8 ms·

Deporting people who are in the country illegally is in line with the constitution. Deporting people without due process is not.

ElevenLathe 1y ago
Even this is stretching it. It's not as though the Andrew Jackson administration was doing deportations (besides the Trail of Tears, which was euphemistically referred to as a deportation campaign). The practice of criminalizing immigration enforcement didn't coincide with any amendment to the Constitution, which is itself only nominally even part of U.S. law anymore.
Dig1t 1y ago
Genuinely curious for a good faith answer: one administration allows tens of millions of people into the country during its term. You are saying that every individual is owed multiple court hearings, the full gamut which is usually used for people overstaying a visa or something. A system equipped to handle a relatively small number of people. The court system cannot possibly fulfill these tens of millions of cases in any reasonable time frame. These people will be in court for the rest of our lives and in the meantime they will have children and ultimately be allowed to stay forever by some future administration. Which is basically the same as just making them citizens. Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. Or maybe I’m missing something and haven’t heard the other side’s arguments.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
  > Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. I think we are at a point where we should accept that there will be decades of court dates. The real alternative is that anyone can be taken away because there would be no process for even a multi-generation born citizen to challenge the arrest. The real deterrent for it happening to such a citizen is reporting and publicity, which is increasingly seeming like it can be thwarted by a population that is primed to strip the humanity of those they disagree with. The way this is being handled, the timeline where we just let those 10 million stay in the country and avoid similar things in the future seems very appealing indeed. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as the saying goes.
  - Dig1t 1y ago
    >just let those 10 million stay in the country and avoid similar things in the future But this is what I’m getting at, this is not the first time this has happened, it’s been happening with millions of people for generations now. Heck Reagan pardoned millions back in the 1980’s. So how long are we supposed to keep saying “okay you guys can stay but let’s do better in the future”? After so many decades it is obvious that nothing is going to change without some kind of drastic political change, which is basically why Trump was elected. But just looking at the system from a Birds Eye view: it’s easy in, difficult out. All it takes is one president to not enforce the law and the law is basically moot. Just seems disingenuous the people saying deporting people is horrible yet offering no solutions other than to just let them all stay here forever. We are well past the point where saying we’ll do better in the future is an argument that anyone will accept. Why is there nobody suggesting a law to expedite or fast track the “due process”? That at least seems like a moderate approach.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
      > people saying deporting people is horrible No, you are not hearing what I am saying. This particular implementation of deportations puts you and I and anyone else at long-term risk of being deported in a similar manner. It puts legal residents at a more immediate risk of being deported in a similar manner. You can’t fast-track due process; that is the point. If you are not afforded due process for allegations that you are an illegal immigrant before you are shipped away then the damage is done and it doesn’t matter that you can prove you were born here to parents who were born here.
      - Dig1t 1y ago
        I understand what you’re saying and I can agree with you that the rule of law is important. You are ignoring the fact that the previous admin ignored due process for letting them in in the first place, but that was not my original question. You still have not offered any kind of solution other than letting them all stay forever, and at this point the majority of the electorate is more interested in seeing them all go back than making sure that every single one gets their day in court. > You can’t fast-track due process We can make laws and change systems, a serious good faith solution would be to propose changes to the due process to account for this case we keep finding ourselves in where we have 20 million people who need to be processed and a system with no hope of handling them all.
- ryan_lane 1y ago
  Let's not continue using propaganda numbers around undocumented immigrants. There's not 10s of millions of illegal immigrants. There's roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants in total, and that number has _decreased_ since the early 2000s (when it was closer to 12 million). A decent percentage of these immigrants are seasonal. A very, very small percentage of the total of undocumented immigrants have criminal histories. Focusing efforts on violent criminals is reasonable, but that doesn't meet the propaganda numbers from the current administration. Deporting tens of thousands of people just doesn't rally hate the same way. Rather than spending time and money building concentration camps, building out secret police (ICE), and deporting people without due process, we could be fixing our immigration system. Let's make work visas that allow migrant workers to work seasonally. Let's add paths to citizenship to migrant workers. Let's prioritize fast paths to citizenship for students, especially those with masters and PHDs. Let's introduce a point system to encourage immigration of the best and brightest from high demand countries, allowing them prioritized visas, PRs and naturalization. Let's fix the DREAMER situation by providing those folks clear paths to citizenship. The reason the immigration situation doesn't get better is because republicans need it to be broken. They use undocumented immigrants as a group to target hate against, which rallies their base.
