So who and how many from those hostile countries to we have to kill to stop them from being hostile? Do we do it blitzkrieg style or Gaza style until all the hostiles are gone? Do you have the reeducation camps ready to ensure whatever resulted in the countries becoming hostile in the first place can’t happen again?
I don’t know about you, but this is starting to sound like a lot more work (and maybe a lot more death) than just dealing with borders.
“illegal immigrants” (whatever that’s supposed to mean)
Attempting to violate constitutional law through executive order is vile, and all law enforcement should be in uniform and identifiable (and held to higher standards than non-law enforcement) so I am completely against everything Trump is doing, but let’s not pretend illegal immigration isn’t a thing as a knee jerk in the other direction.
Illegal immigration is crossing the border without legally passing through customs to establish a legal right to be in that country, or overstaying your legal right to be there (Visa). People who are in a country illegally are rightfully subject to deportation back to wherever they are citizens. Pretending otherwise just helps more moderate people buy into the propaganda and let’s the ratchet work more easily.
We are all rightly complaining about Trump violating the law, so how is it also not a problem for people to violate immigration law? This is the problem I have that leaves me stuck in the middle.
Sanctuary cities that flaunt immigration law are, while not just as bad, still bad. When Trump (lies) and says he only wants to target people here illegally who commit crimes, and a sanctuary city prevents law enforcement cooperation with ICE, that just adds to the narrative of felon illegal immigrants and then you have ICE going after those people at home and grabbing everyone around them as by catch. This only helps the Trump.
Certainly, it is perfectly valid to just want ideal outcomes for all individuals regardless of the system. You are also not required in any way to discuss your viewpoints with anyone. I will thank you for your time up to this point, and wish you a wonderful day.
That makes the conservative talking point of anchor babies a real thing. Make your way onto US soil to give birth by any means necessary, and suddenly you are granted a pathway to citizenship and a guaranteed legal status from day one?
That kind of massive shortcut of the immigration system would break the system. Birth tourism would skyrocket along with all other forms of illegal immigration. There is a reason no country on earth allows that.
Do you not think that doing so would be a huge incentive driving illegal border crossings or visa overstays to take such a shortcut? Do you think that creating a parallel alternative immigration pathway such as that is a good thing?
I certainly disagree with how the trump administration is operating, and fuck anyone who says non-citizens don’t have a right to a day in court, but how can carving out loopholes and shortcuts be good for the long term health of the system? Unless crippling the system to the point of implosion to cause a reform is the goal, but I find that to be too close to the conservatives crippling other public sector programs to cause private sector reform to profit off it.
This is a bit of a catch 22, the child wasn’t deported her parents were. I don’t even doubt that ICE was lazy and didn’t make sure the mother knew what was happening and every option available to their child. This is a shit show how Trump is handling mass deportation instead of expanding the immigration courts to process the backlogs and get everyone their constitutionally protected day in court. ICE has been done a disservice by Trump and deserves a lot of the shit the department is getting.
The child is a US citizen, 100%, but that doesn’t offer protection from prosecution to their parents. A 2 year old who’s US citizen parent or parents commit a crime will have their parent/parents taken away when put in jail, and then be given into the custody of a relative or taken into foster care. This is not unique to immigration.
Would you rather the child have been unilaterally taken from their mother and placed into US foster care when no family was identified that could take them in the US? Then we are separating children from their families, which is fucked up.
There historically have been limited stays of deportation available for illegal immigrant parents of US citizen children, but this administration is obviously being extremely tough on those. If you want to give automatic deportation immunity to anyone who has a child on US soil until those children are legally adults, you turn “anchor babies” from being basically a myth into an actual reality.
There is no perfect solution for any of this.
I’ll take this whole section generously as a nebulous “you” and not you directly calling me either “one of them or a useful hateful racist”.
Two things can both be wrong, it’s not a zero sum game between open borders and fascist police states. Treating it as such caused the Democrats to lose some amount of support base, and did contribute to Trump getting reelected. The increase in Trump support from Hispanics and other immigrant groups was partially from resentment with treating illegal immigration as equivalent to legal immigration.
Yes, the poem on the Statue of Liberty is wonderful, and should still apply as the US is and should remain a nation of immigrants. That is not the same as having open borders for anyone and everyone, and it never has been.