The following comes from a Nov. 22 Christian Newswire release.
The U.S. Supreme Court ordered Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday to respond to the Home School Legal Defense Association’s petition on behalf of the Romeike family, a German homeschooling family who fled to the United States to avoid persecution just because they homeschooled their children.
James Mason, the homeschooling group’s director of litigation, sees this as a hopeful sign that the Court will hear the case. “The government initially waived its right to respond, apparently thinking that Romeike v. Holder wasn’t worthy of the Court’s consideration,” he said. “Clearly, someone in the Supreme Court disagrees. While the odds of the court taking any case are very low, this has increased the chances—but it is impossible to predict whether the court will ultimately accept the case.”
The court had initially scheduled the case for consideration during their conference on November 26. Now, the Justice Department has until December 19 to respond, although they can ask for an extension, which means the final briefing might not happen until February of next year….
Uwe and Hanelore Romeike fled to the United States in 2008 with their family after they faced the threat of thousands of dollars in fines and possible jail time because they chose to homeschool their children, which is illegal in Germany. They were initially granted asylum in 2010 by an immigration judge in Tennessee, but the Obama Administration appealed the decision, and their appeal was upheld by the Sixth Circuit Court in 2013. The homeschooling defense group appealed to the Sixth Circuit for rehearing, but were denied after signs of initial interest in a rehearing. The family’s last hope of staying in the United States now rests in the hands of the Supreme Court….
Michael Donnelly, director for international affairs for the homeschooling association, points out that Germany’s treatment of homeschooling families violates its treaty obligations and is contrary to fundamental human rights standards.
“Germany is a party to numerous international treaties,” he said. “Those treaties and fundamental international human rights standards recognize the role of parents in selecting the kind of education their children should receive. Banning this entire form of education violates those treaties and the rights of all German parents. German policy makers need to update national policy to bring it in line with international human rights and allow parents this basic freedom in education.”
To read entire release, click here.
I pray for the best for this family but look how long its taking…this may not even be considered until next year….way too long and for a parent it feels like years and years……God have mercy on this family. I pray for them.
The Obama administration is truly against parental rights, and this is the best example. They could easily have just refrained from making the appeal, but no. Why ? What is the real reason ? You can bet the family farm it was not even close to the reasons in their appeal.
We have until January of 2017 to suffer through this evil regime, but we can do whatever it takes to fight them every inch of the way.
All the while, it’s difficult to understand why the government wants nothing to do with traditional family values.
Ted, the current administration is full of far left radicals in line with Marxism. Traditional family values are not in keeping with this ideology and therefore the traditional family must be abolished. It is no more complicated than this.
I would imagine the German family is Christian. If this is the case, then there is more evidence that Obama and his minions are anti-Christian. Look at all the Moslems from other nations (including ones who have lived in Germany) who are allowed to immigrate to the United States. Look at the Africans, and Asians who are granted asylum in the United States. To refuse the Romeike family asylum in America is a grave injustice. But, where is the voice of the American bishops? Why don’t we hear them complaining about this immoral tactic? The reason is, birds of a feather, flock together. The bishops are responsible for Obama being elected, and their thinking is basically the same as the ruling administration. May God forgive all the evils and sins for which the United States is responsible.
Father Karl I agree
Yes, Father Karl, the family is Christian.
The current administration is against homeschooling, Father. Not just for Christians, but for anybody as they hold that ‘diversity’ training can only be achieved in streamlined public schools. Translation: The administration cares little for true diversity, that is the natural outcome of allowing parents to parent their own children as they see fit, but is more concerned with State approved diversity. Translation: No diversity at all.
That said, in this arena, while it appears that Christianity is an added cherry on the DOJ’s cake of denying parental rights, I’ve seen many a home schooling agnostic parent who is just as concerned about the outcome of this case. Yet another example to me of this administrations, not so much going after Christianity, but attempting to deny nature itself for everyone.
Ann Malley, thank you for your powerful post!
“The administration cares little for true diversity, that is the natural outcome of allowing parents to parent their own children as they see fit, but is more concerned with State approved diversity. Translation: No diversity at all.”
