—> ICE / Immigration / Nation grapples with ICE killings

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 7K
  • Views: 227K
  • Politics 
Because I do see deportation as the right policy but the methods used to accomplish it as counterproductive.
Also, "counterproductive?" That feels very passive to me. It feels like the passive voice saying "mistakes were made."

Why "counterproductive?" Because it looks bad to the general public? Because it creates bad PR? Because it hurts the administration's approval ratings? You don't just see the tactics as cruel?
 
That 5 minutes from Dan Goldman is amazing and I want more of that from our Dems in Congress

 
This wording distinguishes between conviction and charge and implies that both make you susceptible to deportation.

Asylum seekers find themselves in a particularly precarious position when entangled with the criminal justice system. A criminal conviction can be a significant barrier to obtaining asylum, as it may lead to a finding of inadmissibility or deportability. The U.S. government takes a stringent approach to asylum seekers with criminal records, often barring them from relief if they are convicted of particularly serious crimes or multiple offenses. It’s a delicate balance for those fleeing persecution, as the very protection they seek in the U.S. can be jeopardized by criminal charges. Asylum seekers must navigate this complex intersection of criminal and immigration law with care, as the consequences of a misstep can be the difference between safety and a return to danger.

 
How do you then reconcile that with the concept of fairness?
Do you not think millions of people living here illegally given the housing crisis makes it worse for those here legally who struggle with affordable housing?
I dont even attempt to reconcile anything in this nation with fairness. If fairness existed, 99% of those with 8 figure bank accounts would be executed in the street tomorrow. If fairness existed, we would give every snatch of land on the continental US back to native Americans.

And no...I do not believe that importing a HUGE increase in the labor pool that produces housing has exacerbated a housing shortage. Nor do I believe that reducing that labor pool will lead to an improvement in housing availability.
 
I dont even attempt to reconcile anything in this nation with fairness. If fairness existed, 99% of those with 8 figure bank accounts would be executed in the street tomorrow. If fairness existed, we would give every snatch of land on the continental US back to native Americans.

And no...I do not believe that importing a HUGE increase in the labor pool that produces housing has exacerbated a housing shortage. Nor do I believe that reducing that labor pool will lead to an improvement in housing availability.
i kinda doubt that 99% of fortunes in the tens of millions were ill-gotten. hundreds of millions and billions.....different story.
 
This wording distinguishes between conviction and charge and implies that both make you susceptible to deportation.

Asylum seekers find themselves in a particularly precarious position when entangled with the criminal justice system. A criminal conviction can be a significant barrier to obtaining asylum, as it may lead to a finding of inadmissibility or deportability. The U.S. government takes a stringent approach to asylum seekers with criminal records, often barring them from relief if they are convicted of particularly serious crimes or multiple offenses. It’s a delicate balance for those fleeing persecution, as the very protection they seek in the U.S. can be jeopardized by criminal charges. Asylum seekers must navigate this complex intersection of criminal and immigration law with care, as the consequences of a misstep can be the difference between safety and a return to danger.

That wording seems to suggest that seeking asylum while you have charges pending against you is the issue, not so drummed up charge that a deputy sheriff in Podunk, Texas made up once you got here. I might be wrong but i still expect no worse than a tie with you.
 
What’s so hard about saying, “no, that’s a lie and you should be ashamed for comparing the two.”
Or he could say, “Are you comparing ICE to Central American drug cartels? I realize they are waiting outside churches and schools to apprehend people as they come and go with their families, but comparing them to Central American drug cartels is a bit much.”
 
But you agree it would be very easy for other sources to refute it if not true correct? I mean don't you think the NYT would love to highlight fox news making up fictional people with fabricated criminal charges? I give you more credit than that. This did't come from Hannity. Hard to discuss anything in good faith if every source of information that doesn't align with your pov is discredited. It's not like sources I'm assuming you have faith in haven't been very publicly exposed to intentionally misreporting information only to later go back and go "my bad". I'm certainly no champion of the press. Right or left.
No one is suggesting FoxNews made up names, only that rather than asking for more details that could better identify the person and crimes/convictions in question, Fox did nothing more than repeat what they’d been told by DHS.
As it is, all we have is a few names and vague crimes. I googled a couple of the names and got little more than other conservative sites (AOL, LOL) parroting the same Fox News piece. If someone had been arrested, charged and convicted of murder, you’d think it might show up in a search, especially when their name is something much rarer than Dave Smith or John Williams and you include “murder” in the query.
Again, I’m not saying these people weren’t arrested when and where DHS claims or that they aren’t guilty of the listed crimes, but neither DHS nor FoxNews did anything to remove the skepticism that both entities have earned through a distinguished record of bad acts.
 
This wording distinguishes between conviction and charge and implies that both make you susceptible to deportation.

