Now that response made more sense. Thanks.
Sorry let me clarify. The statute you cite is a criminal statute. Prior to trump, the vast majority immigrants caught attempting to cross the border illegally were put into removal proceedings, an administrative proceeding conducted by an administrative law judge. They were not charged with a crime under Federal law, but simply removed from the country under this process. As they were not charged with a crime, issues of due process are a little different. This process accelerated under Obama because anyone caught at the border would be thrown into proceedings immediately. Prior to that most immigrants caught at the boarder would simply be turned around rather than taken through the administrative proceeding.
Regarding detainment. An ankle monitor is cheaper than having to confine someone. The real reason you confine someone at the border is to discourage them from pursuing an asylum case. If you claim asylum you get a hearing, then a rehearing, then an appeal to the circuit court. This process can continue several times and can take several years. Continuing to pursue your case looks a lot less hopeful when you are looking at the prospect of years in jail awaiting your outcome.
Kinetic Paintball
Owner
Now that response made more sense. Thanks.
Last edited by pbjosh; 11-02-2018 at 04:24 PM.
Josh Coray
J4 Paintball
Lead Design
www.j4paintball.com
you multiple choice answers are all wrong. nice try.
the issue is trump changing the enforcement to be far harsher in every way than obama. what is so difficult about this?
how is this, in any way confusing? you already posted the policy changes confirming my point. this is bordering on too obtuse to be honest.
also, the US military admits that the caravan is not a threat and the deployment is a political stunt.
also, the largest threat? right wing militias stealing from the US military ..... lol
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/...Wf0bMlw4MfESGE
Last edited by cockerpunk; 11-02-2018 at 04:30 PM.
social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.
I think "enforcement" is the wrong term here. These people arriving at the border are claiming asylum, something they have a legal right to do under U.S. and international law. I'd say Trump and Obama "applied" the law differently.
Let's be honest though, the sad fact is if you are really running away from violence or poverty, sitting in a jail cell can be a hell of an improvement.
Kinetic Paintball
Owner
No, quite literally the memorandum said "On April 11, 2017, I issued a memorandum to all federal prosecutors entitled "Renewed Commitment to Criminal Immigration Enforcement." So, the laws were on the book and Obama chose to NOT apply the law. Do not enforce isn't a viable policy.
I understand, when we speed we want the cop to give us a verbal warning, but if we were, in fact speeding, then we were violating the law and are subject to enforcement. It doesn't make the cop a jerk. You were the one speeding.
Last edited by ironyusa; 11-02-2018 at 05:01 PM.
in this post you admit that obama and trump have enforced the law differently.
ergo, for the past .... 10 pages? you've been full of shit.
im not surprised in the least. you knew it all along.
so, now that we have established that indeed, trump changed what he was doing to folks who came over the boarder compared to obama, in a much much much harsher way .... are we ready to answer my litmus test question yet?
social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.
Under this view, no president has enforced the laws prior to Trump then...prior to Trump presidents treated immigration violations as civil matters. The U.S. Code allows for this. It?s not as straight forward as you seem to think it is and relying on a Trump order is the last thing I?d point to for support.
Last edited by d0cwho; 11-02-2018 at 06:43 PM.
That's not my "view." The same thing happened under Obama albeit in lower numbers. Variable reinforcement creates an obfuscation of authority and undermines the effectiveness of policy. Trump isn't locking up random people. He's chosing a strict enforcement of existing policy which is a far more effective strategy whether you like the outcome or not. The "zero tolerance" enforcement is also being applied equally, so there is no discriminatory bias present. So, the policy isn't racist. Illegal immigration is... ILLEGAL. So, if anything the parents are evil for subjecting their kids to trauma.
I'm really not advocating for Trump, but blaming someone for enforcing the rules is idiotic. Don't like it? Change the rules (which is what Trump wants).
Claiming his hands are tied by the law while enforcing it in a way it never has been before (and few if any other laws are) is pretty flimsy, to be generous.
Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts
I work for the company building the Paragon