January 7, 2000
Web posted at: 11:22 a.m. EST (1622 GMT)

(CNN) -- Greta Van Susteren, co-host of CNN's Burden of Proof, made her first chat appearance with CNN.com on January 6, 2000, to discuss the INS decision to send Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba.

Van Sustren joined the chat by telephone from CNN's Washington bureau and CNN.com provided a typist for her.

Chat Moderator: Welcome, Greta Van Susteren!

Greta Van Susteren: Hello, everyone.

Chat Moderator: Is this international custody dispute over?

Greta Van Susteren: No, it is just beginning. We have just had one stage. It will not end until or unless the child is returned to the father. In the mean time, the Gonzalez family in Florida is going to do what it can to defeat the decision of the INS, and much will happen between now and January 14thn.

Question from MexicanAmerican: Boy needs to go back to his father regardless of where the father lives.

Greta Van Susteren: That may ultimately be true. There is a preference in almost every state in the U.S. for the natural parent be united with the child. There are of course exceptions. One would be an unfit father, but the INS says that he is a fit father. The only question I have is whether that fitness determination should have been made in a more public forum. The rules provide that it does not have to be public, I am just accustomed to domestic courts being that way. However, just because I am accustomed to it being public doesn't mean that it has to be done that way.

Question from Cosmo: Janet Reno has confirmed the INS decision, why not let it drop now?

Greta Van Susteren: Because the family objects. It is the family that is not dropping it because they have a different viewpoint of how it should be resolved. It could be that when the family goes to court, it will rule in very short order against the family in the U.S. It could be that this will move very quickly to a final resolution.

Question from TVSingleDad: Does the father have rights of tort against the family members detaining his son in Florida after all this is over?

Greta Van Susteren: Probably not. It is unrealistic to think that a lawsuit would be filed. The family here in the U.S. probably does not have any money to pay a judgment against them, so it is unlikely that the could make any payment in a civil suit.

Question from Cathy: Was it legal for the mother to take the child in the first place, regardless of where she was going with him?

Greta Van Susteren: If she were the legal custodian, and I don't know the terms of the divorce, she does have the legal right to take the child.

Question from questioning: Doesn't it seem odd that the INS turned the child over to grand uncle immediately with out apparently asking for proof of the relationship, yet required the father to document absolutely that he was in fact the child's father?

Greta Van Susteren: I don't know that he was turned over immediately. I don't know the answer to that. What complicates this case is that the child is going to another country. The INS wants to be sure that it is making the right decision.

Question from SharpEye: Do YOU think the boy is afforded the protections of the Constitution of the United States of America, including the 5th and 14th Amendments ?

Greta Van Susteren: What troubles me about this case is that he is six years old. He cannot make a decisions legally to seek asylum. The guardian must make the decision. The law makes the assumption the father is the guardian. In dealing with parents who are absent, you would have parents present evidence that they are the parents, are fit, and want the child, and the child would naturally go the parent.

Here, there is some uncertainty, in my mind, that the father wants to be the father. It could be that he could be the best father in the world, but I would have thought under these bizarre circumstance that the judge would talk to both sides. Instead, it was done by the govt. It happens to be INS procedure, it is lawful, and I am not accustomed to this procedure.

Question from Chicago: Doesn't this whole case have implications for all US Immigration Law? If Elian stays, why not let the 14 Chinese Immigrants seized in Seattle yesterday stay as well?

Greta Van Susteren: The Chinese immigrants are adults. They are different from children. Any one can seek asylum. Seeking and getting are two different matters. If you qualify under the rules for asylum, you will get it. The problem here is that this is a 6 year old boy who cannot lawfully make the decision to seek asylum or not. That is why this is such a thorny issue.

The INS says that the father is the one to make the decision, and the father has decided that the boy should return home to Cuba and not seek asylum in the United States

Question from Angolmois: Who is presenting the Cuban side of the argument in USA?

Greta Van Susteren: It should not be a Cuban side, but the Father's side. From what I understand, the INS has had two interviews with the father in Cuba, and they are satisfied that he is the father and wants to take charge as the law in the US would favor.

Question from Cappy: If this child were not from Cuba, do you think we would even be discussing this case?

Greta Van Susteren: From what immigration lawyers tell me who routinely handle these case, the ordinary procedure is the child would have been sent back immediately. The fact that this boy is from Cuba slowed down the process. It is different. Whether it should be is another issue.

Question from JAT: Is the US trying to practice selective immigration, comparing this to the Cuban Louisiana prisoners, who the US wanted to send bank?

Greta Van Susteren: I think that all immigration are selective since we want to look at these cases individually. I think when you select unfairly or apply the laws selectively that is wrong. The law should remain constant.

Question from Shahr: Was the father offered the chance to immigrate to the US?

Greta Van Susteren: There was some discussion about the father coming to the US but the father saying that he did not want to. I have no idea whether that is true or not.

Question from TVSingleDad: Apart from the son and the father, who wins and who loses in this decision? What do we as a nation lose or gain by this decision?

Greta Van Susteren: I actually think we all lose. The child lost a mother; there is no negotiated diplomatic resolution. Instead, we have protests in Miami. So, there are not clear winners, but lots of losers

Question from Pame5Ashe: Bruce Fein is saying that there is a bill being introduced to make Elian an immediate citizen. Why is this child being afforded so much levity?

Greta Van Susteren: Because he has a lot of people who are pushing for him.

Question from DBob: What right does the US have to keep this child from going home?

Greta Van Susteren: Apparently, the immigration service says it has no right.

Chat Moderator: Thank you, Greta Van Susteren for joining us today.