Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Is ICE Overstepping Its Directive?


Lilly

Recommended Posts

Most of us agree that criminal illegal aliens should be apprehended by ICE. However, I suspect that most of us also feel that those who haven't committed any crimes should be treated at least somewhat differently than felons.

However, in some places this doesn't appear to be happening: http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/13/politics/ice-raids-enforcement-arrest-numbers/

This concerns me, is the Trump Administration lying to the American public when they say their focus is on the criminal illegals? Or, is ICE overstepping their bounds and behaving in a manner not consistent with what they have been directed to do?

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ok, I can't seem to find any new information on this, but it does appear that ICE enforcement differs considerably from state to state: http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/320/

So, I'm now wondering if the recent actions are more of a result of which state one happens to be talking about? In other words, one state may be focusing exclusively on criminal illegals while another state may be just arresting anyone they come across that's illegally here. If this is the case then I do think there needs to be far more consistency of application. Like I said, most people want the criminal illegals gone but are far more willing to 'cut some slack' for the non-criminals. Seriously, I don't think it's going to even be possible to deport 11 million people, better to focus on the criminal element.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Ok, I can't seem to find any new information on this, but it does appear that ICE enforcement differs considerably from state to state: http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/320/

So, I'm now wondering if the recent actions are more of a result of which state one happens to be talking about? In other words, one state may be focusing exclusively on criminal illegals while another state may be just arresting anyone they come across that's illegally here. If this is the case then I do think there needs to be far more consistency of application. Like I said, most people want the criminal illegals gone but are far more willing to 'cut some slack' for the non-criminals. Seriously, I don't think it's going to even be possible to deport 11 million people, better to focus on the criminal element.

I'm in a state where a lot of immigrants legal and ones that green cards expired yet they stayed.  It was under Obama watch that I saw one of my clients where I work get deported!  His papers expired yet he was married to an American and had children who were American born and his was the bread winner and working in our neighboring state of Pennsylvania.

I often wonder why immigrants with American family aren't given an easier path to citizenship. It doesn't  make sense to me. 

It also doesn't make sense to me that in Ohio, if you are an immigrant you can get food stamps and Medicaid in some cases!  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, White Unicorn said:

I'm in a state where a lot of immigrants legal and ones that green cards expired yet they stayed.  It was under Obama watch that I saw one of my clients where I work get deported!  His papers expired yet he was married to an American and had children who were American born and his was the bread winner and working in our neighboring state of Pennsylvania.

I often wonder why immigrants with American family aren't given an easier path to citizenship. It doesn't  make sense to me. 

It also doesn't make sense to me that in Ohio, if you are an immigrant you can get food stamps and Medicaid in some cases!  

People do seem to be forgetting that the previous administration deported quite a few as well. I do indeed think that those who have family (spouse and children) here need to be given some type of legal option.

I'm all for immediately booting out felons...but throwing out the proverbial 'baby with the bathwater' seems very misguided.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they're in America illegally they're not exactly not breaking any laws.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

If they're in America illegally they're not exactly not breaking any laws.

Of course anyone here illegally is violating immigration law, it's just that we're being told ICE is only focusing on removing criminal felons. This doesn't appear to be the case (in all locations anyway).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even the article says most are criminals.  Maybe the ones that haven't committed a crime beside crossing the border illegally haven't been here long or have been deported before.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the latest:

Memos signed by DHS secretary describe sweeping new guidelines for deporting illegal immigrants.

Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly has signed sweeping new guidelines that empower federal authorities to more aggressively detain and deport illegal immigrants inside the United States and at the border.

In a pair of memos, Kelly offered more detail on plans for the agency to hire thousands of additional enforcement agents, expand the pool of immigrants who are prioritized for removal, speed up deportation hearings and enlist local law enforcement to help make arrests.

The new directives would supersede nearly all of those issued under previous administrations, Kelly said, including measures from President Barack Obama aimed at focusing deportations exclusively on hardened criminals and those with terrorist ties.

Read more: The Washington Post

 

Edited by Claire.
Fixed quote box.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Influential politicians, including Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D) of Texas and Sen. Pat McCarran (D) of Nevada, favored open borders, and were dead set against strong border enforcement, Brownell said. But General Swing's close connections to the president shielded him – and the Border Patrol – from meddling by powerful political and corporate interests.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0706/p09s01-coop.html

Thought you might be interested in how Eisenhower deported illegals back in the 1950's

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing about borders (advocating strong or open borders) has a great deal to do with what was happening at the time in history. Right now we absolutely have a problem with our southern border, drugs and criminals are coming across and such a porous border can also allow terrorists easy entry. One can certainly argue that people have been sneaking over the border to work in the US for a very long time, but recently more and more have entered. It's almost as if Mexico is encouraging this practice rather than dealing with it's own excess poor population.

