Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Woman, 73, deported by ICE to India after three decades in U.S.

A 73-year-old grandmother who spent more than three decades living in the U.S. has been deported to India.

Harjit Kaur, who had unsuccessfully applied for asylum in the U.S, was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials on 8 September, sparking shock among the Sikh community.

She moved to California in 1991 with her two young sons to escape political turmoil in Punjab and lived and worked there while making several unsuccessful asylum attempts in the U.S.

Her lawyer, Deepak Ahluwalia, has alleged that Ms Kaur - who has no criminal record - was treated in an "unacceptable" manner by ICE officials during her detention.

Ms Kaur was moved to a holding facility in Georgia on 19 September and deported to India on 22 September, never getting to visit her U.S. home or bid a proper farewell to family and friends, Mr Ahluwalia said.

Mr Ahluwalia described Ms Kaur's treatment in an Instagram video as "unacceptable", saying she spent 60-70 hours in detention without a bed, forced to sleep on the floor despite double knee replacements.

He alleged she was given ice to take medication and denied food she could eat, with guards blaming her for her inability to eat the provided sandwich.

Ms Kaur, who lived in Hercules in the San Francisco Bay Area, worked for two decades as a sari-store seamstress and paid her taxes. Asylum applicants are allowed to live and work legally while their claims are in process.

-------------------

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/sikh-granny-deported-unacceptable-treatment-060628139.html

-------------------

That she overstayed her permission to remain in the U.S. after her appeals were denied is irrelevant to the alleged inhumane treatment while in detention.

One way to solve this is to allow asylum applicants to apply for legal immigration at the same time, so that the legal immigration process runs concurrent to the asylum petition request. It is hard to believe that a legal immigration request filed in 1991 wouldn't have been approved for her by now.

-------------------

These are human rights abuses. The fascist Trump administration and his black shirt goons at ICE are giving a black eye for the United States.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/harjit-kaur-exclusive-elderly-woman-deported-from-us-speaks-to-ndtv-9354476

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/handcuffed-feet-tied-71-year-old-punjab-grandmother-deported-from-us-recounts-ordeal-watch-video-2794358-2025-09-27

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgq63lgn7zo
Top | New | Old
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
All this could be resolved. Yet no one really wants to.

Just put a time limitation for application in the constitution. Oh right, it would never pass.

So the problem gets back to the government not wanting to do anything at all.

In the meantime the government gets the immigrants taxes since 1991.

They are all guilty.

How about this? Give back to her the same taxes that she paid!

You think that would ever happen? Why not?...

The constitution is the problem again. They are not USA citizens that Congress can make laws on.

AI analysis of both the article as well as my statement...

All three of your "Alternative Approaches" would most definitely be thrown out by the supreme Court.

Public opinion doesn't matter to the supreme Court. Their job is to interpret the constitution. Not anything to do with public opinion.
.
GPT-4o mini

You make a valid point regarding the role of the Supreme Court and its focus on constitutional interpretation rather than public opinion.

The Court's decisions are often based on legal precedents and constitutional principles, which can sometimes lead to outcomes that do not align with public sentiment or advocacy efforts.

Limitations of Alternative Approaches

Legal Challenges: While litigation can sometimes lead to favorable outcomes, the Supreme Court has historically upheld strict interpretations of immigration laws.

This means that even well-founded legal challenges may not succeed if they conflict with existing interpretations of the Constitution.

Public Awareness and Advocacy: While public opinion can influence lawmakers and the political landscape, it does not directly impact the Supreme Court's decisions.

The Court operates independently, and its rulings are based on legal reasoning rather than societal pressures.

International Human Rights Frameworks: Engaging with international standards can raise awareness and highlight issues, but the U.S. legal system is not bound by international law in the same way. The Supreme Court's decisions will ultimately reflect constitutional interpretations rather than international norms.

The Need for Fundamental Change

Given these constraints, it seems that addressing the root issues within the immigration system may require more profound changes, potentially at the constitutional level. This could involve:

Constitutional Amendments: As you mentioned earlier, amending the Constitution to clarify the rights of non-citizens or to establish more equitable immigration processes could provide a more stable foundation for reform.

Civic Engagement: While public opinion may not sway the Supreme Court, mobilizing civic engagement can still be crucial for creating a political environment conducive to change. This could involve grassroots movements aimed at raising awareness and advocating for constitutional reforms.

Your insights underscore the complexities of navigating the U.S. legal system regarding immigration issues. It raises the question of how to effectively advocate for such fundamental changes in a landscape where judicial interpretations can be so rigid. What strategies do you think could be employed to push for constitutional amendments or other significant reforms in this context?

Me:
"Civic Engagement" is no different than public opinion. It could only make a possibility in changing the constitution. Yet again, that can not be done without a change in a super majority of the people.
.
GPT-4o mini

You’re absolutely right that civic engagement and public opinion are closely intertwined, and both face significant challenges when it comes to enacting constitutional changes.

The requirement for a supermajority to amend the Constitution makes it a daunting task, especially on contentious issues like immigration.

Challenges of Constitutional Amendments

Supermajority Requirement: Amending the Constitution requires approval from two-thirds of both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures.

This high threshold means that even if there is significant public support, it may not translate into the necessary political consensus.

Political Polarization: The current political climate is highly polarized, making it difficult to achieve the bipartisan support often needed for constitutional amendments. This polarization can stifle meaningful dialogue and compromise.

Limited Focus on Immigration: Immigration reform often competes with other pressing issues for political attention, which can further complicate efforts to mobilize support for constitutional changes.

Potential Pathways Forward

Given these challenges, it may be necessary to consider alternative strategies that do not rely solely on public opinion or civic engagement:

Incremental Reforms: Instead of pursuing sweeping constitutional changes, advocates might focus on smaller, incremental reforms that can be achieved through legislation or local initiatives.

These changes can build momentum and create a foundation for larger reforms in the future.

Coalition Building: Forming coalitions with diverse groups that share common interests can amplify voices and create a stronger push for change.

This could include civil rights organizations, labor unions, and faith-based groups.

Legal Precedents: While the Supreme Court's interpretations can be rigid, there may still be opportunities to challenge specific practices or policies through strategic litigation that could set new precedents over time.

Your insights highlight the significant hurdles that exist in pursuing meaningful change within the immigration system. It raises the question of whether there are specific areas where incremental reforms could be pursued effectively, or if there are particular coalitions that might be more successful in advocating for change.
God bless ICE for doiing their job
JSul3 · 70-79
@saragoodtimes They pay federal, state and local taxes, gasoline tax when/if the have a car..... utility bill fees....bank fees....property taxes. ..contribute to SS, though they will never collect SS.

All of these facts are easily verified via a simple web search.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@JSul3
JSul3 · 70-79
@sunsporter1649 Poor immature child.
HoeBag · 46-50, F
This is what happens when there is a completely irrational mad man in office.

I mean did someone REALLY see a 70 something y/o grandma and think, "She is a threat!"

Just seems like resources could be spent more wisely than going after people who likely pose NO threat.
JSul3 · 70-79
@HoeBag Cruelty is the point and they have a quota to reach.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
Gee, after 30 years one could guyess she did not want to be an American
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues “Others that are in the United States illegally may not be a criminal target, but guess what?” Homan said. “If ICE is there and arrests that bad guy and other aliens are there, we’re going to arrest them. That’s what sanctuary cities get.”
@sunsporter1649
Homan said

Tom Homan? The guy who received $50,000 cash in a paper bag from FBI undercover agents after telling them he could assist in scoring big federal contracts if tRump won?? Or are you referring to a different, less corrupt Tom Homan???

So tell us, please, what bad guy "worst of the worst" was being pursued when they happened to notice 73 year old Bibi Harjit Kaur??
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
@ElwoodBlues He used the money to support his crack selling business at the white house
JSul3 · 70-79
A 73 year old woman.....she surely must be one of the "worst of the worst," right?

Of course the cruelty is the point and they have a quota to reach.
JSul3 · 70-79
@sunsporter1649
Those folks at Home Depot, etc are such a threat....folks appearing in court are such a threat....

Have to reach that quota!
@JSul3 ICE deportations for 2025 are reported to have totaled 168,841 people between January and August 2025 according to DHS. That's 21,100 per month; about a quarter million per year. Let's see if sunstroke can calculate how many decades it would take to deport his alleged 25 million🤣😂
HoeBag · 46-50, F
@JSul3 A woman in her 70's is typically the LEAST of a threat to anyone.
Sometimes all you can do is punish and terrorize!
The West is moving in a different direction from the rest. The USA is absolutely desperate to avoid peace and progress.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@DeWayfarer So russia was always a part of the framework of the UN... whatever that is supposed to mean. Then you switch to talking about the Soviet Union and round off the diversion with the Russian Federation.

Because russia was never a member of the UN - and still isn't.

As you say... facts are facts.

It's now time to show the trespassers the door.
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2 huh? Your almost as bad as @Roundandroundwego😆

It's the territory that matters and whether or not it resigned. And that includes new Zealand or whatever country.

Governments change, territories do not.
Charity · 61-69
All he's trying to do is beat Obama's numbers he's grabbing anybody.
Captainjackass · 31-35, M
You have to be racist to be in ice now. Otherwise you would never be able to handle any of the crimes they do.
Zonuss · 46-50, M
Some see this as a racial cleansing.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@Zonuss thing about sunsporter is he could never start a argument without some type of irrelevant meme.

I'm glad he has blocked me. He doesn't even know that I can still see his irrelevant comments and replies.

 
Post Comment