Back to blog

Donald Trump signs an executive order to stop family separations

See blog

Readers' comments

The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.

guest-amajeess

Hello,
Are you thinking of settling your financial debts today
Are you desperately in need of an urgent loan
to solve all your financial issues,
Have you been scammed by different fraudulent lender's
and you're still looking for a genuine and reliable trusted
lender to help you get that loan you have been applying for
look no further because your help comes now as
EASY LOAN SERVICE is out here to solve all your
financial crises and make you financially stabled again with
just 2% affordable interest rate
Email: easyloanservice@usa.com
you can also text us on +1-(267)-499-4829 for further Inquiries
Thanks and stay Blessed
Steve Carl
Loan Consultant

ParksDept

The little girl in this picture, made famous by publications such as this for the crusade against separating jailed adults from their children, was never in fact separated from her parents. One of those too good to check type situations. As typical the entire debate has been shrouded by advocacy from the press, so much of which can only be characterized as propaganda. Let's go over the facts.

1. Both Bush and Obama separated jailed adults from their children
2. Both Bush and Obama did not jail adults when they detained illegal aliens
3. Those released did not return to their court dates between 30-40% of the time
4. Trump changed the policy to jail all detained illegal aliens
5. This entailed separating jailed parents from their families largely due to a 1997 court ruling
6. After outrage Trump enacted another executive order mandating that families be kept together, possibly in contravention to the court ruling
7. Democrats are still not happy about the initial change in policy and and using any of the consequences of the policy as a bludgeon against it.

The beatings will continue, as they say, but what this debate really comes down to is one about so called catch and release. It would have been instructive if we were told about comparative policies around the world. How, for example, does the UK deal with illegal aliens? Are they jailed, awaiting deportation? Is there a policy of separating jailed adults from their children?

Hedgefundguy in reply to ParksDept

Eight Mexican nationals arrested in Sandusky immigration raid face illegal re-entry charges
.
One man, Cuberto Gallardo-Trujillo, was also previously deported for delivering cocaine.
.
Another man, Josefino Alvaro Leon-Herrera, also has a conviction for trafficking marijuana, prosecutors say.
.
ICE is also working with prosecutors to potentially bring cases against the people rounded up from Fresh Mark, should any have previously been deported or stolen someone's identity, ICE spokesman Khaalid Walls said Friday.
.
Corso's has said it was not aware any employees were using falsified documents to gain employment. Fresh Mark has said nothing about the investigation other than referring reporters to federal authorities, though records show it has a history of hiring people suspected of being in the country illegally.
.
http://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/index.ssf/2018/06/eight_mexican_n...
.
NSFTL
Regards

ParksDept

'On June 20th, after a groundswell of moral outrage, President Donald Trump signed an executive order reversing the policy, a day after he had defended it.'
-
This is false. The zero tolerance order is still in effect, however now President Trump is ordering that the families are detained together rather than separated as is demanded by law.

jouris in reply to ParksDept

"...demanded by law."? Really?
.
And yet, previous administrations (and this administration for over a year) managed just fine by leaving families together. Were all of them violating the law? Did President Trump violate the law when he reversed himself and ordered families kept together?
.
And they used ankle monitors to keep track of those who were awaiting court appearances. Worked quite well -- just as it does to keep track of folks out on bail or on parole.
.
No, this was an unnecessary act of deliberate cruelty. As the administration acknowledged when they said it was supposed to act as a deterrent.

ParksDept in reply to jouris

I never said that jailing illegal immigrants was demanded by law, I said that separation is widely considered law when parents are jailed. Hence why Trump is being hit for possibly violating some court ruling in the 90s.
-
To you point however, I believe that is a in fact a law, but was not carried out to the letter under prosecutional discretion i.e. why Trump is able to enforce such a law now.
-
If the law is cruel, change the law. Don't give the executive so much leeway. I have no doubt the executive branch believes that imprisoning captured illegal aliens is a deterrent to other illegal aliens. Don't you?

jouris in reply to ParksDept

You are quite correct that, IF the parents are put in jail, the children cannot be put in with them. But that rather begs the question: Why are the parents being put in jail?
.
First, under current law, illegal immigration is a civil, not criminal, offense. Like a parking ticket. When you get a parking ticket, do they throw you in jail immediately? Or are you free to go, pending a hearing on your ticket (assuming you choose to contest it)? (Yes, you can be arrested if you don't pay and don't show up to contest. But that's later.) You may think that illegal immigration should be a more serious offense. If so, to quote you, change the law. Until then, it's simply disingenuous to act like the offense is something that it isn't.
.
Second, there are the people who show up applying for asylum -- entirely in conformance with the law. In the past, they were released (often with either ankle trackers or someone to guarantee they would appear -- compliance was upwards of 99.9%) pending a hearing. Now, even though they have broken no laws, they are being detained and their children taken away. You may not like the current asylum laws/ But again, if you don't like the law change it.

