Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (79366)	5/4/2000 9:50:00 PM
From: Ilaine	Respond to of 108807

I have am happy to answer rational questions. Juan Miguel is making the same arguments you make, and he is attempting to withdraw Elian's petition. The standing issue of the Miami relatives is certainly an issue to be determined by the the United States Court of Appeals - I think there is a hearing scheduled for May 11, to hear arguments on that and other issues. But in the order directing Elian not to be removed from the U.S. the Court of Appeals held that Elian, himself, could apply for asylum, and noted that Elian had scrawled his name on one of the petitions. Juan Miguel is arguing that Elian, a child of six who neither reads nor writes Spanish, much less English, did not understand what he was signing. He also argues that Elian lacks legal capacity. However the statute does say "any alien" and the Court of Appeals spent a lot of time on the question. The opinion stated that regardless of the wisdom of allowing a minor child to apply for asylum, that's what the statute says and they have to apply the law that Congress wrote. I suppose Elian could withdraw his own petition. I have heard that there was a case involving a 12-year old Russian boy who didn't want to go back to the Soviet Union, but by the time it was all resolved, he had turned 18.