Fundraising for 2020/2021: Currently at $1580. Fundraising has begun, see the global post for options. Paypal Donation Links US dollars CDN Dollars

Immigration Policy

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 66149
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

Politico
The Trump administration plans to sap money intended to build fighter jets, ships, vehicles and National Guard equipment in order to fund barriers on the U.S.-Mexico border, the Pentagon told Congress on Thursday, a move that has agitated Democrats and even drawn condemnation from a top House Republican.

The surprise reprogramming of another $3.8 billion, transmitted to Congress and provided to POLITICO, means the Pentagon will have forked over nearly $10 billion since last year to help pay for President Donald Trump's border wall.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 66149
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

NY Times
The Trump administration is deploying law enforcement tactical units from the southern border as part of a supercharged arrest operation in sanctuary cities across the country, an escalation in the president’s battle against localities that refuse to participate in immigration enforcement.

The specially trained officers are being sent to cities including Chicago and New York to boost the enforcement power of local Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, according to two officials who are familiar with the secret operation. Additional agents are expected to be sent to San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Houston, Boston, New Orleans, Detroit and Newark, N.J.
...
Among the agents being deployed to sanctuary cities are members of the elite tactical unit known as BORTAC, which acts essentially as the SWAT team of the Border Patrol. With additional gear such as stun grenades and enhanced Special Forces-type training, including sniper certification, the officers typically conduct high-risk operations targeting individuals who are known to be violent, many of them with extensive criminal records.
...
In sanctuary cities, the BORTAC agents will be asked to support interior officers in run-of-the-mill immigration arrests, the officials said. Their presence could spark new fear in immigrant communities that have been on high alert under the stepped-up deportation and detention policies adopted after Mr. Trump took office.
Our chief weapon is surprise, surprise and fear, fear and surprise. Our *two* weapons are fear and surprise, and ruthless efficiency. Our *three* weapons are fear and surprise and ruthless efficiency and an almost fanatical dedication to Trump. Our *four*... No... Amongst our weapons... Amongst our weaponry are such elements as fear, sur- I'll come in again.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 66149
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

CNN
The Supreme Court said on Wednesday that the controversial Trump administration "Remain in Mexico" asylum policy can stay in effect while legal challenges play out.

The court's order is a victory for the administration, which warned there would be a "rush to the border" if the policy that has been in effect for a year was blocked by the courts. It's a devastating loss for immigrant rights groups who say asylum seekers sent back to Mexico are living in dangerous conditions.
...
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the policy last month, but allowed it to remain in effect just long enough for the Supreme Court to consider whether to step in.
I mean, honestly, what irreparable harm could possibly be caused by this?

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

Isgrimnur wrote:
Wed Mar 11, 2020 3:34 pm
CNN
The Supreme Court said on Wednesday that the controversial Trump administration "Remain in Mexico" asylum policy can stay in effect while legal challenges play out.

The court's order is a victory for the administration, which warned there would be a "rush to the border" if the policy that has been in effect for a year was blocked by the courts. It's a devastating loss for immigrant rights groups who say asylum seekers sent back to Mexico are living in dangerous conditions.
...
The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the policy last month, but allowed it to remain in effect just long enough for the Supreme Court to consider whether to step in.
I mean, honestly, what irreparable harm could possibly be caused by this?
Aside from the continuing perception that the Supreme court is biased towards rubber stamping the never ending train of Trump's authoritarian emergency orders while they churn slowly through the system?

User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 47866
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am
daehawk’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Daehawk »

When I see the title my mind thinks "Other than turn around or we do bad things to you" ....that policy.
https://www.gofundme.com/please-help-di ... -wife-died ....Help for me to take care of stuff . Wife died Jan 3 2019 after 31 years. My soulmate.
---------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
GroovAtroN, stop asking
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 66149
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Isgrimnur »

NBC News
The Trump administration does not have the authority to use military funding to pay for construction of a border wall, a federal appeals court panel ruled on Friday.

In a 2-1 ruling, a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that diverting $2.5 billion Congress had appropriated for the military violated the Constitution and is unlawful.

The executive branch "lacked independent constitutional authority to authorize the transfer of funds," the ruling said. "These funds were appropriated for other purposes, and the transfer amounted to 'drawing funds from the Treasury without authorization by statute and thus violating the Appropriations Clause.' Therefore, the transfer of funds here was unlawful."

