The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in to your account.Don't have an account? Register
Whether one agrees or disagrees with DACA, it is clear that America's immigration laws are not working.
Whether it is failure to tighten border security, confront the reality of illegal immigrants living and working on U.S. soil or resolving the limbo of the children who are in the U.S. because of their undocumented parents.
For more than a decade both political parties on Capitol Hill repeatedly have introduced immigration proposals that were virtually identical in wording. But each time lawmakers were ready to fix our immigration mess, they would cower before the fear of political backlash and retreat.
This shameless abdication of legislative responsibility has left the immigration issue festering until it now has metastasized into ugly vitriol from proponents and contestants increasingly unwilling to consider serious compromise.
And this judicial ruling is the latest volley in a contentious debate that shows no sign of sincere efforts by stakeholders to resolve the issue.
Instead immigration reform and DACA remain hostages to partisan grandstanding designed solely to solidify loyalty among ideological zealots and leave millions of immigrants trapped in uncertainty.
And in this election year 2018, there will be no courage by our lawmakers to do the right thing and forge meaningful immigration reform.
A judge like this needs to be suspended for a month without pay to let him go home and think about what he's done. This is just poor work. I hope the ninth circuit has enough respect for the law to slap him down hard.
I have yet to meet anyone who wants to send those kids "back" to Mexico or from wherever their parents migrated. They will make dandy Yankees (which they are, now, in all but name) and who on earth wants to hurt a bunch of youngsters starting-out in life?
Still . . . it is a bit ironic to see this absolutely justified critique of a renegade liberal judge in the same on-line edition of TE that castigates the ideological proclivities of Mr. Trump's nominations to the bench.
Mr. Trump's judges do not seem, in comparison, any more outside the bounds of sound jurisprudence than the current collection of liberal, black-robed ideologues.
The reason they’re here is because Obama wanted to bring in several new million Democratic voters.
If sending them away is abhorrent, some sort of deal needs to be worked out that keeps them from voting so as not to distort the nation’s politics and to keep them from being anchors to bring their families over.
Additional regulations need to be enacted to discourage this stunt that Obama did from happening again.
The reason they’re here is because Obama wanted to bring in several new million Democratic voters.
Where do you get this bullsh*t? In case it has escaped your notice, none of these kids are citizens. And nothing Obama did made them citizens, or even put them on the road to citizenship. Which means they don't vote and can't vote. For Democrats or anybody else.
What the hell are we arguing about today? It’s about how to make them citizens. Once they’re hear, someone was going to get before a microphone and say you can’t send them back. And once that’s been established, the follow on will be bringing the rest of their families over.
Another name for an “undocumented immigrant” is “undocumented Democrat”. Immigration is ALL about politics.
And this particular situation is a big reason Trump won the election because for some reason, seemingly out of the blue for about a year yet also feeling coordinated , a million orphans showed up on America’s doorsteps. Obama encouraged the workd’s parents to send their children to the US. Mexico allowed children to transit through their country. They showed up, were put into secluded camps, then sent to who knows where around the country with people claiming them. Was the weirdest situation. We forget the events around all of this.
Why is this bad comment upvoted?
As if. Letting millions squat on US land has put them on the road to amnesty, which is the road to citizenship. Illegal aliens must be expelled. Otherwise US borders will become meaningless and the USA will be stretched to breaking point by illegal handouts.
What the hell are we arguing about today? It’s about how to make them citizens.
Oh I don't doubt that there would be some who would like to let them become citizens. But neither Obama (nor anybody else) had done anything like that -- which is what you claimed. Nor had Obama argued for doing it. All he did was direct the Justice Department not to spend resources on those kids.
Why is this bad comment upvoted?
Perhaps because some people are aware that (contrary to McGenius' claim) these folks, as non-citizens, can't vote.
No- I didn’t claim Obama could make them citizens. I said he’d get them here and then the assertion would be that you can’t send them back so they should be given citizenship which is where we are.
Who said they can’t vote? Some municipalities they can. The goal is to get them to vote. First challenge is getting them here.
Well, Jouris, when a person like McGenius lies to themselves over and over again for years, there's a chance they'll start to believe their own lies are in fact reality.
"Mr. Trump's judges do not seem, in comparison, any more outside the bounds of sound jurisprudence than the current collection of liberal, black-robed ideologues. Your comment indicates you have not researched legal precedent at the supreme court level.
The right of the president to manage all aspects of immigration, granted to him by congress is quite clear. To date there have been no successful challenges to federal legislation that refuses admission of non-citizens or removes resident aliens.
Regarding immigration, the Supreme Court has stated: "Over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete. Whatever the rule may be concerning deportation of persons who have gained entry into the United States, it is not within the province of any court, unless expressly authorized by law, to review the determination of the political branch of the Government to exclude a given alien,” nor, according to the Supreme court, can lower courts attempt to discern the motives of the president.
This judge's ruling is more dangerous to American democratic ideals than anything Trump has ever done
Allowing the children of Hispanic illegal aliens (from Central and South America) to stay in the United States is unfair to Asians (and Europeans). Millions of impoverished people in Vietnam (and Eastern Europe), for example, want to bring their children to the United States but must wait in line for years.
Hispanics cut in front of the immigration line, shoving Asians to the end of the line.
Due to affirmative action, an American of Asian (or European) ancestry must score roughly 300 points higher than a Hispanic, on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), in order for the admissions committee (of Princeton University) to give him equal consideration with the Hispanic. (There is more information about this issue.)
Hispanics cut in front of the education line, shoving Asian-Americans to the end of the line.
Hispanics expect, demand, and receive preferential treatment from most Democrats and some Republicans. Why are Hispanics so bigoted?
I agree. I would add a comment from one of my previous posts - they also come into the US, send most of their money home, then as soon as the recession hit they all left and went back to South America. How does that help the US economy one iota?
Asian Americans typically have less unemployment, work harder, and earn more money (ie, are more productive) then even the "typical" US citizen. So as long as we are talking Asian Asian (ie, Oriental - Chinese, Vietnamese, etc...) rather than the general milieu of "Asians" that now apparently include Pakistan, Indonesia etc.. I agree!
Are we a nation of laws, or feelings? A judge's ruling halting the arbitrary order of one President that itself overrules an arbitrary order of a former president should not stand. Regardless of the merits, or not, of the so-called Dreamers, this is a legislative issue. Judge's, even progressive ones, are some super-legislature, though a certain strain seems to think they are.
DACA, insofar as it created immigration law (no US law allows undocumented, illegal aliens to work) via Presidential fiat, was clearly and ridiculously unconstitutional. Presidents implement laws, some faster than others, but they don't create them. Whilst DACA may be a good idea, there needs to be some statutory underpinning for it.
The people who are at risk of deportation should not be surprised to find this out: they know they are in the USA illegally. Most of them won't be deported as the task is herculean, but the reason the task needs doing is they broke immigration law in the first place. Or their parents did.
As to unjustness: it is quite unjust to those who have emigrated legally to allow illegal immigrants to stay. And no "decent" country does allow it.
The USA does have reasonable immigration laws and rather a lot of people arrive legally every year. But everybody here legally has a right to expect the Federal government to enforce said laws.
the reason the task needs doing is they broke immigration law in the first place. Or their parents did. [emphasis added]
And there is the nub of it. We do not, generally, punish (and to a kid raised, possibly from infancy, in the US it is punishment) kids for the crimes of their parents.
Doing so when the crime is (like it or not) ranked in seriousness on a par with a parking ticket, which illegal immigration or overstaying a visa is? There's a reason the the vast majority of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, think the law should let them stay.
At this time more than a million people who have been in the US for more than a decade are at risk of deportation. Not because they broke any laws recently but rather because the US has allowed them to stay without regularizing their status. It is reasonable to insist people let in temporarily return to their home, but temporary should not be more than 4 years. Many people at risk that have been in the US a long time have raised a family that has no connection at all with their original home. It is cruel and inhumane to deport such people just because the US failed to institute rational immigration policies. Those cheering Trump's actions should reflect on the fact that many probably would not be living today in the US if their ancestors had been faced with a Trump administration. No decent country in the world is contemplating such action against people who have lived in it for such long period of time. The only equivalence is ethnic cleansing of minority populations, a recognized crime against humanity.
While I understand temporary immigrants wanting to stay in the US, that doesn't mean they have the right to. It is rough, but they were generously provided temporary status and they have stayed for about 15 years. When one of the leaders of the organization to oppose deportation was asked about how the effects of the earthquake were well and truly over she replied, "yeah, but the crime there is really bad". So really, the issue is the US is a better place to live - I agree. That in itself is not a good enough reason.
Think also, if something like this happens again the US may refuse to help. So it's a bunch of people who are pushing themselves onto the American public and potentially hurting many others.
I don't know the immigration law well in the US, but they can also apply for permanent status. IMHO, I would allow everyone to stay who has demonstrated they have paid their taxes and committed no crimes. Then deport the remainder - is that a fair balance?
"The rest of the federal government is marching forward with plans to weaken America’s embrace of those who seek its shores."
No it isn't. Only those who seek to do so illegally. The Trump administration does not have any problem with people who are here on visas.
Immigration agents should raid all the dunkin donuts also, lot's of illegals working there taking jobs from US citizens.
I sincerely hope that the irritating troll whose lengthy, waffle contributions begin "GE0RG1 … " is eligible for very rapid deportation, preferably to North Korea or Eritrea or some other place with very limited internet access!
Sadly, he seems to be based in south-eastern Europe. About all we can do is click "Report" on his spam. And hope his ID gets blocked (although he seems to know how to generate new ones at need).
I understand Georgi is from Bulgaria; used to work for the government in some capacity. He used to have an account, and it was taken away. Now he has to post as a guest, which seems to limit his posts a little, but not enough. I return again to my contention that TE would improve the comments section greatly by restricting post writing to those with subscriptions. I too will continue to report Georgi posts.
i have to confess to being another Georgi Chinkov reporter. (How many of us are there? It seems like everyone!) Some say he is insane and actually contributing from a Bulgarian mental hospital, but it seems more systematic than that. I suspect he's trying to swamp commentary on subjects his trollmasters want to shut down or at least discourage, given his enthusiasm for reposting on certain topics.
TE should be encouraged to spot and delete Chinkov contributions using AI techniques. There are common IR techniques for spotting irrelevant posts and given Chinkov's limited ability to evade simple-minfded troll-blockers the IR/AI combo should be enough, I would have thought, to stop him from bothering us again.
Think of it as a bit of research TE. If AI can't stop Chinkov what can it do?