Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
mr6666

Immigration Policy?

Recommended Posts

Hundreds arrested in DC protesting Trump immigration policy

"Capitol Police arrested nearly 600 people Thursday after hundreds of loudly chanting women demonstrated inside a Senate office building against President Donald Trump’s treatment of migrant families. Among them were a Washington state congresswoman, the lawmaker said on Twitter.

The protests came as demonstrations occurred around the country over the Trump administration’s policy of separating immigrant families. They offered a glimpse of what might happen on Saturday when rallies are planned coast to coast.....

https://apnews.com/bde50e41e89d4b6d91a001b558769835?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&__twitter_impression=true&__

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More toddlers appear alone in court for deportation under family separation

".....The children being detained under the new “zero tolerance” policy, though, are facing immigration proceedings without mom or dad by their side.

READ MORE: What constitutional rights do undocumented immigrants have?

“The parent might be the only one who knows why they fled from the home country, and the child is in a disadvantageous position to defend themselves,” Toczylowski said.......

“It’s certainly grossly inappropriate,” said Dreyer, who is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy committee. “I’m ashamed that we’re doing this.”

Leaders at three legal services organizations and a private firm confirmed that the children are being served with notices to appear in court. They are not entitled to an attorney but rather are given a list of legal services organizations that might help them.

Steve Lee, a UCLA child psychology professor, said expecting the children to advocate for themselves in court is an “incredibly misaligned expectation.”

“That couldn’t be any less developmentally appropriate,” he said, adding that some children may not be mature enough to verbalize a response.........

finding a sponsor is more difficult now given recent fears that stepping forward to accept a child could trigger a sponsor’s deportation.

In April, HHS entered into an agreement with law enforcement officials that requires sponsors and adult family members to submit fingerprints and be subject to a thorough immigration and criminal background check......

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/more-toddlers-appear-alone-in-court-for-deportation-under-family-separation?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=newshour&linkId=100000002887469

 

  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 'Stunning Indictment', ICE Officers Call for Own Agency to Be Dissolved Amid Growing Outrage Over Immigration Policy

"It was never about crime. Never about MS-13. Always just about hurting less privileged people of color. All at the expense of actually protecting America."

 

......"The perception of investigative independence is unnecessarily impacted by the political nature of civil immigration enforcement," wrote the agents to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen. "Many jurisdictions continue to refuse to work with HSI because of a perceived linkage to the politics of civil immigration."

The officers suggested that ICE be dissolved and its work divided among two new separate agencies, one focused on HSI and one focused on Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO)—the unit which has enforced President Donald Trump's hardline immigration policy........

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/06/29/stunning-indictment-ice-officers-call-own-agency-be-dissolved-amid-growing-outrage?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=socialnetwork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NBC NewsVerified account @NBCNews 2h2 hours ago

 
 

ICE fails to fix problems found at its detention centers during inspections and often leave problems unaddressed for years, such as abusing strip-searches and failing to report sexual assaults, a federal investigation released Friday states.

---------------------------------------

".... “This report confirms what the people behind bars in immigration jails already know: migrants in detention suffer abuses, rights deprivations, and neglect, and ICE has no interest in investigating or remedying these harms,” Heidi Altman, National Immigration Justice Center director of policy, stated in a news release. ...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/amid-calls-abolish-ice-investigators-knock-agency-s-detention-center-n887901?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.alternet.org/economy/immigration-crisis-cause-unscrupulous-employers-and-cynical-parties

America’s Immigration Crisis Has Real Culprits — And They Aren’t Immigrants

Deportation isn’t the answer when unscrupulous employers and cynical political party leaders take advantage of working-class immigrants.
President Trump has finally signed an executive order purporting to end his attorney general’s inhumane practice of separating migrant children from their parents when families are found illegally crossing the border. But let’s not pretend that an immigration solution is at hand—certainly not from the GOP, whose supporters may not like the practice of separating children from their parents, but have little problem with a “zero tolerance policy” on illegal immigration. Even the Democrats have been complicit here, most being perfectly content to use photographs of crying babies being taken away from incarcerated parents to score political brownie points with their base in time for the 2018 congressional elections. Their humanitarian concerns are admirable. One only wishes that the Democratic Party evinced similar outrage in regard to its own citizen-workers, who have been repeatedly victimized by offshoring and wage depressing, union busting mass immigration. The Democrats have apparently made a cynical political calculation whereby today’s economic migrants become part of tomorrow’s emergent electoral majority, even if it means screwing a historically loyal constituency—American labor—in the process.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump Aims to Dismantle Protections for Immigrant Kids and Radically Expand the Family Detention System

".... Nielsen then went on to identify “three major loopholes” in need of congressional intervention, each one reflecting long-standing goals of the administration’s hard-right anti-immigration hawks and their partners in the think tank world.

From top to bottom, Nielsen’s email is laden with Trumpian immigration politics — that is to stay, it is full of claims that are half true or simply false. ..........

https://theintercept.com/2018/06/26/trump-family-detention-dhs-ice/

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geoff BennettVerified account @GeoffRBennett

 

NEW: @HHSGov is no longer providing the specific number of migrant children held in its custody resulting from the family separation policy.

