text:
Kristen Dennis
Updates on Changes to Immigration
Recent department of labor denial of a special recruitment labor certification indicates risk for online sources of "national professional journal" ad (may 21, 2019)
Universities and other qualifying academic institutions that rely on advertisements in InsideHigherEd.com or HigherEdJobs.com to satisfy the Special Recruitment labor certification requirement of "at least one advertisement for the job opportunity placed in a national professional journal" should proceed with caution in light of the U.S. Department of Labor's recent denial of a Special Recruitment application on that basis. Read more.
Federal court halts application of Uscis unlawful presence memo impacting students and scholars (may 16, 2019)
On May 3, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina issued an order enjoining U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) from implementing "in all applications" its August 9, 2018 Policy Memorandum "Accrual of Unlawful Presence and F, J, and M Nonimmigrants." The court rejected the government's motion to dismiss the higher education plaintiffs' lawsuit challenging the memorandum, which dramatically changed 21 years of USCIS policy regarding the calculation of unlawful presence for foreign students and scholars admitted to the U.S. for "duration of status" (D/S), finding that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their challenge.
Students and exchange visitors generally are authorized to remain in the U.S. for what is known as "duration of status." In the challenged policy, USCIS changed its longstanding position that students and exchange visitors with duration of status did not begin to accrue "unlawful presence" (potentially becoming subject to the three or ten year bars to re-entry in INA 212(a)(9)(b)) until after an official determination that they were out of status. Instead, the agency stated it would calculate unlawful presence from the date after the student or exchange visitor engages in an unauthorized activity—even if they were unaware that they had violated the terms of their status.
CAUTION! The preliminary injunction is NOT a final decision on the merits of the case. If a student or scholar who is potentially subject to the three or ten year bars travels abroad during the injunction (triggering the bar but-for the injunction), it is unclear what the consequence could be if the plaintiffs are ultimately unsuccessful in court. Students or scholars with concerns about unlawful presence should speak with an immigration attorney before departing the U.S.
This decision is another rebuke to the administration that it cannot make radical changes in existing policy by disregarding administrative law. A final decision is expected in June.
TRAVEL BAN 3.0 LIFTED FOR CHAD, REMAINS FOR 6 OTHER NATIONS (APRIL 11, 2018)
President Donald Trump on Tuesday night lifted restrictions on travel for citizens of Chad, modifying an earlier executive order implementing the third version of his travel ban on nationals from seven nations.
breaking: Supreme court agrees to hear challenges to travel ban 3.0 (jan. 19, 2018)
The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Friday that it would consider a challenge to President Trump's latest effort to limit travel from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad, North Korea, and Venezuela. The justices are likely to hear arguments in the latest case in the spring and to issue a decision in late June. The appeal stems from a lawsuit brought by Hawaii, several individuals and a Muslim group; they prevailed before a Federal District Court and before a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In the meantime, the Trump Administration is fully implementing Travel Ban 3.0, based on a Supreme Court order from early December 2017.
USCIS Accepts daca renewal applications as a result of court order. (jan. 15, 2017)
As a result of a federal court order, USCIS will again be adjudicating Renewal Applications for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) under the same terms in place before the program was rescinded on September 5, 2017. USCIS will not be accepting initial applications from those who have never been granted DACA, nor will it accept advance parole applications from DACA recipients. If one previously had DACA, but it expired before September 5, 2016, DACA must be requested as an initial request, rather than as a renewal. For more information, visit the USCIS website. The Department of Justice has appealed the court's decision, and will also seek direct review of the decision by the US Supreme Court. (Jan. 16, 2018)
BREAKING: SUPREME COURT STAYS LOWER COURT DECISIONS REGARDING TRAVEL BAN 3.0; ALLOWS ORDER TO BE FULLY IMPLEMENTED WHILE CHALLENGES ARE ON-GOING. (DEC. 4, 2017)
Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order permitting the administration to fully implement the latest version of the President's travel ban policy in its entirety.
Lower court rulings had exempted from the travel restrictions foreigners with "bona fide" family or business or educational ties to the United States, but the justices issued a stay Monday that allows Trump to carry out the new policy even on those with U.S. connections, at least for now.
In June, ruling on an earlier version of the travel order, the justices ruled the administration could refuse entry for visitors and immigrants from several Muslim nations, but not to families, travelers and others who had a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with person or entity in the United States." In recent weeks, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in California, and a federal judge in Maryland adopted that standard and applied it to the President's latest order. They agreed the ban could go into effect in part, but not against those with who had close personal or professional ties to a person or an entity here. The 9th Circuit and the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, Va., were still weighing claims that the President's order discriminated based on nationality in violation of a 1965 law. The appeals courts are also considering claims that the ban reflected unconstitutional bias against Muslims.
The administration filed an emergency appeal on November 20 contending that allowing the ban to go into only partial affect "will cause ongoing irreparable harm to the government and the public." They predicted the court would eventually uphold the order so the justices should permit the order to go into full effect without further delay.
What This Means: Non-immigrants from the designated countries who are in the United States should refrain from travel and consult immigration counsel regarding their options.
breaking: ninth circuit us COURT OF APPEALS LIFTS A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AGAINST ENTRY RESTRICTIONS ON NATIONALS OF SIX MUSLIM-MAJORITY COUNTRIES, EXCEPT AS TO FOREIGN NATIONALS WHO HAVE A CREDIBLE CLAIM OF A BONA FIDE RELATIONSHIP WITH A PERSON OR ENTITY IN THE UNITED STATES. (nov. 13, 2017)
This means that the Administration can enforce Travel Ban 3.0, except for those travelers with a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the U.S. People with a qualifying family relationship include grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins. A qualifying relationship with an entity must be formal, documented, and formed in the ordinary course, rather than for the purpose of evading Presidential Proclamation 9645; examples include job offers or admission to a U.S. college or university. The lower court did not block the Presidential Proclamation's entry restrictions against nationals of North Korea and certain nationals of Venezuela, and the travel ban remains in effect for those countries as originally stated in Presidential Proclamation 9645. The Ninth Circuit's formulation regarding implementation of Travel Ban 3.0 is similar to the decision of a second federal trial court in Maryland, which only blocked enforcement of the Travel Ban as against travelers with a bona fide relationship. The bona fide relationship test originated with the U.S. Supreme Court's interim decision on Travel Ban 2.0.
second us district court issues order temporarily blocking administration from implementing travel ban 3.0 (oct. 18, 2017)
Late Tuesday, October 17, 2017, the US District Court for the District of Maryland issued a preliminary injunction preventing the administration from implementing Travel Ban 3.0 against travelers from Syria, Libya, Iran, Yemen, Chad, and Somalia who lack a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States. Again, the restrictions against travelers from North Korea and government officials from Venezuela are not impacted, and will go into effect. In its 91-page opinion, the Court concluded that Travel Ban 3.0--which has "no specified end date and no requirement of renewal"--violated a nondiscrimination provision in the immigration law based on nationality. The Court based much of its ruling on its finding that the president intended to ban Muslims, and thus the order runs afoul of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, protecting religious freedom.
US DISTRICT COURT TEMPORARILY BLOCKS ADMINISTRATION FROM IMPLEMENTING TRAVEL BAN 3.0 AGAINST TRAVELERS FROM SYRIA, LIBYA, IRAN, YEMEN, CHAD, AND SOMALIA; PROVISIONS IMPACTING TRAVELERS FROM NORTH KOREA AND VENEZUELA REMAIN IN PLACE. ORDER WAS SET TO TAKE EFFECT AT 12:01 AM ON OCTOBER 18. (OCT. 17, 2017)
On Tuesday, October 17, 2017, the US District Court for the District of Hawai'i issued a temporary restraining order preventing the administration from implementing the third iteration of the Travel Ban against any travelers from Syria, Libya, Iran, Yemen, Chad, and Somalia, irrespective of whether the individual could demonstrate a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States. That test was imposed by the US Supreme Court in relation to the second version of the Travel Ban. The Court stated in its 40-page opinion that the president had exceeded the authority granted him by Congress in immigration law.
The temporary restraining order is an interim measure, meant to maintain the status quo as the parties continue to argue the case.
white house announces expanded order prohibiting or limiting entry to the united states by nationals of iran, somalia, libya, yemen, syria, chad, north korea, and venezuela (september 24, 2017)
In a Presidential Proclamation issued September 24, 2017, the White House announced expanded prohibitions, limitations, and scrutiny on entry to the United States for nationals of eight countries. The new restrictions apply to foreign nationals of the designated countries who are:
Outside the United States on
3:30 PM EDT, September 24, 2017 for nationals of Iran, Somalia, Libya, Yemen and Syria, who lack a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States; AND
12:01 AM EDT, October 18, 2017 for nationals of Iran, Somalia, Libya, Yemen and Syria who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States; AND
12:01 AM EDT October 18, 2017 for nationals of Chad, North Korea, and Venezuela.
Do not have a valid visa on the effective date; and
Do not qualify for a visa or other valid travel document under the Proclamation.
The new restrictions DO NOT apply to:
lawful permanent residents of the United States (LPRs, green card holders);
foreign nationals of the designated countries admitted to or paroled into the US on or after the effective date;
foreign nationals of the designated countries who have a travel document OTHER than a visa (such as a boarding foil or advance parole document), valid on or after the effective date;
any dual national of a designated country traveling on a passport issued by a non-designated country;
foreign nationals traveling on a diplomatic or diplomatic-type visa, NATO visa, C-2, G-1, G-2, G-3 or G-4 visas; or
any foreign national who has been granted asylum by the US, any refugee already admitted to the US, or any individual granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
Chad. Entry into the US by nationals of Chad holding immigrant (permanent resident) visas, and nonimmigrant (temporary) business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas is suspended.
Iran. Entry into the US by nationals of Iran holding immigrant (permanent resident) visas, and ALL nonimmigrant (temporary) visa classifications, EXCEPT those with valid student (F and M) and exchange visitor (J) visas, is suspended.
Libya. Entry into the US by nationals of Libya holding immigrant (permanent resident) visas, and nonimmigrant (temporary) business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas is suspended.
North Korea. All entry into the US by nationals of North Korea is suspended.
Syria. All entry into the US by nationals of Syria is suspended.
Venezuela. Entry into the US by officials of government agencies of Venezuela involved in screening and vetting procedures (including the Ministry of the Popular Power for Interior, Justice and Peace; the Administrative Service of Identification, Migration and Immigration; the Scientific Penal and Criminal Investigation Service Corps; the Bolivarian National Intelligence Service; and the Ministry of the Popular Power for Foreign Relations), and their immediate family members, as nonimmigrant (temporary) business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas is suspended.
Yemen. Entry into the US by nationals of Yemen holding immigrant (permanent resident) visas, and nonimmigrant (temporary) business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas is suspended.
Somalia. Entry into the US by nationals of Somalia holding immigrant (permanent resident) visas is suspended.
Waivers of the restrictions may be granted by a Consular Officer or the Commissioner of US Customs & Border Protection (CBP) or the Commissioner's designee on a case-by-case basis.
Nationals of Iran and Venezuela holding valid visas in exempt (not listed) classifications can expect to undergo additional screening measures.
Nationals of Somalia applying for nonimmigrant (temporary) visas and entry to the US will be subject to additional scrutiny for connections to terrorist organizations.
update: some refugees still subject to travel ban. (sept. 18, 2017)
On September 12, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order blocking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal's September 7, 2017 ruling that would have exempted from the Travel Ban refugees who have a formal assurance from a refugee resettlement agency. In light of the Supreme Court's September 12, 2017 ruling, refugees will be barred from entry under the Executive Order if their sole basis for establishing a "bona fide relationship" with a person or entity in the United States is a formal assurance from a refugee resettlement agency. Refugees who are part of the Lautenberg program should be permitted to travel and enter the United States, as the Lautenberg program requires a relationship with a close family member in U.S. in order to qualify for the program. In its September 12, 2017 order, the Supreme Court did not, however, disturb the Ninth Circuit's September 7, 2017 ruling with respect to grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins of persons in the United States. These individuals remain exempt from the Travel Ban as they fall within the definition of "close familial relationship" per the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii's July 13, 2017 ruling, which was upheld by the Ninth Circuit on September 7, 2017. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on the merits of the challenge to the Travel and Refugee Ban on October 10, 2017.
previously: ninth circuit court of appeals upholds district court decision on travel ban; grandparents and refugees with assurances from resettlement agencies have "bona fide" connection (sept. 7, 2017)
On Thursday, September 9, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an order upholding an earlier ruling by the District Court that both grandparents and refugees with assurances from US resettlement agencies can demonstrate the "bona fide" relationship required by the Supreme Court's July 19th ruling, enabling a wider class of individuals to enter the US under the Travel Ban.
breaking: trump administration rescinds deferred action for childhood arrivals (daca); offers six month wind-down process as opportunity for congress to act (sept. 5, 2017)
On September 5, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Administration would immediately rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, implemented by President Obama in 2012 through Executive Action. Current DACA recipients will be permitted to retain both the period of deferred action and their employment authorization documents (EADs) until they expire, unless terminated or revoked.
New DACA Applications (and Applications for Employment Authorization) that were received by USCIS before September 5, 2017 will be processed.
Renewal DACA Applications (and Applications for Employment Authorization) that were received by USCIS before September 5, 2017 will be processed.
DACA recipients whose status will expire by March 5, 2018 may submit a Renewal DACA Application before October 5, 2017 and it will be processed.
USCIS will reject all requests to renew DACA and associated Applications for Employment Authorization filed after October 5, 2017.
Effective September 5, 2017, USCIS will no longer approve any new Applications for Advance Parole (travel authorization) under standards associated with the DACA program. USCIS will administratively close all pending DACA Advance Parole Applications, and will refund all associated fees.
The Department of Homeland Security has published Frequently Asked Questions regarding the Administration's action, with more detailed information. Click here.
Several pieces of legislation that would protect "Dreamers" have already been introduced and are awaiting your call of support:
Dream Act, introduced by Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.);
Dream Act of 2017, introduced by Representatives Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-40) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-27); and
American Hope Act, introduced by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA-12), Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (MD-5), Rep. Luis Gutierrez (IL-4), and members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
Each of these bills would provide young people, who were brought to this country as children and grew up in the United States, the chance to apply for lawful permanent residence, and eventually apply for citizenship. Contact your Senators and Representatives now!
15 states and the district of columbia sue trump administration over daca rescission (sept. 6, 2017)
On Wednesday, a group of 16 attorneys general — all Democrats — filed suit in Federal District Court in Brooklyn, claiming that Mr. Trump had improperly upended the policy known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA. The lawsuit alleges that Mr. Trump's action was driven by racial animus toward Mexican Americans and that the Trump administration failed to follow federal rules governing executive policy making. Additional lawsuits are expected, several major companies intend to join the lawsuits, and two, Microsoft and Amazon, have pledged to pay the legal expenses of any employees who become vulnerable to deportation.
UPDATE: Supreme Court stays portion of US District Court Order modifying the Travel Ban injunction for certain refugees (July 19, 2017)
The Supreme Court issued an order staying the US District Court of Hawai'i's order modifying the preliminary injunction with respect to refugees covered by a formal assurance, pending resolution of an appeal in the Ninth Circuit. The Court did not stay the District Court's order modifying the preliminary injunction with respect to grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins of persons in the United States. The Court also denied the motion for clarification of its 6/26/17 order.
Late in the evening on July 13, 2017, the US District Court for the District of Hawai'i ruled that the Travel Ban should not prevent grandparents and other close relatives of residents, and certain refugees with a formal assurance from a US refugee resettlement agency, from entering the US. Specifically, the Court prohibits the government from enforcing the Travel Ban to exclude:
grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins of persons in the US; and
refugees who have a formal assurance from a refugee resettlement agency in the US or are in the US Refugee Admissions Program - Lautenberg Program (which permits certain nationals of the former Soviet Union and other countries with "close family in the US" to apply for refugee status).
Last month, the US Supreme Court ruled that the travel ban could proceed on a limited basis. Applicants who could show a "bona fide relationship" with a "person or entity" in the United States would be exempt from the 90-day ban on travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and the 120-day ban on refugees from around the world. (Read more here). The Supreme Court did not specify which individuals or entities would qualify as close relations, and the US Department of State took a narrow view which excluded grandparents, among others. The State of Hawai'i challenged the government's limited interpretation, and asked the District Court to amend the nationwide injunction. While this ruling is a victory for opponents of the Travel Ban, further litigation in the Courts of Appeals can be expected, as well as consideration of the ultimate issues by the Supreme Court in the fall.
Breaking: Limited enforcement of Revised Travel Ban in effect as of 8:00 pm EDT June 29, 2017
(June 30, 2017)
Who IS Subject to Suspension of Entry Under the Executive Order
Nationals or citizens of Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen who are outside the US, do not have a valid visa, and do not have a bona fide relationship with a close family member or entity in the US. See below for definitions.
Who IS NOT Subject to Suspension of Entry Under the Executive Order
Lawful permanent residents of the United States;
Foreign nationals from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen who have valid visas;
What if your visa has expired?
If you were present in the United States on June 26, 2017, the Executive Order will not apply to you when you apply for a subsequent visa.
If you have a bona fide relationship with a close family member in the US, you can apply for a visa. A "close family" relationship includes: a parent (including parent-in-law), spouse, child, adult son or daughter, fiancé(e), son-in-law, daughter-in-law, and sibling, whether whole or half. This includes step relationships. However, "close family" does not include grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law and any other "extended" family members.
If you have a bona fide relationship with an entity in the US, you can apply for a visa. A bona fide relationship must be formal, documented, and formed in the ordinary course, rather than for the purpose of evading the Executive Order.
Foreign nationals from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen who have Advance Parole
Any dual national of a designated country when traveling on a passport issued by a non-designated country;
Any foreign national traveling on designated diplomatic visas;
Individuals who have already been granted asylum or refugee status in the United States, or any individual who has been granted withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture;
First-time refugees whose travel was already formally scheduled by the Department of State;
New refugee applicants who can demonstrate
A bona fide relationship with a close family member in the US. See above.
A bona fide relationship with an entity in the US, which may include a refugee resettlement agency. See above.
Additional Updates: The plaintiffs in Hawai'i v. Trump have asked the District Court to clarify the scope of the court's injunction barring implementation of the Executive Order (as modified by the Supreme Court). The plaintiffs assert that the government is applying the definition of a bona fide relationship too narrowly in light of the Supreme Court decision.
Supreme Court Permits Limited Enforcement of Trump's Revised Travel Ban; Will Hear Arguments in October
June 26, 2017. Today the Supreme Court agreed to review rulings by two lower courts blocking the implementation of President Donald Trump's March 6 executive order, popularly known as the "travel ban." The justices also granted the Trump administration's request to allow the ban to go into effect ONLY for would-be travelers who DO NOT already have some connection to the United States. Those with a connection are still protected by the injunctions.
Background: Citing national-security concerns, the Executive Order imposed a freeze on new visas for individuals from six Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen). Enforcement of the Executive Order was halted by decisions from the Districts of Maryland and Hawai'i, which were upheld last month by the Fourth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals, respectively. The Trump Administration sought review by the US Supreme Court, and requested that the Court reinstate the travel ban while the case was under consideration.
Today's Decision: The court partially lifted the injunctions with respect to individuals from the six countries who do not have a bona fide connection to a US family member or US entity. Importantly, the court provided the following examples of individuals WITH bona fide connections to the US:
a foreign national with a close familial relationship seeking to enter the US to live with or visit a family member;
a formal, documented relationship with a US entity made in the ordinary course of business, e.g.,
a student admitted to a US college or university;
a worker who accepted an offer of employment from a US company; or
a lecturer invited to address a US audience;
a refugee who can credibly claim a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the US.
The lower court injunctions blocking enforcement of the travel ban would still protect individuals in the above categories.
In other words, the ban only applies to people living overseas "who have no connection to the United States at all." When those people are unable to come to the US, the court reasoned, their constitutional rights are not violated – because they have no right to come to the US – and their exclusion from the country does not harm anyone in the US.
Three Justices dissented from the unsigned opinion – Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch – stating that they would have permitted the travel ban to be fully enforced while the case is pending before the Supreme Court, even for individuals similarly situated to the plaintiffs.
Approximately 72 hours from the release of the decision (Thursday, June 29, 2017), Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials, consular officers, and others will be authorized to ban refugees and travelers from the six affected countries who cannot show a bona fide relationship with a U.S.-based family member or entity. Refugees and people with immigrant and nonimmigrant visas will not be banned if they can show a bona fide relationship with a family member or entity in the United States. For individuals, a "close familial relationship" is required. Travelers may not seek to establish a relationship with an entity solely for the purpose of evading the ban.
The Supreme Court also formally lifted the injunction on the government's study that could lead, under section 2(e) of the Executive Order, to an indefinite ban on entry by nationals of countries that do not provide the US government with sufficient information on their citizens who are applying for US visas or immigration benefits.
If you or any of your employees have questions, please contact us.
President Signs New Executive Order; Courts Halt Implementation
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UPHOLDS STAY OF TRAVEL BAN AND REFUGEE BAN (JUNE 12, 2017)
The Ninth Circuit on Monday affirmed in substantial part the district court's issuance of a preliminary injunction blocking implementation of Sections 2 and 6 of Executive Order 13780, which suspended entry of nationals from six Muslim-majority countries and suspended the US Refugee Admissions Program. The Court of Appeals concluded that the plaintiffs--individuals and the State of Hawai'i--demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits that the Revised Executive Order contravenes the Immigration and Nationality Act by exceeding the President's statutory authority, discriminating on the basis of nationality, and disregarding procedures for setting annual admissions of refugees. The court did not address the plaintiffs' other argument that the Executive Order violates the First Amendment's bar against religious discrimination.
The court did conclude that the district court's injunction was over-broad to the extent it barred the government's internal review of consular vetting procedures, and lifted the injunction as to those activities. The court also agreed with the government that the injunction was inappropriate as applied to President Trump himself, and therefore lifted the injunction as to the President.
GOVERNMENT SEEKS SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF THE FOURTH CIRCUIT'S DECISION AFFIRMING STAY OF THE TRAVEL BAN (June 1, 2017)
The government filed a petition for certiorari seeking Supreme Court review of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision affirming a stay of Section 2(c) of Executive Order 13780, which suspended entry to the US of nationals of six majority-Muslim countries. The government also sought a stay of the US District Court of Hawai'i decision staying the travel ban or, in the alternative, pre-decision review by the Supreme Court.
FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UPHOLDS STAY OF TRAVEL BAN (May 25, 2017)
The Fourth Circuit on Thursday affirmed in substantial part the district court's issuance of a nationwide preliminary injunction as to Section 2(c) of Executive Order 13780, which suspended the entry of nationals of six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days. The court agreed with the government that the district court erred in issuing an injunction against President Trump himself, and therefore lifted the injunction as to the President only.
A majority of a full sitting of the Court held that the groups bringing the case credibly alleged that the order's professed national security aim was given in "bad faith," as a front for a religious purpose, and that although President Trump had broad power to deny entry into the United States, his executive order "stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across the nation."
The ruling is the first appellate court ruling on the second executive order, which was signed March 6. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit also heard arguments earlier this month over a broader injunction against the executive order from the district court in Hawaii, but has yet to release its decision.
Attorney General Sessions has indicated that the Department of Justice will petition the US Supreme Court for review.
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS EXPEDITES TRAVEL BAN APPEAL, HEARING EXPECTED IN MAY (APRIL 4, 2017)
The Ninth Circuit on Monday agreed to hear the President's appeal of a Hawai'i federal judge's preliminary injunction of his controversial travel ban on an expedited basis, setting the stage for oral arguments for a to-be-determined date in May.
FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS EXPEDITES TRAVEL BAN CASE, SETS MAY 8 HEARING (MAR. 24. 2017)
The US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit agreed Thursday to expedite the government's appeal of a court order halting implementation of the travel ban portion of the President's New Executive Order, setting oral arguments in the case for May 8 at the court in Richmond.
During oral arguments surrounding the first order, the Ninth Circuit attracted a large audience by live streaming the hearing. A representative in the Fourth Circuit's Clerk's Office said the court does not plan to livestream the May 8 arguments at this time, but the court does provide audio recordings of arguments.
A federal judge in Hawaii, Derrick K. Watson, also issued an injunction against the order, which blocked the travel restrictions as well as other provisions, including the 120-day suspension of the refugee program. The government has yet to appeal that order.
FEDERAL JUDGE IN HAWAI'I ISSUES WORLDWIDE RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST KEY PARTS OF THE NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER HOURS BEFORE IT WAS SET TO TAKE EFFECT (MAR. 15, 2017)
US District Court Judge Derrick issued a world-wide restraining order blocking two core provisions of the New Executive Order: a 90-day halt in issuance of visas to citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, and a 120-day halt on refugee admissions from all countries. The Court's order applies "in all places," including the United States, at all US borders and ports of entry, and in the issuance of visas. In a 43-page opinion, the Court ruled that the state of Hawaii and a local Muslim leader had "a strong likelihood of success on their claim" that the President's order intentionally targets Muslims and therefore violates the Constitution's guarantee against establishment of religion.
FEDERAL JUDGE IN MARYLAND HALTS IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRAVEL BAN PORTION OF THE EXECUTIVE ORDER (MAR. 16, 2017)
Hours after a federal judge in Hawai'i issued a temporary restraining order against the President's New Executive Order, US District Court Judge Theodore Chuang issued a nationwide preliminary injunction prohibiting the enforcement of the 90-day ban against travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Judge Chuang's order denied the plaintiffs' request to block other parts of the March 6 Executive Order, including the temporary ban on refugees.
On Monday, March 6, 2017, President Trump revoked the January 27, 2017 Executive Order 13769 imposing a travel and refugee ban and issued a replacement order. The New Executive Order will be effective as of 12:01 AM EDT on March 16, 2017
TRAVELERS FROM IRAN, LIBYA, SOMALIA, SUDAN, SYRIA, AND YEMEN
Section 2 of the New Order suspends entry to the United States as of 12:01 AM EDT on March 16, 2017 for nationals or citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen who:
Are outside the United States on March 16, 2017;
Did not have a valid visa at 5:00 pm EST on January 27, 2017; and
Do not have a valid visa on March 16, 2017.
The suspension of entry DOES NOT APPLY TO
Lawful permanent residents of the United States ("green card" holders);
Any foreign national who has a document OTHER than a visa, valid on March 16, 2017 (or issued thereafter), that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission (e.g., an Advance Parole document);
Any foreign national traveling on designated diplomatic visas; OR
Any foreign national who has been granted asylum, any refugee who has already been admitted to the United States, or any individual who has been granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
WAIVER:
A consular officer, Commissioner of US Customs & Border Protection (CBP) (or the Commissioner's delegee, may, in his or her discretion, decide on a case-by-case basis to authorize the issuance of a visa or permit entry of a foreign national subject to the ban if the foreign national demonstrates that denying entry during the suspension would:
Cause undue hardship;
His or her entry would not pose a threat to national security; and
His or her entry would be in the national interest.
Examples of individuals for whom a waiver may be appropriate:
the foreign national has previously been admitted to the United States for a continuous period of work, study, or other long-term activity, is outside the United States on March 16, 2017, seeks to reenter the United States to resume that activity, and the denial of reentry during the suspension period would impair that activity.
the foreign national has previously established significant contacts with the United States but is outside the United States on the effective date of this order for work, study, or other lawful activity.
the foreign national seeks to enter the United States for significant business or professional obligations and the denial of entry during the suspension period would impair those obligations (e.g., to receive a significant award, or attend a prestigious conference).
the foreign national seeks to enter the United States to visit or reside with a close family member (e.g., a spouse, child, or parent) who is a United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, or alien lawfully admitted on a valid nonimmigrant visa, and the denial of entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship.
the foreign national is traveling as a United States Government-sponsored exchange visitor.
Any individual whose visa was marked revoked or marked canceled as a result of Executive Order 13769 shall be entitled to a travel document confirming that the individual is permitted to travel to the United States and seek entry. Any prior cancellation or revocation of a visa that was solely pursuant to Executive Order 13769 shall not be the basis of inadmissibility for any future determination about entry or admissibility.
Iraqis seeking entry to the United States, while not subject to the ban, should be prepared to experience delays in visa issuance. The New Executive Order requires additional screening by the Department of Defense for such applicants, and this make cause delays.
REFUGEES WORLD-WIDE
As before, the New Executive Order suspends entry of refugees into the US and decisions on applications for refugee status under the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for a period of 120 days. The suspension DOES NOT APPLY to refugee applicants who, before March 16, 2017, have been formally scheduled for transit by the Department of State. Refugee admissions and decisions on applications for refugee status will resume 120 days from the effective date (e.g., July 14, 2017) ONLY for stateless persons, and nationals of countries for which the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence have determined have procedures implemented adequate to ensure the security of the US.
The New Executive Order limits the entry of refugees in FY 2017 to no more than 50,000.
Waivers: The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may jointly determine to admit refugees on a case-by-case basis where entry is in the national interest and does not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the US.
On January 27, 2017, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order relating to visa issuance, screening procedures, and refugees, titled "Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States."
temporary restraining order (tro) blocks implementation of executive order; us court of appeals denies government's request to reinstate the travel ban while the case is pending in the district court (updated feb. 10, 2017)
On Friday, February 3, 2017, the US District Court in the Western District of Washington issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) suspending enforcement of the Executive Order nationwide. In response, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of State (DOS) both issued statements indicating that they would return to the policies and procedures in place prior to the Executive Order. DOS stated that provisionally revoked visas were valid once more, and Customs & Border Protection announced procedures for travelers whose visas had been physically marked in the initial roll-out to be admitted.
The Government filed an appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit the following day (February 4), and both sides submitted briefs and conducted oral argument on Tuesday, February 7.
On Thursday, February 9, the Court of Appeals denied the Government's request to lift the TRO and re-institute the Executive Order's travel ban, concluding that the Government had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, nor that the failure to lift the TRO would cause irreparably injury to the Government. Therefore, until further action by a court, the order barring implementation of the travel and refugee ban remains in place, and all individuals may apply for visas and admission to the United States without regard to nationality.
The case now returns to the US District Court for briefing and argument on the merits of the States' request for a preliminary injunction blocking implementation of the Executive Order. All legal briefs are due to be filed by Friday, February 17, and a hearing will likely be scheduled shortly thereafter.
uscis will adjudicate petitions & applications filed by or on behalf of individuals from the designated countries (updated feb. 3, 2017)
We have received reports that guidance may have gone out to the field indicating that Section 3(c) of the Executive Order does not affect USCIS adjudication of applications and petitions filed for or on behalf of individuals in the United States regardless of their country of nationality, and that adjudications at field offices have resumed. We are awaiting official confirmation from USCIS.
No Current Plans to Expand Travel Ban Beyond Current Countries (Updated Feb. 2, 2017)
In response to rumors of plans to expand the travel ban to other countries, the Department of State (DOS) informed the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) that there is no addendum, annex, or amendment now being worked on to expand visa revocations or the travel ban to countries other than those currently implicated in the Executive Order. This includes Colombia and Venezuela which have been widely rumored to be under consideration. DOS confirmed that there is no information that supports such a rumor and asked that AILA members help end the spread of this false information.
entry to the us by nonimmigrants and immigrant visa holders bearing passports from iran, iraq, libya, somalia, sudan, syria, and yemen is barred; US citizens and lawful permanent residents are not subject.
Section 3 of the Executive Order suspends the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry of nationals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen for 90 days from the date of the order (i.e., April 27, 2017); this ban has the potential to be permanent.
The Executive Order applies to nearly all travelers, except U.S. citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents, traveling on passports from Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Somalia, Libya, and Yemen who are applying for entry to the United States at any port of entry—air, land or sea.
On February 1, 2017, White House Counsel issued "Authoritative Guidance" on the Executive Order clarifying that the Order does not apply to Lawful Permanent Residents (those holding a green card--Form I-551--or a temporary I-551 stamp).
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and US Customs & Border Protection (CBP) have stated that dual nationals will be assessed according to the travel document they present. That is, if a citizen of Iran and Canada presents his or her Canadian passport and visa at a port of entry, he or she will be processed based on Canadian nationality.
Landed immigrants of Canada (not including refugees) who hold passports of a restricted country can apply for admission to the US, if the individual presents that passport with a valid immigrant or nonimmigrant visa and proof of their landed immigrant status, and only if the travel both originates in Canada and is through a land border or Preclearance location.
All individuals entering the US should be prepared to experience delays and questioning in secondary inspection.
Lawful Permanent Residents SHOULD NOT sign Form I-407, Abandonment of LPR Status. Returning LPRs should not automatically surrender their green cards if asked to do so. Form I-407 must be signed voluntarily. An LPR who refuses to sign Form I-407 will be issued a Notice to Appear (NTA) so that an immigration judge can determine whether they have lost their LPR status. If you find yourself in this situation, contact us.
All international travelers arriving to the US are subject to CBP inspection. This inspection may include electronic devices such as computers, disks, drives, tapes, mobile phones and other communication devices, cameras, music and other media players and any other electronic or digital devices. Be mindful of your social media activity.
nonimmigrant & immigrant visas for nationals of designated countries revoked; changes to visa application process
The US Department of State (DOS) provisionally revoked all valid nonimmigrant and immigrant visas of nationals of the designated countries as of January 27, 2017, with the exception of the following classifications: A-1, A-2, G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO, C-2, or certain diplomatic visas.
Visa holders from the designated countries will not be permitted to board flights or enter the US. US Consular Offices are cancelling scheduled visa interviews (both immigrant and nonimmigrant) and issuance of visas to individuals from the designated countries. You will not be permitted to enter the Consulate.
Consulates are allowed to process visa applications and issue nonimmigrant and immigrant visas to otherwise eligible visa applicants who apply with a passport from an unrestricted country, even if they hold dual nationality from a restricted country.
Landed immigrants of Canada (not including refugees) who hold passports of a restricted country can apply for an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa to the US, if the individual presents that passport and proof of landed immigrant status to a consular officer. These applications shall be made at a U.S. consular section in Canada.
Expect the roll-out of an enhanced screening program for visa applicants which may delay visa issuance.
Persons from the designated countries, who are in the US in a nonimmigrant status with a valid I-94 record, are allowed to remain in the US. However, if a person from a designated country does need to travel internationally, then a new US visa will need to be obtained to return; no new nonimmigrant visa applications will be approved for persons from the designated countries until after the 90 day period, at the earliest.
refrain from non-essential international travel and contact an attorney.
We are advising clients who might be affected by the Executive Order, including passport holders, citizens, and nationals of the designated countries, to REFRAIN from traveling outside of the United States for the foreseeable future. In addition, you should contact the team at Goldblum & Pollins for appropriate guidance BEFORE planning any future travel outside the United States.
legal challenges to the executive order
There were several immediate legal challenges to the Order in the US District Courts; five courts issued orders temporarily staying the implementation of the Order with respect to foreign nationals who were detained upon arrival at US airports in the initial day of the Order (the "Airport Cases"). Hearings on these cases are scheduled in the next two weeks, but the cases may be mooted as individuals detained at airports are released. On January 30, 2017, a class action complaint was filed in the US District Court in Washington State on behalf of US Citizens and Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs), and their family members who were prevented from completing the immigrant visa application process, or from entering the US with valid immigrant visas. This is likely to be the first substantive challenge to the Order. Currently, there are approximately thirteen legal challenges to the Executive Order.
Contact us for more information or with questions. We will continue to provide updates as the situation develops.
What you can do now: Contact your Senators and Representatives in Congress and let them know how this impacts you, your family, and your work.


text:
Wild Mountain Cooperative
Teaching and Learning Community
Land in Common CLT
Home » Land in Common
Land in Common
Wild Mountain's land is held in trust by Land in Common community land trust.
Land in Common, founded in 2008, removes land from speculative markets and places it into a member-run trust, to be cared for over the long-term by residents. Taking inspiration and insight from the Indian gramdan (land gift) movement, the Brazilian Landless Worker's Movement (MST), and the community land trust movement, Land in Common's goal is to create a multi-generational land base for sustainable livelihoods that supports communities working for just, cooperative, and resilient futures.
We are committed to upholding the inspiring values of Land in Common:
We believe that land is a vital source of life and sustenance. It is not a commodity.
We believe that land access and security should not be tied to economic wealth.
We believe that a home is a fundamental right of all living beings.
We are committed to justice and anti-oppression in all of our work.
We are committed to bold experimentation and to learning with humility.
We are committed to cooperation, collaboration, mutual-aid, and direct democracy.
We value the true wealth of sufficiency and "enoughness."
We honor the importance of spirituality, mindfulness, love, and joy.
We are committed for the long haul, in the service of future generations.
We strive to enact these values in the culture and structure of our organization.
© 2023 Wild Mountain Cooperative – All rights reserved

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Home WWE News Raquel Gonzalez Wants To Face Charlotte Flair & Becky Lynch On The WWE Main Roster
Raquel Gonzalez Wants To Face Charlotte Flair & Becky Lynch On The WWE Main Roster
Charlotte Flair's booking remains one of the most polarizing decisions in WWE. Flair continues to be criticized for getting multiple shots at titles which other WWE Superstars deserved far more than she did. Despite all the backlash, WWE is set on pushing Flair to the moon and that is unlikely to stop anytime soon.
Despite all the criticism, it is a fact that Charlotte Flair is one of the best female in-ring performers in the company and that she has competed in several historic matches in the company.
Both Charlotte Flair and Becky Lynch are two of the biggest names not only on the main roster, but also in NXT's history. Due to this, it seems Raquel Gonzalez wants a piece of them.
While speaking with The Wrestling Inc. Daily, the former NXT Women's Champion talked about her future goals in WWE. Gonzalez made it clear that she wants to square off against Charlotte Flair and Becky Lynch.
"Watching Charlotte Flair and Becky Lynch go at it at Survivor Series was absolutely epic. I have always wanted to step into the ring with either one of them…. I think Rhea is amazing, she's so talented…."
To watch what she's done with Charlotte Flair is an inspiration to the rest of us who are waiting for that opportunity. I would love to step into the ring with one of the OG Four Horsewomen."
Raquel Gonzalez was part of the winning team in the Women's WarGames match at the NXT WarGames event. It remains to be seen whether Raquel Gonzalez will eventually face off against Charlotte Flair and Becky Lynch in the future.
h/t to Wrestling Inc for the quotes.
Next Jon Jones Trolls Twitter Haters After Dunking On Amanda Nunes »
Previous « Xia Li's WWE Vignettes Of Her New Character Made Her Sister Cry


SILVER STRIKE 2016 Upright Arcade Machine Game for sale by IT - FREE SHIPPING!
VIRTUA COP Upright Arcade Machine Game for sale by SEGA - YOU ARE A COP MOVING THROUGH THE CITY!
VR VORTEX V3 Arcade Machine Game for sale by Global VR!
STREET FIGHTER Arcade Machine Game for sale by CAPCOM - ONE ON ONE FIGHTING GAME!
TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES: TURTLES IN TIME Upright Arcade Machine Game for sale by Konami!
DONKEY KONG JUNIOR Video Arcade Game Machine for sale by NINTENDO!
CROSSFIRE - MAXIMUM PAINTBALL Video Arcade Game Machine for sale by TEAM PLAY - NON-VIOLENT GUN GAME!!
ICE EGG VENTURE Upright Arcade Machine Game for sale!
EIGHTEEN 18 WHEELER: AMERICAN PRO TRUCKER Upright Arcade Machine Game for sale by SEGA - COIN-OP or FREE PLAY!
POWERPUTT Upright Arcade Machine Game for sale by IT - REALISTIC 18 HOLE COURSES!
SIMPSONS BOWLING Upright Video Arcade Machine Game for sale by KONAMI - 2 TO CHOOSE FROM!
TIME CRISIS Arcade Machine Game by NAMCO for sale!


