Do you think it's wrong to separate illegal border crossers adult's and children?

[dochawk]

As a lawyer who used to practice immigration law I’m going to stick something him here and be done with it. This is not to take a side but to clear some of the misinformation upon which many labor.

There is an agreed order from decades ago that limits the time for which children can be confined in detention for immigration purposes.

As a separate issue once a person is brought into the criminal system and detention, his children cannot go into criminal detention/court processing with him.

Entering the US illegally is a crime, a misdemeanor (for the first offense).

All of the above are long established.

A majority of those released with dates to appear in immigration court simply do not appear. For this one I cannot tell you how long that it goes back; just that it is the case for the last few years.

Recently, for better or worse, right or wrong, a decision was made that all illegal entrants would be criminally charged. For whatever reason this was not the policy in prior years.

As a consequence of being charged, the rules on detention of children kicked in.

Again, this isn’t to argue either way, or to justify any side, but rather to get the facts straight, as they have been misstated in most arguments from all sides.

As a side speculation, a solution would be to allow parents in detention to waive the limit on how long the children can be detained, allowing them to say together.

hawk, esq.

 

[Rhubarb]

DEEP STATE! CHEM TRAILS! CHEMICALS IN THE WATER TO TURN THE FROGS GAY!

Could you possibly have thrown out more pundit sound-bytes in a single post? Slogans aren’t arguments. Nor do they defend a position. At least get out the Glenn Beck whiteboard to make a point.

Although he’s since apologized for being a partisan hack because it hurts legitimate discourse, and our country at large. So. I guess I don’t even know what.

 

[neophyte]

If it could be done immediately without lengthy separations, then there would be nothing wrong with taking those steps to ensure the children belong to those adults. But apparently it cannot be done quickly.

The reason it can’t be done quickly is entirely due to the way they entered the country, which is the exact reason it needs to be done. Illegal entry + missing or suspect identification = a greater likelihood of harm being done to the kids.

In that case, taking those steps does psychological harm to the children who really do belong with their parents.

And after the identity of their parents can be confirmed, they will be united. The people who are ultimately responsible for that harm are those who brought them into the country illegally, not the people who have to deal with the mess they created by doing it.

Also there is evidence that the zero-tolerance policy and the subsequent taking of the children was deliberately done to act as a deterrent to others who might want to enter. Jeff Sessions said so publicly. That casts doubt on the idea that this is all done to “protect the children.”

How about you travel along the border there, look south as far as you can see and think about how safe it is to smuggle children across that kind of terrain before you cast sanctimonious aspersions at those who want to discourage it.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

If it could be done immediately without lengthy separations, then there would be nothing wrong with taking those steps to ensure the children belong to those adults. But apparently it cannot be done quickly.

The reason it can’t be done quickly is entirely due to the way they entered the country,…

That, and the laws we have put in place regarding that entry.

which is the exact reason it needs to be done. Illegal entry + missing or suspect identification = a greater likelihood of harm being done to the kids.

as opposed to not getting in at all and having even greater harm done to the children.

In that case, taking those steps does psychological harm to the children who really do belong with their parents.

And after the identity of their parents can be confirmed, they will be united.

Not necessarily. We deported many of the parents and they are not unfindable.

The people who are ultimately responsible for that harm are those who brought them into the country illegally,

And who would be ultimately responsible if the kids were killed by gangs in their home town if they did not undertake the journey?

Also there is evidence that the zero-tolerance policy and the subsequent taking of the children was deliberately done to act as a deterrent to others who might want to enter. Jeff Sessions said so publicly. That casts doubt on the idea that this is all done to “protect the children.”

How about you travel along the border there, look south as far as you can see and think about how safe it is to smuggle children across that kind of terrain before you cast sanctimonious aspersions at those who want to discourage it.

I would have to compare that with the terror they are fleeing. Not knowing what that terror is like, not having walked in their shoes, I am not going to judge those who made the terrible choice they did.

 

[mrsdizzyd]

If you separate them for no other reason than they have presented themselves at a border crossing or to any official requesting asylum (which is their right under US law), then yes it is wrong. You are causing irreparable psychological harm to an innocent party ie a minor child. You are harming the human dignity of the parents and the children.

Our legal system functions on the presumption of innocence. We do not separate families without cause. We must have some evidence that the child is in danger not just a baseless suspicion that the child is in danger.

It doesn’t matter which political party is doing the separating. It doesn’t matter if you think you will score some political points. It doesn’t matter if you think you will send a message that the US does not have open borders. Wrong is wrong.

As a result of the wrongheadedness of this policy, the current administration is being forced to reunite these families. The fact that they are have difficulty and the fact that hundreds of parents were deported without their children only further underscores how wrong and damaging this policy is/was.

 

[Sarcelle]

Lots of immigrants have come here to better their lives and they do so legally.

Why does this excuse law breaking?

 

[Augustinian]

I’d say its wrong not to separate them, unless they are going to be immediately deported.

Children should not be sent to adult correctional institutions with their adult guardians waiting on adjudication.

The language as well as the violence and sodomy occurring in the nation’s penitentiaries makes it no place for children and its just wrong to send young minors there, regardless of the situation.

Maybe sending a kid to a shelter for kids might not be ideal, but its often the best choice out of less than ideal options

 

[steve-b]

Do you think it’s wrong to separate illegal border crossers adult’s and children?

