11 Jan

Deportation Of 1/2 Of An Anchor Baby

                                       

Monica Castro had a violent argument with her husband, an illegal alien, a few days before their daughter Rosa’s first birthday. The family lived in a mobile home near Lubbock, TX. Monica left her daughter and the home to report the illegal status of her husband, Omar Gallardo, to the local Border Patrol office. She claims to have offered the information concerning the legal status of her husband in exchange for custody of her daughter.

Besides being an illegal, Gallardo was wanted for questioning as a witness to a murder.

On the morning of December 3, 2003, Federal Agents raided the mobile home and seized Gallardo. Gallardo refused to surrender his daughter: the Border Patrol told Ms Castro she had until that afternoon to get a court order to get custody of her daughter.

A lawyer made an appearance in court to plead for more time.

Unfortunately, there was no court order when the government van showed up at 3 p.m., government agents then drove Gallardo and his daughter to the border.

Monica, sued the federal government, asserting that the Border Patrol had no authority to detain or deport her daughter Rosa. he also maintained that the Border Patrol had made themselves family-court judges by making de-facto custody decisions.

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, New Orleans, has rejected Ms Castro’s arguments, over the dissent of three judges.

The decision, in summary, stated that the appeals court did not:

“condone the Border Patrol’s actions or the choices it made.”

However, the court reasoned:

Gallardo had his daughter, R.M.G., with him when he was arrested.   By permitting Gallardo to keep R.M.G. with him, the Border Patrol agents did not improperly make a custody determination;  rather, they left the status quo in place and refrained from making a custody determination, in that they declined to take R.M.G. away from Gallardo against his will.   The Border Patrol agents cannot be meaningfully said to have “detained” or “deported” R.M.G., because it was Gallardo, and not the Border Patrol, who decided that the baby should go with him to Mexico.   Monica Castro, R.M.G.’s mother, disagreed with Gallardo’s decision and wanted the Border Patrol to transfer the baby to her, but she lacked a court order or any other source of legal authority requiring the Border Patrol to take such action.   The Border Patrol, by accepting Gallardo’s decision to keep R.M.G. with him, did not violate any constitutional or statutory requirement that the plaintiffs have identified.

Monica and Rosa were reunited three years after her husband’s deportation.

Ms Castro’s lawyers have asked the United Supreme Court to hear the case. They maintain the Border Patro Agents should have kept Gallardo overnight, to better resolve the case, the Border Patrol Agents maintained they didn’t want to incur the over $200 dollar expense for Keeping Gallardo overnight. According to Gregory Krrupas, the agent in charge of the Lubbock and Amarillo stations during this period, as stated in a 2006 deposition.

The government offered no assistance in reuniting the mother and daughter, other than identifying the city that the pair was delivered to, Juarez. Now described as the most dangerous city in the world by Susan L. Watson, one of Ms Castro’s lawyers.

Gallardo, a caballero of distinction, was arrested again for entering the country illegally and in a plea bargain, he agreed to return his daughter Rosa to her mother. He was subsequently deported again.

The mother and daughter were reunited at the US Consulate in Ciudad Juarez in 2006. The reunion was tragic, since the child did not recognize her mother and only wanted to be with her paternal grandmother and other Mexican relatives.

Rosa is doing well now, according to her mother she is an honor roll student, with a straight A average in the second grade.

There are numerous implications and tangents in this case. What are the responsibilities of an American Citizen providing care and sustenance to an illegal alien, marrying or living common-law with an illegal alien?

Why did she leave her baby with an illegal alien who was involved in a murder?

Why did the Border Patrol deport an illegal alien wanted for questioning in a murder, when he had a baby with him?

Will the child be considered an American when the sperm donor was an illegal alien?

This is an interesting case that may serve America well if it is argued competently to the Supreme Court. There are many points of illegal Immigration that need to be defined.

About Skook

A professional horseman for over 40 years, Skook continues to work with horses. He is in an ongoing educational program, learning life's lessons from one of the world's greatest instructors, the horse. Skook has a personal website skooksjournal.com featuring his personal writings and historical novel type stories.
This entry was posted in Culture, human rights, Immigration, Mexico, Open Borders, Supreme Court and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Tuesday, January 11th, 2011 at 10:13 am
| 701 views

13 Responses to Deportation Of 1/2 Of An Anchor Baby

  1. B-Rob says: 1

    Will the child be considered an American when the sperm donor was an illegal alien?

    Stay classy, cons . . . .

    ReplyReply
  2. Nan G says: 2

    The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from a Texas woman who wants to sue the federal government for sending her U.S. citizen baby to Mexico with the child’s illegal immigrant father.

    The Supreme Court did not comment Monday in turning down Castro’s appeal.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-10/court-rejects-case-of-us-baby-sent-to-mexico.html

    So much for getting inside the heads of our Justices.
    Sigh.
    I would have lovede to have read their reasonings.

    ReplyReply
  3. Skookum says: 3

    Nan, looks like I was a day late and a dollar short. Good Work. There are still many issues to be resolved. The Supremes didn’t even comment, hmmm…

    ReplyReply
  4. Skookum says: 4

    B-Rob, I’ll admit that comment was on the trashy side; however, I don’t think I have ever heard of a man who made a plea bargain with his daughter as part of the deal. That is the part that I find shocking and why I used that specific comment. The concept is not far removed from human trafficking; although, I think it is for the best that Rosa is with her mother and the plea deal was expedient, but the father had to be a classless jerk to bargain for his freedom with the life of his daughter.

