Trump's policy on 'detaining' children

[billvon 2,384]

Recently Trump's administration has started to separate parents and children at the border - whether they are illegal aliens or are requesting asylum - and holding the children in detention centers. He started this several months back, requesting that Sessions get tougher on such children as part of a crackdown on illegal immigration.

Last week Sessions announced they would be separating families from their children and detaining the children. Previously one of two things happened. After a "credible fear" hearing (i.e. to see if the potential refugee really had a credible reason to be considered a refugee) the family would be released together on a bond, and the decision announced a few weeks later once the courts came to a decision. This worked fairly well; 80% of families showed up for the hearing voluntarily, and then were either accepted or sent back to their countries.

The other option was that they were sent, as a family, back to the country they came from.

No more. Now children are separated immediately and put in detention centers. They are claiming the right to do this by a law that says that unaccompanied minors are OK to detain indefinitely if the parents are unavailable. How do they claim they are unaccompanied when they are with their parents? Easy; they arrest the parents, put them in the back of a car and voila! the parents are unavailable and the kids are unaccompanied. Then they are put in another van and driven to a detention center.

So far they have detained about 2000 kids in 'detention centers' around the country. They are now building new camps to put kids in; often tent cities set up inside existing detention centers because they don't have enough indoor space. One existing place in Texas that holds about 150 boys ranging from 10 to 17 was toured recently; it was pretty indistinguishable from a jail, with locked doors, 5 kids to a room and kids allowed outside no more than 2 hours a day.

This is true of kids aged zero to 17 years. One 18 month old toddler has been held in a detention center for 2 months while her mother is in jail waiting the outcome of her hearing. Another Honduran mother was breastfeeding her infant while awaiting a hearing in a detention center when ICE came and pulled her baby out of her arms, handcuffed her and took the screaming baby away to the detention center.

The Trump administration has been scrambling to justify this sort of treatment of babies, toddlers and children. So far they have blamed it on:

-the immigrants. If you don't want to lose your kids, don't try to escape to America! Your fault if it happens.
-the Democrats. No explanation, just "the Democrats."
-the Bible. (Seriously.*)

So now we have a new America, one where detaining babies, toddlers and children - and keeping them apart from their parents - is considered the good, lawful thing to do. As Jeff Sessions put it after being asked to justify this policy, this is the "Trump era."

====================================

* - Yes, they really said this. Jeff Sessions claimed that Romans 13 justifies this, which reads “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.” This is a well known passage in American politics; it was also used to:

- argue that the American revolution was anti-Christian

- argue that ending slavery was anti-Christian. “The human law must accord with the Divine Law in order to render obedience a duty! They do not condescend to inform us who is to be the judge of that accordance. They dare not.”

- claim that Trump was empowered by God. Pastor Robert Jeffress: "When it comes to how we should deal with evil doers, the Bible, in the book of Romans, is very clear: God has endowed rulers full power to use whatever means necessary — including war — to stop evil. In the case of North Korea, God has given Trump authority to take out Kim Jong-Un.”

[billvon 2,384]

But in case such kids feel depressed, that no one is there for them, they have murals like this within those detention centers:

[gowlerk 1,903]

Yes, this is troubling. Several religious leaders have come out and called it evil. But just as many will close their eyes and let it pass. True Trump believers will no doubt say that it is very sad but must be done to keep America safe.

I mean really, what can you say? It is reported that Trump pressured Session into this policy. They both know that it is cruel. They say that it will act as a deterrent. And maybe it will for some people. But most decent human beings will understand that even so, it goes too far.

America is a country with a lot of people who turn their backs on those who need health care. The same people will have no problem accepting this.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 18]

You mean you're upset that he's doing the same thing that Obama did? I would have never guessed!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 18]

Surely you did see the fake news story pictures that said this was Trump separating children from their parents and putting them in cages. Then shortly thereafter it was pointed out that that picture was taken during the Obama Administration. Your feigned outrage is getting so ridiculous it's almost laughable, if it wasn't so sad!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,121]

rushmc

You mean you're upset that he's doing the same thing that Obama did? I would have never guessed!

