• 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!

Is there a law that requires families to be separated at the border?

So...you would rather Trump not enforce a law than Congress change a law.

Trump's job is to enforce the law. The job of Congress is to write the laws.

Why are you giving Congress a pass for not doing their job?

No sitting President has ever separated children from their families and Trump had to actively enforce this policy...People are not okay with this, and if you are then you have some serious issues.
 
So not easy that hundreds of these children will never see their parents again.

That has nothing to do with the decision of the parent(s) to violate the law with their kid(s) in tow I suppose. I guess we should simply change the law such that if the alleged perp has a kid with them then they cannot be arrested.
 
Do you think you would deserve having your child taken away from you and you be locked up and jailed for a misdemeanor first offense?

That's what is happening, and it's unprecedented.

What do you think we should do with the children of the people who are detained from illegally entering the country?

Let them loose in some border town in the US?

Boot them to Mexico?

Or lock them up with the parents?
 
There is no law requiring the DOJ to prosecute first time crossers ( misdemeanors ) as crims, jail them, etc., either. Historically, it was never done. Zero Tolerance, therefore, is a new policy.

DOJ does not enforce all laws. Trump is being sued by NY, and AG stated "for persistent illegal activities pertaining to Trump Foundation", but he is not being indicted. They could indict, if they wanted to, ( it's not settled law ) but they are not.

That is why the answer is no.

There is no law requiring a law to be enforced?

Really?
 
That has nothing to do with the decision of the parent(s) to violate the law with their kid(s) in tow I suppose. I guess we should simply change the law such that if the alleged perp has a kid with them then they cannot be arrested.

They have to enter the country to ask for asylum. Then their kids are ripped away never to be seen again. They're not "alleged perps" they're people. 91% of them are arriving for the first time. They commit a misdemeanor. The Trump regime has criminalised them. Not only that but called them animals and infestation.
 
They have to enter the country to ask for asylum. Then their kids are ripped away never to be seen again. They're not "alleged perps" they're people. 91% of them are arriving for the first time. They commit a misdemeanor. The Trump regime has criminalised them. Not only that but called them animals and infestation.

That (bolded above) is partly true but you left out legally - they have to legally enter the country. Asking at the point of already being illegally inside the country is more like demanding.
 
Do you think you would deserve having your child taken away from you and you be locked up and jailed for a misdemeanor first offense?

That's what is happening, and it's unprecedented.

Its not unprecedented.
Why do you wish to put kids in jail?
 
The parents are deported, and the kids remain in this country, and they are losing track of parents.

Ou can't compare that to other misdemeanors in the USA, where there are relatives for te kids, and easy to keep track of everyone.

What Trump is doing is unecessary, cruel, abusive for the kids in a new country, and many on both right and left are appalled, and there is swelling opposition.

Yes-- thats the problem-- mom and dad get arrested; kids cant stay in jail; difficult to track when sent to family members (or what to do prior to sending them with family members) what to do with 'em.
 
It is a method of deterring illegal immigration and so is a wall - Trump wants folks to choose between those options.

So pretty much he's throwing thousands of kids into detention centers and using them as bartering chips to get his wall.


....interesting.
 
So pretty much he's throwing thousands of kids into detention centers and using them as bartering chips to get his wall.


....interesting.

You got it.

Bartering chip to get the wall that Mexico is paying for, no less.
 
It's a question that's dishonest in and of itself and rather pathetic for a "truth" based website.

The question should be "IS there a law that requires children to be separated from parents if the parent is arrested for an immigration violation".

The whole premise of it's answer is basically "If we didn't enforce the immigration laws then we wouldn't need to separate the families, so no" which really isn't answering what is actually being suggested or argued. Rather, it's just the website putting on their best Trump act by manipulating the children and using them as a political prop to push their larger immigration agenda.

But I forgot the "rules" of our current political climate, which is "It's bad if Trump does it, but it's perfect acceptable and commendable if you do it to stop Trump, because **** Trump!"
 
So pretty much he's throwing thousands of kids into detention centers and using them as bartering chips to get his wall.


....interesting.

That is the way I see it. It is the responsibility of congress to both make law and to apropriate adequate funds for its enforcement. Trump's premise is that the ease of crossing a largely unsecured border is a significant 'root cause' of illegal immigration - it is hard to deny that basic fact.

IMHO, foreign nationals, regardless of legal status, easily able to get US employment is a bigger factor of the attractiveness of illegal immigration into the US. Once past the border region (100 miles or more in) the odds of our meager ICE force (5K agents?) ever catching someone illeaglly here are slim.
 
That is the way I see it. It is the responsibility of congress to both make law and to apropriate adequate funds for its enforcement. Trump's premise is that the ease of crossing a largely unsecured border is a significant 'root cause' of illegal immigration - it is hard to deny that basic fact.

IMHO, foreign nationals, regardless of legal status, easily able to get US employment is a bigger factor of the attractiveness of illegal immigration into the US. Once past the border region (100 miles or more in) the odds of our meager ICE force (5K agents?) ever catching someone illeaglly here are slim.

So maybe, then, it seems that we should focus on other areas to make it less attractive overall, instead of throwing thousands of children into detention centers until Trump gets his wall. Particularly laws punishing companies for the employ of illegal aliens. And is a wall really going to make that great of an impact anyway? There are lots of ways into this country that the "wall" isn't going to stop. Is it even an effective means of curtailing that flow of people into our country? I think we may be barking up the wrong tree on this, and the fact that Trump would use children an political pawns to get his way is rather disgusting.
 
