Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-31-2018, 05:03 PM
don't mind me don't mind me is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: somewhere over there
Posts: 1,111
Dumping asylum seekers: What's the admin's justification?

Honest question. If the President sees migrants as such an imminent and dangerous threat to our safety, why are they bussed to city parks and bus stations with no notice to the cities and aid organizations? Isn't that just asking them to disappear? How much more "open" can the borders be?

Apologies for the clear POV on this issue, but I haven't seen anything from officials addressing the action at all.

Last edited by don't mind me; 12-31-2018 at 05:04 PM.
  #2  
Old 12-31-2018, 05:25 PM
XT's Avatar
XT XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by don't mind me View Post
Honest question. If the President sees migrants as such an imminent and dangerous threat to our safety, why are they bussed to city parks and bus stations with no notice to the cities and aid organizations? Isn't that just asking them to disappear? How much more "open" can the borders be?

Apologies for the clear POV on this issue, but I haven't seen anything from officials addressing the action at all.
Just as a point of clarification, I disagree with 'the admin's' position on this, however, the President et al doesn't see 'migrants' as a threat, they see illegal immigrants as a threat...those are two totally different things. Personally, I think we need to fix our immigration policies, but you are mischaracterizing the other side. We had must about as many LEGAL immigrants as ever this past year (I think it was down a bit, probably because of Trump but not directly...folks probably wary of coming to the US with an idiot like him in charge. We still had well over a million legal immigrants in 2018).

As far as your question goes, I'd need some context. Do you have a link or cite describing what you are getting at? You seem to be saying that Trump et al are having ICE(?) pick up illegals then dump them...somewhere? I haven't heard of this happening.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!

Last edited by XT; 12-31-2018 at 05:27 PM.
  #3  
Old 12-31-2018, 05:46 PM
Der Trihs's Avatar
Der Trihs Der Trihs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 38,664
His only interest in the matter is in punishing brown people; that's the only justification he needs. There's no real danger to the US, and neither he nor his subordinates actually care if they are refugees, immigrants, or citizens of the US; just their skin color.

Also, refugees aren't migrants.
  #4  
Old 12-31-2018, 06:17 PM
don't mind me don't mind me is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: somewhere over there
Posts: 1,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Just as a point of clarification, I disagree with 'the admin's' position on this, however, the President et al doesn't see 'migrants' as a threat, they see illegal immigrants as a threat...those are two totally different things. Personally, I think we need to fix our immigration policies, but you are mischaracterizing the other side. We had must about as many LEGAL immigrants as ever this past year (I think it was down a bit, probably because of Trump but not directly...folks probably wary of coming to the US with an idiot like him in charge. We still had well over a million legal immigrants in 2018).

As far as your question goes, I'd need some context. Do you have a link or cite describing what you are getting at? You seem to be saying that Trump et al are having ICE(?) pick up illegals then dump them...somewhere? I haven't heard of this happening.
Here ya go. Notice the timing: Christmas Eve. The story mostly quotes Beto O'Rourke as the source. I acknowledge his political slant, but the Texas Tribune is a reputable source.
Quote:
ICE didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Monday and it’s unclear what role the shutdown played in the situation.
(Bolding mine) It looks like this is a likely motivation but still doesn't provide any pretense of consistency.

(I figured this thread would probably wind up in GD, but I didn't think I'd be nudging it that way. Do what seems best, my mod friends.)

Last edited by don't mind me; 12-31-2018 at 06:18 PM.
  #5  
Old 12-31-2018, 06:30 PM
don't mind me don't mind me is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: somewhere over there
Posts: 1,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Just as a point of clarification, I disagree with 'the admin's' position on this, however, the President et al doesn't see 'migrants' as a threat, they see illegal immigrants as a threat...those are two totally different things. Personally, I think we need to fix our immigration policies, but you are mischaracterizing the other side....
I disagree.This is one of many stories contradicting your characterization, the most egregious being the infamous "shithole countries" comment.

(OK. Self-reporting for forum change.)
  #6  
Old 12-31-2018, 07:58 PM
engineer_comp_geek's Avatar
engineer_comp_geek engineer_comp_geek is online now
Robot Mod in Beta Testing
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 22,898
Moderator Action

Quote:
Originally Posted by don't mind me View Post
(I figured this thread would probably wind up in GD, but I didn't think I'd be nudging it that way. Do what seems best, my mod friends.)
That's a bit heavy for a "nudge". More like a shove, I think.

Off to GD (from IMHO).
  #7  
Old 12-31-2018, 08:26 PM
XT's Avatar
XT XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 34,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by don't mind me View Post
Here ya go. Notice the timing: Christmas Eve. The story mostly quotes Beto O'Rourke as the source. I acknowledge his political slant, but the Texas Tribune is a reputable source.
(Bolding mine) It looks like this is a likely motivation but still doesn't provide any pretense of consistency.

(I figured this thread would probably wind up in GD, but I didn't think I'd be nudging it that way. Do what seems best, my mod friends.)
Sounds like a fuckup somewhere coupled with the shutdown and probably a bunch of government workers who didn't know what to do and basically wanted to go home for Christmas and decided to dump the problem on someone else (sort of like the MIB thing with the cat...oh, the cat is a problem. What's the problem? It's your problem...). I seriously doubt this is some devious 3-D chess move by the government or Trump et al, just another example that the monkey in chief at the controls is just smashing buttons and throwing poo all over. And this doesn't have anything to do with legal immigration btw. I did read your other link, but that doesn't demonstrate that legal immigration is a threat to the public or whatever, just more wrong headed stupidity of the Trump administration.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #8  
Old 12-31-2018, 09:17 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
Just as a point of clarification, I disagree with 'the admin's' position on this, however, the President et al doesn't see 'migrants' as a threat, they see illegal immigrants as a threat...those are two totally different things.


https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...udge-trump-un/
Quote:
Trump has been roundly denounced, by the left and right, for saying U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel may be biased against him because of his Mexican heritage.

The judge is presiding over a pair of cases in which the plaintiffs allege Trump University duped them into paying tens of thousands of dollars on the belief they would be trained to learn Trump’s real estate strategies. Trump denies the allegations, saying the students got their money’s worth, with many offering positive evaluations of the program.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.ace7d90a2c66
Quote:
Recent reporting indicates that the Department of Homeland Security is planning to significantly limit legal immigration and naturalization by changing the rules on immigration and welfare that have been central to the immigration system for more than 400 years. DHS wants to change the definition of what constitutes a public charge — someone dependent on the state — to deny green cards to legal migrants who are low-wage workers by considering their use, or likely use, of almost any government benefit as criteria for determining who may enter or remain in the United States.
  #9  
Old 12-31-2018, 10:28 PM
Iggy Iggy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 5,268
It is helpful to understand how an asylum application is supposed to work when looking at the situation where persons were dropped off at bus stations in Texas.

A person presenting himself/herself at a Port of Entry or to an Immigration Officer anywhere in the United States and making a claim of asylum is supposed to be detained pending a credible fear of persecution or torture interview (often called simply a credible fear interview).

Credible Fear has a particular meaning in law and refers to a fear of persecution on the basis of "race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." Some commons reasons for migrants to seek to come to the United States likely do not qualify under the credible fear standard. Hoping for a better life for one's children, fleeing domestic violence, or fear of a high general crime rate in the home country are examples of serious issues that still may not fall under the credible fear standard.

The credible fear interview is to determine if the claim of asylum might be justified if what the claimant says can be supported. It IS NOT the final determination of whether a grant of asylum will be made.

If a person/family passes a credible fear interview they are released into the United States. As they are no longer in custody of the government they may go wherever they wish given their (often quite limited) financial resources. They are instructed on how to follow up with Immigration for a final hearing on their asylum claim at a hearing, often a couple years or more in the future.

A person who fails to make an asylum claim that could be upheld at a hearing is subject to being detained pending deportation to his/her home country.

In the present time many, many asylum claimants are coming to the border with children. There is a policy in place due to an old legal settlement that limits how long children can be detained during such immigration processing. The Flores Settlement limits detention of children to no more than 20 days.

The Flores Settlement agreement came about in the 1993 case of Flores v. Reno, at a time when processing a credible fear interview seemed feasible in no more than 20 days. Though the legal case revolved around unaccompanied minor children in immigration detention, the Flores Settlement consent decree covered all minor children in immigration detention including those accompanied by a parent or relative.

In the present day there have been more asylum claims made than there is capacity (or willingness of the present administration?) to conduct credible fear interviews. So Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been releasing any children (and their accompanying parent/guardian) who have not had a credible fear interview within 20 days.

These people who are timing out are then released in much the same fashion as those who passed a credible fear interview.



TL;DR The government is releasing these people because they have been held too long and must be released to comply with a settlement agreement in an old court case.


As to why they are released without notifying social services agencies and charities....? Laziness or spite would be my guess. ICE officials are not required to make such notifications. So why bother? lazy.

And El Paso used to be somewhat of a Sanctuary City until a recent statewide law in Texas intervened. Dropping bus loads of people off with no notice might be a subtle way of ICE officers making things difficult for a city that provided limited cooperation with them in the past.
  #10  
Old 01-01-2019, 11:55 AM
UltraVires UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy View Post
Credible Fear has a particular meaning in law and refers to a fear of persecution on the basis of "race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." Some commons reasons for migrants to seek to come to the United States likely do not qualify under the credible fear standard. Hoping for a better life for one's children, fleeing domestic violence, or fear of a high general crime rate in the home country are examples of serious issues that still may not fall under the credible fear standard.

The credible fear interview is to determine if the claim of asylum might be justified if what the claimant says can be supported. It IS NOT the final determination of whether a grant of asylum will be made.

If a person/family passes a credible fear interview they are released into the United States. As they are no longer in custody of the government they may go wherever they wish given their (often quite limited) financial resources. They are instructed on how to follow up with Immigration for a final hearing on their asylum claim at a hearing, often a couple years or more in the future.
That seems like an incredible loophole for someone attempting to illegally come to the United States. Just follow the script to pass the interview, be released into the U.S. and never show up at the hearing. Why try to scale a wall or fence or trek through the desert?
  #11  
Old 01-01-2019, 03:01 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
That seems like an incredible loophole for someone attempting to illegally come to the United States. Just follow the script to pass the interview, be released into the U.S. and never show up at the hearing. Why try to scale a wall or fence or trek through the desert?
Hard to wait when they do have small kids, while Mexico's authorities are helping, the sad reality is that most do risk their few belongings or their own lives by waiting in very unsafe places.

As for not showing up at hearings:

https://www.politifact.com/punditfac...-court-data-s/
Quote:
Majority of undocumented immigrants show up for court, data shows
Quote:
"Initially, a lot of migration was single males from Mexico coming for work," said Joshua Breisblatt, a senior policy analyst at the American Immigration Council. "Now you’re seeing a shift to Central American families fleeing record levels of violence in the Northern Triangle."

So what do the court attendance rates of asylees look like? While the data is scarce, they show higher rates, compared to when all migrants are tallied together.

One source of data comes from an Obama-era program that released asylees from detention and matched them with case managers who encouraged compliance with court-ordered obligations. As of April, the Family Case Management Program, or FCMP, had 630 enrolled families.

Before the Trump administration ended the program in June, participants had a 100 percent attendance record at court hearings. They also had a 99 percent rate of check-ins and appointments with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, according to a Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General report.

"According to ICE, overall program compliance for all five regions is an average of 99 percent for ICE check-ins and appointments, as well as 100 percent attendance at court hearings," the report said. "Since the inception of FCMP, 23 out of 954 participants (2 percent) were reported as absconders."

In 2015, the immigration advocacy group American Immigration Council published a report that looked at studies from over the previous two decades that examined how well asylum seekers fulfilled their legal obligations. It found studies showed "very high rates of compliance with proceedings by asylum seekers who were placed into alternatives to detention."
  #12  
Old 01-01-2019, 03:15 PM
DigitalC DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 10,567
It's not laziness, it's hate.
  #13  
Old 01-01-2019, 03:38 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
That seems like an incredible loophole for someone attempting to illegally come to the United States. Just follow the script to pass the interview, be released into the U.S. and never show up at the hearing. Why try to scale a wall or fence or trek through the desert?
You truly don't understand why asylees come to the U.S., do you?

I mean, you literally -- and I mean that literally -- don't understand the first thing.
  #14  
Old 01-01-2019, 03:49 PM
BeenJammin's Avatar
BeenJammin BeenJammin is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by don't mind me View Post
Dumping asylum seekers: What's the admin's justification?
The simple, correct answer is that the vast majority are historically denied. Along with that, lately there seems to be some rumor floating around our execrable southern neighbors to the effect that all you have do is show up and claim asylum - done deal.

How's that working out?
  #15  
Old 01-01-2019, 03:59 PM
running coach's Avatar
running coach running coach is offline
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 35,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeenJammin View Post
The simple, correct answer is that the vast majority are historically denied. Along with that, lately there seems to be some rumor floating around our execrable southern neighbors to the effect that all you have do is show up and claim asylum - done deal.

How's that working out?
I see denial rates from 5% to 99%+. What's the overall rate across all judges?
  #16  
Old 01-01-2019, 04:05 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeenJammin View Post
The simple, correct answer is that the vast majority are historically denied.
...asylum seekers are dumped at bus stations because they are "historically denied?" You know that doesn't make any logical sense right?

Quote:
Along with that, lately there seems to be some rumor floating around our execrable southern neighbors to the effect that all you have do is show up and claim asylum - done deal.
Classy.

Quote:
How's that working out?
How's what working out?
  #17  
Old 01-01-2019, 04:09 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 28,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeenJammin View Post
The simple, correct answer is that the vast majority are historically denied. Along with that, lately there seems to be some rumor floating around our execrable southern neighbors to the effect that all you have do is show up and claim asylum - done deal.

How's that working out?
You are not even wrong, when the subject is about dumping them, not what happens in their hearings. Read the OP and post #11 and try again.
  #18  
Old 01-01-2019, 04:11 PM
BeenJammin's Avatar
BeenJammin BeenJammin is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Classy.
Classier than "shithole."
  #19  
Old 01-01-2019, 04:43 PM
andros andros is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Dejagore
Posts: 10,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeenJammin View Post
Classier than "shithole."
No, it's really not.
  #20  
Old 01-01-2019, 04:54 PM
UltraVires UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
You truly don't understand why asylees come to the U.S., do you?

I mean, you literally -- and I mean that literally -- don't understand the first thing.
I made no such generalization. Please read for comprehension. I said it presents a loophole for those, who are not true asylum seekers, to read from a script and pretend to be asylum seekers.
  #21  
Old 01-01-2019, 05:35 PM
Dacien Dacien is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post


https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...udge-trump-un/

Trump has been roundly denounced, by the left and right, for saying U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel may be biased against him because of his Mexican heritage.

The judge is presiding over a pair of cases in which the plaintiffs allege Trump University duped them into paying tens of thousands of dollars on the belief they would be trained to learn Trump’s real estate strategies. Trump denies the allegations, saying the students got their money’s worth, with many offering positive evaluations of the program.
I'm not defending Trump in saying this, but I'd like to point out that I find it fascinating that some people will argue systemic racism is a problem because white judges are biased against minorities, but would gladly call out Trump for echoing the same concept.

Again though, an accusation like that needs evidence of racial bias, which Trump didn't have.

Last edited by Dacien; 01-01-2019 at 05:36 PM.
  #22  
Old 01-01-2019, 05:42 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by andros View Post
No, it's really not.
...indeed.
  #23  
Old 01-01-2019, 05:49 PM
DigitalC DigitalC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Obamatopia
Posts: 10,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dacien View Post
I'm not defending Trump in saying this, but I'd like to point out that I find it fascinating that some people will argue systemic racism is a problem because white judges are biased against minorities, but would gladly call out Trump for echoing the same concept.

Again though, an accusation like that needs evidence of racial bias, which Trump didn't have.
That is absolutely no where near the same concept.
  #24  
Old 01-01-2019, 06:07 PM
TimeWinder TimeWinder is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany/Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs View Post
His only interest in the matter is in punishing brown people; that's the only justification he needs. There's no real danger to the US, and neither he nor his subordinates actually care if they are refugees, immigrants, or citizens of the US; just their skin color..
I wish they were even pretending any more that this wasn't the real reason.
  #25  
Old 01-01-2019, 09:23 PM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
I made no such generalization. Please read for comprehension. I said it presents a loophole for those, who are not true asylum seekers, to read from a script and pretend to be asylum seekers.
And yet, something like 90 percent of those making an asylum claim show up for court. There was one monitoring program that had 99% of its participants show up to court dates for asylum hearings. And the Trump Administration ended it.

So I ask you, what is the opposite of a loophole?
  #26  
Old 01-01-2019, 10:19 PM
Iggy Iggy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 5,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalC View Post
It's not laziness, it's hate.
I would not presume hate where mere indifference would suffice.

It was not Trump personally deciding to drop these people at the bus station in Texas, it was local immigration officers.

Case loads along the border have gone up substantially, particularly family groups being detained. This Washington Post report notes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Washington Post report
Trump this spring deployed a nuclear option — separating parents from their children — in an attempt to stop families from coming. It backfired. The controversy generated by the policy and its abrupt rollback six weeks later handed smuggling guides across Central America a potent sales pitch. They now tell potential customers the Americans do not jail parents who bring children — and to hurry up before they might start doing so again.

Families asking for mercy constitute a greater-than-ever portion of those taken into custody. More than half of all arrests along the Mexican border last month [Sept 2018] were migrant family members or unaccompanied minors, up from 13 percent in 2013.
And there is coaching according to the same WaPo report:
Quote:
The smuggling guides who charge $10,000 or more for the trip provide transportation and meals, but also coaching, including the key words migrants should say to convince U.S. asylum officers that their fears meet credibility standards.
I'm empathetic to the plight of the poor in Latin America. Mrs Iggy comes from such a background. But the asylum and refugee process is not intended to provide relief to economic migrants. Abusing that system may make it harder for persons with genuine Credible Fear claims to be taken seriously.
  #27  
Old 01-02-2019, 12:30 AM
Eva Luna Eva Luna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago-ish, IL
Posts: 10,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
I see denial rates from 5% to 99%+. What's the overall rate across all judges?
From the same source - Syracuse University keeps a ton of immigration stats. I don't know that I'd call 65% an "overwhelming majority," though.
  #28  
Old 01-02-2019, 08:19 AM
UltraVires UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 14,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
And yet, something like 90 percent of those making an asylum claim show up for court. There was one monitoring program that had 99% of its participants show up to court dates for asylum hearings. And the Trump Administration ended it.

So I ask you, what is the opposite of a loophole?
If it has to do with Trump, guns, or immigration, you guys just cannot be logical like you are with most other topics. Forget that this is immigration; say it is admission to a college.

If it was difficult to get into a particular college the direct way, but I pointed out that if you really wanted in all you had to do was tell a particular story and you would get in even if the story wasn't true, you would call that a loophole would you not?

Of course you would. Everyone would. Because that's what it is.

Even if the amnesty program is used legitimately by 90%, you have allowed 10% to enter the country illegally and disappear. That is a loophole.
  #29  
Old 01-02-2019, 08:42 AM
Ravenman Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
If it has to do with Trump, guns, or immigration, you guys just cannot be logical like you are with most other topics. Forget that this is immigration; say it is admission to a college.

If it was difficult to get into a particular college the direct way, but I pointed out that if you really wanted in all you had to do was tell a particular story and you would get in even if the story wasn't true, you would call that a loophole would you not?

Of course you would. Everyone would. Because that's what it is.

Even if the amnesty program is used legitimately by 90%, you have allowed 10% to enter the country illegally and disappear. That is a loophole.
Yet if we listened to Trump, 100% are entering the country and disappearing.

And let's get real: this whole issue isn't about improving the system for seeking asylum. It's about making a scapegoat of people who look differently than the average Republican voter, and an awful lot of people looooove to find scapegoats. That much has been shown throughout history.

Not to mention that your version of "getting into college" involves 90% of those temporarily admitted to such college being kicked out after a year or so. Again, probably pretty familiar ground for the typical Trump voter.

Last edited by Ravenman; 01-02-2019 at 08:44 AM.
  #30  
Old 01-02-2019, 08:20 PM
don't mind me don't mind me is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: somewhere over there
Posts: 1,111
From Iggy's link above: (#26)
Quote:
As [Border Patrol agent Robert] Rodriguez radioed another agent to pick up the woman and the boy, she handed him her Honduran identification card. Cecilia Ulloa was 25. Darwin, her son, was 13. The math took a moment to sink in, and Ulloa appeared to recognize a familiar look of confusion.

“My stepfather,” she said. “It started when I was 10.”
Not necessarily germane to the subject, but then again maybe so.

I apologize for my apparent "dump and run" of this thread. Y'all are just too smart; by the time I think of a reply to one post, someone has already said it better, and someone else has given me more to chew on. I very much appreciate the information and thoughtful arguments.

Last edited by don't mind me; 01-02-2019 at 08:21 PM.
  #31  
Old 01-03-2019, 02:25 PM
Eva Luna Eva Luna is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Chicago-ish, IL
Posts: 10,603
I should note that there may be a quite pragmatic reason for “dumping”- lack of detention space.
  #32  
Old 01-03-2019, 03:49 PM
rat avatar's Avatar
rat avatar rat avatar is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 5,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eva Luna View Post
From the same source - Syracuse University keeps a ton of immigration stats. I don't know that I'd call 65% an "overwhelming majority," though.
To expand on this post:

Note the link to Sessions and Trump greatly restricting who they will accept. Note that LGBTQ fobia and anti-women sentiment by the administration lead to a huge increase in denials.

Quote:
“Generally, claims by aliens pertaining to domestic violence or gang violence perpetrated by non-governmental actors will not qualify for asylum.
...
The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes — such as domestic violence or gang violence — or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim.”
Also note that the compliance rate and court attendance is excellent for applicants, showing that the concentration camps were unnecessary too. Dumping them is mostly to avoid giving these individuals access to due process in order to appease xenophobia within a particular voting block and is not about safety, the rule of law or justice.

Last edited by rat avatar; 01-03-2019 at 03:50 PM.
  #33  
Old 01-03-2019, 04:03 PM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 40,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy View Post
I'm empathetic to the plight of the poor in Latin America. Mrs Iggy comes from such a background. But the asylum and refugee process is not intended to provide relief to economic migrants. Abusing that system may make it harder for persons with genuine Credible Fear claims to be taken seriously.
There's a big difference between "someone whose fear isn't one included in the US's specific laundry list" and "someone whose only reason to move is economic". I'm not even getting into why it's so completely absurd to be against economic migration.
__________________
Evidence gathered through the use of science is easily dismissed through the use of idiocy. - Czarcasm.

Last edited by Nava; 01-03-2019 at 04:05 PM.
  #34  
Old 01-03-2019, 04:24 PM
Iggy Iggy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 5,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
There's a big difference between "someone whose fear isn't one included in the US's specific laundry list" and "someone whose only reason to move is economic". I'm not even getting into why it's so completely absurd to be against economic migration.
That specific laundry list of Credible Fear categories comes from UN treaties - the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees - which were enacted post-WWII. The entire asylum process laid out in those treaties was a response to the Holocaust. At that time Domestic Violence was not taken as seriously and threats from drug trafficking gangs were not envisioned.

One factor in the whole idea of asylum/refugee status is that the claimant has credible fear to remain anywhere in his/her home country. For example, a Mexican person claiming fear of persecution from unchecked activities of drug gangs in a Sinaloa cartel controlled area might fail a credible fear interview if the immigration officer believes that the claimant would not be subject to persecution if he/she moved elsewhere within Mexico.

At least Mexico is a relatively large country. Imagine a similar claimant who fears threats from MS-13 gang members in El Salvador. Can they really move far enough away within El Salvador to feel unthreatened?

But as it stands, current guidance from the Trump administration is that a foreign country's inability to effectively police drug violence is not grounds for asylum since the threat to the claimant is not from the government of that country.
  #35  
Old 01-04-2019, 11:52 AM
BeenJammin's Avatar
BeenJammin BeenJammin is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 557
So terrorism as a legitimate asylum category simply does not exist.

Score: drug cartels 50-some-billion, USA zero

Score: Fascist dictators with thug gangs another large number, USA zero

Score: Religious zealots probably an ever larger number, USA zero

These people winning the game know what they are doing. Us, meh.
  #36  
Old 01-04-2019, 11:54 AM
BeenJammin's Avatar
BeenJammin BeenJammin is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 557
Get the drugs, politics and religious bullshyt sorted and we are on easy street!
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017