The “Reunite this Family” term was coined by the Boston Globe in an editorial in support of Tim Coco and Genesio “Junior” Oliveira.

“Great strides toward equality for gays have been made in this country, but the woeful fate of Tim Coco and Genesio Oliveira shows that thousands of same-sex couples, even in Massachusetts , still aren't really full citizens.”

“Reunite this Family,”
Boston Globe, Aug. 27, 2007

---

Donate for Fairness

Everyone benefits if the discriminatory, inhumane and mean-spirited Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is declared unconstitutional. Taking this challenge into the Federal Courts – to the Supreme Court if necessary – is a very costly endeavor. Please consider making a donation of any amount. Funds are used for legal expenses and related public education. Your support is desperately needed and appreciated.

You may donate online by clicking below

 

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. redefines rape as not harmful.

Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich [former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.)] authors  misleading letter.

Attorney General Holder Claims ‘Forced’ Sex is Not Rape; Married Couple Readies DOMA Challenge

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. betrays the civil rights movement from which he has benefitted.

His office passed up a Friday deadline to retract a July 27, 2009 letter to Senator John F. Kerry.  The letter, kept under wraps while both sides continued to negotiate, sets back decades of legal precedent by preposterously ruling “forced” sex is not rape.

Senator Kerry alerted Holder last March that forced sex is, in fact, the definition of rape.  At that time, Senator Kerry correctly asserted that the claim is “outrageous” and asked Holder to intervene in the adverse asylum ruling against my spouse, Genesio J. “Junior” Oliveira Jr., made by an illegally appointed immigration judge.  All these months later, the attorney general’s woefully delayed and inadequate response overlooks the facts that Junior’s testimony has already been ruled “credible” and his fear of Brazil “genuine.”

The attorney general’s ruling has wide ramifications for all victims of sexual violence – male or female – regardless of age.  Today, we have taken steps to brief national immigration and women’s rights groups of this ruthless miscarriage of justice.  We seek their support.

While we are deep in despair, we remain profoundly grateful to Senator Kerry and his staff for the efforts they have made and continue to pursue.

DOMA Challenge in Process

As if the attorney general’s credibility wasn’t already shredded by this lapse of judgment, his Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich [former aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.)] goes on to deny the existence of our family-based appeal before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).  In fact, that appeal was rejected two weeks ago solely on Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) grounds.  Having exhausted all administrative remedies, the filing our DOMA challenge in federal court is now imminent.  We are assembling the best immigration and constitutional law scholars in the land to file this challenge – the first in an immigration context.

We further question a statement in the letter that “this is not an appropriate case for the attorney general.” One can’t help but draw comparison between the appropriateness of Holder coming to the aid of fugitive financier Marc Rich, while ignoring Junior who must remain away from home. Rich was accused of tax evasion on more than $100 million in income, fraud and participating in illegal oil deals with Iran. Even though Rich did not qualify for a pardon under DOJ guidelines, then Deputy Attorney General Holder, who was trying to win a recommendation from Rich’s attorney to be the next attorney general, enabled the swindler to return to the U.S.

The Justice Department hiring scandal involving immigration Judge Francis L. Cramer is grounds by itself for a review of Junior’s case, according to many legal scholars. Holder had wide discretion to rule in Junior’s favor without crossing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  We ask Attorney General Holder to distance himself from Weich’s letter, reconsider his position and spare all of us the looming court battle.  We remain open to working with the attorney general to successfully resolve this matter on humanitarian grounds.

Summary of Specific Issues

Junior and I are monumentally disappointed with Attorney General Holder’s initial response as well as the Obama Administration’s continuing insensitivity regarding LGBT issues. We are pained that after more than two years of forced separation, we must continue to wait for justice, fairness and compassion.

We are concerned by Orwellian definitions, outright lies, twisting of facts and what appear to be intentionally misleading statements from rogue members of the attorney general’s staff.

First, the testimony clearly shows that when Junior answered questions about “harm” in 2002, he was answering questions about street beatings. We concede we could have used stronger words than “forced” when separately discussing rape, but there is precedence for victims to take time coming to terms with such trauma.