In the following case, 80% of children were separated from their parents back in their country of origin. The NY Times, is certainly no fan of the current administration. But the one addressing the question and the problem, is qualified to answer and address this issue. Kirstjen Nielsen Addresses Families Separation at Border: Full Transcript - The New York Times

Look at the numbers/month of people trying to enter this country illegally. Presumably most of these people don’t speak English. And Children NOT present with their parents, can’t legally speak for themselves nor can the one who is NOT their parent, speak legally for the child. It’s a huge problem

 

[AdamP88]

It’s not inherently immoral. If you break the laws of any country you can be put in prison, regardless of whether you have children or not.

 

[Augustinian]

If you separate them for no other reason than they have presented themselves at a border crossing or to any official requesting asylum (which is their right under US law), then yes it is wrong.

Actually, that’s not what’s happening. People are sneaking over the border with their children, and after they are pinched they are requesting asylum.

 

[guanophore]

potential of harming innocent families.

They are not entirely innocent, since they have broken the law by entering illegally.

I agree that it is not ultimately beneficial to assume that the adults are unsuitable guardians for the children, but investigation takes a LONG time, and there is little evidence, as we might find in a citizen, since there are limited ways to gather the relevant information.

 

[Allegra]

This is way too much of a blanket statement to even answer. In general, I think it is wrong to incarcerate a family for the sole reason that they attempted to seek asylum. In general, I think all attempts should be made to avoid separating children from their parents, but I realize that it may sometime be necessary.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

potential of harming innocent families.

They are not entirely innocent, since they have broken the law by entering illegally.

I agree that it is not ultimately beneficial to assume that the adults are unsuitable guardians for the children, but investigation takes a LONG time, and there is little evidence, as we might find in a citizen, since there are limited ways to gather the relevant information.

I meant innocent in the moral sense, not the legal sense. Also there are degrees of infractions. We do not punish trespassing with the death penalty even though the trespasser is not completely innocent.

It is clearly proper to separate children from abusive parents and drug-dealing parents and sex-trafficking parents.

As for the process taking a long time, once we taking responsibility for these border crossers by incarcerating them, we assume the responsibility of what happens to them from that point on. We cannot continue to claim this is all their fault from crossing the border. Much of the problem is due to a structure that we have put in place. If it means building separate family detention housing until we are satisfied with their claims, then that’s what we have to do. Of course it would help if we put more resources into the judgement and investigations so that could go faster. But the administration has made no move to do that. They just want that big beautiful wall.

 

[Sarcelle]

They did not seek asylum at the legitimate border crossings. They sneaked into the border and requested asylum after they were caught.

Their first intention was to break the law and then play into the compassion of others when they are caught. It seems to work.

 

[Augustinian]

If it means building separate family detention housing until we are satisfied with their claims, then that’s what we have to do.

The Flores decision of 1997 prevents that solution

 

[guanophore]

We do not punish trespassing with the death penalty even though the trespasser is not completely innocent

Perhaps this is true in most cases, though I know some ranchers that carry a rifle when they run poachers off their property. They have signs posted indicating that trespassers may be shot!

There are many government properties that carry a potentially fatal consequence for trespass, the White House not the least. Here in the Southwest there are still active missile silos and bases that are posted with signs that say deadly force may be used for trespassing. Should our National Borders be different? How can we possibly know if those persons trying to cross have our best interests in mind? I realize it is a complex problem.

I have worked with many human trafficking victims, and can attest that they are kidnapped, bought, and otherwise acquired against their will from other adults, sometimes even parents or those legally responsible for them. How can we assume these children are safe, when we don’t know the people who have “custody” of them?

Unfortunately, many parents place their children in the custody of someone who promises to bring them safely into the US and put them in the charge of a relative or other safe place, then they sell them or trade them.

At the same time, I thinkthere are some border crossing incidents that are taken to an absolutely absurd point, the one at the Canadian border being an example.

 

[po18guy]

A “slight” mis-reading. I do not watch TV, read newspapers or political magazines, listen to either NPR or Fox. Neither am I involved in any social media or media of any type outside of Catholic radio - yet I stand accused of the horrendous crime of disagreeing with the progressive viewpoint.

Why not dissect my viewpoint with counter-argument?

I am sorry to see others offended when their media-programmed viewpoints are challenged.

I much prefer critical thinking.

 

[Inisfallen]

Yes.

I can’t be clearer or less ambiguous than that.

 

[Inisfallen]

They are not entirely innocent, since they have broken the law by entering illegally.

Young children ARE entirely innocent.

 

[guanophore]

It is clearly proper to separate children from abusive parents and drug-dealing parents and sex-trafficking parents.

There is really know way to determine if the persons claiming to be parents actually are, or even if they are parents or other relatives, what their intentions or actions are or have been. Children who have been abused are threatened into silence, and are trained not to talk. And abusers often are very skilled at making themselves look nurturing. The point is, they don’t have their intentions tatooed on their foreheads.

As for the process taking a long time, once we taking responsibility for these border crossers by incarcerating them, we assume the responsibility of what happens to them from that point on.

I agree. It is a wretched situation, but I don’t see how it can be avoided. If we just let people stream across unchecked we run the risk of admitting people who have evil intentions toward the US.

We cannot continue to claim this is all their fault from crossing the border.

Why not? They would not be detained had they not. I do agree that fault finding is not productive in any case. We need to focusing on solving the problem once it has occurred, not blaming those who precipitated it, or are victims of it, such as children.