Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 12:52:03 GMT -5
I meant it; I am taking a break. I'm sure you're all relieved. But since some asked for more of an explanation on legal/constitutional/other issues with the policy, this 128 page complaint by 17 state attorney generals should help. agportal-s3bucket.s3.amazonaws.com/uploadedfiles/Another/News/Press_Releases/complaint_6.pdf And fyi, the administration has now outright admitted that thousands of children will not be reunited with their parents, absent a court ordering them to do it or Congress passes a law forcing them to do so. This is not over. Not even close. Story at twitter link below. And now I'm going out for a drink in the sun. This is by way of an update on this situation, which Helsinki and so many other batshit events has rather pushed out of center stage. I don't know whether you all have continued to follow it, but I have, and since some major events have occurred and are ongoing, I figured I'd update the thread to reflect them. To save myself some time and effort, Imma gonna be lazy and summarize the situation (on which I have kept close tabs), providing a link or two at the bottom to support it. If any of you question the truth/basis for any statement I'm making, say so and I'll point you to a direct link to support that particular statement. I promise in advance that I am not pulling any of it out of my ass. When last I posted in this thread, Amadan had asked for "but is it illegal and why?" I posted a link to a massive brief by state attorney generals setting forth arguments about the legality of the policy (To note: I did that partly because it actually takes shitloads of time to pull together legal explanations of that kind, but also because other lawyers were already doing so, and better than I could, since it is their actual job, and because, frankly, the whole subject was upsetting me and I needed to step away.) To note, other lawsuits were also filed challenging the legality of the policy, including by the ACLU. Trump's executive order stopping the policy did not solve the problem, not only because he threatened to restart the policy, but because there were thousands of children that had already been separated from their parents, many of them shipped off to other states, and the Trump administration was refusing to reunite those families. It was forced to do so only because a court in California ruled in favor of the ACLU and ordered the Trump administration to reunite the families. Just to note, in case any of you are still asking whether the questions of constitutionality and legality regarding the policy had any basis, I point to the facts that not only did a buttload of attorney generals and the ACLU (and lots of us other lawyer types, including Mark and I, think they did) -- and a court agreed -- but also that the Trump administration doesn't seem to fighting that outcome in court. I think that's some evidence, right there, that those constitutional and legal concerns were well-founded. The Trump administration did, however, plead for more time to reunite the families because, they were compelled to admit, they hadn't really bothered to keep track of the kids and finding them and figuring out what parents they belonged to was no easy task. Moreover, in 431 cases, they'd deported parents without their children, and so now the government not only didn't know where the kids were, but they also didn't know where the parents were, making reunifying them one hella difficult task. [Whatever you may want to argue about our immigration policies, it's horrifying and inexcusable that we deported them without their kids. I don't even know what to say to anyone who thinks it's okay. And it's just fucking horrific that we didn't keep track of the kids. What. The. Fuck.] The Trump administration missed the first court deadline to reunite the smallest children with their parents. It then scrambled to meet the second deadline, which was this week. So here's the current status: of the approximately 2500 children that the court ordered reunified with their parents, the Trump administration says it has reunited 1800. It claims that the remaining 700-ish kids are not "eligible" to be reunited with their parents. With regard to most of them, here's why: In other words, these kids will not be reunited with their parents because we deported them and we have no idea where they are. The Trump administration claims that some of these parents "waived reunification". What that means, in most cases, is this: the Trump administration told the parents that they couldn't get their kids back until they waived their (quite possibly valid) asylum claims and agree to be deported without a hearing. If the parents did not do so, the Trump officials said "fine, we're deporting you anyway, and fuck you, we're keeping your kids." Oh, by the way? Those 2500 kids are actually not the only kids who have been separated from their parents by the Trump administration. There were a bunch that had been separated over this last year, before this whole uproar began. So, um, yeah. There are actually still thousands of kids separated from their parents. Very likely, it's for forever. If you want to point to the Trump admin finally, belatedly, reuniting 1800 traumatized kids with their parents, only because a court ordered them to do so, and while many will likely never see their parents again, as a happy ending, I guess I can't stop you. But that sure as hell is not how I view it. Some cites, if you want to read more: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44975126www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-reunites-majority-of-separated-families-by-court-deadline/2018/07/26/7db6263c-9102-11e8-8322-b5482bf5e0f5_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.22ab161c9685www.nytimes.com/2018/07/26/us/migrant-families-reunifications-deadline.htmlI may come back and provide other cites over the weekend.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 15:53:34 GMT -5
Another article and twitter thread on the deplorable way our government is "taking care" of these children we've taken from their parents.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 18:16:11 GMT -5
See also this:
To note: my first reaction is as a human: jesus, how awful this is.
My second reaction is as a lawyer: these children were taken from their parents and at least one court has concluded that this was wrongfully done. If children have also suffered harm while in the government's custody...that's some big trouble for the administration.
And don't even "but they were illegal" me. As I've said upthread, not only were they not all here illegally (some crossed at a port of entry and have valid asylum claims), but even if they were, they still have rights. Even if it were okay to take the kids (which it ain't), having done so, the government took on the responsibility of caring for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 18:35:18 GMT -5
And yes, I've heard the whole "BUT BAD THINGS SOMETIMES HAPPENED TO UNACCOMPANIED MINORS BEFORE TRUMP AND TO KIDS IN FOSTER CARE"
My answer is
1) if so, then that sucked, too and what the fuck is wrong with us? Children who are in the care of the government shouldn't be abused, period. That it has happened to other children doesn't make this right, and
2) these particular kid weren't unaccompanied, orphaned or for whatever reason on their own. Our government took it upon itself to wrongfully tear them away from loving parents. That abuse would not have happened if they hadn't done that.
(If you can't tell, I'm actively disgusted and repelled by some of the arguments I've seen excusing and rationalizing the clearly horrible things that have happened and are happening still. Can't we all agree it sucks and must be rectified ASAP and going forward? That seems like a no-brainer to me.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2018 21:32:26 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 6:47:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gaild on Jul 30, 2018 3:41:38 GMT -5
Let me see if I've got this right. So, effectively, the American government is saying to these would-be immigrants, 'We don't like you. We don't want you. So we're sending you back to your 'quote - shithole' country. But we're keeping your kids because you can't parent them properly (in the way we consider to be right) in that 'shithole' country.' Huh?
Does the U.S. government even consider the terrible psychological damage this is doing to those children? Does it care?
How is this not a crime against humanity?
If the American people are as caring as they would like to think they are, why isn't every senator not swamped with hundreds of thousands of letters from outraged citizens?
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 30, 2018 11:48:56 GMT -5
Let me see if I've got this right. So, effectively, the American government is saying to these would-be immigrants, 'We don't like you. We don't want you. So we're sending you back to your 'quote - shithole' country. But we're keeping your kids because you can't parent them properly (in the way we consider to be right) in that 'shithole' country.' Huh? Does the U.S. government even consider the terrible psychological damage this is doing to those children? Does it care? How is this not a crime against humanity? If the American people are as caring as they would like to think they are, why isn't every senator not swamped with hundreds of thousands of letters from outraged citizens? Outrage exhaustion. Seen any of those UNICEF ads on YouTube about the Rohingyan refugees? Those people are a hundred times worse off than anyone coming across the US border. Why aren't we swamping our politicians with letters about that? Yes, an argument can be made that Americans should be more concerned about what's happening on their borders than what other countries are doing with their refugees, because theoretically we can have more impact on what our own country does. But the fact is that there are traumatized children and refugees all over the world, and isolating the crisis down to the most media-worthy one (because USA and Trump) is a bit of a distortion effect. (I do not mean by this that therefore what's happening here is okay, just that I'm a bit cynical about all the people, especially non-Americans, flipping their shit about how this is the worst human rights crisis in the modern world.)
|
|
|
Post by gaild on Jul 31, 2018 3:22:12 GMT -5
Let me see if I've got this right. So, effectively, the American government is saying to these would-be immigrants, 'We don't like you. We don't want you. So we're sending you back to your 'quote - shithole' country. But we're keeping your kids because you can't parent them properly (in the way we consider to be right) in that 'shithole' country.' Huh? Does the U.S. government even consider the terrible psychological damage this is doing to those children? Does it care? How is this not a crime against humanity? If the American people are as caring as they would like to think they are, why isn't every senator not swamped with hundreds of thousands of letters from outraged citizens? Outrage exhaustion. Seen any of those UNICEF ads on YouTube about the Rohingyan refugees? Those people are a hundred times worse off than anyone coming across the US border. Why aren't we swamping our politicians with letters about that? Yes, an argument can be made that Americans should be more concerned about what's happening on their borders than what other countries are doing with their refugees, because theoretically we can have more impact on what our own country does. But the fact is that there are traumatized children and refugees all over the world, and isolating the crisis down to the most media-worthy one (because USA and Trump) is a bit of a distortion effect. (I do not mean by this that therefore what's happening here is okay, just that I'm a bit cynical about all the people, especially non-Americans, flipping their shit about how this is the worst human rights crisis in the modern world.) Of course I have seen the news on what is happening to the Rohingya people. I am also aware of atrocities in other parts of the world. I commented on the US border crisis because that's what this thread was about. Start a thread about the other issues affecting refugees and people in crisis and I'll comment on those, too.
An as for my being 'non-American', so what? I don't get to have an opinion? Perhaps you don't realize how influential the U.S. is. Your internal policies affect your foreign policies, which has a huge affect on pretty much the rest of the world. So yes, I may not exactly 'flip my shit' but I will express an opinion, or even outrage if its warranted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 6:09:22 GMT -5
I quite obviously am flipping my shit about this, Gail, so I'll join you. I'll also join you in flipping my shit about other senseless atrocities in threads that discuss them.
Why do I and so many others think this worthy of flipping our shit over, when, I mean, it's just a bunch of kids separated from their families, probably forever, dumped in cages and abused?
Because it's not just happening somewhere, done by some evil mob. There isn't some natural catastrophe that led to a terrible situation no one could help. This shit we're flipping over is being done deliberately by the U.S. government, and within our own borders, and in violation of the U.S. Constitution's due process guarantees.
It's been carried out, deliberately, in the cruelest, most callous way, for the pure sake of being punitive.
It's being done, morever, for incredibly inadequate reasons.
It's being done to people who have already been through absolute hell.
And it's being done to children and babies.
If you say "but other babies!", go back to my first point and start again.
ETA:
Of all the many things in regard to which I have no patience for whataboutism, this policy ranks way up on the list.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 31, 2018 7:54:36 GMT -5
An as for my being 'non-American', so what? I don't get to have an opinion? Perhaps you don't realize how influential the U.S. is. Your internal policies affect your foreign policies, which has a huge affect on pretty much the rest of the world. So yes, I may not exactly 'flip my shit' but I will express an opinion, or even outrage if its warranted.
I'm aware of US influence and why everyone else takes an interest in what we do. The only part I was really taking issue with was what came off as finger-wagging: "Why aren't you Americans doing what you should be doing?" If Americans ever suggest what people in other countries should be doing, we get told we're meddlesome and should clean up our own houses and MYOB, but everyone else thinks they're qualified and entitled to lecture us. Yes, I think the situation here with immigrants on the border is terrible. You and Cass are right that I am not outraged to the degree that you are. That doesn't mean I feel no compassion or distress about it, it just doesn't move me to tears for reasons that have already been discussed, and I think the rest of the world, almost the entire world, has their own issues with immigrants and the poor and everyone else they could really try to deal with, not just photogenic crying children on the US border getting worldwide media coverage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 8:04:55 GMT -5
I guess, then, we Americans should stop getting all worked up over things that happen outside our borders.
And as for stuff within our borders, I mean, fuck it, bad things happen everywhere, amirite? It's not like crying out against the stuff our own country does will stop that other bad stuff, so what's the point?
How anyone can get worked up over caged kids deliberately orphaned by the U.S. government when there are random SJWs running about acting like idiots that we could be critiquing, I cannot even guess.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Jul 31, 2018 8:34:11 GMT -5
I think we can and should get worked up over things happening inside and outside our borders.
I'm sorry I don't get as worked up about this particular issue as you do. And I'm not being snarky - I really am sorry this issue doesn't touch me that deeply, because I suspect it indicates an erosion of empathy I've experienced for various reasons. I respect that this is an issue you care deeply about and are putting in a lot of work to fight, but my commenting on SJWs does not mean I literally think random SJW idiots are a worse problem than an immigration crisis.
|
|
|
Post by gaild on Jul 31, 2018 18:38:56 GMT -5
Amadan, I get what you're saying. It's maybe a bit like compassion fatigue - or even more likely, you're pacing yourself. There is so much human misery all over the world that if one had to 'flip one's shit' (sorry, that expression really amused me )at every report, one would end up a basket case. And I agree, most countries, I think, do have immigrant problems. We've had our fair share of xenophobic riots and brutalities (even though they were not government-approved). I think what made me weigh in about the U.S. is that it shocked me. I just didn't think America, of all countries, would tolerate that. Maybe, like me, the world holds you to a higher standard.
|
|
|
Post by Amadan on Aug 1, 2018 9:23:46 GMT -5
And I agree, most countries, I think, do have immigrant problems. We've had our fair share of xenophobic riots and brutalities (even though they were not government-approved). I think what made me weigh in about the U.S. is that it shocked me. I just didn't think America, of all countries, would tolerate that. Maybe, like me, the world holds you to a higher standard. I can be defensive about America (because I think the US does get held to a higher standard, and often unfairly and hypocritically), but on the other hand, it always bemuses me that people (both Americans and non-Americans) will express shock that the US could do such terrible things. Anti-immigration nativism and horrible racism has been part and parcel of our history from the beginning. "This isn't America, this isn't who we are" - um, well, yes, it is. But I still defend America because, frankly, I think the entire world is pretty awful, and the US is less awful than most of the world, and at least in principal, aspires to be better. The current contretemps at the border is bad, no question. But I think it's less terrible than a lot of other things, and I mostly object to the procedural tack this Administration is taking, rather than the fundamental question of whether we're entitled to get hard-assed about border control. What's happening right now isn't the worst thing the US has done in history, and I'm not even convinced it's the worst thing we're doing right now. (The long-term consequences of this Administration's economic and diplomatic actions will quite possibly bring about far more suffering, and not just in the US, than what's experienced by a few illegal immigrant families.)
|
|