  - aydyn 1y ago
    > The reason the immigration situation doesn't get better is because republicans need it to be broken. I try to keep an open mind but its very hard to take the debate seriously when you end with disingenuous points like this.
    - UncleMeat 1y ago
      Why'd they refuse to pass an immigration bill under Biden then?
      - aydyn 1y ago
        Do you really think its a winning argument to say that, actually, its conservatives wanting more illegal immigration? Bizarre.
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  "Following the law is tedious and expensive" is not actually an argument for violating the law. All rights for criminal defendants make the state's job harder.
- dummydummy1234 1y ago
  So why not hire a 15-20 thousand judges? They just increased the budget for ice prisons form 3 billion to 40 billion, and did not increase the budget for the legal infrastructure needed to adequately process everyone. Why they need to do is increase funding for judges, and make the process faster. Aka, like what the Larkin bill did, but the GOP killed that, because solving the immigration issues would be bad for them electorally. Is seems like the plan is to just lock people up... And then nothing, except maybe deport them to random countries and let them sort them out. Keep in mind that this has not been a 'biden' issue. The illegal immigrants already have in many cases been in the US for decades, due to ag/construction/hospitality wanting labor at rates Americans were unwilling to work. Instead, of actually addressing the issue (why are people allowed to hire illegal immigrants in the first place, seems like cutting off the job supply would work as well). But the question becomes, why are they increasing the infrastructure for locking people up, but not the infrastructure for due process, seems like they want to throw out due process. Keep in mind, the people they grab off the streets have not all been illegal immigrants, many are legal on work/student/refugee visas. And maybe you disagree that these people should have been allowed visas in the first place, but there are ways to change those laws.
  - Whoppertime 1y ago
    This would be more convincing if you told us how many judges are currently working, how many cases they handle in a year, and how hiring that many judges would be able to allow quicker turn around, as is, it could be not resolving the issue he described, and result in them waiting around for 20 years for a trial instead of 30 years.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- thinkharderdev 1y ago
  You are confusing two separate things: 1. What to do with people apprehended entering the country illegally and who then claim asylum. 2. What to do with people already inside the country who are suspected of being here illegally. The first thing is complicated and badly in need of a rethink because clearly our asylum laws are being gamed. I don't have any ready answers but I'm sure that there are a zillion proposals for reform. For the second thing, yes I believe that if you are suspected of being in the US illegally then you should absolutely have the right to challenge deportation in court. Otherwise literally anyone can be scooped up off the street and deported with no recourse whether they are an American citizen or not. And honestly it is a bit maddening to see people continuously fail to grasp (or pretend to fail to grasp) this basic point.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
knowitnone 1y ago
so you're willing to pay for it?
- SauciestGNU 1y ago
  And a bullet is cheaper then incarceration. But we have a duty to human rights, which isn't always cost effective or expedient. But if those rights are lost for anyone they're lost for everyone. After all, how do you prove you're owed due process in the absence of said due process?
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  Prosecutions would be much cheaper if defendants couldn't get court appointed lawyers. Or if we didn't have the exclusionary rule. Or if prosecutions didn't need to turn over Brady evidence. Are you willing to pay for these things? It'd be much more efficient for a cop to simply murder anybody suspected of a crime. Efficiency should not be the goal when it comes to people's rights.
- thinkharderdev 1y ago
  Yes, absolutely. Just like I'm willing to pay for due process for everyone charged with a crime in this country.
account42 1y ago
Most countries don't give you a court hearing for being in the country without a visa or other authorization. Being shipped into a detention facility until you can be deported is the norm here.
- mmcwilliams 1y ago
  How many of those countries are subject to the US constitution?
  - Whoppertime 1y ago
    The constitution isn't a suicide pact You can't have lawlessness in entry and checks and balances on exit.
- RandomThoughts3 1y ago
  [dead]

ElevenLathe 1y ago

Even this is stretching it. It's not as though the Andrew Jackson administration was doing deportations (besides the Trail of Tears, which was euphemistically referred to as a deportation campaign). The practice of criminalizing immigration enforcement didn't coincide with any amendment to the Constitution, which is itself only nominally even part of U.S. law anymore.

Dig1t 1y ago

Genuinely curious for a good faith answer: one administration allows tens of millions of people into the country during its term. You are saying that every individual is owed multiple court hearings, the full gamut which is usually used for people overstaying a visa or something. A system equipped to handle a relatively small number of people. The court system cannot possibly fulfill these tens of millions of cases in any reasonable time frame. These people will be in court for the rest of our lives and in the meantime they will have children and ultimately be allowed to stay forever by some future administration. Which is basically the same as just making them citizens. Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. Or maybe I’m missing something and haven’t heard the other side’s arguments.

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
> Do you have a proposed solution other than decades worth of court dates? It doesn’t really seem like the other side has a good faith solution to the problem other than just letting them all stay here forever. I think we are at a point where we should accept that there will be decades of court dates. The real alternative is that anyone can be taken away because there would be no process for even a multi-generation born citizen to challenge the arrest. The real deterrent for it happening to such a citizen is reporting and publicity, which is increasingly seeming like it can be thwarted by a population that is primed to strip the humanity of those they disagree with. The way this is being handled, the timeline where we just let those 10 million stay in the country and avoid similar things in the future seems very appealing indeed. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as the saying goes.
- Dig1t 1y ago
  >just let those 10 million stay in the country and avoid similar things in the future But this is what I’m getting at, this is not the first time this has happened, it’s been happening with millions of people for generations now. Heck Reagan pardoned millions back in the 1980’s. So how long are we supposed to keep saying “okay you guys can stay but let’s do better in the future”? After so many decades it is obvious that nothing is going to change without some kind of drastic political change, which is basically why Trump was elected. But just looking at the system from a Birds Eye view: it’s easy in, difficult out. All it takes is one president to not enforce the law and the law is basically moot. Just seems disingenuous the people saying deporting people is horrible yet offering no solutions other than to just let them all stay here forever. We are well past the point where saying we’ll do better in the future is an argument that anyone will accept. Why is there nobody suggesting a law to expedite or fast track the “due process”? That at least seems like a moderate approach.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    > people saying deporting people is horrible No, you are not hearing what I am saying. This particular implementation of deportations puts you and I and anyone else at long-term risk of being deported in a similar manner. It puts legal residents at a more immediate risk of being deported in a similar manner. You can’t fast-track due process; that is the point. If you are not afforded due process for allegations that you are an illegal immigrant before you are shipped away then the damage is done and it doesn’t matter that you can prove you were born here to parents who were born here.
    - Dig1t 1y ago
      I understand what you’re saying and I can agree with you that the rule of law is important. You are ignoring the fact that the previous admin ignored due process for letting them in in the first place, but that was not my original question. You still have not offered any kind of solution other than letting them all stay forever, and at this point the majority of the electorate is more interested in seeing them all go back than making sure that every single one gets their day in court. > You can’t fast-track due process We can make laws and change systems, a serious good faith solution would be to propose changes to the due process to account for this case we keep finding ourselves in where we have 20 million people who need to be processed and a system with no hope of handling them all.
ryan_lane 1y ago
Let's not continue using propaganda numbers around undocumented immigrants. There's not 10s of millions of illegal immigrants. There's roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants in total, and that number has _decreased_ since the early 2000s (when it was closer to 12 million). A decent percentage of these immigrants are seasonal. A very, very small percentage of the total of undocumented immigrants have criminal histories. Focusing efforts on violent criminals is reasonable, but that doesn't meet the propaganda numbers from the current administration. Deporting tens of thousands of people just doesn't rally hate the same way. Rather than spending time and money building concentration camps, building out secret police (ICE), and deporting people without due process, we could be fixing our immigration system. Let's make work visas that allow migrant workers to work seasonally. Let's add paths to citizenship to migrant workers. Let's prioritize fast paths to citizenship for students, especially those with masters and PHDs. Let's introduce a point system to encourage immigration of the best and brightest from high demand countries, allowing them prioritized visas, PRs and naturalization. Let's fix the DREAMER situation by providing those folks clear paths to citizenship. The reason the immigration situation doesn't get better is because republicans need it to be broken. They use undocumented immigrants as a group to target hate against, which rallies their base.
- aydyn 1y ago
  > The reason the immigration situation doesn't get better is because republicans need it to be broken. I try to keep an open mind but its very hard to take the debate seriously when you end with disingenuous points like this.
  - UncleMeat 1y ago
    Why'd they refuse to pass an immigration bill under Biden then?
    - aydyn 1y ago
      Do you really think its a winning argument to say that, actually, its conservatives wanting more illegal immigration? Bizarre.
UncleMeat 1y ago
"Following the law is tedious and expensive" is not actually an argument for violating the law. All rights for criminal defendants make the state's job harder.
dummydummy1234 1y ago
So why not hire a 15-20 thousand judges? They just increased the budget for ice prisons form 3 billion to 40 billion, and did not increase the budget for the legal infrastructure needed to adequately process everyone. Why they need to do is increase funding for judges, and make the process faster. Aka, like what the Larkin bill did, but the GOP killed that, because solving the immigration issues would be bad for them electorally. Is seems like the plan is to just lock people up... And then nothing, except maybe deport them to random countries and let them sort them out. Keep in mind that this has not been a 'biden' issue. The illegal immigrants already have in many cases been in the US for decades, due to ag/construction/hospitality wanting labor at rates Americans were unwilling to work. Instead, of actually addressing the issue (why are people allowed to hire illegal immigrants in the first place, seems like cutting off the job supply would work as well). But the question becomes, why are they increasing the infrastructure for locking people up, but not the infrastructure for due process, seems like they want to throw out due process. Keep in mind, the people they grab off the streets have not all been illegal immigrants, many are legal on work/student/refugee visas. And maybe you disagree that these people should have been allowed visas in the first place, but there are ways to change those laws.
- Whoppertime 1y ago
  This would be more convincing if you told us how many judges are currently working, how many cases they handle in a year, and how hiring that many judges would be able to allow quicker turn around, as is, it could be not resolving the issue he described, and result in them waiting around for 20 years for a trial instead of 30 years.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
thinkharderdev 1y ago
You are confusing two separate things: 1. What to do with people apprehended entering the country illegally and who then claim asylum. 2. What to do with people already inside the country who are suspected of being here illegally. The first thing is complicated and badly in need of a rethink because clearly our asylum laws are being gamed. I don't have any ready answers but I'm sure that there are a zillion proposals for reform. For the second thing, yes I believe that if you are suspected of being in the US illegally then you should absolutely have the right to challenge deportation in court. Otherwise literally anyone can be scooped up off the street and deported with no recourse whether they are an American citizen or not. And honestly it is a bit maddening to see people continuously fail to grasp (or pretend to fail to grasp) this basic point.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

knowitnone 1y ago

so you're willing to pay for it?

SauciestGNU 1y ago
And a bullet is cheaper then incarceration. But we have a duty to human rights, which isn't always cost effective or expedient. But if those rights are lost for anyone they're lost for everyone. After all, how do you prove you're owed due process in the absence of said due process?
UncleMeat 1y ago
Prosecutions would be much cheaper if defendants couldn't get court appointed lawyers. Or if we didn't have the exclusionary rule. Or if prosecutions didn't need to turn over Brady evidence. Are you willing to pay for these things? It'd be much more efficient for a cop to simply murder anybody suspected of a crime. Efficiency should not be the goal when it comes to people's rights.
thinkharderdev 1y ago
Yes, absolutely. Just like I'm willing to pay for due process for everyone charged with a crime in this country.

account42 1y ago

Most countries don't give you a court hearing for being in the country without a visa or other authorization. Being shipped into a detention facility until you can be deported is the norm here.

mmcwilliams 1y ago
How many of those countries are subject to the US constitution?
- Whoppertime 1y ago
  The constitution isn't a suicide pact You can't have lawlessness in entry and checks and balances on exit.
RandomThoughts3 1y ago
[dead]