This reminds me of the former Soviet Union. The Soviets tried to take away the cultural identities of the various nations they swallowed up. Socialist first convince us that “diversity” of groups is the highest good, (sounds good on the surface, but their goal is to stir up division and chaos!). Next they scream the mantra “Inequality”! After they’ve convinced enough people of this, they impose a “common core”!
Tracy, it’s precisely like the Soviet Union. State mandated leveling and diversity.
There’s a metaphor of three people attempting to look over a wall, one short, one medium sized, and the other tall. The idea of leveling the playing field is then presented as giving the short person two boxes to see over the wall and then giving the middle sized person one box. The reality is cutting off the legs of all so nobody can see over the wall. That way everyone accepts what they are told is on the other side.
OK before we go off on the Administration again for its supposed sins, it might be wise to remember that no one has a right to live here in the U.S. If there is a human right for homeschooling, which is something I’ve never heard before, the correction is to change German law. If Germany fails, then it is hardly the job of Americans to give them refuge. All of the finger wagging at Archbishop Gomez, when juxtapositioned against this post, merely shows how convoluted our thinking is on immigration. Readers of CCD would sooner have the innocent children of Mexican immigrants, who are already here and know no other country as home, deported.
YFC,
It might be wise for you to remember something. You’re incessant violin playing about the legal rights of parents to be able to protect their children just selectively flew out the window. According to you human rights for parents ONLY matter when you are supporting and protecting the rights of a parent to scandalize their children.
YFC, Your post is absolutely heartless!
Hardly Catherine. Please stop attacking me here on CCD.
LETS GET ONE THING CLEAR YFC…SHE IS NOT ATTACKING YOU! Haven’t you heard of dialogue? Plus if we are going to play your way…then IT IS YOU, who is attacking us here because of our faith, you and others who want to come on Catholic websites and try to impose your secular views on the church and faithful etc. We are being attacked for our faith and forced to comply. and if you don’t like it, then don’t advocate your gay theories here either, then, you opened that door and because we are people of faith, it will be brought up because it first began with you……so don’t play victim here. This is a website where anonymous people post…yes….its not personal Mr. No its not because we do not know you personally but we only judge you by what you post on a Catholic website. You want to accuse Catherine of such things, then face what others of faith will tell you….I won’t tolerate anyone attacking one of our own. I don’t dislike you because of it either but I will tell you why we don’t agree with you. You are also precious to our Lord, and because of that, we welcome you back anytime because we care but please don’t think for a chance we are going to go against our faith and morals.
Have a blessed Thanksgiving, may you embrace God’s truths and know that you are in my prayers. Human to human…you matter but sins of men we can do without. Christ is number one in my life, even with my flaws, I still admonish my own flaws because losing my relationship with Christ would be a tragedy and being a slave to whatever removes me from the graces of my Lord. He loves you YFC and I’m sorry that our human capacity of love is not good enough for you but your salvation matters, every bit of it. Take care.
Catherine is not attacking you, YFC, and you know it. She is just calling out what she perceives is glaring inconsistency regarding your posted ideas of parental rights and protecting children. That said, it would be interesting for all involved if you’d respond back based on the merits of what Catherine is saying, or even what you ‘think’ she’s saying. (That is what you know she is saying.)
I’d really like to understand where you’re coming from regarding children, rights, where rights come from, the duty of the United States and the individual with regard to parental rights and righting of what is wrong. In this country and in other countries.
You’re obviously zealous in your position, but it seems that whenever things come to a head positions are sidestepped and/or the real meat is pushed to the side in favor of pshaws and hardlies.
There is no ‘supposed’ about the sins of this administration, YFC. They flaunt their agenda boldly and push it globally by bribing poor countries (Kenya for example) to adopt said agenda with money we do not have. I will not mention the particular agenda items on the table as you know what they are and I’d rather not be slammed for thread-jacking. But ‘innocence’ has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Bottom line, immigration ‘reform’ for Democrats, (at least those that drive the party) has nothing to do with protecting poor people. They want voters, nothing more. Much like Democrats would accuse Republicans of wanting higher profits and fatter bank accounts.
That said, your high handed treatment of Germany’s sovereignty when it comes to their ‘laws’ seems naive. And you are anything but that, YFC. So let’s talk truths instead of sophistry as if the United States is a hands-off-nation regarding the laws/policies of other countries. By your way of thinking the United States shouldn’t offer refuge to anyone…. for any reason.
Regarding the right to home school, I wonder who you believe has the right to school children? Where do ‘rights’ come from, YFC? Where did the supposed right to work against nature itself come from? Not God. So who then?
YFC there is no supposed! OK! You are not a parent to know to understand nor do I feel by your posts that you care what current families are having to deal with…you are only focused on certain things. You display not only ignorance but you show us that you lack empathy, compassion etc….
As much as I feel a sympathy for the family, The US can’t grant political asylum in this case. Political asylum is something reserved for people whose lives are in danger. This would set a precedent that would completely undermine immigration law. More than half of the world’s population lives in countries that outlaw homeschooling.
Also, if the family has an issue with Germany’s prohibition of home schooling, they are EU citizens, and free to relocate to any of the other EU states that allow it (which is a majority of them, with varying degrees of restriction). Even if prohibiting homeschooling were akin to genocide or political persecution, this would not be a suitable test case, as the family had available options beyond illegally immigrating to the US.
“…Political asylum is something reserved for people whose lives are in danger.”
What are your sources for the above, Siollan? I’m interested because I thought political asylum wasn’t just for life/death situations, but also those of oppressive persecution. Imprisonment being one of them. Again, I’d love the details as I thought this family had initially sought asylum the legal way.
Siollan doesn’t know whats he’s talking about.
The liberals have re-defined many things and now they also twist and alter what the Constitution is really all about!
Also for those who live in San Diego…..news is that they are removing the Cross from La Jolla…….they are now going to remove it and no one can stop it. Shame on the city of San Diego! Shame on them!
I was speaking of Mount Soledad Cross. I heard that the original owner, before he passed away had it there to remember the veterans passed. When he passed he donated it to the City in memory of those and in their honor as well and trusted that it would be safe, so others can enjoy and remember their veterans. BUT now the devious city has declared war again but this time it is now said and done and now the cross will have to come down! It was donated to the city by someone who wished it to be kept safe but it is not. The city should have voided that gift and it should no longer be theirs because they are not honoring the person who donated to them that land with the cross. They are a disgrace!
So if you think that this country will defend this good family, think again, if they can’t get it straight here at home and leave this peaceful cross, then how will they respect even those who home school. They are using the stupid excuse of separation of church and state….well then they should have never accepted the gift of Mount Soleded at all, they should not accepted it as a gift from the get go! Jerks…they sure twist things and have no common decency!
@anon There is surprisingly little actual information about how they arrived here, but it seems unlikely that they did so as political refugees. They were granted an ultimately tentative asylum two years after arriving, which suggests they came on a tourist visa and filed the application much later.
Here’s a good primer on asylum law:
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/asylum-or-refugee-status-who-32298.html
To have standing, they would need, first, to prove that they face persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. These are defined less vaguely than they sound.
This is not religious discrimination, because they are free to send their children to any religious school they like, it just has to be an accredited school. A social group would be something more inherent than those who object to assembling children in a classroom.
And objecting to a civil law, and facing civil penalties is not persecution. In the US, you can face similar penalties for refusing to educate children at all. Germany doesn’t recognize homeschooling, and treats it the same as not schooling children. This may be objectionable, but to regard it as equivalent to genocide, or wholesale disenfranchisement based on religious identity, or torturing and imprisoning groups based on vocal dissent… it’s absurd.
Which is not to mention that the family IS free to relocate to any EU state they wish that does allow homeschooling.
Honestly, I question how good of parents these people are anyway. They are willing to sacrifice their own children’s futures over personal ideology. Even if they were allowed to homeschool their children in Germany without civil penalties, no university would recognize their primary education, so they’d effectively be hobbled for life.
And take a look at the legal status of homeschooling internationally.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling_international_status_and_statistics
Do we now have a de facto green light on immigration for any of the billions of families with school age children in the half of the countries in the world that prohibit it?
