Immigration For Dummies

[Bajo_cero2]

You feel that I'm agressive? Well, perhaps you feel this way because you study at Universidad Austral that is not, precisely, an example of academic excelency as soon as there is one official way of thinking.

FYI Universidad Austral is sponsor by [belongs] to the Opus Dei, an extreme right catholic wing. They despite the National Constitution and they follow Faustino Legón doctrine of political science. Legón proposed a) qualified vote b ) caste society c) eugenics (the pseudo science of human racial improvement d) a dictatorship instead of democracy d) he defended racial discrimination e) he propose to go back to the Spaniard catholic monarchy but he f) disagragree with the final solution, instead he proposed sterilization of the "inferior" races or massive deportations.

By the way, did you know that the programm master at UBA is exactly the same that UBA students do in the last 2 years of carrear? This is to compensate the lack of level of the other universities.

Perhaps the 3rd reason of my behaviour is because my academic experience at UBA (as professor asistant for 9 years) and assisting to the seminars of Maier were you had to write a paper and defend it in front of the most respected lawyers/professors in the country.

To belong to his cathedra first you have to do a Master at a new University for bringing back new ideas and the doctor degree later was a must. Bovino did it at Columbia, Mary Beloff at Harvard, Fabricio Gauriglia at Munster, Germany, Cecilia Naddeo at Stanford, Pastor at several universities in Germany, Roberto Sabba at Yale, Eduardo Bertoni at G. Washington University, Nicolas Guzman at Italy with Luigi Ferrajioli, Martin Abregu at American University and so on.

They were not nice at all when they criticize your asserts.

Regarding my work experience, I learnt to be a lawyer at the law firm of former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court that used to be the best law firm in the country. Working with them I knew all the high end lawyers and all of them were aggressive, nasty and rude. Sorry, seems that nobody wants a sheep as his lawyer. Everytime you try to insult me saying that I´m aggressive or rude, I feel it as a complement.

I'm not going to start behaving like a mediocre because you can not defend your claims.

The last topic is, perhaps, that even I have an academic profile, I decided to be a litigant lawyer and that's why I ´m the way I m.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Judges never have an obligation to follow precedents in Argentina because precedents are not binding here; stare decisis is not an accepted doctrine here. HOWEVER, judges at all levels look to the leading cases, take them into account and cite them in their decisions just as they do in Common Law which has translated into leading cases becoming authoritative -- this means that although not binding, they will be followed once established as authoritative.

Interesting, I remember this was a topic at my first exam at CBC (the pre university course).

In the real life many judges decide on a xenophobia basis and if they quote a precedent is because it confirms the decision they want to take besides the law.

Lawyers do not enforce the law. Police officers enforce it. Judges and lawyers apply and interpret it.

I have to admit that it is very difficult to reply you without to be nasty.

You should be less arrogant and learn. Even I m not interested at all in teaching you, it is obvious that you must read a lot more in quantity and quality. The second is the most difficult because you study at the wrong university (one way of thinking UA vsus critic thinking UBA). At private universities they do not give you enough to read and they do not teach you to understand who is who. My advice is to avoid manuals (a 500 pages book) and go for the treaties (7 books of 1000 pages each) and you should read all the authors about the topic you are interested.

As far as we have the same citizenship law since 1869, there was a lot written, I have no less than 500 books at my personal library.

You asserted that you read a manual? Sure, wow, I´m impressed. Only Ramella wrote one and he was one of the authors of the 1949 Constitution of Perón that was very alike the bill of [lack] of rights of China or the Soviet Union... but you knew it right?

The biggest complaint about the new CC is how poorly it is written, and as such, legal scholars and lawyers alike are all very concerned about how it will be interpreted because of the wording.

If this doesn't create a grey zone, then I must be discussing medicine and not law. Words are the bane of the law. Period. And if they are not clear in the law/legislation/codes, they will be left open to a wide variance in interpretation, and this in English is what we call a grey zone.

They probably tell you that at the Opus Dei School where you study because they disagree with the new CC because it abandoned religion concepts that the former CC had.

The new CC is easy to understand if you know what SC decided on that subject because they just adjusted the law to the SC interpretation because there is where we have a limited stare decisis.

The other source of the new CC are the international treaties of human rights so, for understanding it, you must read them and the soft law of UN or the Interamerican system of Human Rights.

Going back to the topic, the new CC just enforces the SC doctrine that stated that you do not to be here to have address (regarding the continue 2 years) and your previous assert was another evidence of your lack of understanding plus your arrogance when you pretend to be the watch dog of an experienced and specialized lawyer while you are just a student.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Typo: "[background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]SC doctrine that stated that you do not need to be [/background][background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]here [/background][background=rgb(252, 252, 252)]full time to have address"[/background]

 

[Somewhereinba]

 

[on the brink]

Kudos to khairyexpat for an outstanding research piece clarifying a puzzling process. Far more useful than BajoCero's proselityzing posts.

 

[summysammy]

Any "yanquis" (U.S. citizens) out there have any more information about the FBI Criminal Record?

I found out in December that the UBA admitted me to study in a master's program--but it starts in March! So little time. I checked the FBI's website to see how long it takes and it states, "Current processing time is 12-14 weeks". Ain't nobody got time for that!

Help?

Yes I was able to get my FBI history report very quickly. First, use an approved "channeler" from the FBI list. Personally, I read up on a lot of posts here in this forum and used one I read about. It was cheaper than the rest of the channelers and really seemed to do this quite often. I used myfbireport.com. They got a response for my fingerprint in 48 hours. Go to their website and call them. They were very friendly. I used card stock to print out 3 copies of the finger print card. I took that to the Palermo Police Station on Sta Fe. They are used to doing this for US and and few other countries. They'll only do 2 copies for you. You mail that (don't smudge it) to the FBIreport people. I suggest DHL. If you tell DHL that they are the same price as Fedex and you are going with their competitor they'll give you a discount. They The FBI report people will ask you where to mail it do. You can use whatever US mail carrier you want to get it to a US ADDRESS. Then from that US address you can use any US CARRIER EXCEPT FOR UPS ground to get it apostilled in DC. From DC you can get it sent direcltly to you OR to your addrss in the US to check for any issues. You can choose how fast to ship it back to Argentina. Again, DHL is super fast and if you use their online "my DHL express" you can get 20% off. I had photos taken of the FBI doc and had a "traductor publico" work on it while I was waiting for it to arrive. Once it was here, I showed it to the translator and then she finished it off. It has to be legalized normally. So, all in all, I used DHL between USA and Argentina and used USPS priority within the US. I got it out and back in 3 weeks. The apostille took the longest. It took 2 weeks. I'll probably write this up in a post soon. Hit me up for more information if this doesn't make sense.

 

[summysammy]

This thread has been very helpful to me and very informative. However, some information is fairly old now. Does anyone have an updated list of necessary documents when applying for the DNI? I will be marrying an Argentinian shortly and just want to apply for the DNI, not the citizenship. I asked an official recently and all she said was 'no problem, no problem'. When I asked what I needed to bring, she said my passport and marriage certificate and nothing else. Seems a bit light to me.

I got married on Oct 28 and processed my permanent residency on Dec 23. I am a US citizen and married and Argentine. I was accepted upon my first attempt! I do still think its strange I haven't got the DNI yet, but I think I am being paranoid. Anyways, it's late today, but I'll post something soon about exactly what I presented. If you have a q before hand you can send me a private message.

 

[summysammy]

This thread has been very helpful to me and very informative. However, some information is fairly old now. Does anyone have an updated list of necessary documents when applying for the DNI? I will be marrying an Argentinian shortly and just want to apply for the DNI, not the citizenship. I asked an official recently and all she said was 'no problem, no problem'. When I asked what I needed to bring, she said my passport and marriage certificate and nothing else. Seems a bit light to me.

That is "light". The part that will take you the longest is just getting your FBI fingerprints done, accepted, and apostilled. If yuo are going to the US on your honeymoon take advantage of the digital scans there. I went on my honey moon, didn't think about it, and came back to find out I needed FBI prints. I just didn't have time to investigate it prior. Anyways, I responded just a few moments ago to someone about how to get the fingerprints on this thread. Check it out.
The rest you can do within a matter of days.

 

[Somewhereinba]

That is "light". The part that will take you the longest is just getting your FBI fingerprints done, accepted, and apostilled. If yuo are going to the US on your honeymoon take advantage of the digital scans there. I went on my honey moon, didn't think about it, and came back to find out I needed FBI prints. I just didn't have time to investigate it prior. Anyways, I responded just a few moments ago to someone about how to get the fingerprints on this thread. Check it out.
The rest you can do within a matter of days.

How much did you pay to get your passport and FBI certificate translated and legalised?

 

[julian63]

Regarding my work experience, I learnt to be a lawyer at the law firm of former prosecutor of the International Criminal Court that used to be the best law firm in the country. Working with them I knew all the high end lawyers and all of them were aggressive, nasty and rude. Sorry, seems that nobody wants a sheep as his lawyer. Everytime you try to insult me saying that I´m aggressive or rude, I feel it as a complement.

I have communicated with Bajo re this sentiment so I know he concedes to overstating the desirable character traits of non-criminal (at least) lawyers. Rudeness and nastiness are never winning character traits for a lawyer or any other professional for that matter.
As the mgr of ALL litigation (from the mundane to security and consumer class action cases) for a major international bank (for 10 years +) with vastly greater experience outside Arg than Bajo, I can assure readers that rudeness and nastiness are not desirable (much less necessary) character traits for good lawyers. On the contrary, the smartest, most effective litigation lawyers were uniformly polite and always extended professional courtesies unless the conduct of their counterparts supported a forfeiture of the customary professional courtesies. Even then, nastiness and rudeness were never a positive quality.

And even contentious litigators can respond to verbal taunts and challenges without rancor. One can correct without berating.