Page 125 of 196 FirstFirst ... 2575115123124125126127135175 ... LastLast
Results 1,241 to 1,250 of 1952

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #1241
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    I didn't say his hands were tied in any capacity other than by the Flores settlement. I think it's beyond flimsy to suggest that it has never enforced like this before, in fact, it's absolutely false. It hasn't been enforced to this extent before (zero tolerance), but again, illegal immigration is against the law.

  2. #1242
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,966
    So are a lot of things. Can you name another civil offense that's treated with "zero tolerance"?
    Your boos mean nothing. I've seen what makes you cheer!

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  3. #1243
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    So are a lot of things. Can you name another civil offense that's treated with "zero tolerance"?
    That's a loaded question. Illegal entry is a criminal offense; living as an undocumented immigrant in the US is civil. It was the initial abiguity that led to Arizona vs the US. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/387/

  4. #1244
    Irony - I think we are talking past each other. There are grey areas in the law that allow the executive to treat the matter as a criminal or a civil matter. Prior to Obama, people caught at the border were simply turned around. Were there criminal trials sometimes? Yes, but it varied. The executive branch has discretion on how to enforce and uphold the laws to some degree.

    Trump as a policy has chosen a stricter method of enforcement, as he is allowed to under the law, to deter immigration. He can choose a different method as presidents before him did. He has some discretion.

  5. #1245
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Ok, so if you acknowledge that since there were criminal trials sometimes, that the "evil" mechanism that separates families and makes babies represent themselves in court predates Trump. To say otherwise is factually incorrect because I have shown that the criminal law and the Flores settlement agreement are the mechanism by which the "evil" occurs. We can then move to the broader discussion on how to change those policies.

    We can talk about potentially compelling reasons why Trump needed to take action. I think allowing the states to enforce immigration is a slippery slope, which is why Arizona vs the US is important.

    There's complexity in nuance and if you can rationalize an argument (whether you agree or not) then you can't attribute motive explicitly to racism or xenophobia which not a single one of you that identify as liberal have acknowledged. You instead let Gordon continue to spout that nonsense and his only criticism comes from those with conservative leanings. Beyond that, my personal opinion is that Trump opened a Pandora's box that was better left alone. I don't think there is an immigration crisis.

  6. #1246
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    Ok, so if you acknowledge that since there were criminal trials sometimes, that the "evil" mechanism that separates families and makes babies represent themselves in court predates Trump. To say otherwise is factually incorrect because I have shown that the criminal law and the Flores settlement agreement are the mechanism by which the "evil" occurs. We can then move to the broader discussion on how to change those policies.

    We can talk about potentially compelling reasons why Trump needed to take action. I think allowing the states to enforce immigration is a slippery slope, which is why Arizona vs the US is important.

    There's complexity in nuance and if you can rationalize an argument (whether you agree or not) then you can't attribute motive explicitly to racism or xenophobia which not a single one of you that identify as liberal have acknowledged. You instead let Gordon continue to spout that nonsense and his only criticism comes from those with conservative leanings. Beyond that, my personal opinion is that Trump opened a Pandora's box that was better left alone. I don't think there is an immigration crisis.
    Let's take a step back. The executive branch has the discretion on whether to charge someone under the civil code, charge someone under the criminal code, or simply allow them to volunterarily deport. They may exercise this discretion because of the sheer case load this would create. Here is a few good articles about this Washington Post, migration policy, Penn State Law Journal.

    Given that the executive has discretion, how he exercises that discretion is important. If someone comes in with a child, the executive can exercise their discretion to try them under a civil proceeding rather than a criminal proceeding. Under Bush and Obama, there was an aggressive policy to criminally prosecute people for the misdemeanor of illegal entry and the felony of illegal reentry. However, the government generally did not prosecute parents traveling with their children for prosecution, and often declined to refer first-time border-crossers or asylum-seekers for prosecution. This discretion is fundamentally different from Obama's use of prosecutorial discretion under DACA and DAPA, which in my opinion were unconstitutional. You may disagree with Gorden's language, but his point that Trump has discretion on how to enforce the laws is accurate.

  7. #1247
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    If we're taking a step back, then please refer to my post about variable reinforcement undermining authority. If anything though, discretionary element of application opens the door for bias. Not to mention, the actual policy Trump issued by way of executive order aimed to remove the "evil" in a flawed system. Since we can arrive at the same outcome with rationalism, we can reject the sensationalist notion that it "all comes back to racism." If you don't agree then the conversation goes nowhere because you are rejecting facts.

  8. #1248
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    I do see your point d0c, my issues is with Gordon's factual and contextual claims.

    Obama was prosecuting the law in exactly this manner. He wanted it as a deterrent to families who are crossing. A strong line so fewer would risk their children. He crossed the line with detention time due to Flores and had to release some familes.

    Trump did not change anything with his presidency nor change the law. His action was to increase judges and facilities because some families were slipping through due to Flores. And the kids were separated due to Flores.

    By increasing judges he could accomplish a 100% processing rate.

    By having more judges processing the kids would spend less time separated or removed from there parents. By increasing facilities the kids would less likely have to go into foster care.

    Both of these result in significantly faster application and approvals for asylum and reuniting families while also reducing the time separated. That means less time separated. Due to blowback, it is requested and now in the California courts to sort out Flores.

    Yes, he could change the processing to catch and release. But he doesn't have to. Nor is it wrong to leave it the way it is. Not enforcing the law results in more families risking their kids to illegally come here. Enforcement is the deterrent as Obama said.

    To Gordon's claim that Trump made this happen, bullshit. There has been no change in policy, just an improvement on processing and an expansion of facilities to hold more kids for a shorter time instead of placing them in what maybe long term foster care.

    There is no new law or change in detainment systems or change in how normal illegal or asylum seekers are considered or treated in Obama vs Trump. That is abundantly clear to everybody but Koolaid Boy.

    The difference is entirely in the ability to process. And Trumps improvement results in lower separation time and less kids being put into out hit and miss ( or often hit and hit and hit) foster care system.

    Left to the previous setup kids would stay longer in detention. Every kid was separated. Now we have shorter stay times, less foster care, and no families falling through the Flores.

    This is better. It isn't the turn away system some of you might prefer, but is the same system as under Obama but with better processing and shorter separation times.

  9. #1249
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,966
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    If we're taking a step back, then please refer to my post about variable reinforcement undermining authority. If anything though, discretionary element of application opens the door for bias.
    Then you should agree that all laws should be applied with zero tolerance, and it is peculiar that this one set has been singled out.

    Maybe even politically motivated to exploit racial animus and "stranger danger" for favor at the polls.
    Last edited by PBSteve; 11-03-2018 at 01:03 PM.
    Your boos mean nothing. I've seen what makes you cheer!

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  10. #1250
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Maybe a bit more simple:

    There is actually less evil in the trump administration than Obama on this situation.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •