Observations about the new deportation campaign

[Doug Fattic]

My daughter works in a school system in southern California that has many hispanic kids. Her job in the last few weeks has become vastly more difficult because the deportation methods now being used is causing real anxiety in the students. They are now under great stress worried about what will happen to their family and friends. Some that were getting good grades are now not studying, some are not eating and sleeping properly, others are becoming belligerent with teachers and other students. This government applied pressure is having a really negative effect. She says the difference in kids lately is very noticeable. My daughter is pretty upset and angry about this. She is a SLP and her work load is being greatly increased as teachers are sending her an increased number of kids having communication problems. Now parents are not showing up to have conferences with her or their teachers. This lack of cooperation and interaction erodes the foundations required for good learning to happen. The result will be that these kids that are US citizens (so they aren’t going to leave) will be less well educated and therefore less able to contribute to our society.

It appears to be a deliberate strategy by the new administration to target parents for deportation doing routine tasks. By applying this kind of pressure those that are here without adequate documentation become afraid and (so the reasoning goes) might leave on their own. It is a lot easier and cheaper to get rid of people this way then by arresting them. However those that have been here for any length of time are entangled with America and does not make it possible for them to have a clean break. They are going to leave problems behind for others to have to clean up. Many of their kids were born in the US so they are US citizens (that is in our constitution) but can’t live here on their own. They need the total support of their parents. What a mess!

This deliberate destabilization is not going to make America a safer and better place to live. In fact it will do the opposite. Nobody that belongs to a targeted group will want to interact with the local police doing their job trying to find out who the real bad guys are. And the process itself hurts all kids in that community and not just the adults specifically targeted because of their fear of what might happen to their friends or relatives even if their parents are properly documented. These new deportation policies appear to me to be an attempt to fulfill a campaign promise that appeals to racial prejudice rather than be a reasoned approach to solving the problem of undocumented immigrants. This is just one example of why I am extremely unhappy about the 2016 election results.

[guido]

The profound cruelty of this administration is horrible. Call your elected officials often to express your disapproval. Attend demonstrations protesting these acts. Support candidates who will bring this madness to an end. 2018 mid-terms will be on us soon, the time to act is now.

[spopepro]

For anyone who might be able to use it--I'm a public school administrator in CA. We have instructions from the state, county counsel, and our superintendents about what to do. Anyone who isn't a student or a staff member *must* check in at the front office (including ICE agents) and if an agent requests access to any records, a student, or any campus resource the correct response is: "this is a very unusual request, I will need to check with our district office." Call your superintendent, and they will be there with legal counsel to handle things. Don't get involved yourself.

Do remind everyone that the constitution extends rights to all persons within our boarders, not just citizens. Consider distributing information to your parents from the ACLU regarding what those rights are, and what to do:

[bking]

I normally stay out of this stuff, I should now.
I'm a sub contractor, a pretty good size one with offices in three states. I employee a lot of Hispanic labor-- good folks, they work hard. I served two years on a mission in they Yucatan decades ago and can still hold my own with my spanish.
All that said, I've had it with all the hand wringing over the current administration enforcing the laws. It is the law, it should be enforced. It is also wrong that cities, even states declare themselves places of sanctuary where law breakers can find safe haven and hide in plain site, so to speak. This country established itself as a nation that abides by the rule of law, our people and our leaders have to abide by those same laws, no one is above them, not even those who come here illegally. Begin to allow to do otherwise, and chaos or worse, anarchy result. We've seen the tip of this in these past months.
That said, I'm arguably the last person on this forum that wants to see hard working illegal immigrants leave this country. But it boils my skin when I'm told I can't give them or continue to offer them jobs that I desperately need filled, or I'll go to jail--that warning came during an audit to our company during the Clinton administration. I've been audited by the Bush, as well as audited numerous times during the Obama administration and warned. Finally, sick of the harassment, we became ICE compliant during Obama's second term.
When Obama was elected and held both houses I was pretty excited about something being done. Instead all their political capital was spent on "affordable health care" (which it is not, and another subject) and nothing over the next eight years was resolved for 20 plus million people, WHO WE ALL KNOW ARE NOT GOING TO BE ROUNDED UP AND SHOVED ACROSS SOME BORDER. That will not be the solution, even be Trump. In the meantime, states and federal institutions controlled by both R's and D's allowed them to get state drivers licenses, attend state schools and colleges, receive grant's and food stamps, free health care and I could go on and on. I AM NOT BITTER ABOUT THIS. I am angry that I can't give them a legal job that would allow them to pay taxes and pay into the SS system that would provide in their old age. I'm mad as H that others do employee them and pay them cash, or hire them using fraudulent SS numbers and ID. All this affects my business tremendously. We struggle every day and have done so for 20 years to find labor. I've cried to my state and federal representatives, we need help. We need to be able to hire people who want to build things, because most kids these days don't want to work where they might actually sweat some.

I'm angry because congress and the administrations under Clinton, under Bush, under Obama have ignored it, have allowed it, have permitted it, have paid for it (actually we all pay for it), but they tell me and other employers: yes we know they're here, yes we provide lots of services for them, but if you give them a legal job where they'll pay their share of taxes, we'll arrest you.
Live by the law, or get it changed. I'm good with either, but you don't get to punt.

My apologies for my rant, I know this really isn't the place.

[Blue Jays]

I am so glad springtime and the warm weather is near.
People will post more about bicycles and terrific rides.

[Todd Amunrud]

I'm a pediatrician in an affluent college town with a pretty large Latino population. Many families have been here for 30+ years, have kids, grandkids, and nieces/nephews born here. My no show/cancellation rate is up. The kids/families that are coming are dealing with loads of stress/anxiety. If any of this deportation happens in a large fashion here, my son will lose approximately half his classmates, who happen to be US citizens, if the whole family goes. These are hard working kids and families well integrated into our community. We're in for the fight. These are my friends who don't need this stress. There is a better pathway forward, but there is no political will to currently push that in a large way. We've been meeting weekly with our community for the last month on this issue and the benefit is increased integration of class and culture. I'm optimistic that the end will be fine for all, trouble is the current stress and anxiety is painful.

[EDS]

I really hate the direction our country is taking and think the current administration's is deplorable. Their only real agenda is to entrench the wealthy. I will likely benefit when they do things like get rid of the AMT, but I do not think we are headed in the right direction.

[mjbabcock]

We have a large Latino population out here. Does anyone know of a model in which local families provide resources for children whose parents have been deported or detained? Seems like there needs to be a national system we could opt into that would include vetting to exclude sex offenders/felons

[taz]

All that said, I've had it with all the hand wringing over the current administration enforcing the laws. It is the law, it should be enforced. It is also wrong that cities, even states declare themselves places of sanctuary where law breakers can find safe haven and hide in plain site, so to speak. This country established itself as a nation that abides by the rule of law, our people and our leaders have to abide by those same laws, no one is above them, not even those who come here illegally.
Live by the law, or get it changed. I'm good with either, but you don't get to punt.

There are NO SANCTUARY CITIES or states. Any and all Federal laws can and are being enforced in all cities - there is no safe haven for undocumented immigrants in any US city or state.

HOWEVER, per the anti-commandeering clause of the Constitution, the Federal government cannot compel States or local governments to ENFORCE Federal laws. In other words, local and state police are not required to arrest or detain undocumented immigrants for violations of Federal law.

The so-called sanctuary cities are places where the local govt, mayors, etc. have said that they are choosing not to act as agents of the Federal government and detain those people, or even inform the Feds as to their presence. This is entirely legal. If the Federal govt/President chooses to enforce the immigration laws, which they have full and complete control over - again as per the Constitution - then they have to use the Federal police forces at their disposal, the FBI, ICE, TSA, Border Patrol.

Another point that is frequently overlooked - when the local govts detain a suspected 'illegal immigrant', they have no prosecution power. All they can do is detain the person until the Feds take custody which can take a while. During this detainment, the local govt is paying for the detention - i.e. your local tax dollars. - and although the Fed govt has authorized reimbursement for this detention, cooperating cities have found that the reimbursement is less than the cost of detention so it is coming out of your cities' local budgets.

Your other points regarding rule of law are valid... But it takes two in those instances to break the law, an non-citizen seeking work *AND* a AMERICAN CITIZEN willing to break the law in order to save some money.

Some STATES may provide driver's licenses and allow to attend states schools, but the undocumented immigrants DO NOT receive Federal grants, Federal food assistance or health care, at least not without a fraudulent social security number which is a separate crime regardless of citizenship status.

[Todd Amunrud]

We have a large Latino population out here. Does anyone know of a model in which local families provide resources for children whose parents have been deported or detained? Seems like there needs to be a national system we could opt into that would include vetting to exclude sex offenders/felons

I think it goes state by state. Here is what we're discussing with families...
257B - 216 Minnesota Statutes

[EricKeller]

these campaigns have always and forever been about harassing legal U.S. citizens. Everyone knows this except for some that seem to think it's about a few undocumented workers.

