- or at least coming close.
I, for one, am shocked that private prisons that aren’t accountable to anyone do things like this!
Can you spot anything in there that might affect your argument?
Have ICE detainee’s been convicted of anything? My first impulse is “no”. Hopefully, once it has been adjudicated that they are illegally here, they are deported.
Seems a little coy.
If you’re referring to the “duly convicted” phrase, I don’t know, are these “detainees” convicted of anything? I scanned the article briefly and only saw references to people crossing the border and being “picked up” and detained.
The terminology isn’t clear to me. Wouldn’t they be “convicts” and in a “prison” if duly convicted? I have been under the impression that “detainees” in a “detention center” were not (yet) convicted of anything. Is that right or wrong?
Or are you referring to something else entirely?
Dude, what crime have these detainees been duly convicted of?
It is not a crime to overstay your visa. Yes, you can be kicked out of the country and not allowed to come back, but it’s still not a crime.
And these people haven’t even been adjudicated to not have the right to stay in the country, that’s why they are being detained, so that their status can be legally determined.
Generally, illegal presence s not a crime, it’s a civil violation.
There’s also that pesky Constitution which applies to anyone on US soil(except for citizen privileges like voting).
Nope. As others have pointed out. No convictions. In fact, there is at least a chance some non-zero number of the detainees might be released after they prove they belong in the USA. Otherwise, they’d be out of the country already.
Ignore Shodan. He’s trolling again.
Is it the use of the word “their” instead of “its”?
“Weasel words” seems much too mild for crap like this.
Perhaps “hyena words”?
How about “Bricker words”?
To be fair, the thread title refers to “prisons”, not to ICE detainment facilities. That might be cause for some confusion.
“TL;DR” isn’t a good defense.
Well, being sent to Solitary for refusing kinda negates the ‘voluntary’ aspect.
Come now people, I think we can agree that as long as a business is a for-profit business in a competitive market operating on free market principles, it’s literally impossible for them to do any thing wrong, because if they did the invisible hand would rise up and slap them. Yes, the detainees would choose to stay in a different detainment center, so since they don’t we can be absolutely confident that any slavery you see them doing is perfectly okay because of, again, Free Market.
Many people already rightfully called you out on the fact that these are detainees, not convicts, and therefore, no, there is nothing in there that would affect the argument, but I have another reason why your statement is useless.
What does it say in the amendment? Does it say, “If convicted of a crime, then they may be enslaved or used for involuntary servitude”? No, it says “as punishment for the crime”.
So, if the sentence of the crime calls for “hard labor”, then that gets around the 13th. If the sentence is for 10 years in jail, then the jail doesn’t get to decide to use them as involuntary servitude or slavery.
There’s no reviews on Yelp! or tripadvisor. How would they know which Detainment Center to choose?
Well, the free market dictates by definition that customers can make informed decisions about their buying choices, so we can safely presume that they’ll get the information somehow.
The Invisible Hand cheerfully provides the information.
Unfortunately, it’s all in sign language, because it’s just a Hand. And not many people read sign language.
Worse, the Hand is Invisible, so no one can see the Hand, let alone talk to it. But you can’t blame the Hand for trying.