
Immigrant entrepreneur arrested to meet quotas - deadmansshoes
http://www.tenthcave.com/2011/10/plea-for-help.html
======
compay
I'm American. My wife is Argentine. We live in Argentina in large part because
when we wanted to marry in 2006, we couldn't get her a permanent visa to live
in the USA.

Her fiancee visa was in fact quickly approved, pending an interview at the US
consulate in Buenos Aires. We waited and waited, called, had our lawyers call,
and the response was always "when the consulate is ready to make an
appointment, they will call you." They never called, leaving us in limbo for
over a year and saddled with thousands of dollars in legal fees.

Eventually we grew tired of the uncertainty. I moved to Argentina, we got
married, and we've lived here ever since.

Argentina is not perfect. But the legal status of foreign residents here is
much clearer than in the USA. As the husband of a citizen, permanent residency
was automatic provided I didn't have a criminal record in my home country (I
don't). I am allowed to vote in municipal elections. And, now as the father of
an Argentine citizen, citizenship is also automatic if I want it.

You might think that Argentina can afford to be generous with immigrants
because it has nowhere near the load of foreign residents that the USA does,
and to an extent that's certainly true. But on the other hand, Argentina has
fairly large immigrant communities (from Peru, Paraguay, Bolivia and China),
more social welfare services (basic healthcare is free here), and a lot less
financial resources than the USA.

Having now lived somewhere else and been on the "other side" of the
immigration issue, I feel indignant and outraged when I read about how my
country treats non-citizen residents.

~~~
colkassad
I married my wife overseas in 2007. In 2008 we applied for immigration at a US
embassy (I sponsored her as my spouse), waited a couple of months, and
received an appointment date. My wife was granted a visa at the appointment. I
made a comment during the interview on how the process was so painless and the
consulate basically said, "well, you guys are married". 3 years later, she is
a US citizen. I think the fiancee visa route plays second fiddle to family
immigration. That and maybe the Buenos Aires consulate needs to get their act
together. It's a shame you spent so much money on lawyers as well :| Good luck
to you...you may want to try again now that you are married.

~~~
bluekite2000
Is this a personal experience that you are generalizing or it is actually
faster to get a wife to the US vs a fiancee? Any link to actual law is
appreciated.

~~~
rhplus
Does "fiancee" even have any legal defintion in the US? Nobody signs anything
when they propose and I'm pretty sure that states don't recognise it as a
legal status, at least not until various common-law cohabitation conditions
comes into play.

~~~
mikeryan
It's a particular type of immigration Visa the K-1 is a "Fiancee Visa". Note
that you are required to get married within 90 days. The point of it is to
allow US Citizens to get married within the US to non-US Citizens.

[http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_2994.htm...](http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_2994.html#1)

------
eis
As a kid I always wanted to go to the USA, maybe even live there. So many
things to see, the business opportunities and the propagated freedom were very
attractive.

During the last decade though, the USA have done a fantastic job of
eradicating every bit of what was left of this dream. Nowerdays all you hear
from them is how Hollywood is destroying little guys' lifes for downloading a
bunch of songs, exporting those policies with force to other countries, insane
financial schemes and starting several wars.

Right now I am planning a trip to Japan. A country, which was hit by a nuclear
meltdown crisis, floods, earthquakes and more. I'd still choose it over going
to the USA any day. Maybe that's something to think about.

The USA are going down fast and it doesn't look like there are changes in
sight in regards to their handling of immigrants, the wars or the rampand
self-made economic problems.

And that is a shame.

~~~
drieddust
Ever since Obama came to power American Visa system got fucked up. I work for
a consulting firm and people are denied Visa on arbitrary grounds such as "we
are not satisfied with your purpose of visit", "why you need to meet your
customer face to face" etc.

Even that is fine but funny thing is that same person is allowed visa for the
same purpose when he applied next time :)

American under Obama have started some kind of cheap protectionism.