Except that Trump was offered a GOP bill today to stop the separating of children from their parents and Trump refused to sign it.

So, I know that won't mean anything to you, but for the more rational people around, it is hard to blame Obama now.

[rushmc 18]

SkyDekker

***You mean you're upset that he's doing the same thing that Obama did? I would have never guessed!

Except that Trump was offered a GOP bill today to stop the separating of children from their parents and Trump refused to sign it.

So, I know that won't mean anything to you, but for the more rational people around, it is hard to blame Obama now.

Funny how you single out one aspect of the bill and claim that's the main reason. You're as truthful as Comey is!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,384]

>So, I know that won't mean anything to you, but for the more rational people around,
>it is hard to blame Obama now.

Yep. But you need rationality to see that.

For Trumpies it would effectively knock out the one of the legs of the Trump apologia refrain:

1) He didn't do it
2) OK maybe he did but it's not that bad.
3) Obama did it first.

[BIGUN 1,050]

Quote

When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.

The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.

If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, it’s relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, there’s only a very brief separation.

Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.

That’s because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.

SOURCE: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/05/illegal-immigration-enforcement-separating-kids-at-border/

Nice "tug at your heart strings" pics, though.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[BIGUN 1,050]

And, for those who'd like to help out:

Support Advocacy Organizations

RAICES: This Texas-based organization offers free and low-cost legal services to immigrant children and families. Donate here and sign up as a volunteer here.
Pueblo Sin Fronteras: This organization provides humanitarian aid and shelter to migrants on their way to the U.S.

Together Rising: This Virginia-based organization is helping provide legal assistance for 60 migrant children who were separated from their parents and are currently detained in Arizona.

Al Otro Lado: This bi-national organization works providing legal services to deportees and migrants in Tijuana, Mexico, including deportee parents whose children remain in the U.S.

The Florence Project: This Arizona-based organization offers free legal services to men, women, and unaccompanied children in immigration custody.

Texas Civil Rights Project: This organization has been using legal advocacy and litigation to help families separated at the border.

Border Angels: This California-based organization supports San Diego County's immigrant population and focuses on issues related to the U.S.-Mexico border.

Neta:This Texas-based grassroots organization helps asylum seekers on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border.

ProBAR: This project of the American Bar Association is currently supporting over 1,000 un-accom­panied children in detention centers across South Texas.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[Phil1111 908]

There is no lawful or useful purpose for this policy.

[BIGUN 1,050]

There is no lawful or useful purpose for illegal immigration. Why don't they travel to Argentina or some place south? Oh wait... They have the same issue with illegal aliens and have enacted the same policies as Trump. In July of 2017; Argentina had hit a 17 percent unemployment rate, which led the government to step up the enforcement of immigration laws.

Why not Bolivia, or Peru, or Paraguay? No. That won't work either. That's where they're emigrating from - to Argentina. Why is it the Korean-owned textile factories hire illegal Bolivian and Paraguayan workers for as little as $300 a month for a 60-hour week in Argentina. Because they can.

A more systemic approach would be for those countries' leadership to reduce crime, improve their own living conditions & wages.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[billvon 2,384]

Quote

When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.

Correct; that's what happens now. Previously they (child and parent) were released on bond until their hearing, at which point they were granted asylum or returned home.

Now Trump has changed that policy to ensure that parents are separated from their children.

Quote

Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.

Again, not if they are released on bond.

But that's a great way to terrify a parent.

"Hey, sorry your husband was killed and you were raped in Guatemala. So you can stay here and see if we'll grant you asylum. But if you do that your kids are going to be in detention for a long, long time. You might not see them before next Christmas. But we'll drop you right back in Guatemala - tomorrow - with your kids if you want!

So do what you want. Just hope your kids are OK in detention."

You'd make a good government lawyer.

[ControlFreak 0]

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Emma Lazarus

Alcohol never really solved any problems. But then again, neither did milk.

[BIGUN 1,050]

Quote

Now Trump has changed that policy to ensure that parents are separated from their children.

Trump didn't change the policy. He enforced the the Flores Agreement that Clinton signed. Bush & Obama didn't peel back the layers and just took the news pics of children "being ripped from their parents arms" to do nothing until illegal immigration was out of control.

Separating the children also helps the HHS & ORR vet children so they;re not turned back to human trafficker. Let's not be all up in arms about a process that also helps the children. Is it perfect? No. If the law were followed - how many times do we hear about this with legal immigrants?

So; you know me enough to know that I'm always receptive to new ways. I haven't seen or heard of any better way - just that this is bad. If your sink is overflowing; do you try to capture the water running thru your fingers or do you try and shut the water off at the supply line?

EDIT: Evidently, both my grammar and spelling sucks on Saturdays.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[BIGUN 1,050]

ControlFreak

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Emma Lazarus

OH, I see. Well, let's see what was going on "around" that poem at the same time:

Immigration Act of August 3, 1882 (22 Statutes-at-Large 214)

First general immigration law, established a system of central control of immigration through State Boards under the Secretary of the Treasury. Provisions:

Broadened restrictions on immigration by adding to the classes of inadmissible aliens, including persons likely to become a public charge.
Introduced a tax of 50 cents on each passenger brought to the United States.

Foran Alien Contract Labor Act of February 26, 1885 (23 Statutes-at-Large 332)

The first “Contract Labor Law,” made it unlawful to import aliens into the United States under contract for the performance of labor or services of any kind. Exceptions were for aliens temporarily in the United States engaging other foreigners as secretaries, servants, or domestics; actors, artists, lecturers, and domestic servants; and skilled aliens working in an industry not yet established in the United States. Amended in February 1887 (24 Statutes-at-Large 414) to render it enforceable by charging the Secretary of the Treasury with enforcement of the act and providing that prohibited persons be sent back on arrival.

Payson Act of March 3, 1887 (24 Statutes-at-Large 476)

Restricted the ownership of real estate in the United States to American citizens and those who have lawfully declared their intentions to become citizens, with certain specific exceptions.

Act of October 19, 1888 (25 Statutes-at-Large 566)

First measure since the Aliens Act of 1798 to provide for expulsion of aliens—directed the return within one year after entry of any immigrant who had landed in violation of the contract labor laws (see acts of February 26, 1885 and February 23, 1887).

Immigration Act of March 3, 1891 (26 Statutes-at-Large 1084)

The first comprehensive law for national control of immigration. Provisions:

Established the Bureau of Immigration under the Treasury Department to administer all immigration laws (except the Chinese Exclusion Act).
Further restricted immigration by adding to the inadmissible classes persons likely to become public charges, persons suffering from certain contagious disease, felons, persons convicted of other crimes or misdemeanors, polygamists, aliens assisted by others by payment of passage, and forbade the encouragement of immigration by means of advertisement.
Allowed the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe rules for inspection along the borders of Canada, British Columbia, and Mexico so as not to obstruct or unnecessarily delay, impede, or annoy passengers in ordinary travel between these countries and the United States.
Directed the deportation of any alien who entered the United States unlawfully.
Act of March 3, 1893 (27 Statutes-at-Large 570)

Provisions:

Added to the reporting requirements regarding alien arrivals to the United States such new information as occupation, marital status, ability to read or write, amount of money in possession, and facts regarding physical and mental health. This information was needed to determine admissibility according to the expanding list of grounds for exclusion. Established boards of special inquiry to decide the admissibility of alien arrivals.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[billvon 2,384]

>Trump didn't change the policy.

Yes, he did. The administraion has been considering it for over a year. Last month he asked Sessions to make the change official. Sessions announced the change last week.

Up until recently, it was under the discretion of INS offices whether to arrest and detain the parents as criminals. Most often, when the person was applying for refugee status, the INS office would hold a hearing and then release them and their children on bond while their case was being decided.

Now there is a "zero tolerance" policy. Everyone is arrested as a criminal and separated from their children.

Here's the timeline -

March 2017 - DHS says they are considering separating parents from children as a default. When asked, DHS secretary said - “Yes I’m considering, in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network. I am considering exactly that.”

May 2018 - Sessions says " “If you cross this border unlawfully, then we will prosecute you. It’s that simple."

Pretty straightforward.