Wow Siollan you must be a favorite…they allowed you a long post….I recall mine not making it……yours is truly a long one….but I still disagree with your opinion! Your long harsh post makes it as you uncharitably judge these parents, wondering if they are good parents…how disgraceful of you! Good people of faith stand up for what you believe…regardless if Siollan may judge you as being bad!
Also Soillan you show no sympathy in my opinion….
America helped free Germany from Nazi tyranny, so Obama could pull this stunt? Remember this one on Memorial Day.
YFC, you said, “If there is a human right for homeschooling, which is something I’ve never heard before….”
I first need to ask you, where do you think “human rights” come from? Since you say you are Catholic, I can only assume that you know the answer, which is God. Next there are numerous passages in the Scriptures which support the human right to school your own children. I found a good blog which has an article posted, “10 Biblical Reasons to Homeschool” by BenandMe.com.
Secondly, the USA has a history of offering political asylum to individuals around the world who are being persecuted by their own governments. These cases are reviewed by the courts before political asylum is granted. (And yes, judges can uphold justice or deny justice, which is why a free people requires their judges to possess sound moral integrity.)
Thirdly, the United States does have a right to evict innocent children of Mexicans who are illegally squatting on our land, regardless of the fact that they know no other country. They also have the right on a case by case basis to grant citizenship to said individuals. (one example might be a child who was abandoned here as a baby, has been raised by the state, does not speak Spanish, and has no known contacts in Mexico). In fact YFC, countries around the world evict more such children than they formalize, compared with the USA.
Finally, sin can be identified. If this were not so, then Jesus would have never given us advise on what we should do when our brother sins against us.
Tracy very well conveyed…
1) Civil rights come from the constitution and laws derived from it and from the States. Human rights are a bit more etherial, but human rights are recognized beyond any one religion, in fact, from all religions and from none at all.
2) It is true that we DO grant political asylum based upon political persecution. But the standard is quite a bit higher than most people realized. I have personally known a lesbian who underwent forced electroconvulsive therapy in post-Soviet Russia who was not granted political asylum until her case was appealed very high up in the system.
3) I’m not sure where you think the US has a right to either “evict” Mexican children or to give them citizenship. When Obama announced that he would not prioritize the deportation of people brought here as infants (the Dreamers), he was ostracized as not obeying law. What he did was say, ok, let’s use the limited resources we have for deportation to find and deport people who of their own free will came here illegally. But let’s not prioritize those who were brought here illegally, as children, by someone else. These kids have no memory of their homeland, and many only speak English. But even Obama is not giving the Dreamers citizenship. He doesn’t have that power, so far as I know. So where do you get your supposition that he can grant them citizenship???
YFC this world is so twisted and crooked. I mean, you have those boycotting Russia because of their moral stance against Sodomy and I know you sure do not agree with Russia…one could see why you would feel that way. Surely but for you to brush off these parents….you should have some respect for these parents and their children. I mean didn’t you have a mum and pop too? Remember those family meals? How would you have liked it if the government didn’t want you having some open dialogue with your parents during a nice family meal. Would you prefer that they took you away from your parents? Sometimes we may not agree on how some parents choose to parent their children, fine as long as they are not being abused, then we should defend all good parents. But how can I expect you to understand….its just foolish to keep trying….so go in peace
Nov. 27 ’13 post, by Your Fellow ‘Catholic’ : “… it might be wise to remember that no one has a right to live here in the U.S.” Now YFC says there is no legal right for anyone to live in the US? YFC, have you ever read a document called the [US] Constitution? “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a
more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity,
provide for the common defence, promote the general
Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and
our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.” You do not discern that all rights come from the people, not the government, and we certainly DO have a right to “live here in the US.” I know you are fact-challenged on the Cath Church, but your positions are increasingly truly mind-blowing.
of course i meant non-citizens, and I think you know that.
I’m still wanting to understand where you’re coming from, YFC.
Would it have been better in your opinion if the Romieke family had secretly sought asylum illegally in the United States, waiting until the birth of future children to seek welcome? You know, hiding out, going under the radar?
What I see in the liberal politics seems very much to imitate liberal policies in the Church – that of go forth and do things against the laws/rubrics/whatever /or just fail to enforce the law. Wait until you’ve developed a following (or worked up sufficient sympathy factor). And then present the State/Church with a de facto situation.
IOW: Ignore the law completely because you’ll only get slammed if you abide by it.
Ann, for the record, i don’t know what IOW means. so if you are trying to communicate something to me with that, I’m sorry, I don’t understand.
These people applied for political asylum in the United States. US grants asylum when there is a well founded fear of persecution. “Persecution” is not merely lawful punishment for violating duly adopted laws in the asylum seekers’ home country. It is not supposed to be used to let people get away with violating the law in their home country.
If, lets say, a French citizen decides she will stop paying French taxes. She can’t move here and claim that they were being persecuted for not paying taxes, even if they claimed they had some religious exemption from paying taxes. She would be laughed out of US immigration courts.
YFC, would it apply to a Christian who violates Sharia Law?
Thank you for the explanation of your view, YFC. (IOW – translates into ‘in other words’. I believe that is a pretty widely understood acronym. I stand corrected in your case. But thank you for saying so.)
Regarding your analogy about the French citizen and taxes, I see the point you are trying to make. But children are not dollars earned. They are not a product in the same sense as a pair of stockings, a car, or a tractor.
You say: ‘”…“Persecution” is not merely lawful punishment for violating duly adopted laws in the asylum seekers’ home country. It is not supposed to be used to let people get away with violating the law in their home country.”
Many laws have been duly adopted that violate personal rights in different countries. Say the Nazi persecution of the Jews. Women in China are legally pressed into forced abortions. The Taliban beating women for not wearing a burka.
Where should the United States or where did the United States stand on these issues? Have we always had a writ in place at the time of every instance of asylum seeking or did the matter have to be adjudicated to see if it would fall under the heading of a ‘human right’.
Sorry if I’m wandering here, but there is a time to take a stand, YFC. If there is no law on the books defending parental rights, perhaps now is the time it should be written. Why? Because it is needed.
Also, YFC, do you think the Romeike family should have just come into the country illegally? Would you defend them then? After all, this family is jus seeking freedom, aren’t they? That and a better, more wholesome life for their children.
OK Tracy, so now we go to the Muslim thing. Why is Muslim law so profoundly important to you, I just would love to know?
In states where Sharia law has been enshrined as the civil law of the land, my take on it is that for the vast majority of cases, say a traffic violator, that no, a violator of Sharia law in this instance would not qualify for asylum in the U.S.
YFC says “There People”…..why don’t you say these parents…..it will help people sympathize even more….after all they are someone’s parents, telling from this story, they really care about their children and their freedom to choose. IT is who they are….their dignity as human beings and parents.
Correction YFC Says “these People” ….
Ann Malley, unfortunately the standards in immigration and asylum are among the most arbitrary in law. That is not my desire, it is just the way it is, unfortunately.
However, I think if you compare your own examples (“the Nazi persecution of the Jews. Women in China are legally pressed into forced abortions. The Taliban beating women for not wearing a burka.”), and then compare any of these to not allowing a family to home-school a child when public education is available and compulsory (and when further family education is not prohibited …. more about this below… ), then I think you have to admit, gas chambers versus home schooling is not a really strong case for this homeschooling family. Being forced into murdering an unborn child vs homeschooling. Which would you choose if you were an asylum judge? Beating a woman vs homeschooling, the same.
And as to the point about furthering the education of a child at home while also going to public schools. Please note that this family was NOT prohibited from home schooling their child on Saturdays and Sundays about the parts of the child’s education (religion, morality, etc) that they thought were lacking. There was no violation of free speech, which is CLEARLY a right. This is merely the case of whether — under the German law — this family had a right to substitute their own educational standards for those of the state. And further, whether they had some human right to that substitution. I think there is very very thin argument that this violates some right that trumps the hundreds of thousand of individuals who seek refuge because of strife, starvation, and TRUE religious persecution.
Ann, thank you for your excellent post! Law abiding immigrants to the US, especially those who have escaped oppressive governments, are more likely to love the US Constitution than even US citizens are! The Leftist’ agenda is more readily accomplished by elevating law breakers into “victims who are in need of special protection” all the while violating the rights of law abiders.
My grandparents were law abiding immigrants – worked hard to get here. All 4 of them.
I am very concerned for this family. I will keep praying for them. God almighty please hear our prayers! We humbly pray.
Rules for Radicals RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag. Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)”
YFC strategically writes: “All of the finger wagging at Archbishop Gomez, when juxtapositioned against this post, merely shows how convoluted our thinking is on immigration. Readers of CCD would sooner have the innocent children of Mexican immigrants, who are already here and know no other country as home, deported.”
Look who is using a new tactic of strategically “threadjacking” the focus away from the plight of the persecution and the destruction of the Christian family. … IOW the persecution of all Christianity and the systematic removal of the rights of all parents to decide what is best for their children.
Please use your search engine to read about using different tactics of “strategic intersectionality”….’Queer Migration Research Network “Homosexual Agenda” Intersectionality and Immigration Rights’
“It seems to me that this is an opportunity for progressive scholars and activists to take control of the rhetoric of such debate, especially when rhetorical terms born in academia find their way into non-academia vernacular spaces.” “Tags: Catholic Church Divide and Conquer” = Sounds Familiar!
Well done, Catherine. Your response is right on target (that is accurate, YFC, not you as the target. Just the tactics.) yet again!
Ann I agree….it is well done!
YFC, I was merely responding to your following statement:
“Persecution” is not merely lawful punishment for violating duly adopted laws in the asylum seekers’ home country. It is not supposed to be used to let people get away with violating the law in their home country.” I presumed that Sharia Law would also be in that mix. I was only trying to clarify your position, so I am not sure about what you mean about “so now we go to that Muslim thing”.
The OBAMA administration is again violating Freedom of Religion – – –
Catholic Church teaching can be found in the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition” –
SUBSIDIARITY – CCC: 1885, 1894, 1883, 2209
PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY – CCC: 2223, 2252.
MIKE that is why we need to make laws that protect that freedom and anyone who violates it will be prosecuted as a hate crime against Christians, people of faith. Just like they have laws in California that are already punishing people for holding faith based values against the acts of homosexuality…..we need to combat it so that if anyone who bashing a Christian will be violating religious freedoms!
I think its shameful to judge this family.. bet they were peacefully being parents until the media got a hold of them and fed them to the wolves with comments like Soillan and YFC etc, all because their country wanted to take their children away for no real good reason! Its unnecessary stress not only on the parents but also on the children. What little hope they will have, hopefully this won’t cause them to fear the government. Take away the identity of people of faith, you might as well just kill them, why live on this bloody earth if you can’t live your faith, live who you are. Just because this world changes often, does not mean that we have to surrender to them what we hold dear! So standing up for what you believe is characteristic of Christian martyrdom.
Just because some do not like children to be home schooled does not make these parents bad ones! While I may feel that home schooling is not for everyone, but I do have high respects for those who do so. I know many awesome parents who still home school, their kids are very good kids. Even one friend of mine, her daughter is a genius, she home schools her because she got bored at her local school. Her daughter entered 7th grade when she was only 9 years of age. Pretty smart, I was so surprised and enjoyed talking to her as she shared with me some mathematical projects in which she was excited about.
Praise God!
‘The Romeikes Can Stay!!!’: Shocking 180 in the Case of German Home-Schooling Family
Mar. 4, 2014 2:31pm by Erica Ritz
“On Tuesday, the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) announced a drastic turnaround on the part of the federal government: The German Romeike family, which sought asylum in the United States to home-school their children, will now be allowed to stay in America.
“The Romeikes can stay!!!” the HSLDA announced on its Facebook page.
Just one day ago, the Romeikes thought they would be forced to return to Germany, where the state could take custody of their children because of their decision to home-school. At a minimum, they would face increasingly harsh fines for violating Germany’s compulsory attendance law.
Uwe and Hannelore Romeike have been fighting to remain in the United States since 2008, when they fled to Tennessee, but the Supreme Court declined to hear their appeal for asylum on Monday.
Today, a Supervisor with the Department of Homeland Security called a member of our legal team to inform us that the Romeike family has been granted “indefinite deferred status”. This means that the Romeikes can stay in the United States permanently (unless they are convicted of a crime, etc.)
This is an incredible victory that can only be credited to our Almighty God.
WOW! Praise God!