• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No More Catch-and-Release of Immigrants?

danielpalos said:
And, all of this, After the right wing asked for and got a tax break. Why should we take the right wing seriously, without wartime tax rates for Any alleged, wartime public policies?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the tax break (which benefits billions of citizens) has to do with trying to close an immigration loophole that's allowed many to enter our country illegally.
 
What if...? said:
They probably need bodies in the private prisons.

We pay them for the beds whether they're occupied or not.

It might also be the private prisons don't have enough bodies to perform the for profit work they contract out.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of privately run prisons, and these housing areas might or might not be privately operated, but either way, they appear to be a necessary evil.
 
HowardBThiname said:
That's true. It's kind of perplexing how it's been allowed to go on for so long.
Click to expand...

Illegals have great propaganda value.

As long as they're here they can be pointed to as the reason wages have been stagnant for forty years.

Never mind that profits and the wealth of the upper fraction of a percent went up even faster than before.

If you look at the graphs it wasn't the end of the post ww2 boom.

If it was profits and the wealth of a few wouldn't have skyrocketed.

Everybody would have taken a haircut.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I think that this will never happen. The Trump administration is "lookng into" places to keep many thousands (over 10K/month apply) of asylum seekers instead of handing them work permits and letting them "slip through the cracks". The odds that asylum seekers (many are children) will be kept in a (miliatry?) jail for two to or three years pendng the very slow hearing process are slim to none.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/timing-the-affirmative-asylum-application-process.html
Click to expand...


It appears they can be legally detained for six months (longer, if certain criteria are met), so the onus would be to create quick-court dates within that time frame that could decide the immigrant's status.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zadvydas_v._Davis
 
What if...? said:
Illegals have great propaganda value.

As long as they're here they can be pointed to as the reason wages have been stagnant for forty years.

Never mind that profits and the wealth of the upper fraction of a percent went up even faster than before.

If you look at the graphs it wasn't the end of the post ww2 boom.

If it was profits and the wealth of a few wouldn't have skyrocketed.

Everybody would have taken a haircut.
Click to expand...




Wages aren't really at issue here, anyway. The reason most Americans want to ensure the security of our borders is to prevent ILLEGAL entry. Most citizens are fine with Mexicans being issued work permits as long as they abide by the terms of their permit. Citizens are also fine with immigrants who come to the US lawfully. It's the "illegal" part that most American oppose.
 
HowardBThiname said:
I'm not a fan of privately run prisons, and these housing areas might or might not be privately operated, but either way, they appear to be a necessary evil.
Click to expand...

Evil yes.

Necessary, absolutely not.

Until they go after those who hire illegals they're just lying and scapegoating.

And you are letting them.

Cheering them on

These are ****ing people. Not political tokens.

They love thirty mothers and their children and just want to live a good life.

Greed and the hunger for power makes life untenable where they happened to be born.

And we support the greedy and power hungry over the regular people every time. Unless we can install someone who will make their population more profitable to American interests.

So life sucks all over the planet.

Because it is profitable.
 
danielpalos said:
why so harsh? crossing the border without inspection is a misdemeanor, and you have to catch them in the Act. simply being in the US is a civil offense.
Click to expand...

A "misdemeanor" is not a "civil offense" as you claim. It's a criminal offense, but some prosecutors opt to charge illegals with civil charges. Some face criminal charges.

But, crossing our border illegally can, and is, often met with criminal charges.

1.jpg
 
HowardBThiname said:
Wages aren't really at issue here, anyway. The reason most Americans want to ensure the security of our borders is to prevent ILLEGAL entry. Most citizens are fine with Mexicans being issued work permits as long as they abide by the terms of their permit. Citizens are also fine with immigrants who come to the US lawfully. It's the "illegal" part that most American oppose.
Click to expand...

Nice try.

Its the economic impact that is the framework around which the hate is constructed.

They're taking our jobs and getting welfare money, going to our schools.

THAT is the rhetoric.

NOT some nebulous disapproval of law breaking.
 
HowardBThiname said:
A "misdemeanor" is not a "civil offense" as you claim. It's a criminal offense, but some prosecutors opt to charge illegals with civil charges. Some face criminal charges.

But, crossing our border illegally can, and is, often met with criminal charges.

View attachment 67231335
Click to expand...

Its civil the first time.

Coming back is a criminal violation. Violation of an order of removal.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I think that this will never happen. The Trump administration is "lookng into" places to keep many thousands (over 10K/month apply) of asylum seekers instead of handing them work permits and letting them "slip through the cracks". The odds that asylum seekers (many are children) will be kept in a (miliatry?) jail for two to or three years pendng the very slow hearing process are slim to none.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/timing-the-affirmative-asylum-application-process.html
Click to expand...

Why is there such a long waiting period for these hearings? I keep reading backlogged but why? The entire process sounds completely feckless.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Most of the time that's true, but it might be getting ready to change.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...cute-first-time-border-crossers-idUSKCN1HD2VM
Click to expand...

YEAH! Punish the powerless and protect the powerful.

Lets pay $40,000 a year to imprison these people instead of going after those who hire them, aggressively and finally. With a program that pays for itself and WOULD work.

Still no challenge to this idea from those who would rather hate desperate people.
 
What if...? said:
Evil yes.

Necessary, absolutely not.

Until they go after those who hire illegals they're just lying and scapegoating.

And you are letting them.

Cheering them on

These are ****ing people. Not political tokens.
Click to expand...

Many states, like Oklahoma, have implemented laws to punish those who hire illegals. And, we have a federal identification program designed to help employers know the difference. Unfortunately, illegals have figured out ways to get around the program, so that isn't helping much, either.

They love thirty mothers and their children and just want to live a good life.

Greed and the hunger for power makes life untenable where they happened to be born.

And we support the greedy and power hungry over the regular people every time. Unless we can install someone who will make their population more profitable to American interests.

So life sucks all over the planet.

Because it is profitable.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by "thirty mothers." That sounds odd. Most of us have just one mother.

Life may well be untenable for some of them, but that doesn't give them a pass to violate our rules in coming here. Just because the grass is greener on the other side of the fence does not mean you have a right to cross the fence without permission and then take advantage of the people who created that green grass.
 
tecoyah said:
Special courts need to be created and anyone seeking asylum held until the hearing (within a week), then either ejected or housed in designated facilities until they are legal. The cost of this program would likely be far less than a dysfunctional wall.
Click to expand...

We have a largely unused facility 90 miles off shore. Send the refugee claimers there for processing. Once they are released on American soil we never see them again.

I personally don't care whether proper vetting takes a day, a week, or a year. No one should be released until we know who they are.
 
What if...? said:
Nice try.

Its the economic impact that is the framework around which the hate is constructed.

They're taking our jobs and getting welfare money, going to our schools.

THAT is the rhetoric.

NOT some nebulous disapproval of law breaking.
Click to expand...

It's not the economics at all -- it's the fact that some who live here do not abide by the law. That's really it in a nutshell.
 
What if...? said:
YEAH! Punish the powerless and protect the powerful.

Lets pay $40,000 a year to imprison these people instead of going after those who hire them, aggressively and finally. With a program that pays for itself and WOULD work.

Still no challenge to this idea from those who would rather hate desperate people.
Click to expand...

This isn't about the powerful and the powerless.

It's about upholding the law-- or breaking it.
 
tecoyah said:
Special courts need to be created and anyone seeking asylum held until the hearing (within a week), then either ejected or housed in designated facilities until they are legal. The cost of this program would likely be far less than a dysfunctional wall.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with the special courts remedy -- that would go a long way toward alleviating the problem.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Many states, like Oklahoma, have implemented laws to punish those who hire illegals. And, we have a federal identification program designed to help employers know the difference. Unfortunately, illegals have figured out ways to get around the program, so that isn't helping much, either.



I don't know what you mean by "thirty mothers." That sounds odd. Most of us have just one mother.

Life may well be untenable for some of them, but that doesn't give them a pass to violate our rules in coming here. Just because the grass is greener on the other side of the fence does not mean you have a right to cross the fence without permission and then take advantage of the people who created that green grass.
Click to expand...

It was "their" chikdren. But i think you knew that.

They're not getting around e-verify in any significant numbers.

It just isn't mandatory federally.

Ask yourself why that is.
 
HowardBThiname said:
It's not the economics at all -- it's the fact that some who live here do not abide by the law. That's really it in a nutshell.
Click to expand...

If there was no "harm" nobody would care.

Few of us are that enamored of the "law" itself.

Few obey every traffic law, are perfectly honest on our taxes.

Try again.
 
HowardBThiname said:
This isn't about the powerful and the powerless.

It's about upholding the law-- or breaking it.
Click to expand...

No it is not.

HSBC got busted cold laundering drug money.

A crime we would be imprisoned for.

They received a fine that represented their profits for a short time.

Try again.
 
What if...? said:
It was "their" chikdren. But i think you knew that.

They're not getting around e-verify in any significant numbers.

It just isn't mandatory federally.

Ask yourself why that is.
Click to expand...

It is mandatory everywhere for federal contractors, and many states have also adopted it for other employers. It's not too big of an issue in states that don't see a lot of illegals, though.

States like California have banned the use of e-Verify, and, of course, that's idiotic -- but, we are talking about California after all.
 
What if...? said:
If there was no "harm" nobody would care.

Few of us are that enamored of the "law" itself.

Few obey every traffic law, are perfectly honest on our taxes.

Try again.
Click to expand...

Actually, the vast majority of people will follow the law, studies have shown that. That's why most people oppose illegals -- they aren't abiding by the law.
 
What if...? said:
No it is not.

HSBC got busted cold laundering drug money.

A crime we would be imprisoned for.

They received a fine that represented their profits for a short time.

Try again.
Click to expand...

Be honest, HSBC (a European-owned bank) didn't launder money -- cartel members did through that bank.

And yes, those cartel members are imprisoned when caught. HSBC has changed its policies to prevent that in the future.
 
Sessions has ordered a zero tolerance policy to be followed by prosecutors on the southern borders.

“To those who wish to challenge the Trump administration’s commitment to public safety, national security, and the rule of law, I warn you: illegally entering this country will not be rewarded, but will instead be met with the full prosecutorial powers of the Department of Justice," Sessions said in a statement. He called the “situation” at the southwest border “unacceptable.”


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...er-prosecutors-to-adopt-zero-tolerance-policy

It's about time.
 
HowardBThiname said:
This could actually go a long way toward keeping illegals out of our nation, if true.
Click to expand...



News flash! These people are risking their lives to escape violent gangs that are killing people left and right in their home towns. You really think this crap is going to scare them? You think they can't change tactics? You think that border crossings didn't happen before this policy?

Oh, and did it escape your attention that southern border crossings are actually falling, because economies south of the US border are getting better? And that most of the undocumented immigration are people from Asia, who fly in on a tourist vis and stick around?


The Catch-and-release program has been a thorn in our side. Immigrants are apprehended - they claim they're seeking asylum and given a court date to make a determination, but then they are released, pending that court date. Very few ever show up for their court dates.
Click to expand...
Riiiiiiiight

Like it or not, those individuals do have a legal right to show up at the border and request asylum. We don't have the facilities to handle it, and a few years ago people were freaking out over the idea of immigrants being detained in their community so... good luck building more detention centers.

Oh, and the asylum courts are incredibly backlogged, and Trump hasn't done anything to fix that. So have fun paying to house asylum seekers for a year or two.

While no-shows are high, they aren't 90%. More like 40%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom