Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Churches are legal sanctuary. I can't believe this is going on.

There are churches actively accepting refugees and/or the undocumented into their sanctuaries.

February 21, 2017
By Michael D. Shear and Ron Nixon

Washington — President Trump (click here) has directed his administration to more aggressively enforce the nation’s immigration laws, unleashing the full force of the federal government to find, arrest and deport those in the country illegally, regardless of whether they have committed serious crimes.

Documents released on Tuesday by the Department of Homeland Security revealed the broad scope of the president’s ambitions: to publicize crimes by immigrants; enlist local police officers as enforcers; strip immigrants of privacy rights; erect new detention facilities; discourage asylum seekers; and, ultimately, speed up deportations.

The new enforcement policies put into practice the fearful speech that Mr. Trump offered on the campaign trail, vastly expanding the definition of “criminal aliens” and warning that such unauthorized immigrants “routinely victimize Americans,” disregard the “rule of law and pose a threat” to people in communities across the United States.

Despite Mr. Trump's talk, research shows lower levels of crime among immigrants than among native-born Americans....

The courts. The undocumented and especially refugees do have rights under the USA Constitution. They are persons.

Pyler vs. Doe

This is a class action, (click here) filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in September 1977, on behalf of certain school-age children of Mexican origin residing in Smith County, Tex., who could not establish that they had been legally admitted into the United States. The action complained of the exclusion of plaintiff children from the public schools of the Tyler Independent School District.[2]The Superintendent and members of the Board of Trustees of the School District were named as defendants; the State of Texas intervened as a party-defendant. After certifying a class consisting of all undocumented school-age children of Mexican origin residing within the School District, the District Court preliminarily enjoined defendants from denying a free education to members of the plaintiff class. In December 1977, the court conducted an extensive hearing on plaintiffs' motion for permanent injunctive relief....

...The District Court held that illegal aliens were entitled to the protection of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that § 21.031 violated that Clause. Suggesting that "the state's exclusion of undocumented children from its public schools . . . may well be the type of invidiously motivated state action for which the suspect classification doctrine was designed," the court held that it was unnecessary to decide whether the statute would survive a "strict scrutiny" analysis because, in any event, the discrimination embodied in the statute was not supported by a rational basis. Id., at 585. The District Court also concluded that the Texas statute violated the Supremacy Clause.[5] Id., at 590-592.

Pyler vs. Doe illustrates clearly PERSONS are real with real circumstances. The reason the school district in Texas wrote a law barring the undocumented children was because they would cost money to educate. Sadly, the Texas school district lost sight of the LONG VIEW. If these children were not educated they would not be productive people within the borders of the USA. 

So, the USA's courts determined discrimination was not costly to educate HUMAN BEINGS within the borders of the USA.

Below is out of order to above:

...In considering this motion, the District Court made extensive findings of fact. The court found that neither § 21.031 nor the School District policy implementing it had "either the purpose or effect of keeping illegal aliens out of the State of Texas." 458 F. Supp. 569, 575 (1978)....

Pyler vs. Doe runs into some trouble in that according to Trump there are means to remove the undocumented from the country. However, it has yet to determine whether or not the "Trump SS" is carrying out legal search and seizures and conducting deportation according to the law.

WHAT actually NEEDS TO BE DONE is to grow more courts for immigration and reduce the backlog. Trump is loading the front end of the deportation backlog without providing a way to resolve the legal issues that face these undocumented. Like most Republicans it is all show with little substance.

Trump's SS is adding to the backlog and clogging up the immigration courts even further. Those rounded up like cattle will be back to their lives in the USA before too much longer.

Laws are laws, but, they lose their authority when human life is effected adversely. It is a human rights issue and if this precedent of rounding up people believed to be the undocumented and sending them to the courts for deportation is allowed, where does it stop? It is a precedent and a very dangerous one. In comparison to the problems the undocumented cause in a country of over 330 million legal Americans the precedent isn't worth it. I know there are criminal deaths and I am sure if it were mine I would feel differently, but, that does not negate the precedent as being dangerous.

There are reasons the undocumented exist and it is not due to the will to prevent it. But, the real answers to the undocumented is to help solve the problems south of our southern border. If life was worth living there there would be virtually no undocumented to worry about and ICE would not be overwhelmed.

That has been the problem all along. The USA didn't solve the problems in Mexico because it didn't solve the problems in Latin America. Columbia acts as a stop gap to some extent, but, even with USA backing in Columbia the problems are not solved.

Real statesmanship to other countries to solve the problems along with more immigration courts domestically and the USA would not be having problems with undocumented.

Anyone can put the "Trump SS Roundup" on camera for the constituents, but, the real results are different than the story the cameras tell. 

It is no different than the "State Dinner" with the UK. It is expected and of course regardless the royal treatment, Trump holds his ground and cannot be called corrupted by money and politics. Everything is a show.