[woodworker]

The "let's enforce the law" position or argument as it applies to immigration misses a lot. It's the sort of simple theoretical argument that is appealing on its face but appalling in practice.

What it really misses is the reality of the situation. We as a country have generally supported immigrant populations fleeing poverty, political instability, war, etc. We have been lax in our enforcement of immigration laws because it suited us. We wanted cheap labor for our agricultural, construction, and service industries. We've benefitted from that labor, and the individuals who provided these benefits have asked nothing more than that they be allowed to stay in a place that was far better than where they came from so that they could support their families. In my experience, living in Southern California, these are decent, hard-working, honest folks. Now, under the guise of them being rapists or felons or "bad hombres" or terrorists--an assertion without factual backing--we are seeking to remove them, even though they've been good citizens and productive members of society, and even though we have benefitted from their efforts. Although such deportation policies may be in keeping with some of our baser historical attitudes toward past immigrant groups (e.g. the Irish, the Chinese, and the Jewish immigrants), it's certainly inconsistent with the melting pot principles that we so often tout and that we think set us apart from other countries.

If we support the policies now being proposed and implemented, we are turning our backs on what should be our guiding principles. It also lacks any compassion for those less fortunate.

That's why I have a problem with this simplistic argument.

[Dallas Tex]

Where were your voices when Obama deported 2.5 million people?

[Saab2000]

Where were your voices when Obama deported 2.5 million people?

I was going to point this out earlier. There's plenty of hypocrisy to go around. There is a difference in tone, however.

We need common sense and less hysteria.

There's a TV in a common room at my new company. Whenever nobody is looking I change the channel to ESPN to get away from the 'news' channels that always seem to be the choice.

[theflashunc]

Where were your voices when Obama deported 2.5 million people?

He didn't cite Operation: Wetback as a model for handling illegal immigration, for starters. And supported the DREAMers rather than trying to, yanno, deport them.

[woodworker]

Where were your voices when Obama deported 2.5 million people?

My voice was in the form of helping those that I could to stay in the country by working through the immigration courts because I thought that they were good, decent people who deserved better opportunities.

But how is the reference to a prior deplorable policy an argument in favor of a present one that is even worse, particularly when the latter is framed in such an offensive way (meaning that it not only states that those to be deported are here illegally but also insinuates that they are terrible people who came to the country to do us harm)?

From my perspective, that's not an argument in favor of the present policy.

[spopepro]

Where were your voices when Obama deported 2.5 million people?

My voice, and my actions, have been consistent when I protested with my students when ICE raids were happening in our community in 2009 through today. In contrast to what appears to be the "question nothing" strategy of current republican leadership and membership, if you were listening you would have heard our many complaints with the lack of action on a path to citizenship and other reforms.

But I suspect your question was rhetorical, in any case.

Also, I think if you read Doug's (and some others') statements carefully, you will find that the complaint isn't so much about what the law is (although we might have issues there too), or what the enforcement is, but the tactics and methods currently employed. It seems clear that instructions have been given to make very visible, statement making, enforcement activities happen. Word is traveling that DHS vehicles are hanging out around schools (but I haven't observed them at any of my schools). There is clearly an attempt to intimidate, which is completely outside of what constitutes law, or normal enforcement. Indeed, a change to enforcement actions might require a change in law or code, which would be subjected to the courts (and everyone can see how well that is going).

[jclay]

But how is the reference to a prior deplorable policy an argument in favor of a present one that is even worse, particularly when the latter is framed in such an offensive way (meaning that it not only states that those to be deported are here illegally but also insinuates that they are terrible people who came to the country to do us harm)?

From my perspective, that's not an argument in favor of the present policy.

Perfectly stated.

This isn't a high school football game; Obama and the Democratic Party have been disappointing and oftentimes destructive. But only slightly to the right of Nixon.

[guido]

Where were your voices when Obama deported 2.5 million people?

Some of us were calling for that action to stop at the time as well.

[Dallas Tex]

My voice was in the form of helping those that I could to stay in the country by working through the immigration courts because I thought that they were good, decent people who deserved better opportunities.

But how is the reference to a prior deplorable policy an argument in favor of a present one that is even worse, particularly when the latter is framed in such an offensive way (meaning that it not only states that those to be deported are here illegally but also insinuates that they are terrible people who came to the country to do us harm)?

From my perspective, that's not an argument in favor of the present policy.

It wasn't meant to be.