"Hansen admitted to federal agents that no one had achieved U.S. citizenship through the program," Judge Ronald M. Gould composed for the panel on February 12 "and it is not possible to become a U.S. citizen through adult adoption."

The panel confirmed the panel's decision to uphold Mr. Hansen's convictions for fraud which led to 20-year prison sentences however, the panel reversed his convictions in accordance with the 1986 law that encouraged immigrants to stay over their visas. This could have been accompanied by 10 year sentences that would have been executed simultaneously with the punishments for fraud.

The law of 1986, Judge Gould said, was unconstitutional. According to the law, he wrote, "many commonplace statements and actions could be construed as encouraging or inducing an undocumented immigrant to come to or reside in the United States." The only thing it takes to make an unintentional utterance into a crime as he wrote is "knowingly telling an undocumented immigrant 'I encourage you to reside in the United States.'"

Other statements that could be in violation of the law according to Judge Gould stated, included "encouraging an undocumented immigrant to take shelter during a natural disaster, advising an undocumented immigrant about available social services, telling a tourist that she is unlikely to face serious consequences if she overstays her tourist visa or providing certain legal advice to undocumented immigrants."

The court, in July split three-judge panel of judges from the 10th Circuit, in Denver joined with in the Ninth Circuit in striking down the law in a ruling that said it was certainly violated hundreds of times a day.

In the same month in the same month, in the same month, Ninth Circuit turned down the government's request to have a bigger panel of judges hear the case of Mr. Hansen's case, based on the dissensions of several judges. One judge, Judge Patrick J. Bumatay stated that the most important word in the law of 1986"encourages "encourages" -- was an art term that requires complicity in an act of crime, but did not apply to exchanges that were casual.

The truth is that criminal legal proceedings tend to be limited to criminal cases that involve clear behavior by unfriendly defendants. However, there is at least one possibility of alternative.
http://www.dream11today.com/is-encouraging-unauthorized-immigration-free-speech-or-a-felony/