HHS spokesperson says it currently has "11,871 minors in our care" -- a number that includes those who crossed the border unaccompanied

10:05 AM - 2 Jul 2018
 
-SO THEY LOST COUNT?!
<_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NipkowDisc said:

the democruds think ms-13 are migrant children.

:lol:

which is sick, confused, irrational.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the democruds doan wanna take responsibility for letting scum like ms-13 in to bedevil ordinary everyday law-abiding and god-fearing americans. they wanna abolish ice and open the floodgates as if they aren't opened up enough already.

GIVE US YOUR TIRED, YOUR POOR, THESE LITTLE INNOCENT CHERUBS WHO ARE JUST AS CUTE AS BUTTONS.

:o

Image result for ms-13 gang members

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Conservative Group Is Using Ronald Reagan to Attack President Trump's Immigration Policies

..... “They didn’t ask what this country could do for them, but what they could do to make this refuge the greatest home of freedom in history,” Reagan says in the footage. “They brought with them courage and the values of family, work and freedom. Let us pledge to each other that we can make America Great Again.”

 

...........“The point is that the Republican Party is no longer the party of Ronald Reagan. If it were, it would not be pursuing the anti-immigrant policy that President Trump is pursuing,” said Linda Chavez, the group’s director, who also served as Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of the Office of Public Liaison in the Reagan administration. “As someone who worked in the Reagan White House and was part of the Reagan administration, it is disheartening to see President Trump using immigration as a wedge issue and trying to act as if immigrants are somehow bad for America, when in my view immigrants are what make America great.” .......

http://time.com/5329179/reagan-trump-immigration-ad/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Federal Judge Rules Against Indefinite and Arbitrary Detention for Asylum Seekers

A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration may not arbitrarily detain people seeking asylum. US District Judge James Boasberg ruled asylum seekers who have passed a credible fear interview should be given humanitarian parole, not indefinite detention.

The suit was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights First and the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies. ....

https://truthout.org/video/federal-judge-rules-against-indefinite-and-arbitrary-detention-for-asylum-seekers/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U.S. Army is quietly discharging immigrant recruits

 

Some immigrant U.S. Army reservists and recruits who enlisted in the military with a promised path to citizenship are being abruptly discharged, the Associated Press has learned. ....

“It was my dream to serve in the military,” said reservist Lucas Calixto, a Brazilian immigrant who filed a lawsuit against the Army last week. “Since this country has been so good to me, I thought it was the least I could do to give back to my adopted country and serve in the United States military.”

 
Some of the service members say they were not told why they were being discharged. Others who pressed for answers said the Army informed them they’d been labeled as security risks.....
 
“Immigrants have been serving in the Army since 1775,” Stock said. “We wouldn’t have won the revolution without immigrants. And we’re not going to win the global war on terrorism today without immigrants.” ...
 

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mr6666 said:

U.S. Army is quietly discharging immigrant recruits

 

Some immigrant U.S. Army reservists and recruits who enlisted in the military with a promised path to citizenship are being abruptly discharged, the Associated Press has learned. ....

“It was my dream to serve in the military,” said reservist Lucas Calixto, a Brazilian immigrant who filed a lawsuit against the Army last week. “Since this country has been so good to me, I thought it was the least I could do to give back to my adopted country and serve in the United States military.”

 
Some of the service members say they were not told why they were being discharged. Others who pressed for answers said the Army informed them they’d been labeled as security risks.....
 
“Immigrants have been serving in the Army since 1775,” Stock said. “We wouldn’t have won the revolution without immigrants. And we’re not going to win the global war on terrorism today without immigrants.” ...
 

 

Another broken promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChristineHoard said:

Another broken promise.

While immigrants should never have been allowed to serve in the US Military to begin with,  those that did serve and completed their duties should be granted citizenship. 

PS:  The reason immigrants (non citizens) shouldn't be able to serve is because a nation shouldn't employee outsiders to engage in armed conflict.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://quillette.com/2017/08/27/argument-open-borders-liberal-hubris/

An Argument Against Open Borders and Liberal Hubris

No one except a militant nativist would deny that some level of immigration is beneficial and should be accepted. After that, we face a question of scale. There are those, however, on the opposite end of the spectrum, who believe that no level of immigration should ever be denied. These are advocates of “open borders”; an idea as strange as that of the nativist—yet more dangerous for being considered respectable.

The liberal Economist magazine contains an essay promoting open borders. It imagines a world in which people are free to live and work wherever they please. It is an astonishingly biased and unreflective piece, which illuminates dangerous extremes of progressive utopianism:

Perhaps I sound inhuman. Who could dislike people living and working whereever they please? It can be a splendid thing, but if everybody did it think of what that would entail. The Economist reports that if borders were opened, 630 million people would be likely to migrate. Perhaps 138 million would go to the US, expanding its population by almost a half. About 42 million would join the British, expanding their numbers by more than a half. How many would go to Australia, a country with a population of 24 million, and with infrastructure already under strain? Such influxes would pose monumental demographic changes, soon made more dramatic by the higher birth rates. It will be exacerbated by the fact that local governments will not be able to keep up with the building of roads, hospitals, schools and transport systems that citizens—both old and new—will demand.

