[Winstonm]

Lawfare reports:

Quote

In the Matter of A-C-M, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) concluded that a woman who was “kidnapped and required to perform cooking and cleaning for [El Salvadoran] guerrillas under threat of death” is—based on the cooking and cleaning done while enslaved—a material supporter of terrorism and therefore ineligible for asylum. The immigration judge who initially heard the case stated that he would have granted the woman—who was “forced to witness her husband … dig his own grave before being killed”—asylum, but for the terrorism-related bars.

This is absurd and cruel. It’s also, as we’ll explain, procedurally nonsensical. And it’s bad for national security to boot. Are we really so fearful that we can no longer no longer distinguish between terrorists and their victims? What little moral standing we have left is squandered if we engage in a this kind of category collapse—expecting the world to follow us in our fight against terrorism, only to treat the killing of civilians and the enslaved victims of those who kill civilians as one and the same.

[gszes]

I admit to laziness since I did not look up to see if the "judge" OR the appeals committee were part of the executive or the judicial branch. When people's jobs depend on them following even the most idiotic of "laws", these are the results one will see from time to time. With any luck whatsoever, the case will be booted up somewhere and maybe someone with an ounce of common sense will prevail. The scary part is the conditions, used to deny her appeal, might not even be part of a law written by CONgress but administrative rules written by some answerable-to-no-one bureaucrat. If you think about it - some of our Guantanamo prisoners have been held ad nauseum for providing some sort of material support to terrorism and none of them ever reported doing so under threat of death. Maybe the distinction is lost on the peeps in charge of this situation.

[Winstonm]

Then again, it may once again be the profit motive. Daily Beast reports:

Quote

Separating refugee and immigrant children from their parents isn’t just an emotionally wrenching policy. It’s an enterprise that is benefitting intelligence and defense contractors

[FelicityR]

gszes, on 2018-June-14, 17:33, said:

If you think about it - some of our Guantanamo prisoners have been held ad nauseum for providing some sort of material support to terrorism and none of them ever reported doing so under threat of death. Maybe the distinction is lost on the peeps in charge of this situation.

Whilst I agree wholeheartedly with Winstonm's initial post that bureaucratic/judicial protocol is entirely at fault here and overrides common sense, I am glad gszes has mentioned Guantanamo because as much as it is an abuse of human rights there is a flipside to all this. Sadly, this former Guantanamo prisoner proved that classifying and counteracting terrorism and drawing a line somewhere is far more difficult than appears. To make matters worse he also ended up killing innocent people after receiving £1 million in compensation from British taxpayers.

https://www.theguard...terrorism-chief

[Winstonm]

FelicityR, on 2018-June-15, 07:09, said:

Whilst I agree wholeheartedly with Winstonm's initial post that bureaucratic/judicial protocol is entirely at fault here and overrides common sense, I am glad gszes has mentioned Guantanamo because as much as it is an abuse of human rights there is a flipside to all this. Sadly, this former Guantanamo prisoner proved that classifying and counteracting terrorism and drawing a line somewhere is far more difficult than appears. To make matters worse he also ended up killing innocent people after receiving £1 million in compensation from British taxpayers.

https://www.theguard...terrorism-chief

A good counterpoint to show that simplistic sloganizing cannot solve complex human interactions. It takes humans working together to work out reasonably satisfactory solutions to complex human problems.

[barmar]

gszes, on 2018-June-14, 17:33, said:

I admit to laziness since I did not look up to see if the "judge" OR the appeals committee were part of the executive or the judicial branch.

Last Week Tonight did one of their main stories on Immigration Courts. They're part of the executive branch, and totally overwhelmed. Since they're not real courts, defendants aren't entitled to attorneys if they can't afford them (and probably most can't). Children routinely have to go into court by themselves -- they played a transcript of a little girl being questioned by the immigration judge. There's an enormous backlog (people generally wait years to get to court), and earlier this year Sessions instituted a quota for clearing cases, so they expedite rulings.

On NPR this morning they were interviewing someone about the current Zero Tolerance policy on illegal immigrants, which is separating children from their parents. They suggested that the Trump administration may be taking a hard line on this as a strategy to spur Congress to pass more common sense legislation. One of the current House bills does add wording that prohibits splitting up families like this, but it doesn't seem like any bill is likely to get to a vote any time soon. So the branches are playing chicken with the lives of immigrants at stake.

[Winstonm]

barmar, on 2018-June-15, 09:06, said:

Last Week Tonight did one of their main stories on Immigration Courts. They're part of the executive branch, and totally overwhelmed. Since they're not real courts, defendants aren't entitled to attorneys if they can't afford them (and probably most can't). Children routinely have to go into court by themselves -- they played a transcript of a little girl being questioned by the immigration judge. There's an enormous backlog (people generally wait years to get to court), and earlier this year Sessions instituted a quota for clearing cases, so they expedite rulings.

On NPR this morning they were interviewing someone about the current Zero Tolerance policy on illegal immigrants, which is separating children from their parents. They suggested that the Trump administration may be taking a hard line on this as a strategy to spur Congress to pass more common sense legislation. One of the current House bills does add wording that prohibits splitting up families like this, but it doesn't seem like any bill is likely to get to a vote any time soon. So the branches are playing chicken with the lives of immigrants at stake.

Note that today Dennison vowed to veto any immigration bill that wasn't hardline, meaning, I guess, a bill along the lines of North Korea's immigration policies or some other authoritarian-led country he likes.

[barmar]

Winstonm, on 2018-June-15, 12:24, said:

Note that today Dennison vowed to veto any immigration bill that wasn't hardline, meaning, I guess, a bill along the lines of North Korea's immigration policies or some other authoritarian-led country he likes.

But then his office clarified that he supports both bills that are currently proposed in the House.

At this point I refuse to believe anything the White House says about what he would or wouldn't sign. He's fooled us before. So we just have to wait until the bill gets to his desk.

[Winstonm]

barmar, on 2018-June-17, 09:32, said:

But then his office clarified that he supports both bills that are currently proposed in the House.

At this point I refuse to believe anything the White House says about what he would or wouldn't sign. He's fooled us before. So we just have to wait until the bill gets to his desk.

I doubt Dennison knows what he supports until he talks to someone who has his ear.

[Al_U_Card]

Here in Canada, we are also having an illegal immigration situation with the Haitian "dreamers" entering on foot. Rejected by Trump and "encouraged" by your border guards (They show where and how to cross on foot cross-country....) these illegals are "arrested" here and put in tents while they are processed by our system. Other than known criminals, their chances are pretty good.
One alternative would be to inform all parties that presenting oneself legally gives you a chance but once you are arrested entering illegally you lose any chance of entry. A real issue here.

[PassedOut]

Al_U_Card, on 2018-June-17, 14:08, said:

Here in Canada, we are also having an illegal immigration situation with the Haitian "dreamers" entering on foot.

What are Haitian dreamers?

[Winstonm]

PassedOut, on 2018-June-17, 14:49, said:

What are Haitian dreamers?

That would be me...I dream of vacationing in Haiti but now that health insurance is so costly, alas, Haiti must remain a dream.

[hrothgar]

PassedOut, on 2018-June-17, 14:49, said:

What are Haitian dreamers?

After the Earthquake, a significant number of Haitian refugees moved to the US.
With the recent restrictions in the US, many of them have crossed over into Canada.

Please note: this has nothing to do with "Dreamers" as the term is commonly understood in the US.

[ggwhiz]

PassedOut, on 2018-June-17, 14:49, said:

What are Haitian dreamers?

Dubbya granted Temporary Protected Status to about 60k Haitians to live and work in the US after the 2010 earthquake. That comes with an expiration date and Trump has already cancelled it but with 6-month extensions announced they currently have until July next year before deportation begins.

320K from various shithole countries are living under this program and the segment for 2,500 Nicaraguans has also been cut.

Guess where most of these people head? And Canadian Steel and Aluminum are a national security threat to the US.

[barmar]

Winstonm, on 2018-June-17, 10:35, said:

I doubt Dennison knows what he supports until he talks to someone who has his ear.

I.e. Fox and Friends. We effectively elected Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doucey.