~~~
gujk
Do you really think it is related to Obama's administration, or just a general
trend of official xenophobia and terrorist mumbo jumbo over the past decade?

~~~
drieddust
Not sure but there is a correlation because this trend has escalated ever
since he has planned for a re-contest.

------
rdtsc
An interesting factoid. There is no legal way for anyone to just come to US
and make it their home country.

Say someone from Africa or South America. They can't simply save enough money,
get on a plane, land at JFK and then after 10 years or whatever time become
citizens. They would have to be persecuted in a terrible way before being
granted asylum, have to marry a US citizen, find a company that would hire
them.

I think that is very interesting given that this country was founded on
immigrants just hoping on the boat and coming here, either to build a better
life or because things got terribly bad where they were.

I personally went through the whole process and it is a fucking mess. I knew
how to deal with it, because I dealt with bureaucracy in the old country. I
can sense an annoyed low level clerk's power trip coming on before they notice
it. Such individual need special treatment. You never want to fall into
anyone's cross-hairs, it seems like they would destroy you just because they
can.

Also know someone who works for immigration. It is quite a dysfunctional
entity. Very inefficient. Lots of internal mistakes, unpaid interns do the job
searching through databases and picking people out for violations &
deportation. Next time you know someone was picked out -- chances are some kid
thought their last name sounded funny and it caught their attention.

~~~
blahedo
> _There is no legal way for anyone to just come to US and make it their home
> country._

Are there countries where this is possible? This is a real question, I'm not
snarking---is there some country X where I could just up and say, "I want to
move to X" and just go there and make it my permanent residence? (I know that
there are some countries that _in practice_ don't _enforce_ their
requirements, but I thought all countries had them.)

~~~
rrhm
Every country has their requirements, and to a greater extent they enforce
them. However, some countries make it downright impossible for a foreigner to
become a resident or a citizen, while others make it exceedingly easy.

For instance, if you wanted to become a permanent resident or a citizen to the
Dominican Republic, all you would have to do is get there (via sea or air), go
through the motions, submit the paperwork and pay the taxes.

You would start by buying a US$10 tourist card, as a permit to enter the
country, which will be approved unless you are obviously wanted by Interpol.

This will give you 60 days, during which you can apply for your provisional
resident visa. For the resident visa you will need to provide, aside from the
usual forms and tax payments, proof of solvency, defined as about 13k dollars
in assets (cash and property) at the current exchange rate, and a letter of
sponsorship from any good-faith Dominican citizen with in-country legal
residence.

Within the first two months after this visa you can apply for a provisional
residency card. About four months after the application, you receive your
provisional residency card, which lasts a year. At about the year mark, it
does not matter much if it happens before or after, you can apply for your
permanent residency card. That last one lasts 3 years and is indefinitely
renewable (as long as you do not commit a horrible crime).

After two years of uninterrupted legal residency in the country (i.e. at least
six months and one day per year) you can apply for naturalization.

All the while, you are free to engage in productive business from day one. You
would be taxed differently, on account of not being a citizen, but you would
be allowed to work for a profit. If you happen to aquire assets in-country,
there is leeway to have the sponsorship requirements waived.

Legal translations, medical examinations and notary public fees carry the
burden of the cost of the process. Taxes will run you up less than $100 in
total. The entire process is fairly inexpensive and could probably be done
with less than $1000 dollars.

~~~
galadriel
Note that the landing with $10 requires that one has to be from developed
world.

And there is also a pretty similar procedure to get green card in USA, the EB5
route.

~~~
rdtsc
There is a bit of difference between $10 and $1000000 but , <sarcasm>aside
from that, it is the same</sarcasm>

------
0x12
US immigration sucks. What bugs me most is that the US is founded on
immigrants, so it's basically the descendents of one group of immigrants
telling those 'late to the party' that they can't enter, or in this case that
they have to leave.

To do this to someone that has been there for a lifetime and then some is
ridiculous.

Too many lives have already been wrecked to satisfy little minds and to get
stamps on pieces of paper.

Immigrants like these are the ones a country should hope to receive, not to
turn away at some arbitrary future date for bureaucratic reasons only.

Disgusting.

------
steve8918
I hate to say it but from a brief reading of the information, it sounds like
their asylum was first denied back in 1997, and they've been fighting it ever
since. They certainly have the right to fight it, but it's been an uphill
battle for almost 15 years, so the outcome certainly doesn't seem like a
surprise.

The person is obviously a great entrepreneur, he probably should have just
left on his own accord instead of fighting it to the point where he's thrown
in jail.

The ridiculous thing is that he's in the US, paying his taxes, creating
income, etc.... why throw him out? I suppose it's because he applied for
asylum that was denied, and they are throwing him out to prove a point, but
the entire thing is just counterproductive to what we want in this country.

