Liberals have been railing against her family's immigration story all week, but they didn't do their homework. From Forbes: "The controversy over how Utah Republican Congressional candidate Mia
Love’s family became lawful permanent residents may have another twist –
Love may be right about how her family received their green cards,
which allowed them to stay in America. The magazine Mother Jones
recently argued in an article that Mia Love’s story of how her Haitian
parents came to America doesn’t add up and that her birth in America
couldn’t have made any difference in her family staying in America."
The article continues about the rule that Mayor Love may have been referencing: "However, such a law did, in fact, exist, although it did not give
citizenship to the parents of U.S.-born children but rather the ability
to obtain legal residency, explains Margaret Stock, an immigration
attorney with Lane Powell and author of a National Foundation for American Policy paper
on birthright citizenship. (In general, an individual can apply for
citizenship 5 years after becoming a legal resident.) Stock points out
that the State Department’s Foreign Affairs manual describes the law
that Love’s family may have used, which expired in 1977, a little more
than a year after Mia Love’s birth on U.S. soil. Here is what the manual states..."
More: "The [immigration] quota system was different back then. Having a baby in the U.S.
and registering for immigration as a Western Hemisphere immigrant before
the deadline could allow adult parents during that time to be eligible
for immigrant visas, notes Margaret Stock and the State Department
Foreign Affairs manual. Stock cautions that it is not possible to know
whether Mia Love’s parents used this provision of the law without access
to the family’s immigration documents and paperwork. At this point, it
does not look like Mia Love intends to make such documents available to
the public (assuming they could be readily found)."
And more: "Terry Feiertag, who has practiced immigration law for 40 years, told me, 'Margaret Stock is correct. I did Western Hemisphere baby cases in the
1970’s. The parents in a case like this would have sent the U.S. born
child’s birth certificate to the U.S. consulate in Haiti to register a
priority date for the issuance of a visa. If this woman was born in
1975, the parents would have registered and gotten a priority date after
her birth, and probably would not have been called to their immigrant
visa interview before the law lapsed, which may mean that they got their
visas as a result of later litigation (Silva v. Levi). Also, under the
Western Hemisphere quota people had to apply for visas in their own
countries; they could not adjust status in the U.S.'"
Immigration Attorneys: "Mia Love May Be Right About Her Family's Immigration History"
