doma damage

Will Edwin Echegoyen Watch His Husband Rodrigo Martinez Get Deported On Wednesday?

Maryland’s Edwin Echegoyen, who’s been fighting to keep his husband (and partner of eight years) Rodrigo Martinez from being deported back to El Salavdor, must hand him over to be shipped off Wednesday if an 11th hour appeal fails. The couple, who got married in Washington D.C., of course cannot use their marriage certificate to sponsor Martinez for citizenship, thanks to the Defense Of Marriage Act’s Section 3. You know, the thing Obama hates.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #edwinechegoyen #immigration #maryland stories and more

22 Comments

  • Joe

    I feel for them; but they are not going to win this one. My Mexican partner (of 14 years) and I had to immigrate to Canada so that we could be together. Fuck you USA

  • DJ

    As long as he’s here legally I support them. If not, SEE YA!

  • Chris

    I don’t see why they can’t move to Canada and then perhaps move back home to the USA after the laws are relaxed or changed. I know it sucks and it could very well be very expensive, but I’d do anything to be with the person I love, I mean who wouldn’t?

  • thematics

    @DJ:
    Big difference between ‘being’ here illegally and /staying\ here illegally. If his visa has run out, he’s not eligible to stay as he might be if legally married to a woman. Immigration rules favour straight married couples over same-sex married/civil union’ed couples, given DOMA.

  • Joe

    DJ: Until you learn a little something about the discrimination faced by bi-national gay couples, why don’t you shut the fuck up?

  • Francis

    There have been a couple other cases lately of these anti-gay deportations being halted, so let’s hope that is the outcome here. But, stories like this show why it is absolutely essentially to eliminate DOMA and make changes to the immigration system that unfairly discriminates against same-sex couples.

  • Drigo

    Very sad. I hope things turn out for the best for them.

  • Brian Miller

    I don’t see why they can’t move to Canada and then perhaps move back home to the USA after the laws are relaxed or changed.

    Well, other than the $50,000 in legal bills and mandated savings, plus the fact that Canada’s immigration criteria restrict migration to 20,000 people a year, have three to five year waits, and are extremely narrow and would reject many individuals and couples who are highly qualified, not much.

  • niles

    This is really heartbreaking, perhaps it’s time for his husband to pull an Ann Franke and disappear.

  • Stanley

    As a constitutional conservative & gay Republican, I do not personally support same-sex marriage. Marriage is the union between one man & one woman.

    I am sympathetic, and I feel sorry to hear what these men are going through. However, citizens in the US have never been able to sponsor a same-sex partner or spouse who is a nonresident alien for permanent residency (green card) status. They are asking to exercise a privilege that does not currently exist.

    Perhaps Rodrigo Martinez can sponsor Edwin Echegoyen for residency in San Salvador? Then they can still be together. What are the laws for same-sex marriage in San Salvador, and why aren’t people attacking San Salvador for not recognizing same-sex marriage?

    This is all part of the “Blame America first” strategy that the gay left has perfected.

  • The Artist

    If you DON’T support same sex marriage, THEN DON’T HAVE ONE. People should be allowed to do whatever they want, as long as their not hurting anyone. This country was built by immigrants, remember that. PEACELUVNBWILD!

  • Francis

    Stanley has emotional and personality issues revolving around his self-hatred and needs help, and to not be taken seriously.

  • Soupy

    If you were a true constitutional conservative Stanley, you would have a lot of problems with how teabaggers and republicans distort and misuse it. But you are still suffering from a slave mentality that desperately wants acceptance from people who think that you are a lesser being and unworthy of constitutional protection.

  • justiceontherocks

    @Stanley: You have more issues then Newsweek magazine. The constitution does not define marriage as between a man and a woman. Read it some time.

    You’re never going to be a happy healthy person until you stop buying into every anti-gay stereotype you used to tell yourself when you were trying to believe you didn’t enjoy sucking cock. You have a lot more important things to do than write silly posts on here.

  • Jeffree

    @Stanley: There’s a site you’ll fit into much better than here. Go gòogle “gay patriot” and find yourself among other gayish republicans. Bon voyage!

  • the crustybastard

    @Brian Miller:

    You neglected to mention that the US’s antigay laws will not be substantially relaxed or changed in these gentlemen’s lifetime.

  • Shannon1981

    @Stanley I think you are a nice guy, but very troubled. Please seek help for the self loathing. It will do you a world of good. And others here are right. I think a less liberal gay blog would be better for you.

  • Jonathan

    @Francis: YES!

  • D.R.A.

    @Stanley: The reason why we’re criticizing America and not El Salvador is because they live in America.

    By the way, love your usage of “the gay left.” Attacking the people who’re fighting for your right to be equal. Very nice.

  • Troy

    @Stanley

    Have you ever read every word of the Constitution; and more so, comprehend the context of every word? Apparently not. So as a Constitutionalist, you must favor the Tree-Fifths Compromise in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution where an African American is 3/5 of a person? What about the Fifteenth Amendment that gave previously denied rights to people without regard to race, color, or previous condition of servitude? And giving women the right to vote in Nineteenth Amendment must really chaff you.

    The Constitution is a living document. It’s not fixed. It was written that way for a reason. The Founding Fathers had the foresight to envision an evolving society and therefore an evolving Constitution, which is why the language in Article 5 exists.

    On many fronts, where would this nation be today if it weren’t for Article 5?

  • Troy

    @Stanley: @Stanley

    Have you ever read every word of the Constitution; and more so, comprehend the context of every word? Apparently not. So as a Constitutionalist, you must favor the Tree-Fifths Compromise in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution where an African American is 3/5 of a person? What about the Fifteenth Amendment that gave previously denied rights to people without regard to race, color, or previous condition of servitude? And giving women the right to vote in Nineteenth Amendment must really chaff you.

    The Constitution is a living document. It’s not fixed. It was written that way for a reason. The Founding Fathers had the foresight to envision an evolving society and therefore an evolving Constitution, which is why the language in Article 5 exists.

    On many fronts, where would this nation be today if it weren’t for Article 5?

  • InExile

    Heterosexual couples can file for a K-1 Visa for their “fiance” and be immeadiately admitted into the US where they then fly to Vegas and get married (they don’t even have to know each other), NOT so for gay couples! Married or not, same sex couples are screwed when it comes to immigration. And NO, there is no other way to get in for same sex couples. Bi-national couples have 2 choices, separate or move to a foreign country to be together.

Comments are closed.