Second, we question Weich’s sincerity and motives when he writes Junior’s dealing with immigration began in 2004. The record clearly shows Junior proactively sought asylum beginning in October, 2002. He has accrued NO illegal time in the U.S.

Third, Holder’s office demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the “Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,” or has deliberately misapplied the asylum law. The standard for granting asylum does not require a government be the perpetrator.  In Reyes-Reyes v. Ashcroft, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the term “government acquiescence” was broad enough to include the government’s failure to address severe physical abuse inflicted by non-government actors.  Others have won asylum with even fewer facts than Junior presented.

Fourth, the attorney general’s office absurdly suggests that because Junior followed the rules and complied with “voluntary” departure, Holder’s assistance is unavailable. This confirms Holder helps only those who break rules rather than follow them as Junior did. “Voluntary” departure is, itself, a misnomer since one will be imprisoned if one doesn’t “volunteer.”

Fifth, there are a number of reasons why an appeal wasn’t initially undertaken in 2007, and the doctrine of equitable tolling (deadlines being extended) may be applied for a number of reasons.  Among these, Immigration Judge Cramer’s status as an illegal political appointment and unfamiliar with immigration law was not yet known. Even DOJ did not acknowledge this until July 28, 2008 – more than a year after the deadline for further appeal. 

Holder had a moral obligation to set a precedent that the “harmfulness” of rape is not subject to minimization or inappropriate interpretation by DOJ judges.

That Junior and I are married — a fact known to the immigration judge, BIA and Mr. Holder — should count toward a level of compassion.  When my mother passed away a year ago, the mean-spirited ones kept him from at least attending her funeral.  As Senator Kerry said, “Nobody’s asking to overturn or change the federal law. This is really a humanitarian situation that deserves an appropriate focus.”

I love you Junior and I will bring you home somehow.

Tim Coco

---

Thank you Senator John F. Kerry!

Please do the right thing Mr. Holder!

World waits for
Eric Holder to act

Senator Kerry’s March call on Obama Administration to act responsibly and correct injustice goes unheeded...so far

As you may know, Senator John F. Kerry courageously called on the Obama Administration two months ago to use existing law to reunite me with my spouse. For some reason Attorney General Eric Holder has not yet seen fit to act on the matter.

The so far two-month delay by the attorney general may not mean much to the Obama Administration. This Memorial Day, however, is yet another holiday Junior and I will not celebrate together in the nearly two years since we were forcibly separated by a rogue Federal government. Worse, Junior observed a milestone birthday this week – his 30th – without me at his side. Normally, I would have traveled to Brazil, but I deluded myself into thinking Attorney General Holder would correct an injustice in a timely manner.

“Tim and Junior have played by the rules since day one. Junior’s asylum claim is a legitimate one and has been recognized as such, which is why I am asking the Attorney General to come down on the side of fairness, justice, and compassion and allow Mr. Oliveira to return home to Massachusetts to his husband,” said Senator Kerry in a March 19 press release.

Senator Kerry’s wonderful appeal was carried by thousands of newspapers, radio and television news programs and Web sites around the world. Senator Kerry and his able staff also followed up on media calls and even penned an opinion piece, “No Time to Wait for Justice,” that was carried by a number of media, including the Huffington Post.

“Some critics have rightly suggested that repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which Congress passed in 1996 in an effort to prohibit same sex marriages, would solve Tim and Junior’s problem. But Tim and Junior don’t have time to wait for that to happen before they can be reunited. That’s why I've asked Attorney General Holder to take a closer look at Junior’s asylum claim and reunite this loving couple,” Kerry wrote.

Kerry pointed out some of the extreme injustices we have faced. “It is astounding that Immigration Judge Francis Cramer, who presided at Junior’s asylum hearing, found that Junior’s testimony was ‘credible’ and his fear of Brazil ‘genuine’ but nonetheless denied the asylum claim and said that Junior ‘was never physically harmed’ by the rape. The Immigration Appeals Board upheld the ruling in 2007, at which point Junior returned to Brazil and has been separated from his spouse ever since.”

Cramer role scuttles Gregg’s commerce appointment

As we now know, additional injustices include Cramer’s illegal appointment in the first place, foisted upon the nation by the illegal and deceitful acts of Senator Judd Gregg. Cramer handled minor cases while working in Gregg’s New Hampshire law office and then served as Gregg’s campaign treasurer. Cramer had no immigration experience. Adding insult to injury, the Department of Justice engaged in a cover-up of its illegal activities, according to the Government Accountability Office and the Justice Department’s own inspector general.

While we also don’t understand why Attorney General Holder is continuing to allow these illegal appointees to serve, we are pleased that we played a role in scuttling the ill-advised appointment of Gregg as commerce secretary. We believe our complaint before the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, along with the threat of intense questioning of Gregg’s actions in regards to Cramer during confirmation hearings, caused Gregg to withdraw.

DOMA appeal on track for federal court showdown

There is still another reason for the attorney general to act swiftly. If Holder fails to face us now, he will certainly face us in federal court. Our I-130 “Petition for Alien Relative,” the method heterosexuals use to sponsor their spouses for immigration, was denied in March. We have appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, placing us on track for an appeals court challenge of the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act. Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) filed its own DOMA challenge in federal court in March and declined to include our case. I told Bay Windows newspaper:

“At the risk of sounding mean, our case is hopefully the triumph of love over money. GLAD’s cases are all about getting money, whether it’s Social Security, tax benefits, pensions. Our case is about being together, which is pretty basic. And as usual, except for Sen. Kerry, we have been abandoned by all the organizations we expect to help us.”

Junior creates new video: ‘Dear Mr. President’

My Junior has done a wonderful job of keeping our issue alive on the Web. His latest video, “Dear Mr. President,” quotes President Obama as saying “You read about some injustice and you say that’s not right. Some one should fix that. We realize no one else is going to fix it if you don’t.” The video urges the president to keep his promise to fix injustices.

See the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhHpOwcS2KA

Tim Coco

---

President Obama

Gregg with his choice for president, Mitt Romney

Please say it isn’t so!

Obama considers anti-civil rights ideologue for Commerce post

January 30, 2009

The news today is that President Obama is considering naming anti-civil rights Senator Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) as U.S. commerce secretary. This would be the second time in two weeks that the president has placed an anti-gay bigot on a prized pedestal. Gregg would share the stage with evangelical minister Rick Warren, a virulent right wing ideologue who delivered Obama’s inaugural invocation.

Those who have followed these updates know that Gregg was implicated in the illegal appointment of immigration Judge Francis L. Cramer. The July 28, 2008 U.S. Department of Justice report, “An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring by Monica Goodling and Other Staff in the Office of the Attorney General,” found that Gregg conspired with DOJ staff to illegally use “political or ideological affiliations in the hiring process for career Department employees.”

In deciding the asylum case of my legally wedded spouse, Genesio J. Oliveira, Jr., Cramer was not only ignorant of immigration precedents, laws and procedures, he relied on commentary outside of the evidentiary record, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act [§240(b)(4)(B)] and the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. Despite finding Oliveira’s testimony “credible” and his fear of Brazil “genuine,” Cramer apparently exercised his anti-gay credentials in denying the asylum petition. As we now know, DOJ job candidates were subject to an anti gay litmus test. According to the DOJ investigation:

We also found that many of Goodling’s and Williamson’s interview notes reflected that the topics of abortion and gay marriage were discussed during interviews. It appeared that these topics were discussed as a result of the question seeking information about how the applicant would characterize the type of conservative they were.

Senator Gregg successfully sought to have Cramer, his campaign treasurer, named as an immigration judge. As noted in the DOJ investigation, Senator Gregg’s role was more than a merely offering a recommendation, but rather the senator had been actively “pushing” Cramer’s appointment with full knowledge that the use of political considerations are illegal when employed in the naming of candidates to career positions.

 

In an internal Department e-mail dated March 18, 2004 to the Justice Management Division, Department White House Liaison Susan Richmond noted that the candidate would soon be appointed and commented: “could you . . . advise [the] Sen. . . . of this? This is the issue he’d been pushing with us.”

 

Gregg’s anti-civil rights voting record has earned him low scores from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and NAACP. Gregg, as examples, voted “yes” on prohibiting same-sex marriage and “no” on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation.

 

Some speculate that naming Gregg to the Commerce post could help the Democrats reach their 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.  However, a Democratic appointment by New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch is not a sure bet. Lynch attended events for Republican John McCain. He also named GOP star Kelly Ayotte as his attorney general. Further, folks counted in the majority such as Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) cannot be relied upon to stand with the Democrats.

 

The best way to remove Gregg from the Senate is to have the Senate Select Committee on Ethics investigate his role in the illegal appointment of his campaign treasurer Cramer as an immigration judge.

 

Please urge President Obama not to reward Gregg’s past illegal activity with a cabinet post. Post in media comment sections, write letters-to-the-editor or call your Democratic senator or representative.

Tim Coco

---

Candlelight Vigil August 12, 2008

This video was made for presentation at a Candlelight Vigil August 12, 2008. See the “In The News” section for more information.

---

Story to Date

This video tells the story, to date, of the relationship and forced separation of Genesio “Junior” Oliveira and Tim Coco.

---

In Memoriam

Annie M. Coco 1926-2008

A New (Angry) Phase
in the Quest for Justice

November 4, 2008

My Friends,

Junior and I are beginning a new phase in our quest for justice, fairness and humanity.

We are stepping up our activities and will no longer contain our anger and the combined anger of the thousands of couples who have been denied basic human rights, equality and, most of all, compassion. We seek, and will employ, all available political, legal and administrative remedies.

What is driving our renewed resolve? Junior made urgent requests of the U.S. Embassy to, first, visit my dying mother and, then, to attend her funeral. The embassy representative violatedU.S. law with her false and illegal declaration that Junior is an “alien unlawfully present for one year or more.” The representative knew – or should have known – this is patently untrue. Junior presented her with a letter from the Consulate General of the United States of America, São Paulo, Brazil, demonstrating his complete compliance with “voluntary departure” instructions issued by the U.S. Board of Immigration Appeals.

Junior has accrued no unlawful presence. U.S. law, governing this matter, states:

INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(iii)(II) Asylees.— No period of time in which an alien has a bona fide application for asylum pending under section 208 shall be taken into account in determining the period of unlawful presence in the United States under clause (i) unless the alien during such period was employed without authorization in the United States.

The representative’s blatant ideological bias, ignorance and incompetence were exceeded only by her arrogance. While the consular official may have identified valid reasons for refusing to grant the visa, her refusal to view evidence and demeaning verbal commentary suggested a pretext for illegal discrimination. Despite the errors of law, there is no right of appeal.

This latest injury compounds earlier ones from the illegal appointment of Senator Judd Gregg’s pal who heard Junior’s asylum case to the Federal government’s refusal to recognize Massachusetts marriage laws. These are not simply red tape and bureaucracy, but rather the evils of extremist right wing/Bush ideology. As such:

• We will no longer beg for justice; we will demand it.
• We will no longer wait for the slow wheels of justice to turn; we will forcefully push them.
• We will no longer demonstrate restraint; we will vehemently pursue the righteousness of our cause.

For each day and each dollar we have lost, we seek reparations. The damage toll continues to rise. In concrete terms, these are the remedies we seek:

1. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and/or his successor must modify or overrule the tainted decisions set down by the incompetent and illegally appointed judge and the politically motivated Board of Immigration Appeals.
2. Junior’s asylum case must be reopened based on new evidence from the Department of Justice scandal, misapplication of the international Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act [§240(b)(4)(B)] and the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.
3. Massachusetts’ top constitutional officers must officially engage the Federal government in defense of the Commonwealth’s marriage laws. We are proud of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, but we require the state’s assistance.
4. Administrative Misconduct charges must be pursued against Mary Kelley, Assistant Chief Counsel, DHS, ICE; consular representatives and other federal employees with the goal of removing these extremist ideologues.
5. Congress must pass the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA), reform immigration laws with special provisions for those who have been victims of past U.S. policies and repeal at least the Federal component of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Failure to address the latter will set into motion our vigorous constitutional challenge.
6. The U.S. must accept Article 22 of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, recognizing the competence of the United Nations committee to hear individual complaints.
7. The Senate Select Committee on Ethics must act against Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH). The July 28, 2008 U.S. Department of Justice report, “An Investigation of Allegations of Politicized Hiring by Monica Goodling and Other Staff in the Office of the Attorney General,” implicates Gregg in unethical and illegal dealings connected with the appointment of immigration Judge Francis L. Cramer.

We reserve the right to pursue additional remedies at a time and in a manner of our choosing. We ask for your continued support and understanding of the increasingly hard line stance we have been forced to assume.

Tim Coco

---

Architect of Hate Karl Rove, White House political advisor, secretly helped an unqualified candidate become an immigration judge.

Et tu, Rove?

September 2, 2008

By Tim Coco

Editor’s Update: While ABC Television has implicated Karl Rove in the appointment of Francis L. Cramer as an immigration judge (see below), I now believe ABC confused two similar candidates. In fairness, it appears from independent research, Rove helped win the appointment of another immigration judge who, like Cramer, was a failed nominee for a tax court appointment. It appears N.H. Senator Judd Gregg played the largest role in winning an illegal appointment for Cramer. Nevertheless, Rove’s involvement in any of the appointments still points to a deeply flawed and illegal process.

It was worse than even we thought.

More than a year ago I began my crusade to bring Junior home. At the time, I learned immigration Judge Francis L. Cramer, who decided Junior’s asylum case, was not only a political appointment but also completely unqualified and unprepared for the job. Cramer, of southern New Hampshire, was one of many illegal hires during the Department of Justice scandal. His seemingly only qualification was that he was a pal of stalwart Republican Senator Judd Gregg. Cramer lost an earlier bid for another judgeship when the appointment came under fire from the American Bar Association.

When the scheme to appoint Cramer unraveled, we now know, crafty Cramer had an ace up his sleeve (these guys never play fair). He turned again to Gregg who, in the words of the recent Department of Justice Investigation, was “pushing” for Cramer’s appointment. Meanwhile, another candidate, Glen L. Bower, turned to his boyhood friend Karl Rove for secret assistance. Besides being undoubtedly one of the two loneliest boys on the playground, Rove was the infamous ringleader in the conspiracy to expose the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, among other nefarious dealings.

Until now, I thought my barrage of press releases and telephone calls to the media on this subject had little effect. The media, however, has been digging and they have struck oil—the stinky and slippery variety.

White House Took Steps to Ensure Anti-Gay Bias in Judge Picks

Last week, the New York Times (“Vetted Judges More Likely to Reject Asylum Bids”) revealed the White House went to great lengths to make sure judges were not sympathetic to gays, among other groups. “Immigrants seeking asylum in the United States have been disproportionately rejected by judges whom the Bush administration chose using a conservative political litmus test …Together, these 16 judges handled 5,031 cases and had a combined denial rate of 66.3 percent — 6.6 percentage points greater than their collective peers. This translates into an extra 157 asylum cases that resulted in denial,” the newspaper reported. Unfortunately, no studies have been conducted to determine the percentage of denials when gays were the hopeful asylees.

ABC reported (“Politically Connected Immigration Judges Unlikely to Face Consequences; DOJ Officials May Have Committed a Crime in Appointing Them”) at the end of July, “There was little in Cramer’s background as a New Hampshire-based commercial and personal injury lawyer that exposed him to immigration law. But Cramer had something better: political connections. He’d worked for Republican Sen. Judd Gregg and most importantly, the (internal Justice Department) report found, he was childhood friends with Rove, one of President Bush’s closest advisors.

In its editorial this past Sunday (“An end to tainted judges”) The Boston Globe reported, “the judges chosen with a partisan filter are significantly more likely to reject immigrants’ bids for asylum. Ridding the immigration courts of this political bias should be a priority of Attorney General Michael Mukasey.” The editorial quoted Mukasey as promising a “swift and unambiguous response” if any immigration judges are found to be deciding cases “based on politics.”

Some lawyers say Cramer, who has rejected nearly 70 percent of the 143 asylum cases he has heard, has finally figured out what to do and shows promise. However, when he heard Junior’s case early in his new career, he was ignorant, or pretended to be, of a longstanding legal precedent and internationally accepted standard that decided gays “constitute a particular social group” for the purpose of determining eligibility for asylum. Cramer otherwise found Genesio’s testimony to be “credible” and his fear of Brazil “genuine.” These determinations, along with other third-party evidence of serious human rights abuses, were enough to grant Junior’s petition. Since the White House screened out anyone thought to be sympathetic to gays, it seems likely Junior was a victim of hate-motivated bias.

Since Mukasey promises a “swift and unambiguous response” to politically motivated decisions by immigration judges, I call on him to use his authority under §1003.1 8 CFR Ch. V to modify or overrule Cramer’s decision and that of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Meanwhile, our “nuclear war strategy,” a federal court challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), is taking shape.

---

Washington Post Ad

April 29, 2008

Tomorrow, April 30, an advertisement will appear on the inside back page of the Washington Post's Express newspaper, asking President Bush and Congress to "Make This Right!"  It is a direct appeal to our leaders to use existing authority to issue Junior a visa to return home.  The press release, "National Ad Campaign Aims to Draw Political Attention to Same-Sex Couple’s Plight" , being sent to hundreds of media outlets, explains the effort.  Many have expected us to quietly accept our fate, but this effort demonstrates we will continue to fight not only for ourselves, but for the thousands of other same-sex couples who are apart or face separation.

---

In Search of a Solution

March 24, 2008

In two weeks, Junior and I will have been separated eight months thanks to unfair, discriminatory and inhumane policies of the United States of America. We will continue to fight. Each setback makes us even more determined to find a solution not only for our family, but for the many other same-sex couples who are also impacted by such mean-spirited laws.

This week, I will meet with a representative of Congresswoman Niki Tsongas’ Washington, D.C. staff. The congresswoman’s staff has been sympathetic, especially Constituent Services Representative Denise Johnson. However, I will press strongly for Tsongas’ staff to convert that sympathy into concrete action. I realize there are no easy solutions, but remedies are available from “humanitarian parole” to immediate passage of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA).

To date, neither of the Democratic presidential candidates have co-sponsored UAFA even though 12 other senators and 91 representatives have signed on as supporters of the bill. In the Senate, this bill is stuck in the Committee on the Judiciary. Please write to Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), chairman, and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, member, to move this bill out of committee. Tell them what you know of our story.

United States Senate
Committee on the Judiciary
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy
317 Russell Senate Building
Washington D.C. 20510
(202) 224-4543
(202) 224-2417 (fax)

Other members of the committee are listed here: http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm

In the House, UAFA is stalled in the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. Write to Chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Massachusetts Rep. William Delahunt, member, and urge movement on this bill.

Honorable Zoe Lofgren
102 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3072

Honorable William D. Delahunt
2454 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-3111

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has acknowledged receipt of our “I-130 Petition for Alien Relative.” This is the same petition used by heterosexual couples to gain legal recognition of their families and obtain visas. We expect this petition to be denied on Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) grounds. It may not be long before we are in Federal Court. This is a “nuclear war” strategy in that there may be no winners. Particularly at risk is the eventual Democratic presidential nominee since national gay marriage issues tend to harm Democratic candidates. That is why we are asking for immediate relief or else this weapon must be armed.

We are considering providing posters and badges for delegates to the national political conventions to carry and wear. The message will be to “Reunite this Family.” This was the headline in the very supportive Boston Globe editorial last August. If you know any delegates to either the Democratic or Republican national conventions who would be willing to carry this message, please let me know.

Positive comments about our plight continue to pour in from local, regional, national and international supporters. Here is an example:

I don’t get it. A Brazillian man comes to this country, learns the language, goes to college, gets married to his partner, and they deport him? Yet we have illegals who are soaking up the wellfare system, living for free, free health insurance, free housing, contributing nothing to this country. Now this poor man has to fight for his spouse to be able to come back to this country? They did everything right. Didn’t try and cheat the system — hmm, maybe that was their mistake, had he come here illegally, he’d still be here. I really hope that someone steps up for this couple and allows that man back into this country. He is the one that should be here, not the ones cheating the system!

Sound Off, Eagle-Tribune

Thank you for your kind words and support!

Tim Coco

---

Alone in the Fight for Basic Fairness?

February 18, 2008

Here is the long delayed update to the story of my separation from Junior as a result of actions taken by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Please pardon the length of this update.

First, some background. Junior was never an “illegal alien.” Six years ago this year, Junior filed a petition for asylum with what was then the U.S. Immigration and Nationalization Service (INS). He made this filing before the end of the six-month stay authorized by his visa, thus keeping him “in status” in the eyes of immigration law. There are many reasons (too painful to detail here) why the asylum application should have been granted.

As the law allows, Junior received his Social Security number and work authorization while his case made its way through the system. As the Department of Homeland Security was formed and Bush made ideological appointments, the government grew increasingly unfriendly to our cause. Even the U.S. State Department changed its longstanding position on a key issue bolstering the asylum petition.

Finally, during the Justice Department hiring scandal, a conservative ideologue was appointed to hear Junior’s case. As the Washington Post reported June 11, last year:

The Bush administration increasingly emphasized partisan political ties over expertise in recent years in selecting the judges who decide the fate of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, despite laws that preclude such considerations…

…another failed tax court nominee, Francis L. Cramer, a former campaign treasurer for Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), was appointed as an immigration judge. Cramer’s bid for a seat on the tax court foundered after the American Bar Association’s taxation section wrote a rare letter to the Senate Finance Committee, saying: “We are unable to conclude that he is qualified to serve.”

Cramer was then hired by the Justice Department’s tax division and was briefly lent to the department’s Office of Immigration Litigation. Ashcroft approved him as an immigration judge in March 2004. The Government Accountability Office, a legislative watchdog, criticized the appointment, saying, “Converting a Schedule C [political] appointee with less than 6 months of immigration law experience to an immigration judge position raises questions about the fairness of the conversion.”

Judge Cramer denied the asylum application and his decision was upheld by a single judge of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Junior was ordered to “voluntarily” depart the U.S. within 60 days and he complied with that order last August.

In 2002, same sex marriage was not yet legal in Massachusetts and any possible legal remedy related to marriage was not available to us. Junior and I married March 3, 2005 as his asylum case continued to move through the system. Despite the marriage, many maintain the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), signed into law by President Bill Clinton, prohibits me from sponsoring Junior as a permanent resident even though heterosexuals may do so.

Since last year, we have exhausted all other potential remedies available to us to compel the U.S. government to enable Junior to return. We did not intend to be “activists” and would have been quite content to accept a “quiet” solution.

As such, we have decided, after lengthy research and deliberation, to move ahead with a head-on challenge to DOMA. We are filing an “I-130 Petition for Alien Relative.” This is the same method used by heterosexuals to sponsor their spouses. We expect this petition to be denied on DOMA grounds and are prepared to appeal to the Federal courts. As far as we know, this will be the first constitutional challenge to DOMA. It could be in the courts before this fall’s presidential election.

Many have urged us not to move ahead with this case because 1) it may harm the chances of the Democratic candidate for president and 2) the Supreme Court’s shift to the extreme right of the political spectrum likely means an adverse ruling for everyone.

It is not our intent to harm Democrats, but we have given party members in Congress ample opportunity to find an alternate solution. In fact, they still have an opportunity to resolve the problem any time between now and the time of our court filing. We will happily withdraw our petition immediately if they act – and there are alternative remedies available if politicians truly want to avoid this showdown. Further, because Supreme Court justices are appointed for life terms, we would have to wait decades for a more amenable court to be seated. Such a wait is too much to ask.

Washington University legal scholar Steven Legomsky told me in an e-mail:

…defeat in the Supreme Court is not 100% certain. They’ve surprised me in the past and could very well do so again. The Court could, if it wished, interpret what is left of the plenary power doctrine as nothing more than a rationality test, and conclude that Congress’s distinction between opposite-sex and same-sex marriages is simply irrational.

I also sadly report that the allies we expected – GLAD, ACLU, HRC and others – have not stepped up to the plate. I was told privately that one group, and possibly others, has made accommodation with lawmakers on DOMA to avert an anti same sex marriage constitutional Amendment. While perhaps well-intentioned, this is a dangerous, self-loathing strategy.

Junior just completed his first video and uploaded it to You Tube. It is the story of our separation, ostensibly told by our dog, Q-Tip. I was very moved by it. Please take a look at it if you have a moment.

Thank you for your kind support over these very many difficult months.

Tim Coco