isn't the immigrant being detained for being an illegal immigrant?
The expectation that a person in the US illegally should be released back into the public to continue benefiting from their crimes is the opposite of due process.
This makes sense if we suggest they are only being detained because of their non violent offense, but they're being detained because they're illegal immigrants who were determined to be illegal immigrants.
This is why I've brought up some of recent history's changes to immigration policy. Obama's Catch and Release was an extremely successful program. Especially when paired with social workers, but even without it. Which brings me back to my "we're walking back successful programs that were good for people's rights" point. Trump changed the rules, broke systems that were working, and now we're discussing this new policy from a purely Trumpian paradigm.
But I do concede that on Trump's terms and since his first term, your point holds. I'll just point to Catch and Release as a broadly valid, cost-effective, and successful program that worked better in a number of ways.
The American public believes that violent illegal immigrants being detained is to their benefit.
Similarly, Americans believe not competing with illegal immigrants for jobs and housing will improve their prospects.
We can argue over the overall impact, but the perception is that good immigration policy is beneficial to Americans.
Violent Illegal Immigrants are already detained and deported. Which is perfectly reasonable to expect, but this legislation's issues come from the inclusion of non-violent offenses.
Americans can believe something, sure, but are we arguing about perception or actually making their lives better? Because detaining and deporting immigrants is an expensive policy that costs money which would be better spent on policies that actually improve Americans' jobs and housing prospects.
Imo, "good immigration policy" would confer actual benefits. This program doesn't do that in any measurable manner.
I agree. I expect the larger issue is red states filing suit against blue states for their own policy as being harmful to their states.
Fair enough.
Sure. But most of these issues are related as fixes for our already broken asylum system.
Yeah, we're in agreement here. Fixing asylum and improving visa systems would both be the best solutions.
The goal isn't to disregard data, but merely pointing out other countries with more intentional/stringent and even efficient immigration systems in the west aren't viewed viewed as regressive or draconian nor immoral.
That's a fair point. I won't argue on moral grounds. I think this approach is impractical compared to the perceived problems it's attempting to solve.
The story the data tells us is that our asylum system is understaffed, underfunded, and with asylum decisions taking on average nearly 4 years instead of 4 months we have created a system where we encourage illegal immigration by merely giving illegal immigrants a free 4 years in this country.
These types of measure shorten the timeline and SHOULD create less of a backlog for deserving asylum cases by getting rid of people who won't be approved due to their criminal history anyway.
My two main responses here are:
First - Yes, the data says the asylum system is too slow and underfunded. But I'd argue the best solution would be more funding, more judges, and speeding up other processes for legal migration. A lot of that stuff was in the bipartisan bill that almost passed until Trump smoked it. It was paired with some potentially draconian stuff, but the compromise left me feeling like there was at least a path to improvements.
Second, while you would expect this speed up the process by removing people who won't be approved due to criminal history. It will also likely increase the number of people pulled into detention and who will need a hearing before a judge. That's especially true with a Trump administration and emboldened red state leaders. So, on the surface it may look like a way to speed up the process, but in practice, it could push things even further behind. That also holds especially true when we factor how much slower processes moved under Trump.
For as much as people piled on Biden's administration for the increase in illegal immigration at its offset. That was caused by manufactured bottlenecks from Trump (along with pandemic slowdowns). Once that cleared up, numbers started to return to historical norms. So this is another case where I think perception is a lagging indicator that's driving a push for an unnecessary "solution" that could make things worse.
. Federalize the state government , don't even need to be convicted of a crime in this new law. Deporting people who was accused not convicted ACCUSED, we really in the fascist time period
