Immigration Policy

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

Politico
The Trump administration plans to sap money intended to build fighter jets, ships, vehicles and National Guard equipment in order to fund barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border, the Pentagon told Congress on Thursday, a move that has agitated Democrats and even drawn condemnation from a top House Republican.

The surprise reprogramming of another $3.8 billion, transmitted to Congress and provided to POLITICO, means the Pentagon will have forked over nearly $10 billion since last year to help pay for President Donald Trump's border wall.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

NY Times
The Trump administration is deploying law enforcement tactical units from the southern border as part of a supercharged arrest operation in sanctuary cities across the country, an escalation in the president’s battle against localities that refuse to participate in immigration enforcement.

The specially trained officers are being sent to cities including Chicago and New York to boost the enforcement power of local Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, according to two officials who are familiar with the secret operation. Additional agents are expected to be sent to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Houston, Boston, New Orleans, Detroit and Newark, N.J.
...
Among the agents being deployed to sanctuary cities are members of the elite tactical unit known as BORTAC, which acts essentially as the SWAT team of the Border Patrol. With additional gear such as stun grenades and enhanced Special Forces-type training, including sniper certification, the officers typically conduct high-risk operations targeting individuals who are known to be violent, many of them with extensive criminal records.
...
In sanctuary cities, the BORTAC agents will be asked to support interior officers in run-of-the-mill immigration arrests, the officials said. Their presence could spark new fear in immigrant communities that have been on high alert under the stepped-up deportation and detention policies adopted after Mr. Trump took office.
Our chief weapon is surprise, surprise and fear, fear and surprise. Our *two* weapons are fear and surprise, and ruthless efficiency. Our *three* weapons are fear and surprise and ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical dedication to Trump. Our *four*... No... Amongst our weapons... Amongst our weaponry are such elements as fear, sur- I'll come in again.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNN
The Supreme Court said on Wednesday that the controversial Trump administration "Remain in Mexico" asylum policy can stay in effect while legal challenges play out.

The court's order is a victory for the administration, which warned there would be a "rush to the border" if the policy that has been in effect for a year was blocked by the courts. It's a devastating loss for immigrant rights groups who say asylum seekers sent back to Mexico are living in dangerous conditions.
...
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the policy last month, but allowed it to remain in effect just long enough for the Supreme Court to consider whether to step in.
I mean, honestly, what irreparable harm could possibly be caused by this?
It's almost as if people are the problem.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Isgrimnur wrote: Wed Mar 11, 2020 3:34 pm CNN
The Supreme Court said on Wednesday that the controversial Trump administration "Remain in Mexico" asylum policy can stay in effect while legal challenges play out.

The court's order is a victory for the administration, which warned there would be a "rush to the border" if the policy that has been in effect for a year was blocked by the courts. It's a devastating loss for immigrant rights groups who say asylum seekers sent back to Mexico are living in dangerous conditions.
...
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the policy last month, but allowed it to remain in effect just long enough for the Supreme Court to consider whether to step in.
I mean, honestly, what irreparable harm could possibly be caused by this?
Aside from the continuing perception that the Supreme court is biased towards rubber stamping the never ending train of Trump's authoritarian emergency orders while they churn slowly through the system?
User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 63524
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Daehawk »

When I see the title my mind thinks "Other than turn around or we do bad things to you" ....that policy.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

NBC News
The Trump administration does not have the authority to use military funding to pay for construction of a border wall, a federal appeals court panel ruled on Friday.

In a 2-1 ruling, a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that diverting $2.5 billion Congress had appropriated for the military violated the Constitution and is unlawful.

The executive branch "lacked independent constitutional authority to authorize the transfer of funds," the ruling said. "These funds were appropriated for other purposes, and the transfer amounted to 'drawing funds from the Treasury without authorization by statute and thus violating the Appropriations Clause.' Therefore, the transfer of funds here was unlawful."

The decision upheld a ruling by a federal judge in California who last year found that the Trump administration's funding scheme was against the law. A coalition of states led by California had filed suit to block the move.
...
In his dissent, Judge Daniel Collins disagreed, saying the administration had the authority to use the money.
Scribd

Image

His dissent starts on P. 46.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

Did we talk about this yet? It's all blurring together - Four States Are Sharing Driver's License Info To Help Find Out Who's A Citizen:
To help figure out the U.S. citizenship status of every adult living in the country, the Trump administration has made agreements to accumulate driver's license and state identification card information from states including Iowa, Nebraska, South Carolina and South Dakota, NPR has learned.

...

In addition to allowing states to redistrict using the number of citizens old enough to vote, Trump's executive order noted that the citizenship data could assist the government in generating a "more reliable count of the unauthorized alien population in the country."

The arrangements with South Carolina, South Dakota, Iowa and Nebraska are not expected to involve information about unauthorized immigrants. All four states require applicants for driver's licenses and state ID cards to provide proof that they are legally residing in the country.
Amazing.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

One thing that pops out that it is so easy to manipulate.
the Census Bureau has been gathering state and federal records to produce anonymized citizenship data
aka unverifiable counts. Well you can verify them if they give you access to the underlying data....which they won't or shouldn't or else it wouldn't be anonymous. You would just have to trust the process is solid and not manipulated.

That said if it wasn't the Trump administration and wasn't to be used for law enforcement purposes this would be a healthy exercise. Finding out the total population seems like something the government should do to serve everyone better. With these folks...hell no. Especially weighing this quote:
The bureau's researchers are relying on those details to help them match different government records about the same individual and try to come up with the most up-to-date citizenship status of every adult in the country. The Trump administration is counting on these efforts to produce anonymized citizenship data that are detailed down to the level of a census block.

Using that kind of information to exclude U.S. citizens under 18 and noncitizens — both those lawfully and unlawfully in the country — when redrawing districts would be "advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites," a GOP redistricting strategist concluded.
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70098
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Smoove_B wrote: Wed Jul 15, 2020 5:08 pm Did we talk about this yet? It's all blurring together - Four States Are Sharing Driver's License Info To Help Find Out Who's A Citizen:
To help figure out the U.S. citizenship status of every adult living in the country, the Trump administration has made agreements to accumulate driver's license and state identification card information from states including Iowa, Nebraska, South Carolina and South Dakota, NPR has learned.

...

In addition to allowing states to redistrict using the number of citizens old enough to vote, Trump's executive order noted that the citizenship data could assist the government in generating a "more reliable count of the unauthorized alien population in the country."

The arrangements with South Carolina, South Dakota, Iowa and Nebraska are not expected to involve information about unauthorized immigrants. All four states require applicants for driver's licenses and state ID cards to provide proof that they are legally residing in the country.
Amazing.

TLDR but I've long since wondered why state IDs aren't tracked at the federal level for interstate (and by extension international) purposes. Do I trust Trump? No. But with no details it seems long overdue.
User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 17424
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by pr0ner »

Oh, look, he's back at it again.

Hodor.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55315
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LawBeefaroni »

pr0ner wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 1:51 pm Oh, look, he's back at it again.

“Excluding these illegal aliens from the apportionment base is more consonant with the principles of representative democracy underpinning our system of Government,” Trump said in a memo outlining the new policy.
Yeah, like he wrote any of that. Useful idiot.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70098
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Silly question, are undocumented people living in the US counted toward government representation and funding? It seems by they nature being "undocumented" they would not be. Quite frankly, if you told me they do count for funding and governing purposes, I'd support their being excluded (for these purposes). To me that is like counting slaves. Seriously. You would have people being brought to work and live without protections or rights of citizenship for the benefit of property owners and their districts would get more representation and funding without the being for those being counted.

I am regularly told the undocumented people do not receive federal benefits. I always just assumed they weren't counted. Is that ignorance on my part?
Jeff V
Posts: 36414
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

You're thinking direct funding. Consider indirect funding, such as infrastructure. That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not. The census really does presume to count everyone, their legal status notwithstanding. Because of Trump's dumbfuckery, however, many are fading into the woodwork, afraid that responding will out them.
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70098
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Jeff V wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

LordMortis wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:41 pm
Jeff V wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
Why should infrastructure be based on actual population? So it can be designed to be effective?
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70098
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Alefroth wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:44 pm
LordMortis wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:41 pm
Jeff V wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
Why should infrastructure be based on actual population? So it can be designed to be effective?

But then you are building funding around an undocumented population concurrent with saying they get no benefits because they aren't documented and you are giving truth to a few notions: 1) illegals are being subsidized by tax dollars. 2) There are populations increasing the authority in government by allowing illegals to remain illegally.

So now ask a blue collar struggling Trump voter why their taxes should contribute an effective infrastructure for illegals while you are also tell them it's ignorant propaganda to suppose that taxes are supporting illegals.

We got some serious problems with how we handle undocumented peoples in this nation and if the look isn't honest then we only feed the anger.
Jeff V
Posts: 36414
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

Honestly reporting their presence is a primary goal of the census. Persecuting them should never be. That they exist for this purpose only needs to be acknowledged. Do you want to accept crumbing roads because of excessive use by undocumented people? Do you want under-funded schools who have to educate more kids than a citizen-only census dictates funding? To not include them is putting your head in the sand, then complaining because local funding is inadequate. Keep in mind that most of these undocumented people are still paying taxes to some extent.

Policy ought to be designed to bring the greatest benefit to the most people. Punishing those who have to support an elevated number of undocumented people does not serve this purpose.
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70098
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Jeff V wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 5:07 pm Honestly reporting their presence is a primary goal of the census. Persecuting them should never be. That they exist for this purpose only needs to be acknowledged. Do you want to accept crumbing roads because of excessive use by undocumented people? Do you want under-funded schools who have to educate more kids than a citizen-only census dictates funding? To not include them is putting your head in the sand, then complaining because local funding is inadequate. Keep in mind that most of these undocumented people are still paying taxes to some extent.

Policy ought to be designed to bring the greatest benefit to the most people. Punishing those who have to support an elevated number of undocumented people does not serve this purpose.
To keep them on as a cheap labor force outside of the protections of the law with all shady dealings while giving their communities the benefits of having an increased population which they have no say in. It sounds something like this to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

LordMortis wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:55 pm
Alefroth wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:44 pm
LordMortis wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:41 pm
Jeff V wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
Why should infrastructure be based on actual population? So it can be designed to be effective?

But then you are building funding around an undocumented population concurrent with saying they get no benefits because they aren't documented and you are giving truth to a few notions: 1) illegals are being subsidized by tax dollars. 2) There are populations increasing the authority in government by allowing illegals to remain illegally.

So now ask a blue collar struggling Trump voter why their taxes should contribute an effective infrastructure for illegals while you are also tell them it's ignorant propaganda to suppose that taxes are supporting illegals.

We got some serious problems with how we handle undocumented peoples in this nation and if the look isn't honest then we only feed the anger.
How is designing infrastructure that will never be able to handle actual capacity and screws everyone over, going to solve the undocumented person problem?
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70098
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

There is a shell game going on for I don't what purpose, to get cheap produce 365? But either we find a way to bring these people in to the system or we reject them. Don't tell me they get no benefits and then design a system to give benefits to the communities use their labor while we as a nation look the other way on their protections. I'm demonstrably ignorant of the whole thing. Show me what's up with the infrastructure gains and how everyone is helped.
User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 8486
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

Pick any infrastructure, roads, utilities, schools, hospitals, etc. It's all designed to serve a calculated amount of people. Now figure it was under-designed by 20% or whatever. That's going to affect everyone, right? It doesn't make sense to plan it for the way things should be instead of the way they are. That's just pragmatism.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

LordMortis wrote: Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:55 pmWe got some serious problems with how we handle undocumented peoples in this nation and if the look isn't honest then we only feed the anger.
Let's go back to 1989 and ask President Bush and some guy named Bill Barr what should be done:


Here is a legal opinion in 1989 from the Bush DOJ stating all persons must be counted in the Census. William Barr was AAG and head of OLC, and surely had to approve this opinion about legislation in Congress.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

ACLU
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last night ruled that President Trump’s use of emergency powers to divert $3.6 billion in military construction funds for the border wall is unlawful. The ruling came in a lawsuit, Sierra Club v. Trump, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the Sierra Club and Southern Border Communities Coalition challenging President Trump’s abuse of emergency powers to build a border wall using funds Congress explicitly denied. Although the district court previously stayed its own injunction blocking these sections of wall, the court of appeals order lifts that stay and requires that construction cease immediately.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Jaymann
Posts: 19317
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: California

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jaymann »

:hand: :hand: :hand: :law-policered:
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20331
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Skinypupy »

Lawyers can’t find the parents of 545 kids separated by the Trump administration.

