4 ms·

This biggest one for me is this: https://www.aclu.org/cases/damus-v-mcaleenan https://www.aclu.org/cases/damus-v-mcaleenan . ICE's position is that they should

This biggest one for me is this: https://www.aclu.org/cases/damus-v-mcaleenan https://www.aclu.org/cases/damus-v-mcaleenan . ICE's position is that they should be able to detain all people who are legally petitioning for asylum without any bail hearings.

culot 7y ago
So if you don't detain them you do what then? Let them roam free? Considering the amount of fraud related to asylum claims, with entire legal entities dedicated to coaching aliens to provide fake testimony, letting them roam free is a definite risk for citizens. Especially as they are coming from one of the most violent warlord-controlled warzones in the hemisphere.
- zo1 7y ago
  This whole problem could be precluded by doing a few simple steps: 1. Build a wall to control flow. 2. Allow anyone to come to the border and seek asylum. 3. Have enough humane beds/housing to store them at the border while their application is processed. 4. Hire enough officials and judges to process all claims timeously. 5. Fingerprint, photograph and document anyone that applies. 6. Turn away all individuals that re-apply without new evidence and attempt to clog the system by creating too much load. Oh and 7: If they come as a family, let them stay together under monitoring. And corollary to 7 would be 8: Do DNA tests on all family groups to affirm family status to prevent trafficking At this point, if no hiccups arise, the wall is only necessary for those that wish to bypass a well-functioning system designed to treat people humanely and allow them to get refuge if they are being persecuted. Edit: fixed formatting.
LiNeXT 7y ago
Just because someone petitions for asylum doesn't mean they have a valid claim to it. If your position is that anyone claiming asylum should not be detained, how do you propose to differentiate between valid and invalid claims such as to sort out who should and shouldn't be detained?
- openasocket 7y ago
  With bail hearings, the exact same way we've always done it, including for asylum cases. It's only under this administration that we stopped having bail hearings for asylum seekers.
  - LiNeXT 7y ago
    Source for this claim? [Edit: I seem some references in links on that ACLU page referring to "parole" being denied. Is this what you are referring to?]
    - openasocket 7y ago
      That asylum seekers used to be released prior to their hearing, and are no longer? It's official policy https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/16/doj-bonds-asylum-seekers-1362789 https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/16/doj-bonds-asylum-s... . If you don't trust politico, they link to AG Barr's memo, which states: "The question presented is whether aliens who are originally placed in expedited proceedings and then transferred to full proceedings after establishing a credible fear become eligible for bond upon transfer. I conclude that such aliens remain ineligible for bond, whether they are arriving at the border or are apprehended in the United States" There's also the issue of parole: releasing asylum seekers if they were initially approved for asylum by the court but the government is appealing the decision. In Damus v. McAleenan. In the recent decision (https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/asylum-parole.pdf https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/as... ) the Judge notes that, while parole was granted in over 90% of these cases in 2016, parole hasn't been granted for a single such case in all of 2019.
downerending 7y ago
Thank you for the link. If this is the most horrible act, I guess I remain unconvinced that there's any fire here. I'm not sure I even understand why detaining is inappropriate.

culot 7y ago

So if you don't detain them you do what then? Let them roam free? Considering the amount of fraud related to asylum claims, with entire legal entities dedicated to coaching aliens to provide fake testimony, letting them roam free is a definite risk for citizens. Especially as they are coming from one of the most violent warlord-controlled warzones in the hemisphere.

zo1 7y ago
This whole problem could be precluded by doing a few simple steps: 1. Build a wall to control flow. 2. Allow anyone to come to the border and seek asylum. 3. Have enough humane beds/housing to store them at the border while their application is processed. 4. Hire enough officials and judges to process all claims timeously. 5. Fingerprint, photograph and document anyone that applies. 6. Turn away all individuals that re-apply without new evidence and attempt to clog the system by creating too much load. Oh and 7: If they come as a family, let them stay together under monitoring. And corollary to 7 would be 8: Do DNA tests on all family groups to affirm family status to prevent trafficking At this point, if no hiccups arise, the wall is only necessary for those that wish to bypass a well-functioning system designed to treat people humanely and allow them to get refuge if they are being persecuted. Edit: fixed formatting.

LiNeXT 7y ago

Just because someone petitions for asylum doesn't mean they have a valid claim to it. If your position is that anyone claiming asylum should not be detained, how do you propose to differentiate between valid and invalid claims such as to sort out who should and shouldn't be detained?

openasocket 7y ago
With bail hearings, the exact same way we've always done it, including for asylum cases. It's only under this administration that we stopped having bail hearings for asylum seekers.
- LiNeXT 7y ago
  Source for this claim? [Edit: I seem some references in links on that ACLU page referring to "parole" being denied. Is this what you are referring to?]
  - openasocket 7y ago
    That asylum seekers used to be released prior to their hearing, and are no longer? It's official policy https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/16/doj-bonds-asylum-seekers-1362789 https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/16/doj-bonds-asylum-s... . If you don't trust politico, they link to AG Barr's memo, which states: "The question presented is whether aliens who are originally placed in expedited proceedings and then transferred to full proceedings after establishing a credible fear become eligible for bond upon transfer. I conclude that such aliens remain ineligible for bond, whether they are arriving at the border or are apprehended in the United States" There's also the issue of parole: releasing asylum seekers if they were initially approved for asylum by the court but the government is appealing the decision. In Damus v. McAleenan. In the recent decision (https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/asylum-parole.pdf https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/as... ) the Judge notes that, while parole was granted in over 90% of these cases in 2016, parole hasn't been granted for a single such case in all of 2019.

downerending 7y ago

Thank you for the link. If this is the most horrible act, I guess I remain unconvinced that there's any fire here. I'm not sure I even understand why detaining is inappropriate.