Results 1 to 4 of 4
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: 'Rigorously Enforced' immigration law

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member lorrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Redondo Beach, California
    Posts
    6,765

    'Rigorously Enforced' immigration law

    The problem with 'Rigorously Enforced' immigration law

    03/14/17 12:27 PM EDT



    On March 6, President Trump signed a new version of his travel ban. Effective March 16, it suspends entry for nationals of six countries — all Muslim-majority — and excludes certain classes of nationals. It also creates a waiver process for affected nationals to still enter during the 90 day ban, or as thereafter extended.

    Much has been written about whether this is merely “MuslimBan 2.0,” or a watered-down, tame version of the original ban that unleashed chaos in airports around the world. States are carefully considering legal grounds to challenge the new ban.

    But there was another directive issued on March 6 that is not getting much coverage. That was the memorandum implementing the new travel ban, issued by President Trump to Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly.

    In that memo, President Trump:

    “Direct(s) the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies (as identified by the Secretary of Homeland Security) to rigorously enforce all existing grounds of inadmissibility and to ensure subsequent compliance with related laws after admission.

    “The heads of all relevant executive departments and agencies shall issue new rules, regulations, or guidance (collectively, rules), as appropriate, to enforce laws relating to such grounds of inadmissibility and subsequent compliance.”

    So what's wrong with calls to "rigorously enforce" immigration law? Turns out, a lot. And this affects everyone, not just nationals of the six banned countries.

    If tax law was rigorously enforced, a mistaken deduction would result in prison time. If traffic laws were rigorously enforced, a speeding ticket would result in a loss of your license to drive. If criminal laws were rigorously enforced, all crimes however minor would result in incarceration.

    But, one may say, that assumes the penalty for breaking a tax law, traffic law, or criminal law will always be that severe, and that's not the case. But rigorous enforcement of immigration laws will nearly always mean one thing: deportation, the harshest of all consequences. (That we assume deportation is the only cure for unlawful immigration is also a problem — one I've written about separately.)

    Moreover, there is a lot of discretion given to immigration officers. That means there's often no way to challenge their determinations. And that's why it is of little solace that now Attorney General Jeff Sessions, in his confirmation hearing, to have claimed "I’m going to follow the laws passed by Congress." It is easy to do that in a very heavy-handed manner when the law gives your officers wide discretion to do what they want with little fear of consequence.

    Imagine not being able to fight for your driver license in court after speeding 1 mile over the limit. Or arrested if you took a tax deduction you perhaps may not have qualified for.

    Now imagine being told, "You didn't respect a law. So we're going to rip you from your family before we hear your side of the story. You'll be locked up until we get around to kicking you out. Yes, we'll be using a trained legal professional to banish you from the country and no, we're not going to give you one. Yes, we could have done things more lightly — the law allows us to — but we're choosing to enforce the law rigorously. Yes, maybe the law allows you to stay, but sorry, you're on your own now. Figure it out."

    That's what makes rigorous enforcement of immigration law so dangerous.

    When it implicates your freedom and your family, it's not a civil issue, it's a civil rights issue. When it implicates your constitutional rights, it's not a legal process issue, it's a due process issue.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...mmigration-law


    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty
    by joining our E-mail Alerts athttp://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    7,377
    Deportation is the only fix for illegal immigration.

    It is not a punishment - it is simply attempting to restore to the American people what is being stolen. It is the only way to protect the American people from further theft.

    So a thief has been stealing from people, do we allow them to continue to destroy the lives and livelihood of the victims, or do we do all we can to stop them.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    7,377
    Deportation is the only fix for illegal immigration.

    It is not a punishment - it is simply attempting to restore to the American people what is being stolen. It is the only way to protect the American people from further theft.

    So a thief has been stealing from people, do we allow them to continue to destroy the lives and livelihood of the victims, or do we do all we can to stop them.

    Rigorously enforcing the laws would have many of them in prison for their crimes.

    Just as there is discretion in the enforcement of all laws, to deport, rather than prosecute is pretty lenient.

  4. #4
    MW
    MW is offline
    Senior Member MW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,717
    Deportation Is Only Restitution, Not Punishment


    By David North, August 12, 2010

    It would be helpful if people realized that deportation is simply restitution, not punishment.

    If you rob a bank, and the cops catch you before you spend the loot, the criminal justice system will do two things: it will restore the money to the bank (restitution) and toss you in jail (punishment). Restitution is simply restoring the status quo, making things like they were before the crime happened.

    If you enter the country illegally, and the authorities catch you and send you back, that is not punishment, that’s just restitution, a restoration of the status quo. If they put you in jail as well, that’s punishment. In most cases, the U.S. government does little more than force a little restitution, and does not engage in any punishment at all.These thoughts struck me after reading a warped piece of prose in the August 10 issue of Immigration Daily; it was in a blog by Greg Siskind, an immigration lawyer. He wrote:

    The idea needs to be repeated over and over again. This is not about amnesty. This is about the appropriate punishment for the people who have broken our immigration laws. Exile – the antis' only offered solution – is the equivalent of chopping off your hands for shoplifting. Fines, English tests, paying back taxes, community service, etc. are all reasonable responses to the offense.

    Purple prose indeed. Chopping off hands! "Exile," the act of being sent back to the land of your birth, being equated with amputation? My goodness.

    Exile, incidentally, usually means being forced to leave the nation of your citizenship, and deportation means being forced to go back to the nation of your citizenship, two quite different concepts.

    In the case of shoplifting, restitution is giving back the purloined goods. In the case of illegal immigration, restitution is putting the alien back where he or she came from.

    The dialogue about illegal aliens, and their supposed "rights," has gotten so out of proportion that the simple concept of restitution has been lost.


    http://cis.org/north/restitution

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" ** Edmund Burke**

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts athttps://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Similar Threads

  1. Holder: ‘Yes, the Immigration Laws Are Being Enforced’
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-14-2014, 02:08 AM
  2. Immigration Laws Should Be Enforced
    By Jean in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-16-2011, 02:26 AM
  3. Immigration law not enforced consistently
    By JohnDoe2 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-31-2011, 10:26 PM
  4. Arpaio: Immigration law will be enforced
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-17-2010, 09:22 AM
  5. Immigration Laws Must be Enforced
    By Texas2step in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-15-2008, 02:49 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •