Thread: Someone Read The 2008 Child Trafficking Law – It Actually Says Most Illegals Have To

Someone Read The 2008 Child Trafficking Law – It Actually Says Most Illegals Have To Be Deported

Posted on 31 July, 2014 by Rick Wells

After the debacle of obamacare you would have thought that someone within the ranks of our 535 Congressmen would have taken the time to read the 2008 Child Trafficking law that is such a key component of the disaster on the southern border. That would be an especially prudent step, to establish the existing law as a baseline from which to make changes. It seems obvious.

Maybe they were waiting until the August recess, planning to casually look it over poolside, as another five weeks worth of illegals flood across our border.

Ann Coulter did the job none in Congress were willing to do. She read the law, the William Wilberforce Sex Trafficking Act. She provides proof that the reports that it requires any non-Mexican or non-Canadian illegal be admitted and granted a deportation hearing are simply untrue.

Of course DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson knows this. He’s spent the majority of his time in office setting the framework for this invasion. As a lawyer, he knows how to read the law and he knows he and his agency, as well as his illegitimate ‘president’ are violating it.

Coulter says the reported loophole which mandates removal proceedings just doesn’t exist; it isn’t there. Both political parties are telling the same lie. The socialist Democrats are naturally going to ignore the laws of a free United States, but many Republicans, it turns out, are also either ill informed, lazy or complicit.

Coulter reported in the Daily Caller that the pertinent part of the law states:

“Any unaccompanied alien child sought to be removed by the Department of Homeland Security, except for an unaccompanied alien child from a contiguous country … shall be — placed in removal proceedings … eligible for relief … at no cost to the child and provided access to counsel.”

She then provides the law’s definition of “unaccompanied alien child” and notes that it is restricted to those who have no relatives in the United States. Those with relatives here are deemed to be accompanied joint illegal aliens unlawfully in the country and eligible for deportation.

Here’s the definition — note subsection (C):

“(g) Definitions
(2) the term ‘unaccompanied alien child’ means a child who –
(A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States;
(B) has not attained 18 years of age; and
(C) with respect to whom –

(i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.”

Just as this is no random occurrence as a result of a sudden uptick in violence in Central America, this unanimous ignorance of the law is no accident either. The supporters of amnesty aren’t asking any questions, and there are many of them within the Republican ranks who have been purchased by the Chamber of Commerce to destroy American wages and give as many of our jobs as possible to foreign invaders.

It’s part of the plan. If they wait until after they pass something to read it again, the fabricated false solution they force us into in this case will be extremely hard to undo. The key is to fix the problem correctly in the first place. That means we deport them, as the law prescribes, now.

http://gopthedailydose.com/2014/07/3...gals-deported/

Ann Coulter

The Loophole Is Obama

5:36 PM 07/30/2014
Ann Coulter
Political Commentator
It’s been reported everywhere — the New York Times, the Washington Post, Fox News — that the William Wilberforce Sex Trafficking Act requires that any non-Mexican children who show up on our border be admitted and given a hearing. (New York Times, July 7, 2014: “Immigrant Surge Rooted in Law to Curb Child Trafficking.”)

The problem, we’ve been told, is that a loophole in the sex trafficking law mandates these hearings — or “removal proceedings.”
But there is no such loophole.

The fact that people on both sides of the aisle are telling the same lie about this law is worrisome. Are Republicans being tricked into thinking we need an emergency bill, so that, two weeks later, we’ll see them emerging from a conference, saying:

We fixed the loophole! We didn’t get everything we wanted, but you can hear about that later.

No, tell me now.

Well, remember amnesty? It’s kind of in this bill. But the headline is: We closed the loophole! So no more worries about that loophole.
But yeah, amnesty passed.

Why else would everyone be carrying on about a non-existent loophole? I know they’re mistaken because I read the law.
The Wilberforce law states, in relevant part:
“Any unaccompanied alien child sought to be removed by the Department of Homeland Security, except for an unaccompanied alien child from a contiguous country (i.e. Mexico — or Canada, so as not to sound discriminatory) … shall be — placed in removal proceedings … eligible for relief … at no cost to the child and provided access to counsel.”



Obviously, that’s the whole ball of wax. Once a kid is in, given La Raza attorneys and a hearing date, he’s never going home. No immigration judge is going to listen to a lawyer-manufactured sob story and say, “No, I’m sorry, that didn’t touch my heart. You have to go back to Huehuetenango.”

But the law’s definition of “unaccompanied alien child” limits the hearings to kids who have no relatives in the United States. If your relatives live here, the law assumes you’re not being sex-trafficked — you’re trying to join them.

Here’s the definition — note subsection (C):

“(g) Definitions
(2) the term ‘unaccompanied alien child’ means a child who –
(A) has no lawful immigration status in the United States;
(B) has not attained 18 years of age; and
(C) with respect to whom –
(i) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.”

The law is not — as George Will suggested on “Fox News Sunday” — a general humanitarian mandate allowing all 2 billion poor children of the world to show up at our border and be told, “Welcome to America!” It’s a law to combat sex trafficking.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Vice President Joe Biden wrote the law — and Feinstein isn’t stupid. She’s well aware of illegal immigration. That’s why the law specifically excludes two huge categories of illegal aliens from getting hearings: (1) Mexicans; and (2) children who have relatives in the U.S.

Those cases look more like illegal immigration than sex trafficking. (Didn’t anyone wonder why Mexican kids are excluded?)
Mexicans make up the lion’s share of illegal immigrants in the U.S., and children with relatives already living in the U.S. are probably just trying to rejoin family — not trying to escape a fiendish kidnapper about to sell them into sex slavery.
According to last Friday’s New York Times, almost 90 percent of the 53,000 illegal alien kids given refugee status since October have already been transferred to parents or relatives living in the U.S. By the law’s clear terms, those 47,000 kids should have been summarily turned away at the border — just as Mexican children are.

(Democrats wailing about a “humanitarian” crisis — after calculating the precise number of voters they need — evidently don’t care about the Mexican kids.)

No law needs to be fixed. The only thing that needs to be fixed is the president.

Obama has gone mad and is defying the law in order to “fundamentally transform America” — as he pledged to do during the 2008 campaign — into Latin America. (Luckily for George Will, he won’t be around by the time Latin America gets to his neighborhood.)
Any Republicans pushing for an immigration bill to seal an imaginary loophole aren’t fighting Obama; they’re helping him.

Constitutionally, the remedy for a president defying the law so he can assist an alien invasion is impeachment. But the media won’t let us impeach Obama — and Republicans don’t have the votes, anyway. The only way for Americans to fight back is to put large Republican majorities in the House and Senate this November.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/30/th...#ixzz394EmUssr