Houshu in reply to jouris

I think that there is a non-trivial distinction between illegal immigration (over staying one's visa, for example) and illegal entry. It is like between a civil case when a tenant refuses to move out after the lease is up, and a criminal case if the tenant breaks into an apartment, even if it is unoccupied.

Houshu in reply to Houshu

... as for applying for asylum, there is also a non-trivial distinction between those present themselves to the border guard to claim asylum and those did all they can to evade border guards and only claim asylum after failed to avoid apprehension.

jouris in reply to Houshu

I think that there is a non-trivial distinction between illegal immigration (over staying one's visa, for example) and illegal entry.
.
Oh, I completely agree. But the distinction is between those who can afford to make their initial entry legally. Certainly nobody would go thru what those sneaking across the border do if they could afford the alternative!
.
.. as for applying for asylum
.
If we make your distinction, it does rather raise the question of why we are treating those who show up at the border and apply in accordnace with the law like criminals, doesn't it?
.
As a technical matter, the law doesn't distinguish between those who apply at the border and those who apply after being in the country for a while (whether they come forward then voluntarily or are picked up and then apply). Again, maybe the law should. But as it stands, it doesn't. (It occurs to me that I don't know if the lack of distinction was a choice or if arises from treaties on the subject which we have signed. If the latter, they would have to be renegotiated, since treaties have the force of law.)

ParksDept in reply to jouris

Is Trump breaking the law by jailing those charge with civil offenses? No, because the law is on his side. Notice how no one is arguing that he is breaking the law by jailing them, and it is disingenuous for you to imply otherwise. YOU don't think it is serious enough to warrant jailing, the law says otherwise. As for the absurd comparison to a parking ticket, is the end result of that conviction detention and forced removal from the country? Of course not, these are miles apart and the law recognizes this fact as it stands.
-
As for the asylum non sequitur, the proper way to request asylum is not to illegally come into the country and then claim as much when you are caught. They must present themselves at a port of entry. If you don't like the law as it stands, change it. Or, at the very least, learn what the current laws and punishments are.

ParksDept in reply to jouris

'If we make your distinction, it does rather raise the question of why we are treating those who show up at the border and apply in accordnace with the law like criminals, doesn't it?'
-
This is false. Trump's enforcement actions have nothing to do with those going through the proper channels to apply for asylum. Those declaring asylum at a port of entry are not separated from their families, nor are they imprisoned. Your efforts to conflate them with those who have illegally entered the country have confused even you.

ashbird in reply to Houshu

Hi Houshu,
.
Here's a link to the a,b,c's of possible defenses to deportation (known as "removal" in INS lingo) if you are interested in some nuts and bolts. .
.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/possible-defenses-deportation-un...
.
In practice, asylum cases can get terribly complicated. The burden of proof is on the deportee to show if returned to his/her home country, irreparable harm will result that is person-specific.

Houshu in reply to ashbird

Thanks for the info.
.
One side intentionally conflates legal and illegal immigration, asylum seeking and illegal entry, while the other side simply is incapable to see the distinction. The only distinction Trump sees is immigration from Norway and immigration from 'sh*thole countries'.
Unfortunately, the only commonality (therefore the only possible compromise) between the two sides is going to be unfavorable to asian immigrants.

G.Y.

Trump's executive order does NOT reunite families that he has already broken up

jouris in reply to G.Y.

Well, how could he?
.
With his administration's usual incompetence they made no provision for keeping track of the kids and who their parents are. So even if they cared, which they don't, they are incapable of doing the right thing.

CA-Oxonian

The greatest crimes in history are generally perpetrated by weak and stupid people attempting to appear strong.

When Trump blustered and boasted during his mass rallies during the 2016 election campaign, pundits claimed that Trump supporters recognized a magical difference between Trump's lies and promises and their sense of "what he'll really do when he's president."

In reality of course there is no difference between the simple-minded lies and promises Trump made on the campaign trail and his action in office. Aside from "do the opposite of whatever that black guy did" Trump's only "policies" are foolish and venal. As an infantile halfwit, one cannot expect him to do better. The problem for the USA is that the 62,905,685 people who failed the world's most basic IQ test on November 8th 2016 still support Trump, not despite his actions but because of them. They are, like Trump himself, weak and simple-minded people desperate for a "strong" leader to "save" them. They think in terms of team sports ("my team's the best, your team are losers") and can't grasp complexity. Hence the appeal of simplistic non-answers to complex problems. Hence the embracing of infantile lies and promises that anyone with an IQ greater than 80 would recognize as utterly without any merit (or internal consistency).

Hence supposedly "moral" people embrace and support evil policies and evil acts.

And this is how nations self-destruct: not because of external factors but because they rot from the inside.

But, no need to worry, there's already a snappy slogan we can re-use for the next set of camps: "Abeit Macht Frei."

Hedgefundguy

Come to Cleveland!
.
And get in line.
.
Juanita Lake joins 20,000 others in line for public housing: A Greater Cleveland
.
"...her budget - about $600 a month, max. A single mother with mental-health issues, Juanita is raising Yvonne alone on about $1,000 a month in disability benefits."
.
"The sad irony is that they will consider themselves lucky if their applications are accepted and they get to join the list of more than 20,000 families waiting to live in one of CMHA's 60 low-income projects and scattered houses."
.
https://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/06/juanita_lake_joins_200...
.
NSFTL
Regards

Hedgefundguy

Trump punted the ball to Congress.
.
According to previous passed laws, the gov't can only hold children for 20 days.
.
Trump's executive order only protects against family separation for 20 days
.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trumps-executive-order-only-protects-against...
.
.
That means Congress still has to do something.
.
NSFTL
Regards

jouris in reply to Hedgefundguy

That means Congress still has to do something.
.
And the Congress is already moving briskly towards another demonstration that they are incapable of doing something.
.
As a result, the while fiasco will return next month. And probably the month after. If Trump was trying to reduce Republican electoral prospects, it's hard to see what more he could do.

Hedgefundguy in reply to jouris

And the Congress is already moving briskly towards another demonstration that they are incapable of doing something.
.
All due to gerrymandering.
.
The Far Right want Wall funding and lower LEGAL immigration numbers.
.
The Far Left want open borders.
.
Gerrymander district voters thinking:
"Why vote for a Democrat if they are going to vote like a Republican?"
.
"Why vote for a Republican if they are going to vote like a Democrat?"
.
NSFTL
Regards

jouris in reply to Hedgefundguy

All due to gerrymandering.
.
I'm not convinced. Gerrymandering has been around a long time. Without giving us the kind of inability to do anything that this Congress has demonstrated. (Not to defend gerrymandering, of course. But it can't really be blamed for what we are seeing today.)

ClayLuisR

Oh Dear, I'm paying the Economist for english written by a robot. QUOTE Mr Sessions’s zero-tolerance policy, which instigated the fiasco, aimed to prosecute all illegal immigrants on arrival and refer them to the criminal-justice systs prouem. UNQUOTE

ClayLuisR

Typo in the 3rd sentence. Do yous need editors to get your online content straight in a hurry? Early morning EST? Happy to help you however I can. You have my e-mail.

venze

The sudden surge of migrants and refugees, especially after Syrian War began, has pushed populism in Europe to its highest level not seen before. US continues to stand firm in not taking migrants in. Yes, many of them are suffering. Who started all the mess? Don't pretend or assume the world does not know. The culprits are... well, no point naming names...

Hedgefundguy in reply to venze

TE was pretty gung-ho about the Syrian uprising.
.
They failed to take into account the "unintended consequences" of supporting that.
.
A faux pas for an Economic Magazine, do you think?
.
NSFTL
Regards