~~~
ecopoesis
The point is there are rules. To come to the US you can either:

1) Apply to INS, wait in line, enter the lottery and follow the law.

2) Hop on a plane and hope they don't catch you.

He chose route 2, and is now paying the consequences. Just because he's an
entrepreneur doesn't give him any more right to be here then any other would
be immigrant, and it certainly doesn't give him the right to jump the line

~~~
RyanMcGreal
The point is: there's something wrong with the rules.

~~~
hugh3
Maybe, but you can't complain if you choose to disobey the rules and they
catch you.

Especially when the rules are just "dumb" rather than "immoral". That is to
say, the United States is morally entitled to set rules about who can and
can't stay in their country, and the rules at the moment are quite dumb.

------
cperciva
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything in the linked post about
"meeting quotas".

Can we please avoid making headlines unnecessarily hysterical?

~~~
0x12
I think that referred to this bit:

"By coincidence, Frontline this week is broadcasting a feature, ‘Lost in
Detention’, outlining the increasingly aggressive measures to deport
immigrants. The key clip begins at the 17-minute mark outlining the arbitrary
goal of 400,000 deportations, including “Non-criminal removals”. "

From [http://mapbrief.com/2011/10/19/political-hypocrisy-
economic-...](http://mapbrief.com/2011/10/19/political-hypocrisy-economic-
ignorance-the-case-against-atanas-entchev/)

~~~
nkassis
What does a Non-criminal removal mean? Like who would be in that category?
Just people who's visa expired?

~~~
Mvandenbergh
Non-criminal removal is for people who are being deported after an appeals
process. Basically they petitioned for a change of visa status which was
denied and eventually all their appeals were turned down. Key is that because
they were following the legal appeal channel, they were at no point in the
country illegally.

~~~
pyre
So by ramping up non-criminal removals, does that mean they are actively
trying to reject more appeals just to meet quotas of people they must deport
(as opposed to rejecting or accepting them on the merits of the case)?

------
atirip
From the Case Summary: "Atanas Entchev (“Entchev”) entered the United States
in August 1991 as a nonimmigrant exchange visitor on a J-1 visa. His wife,
Mayia Entcheva, and son, Enislav Entchev, entered the United States in 1992
and 1993, respectively. They were authorized to remain in the United States
until July 30, 1993. Before their authorization expired, the petitioners
applied for asylum. Entchev argued persecution based on his political beliefs
in opposition to the Communist party, which ruled Bulgaria until 1989."

So they applied for asylum on political grounds in 1993, because the Communist
party was dethroned 4 years earlier. Well...

------
mbpp
I earn for a living freelancing for US companies. It has always baffled me
that I am allowed to do it legally only if I stay outside of the USA.

~~~
mcherm
Perhaps it is because they don't want you to pay US taxes?

------
alkimie
I'm the son of an immigrant and married one as well, so I'm quite
sympathetic....but....he has not explained why his status changed from being
legally in the U.S. to some other status....

~~~
stupandaus
He wasn't a legal immigrant. His status never changed.

~~~
felideon
From the post, that is not clear. It opens with "After living legally in the
United States for over 20 years [...]"

From the case file, however, it seems like they entered with a J-1 visa and
before their authorization to stay expired, they applied for asylum.

~~~
smoyer
Perhaps by "living legally" he meant he'd never been in trouble with the law?
That he was a productive member of society?

I don't necessarily agree with the immigration laws in the U.S., but I think
you have to live within the laws a country has instated.

~~~
felideon
I think in this context, "living legally" means you are not Out-of-status by
overstaying an I-94, issued to you by the USCIS (fka INS) officer at the point
of entry.

IANAL.

------
deadmansshoes
And reactions at [http://mapbrief.com/2011/10/19/political-hypocrisy-
economic-...](http://mapbrief.com/2011/10/19/political-hypocrisy-economic-
ignorance-the-case-against-atanas-entchev/) and
[http://blog.entchev.com/2011/10/17/a-call-for-help-for-
atana...](http://blog.entchev.com/2011/10/17/a-call-for-help-for-atanas.aspx)

------
fourmii
I'm an Australian, currently living in the US on a green card via being
married to an American. While I sympathize with his plight and I also strongly
believe that when you choose to enter a country, you should respect it's laws.
He did willingly come to the US and overstay his visa, so therefore broke US
immigration laws. Now I don't necessarily agree with the US immigration
process, I believe it's rather tough and unfair not to mention a little
demeaning and insensitive.

What do you do though, the immigration system doesn't seem to be set up to
handle exceptions. Once you make one, you have to grant exceptions to others.
It's a tough dilemna, Atanas has been seemingly a constructive member of
society, hopefully paying taxes along the way. It would be a shame in this
sense to punish such a person.

~~~
ireadzalot
It should be acknowledged that Australians have a special and easy way for
coming to US and getting permanent residency. For example, if an Australian
wanted to start a business in US, you are automatically qualified to apply for
residency right away. (My information is based on what an Australian couple
told me 5 years ago in the US).

~~~
fourmii
True, Aussies now have the E3 visa which is a work sponsored visa just for
Aussies. But I came here years before that happened. I had to convince someone
to give me one of the very rare H1B visas just to come over to be with my then
girlfriend. We eventually got married and I applied for the greencard.

I'm not sure about auto qualification if you want to start a business. I think
you need something like $1M in the bank to prove that you have the resources
to start...

------
Rariel
I know this is an unpopular opinion but, having worked for the government and
as an attorney I think it is always sad when families are deported but it is
not outrageous. The laws are the laws and they apply equally to (almost)
everybody. When people over stay their visas they have broken the law, there
is no getting around that and no amount of hard work, tax paying or community
involvement can change that. People are arrested and jailed everyday under
inequitable laws (crack/cocaine sentencing discrepancy comes to mind) but the
way to fix it isn't to get caught up under that law and complain about it.

It's unfortunate that this man will have to relocate but I feel more sympathy
for his son than him.

------
peacemaker
As much as I sympathise with the guy for going through all this I can't help
but think that it's all his own fault.

USA, like many countries, has a strict immigration system in which you must
play by the rules and follow the process to become 'legal'. Just living in the
country is not enough, you must apply for residency by qualifying in some way.

Unfortunately, it's quite tough to qualify to stay in the US for most people.
Skilled immigrant visas are notoriously difficult to attain (there's no simple
points system like Australia for example) and so you must look to marriage to
a citizen, asylum or the green card lottery. If you think marriage is the easy
choice you'd be wrong too.

As someone who is going through the process right now, it can be difficult,
expensive, depressing, demeaning (having to prove your relationship is 'real')
and downright frustrating but right now that's the way the system works so you
must work with the system. This guy obviously didn't and now he's paying the
price.

------
llcoolv
Shame is that this guy is most probably Bulgarian and he holds the burgundy
passport, which enables him to do his trade almost all over Europe (except for
Belarus, Moldova, etc) without having to deal with any bureaucracy or the 'you
dirty outsider' attitude. I really don't get it what so many people see in the
US.

~~~
parfe
>I really don't get it what so many people see in the US.

1) US and EU economies nearly equal each other in size. [1]

2) You only need one language in the US to reach the entire market.

3) I don't believe for a second there isn't prejudice against outsiders in
each individual European country. Wikipedia hosts an article written just
about tensions regarding Polish people entering the UK! [2]

1 [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/...](https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html)

2 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
Polish_sentiment_in_the_Un...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-
Polish_sentiment_in_the_United_Kingdom#United_Kingdom)

~~~
llcoolv
I generally agree with the first point, with the difference that the economy
growth in Europe has been several times higher during the past decade and that
trend will continue. Also the debt problems in Europe are less serious than
the ones in the US. Also, EU is not going to grow only within - Croatia is
joining in 2013 and after that other countries will follow. So Europe has a
much greater potential.

2) Well, i18n is nothing hard these days, at least from a technical
perspective, also you could reach certain market types using only English
quite well in Europe.

3) Yes, this is true, however these problems are visible only in small parts
of certain tiers of society. Shortly, the chances of meeting people who openly
display negative sentiments against foreigners are smaller if you run a
company consulting about GIS, than if you are a plumber/gas station clerk or
whatever.

Also, by "'you dirty outsider' attitude" I meant that attitude being displayed
by the government, which is very typical in the US.

For example I am a software developer, who comes from one of the 'new'
countries and currently lives in another 'new' one, but I have spent
significant time in an Western European country and so far I haven't had a
single problem with bureaucracy (and with drugged-out undereducated unemployed
youths with too fragile minds as well) at any of these places, which compared
to Entchev's case of 'they got my entire family under arrest and ruined the
life I have been building for the past 20 years' is a whole world of
difference.

------
hoggle
We have the same issues here in Austria, it always feels backwards when
somebody well integrated gets kicked out "because the law is the law". It's
also one of the main tools for populist politicians to mine for votes
("Fear!"). Although it might seem to be a complicated issue in the end it's
not. It's just plain stupid.

------
huhtenberg
> ... _our 18-year immigration ordeal_

I wonder what this is referring to and how it reconciles with

> ... _living legally in the United States for over 20 years_

Something tells me there's more to the story than what's in the linked post.

~~~
unreal37
He came to the US on an exchange visa. And then he brought his family. And
then his visa expired. And then he applied as a refugee. And clearly he is not
a true refugee, he just likes living in the US. And he should have left in
1997 but he's been fighting that order in the courts ever since.

I think it might be an unpopular opinion, but in reading the legal doc, he
doesn't have much of a case to stay. He should have been deported 14 years
ago. The real tragedy is that it took so long.

------
baabuu
I really feel sorry for him and his family.One more victim of the stupid,
time-consuming US immigration laws.I completed this immigration ordeal and
witnessed many of my friends in immigration limbo.It is an extremely
difficult, frustrating and time-consuming experience, not to mention it sucks
whatever you earn.

There seems to be some confusion related to his legal status.He entered US
legally and applied asylum for him and his family.During this period, they are
in legal status. After they apply for asylum, they have no control or
information over that process.If the immigration process was fast enough, none
of this would have happened.When the immigration rejected their application
after a long time, they filed an appeal which was rejected again.Now they have
run out of attempts via the asylum option and are being kicked out. I hope
they can try some other category.

<rant> The immigration process, with so many different categories and quotas,
is a huge bureaucratic mess. The are still using papers and just recently
started using online documents for some processing. It is the second highest
profitable government agency minting money out of immigrants. The process can
be streamlined and made faster even with the current policies. But who cares
about legal immigration anyway? Let those "aliens" stand in line and wait
forever. I personally know many friends and families living with constant fear
and uncertainty for almost a decade or more.

The policies and rules are just too confusing and inconsistent.Two identical
immigrant families can go through completely different process, duration and
rules depending on whether a knowledgeable or ignorant immigration agent
processing their files. </rant>

------
tomgruner
This seems extremely harsh to me. And also stupid not to value this man's
contribution to the U.S.

In 2004 I arrived in Spain as an American and found a programming job at the
international division of a sizable U.S. company. But everything was under the
table, and that company did not want to sponsor a visa for me. But even when I
was illegal in Spain I still had access to better free health care than the
uninsured do in the U.S.

Fast forward to 2008, I was still living in Spain and had done some great work
for a unrelated startup that was purchased by a much larger U.S. company. I
was still in Spain illegally, but this major U.S. company on finding out my
status was willing to help me out in any way to become legal here.

Spain has something called "Social Normalization for Exceptional
Circumstances" which means if you have been in the country for three years
illegally and have a company sponsor you, they will give you a work visa. You
also have to be integrated in the community and speak the local languages
well. So in 2008, this major U.S. company paid a lawyer and helped me through
that process, something that I am exceptionally grateful for. During the time
I worked for this company, my work helped bring in millions of Euros of
contracts to the international division of this company in Spain.

Now in 2011 I still live in Spain, have the freedom to change jobs or work for
myself, and after 7 more years I could become a citizen here, on the condition
that I am always working and living in Spain during those years. That means 15
years from illegal to full citizen. I doubt I will stay that long, and don't
actually plan on becoming a Spanish citizen, but knowing that if I had a
family here and have that option is amazing. Now I am happily working for a
Spanish university research group, fully legal.

And I have to say, I think it is disgusting to take a man, and especially his
son who has lived in the U.S. since the age of two and treat them like
criminals when the father has been actively contributing to the U.S. economy
in one of the areas that the U.S. excels at. To criminalize this contribution
is to spit in the face of all those immigrants who became American and made
America what it is today.

 _And it is also denying the basic human rights of this individual.This
clearly violates Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights_ :

Article 15.

    
    
        * (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
        * (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
    

I strongly believe that 20 years of crime free residence and contribution to a
nation deserves citizenship, and if I choose to, that is what I would receive
in Spain after starting here illegaly.

 _Edit: As noted in the comments below, actually this does not violate Article
15 at all. I still stick with my conclusion though._

~~~
Mvandenbergh
_This clearly violates Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights_

No it doesn't, no-one in this story is being deprived of their nationality. In
any case, the prohibition is on arbitrary deprivation, and a 15 year long
court battle is not arbitrary.

~~~
tomgruner
You are right about that, I made a note on the post above. Thanks.

------
zzaz
Another funny thing about US immigration law is, that if you are an
international student in the USA (on an F1 visa) you are entitled to work only
for the university that has issued you this visa. For everything else, you
have to use your OPT (Optional Practical Training), which is a pool of twelve
months, that you can use to work for somebody else, while holding an F1. I
will not dig into details such as the fact that it costs about $400, and it
takes ~ 2 months to apply and be allowed to use a chunk of your OPT.

If you are an international student and not on OPT, you cannot legally work
full time/part time/do an internship with the startup your friend just
launched (or any other company, on this note). You may want to risk spending
your months, or doing some other jazz, and then try to figure things out, but
as we can see from the case at hand these maneuvers do not work out well for
everybody.

As for sponsorship, from the employer's perspective, the whole visa
sponsorship application process costs about $10k, which is not little money
for a small company.

~~~
aquayellow
"Another funny thing about US immigration law is, that if you are an
international student in the USA (on an F1 visa) you are entitled to work only
for the university that has issued you this visa."

Isn't this all part of the 9/11 hysteria ? I am not sure but I was told that
before 2001 you could work part time for any employer you wanted if you came
here on a F1.

------
alain94040
Flagged, title is misleading. Nowhere does it say anything about quotas. The
person claims to have been in the US legally for 18 years, but if you read the
lawsuit, it's far from being clear, on the contrary. He has filed appeal after
appeal, maybe timely, maybe not.

------
pandaman
Immigration lawyers love to to offer asylum because these cases can go for
decades and anyone can "participate". It also looks attractive to the
prospective immigrant when an alternative would be to go through EB or
investment immigration. However, if you are deciding to seek asylum on a
lawyer advice you are most likely not qualified. Real refugees don't become
refugees voluntarily. They also don't have lawyers. Yes, it's much easier to
claim asylum than go through non-fraudulent immigration. However the
consequences of an asylum case falling through are also much harsher.

------
TomGullen
USA's immigration laws are pretty hilarious when you remember the majority of
the population are immigrants themselves who pushed the natives out the way
all those years ago. It's a country founded on immigration.

~~~
hugh3
The "natives" are immigrants too, just from slightly earlier.

We're all Africans.

~~~
TomGullen
Well yeah there is that! I generally find political discussion on immigration
wholly distasteful, and often parading itself as xenophobic/racist propaganda.

The whole immigration issue boils down to "we got here first! nah nah ne nah
nah!"

------
torontos
Reminds me of this amazing story of the undocumented journalist:
[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-
und...](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-undocumented-
immigrant.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all)

------
ebaysucks
People here arguing that the US should accept more immigrants from all over
the world because "the US has been built on immigrants" need to get their
facts straight:

The "National Origins Formula" was only abolished in 1965. Before 1965, US
immigrants were 90+% white.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula> [2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)

This is fact, not opinion.

I'm not arguing a certain side here, but want to point out that those who say
"the US has been built on immigrants" might be nostalgic to a past that never
existed.

------
ohboy
why does this story seem like troll bait?

