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 agree with all of this, particularly the last comment. So what's the solution?
I only see two solutions to this.
1. Make them apply outside the country and be ineligible for admission until approved. This would also require any illegals apprehended to be ineligible to apply from within the country. This is really not much different from other parts of immigration law. We make applicants for all other visas (work, student, family, even tourist) apply from outside. However, this is not what current asylum law says. Trump tried to do this and the courts blocked him. Congress would need to revise asylum law but we both know there is no chance of that happening in the current political climate.
or
2. Significantly accelerate the timeline to process applications and hold applicants in detention until processed. Law and court rulings on detention mean the timeline would need to be under 20 days. Trump has proposed more immigration judges but we are so far behind that it would take an army of them. Perhaps judges could use teams of assistants to do the grunt work of processing and make a recommendation so the judge merely has to look over the file and make the judgment. As for detention, it would take almost 40,000 beds to even hold them 20 days at the incoming rate.
The first one would be much cheaper but the last one is probably the only realistic solution that conforms to existing laws.
To make a nod to the threat topic, the wall is at best a secondary issue when it comes to the current crisis. One of my (many !) objections to the wall is that it misuses political capital best employed for needed immigration reforms. I suspect you may feel the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia
I only see two solutions to this.
1. Make them apply outside the country and be ineligible for admission until approved. This would also require any illegals apprehended to be ineligible to apply from within the country. This is really not much different from other parts of immigration law. We make applicants for all other visas (work, student, family, even tourist) apply from outside. However, this is not what current asylum law says. Trump tried to do this and the courts blocked him. Congress would need to revise asylum law but we both know there is no chance of that happening in the current political climate.
Outside the country, illegals probably have no constitutional right to due process. Trump now has a program with a fancy name for the current metering that started with the Obama Administration. There may well be a filed court case on the metering? No idea how long Mexico may continue to cooperate. Regardless, this efforts may well not be legally nor practically sustainable. That you mention. Plus it's too soon to see if ongoing Trump administrative changes will result in a downward tick in the numbers.
I'm not sure you could legally change the concept of "asylum" - where someone in danger reaches safe harbor, literally knocking at the door. But there should be a distinction between aslyees and refugees.
No doubt we would have dramatically different ideas about our target numbers of admitted "migrants." (Those who in the end would not qualify as a bona fide aslyee.) But, yes, I would prefer admittances fall under a refugee program where applicants apply and are accepted outside the country. Those treks to the border with uncertain outcomes and inadequate support then available within the United States is neither functional nor humane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia
2. Significantly accelerate the timeline to process applications and hold applicants in detention until processed. Law and court rulings on detention mean the timeline would need to be under 20 days. Trump has proposed more immigration judges but we are so far behind that it would take an army of them. Perhaps judges could use teams of assistants to do the grunt work of processing and make a recommendation so the judge merely has to look over the file and make the judgment. As for detention, it would take almost 40,000 beds to even hold them 20 days at the incoming rate.
Speed is good. There is this mismatch between the "credible fear interview" and the resulting judicial decision. The mismatch is on the higher standards of proof that must be met, with now (to my knowledge) even different criteria being applied based on conflicting court decisions last year. A true cluster f*uck, the latter.
There may be a window to where longer timelines may be possible under the Flores Amendment. Family housing would need to be built along with some sort of Congressional authorizations, per some legal observers,
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia
The first one would be much cheaper but the last one is probably the only realistic solution that conforms to existing laws.
Any functional program that prevents misuse of the current asylum laws would, in the end, be the "cheapest." For the United States. And for migrants who don't leave homes poor as they are for a fruitless and dangerous journey. Too, it could ease processing delays for those in the end who qualify for asylum.
It's not just Trump who's gotten turned down by the Courts but Obama also. The law triumphs, a plus. But legislation that doesn't work needs to be dealt with, and not just evaded.
While I am not 100% in support of "the wall", there are places where the border is nothing more than two rows of barbed wire on those cheap garden fence posts and night vision surveillance shows lines of illegals going right through the fence. The collective costs of dealing with illegal immigrants is in excess of $100 billion annually, so there is no reason to not do something to secure the border MUCH better AND reduce that expenditure. The added bonus would be reduction in victims of illegals as well, from drugs to DWI accidents to sex crimes.
While I am not 100% in support of "the wall", there are places where the border is nothing more than two rows of barbed wire on those cheap garden fence posts and night vision surveillance shows lines of illegals going right through the fence. The collective costs of dealing with illegal immigrants is in excess of $100 billion annually, so there is no reason to not do something to secure the border MUCH better AND reduce that expenditure. The added bonus would be reduction in victims of illegals as well, from drugs to DWI accidents to sex crimes.
The 100 billion is pure bunk. Simply a number ginned up by combining things that are not illegal costs such as educating their citizen children with apportionment of overhead costs that will not change if the illegals are removed. Then all such good things like the cost avoidance in the agricultural industry are ignored. We likely make significant savings off the illegals. The Dairy industry opines it would increase the cost of dairy products by 90% if the illegal aliens were all removed. The dairy industry sells about 100 billion of products each year. And that is only a part of the agricultural industry that uses illegal aliens.
And the wall has little impact on arrivals. Asylees come through the gates mostly and most arriving illegals today come on airplanes and overstay their visa.
The 100 billion is pure bunk. Simply a number ginned up by combining things that are not illegal costs such as educating their citizen children with apportionment of overhead costs that will not change if the illegals are removed. Then all such good things like the cost avoidance in the agricultural industry are ignored. We likely make significant savings off the illegals. The Dairy industry opines it would increase the cost of dairy products by 90% if the illegal aliens were all removed. The dairy industry sells about 100 billion of products each year. And that is only a part of the agricultural industry that uses illegal aliens.
And the wall has little impact on arrivals. Asylees come through the3 gzstes mostly and most arriving illegals today come on airplanes and overstay their visa.
I live in a place with a fair amount of Hispanic residents, illegal and legal. They are on welfare, get subsidized housing, free medical care, free school breakfasts and lunches for their kids, work under the table, and pay no taxes. The state doesn't allow the welfare and housing authority personel to even report illegals applying for and receiving such assistance. I can totally see the collective cost of all that plus dealing with them at the borders, easily costing that much money if not more nationwide. The thing is I'm not in the "deport them all" camp, I just want to see our borders safe and secure, the trash taken out, and the ones with something to offer given the opportunity of a green card ( go through the immigration process like every legal immigrant had to) and get off the tax payers backs.
I live in a place with a fair amount of Hispanic residents, illegal and legal. They are on welfare, get subsidized housing, free medical care, free school breakfasts and lunches for their kids, work under the table, and pay no taxes. The state doesn't allow the welfare and housing authority personel to even report illegals applying for and receiving such assistance. I can totally see the collective cost of all that plus dealing with them at the borders, easily costing that much money if not more nationwide. The thing is I'm not in the "deport them all" camp, I just want to see our borders safe and secure, the trash taken out, and the ones with something to offer given the opportunity of a green card ( go through the immigration process like every legal immigrant had to) and get off the tax payers backs.
In general the vast majority of the Hispanic illegals have no option for a green card. Without well established family or a skill you do not get a US visa. In general the choices for the standard illegal alien is to come illegal or don't come at all.
Most welfare and such received by illegal aliens goes to their citizen children not the illegal alien.
They do work under the table and will do even more of that if we tighten eVerify. That is a bad thing for the US citizenry in general and is another strong reason we need to be rid of the illegal aliens. And unfortunately the only workable way to do that is to legalize the vast majority.
The 100 billion is pure bunk. Simply a number ginned up by combining things that are not illegal costs such as educating their citizen children with apportionment of overhead costs that will not change if the illegals are removed.
The only reason they have citizen children to educate is because of their illegal entry so that is a direct cost consequence of their illegal entry. And we must educate ALL the children of illegals, not just the ones that are citizens. Not every child of an illegal alien is a citizen. For example, DACA kids.
Last edited by oceangaia; 03-06-2019 at 05:51 PM..
And the wall has little impact on arrivals. Asylees come through the gates mostly and most arriving illegals today come on airplanes and overstay their visa.
Overstays are not "arriving illegals". They are legal when they arrive. They are vetted. And overstays are not destitute asylum seekers. They either have an existing job sponsor, are enrolledin a college, or have been granted a tourist visa.
To make a nod to the threat topic, the wall is at best a secondary issue when it comes to the current crisis. One of my (many !) objections to the wall is that it misuses political capital best employed for needed immigration reforms. I suspect you may feel the same.
I'm not sure you could legally change the concept of "asylum" - where someone in danger reaches safe harbor, literally knocking at the door. But there should be a distinction between aslyees and refugees.
I don't Trump is the problem. Trump is the side effect of the problem. Many wall supporters like me would not be calling for a wall if this problem had been handled already. We are sick and tired of lawmakers shuffling feet and not dealing with it. We are sick and tired of courts blocking laws that attempt to deal with it. We are sick and tired of there never being enough resources to handle the issues up front but always manage to find the resources to deal with them later.
The only point you made that I really disagree with is that we can change the concept of asylum to not allow you to choose the target country. In our current case, Mexico is recognized by the UN as a suitable country for asylum and those gathering at our border are in no immediate danger necessitating their admission into our country. If Honduras or Guatemala directly abutted our border it would be different.
In general the vast majority of the Hispanic illegals have no option for a green card. Without well established family or a skill you do not get a US visa. In general the choices for the standard illegal alien is to come illegal or don't come at all.
Most welfare and such received by illegal aliens goes to their citizen children not the illegal alien.
They do work under the table and will do even more of that if we tighten eVerify. That is a bad thing for the US citizenry in general and is another strong reason we need to be rid of the illegal aliens. And unfortunately the only workable way to do that is to legalize the vast majority.
No one has an inherent right to come here. If you do not meet the criteria to get a visa, stay home. The fact that you do not qualify for something does not entitle you to take it.
Most welfare may be in the name of the citizen children but the parents benefit as well. The child does not eat the food bought with food stamps while the illegal parents watch and starve. The child does not sleep in the apartment subsidized with housing assistance while the illegal parents sleep outside.
I'll agree with you that we can't deport 12 million people and at some point we will need to resolve it with legalization. But I think that must come only after we lock it down tight. And I really don't care if we lock it down with a Wall or just with better laws and law enforcement.
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.
