2 ms·

> there are loud constituencies who are uneasy about formally allowing people to stay here while being totally content with allowing them to work here undocume

> there are loud constituencies who are uneasy about formally allowing people to stay here while being totally content with allowing them to work here undocumented, so long as they're kept second-class. If you have to get smuggled into a country without papers to live in this country and work for wages less than people who already live in the country, you sort of already have the expectation of being second class. Yet, people still come. It's a choice they make. It's not an easy choice, but still a choice. > we are a nation of laws and then >To deport undocumented workers with children born here is to put young American citizens in the position of having to choose between losing their parents or their home country. Pointlessly. The law is the point, as you said, we're a nation of laws. > The due process concerns about deportation are overwhelming. Due process is only a right guaranteed to citizens. Not quite sure what your point is.

tptacek 10y ago
That we are a nation of laws obviously does not mean we're a nation of ruthless, pointless enforcement of laws, or else we'd all be in prison for Harvey Silverglate's "Orange Juice" crimes. https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229 https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp...
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  > obviously does not mean we're a nation of ruthless, pointless enforcement of laws That's absolutely incorrect. Cops will and can enforce laws arbitrarily. If you're an illegal immigrant, you just have less rope to play with. If you get bored, do a search of police arrest records on how many people are charged with just "resisting arrest". Or you can always apply that timeless advice, "only do one illegal thing at once. For instance, either drive without a license, or have a tail light out. Not both". Immigrants already are driving metaphorically without a license.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Cops also take bribes, as I know from personal experience. But we are not a nation of bribing the cops, just as we are not a nation of ruthless, pointless enforcement of laws. At this point I'm wondering if we actually disagree, since you seem to be agreeing that deportation of families that include citizen children would qualify as ruthless.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      > deportation of families that include citizen children would qualify as ruthless. Depends. There are several instances. Trump has gradually softened his stance on illegal immigration, basically saying now that if you keep your nose clean, you probably won't get deported. If however the family contain family members who are violent criminals or have known gang ties? How is deporting them "ruthless"? It's self-preservation.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        Deporting violent criminals isn't ruthless. Whether or not Trump currently says he's going to do it is besides the point. That is a super common and easily disposed of objection from conservatives. If you don't think Trump is going to propose something, a pledge not to do it should be even less objectionable to Republicans.
        jimmywanger 10y ago
        > Deporting violent criminals isn't ruthless. But... but... think of their children and families! Aren't they human beings too?/s But then it comes down to a value judgement, and all laws/rules have edge cases. Should you take a generally good law, point to the edge cases, and then abolish the law? > If you don't think Trump is going to propose something, a pledge not to do it should be even less objectionable to Republicans. Not from a negotiating perspective. By keeping options in your pocket you're able to wrangle concessions from people.
        tptacek 10y ago
pcwalton 10y ago
> It's a choice they make. It's not an easy choice, but still a choice. And as for the children who never had a choice to make...?
- jimmywanger 10y ago
  That argument works for really any situation involving children. Children never had choices to make when born into an alcoholic family, or in a country in a war torn third world country, and yet they still suffer. That's just sort of how life is. The children suffer based on the mistakes of their parents. We have limited resources, and we have to decide how to partition these resources.
  - pcwalton 10y ago
    So because children suffer injustices, it's fine to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money to deliberately cause more injustice? That can't be your argument.
    - jimmywanger 10y ago
      > it's fine to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money to deliberately cause more injustice? To enforce the law and to prevent these injustices to happen in the future. How are you causing more injustice? That's sort of like saying "Why spend money to evict squatters in houses they don't own? They have children, and it costs money to evict them."
      - pcwalton 10y ago
        Childhood arrivals are not squatters!
        jimmywanger 10y ago
        Childhood arrivals are definitely squatters. If they're not born in the states or citizens. They're here when they shouldn't be here. Those that were born here are citizens, and get the choice like every other citizen - move to be with their families, or stay here alone. The fact that they're children is immaterial.
tptacek 10y ago
I should add: it's absolutely not the case that we extend due process only to US citizens.

tptacek 10y ago

That we are a nation of laws obviously does not mean we're a nation of ruthless, pointless enforcement of laws, or else we'd all be in prison for Harvey Silverglate's "Orange Juice" crimes. https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229 https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp...

jimmywanger 10y ago
> obviously does not mean we're a nation of ruthless, pointless enforcement of laws That's absolutely incorrect. Cops will and can enforce laws arbitrarily. If you're an illegal immigrant, you just have less rope to play with. If you get bored, do a search of police arrest records on how many people are charged with just "resisting arrest". Or you can always apply that timeless advice, "only do one illegal thing at once. For instance, either drive without a license, or have a tail light out. Not both". Immigrants already are driving metaphorically without a license.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Cops also take bribes, as I know from personal experience. But we are not a nation of bribing the cops, just as we are not a nation of ruthless, pointless enforcement of laws. At this point I'm wondering if we actually disagree, since you seem to be agreeing that deportation of families that include citizen children would qualify as ruthless.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    > deportation of families that include citizen children would qualify as ruthless. Depends. There are several instances. Trump has gradually softened his stance on illegal immigration, basically saying now that if you keep your nose clean, you probably won't get deported. If however the family contain family members who are violent criminals or have known gang ties? How is deporting them "ruthless"? It's self-preservation.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      Deporting violent criminals isn't ruthless. Whether or not Trump currently says he's going to do it is besides the point. That is a super common and easily disposed of objection from conservatives. If you don't think Trump is going to propose something, a pledge not to do it should be even less objectionable to Republicans.
      - jimmywanger 10y ago
        > Deporting violent criminals isn't ruthless. But... but... think of their children and families! Aren't they human beings too?/s But then it comes down to a value judgement, and all laws/rules have edge cases. Should you take a generally good law, point to the edge cases, and then abolish the law? > If you don't think Trump is going to propose something, a pledge not to do it should be even less objectionable to Republicans. Not from a negotiating perspective. By keeping options in your pocket you're able to wrangle concessions from people.
        tptacek 10y ago

pcwalton 10y ago

> It's a choice they make. It's not an easy choice, but still a choice. And as for the children who never had a choice to make...?

jimmywanger 10y ago
That argument works for really any situation involving children. Children never had choices to make when born into an alcoholic family, or in a country in a war torn third world country, and yet they still suffer. That's just sort of how life is. The children suffer based on the mistakes of their parents. We have limited resources, and we have to decide how to partition these resources.
- pcwalton 10y ago
  So because children suffer injustices, it's fine to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money to deliberately cause more injustice? That can't be your argument.
  - jimmywanger 10y ago
    > it's fine to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money to deliberately cause more injustice? To enforce the law and to prevent these injustices to happen in the future. How are you causing more injustice? That's sort of like saying "Why spend money to evict squatters in houses they don't own? They have children, and it costs money to evict them."
    - pcwalton 10y ago
      Childhood arrivals are not squatters!
      - jimmywanger 10y ago
        Childhood arrivals are definitely squatters. If they're not born in the states or citizens. They're here when they shouldn't be here. Those that were born here are citizens, and get the choice like every other citizen - move to be with their families, or stay here alone. The fact that they're children is immaterial.

tptacek 10y ago

I should add: it's absolutely not the case that we extend due process only to US citizens.