passed those requirements to prevent deadnaming, the practice of referring to transgender people who have changed their name by the name they used before their transition. It is widely considered insensitive, offensive or traumatizing.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Gideon Taaffe and Noah Dowe at MMFA:

The Trump administration deported two women along with their U.S. citizen children to Honduras last week, including a 4-year-old who was “receiving treatment for metastatic cancer.” While the Trump administration claims the mothers took the children with them willingly, lawyers for the families noted that the mothers were not given meaningful access to lawyers or family members to make alternate arrangements.  Right-wing media have defended the administration’s actions by claiming migrants are using children as “anchor babies,” blaming the parents for their children being removed from the country, and calling it “a nonstory.” 

The Trump administration deported two women alongside their U.S. citizen children, reportedly without giving them access to their lawyers

Three U.S. citizen children were deported to Honduras along with their mothers, including a 4-year-old “with Stage 4 cancer who was sent without medication.” As the BBC reported, “Three young children who are US citizens — including one with cancer — were deported to Honduras alongside their mothers last week, according to advocacy groups and the families' lawyers.” [BBC, 4/28/25]

The Trump administration has claimed that the kids weren’t technically deported, but were allowed to leave as the mothers wanted to take them. Trump “border czar” Tom Homan added, “This is parenting 101. You can decide to take that child with you, or you can decide to leave a child here with a relative or another spouse.” [CBS News, 4/27/25]

The lawyers for the families have said they were given no real opportunity to make alternate arrangements for the children. According to NBC News, “One mother who was about to be deported was allowed less than two minutes on the phone with her husband to figure out what would become of her 2-year-old U.S. citizen child. Another mother wasn’t allowed to speak with attorneys or family members before she was deported, accompanied by her U.S.-born children, even though Immigration and Customs Enforcement knew one of them had Stage 4 cancer.” [NBC News, 4/28/25]

A federal judge in Louisiana stated his “strong suspicion that the Government just deported a U.S. citizen with no meaningful process,” even as the father was trying to keep her in the country. According to Politico, lawyers had filed an emergency petition trying to get the child released from ICE custody. [Politico, 4/25/25]

The ACLU of Louisiana issued a statement condemning the “deeply troubling circumstances” of the case, which they say “raise serious due process concerns” and “stand in direct violation of ICE’s own written and informal directives.” The statement is co-signed by seven human rights and immigration figures. Ware Immigration’s Erin Hebert said that “deporting U.S. citizen children is illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral,” and Teresa Reyes-Flores of the Southeast Dignity not Detention Coalition argued, “ICE’s actions show a blatant violation of due process and basic human rights.” [ACLU, 4/25/25] 

Right-wing media being heartless ghouls as usual on the Trump Regime’s deportations of children with US citizenship.

[gatheringbones]

[“Several contributors to A Woman Like That acknowledged that exploring the territory of their own coming out in writing was unexpectedly difficult. Seasoned writers told me how arduous, even painful, it was to explore coming-out memories that had long been held under pressure at a depth. One novelist said that her family’s rejection of her as an open lesbian had been too agonizing to revisit; she was unable to complete her story. Another, author of a soul-searching memoir and surely no coward, wrote a haunting piece about her first erotic experience with a woman, but withdrew it when she remembered that the words “lesbian and bisexual” would appear in the book’s subtitle.

These are indeed powerful words. I am deeply indebted to the writers who are free to embrace them.

Many writers in this collection recall childhood desire, embryonic lesbian hunger, and the innocence and mystery of those feelings on the brink of collision with the straight world. One writer asserts that she was “born queer,” while another confesses to the sin of “converting”—implying that, contrary to current rules of political correctness, some feel they have chosen to be lesbians. Some write with youthful ebullience and wit of adventures as “sex-positive” lesbians, with almost a gasp of surprise at the seeming absence of oppression in their lives. A handful write of uncommonly loyal families that nurtured independence in childhood and remain a source of strength to their unconventional daughters. Some contributors write of harsh punishment rendered for sexual nonconformity and of the survival skills and moral intelligence they have wrested from their experiences. Two write of their incarceration in mental institutions as young gay women, and of the exhilaration of release. Another, stunned by the abrupt firing of teachers rumored to be lesbians, learns that even a “progressive” environment may be unapologetically homophobic; her knowledge of danger ultimately empowers her to speak against injustice. One writer, who tells of coming out to the sons of whom she has lost custody, speaks of having cracked open their small universe—a shattering, but one that allows light and the possibility of new knowledge and connection.

A number of writers in this collection tell coming-out stories that are not about a single defining moment but rather about a continuum of experience. They recall many passages—a gradual shedding of false selves, an ongoing process of self-discovery and self-naming. One writer, nearly deported from the U.S. for her outspoken political writing, equates coming out with the freedom to explore deeper places in her own psyche. A writer in her seventies tells movingly of her failure to name herself a lesbian at a reunion of those who as children were transported to safety in England to escape the Nazi death camps. Next year, she resolves, she will come out to them. Another, Another, in the form of a diary of a week in the present year, reminds us that, regardless of how secure our identities, we are forced to come out as lesbians each time we intersect with the heterosexual world, or remain invisible as we have been for centuries.”]

Joan Larkin, from a woman like that: lesbian and bisexual writers tell their coming out stories, 2000

[beardedmrbean]

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A California woman was sentenced Monday to more than 3 years in prison in a long-running case over a business that helped pregnant Chinese women travel to the United States to deliver babies who automatically became American citizens.

U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner gave Phoebe Dong a 41-month sentence and ordered her immediately taken into custody from his federal court in Los Angeles. Dong and her husband were convicted in September of conspiracy and money laundering through their company, USA Happy Baby.

The sentencing came as birthright citizenship has been thrust into the spotlight in the United States with the return of President Donald Trump to the White House. Since taking office, Trump issued an executive order to narrow the definition of birthright citizenship, a move quickly blocked by a federal judge who called it “blatantly unconstitutional.”

Dong and her husband, Michael Liu, were among more than a dozen people charged in an Obama-era crackdown on so-called “birth tourism” schemes that helped Chinese women hide their pregnancies while traveling to the United States to give birth. Such businesses have long operated in various states catering to people from China, Russia, Nigeria and elsewhere.

Under the 14th Amendment, any child born in the United States is an American citizen. Many have seen these trips as a way to help their children secure a U.S. college education and a better future — especially since the tourists themselves can apply for permanent residency once the children turn 21.

During her sentencing hearing, Dong wiped away tears as she recalled growing up without siblings due to China’s strict “ one-child ” policy and told the court that the Chinese government forced her mother to have an abortion. Moving to the United States was challenging, she said, but Dong grew hopeful after having children of her own and saw she could help Chinese women who want to have additional children in California.

“I don’t want to lose my kids,” she told the court. “I hope you can give me fair judgment. I will take all my responsibility.”

Federal prosecutors sought a more than five year sentence for Dong and argued that she and Liu helped more than 100 pregnant Chinese women travel to the United States. They said the pair worked with others to coach women on how to trick customs officials by flying into airports believed to be more lax while wearing loose-fitting clothing to hide their pregnancies.

“For tens of thousands of dollars each, defendant helped her numerous customers deceive U.S. authorities and buy U.S. citizenship for their children,” prosecutors said in court filings. They declined to comment after the sentencing.

In December, Liu was also sentenced to 41 months in prison. Dong's lawyer, John McNicholas, asked that she be allowed to serve her term after Liu completes his sentence because of their three children. The youngest is 13.

Federal prosecutor Kevin Fu agreed to the delay but Klausner refused and had her taken into custody immediately. Dong removed a necklace and gave it to a family member before she was led away.

The USA Happy Baby case was part of a broader probe into businesses that helped Chinese women travel to give birth in California. The operator of another business is believed to have fled to China, McNicholas wrote in court filings, while another was sentenced in 2019 to 10 months in prison after pleading guilty to conspiracy and visa fraud for running the company known as “ You Win USA.”

McNicholas said he feels Dong was given a much longer sentence because the government and Klausner blame her for the babies that were born U.S. citizens. That, he said, is unrelated to the allegations that she and Liu helped women travel to the United States to give birth.

“Our position was these children are born in America. They’re citizens,” McNicholas said, adding that Dong will appeal. “Implicitly, he’s saying being born here is not enough.”

[sputnik-two]

Alma Bowman, a 58-year old Filipino-American woman has been detained again by ICE in Georgia and taken to the Stewart Detention Center.

Bowman was born to an American father and a Filipino mother. She has lived in Georgia since she was 10 years old.

Justice for Alma Bowman Petition

Justice for Alma Bowman website/ways to support her family.

From Sophia Qureshi’s reporting at South 285:

58-year-old Alma Bowman was wheeled into the Atlanta ICE Field Office by her lawyer, around 8:30am on March 26. Alma was there for her yearly check-in with ICE; she had been released from detention in 2020, and has been coming for her routine check-ins since then.

Despite documents showing that Alma has claims to U.S. citizenship, her lawyer, and her two grown kids, were worried of what might happen.

It turns out they had reason to be.

Alma says she was born in the Philippines to a Filipino mother and U.S. citizen father, a claim that appears to be supported by documentation her legal team shared with 285 South. When she was 10, the family moved to Georgia. She grew up here, was married twice (both times to U.S. citizens), and has two children, John and Chris (they are also U.S. citizens), and had been living with them in Macon.

In 2017, she was reportedly taken into ICE custody following a traffic stop. She was on parole after having been in prison for a minor drug offense. Alma spent almost three years in immigration detention, during which time, she says that she had told ICE officers and immigration judges that she had claims to U.S. citizenship, but that she was ignored, according to The Intercept. During her time in detention, she also reported cases of medical abuse. She was released and reunited with her family in 2020, but with orders that she had to check in regularly with ICE.

Those check-ins had been happening as planned, until Wednesday.

After going through security, Alma sat with Samantha Hamilton, a lawyer with Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Atlanta (AAAJA) (which has been supporting her case), in the waiting room of the ICE field office in Atlanta for about five minutes. Then, according to Ms. Hamilton, an ICE representative called Alma’s name. “They said that they’re going to take her downstairs to get fingerprinted. And I said, can I go with her? And they said, No.”

Ms. Hamilton, (who in the interests of disclosure also represents this publication), sat in the waiting room, she said, for about 30 minutes, until an ICE representative brought her into a room where a supervisor spoke to her: “he says, so we took her in today, we’re going to take her in.

Alarmed, she responded, “You can’t do that. And they were like, why not?” Ms. Hamilton explained that Alma, who sometimes uses a wheelchair because of her limited mobility, had chronic health conditions, and that she also had credible claims to U.S. citizenship, including a birth certificate “that says that her dad was born in Illinois and was an American citizen.”

Two ICE agents, said Ms. Hamilton, were speaking amongst themselves, and then told her that Alma had a final order of removal and a criminal record. “I just kept arguing. And they just kept saying that their hands were tied, that they couldn’t do anything.”

A few hours later Alma’s son Chris got a call. It was Alma, calling from Stewart detention center in Lumpkin, Georgia.

“I asked her, did they actually fingerprint you when they said they would? She was like, no, as soon as they took me they brought me outside and they put [me] on a bus,” said Ms. Hamilton.

Speaking to 285 South on her way to Stewart on Wednesday, Ms. Hamilton said, “They just lied. It was like an open and shut thing for them.”

285 South reached out to ICE for a response on Wednesday, March 26, and again on Friday, March 28. At the time of publication, they have shared no details of Alma’s case.

Her kids are frustrated, confused and searching for answers. “They’ve [ICE] just decided that, despite the fact that we have complied with the conditions for her to be out and not detained, she’s for some reason, detained again”, her son, John, 27, told 285 South. “Nothing has happened to change the situation, if anything, this past year, we spent hundreds of dollars to apply for her to be able to work legally. She was working, paying taxes, being part of society.”

By the time Ms. Hamilton and Alma’s kids – John and Chris, reached Stewart on Wednesday, visiting hours for family were over. Only her legal team, including Ms. Hamilton and another lawyer from AAAJA, were able to meet with Alma – who passed a note along – to give to her kids.

“In that letter,” John said, “she was more concerned about my brother and I taking care of each other, and ourselves. She was sorry that she put us in this situation. She puts others before herself all the time.”

[learnwithmearticles]

Border Bills, Presidential Race

Kamala Harris is now the Democratic nominee for the 2024 election. Part of her campaign has included leaning into some moderate policies, such as less opposition to fracking and her recent statements about the border.

Harris has stated that she will be harder about the border than Donald Trump, the Republican opponent. At a rally in Georgia, she said she “will bring back the border security bill that Donald Trump killed”.

That Border Bill

Considered bipartisan, the bill Harris referred to was negotiated by Republicans with Democrats, then killed by Republicans after Trump urged them to do so.

By popular account, Trump wanted the bill to tank in order to force reliance on him to handle the ‘crisis’. If he can keep action from happening during the Biden-Harris term, voters might feel forced to vote for him if immigration is one of their concerns.

The proposed bill would provide significant additional funds for surveillance at the U.S.-Mexico border. It aims to increase search and seizure activity from Border Agents. That in itself is violating to individuals, as no warrant or probable cause is necessary for those searches. This allows agents far too much free reign to act as they please towards people regardless of their ‘potential danger’. Numerous videos online document the abuse people face from this.

The bill also calls for expanding the ability to detain people at the border, including funds for expanding custodial detention capacity. Following Trump’s 2016 election, we saw hordes of news about families separated, along with children and parents kept in cages, malnourished, and treated horribly. At least 37,000 people are currently in detention by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). At least 59.5% of those people have no criminal record.

The bill that Harris is announcing support for would worsen border conditions and facilitate Border Agents in keeping even more people wrongfully imprisoned.

Is there any good reason she’s doing this? Is there reason to worry about the border? What does it mean about her if there isn’t?

Immigration and Crime

No, simply. There is no strong evidence that immigration directly causes more crime.

A big concern in this area is drug trafficking. The Department of Homeland Security itself states that most fentanyl stopped at the border is being moved by U.S. citizens.

Additionally, Trump frequently refers to an “immigrant crime wave”. Statistics from places like New York disagree with that concept. While the immigrant population has increased in the city since 2022, the crime rate has overall remained steady, and even decreased for certain violent crimes like rape, murder, and shootings.