So, what we now have are 11 million illegal people, some are indeed criminals but a great number are not felons...the only crime they have committed was sneaking in. Do we then deal with the drug pushers, gangsters, killers, rapists all around criminals in the exact same manner as we deal with people who snuck in but have never broken any other law? What about if they've been here for 10 or 15 years, have children, are adding to our economy, aren't doing anything at all to harm our society? This is a real problem IMO and this is why I'm all for ICE getting the felons out of the country as quickly as possible, but I'm also torn as to what to do with the non-criminal people.

So, should these people really all be treated exactly the same? I think this is a question that we will eventually have to deal with.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Lilly said:

The thing about borders (advocating strong or open borders) has a great deal to do with what was happening at the time in history. Right now we absolutely have a problem with our southern border, drugs and criminals are coming across and such a porous border can also allow terrorists easy entry. One can certainly argue that people have been sneaking over the border to work in the US for a very long time, but recently more and more have entered. It's almost as if Mexico is encouraging this practice rather than dealing with it's own excess poor population.

So, what we now have are 11 million illegal people, some are indeed criminals but a great number are not felons...the only crime they have committed was sneaking in. Do we then deal with the drug pushers, gangsters, killers, rapists all around criminals in the exact same manner as we deal with people who snuck in but have never broken any other law? What about if they've been here for 10 or 15 years, have children, are adding to our economy, aren't doing anything at all to harm our society? This is a real problem IMO and this is why I'm all for ICE getting the felons out of the country as quickly as possible, but I'm also torn as to what to do with the non-criminal people.

So, should these people really all be treated exactly the same? I think this is a question that we will eventually have to deal with.

That is a good question.  I am also torn on what to do, can't help but feel sorry for them.  Some I think we should allow to stay but not given a path to citizenship.  That way if they do turn into criminals they can still be deported.  Also that would be totally unfair to those that did it legally.  They can't have committed any felonies, even low level ones or be members of gangs even if they have kids born here.

I have a feeling there are way more than 11 million of them here.  I read someplace they get that figure from the census bureau.  I bet a lot don't admit they are here illegally.  Which I am counting people that are here on a overstayed visas too.  Many of them need deported as well.

They catch people from many countries other than the Americas coming across the border.  Those need turned back and rarely allowed to stay.  If Mexico decided to allow them to cross their territory as long as they are coming to the US let Mexico take care of them.  I'm really tired of illegal immigration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
23 minutes ago, Ashotep said:

That is a good question.  I am also torn on what to do, can't help but feel sorry for them.  Some I think we should allow to stay but not given a path to citizenship.  That way if they do turn into criminals they can still be deported.  Also that would be totally unfair to those that did it legally.  They can't have committed any felonies, even low level ones or be members of gangs even if they have kids born here.

I have a feeling there are way more than 11 million of them here.  I read someplace they get that figure from the census bureau.  I bet a lot don't admit they are here illegally.  Which I am counting people that are here on a overstayed visas too.  Many of them need deported as well.

They catch people from many countries other than the Americas coming across the border.  Those need turned back and rarely allowed to stay.  If Mexico decided to allow them to cross their territory as long as they are coming to the US let Mexico take care of them.  I'm really tired of illegal immigration.

 

I'm torn on it as well.  I've worked lower paying jobs and worked along side many illegals, for the most part they were just happy to be here and have a decent paying job, that their children were in school getting an education and getting a decent lunch while they were at work.  I've also met a lot of "bad" illegals when I was into hard drugs, multiple felons and pretty dangerous to our community. 

The ones that are here earning a living under the table that haven't stolen identities need some type of protection in my opinion, because all in all they are here to prosper and would take any opportunity to gain citizenship and be a true benefit our society.   The bad ones though, deport them all, even if they have children here I have no sympathy for people that come here and sell hard drugs and commit violent crimes.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all about what kind of country we want to be. Do we want to be a country where people are stopped for being brown and need to show their papers? I think a lot went into us not being that kind of country. And now there are 6 states where they literally have checkpoints. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiw2eXl1p3SAhUJ0YMKHWXaCecQFgg5MAY&url=http%3A%2F%2Falternativemediasyndicate.com%2F2017%2F02%2F11%2Fimmigration-checkpoints-raids-really-happening-least-six-states%2F&usg=AFQjCNEymxcJlt7eZPANqUeZqu2U7wsJRw&bvm=bv.147448319,d.amc

Edited by ChaosRose
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears Canada is feeling the effect now.

'Someone is going to slip through': Worry grows over influx of asylum seekers.

Greg Janzen, the reeve of Emerson, Man., where dozens of would-be refugee claimants have recently crossed the porous Canada-U.S. border, says some area residents are beginning to express anxiety about the influx.

The small border town of 671 has been galvanized to help asylum seekers, and the issue has certainly put the community on the map, attracting media attention from across the globe. Janzen said he's done 95 television interviews over the last two weeks. Before that he'd only done one, a dozen years ago.

But as the number of asylum seekers continues to surge, it's beginning to put a strain on local resources and raise some security concerns over potential risks to the residents, he said.

cont...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/refugee-emerson-border-crossing-1.3988352

Edited by Michelle
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.