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.
What are the refugee laws? Do immigration-activists know what they are? Do they even care? I was under the impression that asylum requires religious or political persecution. The Jews under the Nazis would have qualified, but in what sense is a Guatemalan peasant the equivalent of a Jew during the holocaust?
I'm not an immigration-activist thus cannot speak for them. To speak for myself, I am constitutionally incapable of first not trying to be halfway precise, with "trying" the key word. Googling (to Nolo):
In order to apply for asylum, you must meet the definition of a “refugee.” That is, you must have suffered persecution (or fear future persecution) inflicted on you because of at least one of the following grounds: your race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
This I know: Many from Central America who apply for asylum - especially women - qualify as a member of a social group. The group is not "women" but women who have suffered XYZ where the government has not done XYZ or may itself have reinforced or allowed the XYZ practice.
This ^^^ is not to support this application for I do not but there's no point in railing against a practice without first knowing what it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
If one Guatemalan peasant qualifies for asylum, shouldn't they all qualify?
Per the above, no. The asylum process depends on individual circumstance, which it what makes it so cumbersome with sometimes extensive hearings. The concept that one needs to first prove he/she qualifies is desirable but that then leads to the secondary issues of - what-to-do-with-the kids in the interim. There's no "let me see where you're from ... oh Guatemala, well that country is on my list and good to enter." (Now that probably was true in the past, say, for Cuba.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
And if Guatemalans are refugees, they should apply in Mexico, not trek across Mexico to get to America.
This was discussed earlier in the thread with the laws or international agreements still unclear, at least to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
It is rather obvious that they just want to come to the United States. I don't blame them. I would want to come here too.
I don't blame them either. I also think asylum is not for some number (great majority? most?) the appropriate entry process. So what next? If you were the current keeper-of-the-gate and up comes a group of asylum-seekers how would you respond? I don't blame Trump for trying to slam the door shut, not really. To discourage asylum-seekers by separating children from their parents is/was not, however, acceptable IMHO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
I do not believe ANYONE from Latin-America should qualify as refugees.
What is it about Latin America that led you to this conclusion?
Then that would make the Obama administration a dictatorship also. Obama was the president that began this policy of separating children from their adult guardians at the border. Where was your liberal outrage then??
And Obama, like Trump, did this to DISCOURAGE migrants from coming to our country illegally with their children. To welcome these families, would create a situation where hundreds of thousands of impoverished Central American families would stampede across our southern border. However economic hardship is NOT grounds for asylum.
Again, every day in the US, child services removes children from their parents, when they have committed crimes and need to be locked up.
Instead you should be raging against these Central American migrants for USING their children to try to gain illegal entry into our country. These migrants are the ones putting their children in danger. And imo it is also extremely irresponsible of the parents to have large families when the parents are so poor. Since so many of these migrants are Catholic, the pope should be counseling the adults in developing and struggling countries to stop having babies until their lives turn around.
Oh ohh!
you blamed this on everyone but trump HERE are the ones you forgot
Hillary , Schumer , Pelosi,those far left Dems , all Latinos that live in the world,and let us not forget fake news.
Did I FORGET anyone?
There's some confusion here. The Trump administration as we speak is not separating children from accompanying adults. That practice stopped. Maybe the thread premise is wrong or I've missed something. I assumed we were talking about a past practice that has implications for the ongoing Caravan-asylum issue.
There are two issues:
1. How to ensure that those children who were separated are returned to the rightful parents. Record-keeping was sloppy. There are reports that the numbers separated are higher than first reported.
2. How to ensure that children who continue to arrive at the border are with their parents not a trafficker. Whatever I may think of how Trump has handled matters, there are good-faith efforts by CBP-ICE to monitor this with a system in place. Certainly, it needs to be done.
It's not clear what you are advocating. What would you do differently? No one has ever alleged there are "no questions asked."
Sigh. What I was referring to is those who want these kids returned to adults with "no questions asked". If you read through the many posts by the pro-illegal immigration bunch, that's what they want to do. With concerns about trafficking minors, these people still want to hand over children back to the adults who brought them here. IOW, just hand them over, with no questions asked.