Another study found that, in the past 150 years, immigrants have been less likely to be incarcerated than U.S.-born citizens - 60% less, currently.

Evidence does not support the necessity of stricter border policies - especially ones that will only increase abuse towards those seeking asylum and do nothing to facilitate people becoming documented and successful working citizens.

As stated, Trump caused the bill to fail allegedly because it would force voters to vote for him if they want stricter border policies. Harris supporting such a bill completely weakens that attempt from Trump, making her a viable option for people concerned about immigration.

Again, as discussed, people do not need to be concerned about the border, but too many people still are. Considering the minds of voters, this switch from Harris to a non-progressive stance could be advantageous for her campaign.

(Of course, this is then hoping that she will not follow through, because such a law is unnecessary and harmful to people)

Additional Resources

1. Harris supporting border bill

2. Trump tanking the bill

3. The Bill

4. 90% of fentanyl from U.S. citizens

5. Detainee Statistics

6. Immigration and (Lack of) Crime

7. Incarceration Rates

[dankusner]

Issues in Texas after Obergefell v. Hodges

A lot has happened since 2013 in the realm of same sex marriage.

To catch you up to speed, the U.S. v. Windsor case came down on June 26, 2013, requiring the federal government to recognize same sex marriages that are conducted lawfully in the states where the parties reside.

See U.S. v. Windsor 133 S. Ct. 2675 (2013),

Though a step towards full legal recognition of same sex marriages, this decision specifically allowed states to continue to define who can be married.

Texas, in turn, continued to disallow same sex marriages.

Then, on June 26, 2015 (precisely two years after Windsor), our Supremes finally afforded equal protection and recognition to same sex marriages throughout the entire United States.

Specifically, the majority held "that the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.

The Court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry.

No longer may this liberty be denied to them."

Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584, 2605 (2015).

So where does this leave Texas law?

The truth is we are still figuring it out.

In fact, our current Texas Family Code contains several statutes which contradict Obergefell.

We still have provisions in both the Texas Family Code and the Texas Constitution defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.

Further, the Texas Family Code still recognizes only an informal marriage between a man and woman and does not recognize other statutory relationships found in other states, such as domestic partnerships.

Also, the Texas Family Code still contains presumptions of paternity which arguably may or may not be afforded to same sex couples.

With all that being said, courts in Texas are already dealing with these issues.

Let’s start with the idea of informal marriage aka "common law" marriage.

The only requirements for common law marriage under our Texas Family Code are that the parties must agree to be married, reside together, and hold themselves out as married.

The question arises as to whether informal (or even formal) marriages can be recognized in Texas prior to the Obergefell ruling, and whether the ruling itself is retroactive.

Though cases have been filed concerning the issue of retroactivity, unfortunately, no appellate decision has yet addressed it in Texas.

So, for the time being, the answer depends on where the case is filed.

Interestingly, Judge Guy Herman in Travis County, Texas back dated a same sex common law marriage for purposes of a probate case.

See Interlocutory Judgment Declaring Heirs in Estate of Stella Marie Powell, Cause No. C-1-PB-14- 001695, October 5, 2015.

The deceased, Stella Marie Powell, and her partner, Sonemaly Phrasavath, had a longtime relationship with each other and Ms. Powell passed away prior to the Obergefell ruling.

When Ms. Powell passed away, Ms. Phrasavath filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on August 25, 2015 to be able to inherit as a spouse would inherit, based on their common law marriage.

Despite the Attorney General’s intervention, the Court found on October 5, 2015 that the two did in fact have a common law mar- riage.

See Interlocutory Judgment Declar- ing Heirs in Estate of Stella Marie Powell, Cause No. C-1-PB-14-001695, October 5, 2015.

As for issues concerning children, for children born after June 26, 2015, both same sex parents can put their names on the birth certificate.

Further, for those children born prior to June 26, 2015, whom only one parent’s name appears on the birth certificate, those need to be amended to prevent any confusion in the event of litigation (a possible custody battle) or even for inheritance purposes.

Fortunately, the Texas Department of State Health Services issued a memorandum opinion after Obergefell, on August 12, 2015, which has been adopted and controls how the State will comply with the Supreme Court decision.

Many issues concerning amending birth certificates and death certificates can be resolved through a simple form.

In terms of same sex couples gaining parenting rights, there is still ample litigation which must occur.

General standing will be a hot button issue, as many same sex couples who reared children prior to Obergefell will be able to gain standing solely based on possession.

However, if couples fight and separate, that standing may be at issue.

The case law is slowly but surely beginning to answer some of the questions that lawyers and same sex couples have as it relates to the application of the Obergefell case.

Additionally, our next legislative session will occur in 2017.

Hope- fully with some thoughtful legislative updates, we can continue to go towards infinity and beyond to expand and define the rights of same sex couples and their children.

1

This case is currently on appeal, with the State of Texas appealing the Probate Court’s findings

24073365

[zdfsdtgfsd]

Is Surrogacy Legal for Chinese in the United States? A Comprehensive Guide

Surrogacy has become an increasingly popular option for individuals and couples seeking to build their families. For Chinese citizens, surrogacy in the United States offers a viable solution due to the country's advanced medical technology, legal framework, and surrogacy-friendly policies. However, many Chinese nationals wonder: Is surrogacy legal for Chinese in the United States? This article explores the legalities, processes, and considerations for Chinese individuals pursuing surrogacy in the U.S., providing valuable insights to help you navigate this complex journey.

Understanding Surrogacy Laws in the United States

The United States is one of the most surrogacy-friendly countries in the world, with laws that vary by state. While surrogacy is legal in many states, the regulations and requirements differ significantly. For Chinese citizens, the key advantage of pursuing surrogacy in the U.S. is the clear legal framework that protects the rights of intended parents, surrogates, and the child.

Unlike China, where surrogacy is strictly prohibited, the U.S. allows both gestational and traditional surrogacy arrangements. Gestational surrogacy, where the surrogate has no genetic link to the child, is the most common and legally secure option. States like California, Illinois, and Nevada are particularly surrogacy-friendly, offering robust legal protections for all parties involved.

Is Surrogacy Legal for Chinese in the United States?

Yes, surrogacy is legal for Chinese citizens in the United States. Chinese nationals can enter into surrogacy agreements in the U.S. and legally become parents through this process. However, there are several important considerations to keep in mind:

Legal Representation: It is crucial to work with an experienced surrogacy attorney who understands both U.S. surrogacy laws and the specific needs of international intended parents.

Birth Certificate and Citizenship: Children born through surrogacy in the U.S. are automatically granted U.S. citizenship if at least one intended parent is genetically related to the child. Chinese parents can then apply for a Chinese passport for their child to bring them back to China.

Travel and Immigration: Chinese parents must comply with U.S. immigration laws and ensure proper documentation for their child's travel to China.

The Surrogacy Process for Chinese Citizens in the U.S.

The surrogacy process for Chinese nationals in the United States typically involves the following steps:

1. Choosing a Surrogacy Agency

Selecting a reputable surrogacy agency is the first step. The agency will help match intended parents with a surrogate, coordinate medical procedures, and provide legal and emotional support throughout the journey.

