Idiot British Judge DID rule migrant's pet was a reason he shouldn't be deported

A judge allowed an illegal immigrant to dodge deportation because he feared separating him from his cat risked ‘serious emotional consequences’, it emerged yesterday.

The human rights ruling, obtained by the Daily Mail, vindicates Home Secretary Theresa May over the ‘cat-gate’ row with Justice Secretary Ken Clarke at the Tory Conference.

She claimed that the cat, Maya, was a key reason behind the decision to let the man, a Bolivian national, stay in Britain, citing it as an example of how the Human Rights Act has been badly applied by judges. But Mr Clarke accused her of ‘misrepresenting’ the judgment.

Yesterday it was revealed that the Bolivian not only argued that he would suffer from being separated from his cat, but also that his pet’s quality of life would be affected.

It emerged that officials discovered he had arrived in Britain as a student in 2002 and overstayed his two-year visa only when he was arrested for shoplifting in 2007. He was never charged over the shoplifting allegations.

The fallout from the row continued yesterday as David Cameron, in his own Conference speech, publicly sided with Mrs May. He also slapped down Mr Clarke and appeared to mock the Justice Secretary for being on the side of criminals.

Immigration Judge James Devitte allowed the Bolivian to stay in this country under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act – the right to a private and family life. The case had been thought to have involved a man and his girlfriend, but in fact the judgment reveals that the couple are two gay men.

The judge heard evidence from the man’s boyfriend’s siblings, who confirmed the pair had lived together for three years and said the Bolivian was regarded as their ‘brother’s partner’.

In his six-page ruling, the judge said: ‘In 2005 the appellant and his partner acquired a cat, whom they called Maya and who has lived with them since that date.’

He revealed that the Home Office had rejected arguments from the man that removing him would have ‘consequences’ for Maya. The Home Office’s initial ruling stated: ‘Although you have a cat called Maya she is considered to be able to adapt to life abroad with her owners. ‘While your cat’s material quality of life in Bolivia may not be at the same standard as in the United Kingdom, this does not give rise to a right to remain in the United Kingdom.’

But Judge Devitte stated unequivocally: ‘The evidence concerning the joint acquisition of Maya by the appellant and his partner reinforces my conclusion on the strength and quality of the family life that [the] appellant and his partner enjoy.’

Bizarrely, he added: ‘In Canada and to a much lesser extent in the United States there is an increasing recognition of the significance that pets occupy in family life and of the potentially serious emotional consequences pet owners may suffer when some unhappy event terminates the bond they have with a pet.

In her speech, Mrs May listed the case along with a string of other examples of how Article 8 was being misapplied by judges. She said he ‘cannot be deported because – and I am not making this up – he had a pet cat’.

At a fringe event later the same day Mr Clarke said: ‘They are British cases and British judges she is complaining about. I cannot believe anybody had ever had deportation refused on the basis of owning a cat.’

SOURCE






Immigrant Population at Record 40 Million in 2010

2000 to 2010 was Highest Decade of Immigration Ever, Despite Job Loss

New Center for Immigration Studies' analysis of Census Bureau data shows the nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal), also referred to as the foreign born, reached 40 million in 2010, the highest number in American history. Nearly 14 million new immigrants (legal and illegal) settled in the country from 2000 to 2010, making it the highest decade of immigration in American history. This is the case even though there was a net decline of jobs during the decade. In contrast, from 1990 to 2000, job growth exceeded 20 million and slightly fewer immigrants arrived (13.2 million).

Steven A. Camarota's Memorandum, 'A Record-Setting Decade of Immigration: 2000-2010,' is available on the Center for Immigration Studies' website here. The nation’s immigrant population (legal and illegal) reached 40 million in 2010, the highest number in the nation’s history.

The nation’s immigrant population has doubled since 1990, nearly tripled since 1980, and quadrupled since 1970 when it stood at 9.7 million.

Of the 40 million immigrants in the country in 2010, 13.9 million arrived in 2000 or later making it the highest decade of immigration in American history, even though there was a net loss of jobs during the decade.

New arrivals are offset by out-migration and deaths. As a result, the net increase in the immigrant population was more than 8.8 million over the last decade, from 31.1 million in 2000.

While the number of immigrants in the country is higher than at any time in American history, the immigrant share of the population (12.9 percent) was higher 90 years ago.

Growth in the immigrant population has primarily been driven by high levels of legal immigration. Roughly three-fourths of immigrants in the country are here legally.

Immigrants continue to head to non-traditional states of settlement. The six states with the largest immigrant populations accounted for 65 percent of the total in 2010, 68 percent in 2000, and 73 percent in 1990.

Overall the immigrant population grew 28 percent between 2000 and 2010. But it grew at more than twice the national rate in: Alabama (92%), South Carolina (88%), Tennessee (82%), Arkansas (79%), Kentucky (75%), North Carolina (67%), South Dakota (65%), Georgia (63%), Indiana (61%), Nevada (61%), Delaware (60%), Virginia (60%), and Oklahoma (57%).

Since 1990 the immigrant population has doubled. It grew at more than twice the national rate in: North Carolina (525%), Georgia (445%), Arkansas (430%), Tennessee (389%), Nevada (385%), South Carolina (337%), Kentucky (312%), Nebraska (298%), Alabama (287%), Utah (280%), Colorado (249%), Minnesota (235%), Delaware (223%), Iowa (222%), Indiana (219%), Oklahoma (215%) and Arizona (208%).

States with the largest numerical increase over the last decade were: California, Texas, Florida, New York, New Jersey, Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, Washington, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts.

Latin America continued to dominate immigration. Countries from this region accounted for 58 percent of the growth in the immigrant population from 2000 to 2010.

With nearly 12 million immigrants, Mexico was by far the top immigrant-sending country, accounting for 29 percent of all immigrants.

Countries in addition to Mexico have also seen significant growth in their populations. In 1990 there was only one sending-country with more than 1 million immigrants in the United States, by 2000 there were four such countries and in 2010 there were eight.

Discussion:

The finding that immigration was so high in the first decade of the 21st century is important because it is a reminder that immigration is a complex process; and it is impacted by many factors in addition to labor market conditions in this country. The desire to access public services, enjoy greater political freedom, or join relatives in the United States all affect the decision to migrate. These things do not change even if there is little or no job growth. Moreover, the opportunities available in the United States may still be much better than in many sending countries even if the US economy is experiencing a prolonged period of weak job growth.

It is also important to understand that immigration is driven in part by social networks of friends and family who provide information about conditions in the United States and often help new immigrants after they arrive. As the immigrant population grows, it creates momentum for more immigration. None of this means that the level of immigration is unaffected by the economy. There is evidence that immigration levels were affected to some extent by the economy during the last decade. However, the evidence is clear that the level of new immigration remained high, even in the face of a prolonged period of weak job growth.

Data Source:

The data for this Center for Immigration Studies analysis comes primarily from the American Community Survey (ACS) collected by the Census Bureau. The ACS has become one of the primary sources of data on the size and growth of the nation’s immigrant (or foreign-born) population. Immigrants are persons living in the United States who were not American citizens at birth. This includes naturalized American citizens, legal permanent residents (green card holders), illegal aliens, and people on long-term temporary visas such as foreign students or guest workers, who respond to the ACS. It does not include those born abroad of American parents or those born in outlying territories of the United States.

The above is a press release from from Center for Immigration Studies. 1522 K St. NW, Suite 820, Washington, DC 20005, (202) 466-8185 fax: (202) 466-8076. Email: center@cis.org. Contact: Steven A. Camarota, sac@cis.org, 202-466-8185. The Center for Immigration Studies is an independent research institution which examines the impact of immigration on the United States. The Center for Immigration Studies is not affiliated with any other organization