Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can’t believe that a president would want to separate children from their parents, but the worst thing is, trump had no plans to reunite families and it’s extremely sad! Will some of these young kids and babies ever see their families again?
I can't believe that there are still millions of moms and dads across the US that are separated from their kids while they serve their time in prisons...
If you do the crime you should do the time. Sneaking in to America and violating our immigration laws will get you in trouble.
It is pretty basic. Break the law and you will be separated from your loved ones. It happens everyday in America.
I don't know why we don't have more concern for the Angel Parents that will never see their kids again.
Do Mexicans qualify as refugees? Are the people applying for asylum even Mexicans? And if they aren't Mexicans, then they must be Central or South-Americans. Which means they traveled through Mexico to get to the United States. Why don't they file for asylum in Mexico? Refugees are supposed to apply at the first safe country they come to. Is Mexico not safe? And if it isn't safe, then shouldn't every Mexican qualify for asylum?
On what basis do we even grant asylum from a country like Guatemala? Is Guatemala unsafe? If so, should every Guatemalan qualify for asylum in the United States?
What do these asylum-seekers say is the reason they believe they are being politically or religiously-persecuted? And do you believe these people are being coached to say the right things? Since it is unlikely that US immigration courts could prove they are lying?
As I said, I do not believe ANY of the people from Latin-America are legitimate asylum-seekers. At least not in the spirit of the Geneva Convention. And even if they were, they should be applying in Mexico.
It is no different than these Syrian refugees who decided to travel through Greece, Italy, and Eastern Europe, so they could get to Germany and Sweden. Is that a legitimate use of the asylum system?
There are two ways to roll here. One is to find the answer that matters. The other is what we'd want it to be. Admittedly, I prefer the former but the latter is so much easier. Attempts at precision begin with international accords agreed to by the US resulting in legislation / regulations / directives which are then administered by the executive branch subject to Court review and so on ad infinitum. But the time you end up even the USCIS may be confused (not that that's the only relevant player). Pity the poor Guatemalan peasant.
At some point what is "legitimate" is someone with force saying it is. Or, in these cases, a judge looking to the Constitution, existing legislation, and case law. (For a start, Judge Scalia carries some of the blame with his literal interpretation to the Constitution.) To be lazy here (and not look) ... some amorphous "they" make a series of decisions that varies according to country-of-origin and program (refugee, asylum, others) resulting in criteria. Then yet other "they s" determine whether certain groups and eventually certain individuals meet those criteria.
The issue that I have with asylum is that - referring now to my own take - while it conceptually overlaps with refugee status its application is highly individual resulting in judicial rulings for that person in proceedings that take place within the United States. And, yes, the case need be proved with evidence etc. which is what makes the process so cumbersome. In the end, because of that difficulty, many do not qualify for asylum. Again ... refugee status is different yet. If you don't want your country to accept refugees, then take it to ballot box.
There, countries decide on whether or not they want to accept refugees and, if so, in what numbers.
But back to asylum ... it's easy enough to conclude that the process does not work for this current situation. That's not to say that there are not individuals that meet the criteria, for who am I to judge. Based on how some of this has played out this year, legislation may well be called for. That or maybe some folks get their wish when it comes to RBG's health.
Note of irony - I noticed your post while busy listening to YOUR video on the Holocaust that you suggested. Fact - before the events of ww2 there did not appear to be much in the way of refugee programs or status. Rather, the US would decide whether or not to accept immigrants. The Holocaust changed that.
I can't believe that there are still millions of moms and dads across the US that are separated from their kids while they serve their time in prisons...
If you do the crime you should do the time. Sneaking in to America and violating our immigration laws will get you in trouble.
It is pretty basic. Break the law and you will be separated from your loved ones. It happens everyday in America.
I don't know why we don't have more concern for the Angel Parents that will never see their kids again.
Actually, I think that's the way it's been spun but ????
Curious ... I skimmed it ... a couple of quick comments ... the article maintains there is a "tension between enforcing our laws and keeping family units together." This was written before Trump signed the executive order ending his separation policy. Did he even need the executive order; maybe just stop doing it?
I think CBP / ICE always had the discretion to detain or not to detain. It doesn't matter whether the person is a single adult or part of a household unit. Actual practice may vary from location to location - maybe depending on country-of-origin, place of entry, criminal records other than the misdemeanor for crossing the border. The largest single factor may simply have been availability of space. Per the article another factor was: "The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit."
But it's a policy or a practice not mandated by law (in other words there's no law that any individual had to be detained while awaiting asylum decisions). Do it or not do it. CPB / ICE / USCIS (somebody's !!!) call. With the increasing numbers, the Trump Administration wanted to change past practice but found itself constrained by the presence of children, and various laws concerning their placement.
Why change the practice?: The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry.
I'm not sure why that's ^^^ relevant to the situation. Have there not been increased penalties for re-entries in place for some time with formal charges streamlined? An illegal entry does not impact the asylum process, although the misdemeanor remains on the record. What does this have to do with children - other than the decline to detain - which per the above, may have been the end result regardless.
Lots of confusion here - with, I suspect, the article written with that intent. Not much learning on my part.
Isn't all of this a pain ^^^. So much easier to just bar the door and say "Hell, no."
None of that shows any proof she was an illegal immigrant. Even if the work visa thing was true, that still does not make her an illegal immigrant (do you all even know what that means? goodness...). If even her work visa issue was true, and no article has actually stated so (and we all know no media outlet would ever lie, lol), that is basically an admin error, a sorts that has even happened to me when applied and issued a visa that ended up not be incorrect for what I need.
But yea, compare someone who came over for a modeling gig in NYC and perhaps had the wrong visa, to someone who sneaks across the border then works for several years illegally. with zero intent on ever doing anything the legal way.
Do Mexicans qualify as refugees? Are the people applying for asylum even Mexicans? And if they aren't Mexicans, then they must be Central or South-Americans. Which means they traveled through Mexico to get to the United States. Why don't they file for asylum in Mexico? Refugees are supposed to apply at the first safe country they come to. Is Mexico not safe? And if it isn't safe, then shouldn't every Mexican qualify for asylum?
On what basis do we even grant asylum from a country like Guatemala? Is Guatemala unsafe? If so, should every Guatemalan qualify for asylum in the United States?
What do these asylum-seekers say is the reason they believe they are being politically or religiously-persecuted? And do you believe these people are being coached to say the right things? Since it is unlikely that US immigration courts could prove they are lying?
As I said, I do not believe ANY of the people from Latin-America are legitimate asylum-seekers. At least not in the spirit of the Geneva Convention. And even if they were, they should be applying in Mexico.
It is no different than these Syrian refugees who decided to travel through Greece, Italy, and Eastern Europe, so they could get to Germany and Sweden. Is that a legitimate use of the asylum system?
Doesn't matter what you think about asylum seekers. The U.S. has laws that provide help for those seeking asylum.
But trump makes up his own laws, he seems to be fine with rich white Europeans coming here illegally, but if a family from Central America trying to escape danger gets in, they go to jail and get separated from their kids.
Everyone who breaks the law and goes to jail is separated from their kids. Why do you pretend that is some sort of racist policy?
Oh, FatBob, FatBob. Have missed you and your nonsense.
Seeking asylum is not illegal.
Kidnapping kids is illegal. Court has ruled that these families need to be reunited.
And, how do you know that the kids belong to the adults who sneaked them across the border? Many kids have been trafficked into this country. However, you darn well know all this. Are you now saying that these kids should just be handed over to the adults who brought them here with no questions asked?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
with zero intent on ever doing anything the legal way.