Asylum seekers find themselves in a particularly precarious position when entangled with the criminal justice system. A criminal conviction can be a significant barrier to obtaining asylum, as it may lead to a finding of inadmissibility or deportability. The U.S. government takes a stringent approach to asylum seekers with criminal records, often barring them from relief if they are convicted of particularly serious crimes or multiple offenses. It’s a delicate balance for those fleeing persecution, as the very protection they seek in the U.S. can be jeopardized by criminal charges. Asylum seekers must navigate this complex intersection of criminal and immigration law with care, as the consequences of a misstep can be the difference between safety and a return to danger.

1. You are quoting a sales document. These types of info pages always play up threats because that's how they get business. You might notice the following at the bottom of the page: " Our experienced team is dedicated to providing comprehensive legal services to non-citizens facing the immigration consequences of criminal charges. If you or a loved one is navigating this complex legal landscape, we invite you to contact us. Together, we can explore your options, develop a tailored defense strategy, and fight for your right to remain in the United States. For expert guidance and advocacy, reach out to us at our Chicago office and take the first step towards securing your future."

This is not a judicial opinion or legal brief or statute where the authors would be striving for precision.

2. But the language doesn't say that charges alone can be grounds for deportation. It says that the asylum status could be jeopardized. For instance:

* An asylum seeker who is offered a plea bargain might not understand that the guilty plea is a conviction and could make asylum difficult to obtain
* An asylum seeker might volunteer information in the course of an investigation that could be used in a proceeding against them -- asylum seekers being almost by definition unfamiliar with US law and in many cases the rule of law in general.
* If an asylum seeker is being detained without bond, that person could miss their hearing.

Any more questions? Or are you going to dig up some more random shit on google?
 
That wording seems to suggest that seeking asylum while you have charges pending against you is the issue, not so drummed up charge that a deputy sheriff in Podunk, Texas made up once you got here. I might be wrong but i still expect no worse than a tie with you.
No, it's more that the charges can have downstream effects that have a practical impact. The charges alone are not grounds for removal.
 
Under trumpism could not charges alone become grounds for removal?
What do you mean, under trumpism? If Trump could make the law, sure he'd make it that way. If he's going to disregard the law, then he will be able to go as far as the courts and congress let him.

But the law is the law. Due process applies to everyone.
 
Also, "counterproductive?" That feels very passive to me. It feels like the passive voice saying "mistakes were made."

Why "counterproductive?" Because it looks bad to the general public? Because it creates bad PR? Because it hurts the administration's approval ratings? You don't just see the tactics as cruel?
I see it as counterproductive because it makes the task at hand harder than it needs to be or impedes the goal. Yes, many mistakes have been made. A rational person with any perspective understands that the general public doesn't have all the details of what takes place in a given situation so why undertake measures that have the potential to backfire given that the media isn't likely to be on your side. Legally states and cities aren't required to assist ice so why not spend the necessary time to negotiate the cooperation needed to avoid the scenes that have played out. Has any of the chaos helped in achieving the goal? When people like me who support deporting those here illegally go "what the fuck are you doing", then you haven't managed anything to do with it well.

Cruel isn't a word I would use personally though I can understand how people opposed to deportations would go there. I have spent enough time in the business world to know that the vast majority of people want to do their jobs the right way. When they don't it is usually the fault of management which is what I perceive as the majority of the problems with ice. Wrong plan, wrong tone, wrong training, wrong leadership, etc. I'm sure there are a few rogue ice cops who get off on trying to inflict as much harm as possible but as with most jobs those are a very tiny fraction of people. I suspect that your concept of cruelty goes beyond individual cases and includes the intent to deport many of those here illegally.
 
I see it as counterproductive because it makes the task at hand harder than it needs to be or impedes the goal. Yes, many mistakes have been made. A rational person with any perspective understands that the general public doesn't have all the details of what takes place in a given situation so why undertake measures that have the potential to backfire given that the media isn't likely to be on your side. Legally states and cities aren't required to assist ice so why not spend the necessary time to negotiate the cooperation needed to avoid the scenes that have played out. Has any of the chaos helped in achieving the goal? When people like me who support deporting those here illegally go "what the fuck are you doing", then you haven't managed anything to do with it well.

Cruel isn't a word I would use personally though I can understand how people opposed to deportations would go there. I have spent enough time in the business world to know that the vast majority of people want to do their jobs the right way. When they don't it is usually the fault of management which is what I perceive as the majority of the problems with ice. Wrong plan, wrong tone, wrong training, wrong leadership, etc. I'm sure there are a few rogue ice cops who get off on trying to inflict as much harm as possible but as with most jobs those are a very tiny fraction of people. I suspect that your concept of cruelty goes beyond individual cases and includes the intent to deport many of those here illegally.
I don’t think people are saying the mere deportation of illegal immigrants is cruel. At least I wouldn’t say that.
But much of what ICE and DHS is doing since Trump came into power is definitely cruel.
 
Back
Top