Except that’s not the situation here and you left a key option out.
D) the child remains with the legally resident / citizen parent or their immediate families
In these cases they have legally resident parents, just not the one who the child was with when snatched without due process. They’re being denied the ability to coordinate the handoff of the child to the other parent or family who can take responsibility. ICE is not allowing the families to coordinate the child’s care - they’re isolating the parent from their broader families, denying due process, access to legal representation, and unilaterally deporting US citizen children who have other options but were denied the ability to access them.
In the United States our constitution assures -all people- due process and basic human rights. There is no carve out that if you’re visiting the country or otherwise not a citizen that you can be summarily detained, deprived of liberty, and handled however the government chooses including extraordinary rendition to third countries for indefinite imprisonment without recourse. Nothing that is happening is allowable, or even defensible because however you feel about immigration - every action being taken could be taken to tourists, students, or other guests if allowed under the premise only citizens enjoy protections.
And in these cases, even citizens are being given no deference - and the fact they’re toddlers should be even more frightening.
Here’s a quote from the release that basically implies ICE is murdering one child summarily:
“””a U.S. citizen child suffering from a rare form of metastatic cancer was deported without medication or the ability to consult with their treating physicians–despite ICE being notified in advance of the child’s urgent medical needs.“””
So, the headline as written dramatically understates the situation, and the proposed dichotomy is false. There are many other options, spelled out in the law and regulation and requirements - even constitutionally - and they’re being ignored as an apparent matter of political policy.
> In these cases they have legally resident parents, just not the one who the child was with when snatched without due process.
Is that true? I re-read the article (but didn’t google for other sources), but nowhere could I see that definitively stated.
It would be interesting if the deportable mother of one of these minors (e.g. the one who is pregnant) decided to leave them with other family in the US rather than stay together as a family, but it is of course her right to make such a decision.
In the case of the two year old who was removed with their mother, they have US citizen family that the father is trying to transfer custody (it seems he doesn’t have legal status, but I haven’t seen a definitive source)
Except it’s not, because it’s not the parents but “a parent” being deported, and b) was phrased fallaciously to imply the child would be left alone without legal care givers.
Why is a) bad? Have you considered d) pass a different law? Why are you pretending the law is some immutable thing that we always need to follow, regardless of the situations an unjust law might place someone in if followed?
Why does the consequence have to be deportation? Can we imagine a form of deterrence that doesn’t necessitate the cruelty of familial separation? Do we at least agree that what is happening right now, to this family and to others, is deeply unjust?
What about the threat of jail? Is the US punitive system not effective? In many ways I'd rather be an immigrant than a citizen if the punishment for crimes is deportation rather than detention... as long as I'm not being sent to country that has also suspended their constitutional right to due process.
First, I don't believe this crime rises to the level of jail. Second, it doesn't make sense here because if the parents are jailed who will take care of the children? I'm also not sold on putting more people into the meat grinder of US judicial system. When they deported at least they will be free. Ironically, compared to the US judicial system, this is the more human approach.
You said "break the rules". If you meant border crossing say it next time. Also they aren't free if they are deported to, like I already said, a country that has also suspended due process.
You have misunderstood what it means to follow the law. The law guarantees liberties, but doesn't guarantee prosecution. Obama has DACA, which gives young illegal immigrants a deferral on their prosecution. More generally there's the concept of prosecutorial discretion. Have you ever for example driven a car badly, been pulled over, but the cop let you off with just a warning?
Or, for that matter, driven a car badly but not been pulled over at all? Surely in the interest of absolute lawfulness they then proceeded to the nearest police station to demand to be ticketed.
Surely you understand the difference between a cop declining to issue a speeding ticket and a federal "discretionary" policy that makes it de facto legal to violate standing immigration law at scale.
There is no difference. People often complain during the pandemic that the San Francisco police department has seemingly instituted a "discretionary" policy that makes it de facto legal to violate traffic law at scale, you know, including speeding, not stopping at stop signs, not yielding to pedestrians. https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/11nbnxw/san_f...
Maybe you are misunderstanding. A single cop deciding "okay today I'm letting you off with a warning" is quite different from the President directing the entire Federal bureaucracy to not enforce existing immigration law. If for some reason a large jurisdiction, say maybe the state of California, decided that it was policy to let everyone off with a warning for speeding infractions, then, if I squint hard enough and ignore a wide range of second and third order effects, then yeah maybe they are similar.
Nah, lies, propaganda, and an incoherent strategy for Biden leading to limited window with Harris lost the last election.
There was a perfectly cromulent immigration plan ready to be voted on by Congress before Trump threw a tantrum because it would have hurt his election chances.
A tangent, but a welcome one for sure! NIMBYism has led to some pretty terrible outcomes. I recommend giving the work of the StrongTowns organization a read for a critical review of current policy and upcoming issues associated with it, as well as reasonable recommendations for how we can make stronger communities.
"you don't apply the law" is a really dishonest way of phrasing this, when "hit them with a small financial penalty for the civil immigration violation and fast-track their green cards" is also an option.
Illegally immigrating to the US is a civil violation, not a criminal one, and far less of a threat to US safety than going 5mph over the speed limit or running red lights. It is entirely lawful for the executive and judicial branches to use discretion and compassion in cases when under-18 US citizens are involved.
I understand this is splitting hairs, but that law applies equally to US citizens. And formally people aren't deported for crossing into the US illegally, they are deported for being there without a valid visa/etc. (Informally there is more leeway for overstaying a work visa, of course.)
DEPORTING US CITIZENS is the logical choice? Logical to deport children to someplace they have never been and they don't have citizenship to? It's still illogical, evil, unconstitutional, and cruel.
> c) deport the entire family, including the US minors. Since they have US citizenship, they can always return to the US
I mean sure. But let's let the next Democrat who's in charge determine that kidnapping or maybe even voting wrong are crimes that merit summary deportation. After all, if they're good citizens, they can always return.
The history of suspending habeas corpus is strikingly one way. Maybe we'll be the first society to defy that trend. But the end game we're heading to is mass political violence.
Maybe if your labor is exploited by a capitalist hiring you illegally you should be legalized instead of humiliated and your life destroyed with a possible death sentence in a concentration camp. Meanwhile all the money you paid into this system is repatriated among "good just legal" citizens like yourself.
You benefit from this monstrosity that takes advantage of people and leaves them destitute and you know it deep down. If yall support this don't ever delude yourself into thinking you're a good person.
That means you have the following options:
a) deport nobody, i.e. you don't apply the law
b) deport just the parents. What do you do with the minor children? Separating them from their parents (different countries) would be cruel.
c) deport the entire family, including the US minors. Since they have US citizenship, they can always return to the US.