Hacker News Reader

Comment by factsaresacred | Hacker News Reader

> I think that what we’re seeing right now with ICE is deeply immoral. It’s a violation of human rights on all kinds of levels.

Treating criminals as criminals happens every day in every country and comes with the same consequences - children are separated from their parents.

Right now there are tens of thousands of broken black homes as one or two parents are in prison - where's the outrage for them and what about their human rights and their families?

This moral panic, fanned by the media, truly reflects an inability for critical thought. Illegal aliens ignore US law, knowing full well that their acts are illegal and have consequences. Go to a port of entry or embassy like all other immigrants. It's that simple.

View on HN

Not at all. Children are not separated because you used your prescription medicine after its end date. Children are not separated because you ran a red light.

Border crossing is merely misdemeanor and most of them are just seeking asylum.

> Illegal aliens ignore US law, knowing full well that their acts are illegal and have consequences. Go to a port of entry or embassy like all other immigrants. It's that simple.

Most of them actually come to a proper border patrol station to seek asylum. Again, US laws need to change if we need to better help these people.

Running a red light usually does not result in arrest. But if someone ran a red light and then refused to show their license and got arrested. Well, if their child was with them, then the child would not be put in the same prison that the parent was put in. ie. they would be separated.

I didn't read the law so I may be mistaken, but based on my understanding is someone comes to a proper boarder control and claims asylum then they will not be arrested. The ones being arrested are the ones who are crossing illegally and then when caught, claiming asylum.

>I didn't read the law so I may be mistaken

You can read about the asylum process here:

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/ob...

I should have been more precise with what I wrote. I do not understand legalese and therefore base my understanding on a group of people who I feel are honest.

These people are asylum seekers. What they are doing is literally not illegal. According to USCIS, asylum seekers must be physically present in the US to apply: To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States. You may apply for asylum status regardless of how you arrived in the United States or your current immigration status.

https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/ob...

These people are being punished for following the law.

Additionally, there is no need to detain parents separately from children, and prior to the Trump administration, while deportations of asylum seekers did happen, families were not split up.

> Right now there are tens of thousands of broken black homes as one or two parents are in prison - where's the outrage for them and what about their human rights and their families?

Nice of you to pretend to care. Can I refer you to your closest Black Lives Matter chapter?

The legal way to claim asylum is to do so from official points of entry.

So if you are out of resources, cross the border at another point and then seek asylum the proper response it to lock up your kids.

>the proper response it to lock up your kids.

The irony is that the ninth circuit ruling mandating separation was done to prevent locking up children.

And no, it's not the proper response but it is the legal one as it stands today. GoP is working on a clean bill to do away with seperation. Democrats are expected to vote against it. So there's that.

No. The legal way to claim asylum is to do so within a year of entering the country, regardless of whether your entry was official[1].

The US is currently breaking its commitment to the 1951 UN convention on the rights of refugees by not ignoring "irregular entry."

[1]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158

Sure, they may apply for asylum. However, if they entered illegally, then they should be detained so that if they are not accepted for asylum then they can get deported.

First: They are not entering illegally if they intend to report within a year. Entering illegally is something that non-refugees do. This is why Nielsen's claims about "criminal refugees" are misleading at best -- she's talking about the "crime" of entering the country in the way we explicitly allow.

Second: Consider what an actual refugee crisis looks like. You can't detain hundreds of thousands of people crossing over a massive border, both for logistical and humanitarian reasons. That's why we're a signatory to the 1951 agreement.

This is probably what 45 is referring to when he talks about a "loophole" in immigration law, and why he feels politically safe asking for a legislative rather than executive solution. But to be absolutely clear: nothing about our current laws requires that we separate children from their parents, or detain refugee applicants indefinitely. Those are both cruel options, chosen to terrorize an already vulnerable population.

>First: They are not entering illegally if they intend to report within a year.

Illegal entry is illegal entry. I don't know what you're talking about. There is no exemption for asylum seekers.

>This is probably what 45 is referring to when he talks about a "loophole" in immigration law

The loophole is that the Trump administration is enforcing an existing law that was not enforced by previous administrations. You're advocating for following the precedent set by previous administrations and simply ignore the law again.

>and why he feels politically safe asking for a legislative rather than executive solution.

But it should be a legislative solution. It is a bad law that was made worse by the ninth circuit interpretation. If 1/10th of the pressure that is levied on Trump was put on Congress, this law would be changed already.

The fact that Democrats in Congress are now using this for political gains is incredibly distasteful. [1]

[1]http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/393069-schumer-rejects-go...

https://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/563084/us-border-asy...

U.S. agents have started to turn back asylum seekers at [official] ports of entry in recent weeks, leaving throngs of hopefuls at bridges all along the border.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com