No sitting President has ever separated children from their families

You are either pathetically ill-informed or you are outright lying.

Obama separated children from their families. Congress pass the law...and Bush signed it...that requires children to be separated from their families. The 9th Circuit Court affirmed that children will be separated from their families.

and Trump had to actively enforce this policy...People are not okay with this, and if you are then you have some serious issues.

I agree.

Schumer has some serious issues since he WON'T support Congress dealing with the law that Congress passed that makes this okay.
 
So maybe, then, it seems that we should focus on other areas to make it less attractive overall, instead of throwing thousands of children into detention centers until Trump gets his wall. Particularly laws punishing companies for the employ of illegal aliens. And is a wall really going to make that great of an impact anyway? There are lots of ways into this country that the "wall" isn't going to stop. Is it even an effective means of curtailing that flow of people into our country? I think we may be barking up the wrong tree on this, and the fact that Trump would use children an political pawns to get his way is rather disgusting.

The easiest way to stop the use of illegal labor would be to change the federal income tax code to allow deduction of only the direct labor costs of those with an (annual?) eVerify system code. That code would be present on each tax deductible (to the employer) W-2 or 1099. As it stands now, anyone can get a ITIN without the need of proof of legal authorization to work inside the US and employers can (legally?) employ them.

https://www.americanimmigrationcoun...out-individual-tax-identification-number-itin
 
Last edited:
So...you would rather Trump not enforce a law than Congress change a law.

Trump's job is to enforce the law. The job of Congress is to write the laws.

Why are you giving Congress a pass for not doing their job?

The President, as well governors, mayors, police chiefs etc, have extremely wide latitude in deciding which laws to enforce and how strictly to enforce them. Determining enforcement priorities is one of their jobs. Trump is full of crap laying this on Congress doorstep. He has the power, the authority, the responsibility to decide how laws are enforced.
 
There is no law requiring a law to be enforced?

Really?

Really. It's completely within an executive (President, governor, mayor) to decide which laws to enforce and which to not. One of the prime reasons for that is money. Another is because conditions change in world faster than Congress can react and pass new legislation.
 
The President, as well governors, mayors, police chiefs etc, have extremely wide latitude in deciding which laws to enforce and how strictly to enforce them. Determining enforcement priorities is one of their jobs. Trump is full of crap laying this on Congress doorstep. He has the power, the authority, the responsibility to decide how laws are enforced.

And there you go. He has the power to enforce the laws. He also has the responsibility to enforce the laws.

So why is it his fault when he enforces the law? If it's a law you don't like, then you should be shouting for Congress to change it...not shout at the President for enforcing it.
 
No sitting President has ever separated children from their families and Trump had to actively enforce this policy...People are not okay with this, and if you are then you have some serious issues.
Give it a rest already. You speak for yourself not everyone else. Your not ok with it and there's many others that are not. There are also people who understand why it must be done and support the law being enforced until the law can be rewritten.

And by the way it has happened under other administrations too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
They have to enter the country to ask for asylum. Then their kids are ripped away never to be seen again. They're not "alleged perps" they're people. 91% of them are arriving for the first time. They commit a misdemeanor. The Trump regime has criminalised them. Not only that but called them animals and infestation.

Your lying he did not call them animals

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
There is no law requiring the DOJ to prosecute first time crossers ( misdemeanors ) as crims, jail them, etc., either. Historically, it was never done. Zero Tolerance, therefore, is a new policy.

DOJ does not enforce all laws. Trump is being sued by NY, and AG stated "for persistent illegal activities pertaining to Trump Foundation", but he is not being indicted. They could indict, if they wanted to, ( it's not settled law ) but they are not.

That is why the answer is no.

Hmm... if nobody is prosecuted for a 'first time' offense then what happens on their 'next time'? It would seem that the obvious answer is that 'next time' is then still legally the 'first time'. This is exactly how we got up to 12 million illegal immigrants - eventually they manage not to get caught.
 
We do have a successful electronic bracelet monitoring system in place for normal criminals.

It'd also be easier to simply lock the family up together.

Yadda yadda. Words don't matter. Nobody has explained why the separation tactic is necessary, or even desireable. Oh I take that back. Trump explained that it is bargaining chip.
It’s the law.

Do no like the law... have Congress change it.

Obama had Congress for 2-years... why didn’t they change it?... Instead of opening the border and ignoring the law?

Tell me, do you get to choose the laws you want to obey?
 
So maybe, then, it seems that we should focus on other areas to make it less attractive overall, instead of throwing thousands of children into detention centers until Trump gets his wall. Particularly laws punishing companies for the employ of illegal aliens. And is a wall really going to make that great of an impact anyway? There are lots of ways into this country that the "wall" isn't going to stop. Is it even an effective means of curtailing that flow of people into our country? I think we may be barking up the wrong tree on this, and the fact that Trump would use children an political pawns to get his way is rather disgusting.
Is it more disgusting than encouraging thousands of unaccompanied minors to flood our borders to get more immigrants inside our borders?

Which is more disgusting by your estimation?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
The President, as well governors, mayors, police chiefs etc, have extremely wide latitude in deciding which laws to enforce and how strictly to enforce them. Determining enforcement priorities is one of their jobs. Trump is full of crap laying this on Congress doorstep. He has the power, the authority, the responsibility to decide how laws are enforced.
That sounds like something a dictator would do.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom