The President Trump Immigration Thread

[PaulF]

This whole situation first needs some daylight. The issue here, if one exists at all, is in transparency.

I'm not convinced anyone has their arms around the facts yet. I sure don't.

These are my questions:

What is actually happening down there? Is it legal? Is it ethical? Is it necessary?

The answers to all of these questions may, in fact, be resoundingly "YES!"...but the evidence to fully support that is so far lacking.

The left really seems to think they have something here, and the response from the right seems to be doing little but feeding the frenzy. Even if the children are in custody legally, and separating them from their parents is necessary and proper...If our government is really, actually mistreating children in their custody...we need to stop the mistreatment. Immediately. Full stop. These are children and there is little room for error here. If we let our government treat other people's children poorly it will only be a matter of time before the government treats ours the same.

Our government shouldn't be afraid to openly discuss they way they treat the children in their care, and they certainly shouldn't be powerful enough to hide such behavior from The People.

 

[HoughMade]

What was the protocol before this new "separate kids from their parents" thing started, and why was there the change? It would appear that the whole reason for this move is not for the protection of anyone, but to hold the kids hostage to achieve a desired outcome. If that's how it is, then depending on one's morals, they either agree with the practice, or they don't.

So you're in charge of building family housing anywhere pretrial detainees are held?

 

[bwframe]

Meh.

Who else is there? If you have a better news source that is less biased, I'd be willing to listen.

No reason to discuss this further, with you are touting NPR as your unbiased source.

"It's for the children," is always a winning argument for the left.
Maybe not this time? Maybe we've heard enough to not fall for it anymore?

 

[Kutnupe14]

So you're in charge of building family housing anywhere pretrial detainees are held?

I mentioned earlier, that this was a "new" protocol. What was in place prior, and why the change? That's a fair question to ask, isn't it?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What was the protocol before this new "separate kids from their parents" thing started...

Not enforce the law. When adults are arrested and incarcerated, they are separated from their children. That's nothing new, and not unique to border arrests.

I've not been on the border for nearly 20 years, but all that happened when we caught someone was BP finger printed them, drove them to a checkpoint, and put them back on their side to try again in a few hours.

 

[JettaKnight]

No reason to discuss this further, with you are touting NPR as your unbiased source.

I never said they were unbiased. In fact, it'd be foolish to do so.

You never answered my question, Do you have a better and less biased news source for me to consider as my primary go-to?

"It's for the children," is always a winning argument for the left.
Maybe not this time? Maybe we've heard enough to not fall for it anymore?

And what does that have to do with anything I said at all or even listening to the story? Did you even bother?

The story was about a tent, that the reporter couldn't see [inside]; a tent with rooms, and air-conditioning, and medical service... and audio of the World Cup.

 

[d.kaufman]

I mentioned earlier, that this was a "new" protocol. What was in place prior, and why the change? That's a fair question to ask, isn't it?

From what ive read this is not new. The supreme court ruled in 1997 that immigrant children cannot be help in detention centers like the adults so these shelters were established. So by my reading on this supreme court decision we can stop blaming Trump.

 

[Kutnupe14]

From what ive read this is not new. The supreme court ruled in 1997 that immigrant children cannot be help in detention centers like the adults so these shelters were established. So by my reading on this supreme court decision we can stop blaming Trump.

Well there you go. Why does't the administration simply say this? Or have they?

 

[d.kaufman]

Well there you go. Why does't the administration simply say this? Or have they?

That i cant answer. I wish they would though and put this s**t to rest. I did read an article awhile back that was done with Geraldo Rivera. Apparently his charity runs 27 of these shelters. The kids have access to education, recreation, and obviously food and clothing, etc. something along the lines of 34k spent per child annually.

 

[JettaKnight]

That i cant answer. I wish they would though and put this s**t to rest. I did read an article awhile back that was done with Geraldo Rivera. Apparently his charity runs 27 of these shelters. The kids have access to education, recreation, and obviously food and clothing, etc. something along the lines of 34k spent per child annually.

I bet if we go down there, we'll find all the shelters he set up are empty.

 

[HoughMade]

It's worth the read. I have quoted only a portion.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/illegal-immigration-enforcement-separating-kids-at-border/

The Trump administration isn’t changing the rules that pertain to separating an adult from the child. Those remain the same. Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the child’s parent, or is a threat to the child, or is put into criminal proceedings.

It’s the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults. The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry. (Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, illegal re-entry a felony.)

When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.

The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.

If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, it’s relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, there’s only a very brief separation.

Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.

That’s because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.

The clock ticking on the time the government can hold a child will almost always run out before an asylum claim is settled. The migrant is allowed ten days to seek an attorney, and there may be continuances or other complications.

This creates the choice of either releasing the adults and children together into the country pending the ajudication of the asylum claim, or holding the adults and releasing the children. If the adult is held, HHS places the child with a responsible party in the U.S., ideally a relative (migrants are likely to have family and friends here).

 

[d.kaufman]

It's worth the read.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/illegal-immigration-enforcement-separating-kids-at-border/

Not sure if this could be the same as i haven't read your link yet so I'll post it anyway
Rare Look Inside A Child Migrant Shelter In El Cajon Amid Family Separation Outcry | KPBS

 

[ghitch75]

here is the law.......

https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/..._final_plus_extension_of_settlement011797.pdf

 

[BugI02]

What was the protocol before this new "separate kids from their parents" thing started, and why was there the change? It would appear that the whole reason for this move is not for the protection of anyone, but to hold the kids hostage to achieve a desired outcome. If that's how it is, then depending on one's morals, they either agree with the practice, or they don't.

Is is possible the people being protected are American citizens and that they are being protected from a de facto porous border and the concomitant invasion of migrants due to catch and release

 

[SwikLS]

I'm with her.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

The Trump administration isn’t changing the rules that pertain to separating an adult from the child. Those remain the same. Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the child’s parent, or is a threat to the child, or is put into criminal proceedings.

It’s the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults.

Huh, who knew?

Not enforce the law. When adults are arrested and incarcerated, they are separated from their children. That's nothing new, and not unique to border arrests.

I've not been on the border for nearly 20 years, but all that happened when we caught someone was BP finger printed them, drove them to a checkpoint, and put them back on their side to try again in a few hours.

Oh, right.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'm with her.

Huh. Blind pig Hillary found an acorn.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I'm glad we're finally enforcing border security, but I don't think we need to branch out to "endangerment" issues that occur outside our borders. Plus it opens the issue of releasing illegals to "abusive" parents and that humanitarian claim.

I agree with you on this point as a simple matter of jurisdiction. However, when they endanger children on our side of the border, that's a different matter. From what I've read, thousands of people have died on US soil after entering illegally in remote areas.

What was the protocol before this new "separate kids from their parents" thing started, and why was there the change? It would appear that the whole reason for this move is not for the protection of anyone, but to hold the kids hostage to achieve a desired outcome. If that's how it is, then depending on one's morals, they either agree with the practice, or they don't.

As others have indicated, the protocol is not new when the adults are arrested. What has changed is the 100% prosecution rate of adults found to have criminally entered from the near zero percent rate prior.

It's worth the read. I have quoted only a portion.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/illegal-immigration-enforcement-separating-kids-at-border/

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to HoughMade again.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

NBC reporter this morning said he wanted to get "both sides of the story", so he interviewed an immigration activist, a civil rights attorney (fighting for the immigrants) and a nun. So... where was the "other side"? Oh, and the latest is a piece of audio of children crying. If children crying isn't ironclad proof of abuse, I don't know what is.

 

[bwframe]

[video=youtube;JQDwEBMgV14]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQDwEBMgV14[/video]