2. Legal Agreements

Once a surrogate is chosen, a surrogacy agreement is drafted. This legally binding contract outlines the rights and responsibilities of all parties, including compensation for the surrogate, medical procedures, and parental rights.

3. Medical Procedures

The intended mother or an egg donor undergoes egg retrieval, which is then fertilized with sperm from the intended father or a sperm donor. The resulting embryo is transferred to the surrogate's uterus.

4. Pregnancy and Birth

The surrogate carries the pregnancy to term, and the intended parents are typically present for the birth. After delivery, the intended parents assume full legal custody of the child.

5. Obtaining Citizenship and Travel Documents

The child's birth certificate is issued, and U.S. citizenship is confirmed. Chinese parents must then apply for a Chinese visa or passport to bring their child home.

Challenges and Considerations for Chinese Nationals

While surrogacy in the U.S. offers many advantages, there are challenges that Chinese nationals should be aware of:

Cost: Surrogacy in the U.S. can be expensive, with costs ranging from 100,000to

100,000to150,000 or more. This includes agency fees, medical expenses, legal fees, and surrogate compensation.

Cultural and Language Barriers: Navigating the surrogacy process in a foreign country can be daunting. Working with professionals who understand Chinese culture and language can help ease the process.

Legal Compliance in China: While surrogacy is legal in the U.S., Chinese laws do not recognize surrogacy. Parents must ensure that their child's documentation is in order to avoid legal issues in China.

Why Choose the United States for Surrogacy?

For Chinese citizens, the United States offers several advantages for surrogacy:

Legal Protections: U.S. surrogacy laws are well-established, providing security and peace of mind for intended parents.

Advanced Medical Technology: The U.S. is a global leader in reproductive medicine, offering high success rates for surrogacy procedures.

Diverse Surrogacy Options: Intended parents can choose from a wide range of surrogacy arrangements, including gestational surrogacy, egg donation, and sperm donation.

Conclusion

Is surrogacy legal for Chinese in the United States? The answer is a resounding yes. With its favorable legal environment, advanced medical technology, and comprehensive support systems, the U.S. is an ideal destination for Chinese nationals seeking to build their families through surrogacy. However, it is essential to work with experienced professionals and understand the legal and financial implications of the process.

By choosing the right surrogacy agency, legal representation, and medical team, Chinese citizens can successfully navigate the surrogacy journey in the United States and fulfill their dreams of parenthood.

[hudsonmckenzie]

Something You Must Know Before Hiring An Ireland Immigration Lawyer in London

The United States is initially called as a country of immigrants. The English-speaking Protestant Christians who found the region, however, have not always welcomed other societies. The hated have changed over a period of time.

Northern Europeans who did not speak English were despised in ancient times. Following that came French Canadians, the insufficient Irish, Catholic Italians, Revolutionary Germans, eluding Jews, Asian workers dared by other immigrants and Spanish-speaking Latin Americans.

In general, the United States is in its nextbig trend of immigration with the start of 19th century. The first shift wasdriven by primarily Europeans. It activatedlimits on immigration in the 1920s. Tranquil rules in the 1960s allowed the current wave, made up originally of Latin Americans and Asians.

According to Census Bureau data, there are more than 43 million immigrants in the United States out of a total population of about 323 million people. This represents close to 14 percent of the country's population. About 27% of Americans are immigrants or children of immigrants who were born in the United States.The figure reveals a steadyincrease from 1970 when there were fewer than ten million immigrants in the United States. But there are respectively fewer immigrants now than in 1890 when foreign-born residents comprise15 percent of the population.

Illegal immigration - The unclaimed population is almost eleven million and has flattened off since the 2008 economic adversity, which cause many to get back to their home nations and discouraged others from projecting toward the United States. In 2017, Customs and Border Protection showed a 26 percent decrease in the number of people imprisoned or stopped at the southern border from the year before, which is some traitof the Trump administration’s policies. At the same time, custodies of suspected undocumented immigrants surged by 40 percent.

More than half of the undocumented have resided in the country for nearlya decade; almostone-thirdis the parentage of U.S.-born children. Central American asylum seekers, many of whom are minors who have run awayfrom violence in their home countries, make up a swellingpart of those who snap the U.S.-Mexico border. These immigrants have a number of legal rights to Mexican nationals in the United States: under a 2008 anti-human trafficking law, minors from noncontiguous countries carrytheauthority to a deportation hearing before being turned back to their home countries.

The United States allowednearly 1.2 million individuals [PDF] legal permanent residency in 2016, more than two-thirds of whom were established based on family reunions.

Keeping in mind the difficulty of U.S immigration law and related sections, a big chunk of people wanting to migrate to the US rely on the expertise and skills of an Ireland immigration lawyer in London. These lawyers have particular knowledgein regard to U.S immigration law and deliver all-inclusive help to their clients from making the application to getting approvals at various intervals. In order to increase your likelihood of getting visa approval, it is necessary to rely on the expertise of reputed and experienced Ireland immigration lawyer in London who can understand your case prudently and suggest the next promising step further.

[howwelldoyouknowyourmoon]

Divorce, Drugs, Jail, a Nasty Custody Battle—Family Woes Lay Bare the Dark Side of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon

Time Asia

by Alex Tresniowski            September 21, 1998 As weddings go, it was a doozy: More than 7,000 couples squeezed into New York City’s Madison Square Garden on June 13 to take their vows or rededicate them before Rev. Sun Myung Moon. By contrast, just three weeks later, a mere 100 or so people gathered for the nuptials of Un Jin Moon and Rodney Jenkins at the Keswick Club near Charlottesville, Va. Conspicuously absent from the ceremony was the father of the bride—the Reverend Moon.

This tale of two weddings sheds harsh light on the frenzied times and nasty feuds that are rending the family of Moon, 78, the founder and leader of the powerful Unification Church. While church members believe that Moon, his second wife, Hak Ja Han, 55, and their 12 surviving children—known to followers as the True Family—embody a theoretical ideal that should be emulated, evidence suggests that the Moons are hardly a model of domestic tranquility. “This is a dysfunctional family,” says Madelene Pretorius, 36, a former church employee who left the group in 1995. “It’s very difficult to reconcile Rev. Moon’s principles with the reality I was experiencing.”

First, consider Moon’s messy estrangement from his daughter Un Jin, 30—who fled a mate chosen by her parents and is now battling for custody of their two young children. Oldest son Hyo Jin, 35, racked up enough woes to fill a Jerry Springer marathon: divorce, a DWI [DUI] arrest and drug abuse, as well as allegations of spousal abuse. Another of Moon’s daughters, Sun Jin, 22, fled the family’s palatial Westchester County, N.Y., estate in 1995 after an arranged marriage, then lived in Greenwich Village before a diagnosis of Hodgkin’s disease returned her to the fold. What’s more, court papers and disillusioned associates alike are laying bare the secretive family’s lavish lifestyle, which stands in contrast to Moon’s austere public image. “There were BMWs and expensive Mercedeses everywhere for the Moon family’s use,” says Donna Collins, 28, a former church member. “Money was no object.” At the same time, “there were church members working 12 hours a day who couldn’t afford to buy their kids sneakers,” says a former friend of the family. “The members did without for the True Family to have.”

Quite a host of problems for the man many consider to be a messiah. The Korean-born Moon, who founded his Unification Church in Korea in 1954 before coming to the U.S. in 1971, had his heyday in the mid-70s, when his calls for peace and purity filled airports with panhandling “Moonies.” (The church preaches that Jesus’s failure to restore man to his original state of grace forced God to send the second Messiah—Moon.)

But ever since Moon’s 1982 conviction on tax-evasion [and document forgery] charges, which landed him in the Danbury, Conn., federal penitentiary for a year, the church’s membership in the U.S. has been dwindling. One church official puts it at 30,000, down from 50,000. “There seems to be a falling away of his inner circle as well,” says journalist Robert Parry, who has investigated the church. “Some people who have been with Rev. Moon for a long time have grown disenchanted. There are real problems inside the family, and what some of these folks in the inner circle are seeing is that the Moons are far from perfect.”

The disillusioned seem to include many of his children, who were raised with a lack of parental supervision in an atmosphere of incredible luxury at two sprawling Westchester County estates, East Garden and Belvedere. The kids were treated to private hairdressers and fawning attendants and were brought up mainly by nannies while the Moons traveled. When Un Jin expressed an interest in horses, Moon built her a $10 million riding facility; Hyun Jin’s fondness for guns led to construction of a huge shooting range. “The sons, especially, are very arrogant,” says the former Moon friend. “They have egos that you couldn’t fit into a banquet hall.”

Tragedy struck the Moons in 1984: Their 17-year-old son Heung Jin was killed when he crashed his sports car into a truck. More trouble followed. Daughter Ye Jin, 37, moved to Boston in 1993 and cut off most family contact. Restive younger daughter Un Jin, who at age 18 was joined to church member Jun Heon Park in a union arranged by Moon, split from her family in 1996. On July 3, 1998, she married equestrian Rodney Jenkins, 54, whom she had met while training for the Olympics two years earlier. (According to her attorney, Un Jin never got a divorce from Park because their ceremony was not recognized as a marriage under the law.) “Spiritually, Un Jin has been declared dead to church members,” says a friend. “Basically, she has fallen. She is not supported by the family; she doesn’t get a dime.” Un Jin is now suing for custody of her two daughters, ages 4 and 8, who are being raised at her parents’ East Garden estate.

But Moon’s biggest problem is oldest son Hyo Jin, the church’s crown prince. Last December his 15-year arranged marriage to Nansook Hong fell apart amid her charges that he forced her to flee from East Garden with their five children in tow. “He punched me in the nose and blood came rushing out,” Hong, whose tell-all book about the Moons will be published this month, says in an affidavit. “I was seven months pregnant and was afraid he would kill my baby.”

In 1996, Hyo Jin spent three months in a Massachusetts jail for failing to pay lawyers’ fees related to his divorce, and this February he was locked up for 20 days in Westchester County jail for violating an order of protection obtained by his wife. That followed his 1994 arrest for drunk driving and two 1995 stays at substance-abuse treatment centers, including the Betty Ford Center in California. Hong’s affidavit claims that Hyo Jin—now working as a music producer at the church-affiliated Manhattan Center Studios in New York City—once brought home a box filled with $1 million in cash, then spent $400,000 “buying cocaine and alcohol, entertaining his friends every night and giving expensive gifts to other women.” In September of 1996, during his ongoing divorce proceedings, Hyo Jin filed for bankruptcy (he later withdrew the filing). A deposition in the case quotes him as stating, “All I like was guns and music.”

Hardly the kind of devotion that is likely to attract new followers to the cause. Even so, says attorney Herbert Rosedale, a prominent Moon critic, “the church’s activities are still strong, and their recruitment is still very active.” Indeed, the church still owns the influential conservative newspaper Washington Times, is developing vast tracts of land in South America and operates various foundations that promote Moon’s family-values message.

Running it all is the still-vigorous Moon, though the family’s troubles have thrown his succession into doubt. Hyo Jin had been the heir apparent, but “there is no way they are going to let him take over now,” says a family friend. More likely, Moon’s wife, Hak Ja Han, or another son, Hyun Jin, 29, who currently runs a church-affiliated business, will take the reins. Moon isn’t talking, but the very public disintegration of his True Family portends a tempestuous transition. “When the reverend passes away, they’ll all be killing each other for power,” says the friend. “I don’t think there will be anything left.”

_______________________________

The six ‘wives’ of Sun Myung Moon

[rijallaw]

The Path To U.S. Citizenship Through Your Parents

Thanks to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, any child born on U.S. soil is automatically granted citizenship, ensuring that children of parents residing in the United States, regardless of their immigration status, can enjoy the privileges of citizenship. When they reach the age of 18, individuals with legal immigration status can apply for naturalization to become full-fledged citizens. Navigating the complex process of acquiring citizenship can be made much more manageable with the guidance of an experienced immigration attorney.

Understanding The Routes To Citizenship The Child Citizenship Act offers a means for children to obtain citizenship through their parents. You may be surprised to learn that you or your loved ones could already be U.S. citizens through one of these three pathways:

1) Naturalization:

This is the most common method of achieving U.S. citizenship. Lawful permanent residents typically need to demonstrate their residency for the required number of years, good moral character, physical presence, knowledge of American history and customs, and a basic understanding of English.

2) Acquisition:

Individuals born outside the United States can acquire U.S. citizenship if at least one parent is a U.S. citizen. Different rules and requirements apply to different circumstances and eras, making this pathway complex to navigate.

3) Derivation:

When a lawful permanent resident’s parent or parents become naturalized U.S. citizens, the resident’s status may automatically change to that of a U.S. citizen. Those who acquire citizenship through acquisition or derivation are exempt from taking a citizenship test since they are already U.S. citizens.

The Child Citizenship Act Of 2000 This act, signed into law by President Clinton and effective since February 27, 2001, stipulates that the children of legal permanent residents automatically become U.S. citizens if the following conditions are met:

– The child has at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen (by birth or naturalization).

– The child is under 18 years old.

– The U.S. citizen parent has legal and physical custody of the child, who is now a permanent resident of the U.S.

Upon meeting these requirements, the child is considered a natural-born U.S. citizen through their parents. While no naturalization application is needed, proof of citizenship can be obtained through a Certificate of Citizenship (using Form N-600) or a U.S. Passport application.

Added Benefits Of Citizenship In addition to enjoying the rights and benefits of U.S. citizenship, citizens are safeguarded from deportation, providing security in the face of legal issues that may arise.

The Significance Of Legal Guidance Submitting a citizenship confirmation request does not guarantee approval. A thorough understanding of requirements and necessary documentation is essential. Immigration officers evaluate each application to determine whether lawful citizenship has already been achieved. Having robust legal advice from an immigration attorney significantly enhances your chances of success.

Consult An Experienced Immigration Attorney If you have questions about eligibility requirements for confirming citizenship, don’t hesitate to reach out to our office. Rijal Law Firm’s immigration attorneys have assisted countless families in securing citizenship for their children. Choosing the right law firm is paramount when it comes to your child’s citizenship. Contact us today to ensure a smooth and successful citizenship process.

