As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

U.S Immigration

2456738

Posts

  • Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister Registered User regular
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    Styrofoam SammichDoodmannDarkPrimusKetBraTetraNitroCubaneoverride367HacksawDee KaeYamiB.Kraint
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    Forar wrote: »
    Not to predict the future, but if they don't vet the homes and people being brought in/retained to do the work, I imagine at least some of the outrage about the speed of this situation would be replaced with outrage that they didn't take more time to do it right, especially with the GOP obstructing and presumably a bunch of assholes in the system slow rolling and digging in their heels.

    The Q idiots on Facebook would have a field day if some kids were sent to actual child traffickers.

  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud friend pelican soft and relaxing mouthRegistered User regular
    this applies to more than the concentration camps themselves which are entirely indefensible (as is any opinion on them that isn't "let everyone currently imprisoned go and burn them to the ground," in my opinion), the democrats are going to need to figure out a way to get those senators in line so they can do literally anything or they're in serious trouble. "vote for us some more even though we can't get even close the concentration camps because members of our party don't want to" is not a winning message to go into the midterms with, especially when kids in cages was one of the main lines they used last year

    anyway, let everyone currently imprisoned go and burn them to the ground.

    Go where? Okay 11 year old girl, you are free to go....

    this is a really bad justification for not only keeping concentration camps open but expanding their size and use, and being that i'm not trying to defend such it isn't really on me to figure out what to do instead

    in any case almost all of the children in the concentration camps were going to a particular place (usually family) before they got kidnapped by immigration agents. a lot of them were also with their parents before they got separated! "go where" is a problem that was almost entirely caused by the camps' existence in the first place
    It is actually up to you indeed to come up with a solution if your solution was just let them go.
    It takes a significant time to locate their US family members AND validate that they are indeed appropriate wards for the children.
    That doesn't excuse keeping them in horrific conditions without a solution however.

    pelcan Mouth perfect size for put poster in to n\ap! inside poster sleep soundly put poster in Pelicn Mouth no problems because good Support for poster neck weak of big poster head
    zagdrobshrykeiTunesIsEviljmcdonaldElvenshaeFencingsaxGnizmoDamnItCohaagenLord_AsmodeusTofystedethJaysonFourKristmas Kthulhu
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    I think it's still the total lack of access that's fuckin this whole thing up for me.

    Like i can understand the idea that simple logistics is a issue we're overcoming and that we're trying to get the right systems in place to properly get these kids where they were headed or into a more proper foster/adoption system. That doing so is an unfortunately tedious process that may take some time.

    Heck I can be understanding that getting these facilities updated and filled with the proper amenities to make them not nightmare factories and indeed a pleasant 2 or 3 night stay as bureaucratic and logistical machinery works is also going to take time.

    However a thing that can be done quite easily is that we can get lawyers, independent investigators, possibly international investigators, and maybe even our own government investigators into the facilities to get first hand accounts from these children, to make sure we are actually improving conditions in the facilities and the process by which they are moved through those facilities. As well to get accounts of treatment under the previous government in the explicit goal to see what level of punishment needs to be levied at the CBP agents involved.

    It all starts with access, and granting access is free and fuckin easy. Let these children speak. Let us see what is going on in these camps. Hiding it is the thing that makes me greatly favor the belief that we're probably not doing much better by the kids than we were 3 months ago.

    DoodmannFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudKamarGnizmoKaputaNobeardYamiB.never dieKristmas Kthulhu
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    I know the Dems are terrified of looking weak on security issues but if we can't get rid of the depts, the entire leadership of ICE, CBP and DHS needs to be canned and new people brought in.

    These agencies are rotten to the core.

    DoodmannSleepStyrofoam SammichMetzger MeisterFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudzagdrobDarkPrimusElvenshaeKamarTetraNitroCubaneTofystedethJaysonFourNobeardHacksawOrcaDee KaeKristmas KthulhuKraint
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    SmrtnikGnome-InterruptusOrca
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    edited March 24
    I suspect that the recent ramping up of conservative rhetoric regarding Biden and the border will sufficiently scare them into scaling back on whatever their base-case-scenario was for immigration reform, or even immigration marginal adjustment, and will simply lower it on their list of priorities and encourage voters to follow suit.

    It's largely political either way, and there's a lot of evidence to suggest that there are a lot of people that are more than eager not to care about immigration until closer to the midterms, at least.

    Javen on
    Sleep
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    Look, I was all for "giving Biden" time, but it has been 2 MONTHS. They absolutely can get people into better quarters than this, even if it means putting people on a plane and sending them somewhere warmer for a short period of time. The "it takes time" excuse has worn very thin.

    On top of all that, the lack of lawyer/press (ESPECIALLY lawyer) access is the real cherry on top of a crap sundae here, and cannot be ignored. While I'm very much of the opinion "if they were doing nothing wrong, they wouldn't be afraid to show it" is terrible logic when applied to individuals, it's absolutely 100% the right thing to say about the gov't. In cases like this, if they won't let you in, you assume they are doing something bad and let them prove you wrong. It's the price for having the power of being the gov't.

    Metzger MeisterYamiB.
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    this applies to more than the concentration camps themselves which are entirely indefensible (as is any opinion on them that isn't "let everyone currently imprisoned go and burn them to the ground," in my opinion), the democrats are going to need to figure out a way to get those senators in line so they can do literally anything or they're in serious trouble. "vote for us some more even though we can't get even close the concentration camps because members of our party don't want to" is not a winning message to go into the midterms with, especially when kids in cages was one of the main lines they used last year

    anyway, let everyone currently imprisoned go and burn them to the ground.

    Go where? Okay 11 year old girl, you are free to go....

    this is a really bad justification for not only keeping concentration camps open but expanding their size and use, and being that i'm not trying to defend such it isn't really on me to figure out what to do instead

    in any case almost all of the children in the concentration camps were going to a particular place (usually family) before they got kidnapped by immigration agents. a lot of them were also with their parents before they got separated! "go where" is a problem that was almost entirely caused by the camps' existence in the first place
    It is actually up to you indeed to come up with a solution if your solution was just let them go.
    It takes a significant time to locate their US family members AND validate that they are indeed appropriate wards for the children.
    That doesn't excuse keeping them in horrific conditions without a solution however.

    The fastest improvement would simply be humane conditions in refugee centers. Warm, private rooms with blankets, beds and good food. But they'd still be imprisoned.

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudDoodmannCouscousSleepjmcdonaldElvenshae
  • DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    Is our goal to slow the flow of refugees? Why?

    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    GrpAhic DeiGn is My PAssIon
    YamiB.
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This is not true at all. The president has a lot of control over immigration policy but the actual implementation of that policy still takes time because just wanting a thing to be done doesn't make it happen. Trump ran into this issue basically every day of his presidency.

    zagdrobCouscousFencingsaxLord_AsmodeusEinzelGnome-InterruptusJaysonFour
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud friend pelican soft and relaxing mouthRegistered User regular
    If I remember correctly, are these facilities still private pay to play institutes with monstrous child safety violations?

    pelcan Mouth perfect size for put poster in to n\ap! inside poster sleep soundly put poster in Pelicn Mouth no problems because good Support for poster neck weak of big poster head
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    this applies to more than the concentration camps themselves which are entirely indefensible (as is any opinion on them that isn't "let everyone currently imprisoned go and burn them to the ground," in my opinion), the democrats are going to need to figure out a way to get those senators in line so they can do literally anything or they're in serious trouble. "vote for us some more even though we can't get even close the concentration camps because members of our party don't want to" is not a winning message to go into the midterms with, especially when kids in cages was one of the main lines they used last year

    anyway, let everyone currently imprisoned go and burn them to the ground.

    Go where? Okay 11 year old girl, you are free to go....

    this is a really bad justification for not only keeping concentration camps open but expanding their size and use, and being that i'm not trying to defend such it isn't really on me to figure out what to do instead

    in any case almost all of the children in the concentration camps were going to a particular place (usually family) before they got kidnapped by immigration agents. a lot of them were also with their parents before they got separated! "go where" is a problem that was almost entirely caused by the camps' existence in the first place
    It is actually up to you indeed to come up with a solution if your solution was just let them go.
    It takes a significant time to locate their US family members AND validate that they are indeed appropriate wards for the children.
    That doesn't excuse keeping them in horrific conditions without a solution however.

    The fastest improvement would simply be humane conditions in refugee centers. Warm, private rooms with blankets, beds and good food. But they'd still be imprisoned.

    That kind of thing still isn't fast. A lot of the current issues seem to be basically "Where can we house all these people while they are processed?". They've opened up facilities from what I've seen in reporting but these things still take time to set up.

    CelestialBadgerFencingsaxGnome-Interruptus
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    Styrofoam SammichFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudDoodmannMetzger MeisterDarkPrimusPolaritieTetraNitroCubaneDacTef101TicaldfjamJaysonFourHacksawuserYamiB.OneAngryPossumnever dieKristmas KthulhuKraint
  • Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister Registered User regular
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    Or, alternatively, because capitalism is an inhuman and monstrous system we allow the free flow of capital across international boundaries but not workers, ensuring a form of social control whereby we are either utilizing multinational corporations to exploit cheap labor in the global south or oh so graciously allowing a few people to trickle over the border to maybe, perhaps, possibly get some under the table work doing dangerous and difficult manual labor, which they often are taxed on while receiving no benefits or representation for same, while we're largely responsible for the poor conditions in their home country anyway! An excellent example is Mexican corn farming under NAFTA. We demanded that Mexico end corn subsidies while still massively subsidizing US corn crops, crippling the Mexican corn production industry by artificially lowering the price of American corn in Mexican markets, which leads to millions of Mexican farmers losing their livelihoods and being forced to pursue opportunities for work in America, where they can be arrested and deported for the crime of feeding our ungrateful ass country.

    We have been the villains in this story for my entire life. We can choose to stop at any fucking point. We can leverage the almighty power of the US government, you know, the one that rules every facet of our lives and can project military might across the globe, to solve this issue. We're a nation of cowards though, and actually solving this would be to admit that we have committed grave crimes against these people and that they are owed serious, lifelong restitution.

    DoodmannDarkPrimusTetraNitroCubaneKristmas Kthulhu
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud friend pelican soft and relaxing mouthRegistered User regular
    Lawyers are required to have access to their clients so it is a gross violation to prevent that in any way.

    pelcan Mouth perfect size for put poster in to n\ap! inside poster sleep soundly put poster in Pelicn Mouth no problems because good Support for poster neck weak of big poster head
    IncenjucarDoodmannshrykeSleepKamarDavid WalgasGnizmoTetraNitroCubaneoverride367ShadowfireLord_AsmodeusUndead ScottsmanJaysonFourNobeardHacksawHefflingOrcaYamiB.never dieKristmas KthulhuKraint
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    "Huge step past Trump" is pretty premature anyway when its still a bunch of immigrants in cages on concrete floors without sufficient necessities or pandemic protection.

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
    SleepElendilMetzger MeisterFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudTetraNitroCubaneJragghenKaputaHacksawNiryaYamiB.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    I dont think 11 year old with literally nowhere to go accurately describes your average individual here.

    A 17 year old with somewhere to go would still need to have stuff verified for basic safety reasons

    shrykeElvenshaeFencingsaxKristmas Kthulhu
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Lawyers are required to have access to their clients so it is a gross violation to prevent that in any way.

    Part of the problem is people in immigration courts have significantly less rights than the regular justice system.

    shrykezagdrobElvenshaeFencingsaxLord_AsmodeusGnome-InterruptusYamiB.OneAngryPossum
  • Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This is not true at all. The president has a lot of control over immigration policy but the actual implementation of that policy still takes time because just wanting a thing to be done doesn't make it happen. Trump ran into this issue basically every day of his presidency.

    What about domestic policy? They're here in America, the camps are here in America, children are dying of preventable illnesses in those camps here in America, does the president not have some minor amount of influence on domestic policy? Or is he toothless in this arena as well? If so what's the point of even having a president? I was under the impression that the buck stopped there, during the Trump administration, but suddenly the tune sounds a little different.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    I imagine there's a great deal of damage control going on. We've already seen the media swallowing whole the GOP's narrative on hordes of immigrants crossing the border just like last week. They are probably trying to stop even more of that kind of media narrative from taking hold.

    Gnome-InterruptusJragghen
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar Not a Fictional Character Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Lawyers are required to have access to their clients so it is a gross violation to prevent that in any way.

    I understand that, being very ancient school Democrat, Biden is probably not going to have the immigration goals that we may prefer, lesser evil etc., but I don't see where there's even any room for this behavior. The question "why can't anyone access these facilities?" should be happening every single time Biden and his administration show up in public.

    DoodmannSleepFuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudNobeardKristmas Kthulhu
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.


    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden’s administration has tried for weeks to keep the public from seeing images like those released Monday of immigrant children in U.S. custody at the border sleeping on mats under foil blankets, separated in groups by plastic partitions.

    ...

    Officials barred nonprofit lawyers who conduct oversight from entering a Border Patrol tent where thousands of children and teenagers are detained. And federal agencies have refused or ignored dozens of requests from the media for access to detention sites. Such access was granted several times by the administration of President Donald Trump, whose restrictive immigration approach Biden vowed to reverse.

    ...

    Under Biden, the agencies also have denied full access to nonprofit lawyers who conduct oversight of facilities where children are detained. Those oversight visits occur under a federal court settlement.

    When lawyers this month visited the Border Patrol facility at Donna, where thousands of children are now detained, agents refused to let them inside and the Justice Department said they were not entitled to gain access. The lawyers were forced to interview children outside. The Justice Department declined to comment.

    ...

    The Donna facility consists of large interconnected tents. Overhead photos taken by AP show enclosed outdoor areas where children can go. But lawyers who have interviewed children detained at Donna say some can go days without being allowed outside.

    https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-politics-immigration-border-patrols-73171bd6fd8494c16c8ca1f7f3f54130

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudDarkPrimusTetraNitroCubane
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This is not true at all. The president has a lot of control over immigration policy but the actual implementation of that policy still takes time because just wanting a thing to be done doesn't make it happen. Trump ran into this issue basically every day of his presidency.

    What about domestic policy? They're here in America, the camps are here in America, children are dying of preventable illnesses in those camps here in America, does the president not have some minor amount of influence on domestic policy? Or is he toothless in this arena as well? If so what's the point of even having a president? I was under the impression that the buck stopped there, during the Trump administration, but suddenly the tune sounds a little different.

    What are you even talking about?

    I didn't mention influence, I talked about time and logistics. The President has a great deal of power over setting some parts of how immigration is handled but having the power to set policy is not the same as being able to make that policy happen the instant you decide it should. There's all sorts of things at work from processes policy changes have to go through to basic logistical issues that can slow or hamper the ability of the government to act on an issue even as they have the power, even unilateral power, to do so.

    eg - You can decide you should end the policy of forcing refugees to stay on the Mexican side of the border and instead have them cross over and stay in the US while they are processed. And you can decide you then need to expand facilities to house all the unaccompanied minors within that group while you vet the places they will stay. The president can do all that. But deciding that you are gonna do that does not instantly create the facilities in question or the manpower needed to do all that processing.

    FencingsaxSmrtnikGnome-Interruptus
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.


    WASHINGTON (AP) — President Joe Biden’s administration has tried for weeks to keep the public from seeing images like those released Monday of immigrant children in U.S. custody at the border sleeping on mats under foil blankets, separated in groups by plastic partitions.

    ...

    Officials barred nonprofit lawyers who conduct oversight from entering a Border Patrol tent where thousands of children and teenagers are detained. And federal agencies have refused or ignored dozens of requests from the media for access to detention sites. Such access was granted several times by the administration of President Donald Trump, whose restrictive immigration approach Biden vowed to reverse.

    ...

    Under Biden, the agencies also have denied full access to nonprofit lawyers who conduct oversight of facilities where children are detained. Those oversight visits occur under a federal court settlement.

    When lawyers this month visited the Border Patrol facility at Donna, where thousands of children are now detained, agents refused to let them inside and the Justice Department said they were not entitled to gain access. The lawyers were forced to interview children outside. The Justice Department declined to comment.

    ...

    The Donna facility consists of large interconnected tents. Overhead photos taken by AP show enclosed outdoor areas where children can go. But lawyers who have interviewed children detained at Donna say some can go days without being allowed outside.

    https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-politics-immigration-border-patrols-73171bd6fd8494c16c8ca1f7f3f54130

    Again, being denied full access to the site is not what I was asking and not the same as being blocked from interviewing detainees.

    They only said they were unable to interview all detainees. They didn't elaborate on if Border Patrol said no, they ran out of time, some of the kids couldn't be found for interviews, etc.

    JaysonFour
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.

    The pictures were released with the assistance of a Democratic Rep from Texas, who corroborates that both the media and non-profit lawyers were denied access. The lack of a definitive reason why is likely due to the relevant departments, or anyone from the Biden administration, declining to comment.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.

    The lawyers interviewed in the post you are referencing were there to process cases for children specifically. It's not as though lawyers are normally granted unilateral privilege to interview anyone present in the same facility as their client.

    That said, the way you are phrasing things makes it sound as though you're being skeptical of the veracity of the lawyer's claims. Was that your intention?

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
  • ButtersButters A glass of some milks Registered User regular
    edited March 24
    One of the challenges Biden faces that Trump did not is a huge contingent of DHS itching to do what Trump wanted them to do for decades. In a matter of weeks ICE was arresting people at churches and courthouses.

    I want all the fascists purged along with reform but that is not something that will be achieved quickly or without Congress. The President does have a lot of power to restrict immigration but not as much to reform it and Biden can't abolish ICE o DHS. Congress has to do that.

    Butters on
    PSN: idontworkhere582 | CFN: idontworkhere | Steam: lordbutters
    BigJoeMSmrtnikJragghenJaysonFour
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Doodmann wrote: »
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    Is our goal to slow the flow of refugees? Why?

    The existence of refugees means something has gone badly somewhere. While we're unlikely to ever stop all reasons for it, reducing the number of people who feel the need to flee where we can is a good idea.

    shrykeElvenshaeGnizmoSmrtnikAimLord_AsmodeusTofystedethEinzelGnome-InterruptusKristmas Kthulhu
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    I think it is inaccurate to say they aren't moving on the issue.

    Moving many refugees from camps in Mexico to the USA has depressingly probably improved conditions for many. Migrant Protection Protocols appears to have ended?

    https://fox2now.com/news/border-report/u-s-ramps-up-return-of-asylum-seekers-from-mexico/
    EL PASO, Texas (Border Report) – Federal authorities have increased two-fold the number of asylum-seekers allowed to return from Mexico through the El Paso port of entry.

    As of this week, 100 international citizens are coming across from Juarez, Mexico, daily as they’re taken out of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program. Those international citizens are being routed to the Annunciation House nonprofit shelter system.

    “We continue to work with our (non-government organizations) and the Frontera Welcome Coalition to assess needs and to help with migrant shelter capacity,” said El Paso Assistant Fire Chief and Emergency Management Coordinator Lt. Jorge Rodriguez. “As of (Tuesday), MPP transfers went from 50 per day to 100 per day. That continues to work seamlessly with our NGOs and our federal partners.”

    El Paso was one of three ports of entry the Department of Homeland Security back in February designated for processing asylum seekers taken out of the Trump-era program. MPP, or “Remain in Mexico,” forced nearly 70,000 potential refugees to await the outcome of their cases outside the United States. More than half left or no longer have an active case in U.S. immigration court; however, the Biden administration may be reviewing some of those cases soon.
    https://www.texastribune.org/2021/03/22/donna-border-patrol-facility-photos/
    “But it is not enough for members of the Senate to see what is happening — the American people must see. That is why I requested that members of the media be allowed to join us. But your administration clearly and emphatically refused to offer press access,” Cruz said in a statement.

    Immigrant rights groups have pushed back on that narrative however, arguing that the increase is because migrants are still reeling in the aftermath of Trump’s restrictive policies, including the Migrant Protection Protocols, which forced more than 70,000 asylum seekers back into Mexico as they wait for their immigration hearings.

    “The increased number of people crossing the border is something that border experts have predicted for some time now. The roots of what is happening are in the Trump administration policies that caused massive numbers of people to be stuck on the Mexican side of the border,” the human rights advocacy group Washington Office on Latin America said in a statement.

    Putting some families in hotels has started and could easily be expanded for families in general where there are parents.

    (actual article is from Reuters, not VOA)
    https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-place-some-migrant-families-hotels-move-away-detention-centers
    WASHINGTON - Some migrant families arriving in the United States will be housed in hotels under a new program managed by nonprofit organizations, according to two people familiar with the plans. It would be a move away from for-profit detention centers that Democrats and health experts have criticized.

    Endeavors, a San Antonio-based organization, will oversee what it calls "family reception sites" at hotels in Texas and Arizona, the two sources said. The organization, in partnership with other nonprofits, will initially provide up to 1,400 beds in seven brand-name hotels for families deemed vulnerable when caught at the border.

    The opening of the reception centers would mark a significant shift by the administration of President Joe Biden, a Democrat, away from the detention of migrant families in for-profit facilities.
    The hotel sites, set to open in April, will offer COVID-19 testing, medical care, food services, social workers and case managers to help with travel and onward destinations, according to the two sources, who requested anonymity to discuss the matter. Staff will be trained to work with children.

    It remained unclear whether migrants would be required to wear ankle bracelets or be subject to any other form of monitoring, the people said.

    The families will arrive at border patrol stations and then be sent to the hotel sites to continue immigration paperwork, the two sources said. They could leave the reception centers as early as six hours after arrival if paperwork is completed, they test negative for COVID-19 and transportation has been arranged.
    Biden officials have said migrant families will be expelled to Mexico or their home countries under a Trump-era health order known as Title 42. But more than half of the 19,000 family members caught at the border in February were not expelled, with many released into the United States.

    The housing of some migrants in hotels was reported by Axios earlier Saturday.

    Endeavors will also operate a new 2,000-bed shelter for unaccompanied children in Texas, the sources said.

    The Biden administration has struggled to house a rising number of unaccompanied minors arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border. More than 500 children have been living in crowded border stations for more than 10 days as of Thursday.

    The new family and child facilities are expected to ramp up bed capacity gradually, the people familiar with the effort said.

    The administration seems to consider the conditions a problem rather than a feature. It is very depressing that this is an improvement from previously but it is.

    shrykeButtersjmcdonaldFencingsaxSmrtnikLord_AsmodeusGnome-InterruptusJaysonFour
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.

    The lawyers interviewed in the post you are referencing were there to process cases for children specifically. It's not as though lawyers are normally granted unilateral privilege to interview anyone present in the same facility as their client.

    That said, the way you are phrasing things makes it sound as though you're being skeptical of the veracity of the lawyer's claims. Was that your intention?

    No, I'm not actually skeptical about the veracity of the lawyer's claims and that wasn't my intention at all. I am certain that their choice of words is both accurate and truthful.

    I'm skeptical about added interpretation that 'unable to interview' is the same as 'blocked from interviewing' without more elaboration or information from the lawyer.

  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited March 24
    zagdrob wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Id expect real reform from an administration that wasnt blocking lawyers.

    Any real reform needs to come from Congress not the Biden Administration. Anything Biden does is just temporarily spackling over the giant holes Trump punched in the walls (in a house that was already collapsing).

    Also, the story about 'blocking lawyers' was from before HHS was confirmed, and only said they weren't able (no details on if it was a refusal or simply / other constraints) able to interview all the children and CBP denied a tour of the facility. Not going to extend CBP benefit of the doubt, but that's already a huge step past what Trump admin did.

    "Only " blocking lawyers from touring the facility and interviewing all the detainees they want to talk to when the lawyers are from nonprofits whose core mission is to conduct oversight means you've only and just prevented them from doing any real oversight over the facility. That's somewhat of a misuse of that only.

    I hadn't seen anything in the stories Sammich or DarkPrimus quoted saying they were blocked from interviewing all detainees, just that they were unable to without elaboration as to why.

    The lawyers interviewed in the post you are referencing were there to process cases for children specifically. It's not as though lawyers are normally granted unilateral privilege to interview anyone present in the same facility as their client.

    That said, the way you are phrasing things makes it sound as though you're being skeptical of the veracity of the lawyer's claims. Was that your intention?

    No, I'm not actually skeptical about the veracity of the lawyer's claims and that wasn't my intention at all. I am certain that their choice of words is both accurate and truthful.

    I'm skeptical about added interpretation that 'unable to interview' is the same as 'blocked from interviewing' without more elaboration or information from the lawyer.

    That feels like semantical quibbling to me. There are plenty of ways for someone to prevent a lawyer from talking to their clients without the Hollywood scene of a guard slamming the bars to the cell shut as the lawyer is about to enter and crossing their arms saying "No visitors." It can be as simple as having a lawyer who is supposed to be representing six children only be allowed enough time in the facility to properly process the interviews with two of the children.

    We should not extend any goodwill or benefit of doubt to the government on this. Make no positive assumptions on their behalf. It is on them to demonstrate their good faith efforts. Words are cheap, judge them by their works.

    DarkPrimus on
    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    Styrofoam SammichTefDamnItCohaagenKaputaHacksawYamiB.Kristmas Kthulhu
  • DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Doodmann wrote: »
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    Is our goal to slow the flow of refugees? Why?

    The existence of refugees means something has gone badly somewhere. While we're unlikely to ever stop all reasons for it, reducing the number of people who feel the need to flee where we can is a good idea.

    I agree, my point is that stopping them from coming in and keeping them from fleeing are two completely separate issues on the ground even if they are connected in a broad sense.

    Stopping them from coming in is a fundamental betrayal of the ideas we're supposed to stand for (yes I know history shows this to be laughable but that's why its aspirational) where as us stopping refugees from existing is a larger greyer question of hegemony, foreign policy and also historically probably our fault.

    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    GrpAhic DeiGn is My PAssIon
    DarkPrimus
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Doodmann wrote: »
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    Is our goal to slow the flow of refugees? Why?

    The existence of refugees means something has gone badly somewhere. While we're unlikely to ever stop all reasons for it, reducing the number of people who feel the need to flee where we can is a good idea.

    That's not going to happen unless we take immediate and extreme action to halt climate change, because the environmental damage that climate change is going to wreak on the world in the coming years is going to be the primary mover by which refugees flee to the United States and elsewhere.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    SleepTyphoid Manny
  • HydropoloHydropolo Registered User regular
    To the "it takes time" crowd, now that we are two months in, would you accept > 2 months as acceptable time frame to get basic food/water/hygiene/boarding if say, a massive hurricane hit part of the country? We expect FEMA to be in and going in days at WORST. This is why I don't give Biden much more benefit of the doubt here. Declare an emergency (the conditions we're seeing constitute one to me) and get FEMA to at least set up refugee camps.

    If Biden's admin is doing something to alleviate the problem, they need to communicate.

    Styrofoam SammichDoodmannDarkPrimusHacksawYamiB.OneAngryPossum
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Doodmann wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    Doodmann wrote: »
    He's the president. The last few administrations proves that the president has a remarkable amount of unilateral power to change policy. This crisis could be over in a week if the will to end it existed.

    This seems to be a case of "every job I don't understand is easy and people who do it wrong are just stupid or lazy" which I see about just about every profession.

    The Trump administration slowed the flow of refugees only by sadistically inhumane methods. The idea was to make people more scared of ICE than the monsters in their own country. Biden doesn't have that option, nor should he do it.

    Without that option the only truly reliable methods of stemming the flow of refugees is extremely slow: by trade and aid, improving the conditions in their home countries so they don't want to leave. This takes years. Decades, even, when you factor in how many are climate change refugees.

    No easy answers.

    Is our goal to slow the flow of refugees? Why?

    The existence of refugees means something has gone badly somewhere. While we're unlikely to ever stop all reasons for it, reducing the number of people who feel the need to flee where we can is a good idea.

    I agree, my point is that stopping them from coming in and keeping them from fleeing are two completely separate issues on the ground even if they are connected in a broad sense.

    Stopping them from coming in is a fundamental betrayal of the ideas we're supposed to stand for (yes I know history shows this to be laughable but that's why its aspirational) where as us stopping refugees from existing is a larger greyer question of hegemony, foreign policy and also historically probably our fault.

    Biden has talked a lot about stemming the flow of refugees from the northern triangle by improving conditions there.

    CelestialBadgerFencingsaxLord_Asmodeus
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Biden has talked about a lot of things. Talk is cheap.

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    Styrofoam SammichHacksawYamiB.
  • MazzyxMazzyx Comedy Gold Registered User regular
    Hydropolo wrote: »
    To the "it takes time" crowd, now that we are two months in, would you accept > 2 months as acceptable time frame to get basic food/water/hygiene/boarding if say, a massive hurricane hit part of the country? We expect FEMA to be in and going in days at WORST. This is why I don't give Biden much more benefit of the doubt here. Declare an emergency (the conditions we're seeing constitute one to me) and get FEMA to at least set up refugee camps.

    If Biden's admin is doing something to alleviate the problem, they need to communicate.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/14/biden-fema-migrant-children-surge-mexico-border
    The Biden administration, which has prioritized reversing the immigration policies of Donald Trump, announced late Saturday that it would deploy the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), best known for responding to natural disasters, to the border, to manage and care for the children.

    Fema agents would assist in the transfer of children in custody within 72 hours “into family homes or homes that are safe for them to be”, Pelosi said.

    He is deploying FEMA.

    03x29di.png
    shrykeButtersCouscousFencingsaxSmrtnikLord_AsmodeusiTunesIsEvilGnome-InterruptusJaysonFour
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Hydropolo wrote: »
    To the "it takes time" crowd, now that we are two months in, would you accept > 2 months as acceptable time frame to get basic food/water/hygiene/boarding if say, a massive hurricane hit part of the country? We expect FEMA to be in and going in days at WORST. This is why I don't give Biden much more benefit of the doubt here. Declare an emergency (the conditions we're seeing constitute one to me) and get FEMA to at least set up refugee camps.

    If Biden's admin is doing something to alleviate the problem, they need to communicate.

    Conditions for housing disaster victims is just like cots in the middle of a warehouse or a gymnasium or something. It's not that far off the photos posted last page.

    ButterszagdrobtinwhiskersElvenshaeSmrtnikLord_AsmodeusGnome-InterruptusJaysonFour
Sign In or Register to comment.