The Immigration Debate

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
Weather Bob
Forum Addict
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:13 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Weather Bob » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:46 am

DCB wrote:Or we could just abolish the Department of Ethnic Cleansing.
In shelters from Kansas to New York, hundreds of migrant children have been roused in the middle of the night in recent weeks and loaded onto buses with backpacks and snacks for a cross-country journey to their new home: a barren tent city on a sprawling patch of desert in West Texas

If the Marquis de Sade and George Orwell had a baby, it would be this policy right here.


Image

At a packed processing hub, Christian was taken from Noehmi and placed in a cage with toddlers. Noehmi remained in a cold holding cell, clutching Helen. Soon, she recalled, a plainclothes official arrived and informed her that she and Helen would be separated. “No!” Noehmi cried. “The girl is under my care! Please!”

Noehmi said that the official told her, “Don’t make things too difficult,” and pulled Helen from her arms. “The girl will stay here,” he said, “and you’ll be deported.” Helen cried as he escorted her from the room and out of sight. [...]

The next day, authorities—likely from the Office of Refugee Resettlement (O.R.R.)—called to say that they were holding Helen at a shelter near Houston; according to Noehmi, they wouldn’t say exactly where.


In theory, five-year-old Helen -- detained at an undisclosed location in Texas -- had the right to a hearing before a judge, which might have allowed her to be reunited with her mother in Maryland. And somehow she actually managed to check the right box on a form asking for that hearing. But in early August an ICE goon handed her a new paper to "sign" (again, Helen is five years old). The form was already filled out, stating that she would forfeit her right to a hearing:

Image

That's what America is now. A country where five-year-old girls are dragged away from their grandmothers, shipped around the country to an "archipelago" of unknown camps and holding-centers, locked up for months in secret, and forced to "sign" legal papers in which they give up their few remaining "rights".

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-des ... her-rights
Last edited by Weather Bob on Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

Weather Bob
Forum Addict
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:13 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Weather Bob » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:47 am

Two additional notes, to forestall obvious counter-arguments:

First - yes, the US government detained children crossing the border before Trump took office. In nearly all cases those were children who arrived at the border alone, with no accompanying guardian. When that happens, the government has no good options, but holding them while trying to find a parent or relative to take custody is the least bad alternative.

What Trump's ICE has done is adopt a new policy of forcibly separating children from their parents/guardians against their will. This has created massive trauma for children and their families, exponentially increased the number of children being held, and led to untold numbers of abuses (e.g., threatening parents that they will never see their children again unless they give up their right to asylum and volunteer to be deported).

Second - yes, some adult immigrants have committed crimes, and may deserve to be deported (though crime rates among immigrants are much much lower than among native-born citizens). But if you think that adult immigrants who commit crimes should be deported, you should be absolutely outraged about the ICE stormtroopers going after five-year-old girls, refugees fleeing from violence, and law-abiding, longstanding residents who are valued members of their communities. Every resource ICE spends persecuting nonviolent persons means that someone else who maybe should be tracked down and deported -- violent criminals or drug traffickers -- is being ignored.

Paleo2 and I may disagree about immigration, but I'd like to think that we can reach common ground on this: the government should be prioritizing tracking down and deporting the small number of people who commit violent crimes, not locking up and terrorizing toddlers or children or innocent refugees fleeing violence.

gozer
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5881
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby gozer » Fri Oct 12, 2018 7:59 am

Several shelter workers, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of being fired, described what they said has become standard practice for moving the children: In order to avoid escape attempts, the moves are carried out late at night because children will be less likely to try to run away.


nacht und nebel

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27948
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:32 am

I thought minors could not sign contracts and if they do, they are not legally binding.

Weather Bob
Forum Addict
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:13 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Weather Bob » Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:25 pm

gozer wrote:


nacht und nebel

It's appalling.

Weather Bob
Forum Addict
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:13 pm

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Weather Bob » Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:29 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:I thought minors could not sign contracts and if they do, they are not legally binding.


Do you think Trump's people care about any of that? It's amazing they even bothered with the charade of having the kid "sign" a piece of paper.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27948
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:16 am

Undocumented immigrants pay billions of dollars in federal taxes each year

One of the biggest misconceptions about undocumented immigrants is that they don’t pay any taxes. In his first address to Congress, President Trump set the tone for his coming immigration agenda when he said immigration costs US taxpayers “billions of dollars a year.”

A 2017 Gallup poll that asked survey respondents “whether immigrants to the United States are making the [tax] situation in the country better or worse” found that 41 percent said “worse,” while only 23 percent said “better” (33 percent said they had “no effect”).

The reality is far different. Immigrants who are authorized to work in the United States pay the same taxes as US citizens. And, contrary to the persistent myth, undocumented immigrants do in fact pay taxes too. Millions of undocumented immigrants file tax returns each year, and they are paying taxes for benefits they can’t even use.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27948
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:15 am

Ivana Trump wasn't a U.S. citizen until 1988. She gave birth to Don Jr. in 1977, Ivanka in 1981, and Eric in 1984.

Let's cancel their birthright citizenship first.

-Anon

gozer
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5881
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby gozer » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:23 am

would trump even be able to do anything of the sort without an amendment to the constitution? like the one repealing the xiv. amendment that the ku kluxers have been calling for since at least 1915 or so?

such as a whole bunch of states and congress having to approve such a thing?

Paleo2
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 744
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:45 am

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Paleo2 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:02 am

gozer wrote:would trump even be able to do anything of the sort without an amendment to the constitution? like the one repealing the xiv. amendment that the ku kluxers have been calling for since at least 1915 or so?

such as a whole bunch of states and congress having to approve such a thing?


That is an interesting question. I wonder if anyone knows.

I am of the opinion that the 14th Amendment has been the root of many of the worst court decisions of any part of the Constitution. I really Citizens United is now the law of the land, but I think it was a horrible misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment. The old idea of 14th Amendment making corporations people.

The writers of the 14th Amendment clearly intended it to extend citizenship to slaves, and to exclude children of foreigners and members of Indian tribes.
As far as I can tell, that was the law of the land for about 25 years.
Then due to some rather cruel and racist laws, Orientals (an interesting term that was not clearly defined) were able to immigrate to the US but could not become citizens.
In the 1890s the Supreme Court ruled that permanent residents’ American born kids were citizens. This was because a man who was born in the US of Chinese permanent residents was denied reentry to the US on the basis of being a Chinese National at a time when the Chinese Exclusion Act was in force.

In my opinion giving citizenship to the children of permanent residents was good policy, but an incorrect reading of the 14th Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled that the US chose its permanent residents, therefore they were under American jurisdiction. I can understand the logic. Excellent policy, but questionable interpretation of the Constitution. “Orientals” were not allowed to naturalize until the 1950s, so the bravery of the 442nd would not have been possible without this policy.

American Indian tribal citizens In Oklahoma were granted citizenship in 1907, when Oklahoma became a state. Other Indians were granted SOME citizenship rights in 1924, but in some states didn’t have full rights until 1948. In fact, in North Dakota there are voting laws currently in effect which take away some of the citizenship rights of Indians living on reservations.


The question is, when did temporary legal visitors and illegal aliens get included? These were not included in the Supreme Court decision.

When did birh tourism, in which pregnant tourist women from Russia or China or wherever can stay in special houses and give birth to American citizens? When did it become the law of the land where women can wait until they go into labor, run across the border, and demand they be taken to the hospital, giving birth to an American citizen at our expense? It would appear that, since the Supreme Court said people the US had invited to live in the US were under American jurisdiction due to the invitation, that does not apply to people who are not living in the US or else not here legally.

I have seen claims that the extension of birthright citizenship to these classes of people was by an executive order signed by LBJ. If that is true, then this extension could be revoked by executive order.

The idea that the Court never gave citizenship to illegal aliens is NOT a recent right-wing idea. Harry Reid proposed a law in 1992 stripping birthright citizenship from children of illegal aliens. He changed his mind in 1999. Only a cynic would say he changed his mind due to political considerations, such as pressure from the Las Vegas hotel and entertainment lobby.

I am not a constitutional scholar. I am also cynical enough to say that constitutional law depends on whatever nine people are currently on the Supreme Court, rather than the intent of the people who wrote the Constitution and its Amendments. Clearly the people who wrote the 14th Amendment intended it to give citizenship to freed slaves and their progeny, and not to the children of anyone who can sneak past the border guards.

Strictly from a constitutional perspective, I would like to see Trump sign an order ending birthright citizenship for children of tourists and illegal aliens. The legal challenges would be almost instantaneous, and the order would be set aside until the Supreme Court could decide the issue. That way the issue can be decided once and for all.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27948
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:08 am

Paleo2 wrote:I am of the opinion that the 14th Amendment has been the root of many of the worst court decisions of any part of the Constitution. I really Citizens United is now the law of the land, but I think it was a horrible misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment. The old idea of 14th Amendment making corporations people.

That had nothing to do with the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. Instead, it was an interpretation of the First Amendment coupled with the equal protection of the laws clause of the 14th.

gozer
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5881
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby gozer » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:23 am

which is what i had heard about this at one point . . . so an even longer row to hoe then? whatever the results of the election, i would be a bit surprised to hear anything about this from trump or others in clowngress long about say, 12. november or so . . . trump may have bats in his belfry from long-term sleep deprivation, but he's not stupid . . .

Paleo2
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 744
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:45 am

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Paleo2 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:54 am

gozer wrote:which is what i had heard about this at one point . . . so an even longer row to hoe then? whatever the results of the election, i would be a bit surprised to hear anything about this from trump or others in clowngress long about say, 12. november or so . . . trump may have bats in his belfry from long-term sleep deprivation, but he's not stupid . . .


That is an interesting point.

Trump may just be trying to rally the base before the election. Then he may ignore the issue until 2020

Paleo2
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 744
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 9:45 am

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Paleo2 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 12:00 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
Paleo2 wrote:I am of the opinion that the 14th Amendment has been the root of many of the worst court decisions of any part of the Constitution. I really Citizens United is now the law of the land, but I think it was a horrible misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment. The old idea of 14th Amendment making corporations people.

That had nothing to do with the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. Instead, it was an interpretation of the First Amendment coupled with the equal protection of the laws clause of the 14th.


True.

The equal protection clause has been the root of most of the bad decisions for the 14th Amendment, and the root of most of the good decisions as well.

For example, gay marriage. Let me make it clear I am 100% in favor of same sex marriage having the same rights as opposite sex marriage. The Court decision was based on the equal protection clause. I am not a constitutional scholar so I can’t say if that was a good decision or not. I am sure that is not something the people who wrote the Amendment had in mind, though.

But, if some states allow gay marriage, at the very least other states should be forced to recognize those marriages.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27948
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The Immigration Debate

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:59 pm

Now Trump, as Commander-in-Chief, says he is considering allowing the 15,000 troops being sent to the border to fire on immigrants who throw rocks or stones.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests