DarkWizard12

Doesn't it take more taxpayer dollars to deport them, and in some instances, keep them deported?

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKGrannie Even pro-choicers will say the fetus is alive.

RyrineaHaruno

The Feds are looking in to the unconstitutional round ups of these people. He has been reported repeatedly forced people to sign papers for their deportation WHILE THAT is the people story who failed complaints.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/08/...ints - CNN.com

It says almost 3,000 lawsuits have been filed against Arpaio, from employees to people he has arrested.

The Bs meter for what comes out of Arpaio mouth.

bicycleman

How can it be unconstitutional? These illegals aren't citizens and don't have Constitutional rights.

1069

There was some very public controversy about this in Texas last year, when it came to light that most if not all pregnant prisoners are forced to give birth shackled, in some cases not even let up to use the toilet during labor and forced to lie in their own waste.
Many experts have since weighed in on the matter, and all agree that it is not a physically nor a psychologically healthy way to give birth.
Some jails have since discontinued the practice; activist groups are fighting to have it abolished by law.
Unless the woman is a violent criminal who presents some legitimate risk to health care workers or other patients, any flight risk can be mitigated by allowing her to labor unshackled in a secure, guarded room.
Shackles on non-violent offenders in labor and delivery are dehumanizing and necessary.... and misogynistic, also, in my view.

edit:

after a brief Google search, i see that a lot of states are having issues with it. There are dozens of lawsuits pending, from all over the country:

Shackled in labor: ‘Dehumanizing,’ ‘outrageous’ :: The SouthtownStar :: News Kurth Lampe Press Room

Federal Appeals Court Condemns Shackling Of Pregnant Prisoners In Labor | American Civil Liberties Union

"The shackles caused Nelson cramps and intense pain, as she could not adjust her position during contractions. She was unshackled during delivery, but was immediately re-shackled after the birth of her son. After childbirth, the use of shackles caused her to soil the sheets of her bed because she could not be unshackled quickly enough to get to a bathroom.

"Restraining a pregnant woman can pose undue health risks to the woman and her pregnancy," said Diana Kasdan, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. "Today's decision reaffirms that pregnant women in prison do not lose their right to safe and humane treatment."

Nelson filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against ADOC and several ADOC officials, and a federal district court judge ruled that a jury should decide whether her treatment violated the constitution. A three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, dismissed Nelson's case by ruling that her shackling was not unconstitutional. The ACLU represented Nelson in a subsequent hearing before the full Eighth Circuit Court which found that legal precedent clearly establishes the constitutional protections against shackling pregnant women in labor, paving the way for Nelson's lawsuit to go to trial.

"Shackling pregnant women is not only dangerous it is inhumane," said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. "The importance of this decision cannot be overstated."

The National Perinatal Association, American College of Nurse Midwives, American Medical Women's Association, the Rebecca Project for Human Rights and dozens of other public health and advocacy organizations that are dedicated to protecting the health and rights of women and their children also opposed the prison's shackling of Nelson."

RyrineaHaruno

They were not all Illegals, they had papers. Most of these, completes were from his employes, and the people of that area. They do have, what is known as HUMAN RIGHTS by the Geneva convention, and the UNTIED NATIONS. Basic Humans rights, were violated in this cases, and many other cases this man has been in.


.

I am very aware of this, and many states have outlawed this type of inhuman action. But it will take some time here in Texas to do so.

1069

As the above poster mentioned, one doesn't have to be a citizen to be afforded human rights.

1069

As the above poster mentioned, one doesn't have to be a citizen to be afforded human rights.
This is akin to torture; it is unhealthy for both the mother and the baby.
There is no reason for it. It's a holdover from a time when it was considered appropriate to torture and humiliate prisoners, regardless of whether they were in for murder, or for writing a hot check.

bicycleman

RH, these were your words in post 12: You don't say anything about human rights violations. Human rights aren't the same as the Constitutional rights that an American citizen has; therefore human rights of non-American citizens don't apply to the US Constitution.

The Geneva Convention only applies to captured prisoners of war. I didn't know we were at war with Mexico. When did the war start?

Some were American citizens? Really? What were they doing sneaking back into the US when they could have crossed over legally at the legal checkpoints?

RyrineaHaruno

Still that what the news arterial states, as it is unconstitutional to violets those human right people have here.

bicycleman

Could you cite the part of the Constitution that pertains to the human rights of non-citizens?