We all knew that the cruelty is the point, but this makes me ill. I can’t even imagine those parents.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

Politico
A federal judge in Illinois on Monday struck down the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown on legal immigration through public assistance programs, a blunt check on President Donald Trump's agenda just one day before the election.

The administration's policy, known as the "public charge" regulation, has undergone lengthy litigation since it was finalized last year. Lower courts blocked its implementation until the Supreme Court in January stepped in and said immigration officials could start enforcing it while judges weighed its legality. So, despite other lower court attempts to pause or delay the policy, particularly in light of the coronavirus pandemic, it's mostly stayed in effect since February.

Why this ruling is different: U.S. District Judge Gary Feinerman said in his opinion that the Supreme Court's earlier judgment lifting all temporary freezes didn't apply here, as he flatly declared the rule to be illegal and told the administration it can no longer be enforced anywhere in the country.

Under the rule, legal immigrants who use government benefits like Medicaid or food stamps for more than 12 months within any three-year period will jeopardize their ability to get a green card. While the policy affects relatively few people, researchers have chronicled how it has scared immigrants away from applying for assistance or even enrolling their kids in public health coverage.
...
Notably, Trump’s newest SCOTUS appointee, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, had dissented from her colleagues at the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals when they overturned. Thus, she will have to recuse herself from weighing in on the case again now that she is on the high court bench.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

NPR
A federal judge has reversed the Trump administration's latest round of rules placing further limits on the Obama-era program that shields undocumented immigrants who came to the country as children from deportation.

Under the order filed Friday, Judge Nicholas Garaufis of U.S. District Court in Brooklyn instructed the Department of Homeland Security to begin accepting new applications for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program as soon as Monday.

In his ruling, Garaufis said the terms of the federal program must be immediately restored to what they were "prior to the attempted rescission of September 2017" when the White House began a series of maneuvers to dismantle the program.

The judge also instructed officials to reinstate two-year permits for qualifying applicants. Over the summer, the administration had begun issuing one-year permits.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Holman
Posts: 28906
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Holman »

Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

Oh look, we have another immigration crisis.
“There’s no question Donald Trump’s strategy was inhumane, brutal and un-American,” said Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-Texas), who represents a border district. “But what we’re doing now is also a failure.”
What to do? This is snowballing and not going to go away someday as if by magic.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

The newest GOP talking point is morally repugnant. And I was surprised to hear even Romney parroting it. So let's get this straight - a policy that might incentivize some kids being sent by their parents on alone is being compared to a evil, inhumane policy where they intentionally separated kids from their parents, didn't bother to keep track of them, and was designed to punish immigrants. Romney really got knocked back several steps on this one in my eyes. That is real bullshit.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

You Really Think Someone Would Do That? Just Go On the Internet and Tell Lies?
Last week, at the U.S. border with Mexico, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) declared that the recent increase in unaccompanied minors attempting to enter the United States was a “crisis … created by the presidential policies of this new administration.”

We looked at data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection to see whether there’s a “crisis” — or even a “surge,” as many news outlets have characterized it. We analyzed monthly CBP data from 2012 to now and found no crisis or surge that can be attributed to Biden administration policies. Rather, the current increase in apprehensions fits a predictable pattern of seasonal changes in undocumented immigration combined with a backlog of demand because of 2020’s coronavirus border closure.
And:
In other words, in fiscal year 2021, it appears that migrants are continuing to enter the United States in the same numbers as in fiscal year 2019 — plus the pent-up demand from people who would have come in fiscal year 2020, but for the pandemic. That’s visible in the first figure, earlier, in which the blue trend line for the five months of data available for fiscal year 2021 (October, November, December, January and February) neatly reflects the trend line for fiscal year 2019 — plus the difference between fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2019.

This suggests that Title 42 expulsions delayed prospective migrants rather than deterred them — and they’re arriving now.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

That is a good piece. That someone took a beat to validate the talking point is exactly what should do. Parroting or amplifying GOP talking points is madness/malpractice.
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

Biden hands off to Harris.

On one hand, this is a good opportunity for Harris to make a mark, and Biden's attention is needed elsewhere; this is not a good place to get lost in the weeds. OTOH, it could be the equivalent of tasking Kushner with solving peace in the Middle East.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

There are 10-ish caravans in a Scaramucci.

Jeff V
Posts: 36414
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

Kraken wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 1:37 am Biden hands off to Harris.

On one hand, this is a good opportunity for Harris to make a mark, and Biden's attention is needed elsewhere; this is not a good place to get lost in the weeds. OTOH, it could be the equivalent of tasking Kushner with solving peace in the Middle East.
Statistically, this "crisis" is no more than normal volume plus pent up demand from a year of closed borders. Of course, the elephants are going to spin it to a catastrophe of epic proportions. I'm pretty sure we're going to have a solution better than locking them up in cages.
Black Lives Matter
User avatar
stimpy
Posts: 6102
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 6:04 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by stimpy »

Jeff V wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:19 pm Statistically, this "crisis" is no more than normal volume plus pent up demand from a year of closed borders.
Um, arent our borders always closed?
Edit: My mistake. I think you were referring to other countries borders, in addition to ours.
Last edited by stimpy on Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He/Him/His/Porcupine
User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 43688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Kraken »

Jeff V wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:19 pm
Kraken wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 1:37 am Biden hands off to Harris.

On one hand, this is a good opportunity for Harris to make a mark, and Biden's attention is needed elsewhere; this is not a good place to get lost in the weeds. OTOH, it could be the equivalent of tasking Kushner with solving peace in the Middle East.
Statistically, this "crisis" is no more than normal volume plus pent up demand from a year of closed borders. Of course, the elephants are going to spin it to a catastrophe of epic proportions. I'm pretty sure we're going to have a solution better than locking them up in cages.
I see it as an opportunity for Kamala to shine. The crisis, such as it is, is one of logistics, and those are solvable.
Jeff V
Posts: 36414
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

stimpy wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:25 pm
Jeff V wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:19 pm Statistically, this "crisis" is no more than normal volume plus pent up demand from a year of closed borders.
Um, arent our borders always closed?
Well no, in non-pandemic times, it's possible to cross freely with proper documentation. I never had a problem coming or going to various countries when I traveled, but these days Canada would shoot me dead before letting me see Niagara Falls again. For refugees, they would be allowed across the border before being detained. It was a Trump administration policy to require they be detained either in their home country (most are fleeing horrific conditions in Central America) or Mexico, since Mexico seems to allow them free passage.
Black Lives Matter
Jeff V
Posts: 36414
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

Kraken wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:27 pm
Jeff V wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 11:19 pm
Kraken wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 1:37 am Biden hands off to Harris.

On one hand, this is a good opportunity for Harris to make a mark, and Biden's attention is needed elsewhere; this is not a good place to get lost in the weeds. OTOH, it could be the equivalent of tasking Kushner with solving peace in the Middle East.
Statistically, this "crisis" is no more than normal volume plus pent up demand from a year of closed borders. Of course, the elephants are going to spin it to a catastrophe of epic proportions. I'm pretty sure we're going to have a solution better than locking them up in cages.
I see it as an opportunity for Kamala to shine. The crisis, such as it is, is one of logistics, and those are solvable.
Yep and I hope she knocks it out of the park. We do need more humanitarian methods of dealing with this sort of thing. Pretending these people don't exist (or disappearing them when they appear) is a head-in-the-sand approach. The best way to deal with the issue is to combat reason for them leaving, which might mean deposing despotic regimes or busting gangs in the countries these people are fleeing from. Failure to do so will lead us down the road that toppled the Roman Empire, among others -- the mass movement of refugees for whatever reason is not going to be deterred by an arbitrary border. People are motivated to go where they feel safe.
Black Lives Matter
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Post Reply