Facts
The case concerns the non-extension of the residence permit of [X.] , a national from Cameroon, and her daughter [Y.] , a Swiss citizen. [X.] had illegally worked as a prostitute in Switzerland in 1999 and was subsequently deported. In 2001, she illegally re-entered Switzerland, where she stayed with her Swiss boyfriend. In 2003, [X.] gave birth to her daughter [Y.] in Cameroon. In 2006, [X.] married the Swiss citizen [Z.] . In 2007, [X.] and [Y.] travelled to Switzerland, where they were granted a residence permit valid until 2008. After the divorce from [Z.] in 2008, the Population and Migration Office of the Canton of Valais rejected the extension of [X.] 's residence permit in 2009. The Cantonal Court and the State Council confirmed this decision, as [X.] had not behaved impeccably in Switzerland and her family reunification was based on a "planned abusive strategy".
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court overturns the decision of the Cantonal Court and instructs the Population and Migration Office to extend [X.] 's residence permit. While the interest in a restrictive immigration policy can generally constitute a legitimate public interest that can speak against the stay of a foreign parent of a Swiss child, the interests of the Swiss daughter [Y.] in remaining with her mother in Switzerland take precedence here. [X.] 's criminal record is not so serious that it would take…