Thread: Why the Obama administration is right to deport migrants ordered to leave: LA Times

Editorial Why the Obama administration is right to deport migrants ordered to leave


A six-year-old holds his father's hand during a rally for immigration reform in front of the Supreme Court on Nov. 20. (Pablo Martinez Monsivais / Associated Press)

The Times Editorial Board Contact Reporter


Reports out of Washington suggest that the Obama administration is planning to sweep up and deport hundreds of families whose applications for asylum or some other form of permission to remain in the country were rejected by immigration courts. Immigration rights advocates have begun rallying in opposition, arguing that it is inhumane for the government to send back to Central America — the source of many of the cases — people who have fled violence and crime-ridden neighborhoods for a chance at a better future for themselves and their children.

It's hard to argue with that logic, but it is based on a flawed premise. To not deport those whom an immigration judge has ruled ineligible to remain in the country is to throw over any notion of enforceable immigration law. And that is an indefensible position.

The government has both the right and the responsibility to determine who gets to enter the country, and who gets to stay as legal residents.-


We share some of the concerns that have been raised about the fairness of the immigration court system. It is understaffed, and judges carry excessively high caseloads. Studies have found that petitioners who have a lawyer at their elbow stand a much better chance of winning permission to stay than those without lawyers, largely because of the arcane and confusing nature of immigration law itself. Immigration cases typically are civil proceedings, and although those facing deportation have a right to counsel, they do not have a right to one paid for by the government, unlike criminal defendants.

So those without means to hire an attorney are at the mercy of the pro bono immigration bar, which is just as overextended as the judges. In that scenario, it's likely that some people who have a legitimate right to asylum wind up getting deported anyway, a regrettable turn of events.

Join the conversation on Facebook >>

But that shortcoming is an argument for a more robustly funded immigration courts, not an excuse to turn the system on its ear and not enforce a lawful order from an immigration judge.

There is no doubt that the U.S. immigration system is in shambles. More than 11 million people are living here illegally, but most have been here for so long they are deeply entwined in our economy and our neighborhoods.

To deport them all — a popular mantra from the nativist right during this presidential election cycle — would tear apart families and communities. It also would be prohibitively expensive, requiring billions of dollars in added enforcement capacity and causing billions of dollars in losses to the economy. The better approach would be for Congress to stop using illegal immigration as a boogeyman and start crafting meaningful reforms that would include a path to citizenship for those who have put down roots and been responsible members of society, while stiffening the government's ability to enforce borders and track down people who overstay visas.

The current wave of asylum-seekers raises some particularly vexing questions. The U.S. has a long and occasionally problematic history in Central America, and bears some moral culpability for the criminal gangs that relocated from U.S. cities, including Los Angeles, to thrive in urban neighborhoods of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. The U.S. also is the main market for the illicit drug trade that helps many of those gangs flourish.

The solution to those issues, though, isn't to allow entry to the U.S. for anyone able to reach the U.S. border after fleeing a dangerous neighborhood in Tegucigalpa or San Salvador. Those who face legally articulated persecution — usually based on religion, political beliefs or other recognized classes of special victimization — should be granted asylum if U.S. immigration courts say they are eligible.

The government has both the right and the responsibility to determine who gets to enter the country, and who gets to stay as legal residents with the possibility of eventual naturalized citizenship. Openness to immigration has been a defining aspect of American history, and one of the nation's strengths. Still, we have to expect the government to follow through on legal processes that have been completed. When the courts reject arguments that individual migrants have a right to stay, the government is correct in targeting them for removal. To do otherwise not only erodes the sense that we are a nation ruled by laws, but it also serves as an encouragement for others who think gaining entry to the U.S. is as simple as showing up and saying, "Let me in."

That only exacerbates our illegal immigration problem.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-deportations-20151229-story.html

Damn!! The Los Angeles Times?! Really? I don't agree with everything they said in their article, but I certainly agree with the position that we're a nation ruled by laws and we have the right as a nation to decide who enters and who stay.

Is it possible Trump can win California?! OH HELL YES! He can Run the Table. Come on Iowa!! Iowa Trump Supporters I can't emphasize enough how much everything we're fighting for depends on you guys figuring out how to get to the Iowa Caucuses on Feb 1 and lobby and vote for Donald J Trump for the Republican nominee for President of the United States!!

L.A. Sheriff Lee Baca: Let us deport the bad guys

judy wrote:

Is it possible Trump can win California?! OH HELL YES!

IMO it's highly unlikely because, unfortunately, California is the most socially liberal state in the country.

September 13, 2015, 07:59 am

Poll: Trump tops GOP field in California

By Kyle Balluck

Getty

Billionaire Donald Trump leads the crowded 2016 Republican presidential field in California, according to a poll released Sunday morning.

The USC Dornsife/LA Times Poll found that 24 percent of Republicans said they would support Trump.Retired pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson is in second place with 18 percent.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) each received 6 percent support.

Pollsters found that Carson would beat Trump in a head-to-head matchup, however, 43 percent to 32 percent.

"More than half of the Republican primary voters who have chosen a candidate are supporting someone who has never held elected office," Dan Schnur, director of the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Poll and director of the Unruh Institute of Politics of USC, said.

"Sheer anger toward Washington is handily defeating ideology in the Republican primary," he added.

Pollsters also found former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton atop the Democratic field, with 42 percent support.

Twenty six percent said they would back Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Vice President Joe Biden grabbed support from 11 percent of respondents when his name was added to the field.

"Clinton is holding up pretty well," said Drew Lieberman, vice president of Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, which helped conduct the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Poll. "What you see going on here is that she has very solid coalition of moderate-type Democrats plus non-white voters that someone like Sanders or anybody from her left flank would have to overcome in order to cut into her vote share."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...-in-california

GO TRUMP!! RUN THE TABLE!!

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

September 13, 2015, 07:59 am

Poll: Trump tops GOP field in California

By Kyle Balluck

Getty

Billionaire Donald Trump leads the crowded 2016 Republican presidential field in California, according to a poll released Sunday morning.

The USC Dornsife/LA Times Poll found that 24 percent of Republicans said they would support Trump.Retired pediatric neurosurgeon Ben Carson is in second place with 18 percent.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) each received 6 percent support.

Pollsters found that Carson would beat Trump in a head-to-head matchup, however, 43 percent to 32 percent.

"More than half of the Republican primary voters who have chosen a candidate are supporting someone who has never held elected office," Dan Schnur, director of the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Poll and director of the Unruh Institute of Politics of USC, said.

"Sheer anger toward Washington is handily defeating ideology in the Republican primary," he added.

Pollsters also found former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton atop the Democratic field, with 42 percent support.

Twenty six percent said they would back Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Vice President Joe Biden grabbed support from 11 percent of respondents when his name was added to the field.

"Clinton is holding up pretty well," said Drew Lieberman, vice president of Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, which helped conduct the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times Poll. "What you see going on here is that she has very solid coalition of moderate-type Democrats plus non-white voters that someone like Sanders or anybody from her left flank would have to overcome in order to cut into her vote share."

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...-in-california

Leading the Republican presidential field in California is a far cry from taking the state in the presidential election. Of course I hope I'm wrong but I just don't see a likely scenario for it to happen.

We're talking about the Republican primary. Can Trump win California in a General Election? Well, quite possibly. No state of citizens is more fed up with illegal aliens and Muslim terrorists than California. And no state of citizens has been more sold out by their politicians than the state of California. There's a good chance Trump will carry California in both the primary and general elections. Why wouldn't he?

Trump might carry CA. in the primary.

The chances of him taking CA. in Nov. is zero. IMO

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Trump might carry CA. in the primary.

The chances of him taking CA. in Nov. is zero. IMO

I think Trump is going to appeal to a lot of Independents and Democrats in the General Election possibly enough to carry a Republican leaning state like California. Maybe not, but it's entirely possible. Californians want solutions same as the rest of US, in many areas even more so. There are a lot of Hispanic Americans in California who are totally 100% as fed up with what's happening in our country and even worse right under their noses in California that this could be a big break-through vote for Trump. Huge. I'm not saying it's going to be, I'm just saying that when he gets on the trail in California, you're going to see a lot of support for him from all parties and Independents.