Yes, then when back they can apply for a visa and go thru the proper channels just like any other LEGAL immigrant.
Why should they get free amnesty just because their parents brought them across?
Is there some sort of legal line like oh, they came across when they were just 2 or 5 or 10 or 15 so they are now a “dreamer” and get to stay for free?
There should be.
Because if it’s cruel to throw a bred-in-captivity animal into the wild and walk away, how can we justify doing it to a human being? It’s essentially the same thing: the person will have no network of people, no cultural context, may well not speak any local non-English language.
And yes, that’s exactly what the definition of DACA is. “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals”, that has a specific definition of “childhood”. The “dreamers” refer to people covered by the DREAM act from 2001 (under George W. Bush and co-sponsored by Orrin Hatch, Republican from Utah) to legalize residency to aliens who arrived prior to age 16 and have completed at least some college or military service.
Making this out to be about “illegals living on govt handouts” or something is stupid: these people are by definition integrated and productive members of our society, and since childhood.
To say “they get to stay for free” is one way to put it; another would be kicking them out, aside from the cruelty factor, is throwing away money already invested in their education and training, and what they pay in taxes.
Remember, DREAMers aren’t people in hiding, living on cash and invisible to the IRS - they ARE CURRENTLY legal, but the laws legalizing their status are expiring.
That link doesn’t work very well for me, but refers to Mexican gangs kidnapping the people ICE dumps right across the Rio Grande. Each dumpee is worth thousands of dollars in ransom.
Isn’t this a profit-making opportunity for America? ICE can dump the dumpee at a more favorable location for, say, $3000 paid directly to the Trump Organization, underbidding the Mexican kidnappers. Win-win.
I would like to see the poll widen, so the NO answerers could specify whether their reason is because of their own personal risk for doing so, or because of a philosophical objection to the people being protected, or in order to dutifully conform with the law no matter what it is.
What do you consider a crime? My DREAMer friend and I jaywalked across the street last night. Now, no Chicago cop in their right mind is going to care about jaywalking but I’d hate to live in fear that if I was jaywalking in some small Illinois town and some cop decided to make an issue of it.
Those all sound good but how can we believe things such as age when so many have forged documents? They might have only come here 2 years ago instead of 10. You say they cant speaks say spanish anymore? I’ve NEVER seen an immigrant who cannot because they grow up with parents and neighbors all speaking the same language. YES, they can still speak the language. You say they have no family to go home to?
How do you know?
They might have all kinds of family back home but those family members back home have gotten used to that money sent from the US. You do realize money sent from families is one of Mexico’s (and other countries) biggest source of foreign currency.
Again, I see no reason then when they get back home they can reapply for a visa.
Which other laws do you feel like breaking with impunity? You are also wrong that big city cops don’t care about jaywalking.
Maybe, maybe. I was only addressing your assertion that only the criminals (immigration infractions aside) were being rounded up, when the reality is they are picking up law-abiding people and shipping the families away. I recognize we aren’t going to agree on the rightness of all the deportation, so I’m not going to argue it.
But to address your points:
Why do they need to be deported, their families uprooted, local industries put in a bind, and schools disrupted? Why not have an agent turn up at the house, document their situation (Single? Married to US Citizen? Married to foreign national? Any kids born into US citizenship? How long has this been going on, etc.), and if the situation warrants get them into the citizenship track?
They should get free amnesty just because their parents brought them across. They did nothing wrong, why should a child have to pay the consequences of his ancestors’ actions? That kind of justice prevailed in the stone-age and the Old Testament but it’s hardly the standard today.
Evidently there is no such ‘legal line’ but there doesn’t need to be. Just see item #1 and empower the agent to either fast-track citizenship or refer the matter for deportation review. Americans have grown too fond of hiding behind laws rather than accepting situations as unique stories that can’t just be pigeonholed.
Unfortunately, stone-age thinking is a hallmark of the modern nativist movement.
Everything you mention above sounds great but again, where is the line the agent must document? What is the documentation?
For example, you say in #2 they should get free amnesty if their parents took them across. Are you saying 10 years ago? 5 years ago? 2 months ago? Where is the “line”?
How do you know that person they are with is actually their parent? Some adult grabs some stray kid and says they are theirs and now, BOTH get free amnesty?
You do realize their is a WHOLE industry behind getting thru the gaps in immigration laws dont you? For example I’ve read where they throw away any identification paperwork so they then can claim family ties, claim a different nationality, claim a different age, etc… They are also coached on using sob stories and making all kinds of claims.
Also you do realize in #3 the “agent” system you just described sets up a situation where abuse can clearly happen dont you? Heck, slip the agent some money and all the paperwork comes clean.
No, the answer lies first in #1 creating a tight border where people cant get thru in the first place, #2 Making it clear they cant just bring kids across and use them as a shield, #3 Tell employers their are consequences for hiring illegals.
Yes I know this all sounds harsh and it would be “nice” if we could review every illegals case one by one but such a system is too prone to problems and is extremely slow and expensive so sorry to say, its better to just follow the law.
Now after saying that I’m not saying just round them up and stick them on a plane and tell them to never return. I have no problem for example, allowing students a few months to finish a semester or a family a few months time to settle their financial affairs before they must report for deportation. And during said process they complete all the paperwork, fingerprinting, and other things so when they get back to their native country, they can turn in the paperwork and be, like you said “fast-tracked” for a return visa and greencard. Which I think should take no less than a year.
Is a year so terribly long?
Again, I feel we should follow the laws and dont let children be a shield nor should their be a freebee system where just because you’ve been here for a certain amount of time and done everything right you should get a free pass. Every country in the world has immigration laws. Why should the US have an open border?
Well what do you call a open border policy in an age of limited resources? Every modern country has immigration laws, not an open border.
If anything YOUR open border idea is “stone age”.
You do realize your open border, feel-good, lax immigration, pro sanctuary feelings lead to thedeath of that woman in San Fransisco? That man was an ILLEGAL from Mexico who they tried to deport but the sanctuary madness which is California kept protecting him.
Also realize according to THIS STUDY illegals commit twice the amount of crimes as natives.
DACA and DREAMER Youth also commit twice the crimes.
So before you start telling me I’m a heartless throwback, first tell me what you would tell that womans family?
I would tell them that we’re going to use her death as an excuse to destroy a whole lot of innocent people’s lives and send a bunch of innocent people -children- to their deaths. They’ll be so happy!
Please don’t distort and mischaracterize my position.
Neither i, nor anyone else in this thread, has advocated open borders. Not a single person. And just to make it crystal clear for you, i’ll say it outright: i completely recognize the fact that we can’t let in just anyone who wants to come.
What i’m calling for is nothing more and nothing less than a policy that is supported by about 85 percent of Americans: a policy recognizing that minor children are not responsible for the actions of their parents; a policy recognizing that sending people back to a country that they have not seen since they were minors children, where they might have no ties, and with which they have no familiarity, is a fundamentally inhumane; and a policy that allows those people who were brought here as children, and whose lives are closely tied to the United States, to remain in the country.
I’m an immigrant. I came to the United States legally, and did all of the proper paperwork, and as a general proposition i believe that’s how immigration should work. But i also have the basic sense and the basic human decency to recognize that my situation is different from those brought here as children, and that they deserve some special consideration.
Yeah, it’s a suggestion fraught with weevils and possibly prone to abuse. But get this: so is law-enforcement in general. ICE agents and all the roundup infrastructure is not without overhead and its own peculiar expenses. I have to believe there is a significant cost per deportee that could instead be directed to local authorities to execute the appropriate research and decision-making duties. Heck, there could even be a panel of locals drawn at random from within a given radius of the person’s residence to weigh in on whether or not to deport. I dunno, IANAL.
But if the video in post #120 is any indication, people vote and support legislation based on what they think is the big picture, but when it comes down to how it works in practice right under their noses they (rightly) want to back-pedal. This, and the very existence of ‘sanctuary cities’ tells me that, however hare-brained my proposal might be, it is probably closer to achieving a just resolution of the issue than some disinterested politicians 2,000 miles away making blanket rules with deadlines and benchmarks–in exchange for some pork agreement or other on a completely unrelated issue.
And just to be clear–I’m really only for going the extra mile to keep people who would be citizens but for the paperwork. I don’t have much patience for criminals who actively seek to harm others.
What if my grandparents made that their priority 75 years ago?
And, yes, “setting myself up for liability” is so much worse than being shipped off to Bergen-Belsen.
Ok, I have an idea for a compromise. I know you have the compassion but you do still recognize the law.
Lets say you do provide “sanctuary” to a dreamer.
Would you be against such a system having some organization? Lets say yes, you allow a dreamer into your home. However, in exchange for the person being granted limited amnesty (basically the right to stay until their case is reviewed) you would agree to inform ICE and sign paperwork that you personally would bare full responsibility for said person? You become a legal sponsor.
In exchange the dreamer would as stated, get to stay while their case is up for review. The downside is its still possible they might be deported if they dont get approval but chances of this would be low since as you stated, they came into the country as minors and have met all responsibilities as future citizens.
You, as a US citizen, have met the person and fully trust them. You will promise they will abide by all laws. Really not different from current immigrant sponsor programs.
I can go along with this.
What do you think?
Urban, I think I see the disconnect here. You’re proposing a situation which trusts the government to act fairly with these people. Those in opposition are on the continuum of [The government is strongly inclined toward deportation anyway] <—> [The USA has become 1938 Germany]. For my part, I’d find advising my government I was harboring a DREAMer to be unwise. This sort of paranoia is only hysteria until heaps of DREAMer corpses start turning up.
I am compelled to point out, there are only about 800,000 individuals with DREAMer status. This is not a particularly huge number, and yet President Trump has given them extraordinary power to further divide this nation and stir up controversy. It’s a distraction. If you’re driving a school bus full of children and you come around a corner to find 10 pregnant women crossing the road, and you have the choice to either bowl the women over or drive the bus off a cliff–which do you pick? We can ignore the deportations and let ourselves believe they are really just going back to their loving homeland of Mexico, Guatemala, India, and wherever else. Or we can at least entertain the possibility that anyone monstrous enough to target a tiny segment of his own population for harsh punishment in the face of no crime is capable of firing up the ovens himself.
You know nothing about immigration law. Once their DACA permits expire, there is no legal way for these kids to come back. Once you have entered this country illegally, it’s a ten year clock before you can even reapply to enter. Once that ten years are over, you have to have grounds to enter: a family member to sponsor you, or skills your employer can’t find anywhere else. Most will be denied.
You say “until their case is reviewed”. Right now, there’s nothing to review. There’s no path to give them any sort of legal status.
So when you say “if they get approval”, who would you give approval?