Obama Policy Memo Outlines How Illegal Immigrants Can Obtain ‘legal status’ If They Are Family Members Of A U.S. Military Service Member.
Memo Could Affect 65,000 Military Immigrants
A memo released by the Obama administration outlines how and when the administration can legally permit relatives of U.S. service military members who are here illegally to stay in the country on a “parole in place” status. This will essentially give illegal immigrants “legal status” as long as they don’t have a criminal record and are family members of a U.S. military service member. This applies to both current and former U.S. military service member family members.
Before Policy Memorandum PM-602-0091, issued on November 15, 2013, relatives here illegally were still able to remain in the country but were required to apply for “parole in place”. This was often very confusing and convoluted to military service member family members. Additionally, it was not taken advantage of due to the uncertainty and lack of awareness surrounding the matter. It is currently estimated that nearly 5% of our active duty military members are currently immigrants meaning this law will affect a significant amount of individuals as there are around 65,000 military immigrants who currently … Read More... “Military: Immigration Citizenship Laws for Family Members”
Military service in itself creates the need for maintaining a status quo in regards to jurisdiction. The words “Home of Record” should be the key starting point in any custody order involving military families. During the course of a military career there will be many “current”, or temporary, addresses due to changes in assignment. It is therefore important that an initial custody order specifies that the jurisdiction will be permanently retained in the “Home of Record” where the action was first heard, unless both parties consent to a different venue.
In the last few years we have all watched the televised homecomings of military personnel returning from tours of duty to see their loved ones, more often than not children overjoyed to be in the arms of fathers and mothers once again. But what do we see of the not-too-happy homecomings where the returning parent’s outstretched arms are left empty and cold? This is the picture which should be burned into our minds each time we see a happy reunion. For each of those joyous televised feel-good sound bites there is a parent who will step into a battle more heartbreaking than the battlefield they have just left, more grievous than any physical injury they may have sustained along the way.
The Ohio Revised Code §3105.03 states that “[t]he plaintiff in actions for divorce and annulment shall have been a resident of the state at least six months immediately before filing the complaint.” That being said, many people are often confused as to what is meant by the term “resident.” When it comes to divorce, Ohio defines being a “resident” as being domiciled in Ohio. For one to be domiciled in a state, the person must have a home in the state, and he must have the intent on making Ohio his permanent home. He must have the intention of living and staying in the state of Ohio. When a person enters the military and is enlisted to service, his domicile remains where it was before his Military service unless he chooses to move to a new domicile where he intends to remain. Therefore, the real focus is a person’s intent to remain in a state.
Jeffrey Lee Chafin v. Lynne Hales Chafin
On February 6, 2010, I posted an article entitled, 
Here is an update about our client, Kent Swaim, whose two sons were abducted to Japan by their mother, published in the DDN on September 8, 2010.