The decision upheld a ruling by a federal judge in California who last year found that the Trump administration's funding scheme was against the law. A coalition of states led by California had filed suit to block the move.
...
In his dissent, Judge Daniel Collins disagreed, saying the administration had the authority to use the money.
Scribd

Image

His dissent starts on P. 46.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 42788
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

Did we talk about this yet? It's all blurring together - Four States Are Sharing Driver's License Info To Help Find Out Who's A Citizen:
To help figure out the U.S. citizenship status of every adult living in the country, the Trump administration has made agreements to accumulate driver's license and state identification card information from states including Iowa, Nebraska, South Carolina and South Dakota, NPR has learned.

...

In addition to allowing states to redistrict using the number of citizens old enough to vote, Trump's executive order noted that the citizenship data could assist the government in generating a "more reliable count of the unauthorized alien population in the country."

The arrangements with South Carolina, South Dakota, Iowa and Nebraska are not expected to involve information about unauthorized immigrants. All four states require applicants for driver's licenses and state ID cards to provide proof that they are legally residing in the country.
Amazing.

malchior
Posts: 12207
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by malchior »

One thing that pops out that it is so easy to manipulate.
the Census Bureau has been gathering state and federal records to produce anonymized citizenship data
aka unverifiable counts. Well you can verify them if they give you access to the underlying data....which they won't or shouldn't or else it wouldn't be anonymous. You would just have to trust the process is solid and not manipulated.

That said if it wasn't the Trump administration and wasn't to be used for law enforcement purposes this would be a healthy exercise. Finding out the total population seems like something the government should do to serve everyone better. With these folks...hell no. Especially weighing this quote:
The bureau's researchers are relying on those details to help them match different government records about the same individual and try to come up with the most up-to-date citizenship status of every adult in the country. The Trump administration is counting on these efforts to produce anonymized citizenship data that are detailed down to the level of a census block.

Using that kind of information to exclude U.S. citizens under 18 and noncitizens — both those lawfully and unlawfully in the country — when redrawing districts would be "advantageous to Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites," a GOP redistricting strategist concluded.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63104
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Smoove_B wrote:
Wed Jul 15, 2020 5:08 pm
Did we talk about this yet? It's all blurring together - Four States Are Sharing Driver's License Info To Help Find Out Who's A Citizen:
To help figure out the U.S. citizenship status of every adult living in the country, the Trump administration has made agreements to accumulate driver's license and state identification card information from states including Iowa, Nebraska, South Carolina and South Dakota, NPR has learned.

...

In addition to allowing states to redistrict using the number of citizens old enough to vote, Trump's executive order noted that the citizenship data could assist the government in generating a "more reliable count of the unauthorized alien population in the country."

The arrangements with South Carolina, South Dakota, Iowa and Nebraska are not expected to involve information about unauthorized immigrants. All four states require applicants for driver's licenses and state ID cards to provide proof that they are legally residing in the country.
Amazing.

TLDR but I've long since wondered why state IDs aren't tracked at the federal level for interstate (and by extension international) purposes. Do I trust Trump? No. But with no details it seems long overdue.

User avatar
pr0ner
Posts: 15547
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, VA
Contact:

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by pr0ner »

Oh, look, he's back at it again.

Hodor.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 49014
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies
LawBeefaroni OO’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LawBeefaroni »

pr0ner wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 1:51 pm
Oh, look, he's back at it again.

“Excluding these illegal aliens from the apportionment base is more consonant with the principles of representative democracy underpinning our system of Government,” Trump said in a memo outlining the new policy.
Yeah, like he wrote any of that. Useful idiot.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63104
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Silly question, are undocumented people living in the US counted toward government representation and funding? It seems by they nature being "undocumented" they would not be. Quite frankly, if you told me they do count for funding and governing purposes, I'd support their being excluded (for these purposes). To me that is like counting slaves. Seriously. You would have people being brought to work and live without protections or rights of citizenship for the benefit of property owners and their districts would get more representation and funding without the being for those being counted.

I am regularly told the undocumented people do not receive federal benefits. I always just assumed they weren't counted. Is that ignorance on my part?

Jeff V
Posts: 33096
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

You're thinking direct funding. Consider indirect funding, such as infrastructure. That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not. The census really does presume to count everyone, their legal status notwithstanding. Because of Trump's dumbfuckery, however, many are fading into the woodwork, afraid that responding will out them.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63104
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Jeff V wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm
That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?

User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 5289
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

LordMortis wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:41 pm
Jeff V wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm
That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
Why should infrastructure be based on actual population? So it can be designed to be effective?

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63104
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Alefroth wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:44 pm
LordMortis wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:41 pm
Jeff V wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm
That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
Why should infrastructure be based on actual population? So it can be designed to be effective?

But then you are building funding around an undocumented population concurrent with saying they get no benefits because they aren't documented and you are giving truth to a few notions: 1) illegals are being subsidized by tax dollars. 2) There are populations increasing the authority in government by allowing illegals to remain illegally.

So now ask a blue collar struggling Trump voter why their taxes should contribute an effective infrastructure for illegals while you are also tell them it's ignorant propaganda to suppose that taxes are supporting illegals.

We got some serious problems with how we handle undocumented peoples in this nation and if the look isn't honest then we only feed the anger.

Jeff V
Posts: 33096
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: Nowhere you want to be.

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Jeff V »

Honestly reporting their presence is a primary goal of the census. Persecuting them should never be. That they exist for this purpose only needs to be acknowledged. Do you want to accept crumbing roads because of excessive use by undocumented people? Do you want under-funded schools who have to educate more kids than a citizen-only census dictates funding? To not include them is putting your head in the sand, then complaining because local funding is inadequate. Keep in mind that most of these undocumented people are still paying taxes to some extent.

Policy ought to be designed to bring the greatest benefit to the most people. Punishing those who have to support an elevated number of undocumented people does not serve this purpose.

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63104
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

Jeff V wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 5:07 pm
Honestly reporting their presence is a primary goal of the census. Persecuting them should never be. That they exist for this purpose only needs to be acknowledged. Do you want to accept crumbing roads because of excessive use by undocumented people? Do you want under-funded schools who have to educate more kids than a citizen-only census dictates funding? To not include them is putting your head in the sand, then complaining because local funding is inadequate. Keep in mind that most of these undocumented people are still paying taxes to some extent.

Policy ought to be designed to bring the greatest benefit to the most people. Punishing those who have to support an elevated number of undocumented people does not serve this purpose.
To keep them on as a cheap labor force outside of the protections of the law with all shady dealings while giving their communities the benefits of having an increased population which they have no say in. It sounds something like this to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-Fifths_Compromise

User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 5289
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

LordMortis wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:55 pm
Alefroth wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:44 pm
LordMortis wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:41 pm
Jeff V wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 3:31 pm
That sort of thing needs to be sized according to actual population, not just legal population. Or schools, especially when the kids are legal or one or both parents are not.
Why?
Why should infrastructure be based on actual population? So it can be designed to be effective?

But then you are building funding around an undocumented population concurrent with saying they get no benefits because they aren't documented and you are giving truth to a few notions: 1) illegals are being subsidized by tax dollars. 2) There are populations increasing the authority in government by allowing illegals to remain illegally.

So now ask a blue collar struggling Trump voter why their taxes should contribute an effective infrastructure for illegals while you are also tell them it's ignorant propaganda to suppose that taxes are supporting illegals.

We got some serious problems with how we handle undocumented peoples in this nation and if the look isn't honest then we only feed the anger.
How is designing infrastructure that will never be able to handle actual capacity and screws everyone over, going to solve the undocumented person problem?

User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 63104
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by LordMortis »

There is a shell game going on for I don't what purpose, to get cheap produce 365? But either we find a way to bring these people in to the system or we reject them. Don't tell me they get no benefits and then design a system to give benefits to the communities use their labor while we as a nation look the other way on their protections. I'm demonstrably ignorant of the whole thing. Show me what's up with the infrastructure gains and how everyone is helped.

User avatar
Alefroth
Posts: 5289
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 1:56 pm
Location: Bellingham WA

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Alefroth »

Pick any infrastructure, roads, utilities, schools, hospitals, etc. It's all designed to serve a calculated amount of people. Now figure it was under-designed by 20% or whatever. That's going to affect everyone, right? It doesn't make sense to plan it for the way things should be instead of the way they are. That's just pragmatism.

User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 42788
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Immigration Policy

Post by Smoove_B »

LordMortis wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 4:55 pm
We got some serious problems with how we handle undocumented peoples in this nation and if the look isn't honest then we only feed the anger.
Let's go back to 1989 and ask President Bush and some guy named Bill Barr what should be done:


Here is a legal opinion in 1989 from the Bush DOJ stating all persons must be counted in the Census. William Barr was AAG and head of OLC, and surely had to approve this opinion about legislation in Congress.

Post Reply