Changes for "permatourists"

[Bajo_cero2]

Interesting... I thought you needed a reason to stay - such as the fact that returning to your own country would put your life at risk. Then you could apply for amnesty.

Are you aware of anyone who has actually gone before a judge to request a simple residency? Specifically someone from the States who just wanted to live here?

There are many categories but if you don´t full fit any of them it doesn´t mean automatically you don´t have the right to live here.

I used to work at an human right NGO, they have a migration department and they used to go to Court for cases about Bolivians, Paraguayans etc. I know that you can win a case against bureaucracy.

Nobody took care about expat because there were like 5.000.000 illegals from border countries. So there are not precedents about what I suggest but, but it can be done.

Regards

 

[LAtoBA]

The Arizona statute did not authorize anyone at the state level to throw illegals out of the country, only to ask about an indivudual's immigration status. If the law included the power to detain the "illegals" it isn't being enforced. A federal judge has already enjoined that portion of the law and no one is about to be deported from the US because of the now "crippled" statute.

Yeah worded it wrong. Was referring more to the big debate that was going on here in BAexpats about "Argentines being deported in Arizona..." or something along those lines. Yes, you're correct several pieces of the law have been "crippled". Thanks.

 

[steveinbsas]

Yeah worded it wrong. Was referring more to the big debate that was going on here in BAexpats about "Argentines being deported in Arizona..." or something along those lines. Yes, you're correct several pieces of the law have been "crippled". Thanks.

Please note that I added "with the intent of enforcing existing federal laws" to my post since you quoted it. It's an important point I want to emphasize:

The Arizona statute did not authorize anyone at the state level to throw illegals out of the country, only to ask about an individual's immigration status with the intent of enforcing existing federal laws. If the Arizona law included the power to detain the "illegals" it isn't being enforced. A federal judge has already enjoined that portion of the law and no one is about to be deported from the US because of the now "crippled" statute.

 

[LAtoBA]

I just posted my experience in more detail in the aforementioned thread. As to the person who wants to come here for 9months, I say don't sweat it! Just don't cross the border out/into Argentina more than one time (that's one time additional to your first entry).

Your post was very useful. I'm not condoning this at all as 4 years without pursuing any type of legality towards residency is mind blowing to me, but theoretically, couldn't one just get a new passport issued before their old expired in order to get a "clean" passport? That way it's not all marked up? I know people do this anyway when they've run out of room.

 

[LAtoBA]

Please note that I added "with the intent of enforcing existing federal laws" to my post since you quoted it. It's an important point I want to emphasize:

What are you trying to emphasize? (no sarcasm)

 

[French jurist]

Your post was very useful. I'm not condoning this at all as 4 years without pursuing any type of legality towards residency is mind blowing to me, but theoretically, couldn't one just get a new passport issued before their old expired in order to get a "clean" passport? That way it's not all marked up? I know people do this anyway when they've run out of room.

Passports are scanned since a few years (two or three ?), anyway it's one thing passively circumventing the law (basic permatourist) and doing it actively (asking for a new passport).

 

[LAtoBA]

Passports are scanned since a few years (two or three ?), anyway it's one thing passively circumventing the law (basic permatourist) and doing it actively (asking for a new passport).

I disagree. Breaking the law is breaking the law. Both are wrong and both are "now" against the law. Yes, "losing" your passport is unlawful, but so is staying 3 or 4 years without actively pursuing some type of residency status. Both actions are taking advantage of the immigration system. I don't see how one is different from the other.

 

[MizzMarr]

Your post was very useful. I'm not condoning this at all as 4 years without pursuing any type of legality towards residency is mind blowing to me, but theoretically, couldn't one just get a new passport issued before their old expired in order to get a "clean" passport? That way it's not all marked up? I know people do this anyway when they've run out of room.

I'm glad that the post was useful; however, you are assuming that I was here 4 years without pursuing legality. My story as posted was the nuts and bolts version, skipping any lengthy details of why or why not this hadn't happened sooner (which there are many details). Needless to say the laws changing and getting flagged at the border made me take getting legal fast seriously. And yes, as I mentioned in my other post "losing" the passport every now and then is a tactic to keep the passport tidy and not overrun with stamps. However--it should be noted that my migraciones help told us that if you lose your passport "too often" (I'd assume more than once every two years) that gets flagged as suspicious.

 

[steveinbsas]

What are you trying to emphasize? (no sarcasm)

That the Arizona statute did not create any new laws or regulations regarding immigration, but authorized state officials to "assist" federal authorities in enforcing existing federal statutes. Even if an "arrest" was made, the state officials had no power to determine the final outcome (including deportation).

 

[MizzMarr]

Passports are scanned since a few years (two or three ?), anyway it's one thing passively circumventing the law (basic permatourist) and doing it actively (asking for a new passport).

Actually, as I understand it now they do scan the passport, but it doesn't actually enter anything into the system--maybe they're just verifying the barcode? Anything that goes into the migraciones database is entered by hand (as when I got "flagged" they manually entered my address, etc., and that is what ended up showing in the database--the ONLY other time that my name showed in the migraciones database was when I renewed my tourist visa at the migraciones offices).