[mariacallous]

Luis Alberto Castillo tried to do it the right way. According to an affidavit filed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Castillo, a 29-year-old Venezuelan citizen who had been living in Colombia, arrived at the Paso del Norte Port of Entry in El Paso, Texas, on Jan. 19. He had made an appointment to apply for asylum on CBP One, an official U.S. government app, Castillo’s own affidavit said.

Both U.S. and international law enshrine a right to asylum. But Castillo ran into two hitches. The first was that, as reported by the New York Times, the border agent thought a tattoo on his neck looked suspicious and ordered him temporarily detained. The second was that this happened the day before Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term as U.S. president—and quickly suspended access to asylum.

Castillo spent two weeks in custody in El Paso. A Times investigation would later find that he had no criminal convictions in Colombia; his family told the newspaper’s reporters that his neck tattoo was a tribute to Michael Jordan. Nonetheless, Castillo found himself shackled and loaded onto a military cargo plane with several other migrants born in Venezuela. Their destination: the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay.

Trump’s signature election promise was to carry out what he calls a “mass deportation” of as many as 20 million people—a plan that will by its nature almost certainly run afoul of international law. Collective expulsions violate a host of protections, including the right to individual assessment of risks and bans against forcing individuals to go back to countries where they face grave human rights abuses.

On the campaign trail, Trump advisor Stephen Miller outlined what these expulsions would look like: roundups of immigrants by the military and federal law enforcement officers, mass detentions, and deportations of immigrant families with U.S. citizen children.

Miller is now Trump’s deputy chief of staff for policy, and some of those plans are taking shape. Trump officials have indicated that some federal personnel, including Internal Revenue Service workers and staff of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, have been reassigned from their jobs or asked to volunteer to bolster immigration investigations. Trump has also issued executive orders challenging birthright citizenship—a right enshrined in the plain text of the 14th Amendment—and allowing immigration-related arrests inside hospitals, schools, and places of worship, which were long considered places of sanctuary.

In recent days, the Trump administration has ignored court orders to halt deportation flights under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, an archaic authority meant to be used only in wartime. The White House also rebuffed a court order that blocked the expulsion of a Brown University medical professor. The president himself has announced his intention to “find, apprehend, and deport” more pro-Palestine student protesters in the wake of the detentions of two Columbia students and the “self-deportation” of a third. The administration has, without evidence, claimed that both Venezuelan and pro-Palestinian detainees are linked to terrorism.

But the full machinery to conduct mass deportations is not yet in place. On Feb. 12, the Department of Homeland Security issued a request for “immediate assistance” from the Pentagon for the “detention and secure transfer of aliens within the Continental United States,” including the use of El Paso’s Fort Bliss as a staging ground for 10,000 immigrants. This month, the Guardian reported that the base is also “being considered for large-scale detention.”

Dozens of other installations could follow suit, including New Jersey’s Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst; Hill Air Force Base near Salt Lake City; Homestead Air Reserve Base outside Miami; and Kirtland Air Force Base in Albuquerque, the government memo said.

As the Trump administration builds its deportation machine at home, it is also making use of alliances and client states to do so throughout the Americas—fruits of the same imperial interventions that helped trigger the last century of northward migrations. In addition to Guantánamo Bay, these facilities range from hotels in the Panamanian jungle to airstrips in Honduras.

One of the most troubling partnerships is with El Salvador, whose president, Nayib Bukele, calls himself the “world’s coolest dictator.” In 2022, Bukele declared a “state of exception” in his country, allowing the military and police to arrest people on suspicion of gang affiliation—including allegedly suspicious tattoos—without due process. El Salvador quickly achieved the highest incarceration rate in the world.

On a visit to El Salvador’s capital last month, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that Bukele has offered to house in his prisons immigrants deported from the United States and “dangerous American criminals in custody in our country, including those of U.S. citizenship and legal residents.”

Many are expected to be stuffed into Bukele’s new Terrorism Confinement Center, a prison built to hold 40,000 people. Inmates there are shaved, stripped naked, and given just a pair of thin white boxer shorts to wear. An investigation by the Salvadoran human rights organization Cristosal found that in the prison’s first year, “dozens of inmates died as a result of torture, beatings, mechanical suffocation via strangulation or wounds or were left to die because of lack of medical attention,” according to El País.

Ties between Trump’s circle and Bukele run deep. Donald Trump Jr. and his then-partner, former Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle, attended Bukele’s second, unconstitutional inauguration last June. Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz was there, too, along with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. “We have the whole team here. We are now in El Salvador. … We are here just promoting those who support freedom around the world,” Donald Trump Jr. said in a video he posted to TikTok.

A few months later, Elon Musk hosted the Salvadoran dictator in Texas to discuss “the future of humanity.” Their relationship blossomed on Musk’s social media hub, X, with the tech mogul declaring in January that Bukele’s “state of exception” model “needs to happen and will happen in America.”

Last month, as federal judges tried to put limits on Musk’s purge of the federal government, the billionaire retweeted a statement from Bukele: “If you don’t impeach the corrupt judges, you CANNOT fix the country.” Musk replied in a quote tweet: “Unfortunately, as President Bukele eloquently articulates, there is no other option. We must impeach to save democracy.”

The constitutional violations inherent in all of this—imprisoning people who haven’t even been accused of a crime, deporting U.S. citizens to serve sentences in foreign prisons—are too many to detail. The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution spring to mind.

But the Trump administration has already shown a willingness to blow through legal and social red lines, as vividly illustrated by its use of Guantánamo, for the first time, to detain people deported from U.S. territory.

The naval station has long been a symbol of American exception. U.S. Marines, with Cuban help, seized Guantánamo while intervening in the island’s 1898 independence war against Spain; Washington extorted a lease after the conflict in exchange for withdrawing troops from the rest of the island. The land has remained in U.S. hands ever since, even as Fidel Castro’s guerrillas overthrew Cuba’s U.S.-backed dictator in 1959. That strange arrangement—a U.S. base on hostile territory—created a legal gray area where presidents have argued that neither U.S. nor Cuban law applies.

The Clinton administration used Guantánamo to temporarily house tens of thousands of mainly Cuban and Haitian migrants interdicted at sea in the 1990s. In 2002, the Bush administration began using the base to indefinitely house detainees captured on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Pakistan, pledging to the American people that the prisoners held on the island would be the “worst of the worst.” This was always false: The Bush-era detainees were mainly what the Defense Department admitted were “low-value” enemy combatants; only seven of the 780 prisoners were ever convicted of terror-related offenses, most in pre-trial settlements.

The Trump administration has seized on past injustices and made them worse. As immigrant-rights advocates and lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union said in a federal lawsuit filed this month: “Never before has the federal government moved noncitizens apprehended and detained in the United States on civil immigration charges to Guantánamo. Nor is there any legitimate reason to do so now.”

As they were flying Castillo, the Venezuelan migrant, and other men to Cuba, the Trump administration again slapped on the Bush-era label, calling them—without evidence—the “worst of the worst.” Lawyers for the men said the government denied the detainees access to their attorneys and kept them in the dark about their location.

“Each of us are in a small cell with a thin mattress,” Castillo said in his federal affidavit. “We only get one hour a day outside of the cell. That is the only time we can see the sun, and even then, we are in a small cage in the yard. We are searched every time we use the bathroom. The food is not enough and not edible. I do not understand why we are being treated this way.”

The migrants held a five-day hunger strike. At least one told NPR that he tried to commit suicide. Their families were told nothing. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s online “detainee locator” falsely claimed at least some of the men were being held in a small field office in the evocatively named locale of Plantation, Florida.

It was not until Castillo’s family recognized him in an official photo released by the Trump administration—a shot of him being ushered, head bowed, by a masked and gloved soldier; a smidge of tattoo sticking over the collar of his sweatshirt—that Castillo got representation and learned where he was being held. Organizations led by the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center quickly filed suit against the departments of homeland security, state, and defense on behalf of Castillo and two other inmates, seeking a court order to allow attorneys to access them and other future detainees at the base in eastern Cuba.

Then, on Feb. 20, without warning, the Trump administration cleared the camp, sending all but one of the inmates to an airstrip in Honduras, where they were to be transferred to another plane taking them to Venezuela. Three days later, another planeload of migrants arrived at Guantánamo Bay. This second cohort was transferred to U.S. facilities shortly thereafter.

Meanwhile, over the weekend, the first planeloads of Venezuelan deportees were flown from the United States to El Salvador under the 1798 act. The flights were carried out in apparent defiance of an order to halt the flight by U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, who argued that the act “cannot be used here against nationals of a country—Venezuela—with whom the United States is not at war.” He ordered “any plane containing these folks … to be returned to the United States.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the judge’s order was issued after the flights had already left U.S. territory and thus had “no lawful basis.” But Boasberg had said that his order also applied to flights that were already “in the air.”

“Oopsie… Too late,” Bukele tweeted, punctuating his post with a laugh-cry emoji. It was retweeted by Rubio.

[thepricefiles]

Walter Scott Price

Marx Christian and Charlotte's son, Walter Scott Price Sr., was born September 26, 1876 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and only made it to the 7th grade. He was 17 years old when he joined the U.S. Army during the Spanish-American war. He had wanted to see serve in Cuba but instead guarded powder works in New Jersey. At 21, he enlisted in the Second Regiment of The Pennsylvania National Guard in Pennsgrove, New Jersey as a Pennsylvania Volunteer in the Spanish-American War and as a member of the Soldiers of the Pennsylvania Second Regiment of the National Guard. In 1898, the entire Pennsylvania National Guard was "mustered into federal service" for the Spanish-American War. Enlistment records list him as Walter S. Price, Corporal, Co. K; Residence: Philadelphia, Pa. (Pennsylvania National Guard) ; Enrolled April 28, 1898; Mustered in May 13, 1898; Promoted to Sergeant ,June 2, 1898; Mustered out with company Nov. 15, 1898. In 1899, he enlisted in the Fourth United States Regulars, an infantry regiment in the United States Army. at Fort Sheridan, Illinois. He was also a US army engineer. At age 21, he was one of 12 US army  engineers sent to the Philippines during the Spanish-American War to help rebuild war-torn communities.

Price was deployed to the Pacific in 1899 from New York (Suez Canal) with the First Regiment to take that route (the first United States Troops to cross the Atlantic on deployment). He arrived in the Pacific as a Second Lieutenant. In 1901, he was given the rank of corporal, and became a military Provost at Camp Bumpus in Tacloban Leyte (The Military Provost Staff Corps was formed in 1901 under Army Order 241 and are the Army's specialists in custody and detention).  The Military Provost Staff Corps were not the Military Police. They were the staff of the military prisons and similar establishments. He became the camp’s commanding officer with he rank of Captain. He accepted the surrender of Philippine Col Leon Rojas, a resistance leader.

He refused an officer’s commission in both the US army and the Philippine Constabulary and was mustered out of his unit at age 25. In 1901, he sought a discharge from the army. He was given an honorable discharge.

Walter met and married Simeona Custodio Kalingag Price, born April 16 1873, died August 30, 1973, age 100. Simeona was from Cavite, Philippines, and migrated to San Jose, Leyte after the Spanish-American War. She was a relative on her father’s side of General Emilio Aguinaldo, President of the first Philippine Republic. Walter and Simeona's children were: Joseph Christian Price, b. 14 October 1902, Leyte, Philippines; Walter Scott Price, Jr. "Scotty", b. 1904, Leyte, Philippines; Sofia Price, b. 1905, Leyte, Philippines; Francisca Price, b. 1908, Leyte, Philippine; Carlota Price, b. Tacloban, Leyte Philippines; Fred Price, b. Tacloban, Leyte Philippines; Maria Price; Dorothy Price; Pacifica Price. Walter was a 6-foot, 225-pound man. He was called one of the ten best-dressed men in 1940s Manila. He wore large diamond rings. He was nicknamed the (Transportation) "King of Leyte".

Between 1902 and 1940 Walter's sons were sent to the US for schooling.  Walter Scott Price Sr. remained in Leyte to set up business enterprises and assisted the army as a civilian, up until the outbreak of the Japanese-American war.  He founded a transportation company, the Leyte Transportation Company (Letranco) with three buses and one motorcycle, carrying passengers and crops. It grew to a fleet of 140 vehicles and the only form of transportation and bus service  in Leyte until WWII. He opened coconut plantations and invested in mining. He contracted with the army to load and unload transport ships that docked at Tacloban. He expanded into road construction. he bought a roller and despite having no knowledge of civil engineering, he began developing and building paved roads and a steel bridge that connected towns. He contributed to the development of the province of Leyte.

During the Japanese invasion of Leyte, in 1942, he was initially only placed under house arrest by the Japanese due to his status in the town. But he was caught in his office “attempting to remove something from the safe” and was sent to an Internment Camp at The University of Santo Tomas on January 16, 1943 and became a POW. His room in the camp was EB0114. He was relocated to the Los Banos Internment Camp, Philippines (He volunteered to take the place of a sick prisoner). US paratroopers from the 11th Airborne Division and Filipino guerrillas liberated the camp of February 23, 1945. The internees were evacuated over the Laguna de Bay by amphibious vehicles with “US fighters flying overhead and Japanese troops shooting at them from Mount Makiling”. News of Walter’s release was wired by the Red Cross to his family in the U.S. When finally freed during the American liberation of the camp in 1945, by the American forces, the "once heavyweight Walter" was a “skeleton of 95 pounds”  when found by his son Scotty at the camp. He died of pneumonia on May 18, 1945, at the age of 68 at the U.S. Army 5th Field Hospital, Santo Tomas University, Manila, Philippines. In a chronicle of the internees (Hartendorp), it was documented that the “Transportation King of Leyte, died of pneumonia”. He was buried in the University Santo Tomas Cemetery, Southwest Plot Manila, Capital District, National Capital Region, Philippines. Find a Grave Memorial 135545557. Walter was a Baptist, and a member of the Masonic Lodge, but he received the last rites of the Catholic Church.

Walter's only known biography is “Walter Scott Price, King of Leyte” by Father Raymond Quetchenbach, SVD, Leyte-Samar Studies 8, no. 1, 1974, 33-38. He is also mentioned on the book The MacArthur Highway and Other Relics of American Empire in the Philippines by Joseph P. McCallus (Page ix: “In the US, Lia Scott Price supplied info and contacts regarding her ancestor Walter Scott Price”): “The wealthy residents came to the court of an American known as “The King of Leyte”, Walter Scott Price.

Sources:

-“Walter Scott Price, King of Leyte” by Father Raymond Quetchenbach, SVD, Leyte-Samar Studies 8, no. 1, 1974, 33-38

-Walter Scott Price: US Census Records, US Army Enlistment Records, Birth, Death and Obituary Records from ancestry.com

-The MacArthur Highway and Other Relics of American Empire in the Philippines by Joseph P. McCallus, Columbus State University, Columbus, Georgia, Pg 53 “The King of Leyte and the Junkyard Oakie” (with a credit to Lia Scott Price, Walter's great-granddaughter.)

The book on amazon:

The MacArthur Highway and Other Relics of American Empire in the Philippines

Photos from the Price Family Album

Walter Scott Price and Simeona Kalingag Price

Walter Scott Price

The Walter Scott Price Family

The author L. Price's grandfather is Walter Scott ("Scotty") Price Jr.

[theivorybilledwoodpecker]

Yes, anyone can become disabled at any point. But you're talking about children. People who have been born.

A zygote/embryo/fetus is not a "baby."

Let me guess. "If you can't afford every possible financial cost that might occur, you shouldn't have kids, disabled or not!"

Welll, guess what. That would basically mean no one but the 1% would be allowed to have kids.

It's one of those statements that sound so simple, but implement that, and you'll be committing an atrocity:

The U.S. government used poverty as one of the many excuses to take Native American children from their families and give them to white people. Couldn't afford a refrigerator? You lost your kid. People today have severe PTSD from that.

Children of immigrants here without legal status have been taken from their parents and given to others.

Systemic racism means that some marginalized groups disproportionately experience poverty. Should they not be allowed to have kids?

And what should happen to children once born? Because I hate to break it to you, but some medical bills cost millions of dollars, and most people can't afford that. Should loving parents who don't have millions need to give up custody the moment a child is born because they might one day have a condition the parents can't afford? Let the system fill up until a 1% decides to adopt?

"Oh, I only meant emotionally!"

And most people who want kids do think they are prepared for one no matter what. But thinking in hypotheticals is very different from hearing reality. Textbooks can't prepare them for every situatiin.

Deciding to terminate a pregnancy for reasons of disability means they are not ready to raise a child with disabilities, not that they don't think any child with disabilities should be born.

"But that means if they have a child who develops disabilities, they won't be a good parent!"

Bitch, no. Because a child or baby is not the same as an embryo/zygote/fetus.

People who have been forced to give birth have been shamed when speaking out. People accuse them of not loving their children.

But that's not true. Because a child is not the same as a zef. It's not "ZEFs aren't children...except when diagnosed with a disability." They just aren't children.

A person can recognize, when they are pregnant, that they don't want a child or aren't ready to care for them, yet still love the child and do their best to care for them after they are born. Your logic is flawed.

Gentle reminder that you can be 100% pro choice and still understand that aborting a fetus because it will be disabled as a human is a eugenicist idea that comes from absolutely horrifying ideas that have been placed in western culture as a result of more overt eugenics movements in our past.

[whatisonthemoon]

Foreigners give babies to ‘Moonies’ The Anniston Star January 23, 1989

MOBILE (AP) – An investigator with the Mobile County Sheriff’s Department remains baffled by three adoption cases involving foreign couples that a Unification Church member said was motivated simply by love. “Why have these people come from these different countries to give their children to these particular people?” said Lark Dodd. But Ms. Dodd said her investigation into the cases was closed since no wrongdoing was discovered. Two of the foreign couples who traveled to Mobile to have their babies gave custody of the newborns to Unification Church members. A third couple returned to Canada with their infant son after the state launched an investigation. An attorney for the Unification church said the church has not arranged the adoptions or instructed members to have babies and give them to church members. “To the best of my knowledge these relationships were developed by the individuals themselves,” with no guidance from the church, said David Hagar, an attorney at the Unification Church’s New York office. Workers at Spring Hill Memorial Hospital told The Birmingham News that the Canadian woman refused to look at the 9-pound, 12-ounce baby boy she gave birth to on Sept. 21 and told them another woman would pick up the infant.

The bewilderment of hospital officials heightened when a 58-year-old woman appeared, saying she would take custody. “They had no adoption papers,” said Brenda Hutchison, clinical supervisor of the hospital’s pediatric department. “We had nothing that said this woman could have the baby.” While pondering the situation, hospital workers recalled a similar case just two weeks before. A woman from France had a baby boy and said she was giving the baby as a gift to a woman who would pick the child up. That case did have legal adoption papers. “They said, ‘God told me to do this’,” Ms. Hutchison said. “They both said these babies were gifts.” Interviews with law enforcement, hospital and Unification Church officials revealed the adoption cases involved the “Moonies” – followers of Unification Church leader Sun Myung Moon. Church members in Bayou La Batre, a hub for Unification Church activity in Alabama, paid for couples to fly to Mobile from Austria, Canada and France to have their babies born as U.S. citizens. Then church members in the coastal community filed for adoption, authorities said. “There’s nothing strange or unusual about the church,” said Martin Porter, president and chairman of Master Marine Inc., a Unification Church-owned shipbuilding business in Bayou La Batre.

Porter said that includes bringing church members from other countries to Mobile to have their babies and give them to Porter and Master Marine’s vice president, Paul Werner. 

Porter explained the motive for such a gift simply: “Why would you do that (give a baby up for adoption to a specific person)?” he asked. “It would be because you have a very deep love for the person. It would only be because they wanted to.” In addition to the babies born in September that Porter and Werner filed to adopt, four months earlier Werner filed for adoption of a baby boy whose mother came from Austria and gave birth at the University of South Alabama Hospital, said Ms. Dodd.

The three adoption cases prompted the state Department of Human Resources to investigate. 

The couple from Canada were forced by a court order to remain in the United States while the case was investigated and their baby was put in state custody. After nearly two months, the couple dropped the adoption procedure.

“They were just blown away… by the legal machinery that was going to come at them,” said Hagar, who flew to Mobile at Werner’s request: “Any time a petition for adoption is filed, we are obliged to make an investigation and report to the (probate) judge,” said Jerry Milner, supervisor of the Department of Human Resources’ office of adoptions. He declined to comment on the case specifically. But it appears the two babies adopted and living with Porter and Werner will remain in their custody, Ms. Dodd said. She said all people involved in the adoption cases were Unification Church members who knew each other personally and could have arranged the adoptions outside official church channels. It would be illegal for the church to play a role in arranging the adoption, she said. 

Ms. Dodd also said Werner told her that he and Porter paid the expenses of the couples who had their babies in Mobile. To pay them a fee would violate state law against child-selling, she said.

“There’s no financial remuneration passing to anybody,” Hagar said. “This isn’t a baby auction.” Alabama Watchman Fellowship Director Craig Branch, whose evangelical ministry monitors the Unification Church, contends the adoptions must have been orchestrated by the church.