> If you get hit with a traffic stop, you shouldn't be lumped in with violent offenders.
Yes, for whatever additional crimes they have committed.
Being here illegally, that's what ICE is after (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), and they are fully in their prevue to send home people who are here against the law.
But also consider the new development with courthouse arrests, where ICE and the immigration court officials collaborate to 1) terminate an in-progress asylum case while the asylum seeker is in the courthouse, 2) arrest the asylum seeker as they exit the courtroom.
Some/many of these folks did not enter illegally and did not overstay their visa, but requested asylum at the border and were released into the US. The immigration judges are also not ruling against the asylum seeker, which would be understandable, but it seems the cases are being cut short.
I admit I don't understand the legal details, but it seems to me that this particular group of people targeted by ICE are not here against the law, and also didn't get a fair chance to complete their asylum cases.
I do approve of local police arranging the handover to ICE of convicted criminals for deportation after they've served their sentence.
First, people should be allowed to prove their eligibility and they are not being given that chance.
Second, ICE is going way beyond arresting/deporting illegal aliens. In Boston they stopped a swearing-in ceremony literally minutes before immigrants were about to become citizens.
Yeah, people who justify ICE are really morally bankrupt and I would not engage in any conversation with them, it's a worthless exercise in frustration. They won't budge, they are probably very hateful people in real life and take pleasure in some sort of revenge on fellow humans.
There are a lot of reasons why people are here illegally. Over 50 years we created an environment in Latin America that made it dangerous and unlivable for normal, law-abiding people. At the same time, we radically altered what we consider to be refugee status for immigration, and introduced rules that unfairly put requirements on other countries that refugees going over land need to apply for refugee status in every other country, whether or not there is infrastructure or jobs to support those refugees.
This is all while companies reap the benefit of and build their pricing structures off of cheap, undocumented labor. We are profiting off of criminalizing people who are just trying to live their lives.
You might count yourself fortunate not to be in this kind of a predicament, but it may benefit you to consider educating yourself on the subject and having a bit of empathy for others instead of relying on categorical absolutes.
Nonsense. They are targeting people who are here legally. Cancelling their asylum applications while they are in the legal process and then arresting them at court, when they are following all of the rules.
There are also millions of people who were brought here as babies or young children, through no fault of their own, and who have no ties whatsoever to the country where they were born. There should be a process to fix that, sending them to a faraway country they have never lived is disgusting.
At every turn Republicans have fought any attempt to find sensible solutions because they want to wield "they are here illegally!" as a cudgel, and they have fooled people like you
They are also going after legal immigrants who have any crime on their record, even just a misdemeanor from decades ago. There was one a few weeks ago for example of a Canadian who has lived here for something like 30 years, since he was a child, on a permanent resident visa. As a teen he participated in some normal but illegal high school shenanigan and got a misdemeanor on his record. When returning from a business trip to Canada he was stopped and deported over that high school misdemeanor.
They are also trying to make it hard for these people to defend themselves. For example in another case they are trying to deport a legal permanent resident who came here is a kid from the UK something like 40 or 50 years ago. She has an American husband, American children, and American grandchildren. A decade or two she wrote a check for a small amount and failed to ensure enough money was in the account. She pleaded guilty to the lowest level of passing a bad check and served probation. This is the only blemish on her record.
Not only have they decided that she needs to be expelled as quickly as possible, they put her in a detention facility far from her home even though there are facilities with room much closer to home, making it hard for her family to visit. I believe I read they have also moved her at least once, making it hard for her lawyer to visit. (I believe she also may have spent time in solitary, because she kept asking for someone to be allowed to bring her prescription medicine, but I may be mixing that up with another case).
Even if you can somehow make a case that every non-citizen who is legally here no matter how long should be deported if they have any blemish on their record, no matter how minor, I don't see how you can make case that they should deliberately make it hard for them to get a hearing.
I also don't see how you can make a case that they should even be in detention. If you really think there is a risk that they would run rather than stay around until their hearing, an ankle monitor would be sufficient and cheaper.
They specifically call out why the semantics matter in the actual article, in the first paragraph.
> President Donald Trump premised his mass deportation agenda on the idea that he will be “returning millions and millions of criminal aliens.” Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem has repeatedly claimed that they are arresting the “worst of the worst.”
When speaking to Trump supporting friends who employ illegal immigrants they specifically defend that it is only the "bad ones."
> When speaking to Trump supporting friends who employ illegal immigrants they specifically defend that it is only the "bad ones."
They still feel this way because their news sources don't tell them about restaurants being raided and the entire kitchen being arrested or ICE raids on agriculture.
Problems aren't problems until it happens to them.
Yes- that's a big problem. The business owners are getting away with massive employment fraud, tax fraud, and any number of OSHA/employee law violations. They need to be arrested and brought to trial.
If you can't run a business without breaking the law (including illegal labor), then that business shouldn't exist.
I agree, however the law must be applied uniformly and consistently for an even playing field. It is not, which allows the government to “pick” winners and losers via selective prosecution.
I hate how everyone overlooks the fact that most "illegal immigrants" are committing a civil offense that is not supposed to allow for any detainment like a criminal offense. And the criminal offenses that are mentioned in the study are mostly state offenses that are supposed to be handled by state law enforcement. There are a very small number of people who have actually committed federal criminal offenses that justify any detainment at all by ICE.
Wait- are you seriously arguing that everyone in the country illegally CAN'T be detained? That illegals are required to remain free, and stay illegally as long as they want?
That's a border control policy known as "no border control at all".
Overstaying a visa, which is the most common way to be "illegal" is literally not a crime and is not handled by criminal courts in the US. It is strictly a civil matter handled by civil courts (which can't impose jail time, by definition.) Sneaking into the country is a federal crime (a misdemeanor for the first offense and a felony for the second) and is handled by criminal courts.
I would rather no border control at all than a secret nazi-like police who are loyal only to their dear leader. We have law and order. There is a proper way to do things. Only fools think dismantling the system will work to their advantage.
If they enter it illegally, that's probably a crime (I have no idea of what it's like in the US).
Of course visa violations aren't a crime, did you ever had to fill administrative papers? What if misfiling your taxes was a crime, regardless of intent? Do you want everyone who made a mistake on their taxes to go to prison preventively? Or only fraudsters?
If a program treats people equally, that's a good thing. If you want equal outcomes (regardless of many very real factors), that by definition will require unequal treatment.
> Equality and Equity are vastly different things.
But related.
I was at a museum that had a full-sized submarine on display. There was a touchable model and audio description for blind people.
Equal, as much as possible - a Braille variant of a novel, for example, provides a fairly equal experience. Equitable, when perfect equal results are not possible. You can't fix a person's severed optic nerve, but you can certainly attempt to give them fair access to things.
DEI is a new name for and/or refinement of a long existing concept that gave us things like the abolitionists, suffragists, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans With Disabilities Act.
I disagree with this telling of history. DEI has much more in common with various affirmative action efforts in the 80s and 90s than it does with something like the Civil Rights Act and as such is a lot more controversial even among the groups it's meant to help.
> DEI has much more in common with various affirmative action efforts in the 80s and 90s
Affirmative Action was from Executive Order 11246 (1965) -- concurrent with and part of the same movement as civil rights legislation -- applying to federal contracting; it largely spread to large organizations that weren't direct federal contractors through subcontracting relationships and through state governments adopting similar requirements in their contracting.
> If the ADA was being proposed today, Republicans would decry it as yet another woke DEI effort.
A lot of the culture war entities which now dominate the GOP did so (obviously, with different language, as "woke" and "DEI" weren't the current generic epithets for things the Right doesn't like) at the time, but (1) were mollified in some cases with special exclusions, like religious schools being excluded from the definition of covered public accommodations, and (2) otherwise were less politically powerful within the party.
The real question is what's happening to that staff & programs. Are they just getting distributed around the rest of the org, continuing at a department level?
Oh, then these words in the article are, uh, poorly written:
> SpinLaunch has already conducted multiple successful tests with this technology. "This is not a rocket, and clearly our ability to perform in just 11 months this many tests and have them all function as planned, really is a testament to the nature of our technology," said Jonathan Yaney, founder and CEO of SpinLaunch, in a 2022 Space.com report after their 10th successful launch.
Very old video. If one has the time to track the rest of the story, there's predictable results.
Millennial puts employer on blast on social media, and gets a very brief window of job offers, she's too good for any of them, then lands in long term unemployment...
Perhaps having a public reputation of being a toxic employee (eager to damage brand reputation) who was let go because she couldn't close sales may have something to do with it.
It amuses me how you choose to frame this person selectively only pointing out the issues you feel relevant while ignoring the whole picture.
Lets start from the beginning. When most of these people are looking for a job in the first place even if they have a long standing history most of these jobs put them through a typical 8 hour long interview complete with cognitive tests. They put all the responsibility of success on the employee from the start even as early as the interview.
Then when you get the job the on boarding. OH god the on boarding...
Most of these places expect that just because you have X or Y on your resume that you know inside and out their snow flake application which of the current staff their lead has typically turned over once a year and is so burned out they are the worst person to even offer help because they are toxic.
Then you get the constant pivoting. Management: We going to start out by doing two week sprints, one week in, we are going to switch to one week sprints. And after that, management wants to try kanbon all the while bugging about your KPIs
Say you manage to make it past that first 6 months. You realize that the next 6 months are going to be exactly as the last but worse because the lead toxic dev has just left and you are now the lead. Mean while they keep pivoting projects and goal posts but simultaneously asking you to do things that they have not even once tried to prepare for.
Finally you been there a year and most everyone who was there before you now is gone. And now you are the jaded burned out lead dev unwanting to go to meetings or be the person to tell the new devs how F'd everything is.
Also I've never once met a "scrum master" I liked. Just saying...
I take the approach that if I have a disaster, I'm getting new a new OS install, and maybe even new hardware. It's my data I care about, not the C: drive.
I store all data to a home NAS drive, and then on a regular basis run a ROBOCOPY batch file to a USB hard drive. I rotate several drives (all cold & offline) to have some versoning/protection against bit-rot and undetected corruption.
Once or twice a year I put a drive in a ziplock bag (water tight) to an off-site location that is fireproof and reasonably burglar proof.
I do not trust SaaS or online backups. Too easy to have my online copy get hacked or have my backup provider go out of business. My fate is in my hands.
Yes, for whatever additional crimes they have committed.
Being here illegally, that's what ICE is after (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), and they are fully in their prevue to send home people who are here against the law.