DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Tent City To Be Built in Texas to House Migrant Children

Trump enacted this. Not Congress.

That said, Congress could stop this tomorrow with 100% Democrat opposition.

Stop parroting the senile wimp. It makes you sound dumb, and convinces no one outside of your own tribe.

Can you list some of your reminders of when a civil offense led to an American citizen being jailed and having their children also jailed?

This is the bottom line. There is no other way to look at it.


They entered the country illegally. Parents go to prison and the children go to child services.

That is what happens when parents here screw up and need to go away. The kids don't go to prison with the parents.

There really is no other way to look at it, I don't care what some of you others think.

I am not saying I like it. I am saying that if the parents gave a rats ass about their kids and don't want to be separated from their kids, don't enter the country illegally.


Pretty simple.

Using kids for your agenda are you?

Asks the man best known for his bizarre and laughable David Hogg obsession.

Also, kids are literally the point.

We're separating parents from their kids specifically because that weird creepy Stephen Miller kid runs policy while Trump yells at the TV.

No way that only happens to the poor ILLEGAL immigrants!

Why do you think they break the law?

Do you know what it costs to enter the country for one person?

Do you know how long it takes for the paperwork?

Do you know what happens if they try to do it the “right” way?

What would you do for your family to escape a place where you might get murdered, but you lacked the time and money to do it the right way?

Peen, this ain’t black and white. You’re better than resort to absolutes on this. I’ve always thought you used reason beyond binary arguments.

Can the Trump adminstration undo the Flores consent decree?

https://politics.stackexchange.com/quest...-consent-decree


In 1997, the U.S. Department of Justice agreed to a settlement in a case called Flores vs. Reno. Among other things, this settlement prohibits unaccompanied children who have crossed the border from being held in federal detention facilities for longer than 20 days. In 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that this 20 day prohibition applies to both accompanied minors (children who came along with family members) and unaccompanied minors.



This has all become relevant now because of the Trump Administration's new "zero tolerance" policy and the family separations that have resulted from it. Many Republicans, including Trump Administration officials, have argued that separating families is necessary because if a parent requests asylum, it usually takes longer than 20 days, so under the Flores settlement either the government has to let both the parent and child go after 20 days (which Republicans deride as "catch and release"), or detain the parent and release the child in which case they're separated. So they're demanding that legislation be passed overturning the Flores settlement and allowing the government to detain parents and children together for longer than 20 days (and demanding various border security measures in return).

Now this is a bit of a red herring, because the "zero tolerance" policy would separate families with or without the Flores settlement. But my question is, does the Trump Administration have the power to undo the Flores settlement on its own? Can the Executive branch break court settlements it's entered into, or does it require legislation to break a court settlement?



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

Answer

It depends exactly what you mean.

Can the Donald Trump administration unilaterally end the Flores consent decree? No. The consent decree is part of an agreement between parties. The federal government is just one of the parties. A modification would require agreement among all involved parties and the approval of the court. There is no evidence that the other parties are interested in removing the consent decree.

Could the Trump administration ask the courts to remove the consent decree? Yes, but there is no guarantee that the courts would do so. The government would have to establish that the consent decree or its side effects are more undesirable than the wrong that the consent decree was created to address. This is generally a high bar, as the government consented to be limited by the decree. It was part of an agreement to settle a suit. Ending or even modifying it would therefore give the other party room to argue that they should no longer have to comply with their responsibilities under the settlement.

It is for this reason that people who advocate an end or modification of the consent decree look to Congress for legislative action. If the underlying law on which the suit proceeded were changed, that would invalidate both sides of the settlement. They could replace it wholesale with a new system, set forth in legislation.

No.It's legal or illegal.




That's the bottom line.





I know that doesn't work for some.....but it is what it is.

It's easy to not be moved by this. All it takes is one easy step.

Step One: Convince oneself that these are less than people.


Problem solved.

Sadly, I agree with your statement.

And I can't believe how many people are able to convince themselves of that.

They're children. No matter where they're from. They're children. There's absolutely nothing they could do to deserve this. It's cruel, inhumane, and beneath us as a country.


Quite frankly, I find it embarrassing that I just saw a CNN Poll that basically said 33% of those polled were in favor of this policy. I can't believe the number could be so high.

How heartless can some people be? This policy doesn't reflect my values. Not the ones I grew up with from my parents. Not the Catholic values they taught me. And not the values I've acquired along the way growing up and traveling the world; some of which taught me that 1st) All humans should be treated with respect. 2nd) Children are children. People are people. We are more alike than we are different.

It's just so damn upsetting. At this point, I can't believe I ever was registered a Republican or ever supported any of these people

Once it was illegal for a slave to step out of line.

Slaves weren't considered citizens of this nation.

Should African Americans still be considered criminals?

Thanks Petey.


I gotta say, in my life, I've been blessed with some pretty smart, moral and principled people. From My Parents/family to the teachers who instructed me, to the friends I grew up with to the professional colleagues I've collaborated with-- some of the best folks that have ever had a place on the planet. Keith is one of those blessings.

He popped up on fb today, with a blog entry he wrote 10 years ago. He dragged it back out of mothballs because of today's prevailing atmosphere and headlines. This seems like the perfect time and place to drop some K-Dawg on'em:

This blog entry is dated 8/31/08... just 65 days before Senator Barack Obama won the 2008 general election for POTUS (facts given solely to establish historical context).

__________________________

Sunday, August 31, 2008
My Dog and Immigration

I am worried that my dog and I have different views on immigration.

I believe that America's strength has always been in our immigrants. They come to America to fulfill the American dream. They have brought a strong work ethic which has been the backbone of the miraculous productivity of America. With each wave of immigration they have also revitalized our culture.

My dog, on the other hand, believes in protecting the perimeter.

I was sitting in our backyard the other morning having coffee. We have a relatively new neighbor behind us. There is a privacy fence between us, so until some other neighbor introduces us I am not sure when or how we will meet. This neighbor has a dog, and the dog came to the other side of that privacy fence, and the two dogs started barking up a storm.

This is a regular event. I call Teddy, our border collie, and he obediently stops barking and comes to my side. But it is obvious that he is serious about protecting our border. I have started referring to him as our furry minuteman.

Teddy's views are based on pure instinct. A xenophobic instinct has served pack animals well in their effort to survive. Its hard to hold his views against him.

Humans are the ultimate social animals. So why do the minutemen's instincts not serve us well in our fight for survival?

A society's strength depends on renewal from the outside...renewal of ideas, culture, and even gene pool. Isolationism has never served America, or any empire, well. Successful empires find unique ways of exporting the empire's vision to the outer reaches of the empire, while embracing the best that those cultures have to offer. The "Pax Romana" or Roman Peace was a 200 year period of relative peace in the Roman Empire. During that time Rome built roads and cities that helped the provinces flourish. Military might alone could not have successfully held such large holdings for so long with such relative peace. It was the mutually beneficial arrangement of local rule, military protection, economic expansion, and cultural exchange that made it work.

America is an empire. We established the empire through an incredible industrial growth, which led to an economic imperialism. The current administration has led America to unilateralism in foreign policy. American corporations, with blessings from the government have changed the underpinning of our economy from production-based to finance-based. Both can have disastrous consequences, and we are seeing the beginnings of those consequences now.

In the past, much of the rest of the world wanted to be like America. Now many people around the world hate us. If we wish to retain our standing in the world we have to regain our position of respect. We will only get there by opening our arms to the world, not shutting them out. Much of America is aghast at how prevalent the spanish language has become in our country. I embrace it. This is exactly the type of cultural infusion that will make our country stronger. In the pack analogy, this is akin to the need to breed outside of the pack to ensure genetic diversity.

I should point out that my dog is an incredibly friendly animal. Three-year-old children can pull his tail or stick their fingers in his mouth without fear. And though he barks at the approach of anyone to our front door, he is incredibly friendly once they have been admitted.

Perhaps our views are not so disparate. He just wants an easy path to legal entry. I can live with that.

But I still wish he wouldn't bark every time the neighbor's dog was on the other side of the fence. And I don't think building a taller fence is the answer.

https://speakaut.blogspot.com/2008/08/my-dog-and-immigration.html


________________


TEN years ago, Petey.
That's why people like Keith are called: "Progressives."

That was a great post you shared.

I'm gonna copy it and send it over to my wife (whom immigrated here from Central America, and at one point was an "illegal immigrant"). She hates the word "illegal immigrant" because of the stigma it carries with some people. But, she's now a Naturalized Citizen and IMO she is a wonderful asset to our society. She's smart, compassionate, caring, and a hard worker. She was a poor girl who came here at the age of 12 and made something of herself with very little adult guidance. With a Masters in Neuro-Cognitive Psychology and a solid job in a field she loves with a major company, she's achieved what might be referred to as the American Dream.

My wife's far more progressive than me. I wouldn't be called a Democrat but I deregistered from the Republican Party recently, and I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 (and don't regret it). Somehow with our political differences, and how opinionated we both are, we are able to make it work.


Anyway, im gonna pass this along. I think she'll like it a lot

I'm pretty sure she will, PeteyD.

Also- please Let her know that she has other Americans like You, Keith, and Clemdawg in her corner.

Let her know that she is backed up by millions upon millions of other Americans who reject this filthy 'protectionist' ideology, and welcome her to become what we all (sh)are.

Great post Clem.

Years of backlash: Obama policy on illegal immigrants' children was also slammed by critics

While the Trump administration is being slammed by critics for its "zero-tolerance" policy of separating children from adults who illegally enter the country, the outcry over the federal government's handling of the sensitive issue of how to handle minors is hardly new.

The Obama administration actually expanded the system of detaining families – typically mothers and their minor children – after a huge surge of Central Americans along the U.S.-Mexican border in 2014. The policy resulted in many minors being detained in various locations, in much-criticized conditions, either with their families or by themselves, if they had crossed the border alone.

Videos and photos at the time showed children in tears, many of them still wearing dirty clothes, in detention facilities where they were kept with their families. The conditions -- which ranged from six adults and children sleeping crammed on two mattresses laid out on concrete floors, to sick minors not receiving medical care -- were documented in many news accounts and reports by human rights groups.


At the time, Obama administration officials argued they had no choice but to implement policies intended to deter families from entering the U.S. illegally. Trump administration officials have made similar arguments.

The difference is the Trump administration is now taking children away from parents who are being prosecuted criminally for offenses that often were once considered civil violations. The children are not being charged with crimes, and are being placed in the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Speaking at the National Sheriffs’ Association conference in New Orleans on Monday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said, "We do not want to separate parents from their children."

But Sessions said word had gotten out before Trump became president that anyone who tried to cross the border with a minor would almost certainly be “given immunity from prosecution.”

“Word got out about this loophole, with predictable results,” Sessions said. “The number of aliens illegally crossing with children between our ports of entry went from 14,000 to 75,000 — that’s a five-fold increase — in just the last four years.”

"We cannot and will not encourage people to bring children by giving them blanket immunity from our laws," Sessions said.

Sen. Ted Cruz introduces 'emergency' bill to keep immigrant families together

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on Monday announced a plan to introduce comprehensive "emergency legislation" designed to end unnecessary separations of illegal immigrant children from their parents.

The bill, an answer to President Trump's call for a congressional solution to the situation, would double the number of immigration judges to 750 and mandate that illegal immigrant families be kept together, unless there has been "aggravated criminal conduct" or threat of harm to the children, according to Cruz's office.

The new legislation would also authorize new temporary shelters for immigrant families, and provide for expedited resolution of asylum claims within 14 days.

Just stop. Defending Trump for intentionally hurting kids is unforgivable and below even you. Wake up.

BUT DOES IT FUND THE WALL? If it does it's DOA. Trump can stop the separations with a phone call. He did this, he can undo this.

Trump aides plan fresh immigration crackdowns before midterms

White House policy adviser Stephen Miller wants to make sure the president can show he’s doing something about border control.

By NANCY COOK 06/18/2018

Top aides to President Donald Trump are planning additional crackdowns on immigration before the November midterms, despite a growing backlash over the administration’s move to separate migrant children from parents at the border.

Senior policy adviser Stephen Miller and a team of officials from the departments of Justice, Labor, Homeland Security and the Office of Management and Budget have been quietly meeting for months to find ways to use executive authority and under-the-radar rule changes to strengthen hard-line U.S. immigration policies, according to interviews with half a dozen current and former administration officials and Republicans close to the White House.

The goal for Miller and his team is to arm Trump with enough data and statistics by early September to show voters that he fulfilled his immigration promises — even without a border wall or any other congressional measure, said one Republican close to the White House.

Among the fresh ideas being circulated: tightening rules on student visas and exchange programs; limiting visas for temporary agricultural workers; making it harder for legal immigrants who have applied for welfare programs to obtain residency; and collecting biometric data from visitors from certain countries.

Details of the ideas are still being worked out, one White House official said.

In one of the most closely watched plans under discussion, DHS has proposed a new rule that former Obama administration officials and immigration advocates worry could be used as an end run around a 1997 court settlement that limits the time migrant children can be kept in government custody. Putting a formal government rule in place, lawyers and advocates say, could in effect supersede the settlement, allowing the administration to get rid of it altogether by dropping the rule a year or two later.

“Once you rescind that regulation, then you go back to being able to do whatever you want and the detention becomes the complete discretion of ICE,” said Leon Fresco, former deputy assistant attorney general for the Office of Immigration Litigation at the Department of Justice. “That is where people think this is headed.”

The president and his top aides have framed the family separation issue as something Democrats could end by signing on to Republican legislation addressing Trump’s priorities, including funding the border wall — even though the separation moves are solely the outgrowth of a Department of Justice decision and not grounded in a particular law.

Miller, who was instrumental to Trump’s early travel ban — which, like the border separations, triggered widespread public outrage and was put into effect without sufficient logistical planning — is among those who see the border crisis as a winning campaign issue.

“That is the fundamental political contrast and political debate that is unfolding right now,” Miller said in an interview with Breitbart News published on May 24. “The Democratic Party is at grave risk of completely marginalizing itself from the American voters by continuing to lean into its absolutist anti-enforcement positions.”

And some in the Trump administration are not inclined to back down from any of its immigration policies because they’ve been planning them for more than a year, according to one White House official and a Republican close to the administration.

On Jan. 25, 2017, Trump signed an executive order that called for the arrest and detention of people caught crossing the border illegally — a broad preview of the Department of Justice’s April “zero-tolerance” decision to refer all border-crossers for federal prosecution, which has led to the separation of children from parents being sent into criminal courts.

Many of the ideas for enacting more aggressive immigration enforcement or tweaking old government rules originated with the White House’s Domestic Policy Council, which Miller effectively runs.

Other participants in the effort include John Walk, a lawyer in the White House counsel’s office and Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ son-in-law; Thomas Homan, the soon-to-retire head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Francis Cissna, director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; Gene Hamilton, a former staffer to Sessions and ex-DHS official, who’s now at the Department of Justice; and officials throughout DHS.

In his Breitbart News interview in May, Miller called for closer examination of H1-B visas, which allow U.S. employers to hire foreign workers for certain specialized jobs.

OMB is currently reviewing a proposal to make it harder for immigrants with visas to obtain permanent residency, including a green card, if they or their children have used government benefits such as Medicaid, food stamps or tax credits. Advocates fear this would keep people from seeking necessary help or medical attention.

The list of proposed rules by DHS, released this spring, offers another road map for the coming changes.

In one interim final rule, DHS would expand and make permanent a pilot program that allows the agency to collect biometric data — such as fingerprints, photographs or retina scans — from certain foreigners at land ports and some airports and seaports, a move that alarms privacy advocates.

“At all of the agencies, there is a steady drip, drip of regulatory and policy changes,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that favors lower levels of immigration. “It is clear that Congress is unlikely to help them in terms of legislative fixes and will probably not even give them much more money, so they are going to use the tools they have and address these problems.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/1...midterms-652246

Bunk. I don't think anybody thinks that.

All one needs to do is understand the difference between legal and illegal entry.

LOL....illegal entry now tied to slavery. Stick to the topic.

Perhaps the emotional direction will get through to some of you.

"The Statue of Liberty is crying today for all those who filled out the paperwork, paid the necessary fees, and did what was legally required under American Law to come to this Country but now must go to the back of the line, behind those who steal their way in."

Please show me the legislation that requires families to be separated. They are trying to pass legislation to end it without there being legislation that requires it.

Trump is trying to play hero again and offer a solution for a problem he created.

Sad. You condone hurting children, that is who YOU ARE.

Sad. You condone hurting children, that is who YOU ARE.

Sad. You condone hurting children, that is who YOU ARE.

The weird guy who worships a creepy senile racist pervert in a wig is here to tell us about the "emotional direction".

A picture of Kramer and the word "ILLEGAL" in all caps and yellow from the Breitbart grandpa memes guy.

You guys still haven't explained how a civil offense dictates this stuff.

This is an old man sundowning.

A ton of people think that.

Read any Diam comment.

You're the one confusing illegal immigration with seeking asylum tho...

That is the reply of a troll with no coherent statement to make.

Here's a ball. Perhaps you'd like to bounce it? Start out behind the barn, playing in the daisies.

The irony in these two lines is incredible.

What laws do you routinely break?

Do you not follow the speed limit? Let’s govenyou a ticket, and then slash your tires to make sure you never speed again.

———————————————

Peen, you know I’m giving an analogy. It remains a valid comparison.

I don’t understand how it can be all about legal vs illegal to you. You ignore soo much more of a complex issue by doing that.

Yeah, it's definitely not racist at all that these guys have a boner for saying "they broke the law, they deserve hell" for civil offenses.

Imagine saying "guy deserves to lose his kid" over a white dude getting a DUI (an actual criminal, not civil offense)

But you know, it’s okay because Obama did this.

"Where was all the liberal outrage when Obama did it? It wasn't on Fox News so it must have not existed!"