[BIGUN 1,050]

The current policy resulted from a decision made in April by Attorney General Jeff Sessions to prosecute all migrants who cross the border, including those with young children.

Those migrants had avoided detention during the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Because of a 1997 court settlement that bars children from being imprisoned with parents, Justice Department officials now say they have no choice but to isolate the children.

Go check out Reno v. Flores - even the left side of the SCOTUS has held this up.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[billvon 2,384]

>The current policy resulted from a decision made in April by Attorney General Jeff
>Sessions to prosecute all migrants who cross the border, including those with young
>children.

Given that Trump just suggested that he will end the policy if the democrats give him what he wants politically - that argument just doesn't fly. Although he makes more sense as a scapegoat than democrats.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

BIGUN

***Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
MOTHER OF EXILES. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Emma Lazarus

OH, I see. Well, let's see what was going on "around" that poem at the same time:

Immigration Act of August 3, 1882 (22 Statutes-at-Large 214)

First general immigration law, established a system of central control of immigration through State Boards under the Secretary of the Treasury. Provisions:

Broadened restrictions on immigration by adding to the classes of inadmissible aliens, including persons likely to become a public charge.
Introduced a tax of 50 cents on each passenger brought to the United States.

Foran Alien Contract Labor Act of February 26, 1885 (23 Statutes-at-Large 332)

The first “Contract Labor Law,” made it unlawful to import aliens into the United States under contract for the performance of labor or services of any kind. Exceptions were for aliens temporarily in the United States engaging other foreigners as secretaries, servants, or domestics; actors, artists, lecturers, and domestic servants; and skilled aliens working in an industry not yet established in the United States. Amended in February 1887 (24 Statutes-at-Large 414) to render it enforceable by charging the Secretary of the Treasury with enforcement of the act and providing that prohibited persons be sent back on arrival.

Payson Act of March 3, 1887 (24 Statutes-at-Large 476)

Restricted the ownership of real estate in the United States to American citizens and those who have lawfully declared their intentions to become citizens, with certain specific exceptions.

Act of October 19, 1888 (25 Statutes-at-Large 566)

First measure since the Aliens Act of 1798 to provide for expulsion of aliens—directed the return within one year after entry of any immigrant who had landed in violation of the contract labor laws (see acts of February 26, 1885 and February 23, 1887).

Immigration Act of March 3, 1891 (26 Statutes-at-Large 1084)

The first comprehensive law for national control of immigration. Provisions:

Established the Bureau of Immigration under the Treasury Department to administer all immigration laws (except the Chinese Exclusion Act).
Further restricted immigration by adding to the inadmissible classes persons likely to become public charges, persons suffering from certain contagious disease, felons, persons convicted of other crimes or misdemeanors, polygamists, aliens assisted by others by payment of passage, and forbade the encouragement of immigration by means of advertisement.
Allowed the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe rules for inspection along the borders of Canada, British Columbia, and Mexico so as not to obstruct or unnecessarily delay, impede, or annoy passengers in ordinary travel between these countries and the United States.
Directed the deportation of any alien who entered the United States unlawfully.
Act of March 3, 1893 (27 Statutes-at-Large 570)

Provisions:

Added to the reporting requirements regarding alien arrivals to the United States such new information as occupation, marital status, ability to read or write, amount of money in possession, and facts regarding physical and mental health. This information was needed to determine admissibility according to the expanding list of grounds for exclusion. Established boards of special inquiry to decide the admissibility of alien arrivals.

Irrespective of the conditions or circumstances everyone should be appalled at the idea of children being taken from their parents arms and then locked away.

Quoting poetry or immigration acts, while enlightened and learned, get us nowhere.

This is not a local border problem anymore than National Healthcare is health problem. The problem is wealth distribution both nationally and globally. National lines drawn in the sand, border walls or even gated communities mean nothing to those who fear for their personal safety or their families welfare.

Under stress people migrate just as our forefathers did out of Africa a quarter million years ago. If you or your family are being shot at, oppressed or starved you look for another place to live. It's that simple.

Of course, Guatemalans aren't migrating in droves to Argentina any more than Bedouins are migrating from the Sahara to the Gobi. If they go at all it is to someplace they heard was better. And even knowing upfront that where they go will result in the host nation putting some of their kids in hell holes won't change their will. After all, they don't catch everyone and it's always the other guy.

Maybe as a species we simply can not do any better than walling ourselves in whilst ignoring the plight of our fellows; one quick look around the world and it sure seems that's the prevailing view.

No, I don't have a solution at hand and I am not taking in a refugee family while I think it through. I simply believe that at it's core the problem is not any one nations immigration laws or the enforcement thereof. I believe it's a big, slow moving problem that can only be solved by looking outside our borders and beyond our lifetimes.

But we won't. We won't because we are predators by nature, by and large, and that's probably because that's the only way it works. After all, the Federation fought the warlike (and homogenous) Klingons and the Romulans and the Borg but they never fought the Orchid People in the Dandelion quadrant, as I recall.

We, on the other hand, have the honor of protecting our Federation, and way of life, from poor Hondurans. So, if separating kids from their moms and dads, useless, cruel and counter productive though it may be, is our only tool then so be it, right? After all, we have bible verses, and Breitbart on our side.

SCOTUS mit uns.

[DanG 1]

Flores says children can't be detained with adults. It doesn't say that everyone crossing the border must be detained. That's what Trump changed. He's using Flores as an excuse to make detention as painful for these people as possible. It may not be illegal, but it is certainly immoral.

And no, Obama didn't do that.

- Dan G

[BIGUN 1,050]

Quote

... and I am not taking in a refugee family ...

Think about that.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[BIGUN 1,050]

DanG

Flores says children can't be detained with adults. It doesn't say that everyone crossing the border must be detained. That's what Trump changed. He's using Flores as an excuse to make detention as painful for these people as possible. It may not be illegal, but it is certainly immoral.

And no, Obama didn't do that.

Partially true.

You're correct that Flores says children can't be detained with adults - and, that is for their protection. The HHS & ORR's job is to ensure they are actually the parents and it doesn't take long. Don't like the time it takes? Don't come.

Quote

It doesn't say that everyone crossing the border must be detained.

You're correct that the law doesn't say, "Must." But, they, "Can." And, after [edit] 60,000 40,000 aliens go through the process of getting a bond until their hearing date - only to never show up for the hearing . . . It becomes a "must" for the rest that show up. [edit] 60,000 40,000 acts of immorality vs. upholding the law.

As recently as February of this year. SCOTUS held that the law did not require hearings. Jennings v. Rodriquez (February 27th 2018) https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/17 It's a .pdf download.

It was the same thing Obama did - but, there was no moral outrage then. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/remember-those-brutal-immigrant-detention-centers-liberals-tried-to-pin-on-trump-it-was-all-obama

And, my opinion as with most things; whether it be immigration or tariffs on China can be summarized in the last sentence of the article - "Start by caring more about your country than your party."

I don't agree with everything Trump does from a process perspective. But, I do agree with the high-level goals for the nation. For a long time; I have been concerned with the U.S. becoming a more "effeminate" society (Culture's Consequences by Geert Hofstede PhD) reliant on other countries for its sustenance and becoming an overly "indentured" country. In my opinion, "Make America Great Again" has meant to a time when these United States were the pinnacle of respect and prosperity that was the envy of the world. I have been concerned since January of 1991 when Bush identified the opportunity to build a "New World Order."

But, I ramble.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[gowlerk 1,903]

Biggie, we all understand that it's legal. It is clearly legal. But it has not been done in the past. Because it is wrong. MAGA? Is that what it means to be great? Like most of the nativist policies of Trump it is about Americans becoming fearful and looking inward. These are not characteristics of a great nation.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[BIGUN 1,050]

But, that's just it. It has been done in the past. Just not so-on-the-radar because it was those other than Trump. But, I get it.

Do I like the process even within the scope of the law? No. What's going on with DACA? No. What's going on with US Veterans being deported? No. There is a better solution.

But at the same time - we have a 2.5 million illegal alien problem. Canada? Has a 200,000 illegal alien problem. What would happen if Canada work up tomorrow to having 2.5 million illegal aliens on their front doorstep? Welcome them with cookies and milk. I don't think so.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.