Should we defund ICE?

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Why does this specific area of law then require for such game-changing powers, such disregard for civil liberties, jury trial, etc.? Why do you consider immigration such a serious threat to society that it requires a specialized force with powers that traditional law enforcement does not have?

ICE are the cruel ones and the ones under discussion here. ICE are the ones who are housing snatched-up children in deplorable conditions and then going "whoops, we misplaced over a thousand vulnerable kids who don't happen to have anyone to legally advocate for them or contact with their caretakers. Guess we'll just have to hope they don't end up being sold for bitcoin in a Thailand back-ally. =/"

ICE has no regard for innocence, for collateral damage, for due process, or for justice. All they want is to lock away lots of brown people where their spanish-speaking voices won't offend lily-white ears.

[Antiboyscout]

Why does this specific area of law then require for such game-changing powers, such disregard for civil liberties, jury trial, etc.? Why do you consider immigration such a serious threat to society that it requires a specialized force with powers that traditional law enforcement does not have?

ICE are the cruel ones and the ones under discussion here. ICE are the ones who are housing snatched-up children in deplorable conditions and then going "whoops, we misplaced over a thousand vulnerable kids who don't happen to have anyone to legally advocate for them or contact with their caretakers. Guess we'll just have to hope they don't end up being sold for bitcoin in a Thailand back-ally. =/"

ICE has no regard for innocence, for collateral damage, for due process, or for justice. All they want is to lock away lots of brown people where their spanish-speaking voices won't offend lily-white ears.

The US constitution does not apply to non-US citizens. If they want to take the issue to the Hague then so be it. Considering how many "asylum seekers" don't bother showing up to their court hearing I doubt they really think they have a chance or don't really care. They just want in.

The local police will not be the ones finding illegals. Local courts will not be hearing their trials. Considering California, they don't appear to want to. Illegals are not citizens of the US there for anything dealing with them gets bumped up to the federal level. Creating a Federal court just for this makes sense. Because the local PD can't/wont deal with Illegals, without ICE the only organization dealing with crime and punishment on the federal level is the FBI. They have enough on their plate and I don't think the G-men would be any more gentle.

By definition, children being brought to the US illegally is child trafficking. Don't take the side of the Coyotes. Coyotes do unspeakable things to the people in their "care". Much like the boat people dying while trying to enter Australia, the best thing you can do is have a zero tolerance policy to discourage people taking the perilous journey in the first place and leaving the Coyote out of a job.

You know, for the US being such an obviously racist and white supremacist country where brown people are second class citizens, discriminated against daily, and are not allowed to succeed, a LOT of brown people want to come here all the time. Odd that. You would think that they would want to stay in their homeland with a majority brown population. Oh well.

[TGLS]

The US constitution does not apply to non-US citizens.

Incorrect.

[Antiboyscout]

The US constitution does not apply to non-US citizens.

Incorrect.

WOW that web site was politically biased.

"Some argue that the plenary power doctrine is sound because aliens have no legal right to enter the United States in the first place; such admission is at the discretion of the US government. Whether the Constitution gives the federal government a general power to restrict immigration is debatable."
Only to liberal loons is that debatable.

Unless it means denying Arizona and Texas a say that is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_v._United_States

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Even if it didn't apply legally, it doesn't change the moral implications of indefinitely detaining people without trial or legal representation.

[Darth Wedgius]

Why does this specific area of law then require for such game-changing powers, such disregard for civil liberties, jury trial, etc.? Why do you consider immigration such a serious threat to society that it requires a specialized force with powers that traditional law enforcement does not have?

It is actually quite common to detain people without trial. Police, for example, do not require a trial before an arrest is made.

And I do not object to immigration, as long as it doesn't take from the public purse and as long as the immigrants are willing to assimilate into the general American society. That requires immigration to be controlled. Illegal immigration, OTOH, is uncontrolled.

ICE has no regard for innocence, for collateral damage, for due process, or for justice. All they want is to lock away lots of brown people where their spanish-speaking voices won't offend lily-white ears.

Citation needed.

[Steve]

It is actually quite common to detain people without trial. Police, for example, do not require a trial before an arrest is made.

I believe the issue being presented is that the detainees are facing indefinite detainment. Yes, arrests precede trials, but the arrested have rights, including a right to a speedy trial. Not to sitting and rotting in a cell with no recourse.

And I do not object to immigration, as long as it doesn't take from the public purse and as long as the immigrants are willing to assimilate into the general American society. That requires immigration to be controlled. Illegal immigration, OTOH, is uncontrolled.

The problem is that the legal immigration system is intentionally engineered to discourage its use. The waiting time for green cards can be measured in decades. It can be years even with some of the fast-tracking exemptions that exist.

I'm not an open border advocate, but I'm not going to fault people who have no choice because our immigration system has been built to intentionally deny them a reasonable means of legal immigration.

Not that it's going to be easy. The thing is, these people are willing to do hard labor jobs that most Americans no longer are interested in, or will only do for much higher wages, while immigrants will do them for cheap because the US currency they're paid with is still better than they'd get working a job back home. And that doesn't account for people who are trying to get to the US because of rampant crime and corruption in their home countries, not simply for economic benefit. With this in mind even the most liberal (using the term literally, not politically) immigration policy is likely to not entirely eliminate the existence of UDIs. But it may at least give enough hope of legitimate entry to dry up the market for the Coyotes. The other direction is just going to lead to more of the same, and will in the long term be untenable because restrictive regimes need widespread support from the populace... and that is, IMHO, exceedingly unlikely.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

To support steve's point about immigrant labor, take a look at this here http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/15/news/ec ... index.html

[Antiboyscout]

or will only do for much higher wages, while immigrants will do them for cheap because the US currency they're paid with is still better than they'd get working a job back home.

Why have wages in the US flat-lined? Lets ask Nancy Pelosi

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... atter.html

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/em ... -not-point

Never mind...

[Darth Wedgius]

It is actually quite common to detain people without trial. Police, for example, do not require a trial before an arrest is made.

I believe the issue being presented is that the detainees are facing indefinite detainment. Yes, arrests precede trials, but the arrested have rights, including a right to a speedy trial. Not to sitting and rotting in a cell with no recourse.

The "without trial" is being repeated a lot, but anyway... I would support faster deportation if possible. I don't know what is taking so long to process the illegal aliens. If it is taking longer because they are claiming asylum and that has to be verified, then they can sit in a cell while that gets verified, or they can go back. You don't get to break into somebody's place on grounds of necessity and then declare you have the right to roam around the place.

And I do not object to immigration, as long as it doesn't take from the public purse and as long as the immigrants are willing to assimilate into the general American society. That requires immigration to be controlled. Illegal immigration, OTOH, is uncontrolled.

The problem is that the legal immigration system is intentionally engineered to discourage its use. The waiting time for green cards can be measured in decades. It can be years even with some of the fast-tracking exemptions that exist.

I'm not an open border advocate, but I'm not going to fault people who have no choice because our immigration system has been built to intentionally deny them a reasonable means of legal immigration.

There I have to disagree. They did have a choice -- to do without what they want. That something is difficult to obtain legally isn't an excuse to just grab it. Otherwise I'd have a Tesla Roadster in my garage.

I have some sympathy for the idea that illegal aliens will do work that Americans won't, but if those jobs paid better then I suspect more Americans would do them. That could mean higher prices here and there, but higher wages for unskilled labor as well, something I'd like to see more of.