    I know, I should have written that sentence, instead of the original one.

    I’ve hired criminals and had them be good employees, but I will never understand their reasoning on the most elemental things.

    ReplyReply
  5. Nan G says: 5

    We almost saw a triple-murder suspect sent back to Mexico instead of standing trial……

    A 33-year old man has been extradited back to Long Beach to face trial for the 2001 murder of a Long Beach couple and the 2002 murder of a 32-year old man. The cases, once thought closed, were re-opened due to the availability of new DNA technology.

    A break for the murders came in October 2010, when Juan Pablo Camacho was confirmed as a match for DNA evidence left at the scene of the 2001 murders. Long Beach Police learned that Camacho, a documented gang member, was currently in federal custody in New York on weapons and illegal entry charges and would be deported to Mexico pending release. Officers flew to New York on December 29 to arrest Camacho and bring him back to Long Beach.

    Camacho has been connected to the shooting deaths of 30-year old Richard Murillo and 33-year old Carrie Waltier, a boyfriend and girlfriend couple. Murillo was found shot to death in a Rose Avenue alley on October 14, 2001 while Waltier was found in the city of South Gate around 8:45pm that night. Police determined that the murders were related but found no leads and the case went cold.

    When Camacho popped up as a match for DNA for both murders, officers also connected him to the 2002 murder of Richard Graves, shot to death in the 300 block of East Esther Street on May 19.

    Camacho is being held without bail in the Los Angeles County Jail on three counts of murder……

    http://www.lbpost.com/news/ryan/10914

    While this wasn’t too near my home it was in my city.
    The trial will be in the courthouse I usually get jury duty for.
    Had he gotten into Mexico before the DNA was tied to him we would have had to take the death penalty and also the possibility of life w/o parole off the table ….. just to get Mexico to cough him up!
    So I’m glad we got him now.

    ReplyReply
  6. Aleric says: 6

    Basically the mother knowingly gave birth to a child from an Illgal Alien and then is upset that person was deported and he was known to be associted with criminals. Go figure. Sorry but I have no sympathy for stupid people. We have coddled stupidity for too long and look at the state our country is in now.

    ReplyReply
  7. John Cooper says: 7

    Skookum–

    Your subtle reference to Solomon in the title was perfect. The Mexicans I know and used to work with around here are honorable and hard working people whom I respect greatly. Nobody – least of all me – wants to see their families broken up.

    But (you knew that was coming), they should have come to America legally. By not doing so, they knowingly took the risk that their family might be broken up. Life can be hard when you’re an outlaw.

    ReplyReply
  8. SJ Reidhead says: 8

    Do you really want an answer?

    Women are stupid when it comes to men. There are some women who will do anything to “keep” their man no matter who they are or what they have done. Unfortunately there are just as many “legal” women in this country who have done the same stupid things. How else to you explain why a woman would move in to shack up with a man she knows is going to molest her child?

    Over the years I have come to the conclusion that a woman will live down to the lowest common denominator when it comes to rationalizing their relationship with their man. They will sacrifice their careers, homes, money, children, dignity, and freedom – just for their man. My humble opinion is the kid should have been put up for adoption, but then I’m just a cranky female with little tolerance when it comes to stupidity!

    SJR
    The Pink Flamingo

    ReplyReply
  9. KansasGirl says: 9

    Skookum, you are sly. I want to know why America keeps making the same mistakes…with the same outcome.

    ReplyReply
  10. Skookum says: 10

    My friends, I will guarantee you as a farmer that needs help when the crops are ready, that the chances of hiring legal residents is nearly impossible; that doesn’t mean we need illegal aliens, it means we tend migrant workers who come here with some type of temporary visa and a type of health insurance that requires them to pay a percentage of emergency room visits. Otherwise, you will be eating fruits and vegetables from South America year round. Oh! by the way, those fruits and vegetables that you see so fresh that say California Produce aren’t grown in California, they are only boxed in California so they can wear a California label and give you more confidence in the purity of your food. It’s a big joke on you.

    We have problems that need to be addressed and I am not talking about Illegal Aliens plugging up our inner cities and stealing manufacturing and construction jobs that many Americans would love to be working right now: I am referring to agricultural workers, there is no hope in labor intensive farming without the migrant.

    But we don’t need 20 million illegals draining our resources and plugging up our emergency rooms with ankle biters and crumb pickers that have a runny nose.

    Obama’s answer is amnesty, with a Democrat voter registration card and unless we address the issues in a practical manner, the Democrats will eventually win with their massive voter registration plans. The problems are not going away. Little Rosa is only a symptom of a much larger problem that we have yet to define.

    Yes the entendre to Solomon was trickery and chicanery, of the type that you might expect from a Progressive Operative on Madison Avenue. LOL

    ReplyReply
  11. KansasGirl says: 11

    @Skookum: this reminds me of the Cloward-Pivens strategy. Their intent is to overwhelm the welfare system in order to destroy America. I wonder if Monica Carlos is part of the plan.

    ReplyReply
  12. Skookum says: 12

    Kansas, I doubt that she is a willing participant in the strategy: she has probably lost her usefulness as a pawn to be exploited and manipulated by the Progressive Socialists, with the refusal of the Supreme Court to hear her case. She will become a forgotten footnote; unless of course, they can devise a new strategy to get mileage out of her, then they will use her in the same tawdry fashion as a two dollar whore in a cat house.

    ReplyReply
  13. KansasGirl says: 13

    @Skookum: Your point is correct. I should have stated, “I wonder if Monica Carlos realizes she is being used”.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>