13 thoughts on “Can our immigration mess get any stupider?”
First, I thought the rule of thumb was to not believe initial reports and confirm anything the media puts out? If it turns out to be true, in the way it’s being currently reported, then it would be beyond stupid. Yet, at this point, it seems like these are reports about “discussions”…which have no concrete context.
Second, there’s still a legitimate issue to consider relative to this matter. According to government reports, there are 1,727 children who have not been reunited with their families since being separated under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy. Maybe more attention and outrage should be directed to that issue?
One of the risks of breaking the law is being separated from your family.
Said as if the separated children are the ones that made the decision to break the law.
Remember that Trump said that they aren’t sending us their best people. So those kids could very well be rapists, murderers, drug dealers, or who knows what else. So it is totally understandable from his point of view that they deserve all kinds of hurt.
Oh yeah…we know Trump is a paragon of truth…so those kids must deserve to be treated that way…despite not deciding to break US law. I suspect Sheriff Arpaio may have been his mentor.
They probably should have cut their heads off and put the heads on pikes and then set fire to the children. That’s probably the correct punishment for crossing a river without permission, don’t you think?
William, my wife and I met with our immigration lawyer. We talked about sponsoring her son. Lawyer told us that USCIS is currently processing applications from 1996 or 1997. So, likely I’d be dead before they could even get to process the application.
Unemployment rate around here is like 2-2.5%. In reality, full employment. Places are complaining they can’t find workers…there are lots of people willing to do those jobs…but, I guess they’re not Norwegian or Swedish. I wonder what the problem with them is?
QUOTE: They probably should have cut their heads off and put the heads on pikes and then set fire to the children. That’s probably the correct punishment for crossing a river without permission, don’t you think?
Indeed…after all, it could be one of the risks of breaking the law.
QUOTE: Unemployment rate around here is like 2-2.5%. In reality, full employment. Places are complaining they can’t find workers…there are lots of people willing to do those jobs…but, I guess they’re not Norwegian or Swedish. I wonder what the problem with them is?
Likely one of life’s little mysteries …we may never know what the real problem is.
Said as if the parents, who are wholly responsible for the children, made the decision. There is only one group of people at whom fingers should be pointed when this happens, and it is the parents who create the situation.
However, that does not mean there are not things to be said about the conditions under which the separated children are kept. But the FACT of the separation is 100% entirely and inevitably about the parents’ choice to create the situation, which they cannot possibly be ignorant of in advance. When you are imprisoned, your children have to be somewhere else and you cannot be with them. This is not some kind of unique situation.
Indeed, that’s quite apparent. But, who said parents weren’t responsible?
I’m not sure what principle you’re appealing to which isn’t manifestly way too broad.
If it’s unjust to separate children from parents being held for committing crimes — and in this situation it’s pretty clear the crime has been committed, which is why the parents are there in the first place — is the reason that parents can’t be imprisoned, only childless people? Or that the children should also be imprisoned? Or that society is obligated to set up some kind of prison town, kind of like a prison camp, in which families can be imprisoned together, halfway between a “real” prison and a camp? Does that moral obligation for family imprisonment apply only to illegal immigration for some reason, or does it apply to all crimes?
None of this seems reasonable.
QUOTE: I’m not sure what principle you’re appealing to which isn’t manifestly way too broad.
If you’re unsure, it might be helpful to ask for clarification.
Politically it’s a loser. But from a legal point…settling on 10 cents or 15 cents on the dollar… might make legal sense. Say your kids were taken from you and then lost for 7 months or longer or forever. Just how much damage would you be entitled ?
As suspected, the way the story was initially reported was misleading. Seems the alleged “discussions” were about paying “potential settlements” to avoid going to court. Interestingly, if these cases go to court, the US could be on the hook for much larger cost than 450,000 per person. If so, settling might be the most cost effective solution…given the government stands a significant risk of losing these cases.
So, the initial story was “Biden is giving away money to illegal immigrants”. Yet, it misses a critical point…who was responsible for creating the circumstances in which the country could be liable? You guessed it, the Trump Administration. Maybe the Biden Administration should yield to all naysayers, forget settlement, go to court and possibly lose. If the cost ends up being exponentially more than the allegedly 450,000 per person…the Biden Administration can publicly thank the naysayers and the Trump Administration. Of course, at that point, the astronomical cost would be the headline and the naysayers will likely blame the Biden administration for NOT settling. Could our immigration mess get any stupider?
First, I thought the rule of thumb was to not believe initial reports and confirm anything the media puts out? If it turns out to be true, in the way it’s being currently reported, then it would be beyond stupid. Yet, at this point, it seems like these are reports about “discussions”…which have no concrete context.
Second, there’s still a legitimate issue to consider relative to this matter. According to government reports, there are 1,727 children who have not been reunited with their families since being separated under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy. Maybe more attention and outrage should be directed to that issue?
One of the risks of breaking the law is being separated from your family.
Said as if the separated children are the ones that made the decision to break the law.
Remember that Trump said that they aren’t sending us their best people. So those kids could very well be rapists, murderers, drug dealers, or who knows what else. So it is totally understandable from his point of view that they deserve all kinds of hurt.
Oh yeah…we know Trump is a paragon of truth…so those kids must deserve to be treated that way…despite not deciding to break US law. I suspect Sheriff Arpaio may have been his mentor.
They probably should have cut their heads off and put the heads on pikes and then set fire to the children. That’s probably the correct punishment for crossing a river without permission, don’t you think?
William, my wife and I met with our immigration lawyer. We talked about sponsoring her son. Lawyer told us that USCIS is currently processing applications from 1996 or 1997. So, likely I’d be dead before they could even get to process the application.
Unemployment rate around here is like 2-2.5%. In reality, full employment. Places are complaining they can’t find workers…there are lots of people willing to do those jobs…but, I guess they’re not Norwegian or Swedish. I wonder what the problem with them is?
QUOTE: They probably should have cut their heads off and put the heads on pikes and then set fire to the children. That’s probably the correct punishment for crossing a river without permission, don’t you think?
Indeed…after all, it could be one of the risks of breaking the law.
QUOTE: Unemployment rate around here is like 2-2.5%. In reality, full employment. Places are complaining they can’t find workers…there are lots of people willing to do those jobs…but, I guess they’re not Norwegian or Swedish. I wonder what the problem with them is?
Likely one of life’s little mysteries …we may never know what the real problem is.
Said as if the parents, who are wholly responsible for the children, made the decision. There is only one group of people at whom fingers should be pointed when this happens, and it is the parents who create the situation.
However, that does not mean there are not things to be said about the conditions under which the separated children are kept. But the FACT of the separation is 100% entirely and inevitably about the parents’ choice to create the situation, which they cannot possibly be ignorant of in advance. When you are imprisoned, your children have to be somewhere else and you cannot be with them. This is not some kind of unique situation.
Indeed, that’s quite apparent. But, who said parents weren’t responsible?
I’m not sure what principle you’re appealing to which isn’t manifestly way too broad.
If it’s unjust to separate children from parents being held for committing crimes — and in this situation it’s pretty clear the crime has been committed, which is why the parents are there in the first place — is the reason that parents can’t be imprisoned, only childless people? Or that the children should also be imprisoned? Or that society is obligated to set up some kind of prison town, kind of like a prison camp, in which families can be imprisoned together, halfway between a “real” prison and a camp? Does that moral obligation for family imprisonment apply only to illegal immigration for some reason, or does it apply to all crimes?
None of this seems reasonable.
QUOTE: I’m not sure what principle you’re appealing to which isn’t manifestly way too broad.
If you’re unsure, it might be helpful to ask for clarification.
Politically it’s a loser. But from a legal point…settling on 10 cents or 15 cents on the dollar… might make legal sense. Say your kids were taken from you and then lost for 7 months or longer or forever. Just how much damage would you be entitled ?
As suspected, the way the story was initially reported was misleading. Seems the alleged “discussions” were about paying “potential settlements” to avoid going to court. Interestingly, if these cases go to court, the US could be on the hook for much larger cost than 450,000 per person. If so, settling might be the most cost effective solution…given the government stands a significant risk of losing these cases.
So, the initial story was “Biden is giving away money to illegal immigrants”. Yet, it misses a critical point…who was responsible for creating the circumstances in which the country could be liable? You guessed it, the Trump Administration. Maybe the Biden Administration should yield to all naysayers, forget settlement, go to court and possibly lose. If the cost ends up being exponentially more than the allegedly 450,000 per person…the Biden Administration can publicly thank the naysayers and the Trump Administration. Of course, at that point, the astronomical cost would be the headline and the naysayers will likely blame the Biden administration for NOT settling. Could our immigration mess get any stupider?