text:
Website Created by Phil Norfleet
Stephen5 Mayfield (Robert4, Abraham3, Robert2, Robert1) was born in about 1758 in Granville County NC; he died in 1846 in Cape Girardeau County MO. Stephen was the son of Robert Mayfield (d. 1816) of Chester County SC. Stephen married twice. The name of his first wife is unknown; she died before 1797. His second wife was Margaret Koch, who he married on 20 May 1797 in Mecklenburg County NC. She was born about 1782 in North Carolina and was the daughter of George Koch and Anna Froschauer.
The vital information for Stephen Mayfield is based on an application submitted to the Sons of the American Revolution by his son, George Washington Mayfield (see the notes for his son George presented below).
The land records of Chester County SC indicate that Stephen Mayfield sold his land and left South Carolina in about 1794. Stephen Mayfield presumably went first to the Mecklenburg County NC area where he took a second wife, Margaret Koch in 1797.
A direct descendant of this Stephen Mayfield, Riley Russell Eddleman, has written a family history entitled The Eddleman-Fulbright Families (published 1981). Per Mr. Eddleman, after living several years in NC, Stephen and his family removed, first to Jackson County, Georgia, and then to Jackson County, Tennessee. Later, in about 1814, Stephen and his family removed to Cape Girardeau County, Missouri where he resided until his death in about 1846.
Children of Stephen Mayfield and His First Wife (Name Unknown)
The 1790 Federal Census for Chester County, South Carolina shows Stephen Mayfield listed adjacent to his father Robert Mayfield; Stephen is shown with a family of 2 white males over 16 (including Stephen), one white male under 16 and 3 white females. Unfortunately, except for son Luke Mayfield (the white male under 16), nothing is known of Stephen's other children by his first wife. In addition to Luke, Stephen apparently had one additional older son and two other daughters by his first wife.
We do have some information concerning Stephen's younger son by his first wife, i.e., Luke Mayfield:
1. Luke6 Mayfield, per his Bible record, was born on 01 August 1777 in Camden District SC; he died on 03 August 1853 in Macoupin County IL. He married Delilah Gore on 10 May 1798; she died 18 February 1835 in Franklin County IL.
The vital information for Luke Mayfield, his wife and children have been taken from his Bible record as published in the "Georgia Genealogical Magazine," Number 74, Fall 1979, pages 298-300.
Luke Mayfield's Bible record indicates that he was a son of a certain Stephen Mayfield; unfortunately, there is no way to tell which Stephen Mayfield is referred to. Another note on his Bible record indicates that Luke had a half-brother named Elisha.
Some Mayfield genealogists have tentatively assigned Luke as the son of Stephen Mayfield of Overton County TN. However, in my opinion, Luke is far more likely to have been a son of this Stephen Mayfield, who, in the 1790 Federal Census, is listed as being a resident of Chester County SC. This Stephen was the son of Robert and Sarah Mayfield (d. 1816) of Chester County SC. My opinion as to Luke's parentage is further strengthened by the fact that Stephen Mayfield, son of Robert, had a son named Elisha by his second marriage (to Margaret Koch); conversely, Stephen Mayfield of Overton County TN has no known son of that name. Even so, more research needs to be done on this topic.
Children of Stephen Mayfield and His Second Wife - Margaret Koch
Margaret Koch's family was of German Palatinate extraction; she was undoubtedly Stephen Mayfield's second wife. They were married in 1797 in Mecklenburg County SC. Their marriage bond, dated 20 May 1797, still exists and is on file in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. John Starnes is cited as the bondsman.
2. Stephen6 Mayfield was born about 1798 in North Carolina. Stephen married Margaret _____ in about 1828; she was born in about 1801 in North Carolina.
3. Elisha Mayfield was born about 1806.
4. Jacob Henry Mayfield was born on 18 October 1809.
5. Mary Mayfield was born about 1813.
6. Catherine Mayfield was born about 1814.
7. Lucinda Mayfield was born about 1818.
8. George Washington Mayfield was born on 13 February 1820 in Cape Girardeau County MO; he died after 1894. George married Sarah P. Cheek; she was born in 1820 in Cape Girardeau County MO.
George Washington Mayfield submitted an application to join the Missouri Society of the Sons of the American Revolution in 1894. The application was examined and approved by the State Registrar on 30 May 1894 and was approved and registered by the Registrar General on 10 August 1894. The following are pertinent extracts from that application:
I George Washington Mayfield, being of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, to wit, of the age of seventy-four, hereby apply for membership in the Society by right of lineal descent in the following line from Stephen Mayfield who was born in North Carolina in Lincoln Parish of the year or thereabouts 1758, lived in North Carolina and who assisted in establishing American Independence.
I was born in Jackson, County of Cape Girardeau, State of Missouri on the 13th day of February, 1820.
I am the son of Stephen Mayfield and Margaret Mayfield nee Cook his wife, and he, the said Stephen Mayfield is the ancestor who assisted in establishing American Independence, while acting in the capacity of private soldier in the cavalry and part of the time as a spy.
... My ancestor's services in the establishment of American independence during the War of Revolution were as follows:
My father was in the service of the war of the American Revolution about seven years and took part in several battles. I have heard my father talk many a time about the Revolutionary War and the battles in which he fought. I also heard his comrade Davy Toney, who was in the same company with him and messed with him, and my father talk together about their services in the War of the American Revolution. My father died about the year 1846. I heard my father say several times that he was in the cavalry service and that a considerable [part] of the time he was a spy and was at times in very close quarters. Was an ardent patriot and I heard revolutionary soldiers say that he was a brave and persistent fighter.
The following is a memorandum of the authority for the above statements: From statements often made by my father Stephen Mayfield and also corroborated by David Toney who served in the Revolutionary army with him.
/Signed/ George Washington Mayfield (His Mark)
[Please note that, in the above application, George Washington Mayfield states that he was born in 1820; George also states that his father, Stephen, was born in 1758. If true, this means that Stephen was 62 when his son George was born. Although unlikely, such an age differential is supported by the Federal Census Reports for Cape Girardeau MO for the years 1820, 1830 and 1840.]


text:
By dcba
Office of Immigrant Affairs Welcomes Artist Phung Huynh as Creative Strategist
Office of Immigrant Affairs Welcomes Artist Phung Huynh as Creative Strategist https://oia.lacounty.gov/wp-content/themes/blade/images/empty/thumbnail.jpg 150 150 dcba dcba https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/283a84264a4cc55a55ac421d46651764?s=96&d=mm&r=g June 24, 2021 June 24, 2021
The Los Angeles County Department of Consumer and Business Affairs is honored to welcome celebrated artist Phung Huynh to the department as Creative Strategist for the Office of Immigrant Affairs (OIA) as part of the Creative Strategist Program administered by the LA County Department of Arts and Culture.
Phung Huynh is a Los Angeles-based artist and educator whose art practice focuses on drawing, painting, and public art. Her work explores cultural perception and representation. Known for exploring the complexities of Southeast Asian refugee communities through drawings that include the iconic pink donut box, Huynh will apply her artistic practice and her own experience as a refugee and immigrant to her work with OIA staff on strategies to build trust and increase participation in LA County support services.
Phung Huynh, Photo by City of Los Angeles COLA program
"The talents of immigrant artists have helped to make Los Angeles County the nation's creative capital," said Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Chair, Hilda L. Solis, Supervisor to the First District. "Phung Huynh's work speaks to the immigrant story and makes a perfect match to help the Office of Immigrant Affairs celebrate the contributions of immigrants that make LA County a vibrant and welcoming place for all."
"It's an honor to welcome Phung Huynh and her impressive artistry and ideas into our Office of Immigrant Affairs," said Rafael Carbajal, Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Affairs. "We extend our gratitude to the Department of Arts and Culture for selecting OIA as a place where art can help us better engage and serve those who have made Los Angeles their home."
"Artists have the power to inspire and advance belonging and identity in communities. The Creative Strategist Program brings that power and creative problem solving into the service sector," said Kristin Sakoda, Director of the Department of Arts and Culture. "We believe that this cross-sector partnership with the Office of Immigrant Affairs and the amazing, community-minded Phung Huynh will find innovative ways to build more access to arts and cultural resources for immigrants in Los Angeles County."
"The role of artist is deeply connected to the role of cultural builder who serves the community," said Huynh. "Intentional engagement and making art through a social justice lens are central to my practice, as well as my commitment to immigrant communities, women's issues, and BIPOC solidarity. As an artist, educator, mother, and activist, I hope that when people engage with my work, they are positively impacted and rethink their relationships with their own communities and what sort of impact they can make."
The Creative Strategist program is a recommendation of the LA County Cultural Equity and Inclusion Initiative, which is implemented by the Department of Arts and Culture. The program places artists and creative professionals in residence at a County agency, applying artistic practices towards the development of innovative solutions to complex social challenges.
In addition to her new assignment with OIA, Huynh has been commissioned with other County public art projects and recently earned a City of Los Angeles (COLA) Individual Artist Fellowship through LA City's Department of Cultural Affairs. As one of 14 COLA fellows, Huynh's works are currently being featured virtually at the Los Angeles Municipal Art Gallery.
OIA Offers Support to Immigrant Detainees Affected by Data Breach
OIA Celebrates National Immigrants Day with Grants to Immigrant-Focused Community-Based Organizations
La Oficina de Asuntos de Inmigrantes del Condado de Los Ángeles da la bienvenida al anuncio de cambio de regla de carga pública
OIA, CHIRLA Expand Program to Link Immigrants and Families to Legal Representation, Support Services
DCBA Stories: Providing Hope
Celebrate Immigrant Heritage Month with Us!
Community Navigators to Connect LA County Immigrants to Critical Services
dcba
All stories by:dcba


text:
Notarize in violation of CA Gov code section 8227.1
Law Related
matt 2019-04-28 18:03:27 UTC #1
CA Notaries! It has come to my attention that Notarize is in blatant violation of CA Gov Code Section 8227.1. I and other notaries have noticed that they are advertising in CA on google and youtube. Please write, email and call Xavier Baccera, the CA Atty General and ask him to open an investigation immediately.
LindaH 2019-04-28 23:51:16 UTC #2
Going to post here what I posted in response on the other site:
"Sorry, but I think this is a bit of a reach
What you're saying is a notary in any other state cannot notarize anything destined to be used in CA...and that's just not so - in fact, that is federally regulated - all states must recognize notarizations done in other states -
I'm against this whole RON deal...but the laws as they're written put venue at the site of the remote notary - and as long as that notary is duly commissioned in that state (at that venue) it's legal and they are not subject to CA notary regulation.
JMO"
No, that's not at all what I'm saying. Please review CA Gov Code section 8227.1
notary_narayan 2019-04-30 01:12:11 UTC #4
hat's not at all what I'm saying. Please review CA Gov Code section 8227
Please dumb down the violations. "Don't yell fire or shooter in a crowded movie theater or something like that & create panic"
It not responsible to scare notaries, who are scared down enough.
If you have taken time to sound out a warning !! please read , and dumb it down as "your personal opinion"
jodyleebode 2019-05-02 04:05:50 UTC #5
Matt please read this:
Federal Rules of Evidence ›
https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-of-evidence.pdf
Jody - since you're reply is linked to my post - what section are you referring to? Please cite the number so we can all read the pertinent part you're referring to.
dan_nsa 2019-09-09 23:58:03 UTC #7
It shall be a misdemeanor for any person who is not a duly commissioned, qualified, and acting notary public for the State of California to do any of the following:
(a) Represent or hold himself or herself out to the public or to any person as being entitled to act as a notary public.
(b) Assume, use or advertise the title of notary public in such a manner as to convey the impression that the person is a notary public.
(c) Purport to act as a notary public.
find a notary


text:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<LinearLayout  xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android"
    xmlns:tools="http://schemas.android.com/tools"
    android:layout_width="match_parent"
    android:layout_height="match_parent"
    android:background="#FFF"
    android:gravity="center_horizontal"
    >
    <TextView
        android:layout_width="wrap_content"
    	android:layout_height="wrap_content"
    	android:text="该功能开发中..."
    	android:textColor="#666666"
    	android:textSize="18sp"
    	android:layout_marginTop="30dp"
        />
</LinearLayout>
<!-- From: file:/F:/workspace/UPG/res/layout/main_fragment_1.xml -->

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


The Fusion Skyer is the original and still the best coaches' bat on the market. Designed to give you the ability to hit the ball much higher and further than a normal cricket bat, without the risk of fatigue or injury.The Skyer bats are around two-thirds the size of a standard cricket bat and are used to give high catches with an amazing hang time of up to seven seconds. The revolutionary half-rubber bat is helping to raise the quality of Team England's fielding drills, drawing gasps from the public who turn up to watch and receiving envious looks from opposition coaches. The Skyer is helping more and more incredible catches to be taken at all levels of the game from international teams to school and club cricket.
The Secret to the Skyer is the unique rubber face. Only available to Fusion. The compound gives exceptionally high performance and is incredibly resilient, it will go on performing even after thousands of uses. Though more expensive than other copies on the market, no other can match its performance.
A new addition to the Ledgends product range is the super Skyer B MAX training cricket bat. The B MAX uses the black Fusion high performance FOB for those big hangers. This cricket training bat is perfect for all levels. The Skyer B MAX is used by the majority of International and first-class coaches.
The Skyer was invented by James Cornford, a former minor counties and second XI player. Mark Garaway, the former Team England analyst, has helped refine it to a standard that it is now a fixture in the team kitbag.


text:
Specialising in interiors, travel, food, lifestyle and thought pieces, Emma J Page is a journalist, editor and commissioning editor. She has a prolific freelance career, writing for publications including Homes & Gardens, The Times Magazine, Livingetc, House & Garden, The World of Interiors, Stella, Architectural Digest, The Telegraph Magazine, Food & Travel and Evening Standard among many others. An influential voice among a number of genres, she regularly writes trends pieces, in-depth profiles, homes stories and interiors news. Her first book, in collaboration with photographer Rachael Smith, will be published in 2021 by Hoxton Mini Press.
"There's only one very good life and that's the life you know you want and you make it yourself" Diana Vreeland
'Emma is an excellent journalist and editor. She has an eye for style and is a pleasure to work with' Sarah Spiteri, Editorial Director, Future
'Emma is always a pleasure to work with and delivers interesting and inspiring features' Jessica Doyle, Design & Interiors Editor, The Telegraph
'From ideas and execution to tone of voice and visual identity, Emma wholly understands a brand when working with them, making her a safe and trusted pair of hands. She is also an authoritative voice in the interiors sphere' Jemma Tibbals, Global Head of Content, Soho House
'Emma is one of the most motivated writers I have worked with' Nicole Gray, Interiors Editor, You magazine
'Emma is the wordsmith behind the new Mama Shelter website. She quickly understood our content expectations and perfectly captured the tone of the brand. We can't wait to work with her again' Vincent Brun, Chief Marketing & Communication Officer, Mama Shelter
emma@emmajpage.com


text:
Questa pagina elenca il cast della serie Simpatiche canaglie di Hal Roach, trasmessa nei cinema tra il 1922 ed il 1944. Nel casting Roach sceglieva attori giovanissimi, con un'età più o meno intorno ai 7 anni. Di seguito un elenco degli attori principali, distinti per epoca.

Bambini (e animali)
Il cast delle Simpatiche canaglie cambiava di frequente: quando i bambini lasciavano la serie, o la dovevano abbandonare perché troppo cresciuti, immediatamente venivano reclutati nuovi bambini. In alcuni casi l'ingresso di un bambino rappresentava un vero e proprio "cambio della guardia" tra i personaggi della serie: in questo caso la sostituzione del personaggio viene indicata.

1922-1926: era Roach - primi film muti
Ernie "Sunshine Sammy" Morrison (1922–1924)
Mickey Daniels (1922–1926)
Mary Kornman (1923–1926)
Jackie Condon (1922–1929)
Jack Davis (1922–1923)
Johnny Downs
Allen "Farina" Hoskins (1922–1931)
Joe Cobb (1923–1929)
Eugene "Pineapple" Jackson (1924–1925)
Andy Samuel
Pal the Wonderdog
Dinah the Mule

1926-1929: era Roach - tardi film muti
Allen "Farina" Hoskins (1922–1931)
Jackie Condon (1922–1929)
Joe Cobb (1923–1929)
Jay R. Smith (1926–1929): sostituì Mickey nel 1926
Jean Darling (1926–1929): sostituì Mary nel 1926
Harry Spear
Bobby "Wheezer" Hutchins (1926–1933)
Mary Ann Jackson (1928–1931)
Bobby "Bonedust" Young
Mildred Kornman
Jack Hanlon
Dinah the Mule
Pete the Pup (1930–1938): chiamato anche Minnie in almeno un episodio

1929-1931: era Roach - primi film sonori
 Allen "Farina" Hoskins (1922–1931)
 Mary Ann Jackson (1928–1931)
 Bobby "Wheezer" Hutchins (1927–1933)
 Bobby "Bonedust" Young
 Norman "Chubby" Chaney (1929–1931): sostituì Joe Cobb nel 1929
 Jackie Cooper (1929–1931)
 Donald Haines (1929–1933)
 Dorothy DeBorba (1930–1933)
 Matthew "Stymie" Beard (1930–1935): entrò nel 1930, nel 1931 divenne il sostituto di Farina
 Buddy McDonald
 Shirley Jean Rickert
 Pete the Pup: il cane originale, Pete chiamato anche Pal the Wonderdog, morì avvelenato nel 1930; l'allevatore Harry Lucenay utilizzò i figli di Pete (che appaiono tutti in Pups is Pups) dopo che questi raggiunsero la maturità nel 1931
 Dinah the Mule

1931-1933: primo periodo di transizione
 Matthew "Stymie" Beard
 Bobby "Wheezer" Hutchins
 Dorothy DeBorba
 Donald Haines
 Jerry Tucker (1931–1938)
 George "Spanky" McFarland (1932–1942)
 Tommy Bond (dal 1932–1934 come Tommy, tornerà nel 1937–1940 come "Butch")
 Sherwood Bailey
 Kendall McComas (1932)
 Dickie Moore
 Jacquie Lyn
 John "Uh-huh" Collum
 Pete the Pup: Lucenay abbandonò i Roach studio nel 1932: negli episodi successivi il personaggio di Pete fu interpretato da altri bulldog non imparentati con l'originale

1934-1935: periodo mediano di transizione
 George "Spanky" McFarland
 Matthew "Stymie" Beard
 Jerry Tucker
 Tommy Bond: lasciò nel 1934 per tornare nel 1937
 Wally Albright
 Scotty Beckett (1934–1935)
 Jackie Lynn Taylor
 Marianne Edwards
 Leonard Kibrick
 Billie "Buckwheat" Thomas (1934-1944): entrò nel cast nel 1934 e nel 1935 divenne il sostituto di Stymie
 Pete the Pup

1935: tardo periodo di transizione
 George "Spanky" McFarland
 Scotty Beckett
 Billie "Buckwheat" Thomas
 Jerry Tucker
 Leonard Kibrick
 Carl "Alfalfa" Switzer (1935–1940): entrò nel 1935 e nel 1936 divenne il sostituto di Scotty Beckett
 Harold Switzer
 Darla Hood (1935–1941)
 Eugene "Porky" Lee (1935–1939)
 Patsy May
 Pete the Pup

1936-1939: fine era Roach/inizio era MGM
 George "Spanky" McFarland
 Carl "Alfa Alfa" Switzer
 Billie "Buckwheat" Thomas
 Darla Hood (1935–1941)
 Eugene "Porky" Lee (1935–1939)
 Patsy May
 Tommy "Butch" Bond: sostituì Leonard nel 1937
 Sidney "The Woim" Kibrick
 Darwood "Waldo" Kaye (1937–1940)
 Gary "Junior" Jasgur
 Harold Switzer
 Leonard Landy
 Pete the Pup

1939-1942: periodo di transizione MGM
 George "Spanky" McFarland
 Carl "Alfalfa" Switzer
 Billie "Buckwheat" Thomas
 Darla Hood
 Leonard Landy
 Mickey Gubitosi (1939–1944): prima sostituì Junior e poi Porky nel 1939
 Billy "Froggy" Laughlin (1940–1944): entrò nel 1940 e nel 1941 sostituì Alfa Alfa
 Janet Burston (1940–1944): fece delle ospitate a partire dal 1940, dal 1942 prese il posto di Darla

1942-1944: tarda era MGM
 Billie "Buckwheat" Thomas
 Billy "Froggy" Laughlin
 Bobby "Mickey" Blake: Gubitosi cambiò il suo cognome in Blake nel 1942
 Janet Burston
 Violet la capra

Altri bambini
 Dorothy Dandridge, la prima attrice afroamericana ad ottenere una nomination agli Academy Award come migliore attrice, fece il suo debutto cinematografico come ospite in Teacher's Beau del 1935.
 Annabella Logan, divenuta in seguito famosa come cantante jazz col nome di Annie Ross, si esibisce in uno degli spettacoli musicali di Our Gang Follies of 1938.
 Philip Hurlic, un attore bambino di successo, ebbe piccole parti in diversi episodi della fine degli anni Trenta, e sostituì temporaneamente Buckwheat nel cast ufficiale per l'episodio Feed 'em and Weep del 1938.
 Sonny Bupp, anche lui un famoso attore bambino, recitò in piccole parti in diversi episodi della fine degli anni Trenta, ivi compreso un ruolo da protagonista in Men in Fright del 1938.
 Juanita Quigley, famosa attrice bambina, fece due apparizioni in altrettanti episodi prodotti dalla MGM nella parte di "Sally": The New Pupil (1940) Going to Press (1942).
 Darryl Hickman, attore bambino di successo, fece la guest star in Going to Press. Suo fratello minore, Dwayne Hickman, in seguito famosa star del programma The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis, ebbe una piccola parte in un episodio del 1942, Melodies Old and New.

Attori adulti ricorrenti
Molti attori adulti del cast delle Simpatiche canaglie apparivano frequentemente anche in altre commedie di Hal Roach, ad esempio nelle serie di Charley Chase e di Stanlio e Ollio:

 June Marlowe era Miss Crabtree, l'insegnante (1930-1932)
 Rosina Lawrence era Miss Lawrence/Miss Jones, l'insegnante (1936-1937)
 Edgar Kennedy era Kennedy il poliziotto (1929-1930)
 Emerson Treacy e Gay Seabrook erano i genitori di Spanky (1933)
 George e Olive Brasno (Shrimps for a Day del 1934 e Arbor Day del 1936)
 Hattie McDaniel era la mamma di Buckwheat (1935-1936)
 William Newell e Barbara Bedford erano i genitori di Alfa Alfa (1938-1940)
 Jimmy Finlayson
 Charlie Hall
 James C. Morton
 Mae Busch
 Johnny Arthur
 Clarence Wilson
 Billy Gilbert
 Lyle Tayo
 Otto Fries
 Richard Daniels in diversi ruoli negli episodi muti
 Franklin Pangborn
 Charles McAvoy
 Margaret Mann
 Zeffie Tilbury
 Claudia Dell

Registi
Hal Roach Studio
 Fred Newmeyer: (Our Gang, The Pinch Singer e Arbor Day, episodio Mail and Female del 1937 e General Spanky)
 Robert F. McGowan (1922 - 1933;  Divot Diggers)
 Robert A. McGowan (1926 - 1930) (nipote di Robert F., solitamente accreditato come "Anthony Mack")
 Ray McCarey (Free Eats)
 Gus Meins (1934 - 1936)
 Gordon Douglas (1936 - 1938 e General Spanky)
 James W. Horne (When the Wind Blows)
 James Parrott (Washee Ironee)
 Nate Watt (Three Men in a Tub e The Awful Tooth)

MGM
 Gordon Douglas (The Little Ranger, Aladdin's Lantern)
 George Sidney (1938 - 1939)
 Edward L. Cahn (1939 - 1942; Three Smart Guys)
 Herbert Glazer (1942 - 1943)
 Sam Baerwitz (Calling All Kids)
 Cy Endfield (Radio Bugs, Dancing Romeo, Tale of a Dog)

Fotografia
Harry W. Gerstand
Art Lloyd
F.E. Hershey
Ernest "Hap" Depew
Francis Corby
Kenneth Peach
Harry Forbes
Walter Lundin
Milton Krasner
Norbert Brodine
Len Powers

Montaggio
Richard Currier
T.J. Crizer
Bert Jordan
William Zeigler
Jack Ogilive
William Turhune
Louis McManus
Robert Crandall
Ray Snyder

Suono
James Greene
Harry Baker
Elmer Raguse
W.B. Delaplain
William Randall
Oscar Lagerstrom
Eral Sitar

Scrittori principali
 H. M. Walker (1922 - 1932)
 Walter Lantz (metà anni '20)
 Leo McCarey  (prima metà anni '20)
 Frank Capra  (metà anni '20)
 Charley Chase (primi anni '20)
 Frank Tashlin (metà anni '30)
 Hal Roach (1922 - metà anni '30)
 Robert F. McGowan (1922 - 1933)
 Hal Law (scrisse la maggior parte degli episodi della MGM)
 Robert A. McGowan (scrisse la maggior parte degli episodi della MGM)

Musica
 Marvin Hatley
 Leroy Shield

Protagonisti
Alfa-Alfa

È stato il protagonista dei cortometraggi tra il 1935 e il 1941. Aveva una spiccata predisposizione nel canto e nella musica e aveva un taglio di capelli a punta. Cortese, composto, Alfa-Alfa era spesso intento a corteggiare Darla. La ragazzina ricambiava l'affetto, ma se c'era qualcuno che poteva contrastarlo, era Butch. Il quale, in un cortometraggio, lo sfidò addirittura ad un incontro di pugilato, salvo poi perdere per il sabotaggio di Porky e Buckwheat. Darla poi non si faceva problemi nel far ingelosire Alfa-Alfa corteggiando anche Waldo. Il soprannome, per quanto potesse alludere alla alfa (allusione che si potrebbe addire piuttosto bene al personaggio, essendo uno dei protagonisti assoluti dello show), in realtà è una storpiatura di "Alfie" (come era anche chiamato sul set), diminutivo di "Alfred". Era interpretato da Carl Switzer.
 Partecipazioni: 65

 Spanky

La sua partecipazione allo show fu molto lunga, fu il protagonista con Alfa-Alfa del periodo sonoro. Il personaggio era piuttosto insofferente alle regole e capriccioso, soprattutto nei primi episodi in cui apparve. Era interpretato da George McFarland. Fu presidente di quasi tutti i "club" che la combriccola ideava nelle varie puntate. Su tutti, il "Club delle Aquile", e il "Club dei maschi odiatori di femmine", apparso anche nel film del 1994. Inizialmente avrebbe dovuto sostituire Chubby, ma lo fece effettivamente solo dal 1940. In due puntate apparirono i suoi genitori, interpretati da Emerson Treacy, e Gay Seabrook.
 Partecipazioni: 97

 Sammy

In America era chiamato Stymie. Era il co-protagonista dal 1930 al 1935, aveva un carattere composto e soprattutto nel doppiaggio italiano, una parlantina infantile e strascicata. Spesso cercava di risolvere i guai che si presentavano, ottenendo però solo il risultato di peggiorarli. Aveva il ruolo di attira-guai della serie, sostituendo Farina (e venendo sostituito più tardi da Buckwheat). Era interpretato da Matthew Beard, che successivamente intraprese la carriera di attore. Nei cortometraggi presentava un capo completamente rasato, ma coperto da una bombetta (regalatagli da Stan Laurel). Suonava molto bene l'armonica.
 Partecipazioni: 36

Buckwheat

Fu interpretato da Carlena Beard, Willie Mae Taylor e la maggior parte delle volte da Billie Thomas. Inizialmente Buckwheat era una femmina, solo con l'interpretazione di Thomas diventò maschio. Il rimasuglio dei primi cortometraggi però c'è: una capigliatura molto sbarazzina e un abbigliamento spesso femminile (poi tralasciato). Prese il posto di Sammy nel ruolo di attira-guai della gang. Partecipò allo show dal 1934 al 1944. Famoso il suo intercalare "Oh-Tay!" tradotto in italiano in "Signorsì!"

Darla

Era interpretata da Darla Hood. Era abbastanza carina, aveva un carattere dolce, e fu certamente la ragazzina più influente nello show. Darla era innamorata di Alfa-Alfa, ma ella non si faceva problemi nel corteggiare Waldo o addirittura Butch per far ingelosire "Alfie".
 Partecipazioni: 54

Porky

Era il fratellino di Spanky ed era interpretato da Eugene Lee. Era il migliore amico di Buckwheat e con lui era protagonista di saltuarie, ma divertenti gag che avvenivano nelle puntate. Era paffuto (il suo soprannome è un evidente riferimento al maiale), un po' capriccioso, amichevole e spiritoso. Nel 1939 lasciò la serie. Prese il suo posto Mickey Gubitosi.
 Partecipazioni: 42

Butch

Era interpretato da Tommy Bond, e originalmente era chiamato Tommy. Lo interpretò dal 1932 al 1934. In quell'anno lasciò la serie e fu sostituito da Scotty Beckett. Poi Bond tornò nello show di Roach interpretando Butch, un insopportabile bulletto in perenne conflitto con Alfa-Alfa, e dotato di una spalla, Woim. Butch è considerabile l'antagonista della serie.
 Partecipazioni: 25

 Jackie Condon

Insieme a Joe, fu il protagonista del periodo muto. Fu interpretato da Jackie Condon. Il personaggio era riconoscibile per i capelli disordinati (prima biondi, poi stranamente neri) e per il carattere trasandato.
 Partecipazioni: 74

Joe

Fu il protagonista del periodo muto. Fu interpretato da Joe Cobb. Era paffuto, ricco e un po' capriccioso. Negli episodi era il migliore amico di Sunshine Sammy e di Farina, ma nella vita reale strinse un forte legame amichevole con Jackie Condon. Fece dei cameo nel periodo sonoro.

Farina

Era interpretata da Allen Hoskins. È la "canaglia" che ha partecipato in più episodi, ben 106, sia come protagonista che come ospite. Specialmente nei primi episodi, incappava in ogni sorta di guaio. Nei primi episodi interpretava la sorellina di Sunshine Sammy. Dopo il 1931 lasciò la serie e fu sostituita da Sammy, e in seguito da Buckwheat.
 Partecipazioni: 106

Mickey Daniels

Fu interpretato dall' omonimo attore, dal 1922 al 1925. Era chiamato anche Freckles, ed era l'indiscusso protagonista delle canaglie nel primo periodo muto. Aveva un carattere decisamente irrequieto (con tanto di capelli rossi e lentiggini). Era innamorato di Mary (ma anche fuori dal set, con lei ebbe un legame più che amichevole). Sostituito da Jay R. Smith che recitò la parte fino al 1929.

Mary

Fu interpretata da Mary Kornman, dal 1922 al 1927. Fu protagonista dei cortometraggi di quegli anni. Si fece apprezzare non solo sul set dai suoi colleghi.

Froggy

Fu interpretato da Billy Laughlin dal 1940 al 1944 e fu protagonista, con Mickey, del periodo MGM. Era abbastanza intelligente e dedito alla musica (quindi in sintonia con AlfaAlfa). Era riconoscibile per la capigliatura bionda curata, gli occhiali spessi, e una voce rochissima, che ricordava il gracidio di una rana (da qui il suo soprannome).

Scotty

Fu interpretato da Scotty Beckett, dal 1934 al 1936. Era molto trasandato (con tanto di maglione sgualcito), e sostituì a tutti gli effetti Jackie Condon. Beckett riapparve poi nella puntata del 1939 Il cugino Wilbur, interpretando il viziato cugino di Alfa-Alfa.

Personaggi secondari
Jackie Cooper

Fu interpretato dall'omonimo attore. Possedeva un certo senso dell'umorismo, e fu il co-protagonista dal 1929 al 1931. Jackie lasciò lo show di Roach in quell'anno e diventò un attore professionista.
 Partecipazioni: 28

Woim

Era chiamato anche Sid, era interpretato da Sidney Kibrick, era la spalla, nonché migliore amico, di Butch. Anche Sid era un "bullo", e ne aveva l'aspetto, ma decisamente insicuro nel compiere le sue azioni, a differenza del compagno. Woim è la storpiatura di Worm, che tradotto in italiano significa "verme". Kibrick mantenne nella vita reale una profonda amicizia con George McFarland, ma non con Carl Switzer.
 Partecipazioni: 27

Mickey

Fu interpretato da Mickey Gubitosi, dal 1940 al 1944. Non va confuso con Mickey Daniels. Fu protagonista, con Froggy, del periodo MGM, e aveva un carattere prepotente, maleducato e capricciosissimo, in perfetta sintonia con Alfa-Alfa, col quale mantenne amicizia anche nella vita reale. Successivamente Blake continuò la sua carriera nel grande schermo ed è tuttora vivo.
 Partecipazioni: 40

Wheezer

Fu interpretato da Bobby Hutchins, dal 1927 al 1933. Fu il co-protagonista di quegli anni. Il suo soprannome era dovuto al fatto che, durante le pause del primo cortometraggio a cui partecipò, correva in lungo e in largo nello studio. In una puntata si vedono i suoi genitori, che non provano affetto reciproco e non pensano molto a Wheezer, tanto da pensare al divorzio. Alla fine della puntata però si riappacificano.
 Partecipazioni: 58

Sunshine Sammy

Fu interpretato da Ernest Morrison, dal 1922 al 1924 (esclusi i cameo fino al 1937). Era il fratello maggiore di Farina e il co-protagonista della serie, pur non avendo mai avuto un ruolo veramente rilevante nella serie. Aveva un naso molto storto e piccolo, e un caratteristico sorriso. Ernest entrò nella serie a 10 anni compiuti e ne uscì a 12.
 Partecipazioni: 17

Waldo Johnston

Fu interpretato da Darwood Kaye. Era ricco, intelligente e amichevole. Era amico delle "canaglie" ma non aveva molto in comune con loro. Spesso Darla lo corteggiava per far ingelosire Alfa-Alfa, finendo però a volte con l'innamorarsi davvero di Waldo.
Nel film del 1994, Waldo presenta molte differenze con l'originale. Per prima cosa è biondo, poi non è affatto amico delle "canaglie", essendo ricco e molto antipatico e sgarbato. Alla fine finirà per farsi odiare anche da Darla, che si era infatuata di lui.
 Partecipazioni: 26

Breezy Brisbane

Fu interpretato da Kendall McComas. Sostituì Jackie Cooper. Aveva un gran senso dell'umorismo ed era abbastanza amichevole, tuttavia non riuscì a diventare uno dei protagonisti assoluti della serie. Partecipò infatti a solo 8 cortometraggi (in tutto il 1932), in cui ebbe tuttavia un ruolo da co-protagonista. Lasciò presto la serie perché McComas, il suo interprete, aveva addirittura 16 anni, ma era basso per la sua età (oltre alla voce, non proprio adolescenziale, soprattutto nel doppiaggio italiano), pur non essendo affetto da nanismo.
 Partecipazioni: 8

Chubby

Fu interpretato da Norman Chaney, dal 1929 al 1931. Era sproporzionatamente obeso (proprio per questo Norman morì a soli 21 anni) ma anche molto intelligente e razionale. Fu co-protagonista degli ultimi cortometraggi muti e dei primi sonori. Era innamorato di Dorothy (ma solo nella serie). Nella serie interpretava il fratello minore di Joe, e lo sostituì nel 1929. Chubby fu a sua volta sostituito da Spanky, che però col tempo interpretò un personaggio ben diverso e molto più ricordato.

Dorothy

Era anche chiamata Echo. Fu interpretata da Dorothy DeBorba dal 1929 al 1933. Sostituì Jean Darling, ed era riconoscibile per gli occhi molto storti. Era la sorellina di Jackie Cooper. Sotto aggraziate sembianze, in più di un'occasione Dorothy rivelava di essere un "maschiaccio". Sparì presto dalla serie nonostante la ragazzina avesse ancora otto anni.

Personaggi adulti
Signorina Crabtree

Era l'insegnante delle canaglie dal 1930 al 1932. Aveva un carattere molto affabile e disposta ad aiutare i bambini, ma spesso loro le facevano scherzi. Era interpretata da June Marlowe

Signor McFarland

Era il giovane e frustrato padre di Spanky. Era interpretato da Emerson Treacy.

Signora McFarland

Era la giovane madre di Spanky. Non sembrava molto intelligente ed era interpretata da Gay Seabrook.

Animali
Dinah

Era l'asina di Peggy, apparve solo nei primissimi cortometraggi.

Pete

Fu certamente l'animale più importante dello show. Era un cane con un occhio cerchiato. Appartenne prima a Wheezer, poi a Spanky.

Rover

Fu il cane di Mickey negli ultimi cortometraggi della serie.

Membri del cast ancora in vita
A marzo 2020, risultano ancora viventi i seguenti attori della serie:

Robert Blake (n. 1933)
Shirley Coates (n. 1927)
Mildred Kornman (n. 1925)
Clyde "Fatty" Dembeck (n. 1934)
Diane Elizabeth East (n. 1925)
Dickie "Happie" Hall (n. 1934)
Sidney Kibrick (n. 1928)
Peggy Lynch (n. 1929)
Priscilla Montgomery (n. 1929)
Valerie Lee (n. 1931)
Leon Tyler (n. 1932)
Jackie Horner (n. 1933)
Clyde Willson (n. 1935)
Payne Johnson (n. 1930)
Laura June Kenny (n. 1931)
Darryl Hickman (n. 1931)
Dwayne Hickman (n. 1934)
Donnie "Beezer" Smith (n. 1924)
Billy Mindy (n. 1931)
Patsy Currier (n. 1930)
Jo-Jo La Savio (n. 1932)
Betsy Gay (n. 1929)
Betta St. John (n. 1929)

Liste di cinema
Simpatiche canaglie

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Freedom Leisure Maidstone is a fantastic leisure centre in the heart of Kent offering Gym & Classes, Swimming & Spa, Swim School, Tennis, Bar & Café, in a beautiful setting next to the River Medway – also a great spot for picnics!
Join Synergy in this fabulous centre for children's courses, parties and workshops.
An energetic mix of dance styles including BreakDance, Street, Hip Hop, Fusion, Acro, Cheerleading, Disco, Jive and more. Includes group and partner formations, dance technique, stretches and improvisation. Opportunities to perform.***Includes guest Percussion and Stamp™ sessions which combine making music with dance.
Does your child love to dance? Try a taste of everything in one party!
Come and experience a unique Synergy Dance® party and learn many different dance styles. Share the fun with your friends! Whether you want to Jive, Jump, Stamp, Wiggle, Break or Twirl…we have the party for you! Have lots of fun with your friends while dancing to the very latest songs and moves such as "Happy" from "Despicable Me", One Direction or Jessie J. You can also "be the DJ" and help to choose the routines and tracks on the day!
Your party includes a birthday card, water, sweets, props (pom poms and musical instruments) and prizes. Learn new dance routines with your friends, play dance games and party in our freestyle "Mini Snow Disco" to close the celebrations. Fancy dress or fun dance outfits encouraged!
Or try one of our fabulous Dance Acrobatics parties – have fun with your friends with bear walks, forward rolls, cartwheels, walkovers and handstands with a snow disco to finish! Parties include intro to basic dance, acrobatic postures, balances and tumbling skills, games and prizes – you will have so much fun you won't want to leave!
Other popular dance themes include Star Wars and sabers, Glow in the Dark, Minions, Smurfs, Trolls, Under the Sea, Strictly Come Dancing, Beauty and the Beast, Super Heroes, 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's dance, Pirates and Princesses, Fairies, Nemo, Paw Patrol, Ninja's, Country & Western, Toy Story, Ballerina, Circus and Space.
Our parties are for: 3yrs – 16yrs.
The party will last for 1 hour. Parties cater for up to 12 and are available on weekends for £165.00 (or £185.00 for up to 18 children). Party food can be arranged in Ground Cafe, Old El Paso and Wimpy. Party food can be arranged (at an extra cost) please enquire at the time of booking.
Got a question? Want something else? Contact admin@synergydance.co.uk and we will call you back!
Our popular workshops run at Freedom Leisure Maidstone during every school holiday, including the long summer break.
Act, Sing and Dance with us as we explore the scenes and songs from the smash hit film, 'Frozen.' Learn and create dances to create this fantastic wonderland! Complete with 'snow'! Children aged 3 may be accompanied by an adult for "stay and play" or drop and collect – only one adult per child, any siblings must also have a ticket.
Does your child love to dance and dream of being a Jedi? Play Star Wars themed dance games and learn some dance/combat moves to prepare you for battle. Practice your light saber skills and dance to the songs from Star Wars. Enjoy the exciting atmosphere of free-styling in Space and re-live the Battle on the Ice Planet Hoth with our Space dance off and Snow Disco from the Frozen Planet. Dress up as your favourite character and enjoy the wonderful atmosphere of all things Star Wars.
Party for all you are worth, come along and dance with our Smurf… dance to much loved Smurf songs from the hit movie – Learn a fabulous mix of dance styles from Breakdance and Street to Disco – workshop includes blue face paint, games and mini-snow disco.
Glow in the dark while you groove to Street and Break Dance moves! "Light up your day" with our action-packed fun with glow in the dark paint, light sabers and more! Suitable for all levels and abilities.
Love "The Next Step"? Try our fabulous Synergy Dance Acro workshop! Includes intro to basic dance technique as well as acrobatic postures, balances, limbering and tumbling skills. Explore Acro Dance through basic movements such as bear walks, forward rolls and log rolls and progress to cartwheels, walkovers and handstands. Musicality and performance technique included. Teachers use progression and mindfulness to transform basic postures, transitions, tumbling and limbering into beautiful AcroDance routines to up to date, fun music. Suitable for complete beginners. Synergy Dance® is an approved studio for the Acrobatic Arts.
Dance to "Happy" and have "Fun, Fun, Fun" in our Minion themed dance workshop. Join our army of yellow minions and help us to win back the moon! Includes movement, dance games, parachute fun, "Despicable Statues", "Despicable FootSteps" and "Battling the Minions". Finish with our Snow Disco to blast away the Purple Minions. Optional yellow or purple face paint to add to the fun!
Explore the exciting world of Beauty & the Beast as we act, sing and dance to the songs. See if you can break the spell during our fun mix of games, challenges and adventures. Finish with a Beauty & the Beast Snow Disco to celebrate Belle's victory! Dressing up encouraged!
Explore the magical world of Toy Story with toys and friends….help Woody find his way home with our dance steps, dance games, role play and snow disco. Bring your favourite toy to join in the fun!
Experience our action packed Cheerleading sessions with an expert Cheerleading instructor! Learn Cheer moves, formations, routines and combos with optional stunts and lifts! No experience necessary, all pom poms provided.
A fun packed Synergy fitness class. The key is variety and fun in this class – aerobics, resistance, stretching, toning, strength and cardio work, all to fun, upbeat music.