guest-aammewej

A journalist at "The Economist" wrote, "YOUNG children in cages, sleeping on thin mattresses and covered in foil blankets. Children crying for their mothers and fathers."
.
At the present time, only Asian and European children — not Hispanic children — are suffering harm.
.
The Hispanic parents of the Hispanic children cut in front of the immigration line. Upon their illegal entry into the United States, Immigration-and-Customs-Enforcement officers take possession of the children and put them in federal facilities. There, the children receive nutritious meals, education, medical care, recreational activities, etc. — paid by the American taxpayers. (There is more information about this issue.)
.
While these Hispanic children enjoy life in the United States, millions of children in Vietnam (for example) languish in poverty and overall misery because their Vietnamese parents respect American laws and wait in line to enter the United States.
.
Furthermore, due to the immigration policy of "open borders", Hispanic illegal immigration has swelled the Hispanic percentage of the American electorate. Succumbing to Hispanic political might, politicians, bureaucrats, and administrators regularly use affirmative action to give preferential treatment to Hispanic children at the expense of Asian and European children.
.
There is more information about this issue.

DT123

The U.S should increase the age of a child to around 16 years, when considering deporting the parents only and keeping the children.

jouris in reply to DT123

Well since there's no system to track the children once they are taken away, we're pretty much going to have to keep the children when deporting the parents. Simply because we won't be able to find the relevant children.
.
Presumably we'll just wait until they are adults, and then deport them separately. If we can figure out where to deport them TO after all that time....

venze

One day 'yes', the next day 'no'. Two bipolar decisions made within less than 24 hours. Such flip-flop C-in-C is making things difficult for others. No matter what some journalists are claiming about the up-going economy and rise in employment (the truth of which is yet to be confirmed), the nation has fast become topsy-turvy, domestically and internationally. How long more must this go on?

TS2912

Let's try to analyze this utterly STUPID and INHUMAN policy...
:
Typically the illegal immigrants fall into 2 categories:
CATEGORY 1 - Economic immigrants typically with families, often fleeing murderous gangs in a non-functioning country. These people are NOT criminal and typically work hard at menial jobs that Americans avoid.
CATEGORY 2 - Criminals crossing the border smuggling drugs or reinforcing US-based gangs. Highly unlikely to be travelling with their kids.
:
This policy by the Trump administration targets the people in category 1.
Make America Great Again? What a horrid joke!

McGenius in reply to TS2912

Category 2 folks travel with other people’s kids which you can’t tell apart and hence look like category 1 folks. Category 1 folks you wish to entice to cross 1000s of miles of terrain controlled by and exposed to category 2 folks

TS2912 in reply to McGenius

Your response is utterly illogical...
:
"Category 2 folks travel with other people’s kids which you can’t tell apart and hence look like category 1 folks. "
So your solution is to treat everyone like Category 1 folks.
(It's like cops killing everyone in a hostage situation because *some* of them were bad guys)
:
"Category 1 folks you wish to entice ..."
Where (in my comment) did I claim I wanted to entice anyone?
.
This is the problem with Trump supporters, they cannot think logically and yet view themselves as "geniuses" :(
(and the consequences are felt at the voting booth)

McGenius in reply to TS2912

Is the default response for cops dealing with people they don’t know to kill everyone in sight? You’re speaking crazy.

Someone shows up at your door uninvited and who you don’t know, do you just let them in?

No, the default response for mature adults is to treat complete strangers, along with their stories of who they are, with suspicion until you can vet them.

Particularly when your neighborhood is infested with drug and human traffickers.

Do you raise your kids to trust everyone they meet? The Democrats find half the US population to be “deplorable”, Obama’s FBI found half them to be POS’s, yet every foreigner is trusted without question?

Hedgefundguy in reply to TS2912

CATEGORY 1 - Economic immigrants typically with families, often fleeing murderous gangs in a non-functioning country.
.
C'mon, you can say it.
.
"Shithole country."
.
.
I say we give them guns and send them back.
.
BTW...
How many CATEGORY 1 countries are there today?
And what is the total population of those countries?
.
NSFTL
Regards

Hedgefundguy in reply to TS2912

CATEGORY 1 - Economic immigrants typically with families, often fleeing murderous gangs in a non-functioning country.
.
Like Cleveland USA?
.
Witnesses: 9-year-old girl killed by gunfire in shootout in Cleveland
.
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- A 9-year-old girl died Wednesday from a gunshot to the head while sitting in a car near the scene of a shootout, witnesses said.
.
An employee of a nearby business, who said he feared retaliation for talking publicly about the incident, said he heard about 15 gunshots. He heard the girl's mother run outside the boxing gym and scream: "Not my baby!"
.
Cleveland gang detectives -- along with the gang unit's commander, Gary Gingell -- were also at the scene investigating.
.
Cleveland police briefed Jones at the scene. He said a group inside a car opened fire on a group standing outside, Jones said. The other group returned fire, Jones said.
.
http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/06/witnesses_9-year-old_gi...
.
NSFTL
Regards

guest-ssniloi

Hopefully this wave of revulsion against Trump and his cruel policy will gain momentum and allow the democrats to regain control of congress, or at least the House, in the mid terms. Then begins the process of first constraining Trump for the remainder of his term and then purging him and his minions from the political arena (if some of them do not end up in jail first via the Mueller investigation). Only then will the long process begin of rehabilitating America from the moral cesspool it currently is to its rightful place among the family of civilised nations. History provides both lessons and warnings but I fear the first reaction of the children of today's parents, when they grow up and read about the Trump era, will be "how could you?" followed by a profound feeling of shame.

McGenius in reply to guest-ssniloi

To defeat Trump you have to create a narrative with his supporters that he really is like a Democrat, I.e. soft on child trafficking. One of those “read my lips, no new taxes” kind of things where he signs an amnesty bill. Paul Ryan and Lindsey graham has been working on getting Trump to sign an amnesty bill. One of those will wreck him.

Directly attacking him won’t do it- it will shore up his base if anything.

McGenius

An interesting tidbit is that the vast majority of these children are separated because they were separated from their families by their families when they sent them alone to the US.

The Economist is only interested in open borders. They can’t be any clearer. Overwhelming US border control by trafficking children by children roaming across Mexico from the rest of Central America being raped and brutalized along the way is merely a means to that end.

Sick, I know.

k. r. gardner

“I say it’s very strongly the Democrats’ fault”, said Mr Trump, a statement even more bizarre and fact-lite than normal.
.
Well now that the executive order was signed, Chuck Schumer has no excuse for not considering either immigration bill the House might not pass tomorrow without Nancy Pelosi's help.

k. r. gardner in reply to Mr. Dean

Because Chuck Schumer said to the cameras that his caucus would not consider any bill the House sent over until Trump signed this executive order. Then, yesterday's vote failed because some Republicans and all House Democrats voted it down. There is another immigration bill
postponed until next week but, I don't think that will make it the Senate either so Chuck's threat is moot.

Mr. Dean in reply to k. r. gardner

So to recap, it's Chuck Schumer's fault that House GOP can't either (a) bring up a bipartisan bill or (b) even get the votes on their own Republican bill, neither of which Trump has committed to signing?

If the GOP decides they want to end family separation, Feinstein's Senate bill does exactly that and no more. It's a clean fix they could pass tomorrow.

k. r. gardner in reply to Mr. Dean

Doesn't the executive order end family separation? It will be Nancy Pelosi's fault if the compromise bill doesn't pass next week. It will be Chuck Schumer's fault if he doesn't let a few Democrats cross the aisle to put a bill on the president's desk.

Mr. Dean in reply to k. r. gardner

It does not.

Also, why would Nancy Pelosi care about passing the GOP's rightwing immigration bill that she and her caucus weren't involved in at all? I don't see any reason the Democrats have to accept this kind of hostage taking, and clearly they don't either. If Paul Ryan wants the votes of Democrats, his bill needs to compromise with them instead of the fringe of his own party.

Mr. Dean in reply to k. r. gardner

Right, because the GOP does not want to end family separation. If they did, that bill would be the vehicle for it. The Democrats really don't have any role to play in the intra-GOP fight (and can't anyway, since Paul Ryan has locked them out of the process).

k. r. gardner in reply to Mr. Dean

That's not true. Ted Cruz and Dianne Feinstein are working on a bill to end family separations that can pass the senate. Her "clean" bill is outlandish. Among other things, she would 'prohibit children from being separated from their parents within 100 miles of the U.S. border'.
.
As bad as republicans are, I don't think they'll be sending storm troopers into Mexico to hunt down families of Guatemalans.

Mr. Dean in reply to k. r. gardner

Hey, if Cruz is willing to compromise that's a great development.

As to the 100 miles, it's actually weirdly necessary due to a special jurisdictional provision. The "border" is defined by statute as within 100 miles of the actual border. Even as citizens you and I lack basic constitutional rights if stopped by border patrol in that zone, which includes all of Florida and Maine, and about 2/3 of the population. It's its own disgrace that should be pared back as well, either on its own or as part of a comprehensive bill.