Under the Obama administration, undocumented immigrants convicted of serious crimes were the priority for removal. Now, immigration agents, customs officers and border patrol agents have been directed to remove anyone convicted of any criminal offense.
That includes people convicted of fraud in any official matter before a governmental agency and people who “have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits.”
In the so-called guidance documents released on Tuesday, the department is directed to begin the process of hiring 10,000 new immigration and customs agents, expanding the number of detention facilities and creating an office within Immigration and Customs Enforcement to help families of those killed by undocumented immigrants.
I am sure lawsuits are coming, as they should.
About the only part I can see that is at all good news:
The officials also made clear that nothing in the directives would change the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, which provides work permits and deportation protection for the young people commonly referred to as Dreamers.
Some math:
Let’s assume 1,000,000 deportation cases, and unimaginable number. If we assume 8 hours of investigation for each case, 4 hours of defense attorney time, and 1 hour of court time it will require about 8,200 new lawyers alone.
In 2012 the Federal Government arrested about 200,000. So the case load we are talking about is FIVE TIMES that which the Government brought in 2012.
What good is DACA protection when you have ICE ramping up a reign of terror that says anyone can be deported for any reason, particularly when they changed the definition of “criminal”? Cities will need to follow LA and decriminalize street vending.
You can’t just hire 10,000 people overnight and properly screen them. There’s going to be so much corruption here. There’s going to be camps. Worse than the detention centers under Obama, which were already full of due process violations and inhumane conditions.
“You can’t just hire 10,000 people overnight and properly screen them” Very true!
As for the rest, we’ll see. I’ve heard those predictions before about other Presidents.
In truth Obama ramped the deportations up.
This will be so much worse though.
The thing is 10,000 isn’t nearly enough. Maybe that is the only good thing about this.
Ramped up relative to what? Obama’s record on deportations is not good no matter how you parse it from an immigrant rights prospective, particularly in 2011-2013, but interior removals ramped down. The focus was largely on areas within 100 miles of the border, and on people who have been here for two weeks. Kelly’s guidance changes that completely, expanding it to the entire country and for immigrants here for two years.
10,000 is certainly not enough, but it’s still a ~50% increase. He’d need those 100k National Guard troops that he wants to truly deport the people Bannon and Miller want to be deported, but would the political economy allow for this to transpire even with the proper resources? DHS still needs appropriations for all of these things. They can’t just up and hire 10k. Trump isn’t going to submit a health care plan or a tax plan, what are the odds he even sends a budget with these requests?
And then there’s the fact that there aren’t enough judges to hear cases. Do they just deport without proper due process?
There will be lawsuits everywhere to ensure Due Process. My point was even 10,000 isn’t nearly enough if you want to deport 11,000,000 million people.
Basically you would need to double the entire Department of Justice to come close to handling all of these cases.
Immigration judges aren’t Article III judges and so they are easier to appoint, but you would probably need close to 1,000 of those alone.
Dems might be dying on their swords on this issue. In fact, it might be one reason why Trumps positives are somewhat holding.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/320487-poll-americans-overwhelmingly-oppose-sanctuary-cit
ies
Hmm, disregard this post. It seems Mark Penn is up to his neck in this project.
It corresponds to what I hear people say. Discounting those who say “Mexican” rather than “illegal immigrant”. Also those who say “immigrant” rather than “illegal immigrant”. Which are two polar views:
The large number of people in-between are disgusted with #2 and gravitating to #1 in consequence. Because Democrats seem to not hear the word “illegal”.
I’d like a political dialog on whether our quotas are too big or too small. Should we carve out exceptions for Mexico and Canada? And similar reform questions, but the Parties seem to have only two stances. No immigrants at all or wide open immigration. Might as well save all the cost of ICE, visas and the like.
OK OK. There are good reasons for those political questions. POLITICS. The immigrants vote (D) so Democrats don’t care if they are legal or not and republicans don’t want them here at all, some because of racism but mostly because they vote (D).
I think most people are absolutely between 1 and 2, but most politically active people are either 1 or 2.
Open borders IS neoliberal corporatism, imo.
Dem party has never been for that until now.
Ridiculous. Are you a nationalist? Do you support spreading wealth world wide or not? You can’t do that without free movement of people. However, the other side of the coin is to pressure one’s own government to invest in other areas, not disaster capitalism coupled with the IMF and the World Bank.
“Are you a nationalist? Do you support spreading wealth world wide or not?” Yes to #1, no to #2
I’m very open to people coming here to become American. I’m opposed to making America someplace else to satisfy immigrants who want money (either jobs or welfare) but want to turn America into their home country.
Eugene Debs on the topic
Are you ready for capital controls? Capital will always move faster than labor unless it is regulated.
Will it be open borders or fair wages? Under the current paradigm, both are not possible.
You can be an economic nationalist without being an ethnic one. I DO think the least of our own citizens should not be the ones paying the price of globalism.
Timely:
There are ways of making it so that immigrants produce more jobs than they consume, but that has to be something you want to do, and it hasn’t been a priority for most nations for decades. Heck, it hasn’t been a consideration, not a priority, because policy has been run to keep wages from increasing as fast as inflation, let alone as fast as productivity.
In this environment, it is not unreasonable for low wage workers who are directly competing with undocumented workers to see them as competition. They are competition.
The right way to fix this, as with almost everything, is to make sure it’s a clear win/win and not questionable which way it goes. Low wage workers, and tech workers, need to see a tight labor market where there’s plenty of work and wages rising faster than inflation. If they do, they won’t care about immigration.
Immigration and Wages