Let's look at this another way. All of you complaining about children being "kidnapped", what should be done with these children?
Should we put them in the same cells with their family and unknown people? Will you scream so loudly when one of them is abused by another illegal entrant? Or will you insist the families be let go?
Would you prefer the government use taxpayer money to put all these people in a hotel?
Let's pretend that happens, the children are with their families in a hotel. Now all you've done is incentivize families to make the trip up here. They know theyll at least have a short time living in previously unattainable luxury. This seems like a really bad idea.
From the ongoing appropriations negotiations, it appears Trump wants to build facilities that are suitable to detain families. If not "jail-like," it sounds like this might meet the Flores agreement requirements for children. Does that work for you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by spankys bbq
How do we prove everyone is who they say they are? How do you prove the parents are actually the parents of the children? Easy, right? DNA. Oh, but we adopted little Julian here. Dont think for one second that wont be the answer to that question.
The refugee program that gave visas to children with parents in the United States turned to DNA. Whatever the problems ... they appear to have been handled.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spankys bbq
I understand that there are a bunch of Americans who feel bad for these people and want to help them escape whatever situation they were in so they can lead a better life, but this needs to stop until a solid and reliable process can be put in place to deal with asylum requests. This would include accurately identifying asylum-seekers.
I agree that we need a "solid and reliable process" that would be more restrictive - at least for a mass migration of what are, in fact, economic migrants. How to stop it in the interim before that process goes into place is the question of the day. The current technique appears to be metering - disallowing the opportunity to make an asylum application.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spankys bbq
As it stands, one could come to the conclusion this sudden wave of asylum-seekers was created to overload our immigration system not to expose flaws but to exploit them. If it were such an attack, it certainly checks the emotion box. It has also created more of a political divide.
Technology and policy isnt going to slow the pace of illegal immigration. Its akin to a door chime only letting you know someone has entered. You may think a wall is barbaric or outdated but, short of mine fields, it is the only thing that will slow illegal entry so the border patrol folk can catch them.
You can call a wall whatever you want but you know it would help. It's not a total solution but a piece of the broader puzzle.
What I think created more of a political divide was the controversy over the wall. Trump's focus on the caravans has been to support the wall - NOT to call for needed legislation (to my knowledge).
They believe its worth the risk, to escape the hardships or violence in their hometowns, they may be right about that too! Life is not totally fair and safe at all times
To send children alone on that journey is beyond risk.
But the kids are not put in jail too. And American children certainly aren't sprayed with tear gas. Big difference.
Stop with the melodramatics You know darn well that when those people tried to rush the US border, they were warned to not do it. Yet, they willingly put their children in danger and disregarded that warning.
What was the BP supposed to do? Stand back and allow them to rush the border?
If any kids got tear gassed, the fault lies squarely with their parents.
Sigh. What I was referring to is those who want these kids returned to adults with "no questions asked". If you read through the many posts by the pro-illegal immigration bunch, that's what they want to do. With concerns about trafficking minors, these people still want to hand over children back to the adults who brought them here. IOW, just hand them over, with no questions asked.
Do you understand now?
I understand the words but I've not noticed the posts. Curious, I'd be interested in links. This isn't some sort of challenge and if the time isn't worth it ... no worries.
There are numerous immigration activist positions that I am aware of but find troubling. For example, someone attached a video that featured an Iranian seeking asylum who was being helped by an Ecuadorian-aslyee activist. The Iranian who had been released from detention was dismayed that the government did not support or provide more assistance to asylum seekers who were still in legal limbo. The Ecuadorian called for removing many legal hurdles.
What was left unsaid is that there is NO numerical restriction on aslyees. The right to apply to given to whoever reaches a US border with the initial bar (the credible fear interview) fairly low. This contrasts with refugee programs where the President can apply numerical limits.
I understand the words but I've not noticed the posts. Curious, I'd be interested in links. This isn't some sort of challenge and if the time isn't worth it ... no worries.
There are numerous immigration activist positions that I am aware of but find troubling. For example, someone attached a video that featured an Iranian seeking asylum who was being helped by an Ecuadorian-aslyee activist. The Iranian who had been released from detention was dismayed that the government did not support or provide more assistance to asylum seekers who were still in legal limbo. The Ecuadorian called for removing many legal hurdles.
What was left unsaid is that there is NO numerical restriction on aslyees. The right to apply to given to whoever reaches a US border with the initial bar (the credible fear interview) fairly low. This contrasts with refugee programs where the President can apply numerical limits.
You're splitting hairs. Maybe you should learn to read between the lines. Children get separated from the adults who brought them here. ICE has concerns that some of these children were trafficked. With such concerns, they aren't going to just hand them over to the adults who brought them, no questions asked.
The pro-illegal immigration posters are outraged that these children aren't just handed over to the adults immediately. When confronted, they blow off all concerns about trafficking minors and go on and on as to how cruel it is to separate families.
They believe its worth the risk, to escape the hardships or violence in their hometowns, they may be right about that too! Life is not totally fair and safe at all times
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellwood
To send children alone on that journey is beyond risk.
Sigh. What I was referring to is those who want these kids returned to adults with "no questions asked". If you read through the many posts by the pro-illegal immigration bunch, that's what they want to do. With concerns about trafficking minors, these people still want to hand over children back to the adults who brought them here. IOW, just hand them over, with no questions asked.
Do you understand now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady
I understand the words but I've not noticed the posts. Curious, I'd be interested in links. This isn't some sort of challenge and if the time isn't worth it ... no worries.
There are numerous immigration activist positions that I am aware of but find troubling. For example, someone attached a video that featured an Iranian seeking asylum who was being helped by an Ecuadorian-aslyee activist. The Iranian who had been released from detention was dismayed that the government did not support or provide more assistance to asylum seekers who were still in legal limbo. The Ecuadorian called for removing many legal hurdles.
What was left unsaid is that there is NO numerical restriction on aslyees. The right to apply to given to whoever reaches a US border with the initial bar (the credible fear interview) fairly low. This contrasts with refugee programs where the President can apply numerical limits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BOS2IAD
You're splitting hairs. Maybe you should learn to read between the lines. Children get separated from the adults who brought them here. ICE has concerns that some of these children were trafficked. With such concerns, they aren't going to just hand them over to the adults who brought them, no questions asked.
The pro-illegal immigration posters are outraged that these children aren't just handed over to the adults immediately. When confronted, they blow off all concerns about trafficking minors and go on and on as to how cruel it is to separate families.
Do you understand now?
I'm really trying here. I understood your point (the words). We both agree turning children over to anyone who claimed them or even (I'm going further here) not verifying that children crossing the border are with parents or guardians. This is what I said in my first response: "Whatever I may think of how Trump has handled matters, there are good-faith efforts by CBP-ICE to monitor this [child trafficking] with a system in place. Certainly, it needs to be done."
Unless I missed it, no one on this thread said don't worry about possible trafficking. That's only a claim that you've made. No one is criticizing Trump-ICE policies concerning trafficked children.
The thread title is "Why are so many asylum seekers still separated from their children" with the original post: "Trump had no plans to reunite families and it’s extremely sad!" I read that to mean that good records were not kept so families are not yet found (there's been some current press about that). The thread then devolved into a discussion of the past separation practice that Trump later changed with the executive order. The comments about how "cruel" the practice was referred to his original policy.
Are you saying that ICE will separate children from accompanying adults if there are concerns about trafficking - that and concerns about parental abuse or criminal parents (other than crossing the border)? This has been policy all along and remains in place. That's a good thing, yes, with again no complaints about it on this thread.
This takes me back to my original question: It's not clear what you are advocating. What would you do differently? It comes across like you've set up a "hypothetical" (immediately, no questions asked) - connected that to trafficking that does exist - then used that to attack posters who were discussing an entirely separate issue.
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.
You know darn well that when those people tried to rush the US border, they were warned to not do it. Yet, they willingly put their children in danger and disregarded that warning.