These predictions might be overestimates, the author tells us. This is true. But they could also be underestimates. When Poland was admitted to the European Union far more migrants flooded into Britain than was expected.

But what of proposed merits of open borders? A consistent failure of the Economist’s article is a reluctance to distinguish between different migrants. If one finds the study, it turns out that 54% of the men and women who expressed a desire to migrate came from Africa and the Middle East —with another 20% being from Central America. Yet the most successful immigrants, in terms of launching businesses and earning wealth, have been found to hail from Asia and Europe. A UCL study found that European immigrants to Britain contribute more to the economy than they take from it while the opposite is true for non European immigrants. It is senseless, then, to claim, as the author of The Economist article does, that immigrants are “more likely than the native-born to bring new ideas and start their own businesses”. Immigrants do not come from “Immigrantland”. Population differences related to entrepreneurial and earning potential are real, and significant, and difficult to bridge.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

While immigrants should never have been allowed to serve in the US Military to begin with,  those that did serve and completed their duties should be granted citizenship. 

PS:  The reason immigrants (non citizens) shouldn't be able to serve is because a nation shouldn't employee outsiders to engage in armed conflict.

 

In the case that they are virtually DACA eligible, I am okay with immigrants serving in the US military. Filipinos can serve in the military and obtain citizenship that way and there have been no problems. I'd like to know the nationality of those serving who were discharged. That might give some insight as to the motivation of this new policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, calvinnme said:

In the case that they are virtually DACA eligible, I am okay with immigrants serving in the US military. Filipinos can serve in the military and obtain citizenship that way and there have been no problems. I'd like to know the nationality of those serving who were discharged. That might give some insight as to the motivation of this new policy.

The above linked article mentions four individuals specifically. They were from Brazil, Pakistan, Iran, and the Dominican Republic. I can understand the middle two causing concern, but not the others. I also know that we desperately need translators, particularly field combat translators, so losing those middle two could be a regrettable loss. But if they failed their security background checks, then there's really no choice.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

The above linked article mentions four individuals specifically. They were from Brazil, Pakistan, Iran, and the Dominican Republic. I can understand the middle two causing concern, but not the others. I also know that we desperately need translators, particularly field combat translators, so losing those middle two could be a regrettable loss. But if they failed their security background checks, then there's really no choice.

I don't get the ones from Brazil or the Dominican Republic either, although there are people from all 50 states who can't pass a security background check. The soldiers from Pakistan and Iran - like you said, it would depend on their individual stories.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

PS:  The reason immigrants (non citizens) shouldn't be able to serve is because a nation shouldn't employ outsiders to engage in armed conflict.

I think we needed to employ the French at one time and others, the precedent is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, cigarjoe said:

I think we needed to employ the French at one time and others, the precedent is there.

I just don't like the concept of rich nations hiring mercenaries.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2018 at 7:35 PM, mr6666 said:

More toddlers appear alone in court for deportation under family separation

".....The children being detained under the new “zero tolerance” policy, though, are facing immigration proceedings without mom or dad by their side.

READ MORE: What constitutional rights do undocumented immigrants have?

“The parent might be the only one who knows why they fled from the home country, and the child is in a disadvantageous position to defend themselves,” Toczylowski said.......

“It’s certainly grossly inappropriate,” said Dreyer, who is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics advocacy committee. “I’m ashamed that we’re doing this.”

Leaders at three legal services organizations and a private firm confirmed that the children are being served with notices to appear in court. They are not entitled to an attorney but rather are given a list of legal services organizations that might help them.

Steve Lee, a UCLA child psychology professor, said expecting the children to advocate for themselves in court is an “incredibly misaligned expectation.”

“That couldn’t be any less developmentally appropriate,” he said, adding that some children may not be mature enough to verbalize a response.........

finding a sponsor is more difficult now given recent fears that stepping forward to accept a child could trigger a sponsor’s deportation.

In April, HHS entered into an agreement with law enforcement officials that requires sponsors and adult family members to submit fingerprints and be subject to a thorough immigration and criminal background check......

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/more-toddlers-appear-alone-in-court-for-deportation-under-family-separation?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=newshour&linkId=100000002887469

 

OK, this is just nuts. How is a child supposed to defend himself/herself if they don't even know why they are there? Let me walk this back. This entire thing is unconstitutional. Even with competent counsel, no child can be held responsible for their parents' actions. The morality AND the optics of this is just terrible. How are judges reacting to having three year old defendants? Tearing their hair out and walking away?

Thanks for the link on constitutional rights. I would agree with the article, that immigrants, even illegal ones, have constitutional rights. I would omit the right to vote in elections outside of very local elections - the school board elections were pointed out as an exception. And I don't think I want people in the country illegally to have the right to bear arms.

May I offer a compromise that DJT would go for? When you encounter minor children at the border with family, let's just put them up in an Embassy Suites Hotel until their hearing. Donald can build them and bill the taxpayer for their keep. That way he gets to build something along the border AND he gets money out of the bargain. He's bound to go for it.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...