8 ms·

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, ho

by 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.

by LiNeXT 7y ago

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.