Pritzker urges Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to stop migrant dropoffs amid winter storm: ‘I plead with you for mercy’

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you, or do you not, mean it when you claim "Sanctuary City", or the many related bumper stickers and lawn signs? If you don't stand behind what you say, just top talking and finally stop screaming and shaming everyone else.


If I have a bumper sticker that says "save the orcas", would it be OK for you to dump an orca on my lawn?
If I have a lawn sign that says "make abortions illegal" would it be OK for you to dump five newborns on my lawn?
If I have a lawn sign that says "prison reform now!" would it be OK for you to force to to house incarcerated people?

One can think there is a problem that needs solving or a policy that needs changing without being personally responsible for all of the symptoms of that problem.


Not the same. Sanctuary City says not enforcing immigration laws.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Do you, or do you not, mean it when you claim "Sanctuary City", or the many related bumper stickers and lawn signs? If you don't stand behind what you say, just top talking and finally stop screaming and shaming everyone else.


If I have a bumper sticker that says "save the orcas", would it be OK for you to dump an orca on my lawn?
If I have a lawn sign that says "make abortions illegal" would it be OK for you to dump five newborns on my lawn?
If I have a lawn sign that says "prison reform now!" would it be OK for you to force to to house incarcerated people?

One can think there is a problem that needs solving or a policy that needs changing without being personally responsible for all of the symptoms of that problem.


Declaring yourself a "Sanctuary" inherently identifies you as welcoming to migrants and opposite other "heartless" cities. It's a pointless declaration if you don't stand behind it. What makes it worse is the rhetoric assuming Texas and other border states should be fine with Orcas dumped on their lawns.

"Let's Find A Solution" might be a reasonable slogan, as some are now realizing. But no - you wanted the validation and shaming opportunities without the responsibility.


That's not what it means. It just means they don't enforce federal immigration laws or do CBP's job for them.


Pritsker, 2021



Pritzker, 2024

"There are plenty of other cities where, if he's gonna send people, they could be sent — but no, he's choosing only Democratic states, Democratic cities..."
i.e...... STOP SENDING THE MIGRANTS TO ILLINOIS!

When you make life easier for people who break our laws, and enter the US illegally, why are you surprised when they want to come to your state? And, why is anyone surprised when more and more keep coming?
Anonymous
Does anyone know how we stop this from happening here?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know how we stop this from happening here?


Democrats need to organize a protest at the Capitol. Thousands of Democrats need to show up holding signs like “Close the Border” and “Pass HR-2” and “End Birthright Citizenship.”

No republicans will dare go protest at the Capitol ever again, so Democrats are going to have to do it. No republican wants to risk getting thrown in prison for 20 years.

But a protest from Democrats will be tolerated. So someone organize it and get out there and do it!!!
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The Biden Administration simply needs to enforce current immigration laws. That’s it.

It would improve this nightmare situation greatly.

Current law requires asylum seekers to be able to apply for asylum and have their cases heard. Is the Biden Admin not doing that part?

I do agree that something needs to be done, but which immigration law is the Biden Admin not following?

They even retained the rule that forces asylum seekers to remain in MX until their case is heard.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/may/13/title-42-migration-biden-new-policy-tougher

The problem is that the system is overloaded. People come here because they know someone will give them a job. Who's giving them jobs? Is it the crunchy progressive MOMS shopping liberal? Or is it the R, low tax supporting lawncare company owner?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Biden Administration simply needs to enforce current immigration laws. That’s it.

It would improve this nightmare situation greatly.

Current law requires asylum seekers to be able to apply for asylum and have their cases heard. Is the Biden Admin not doing that part?

I do agree that something needs to be done, but which immigration law is the Biden Admin not following?

They even retained the rule that forces asylum seekers to remain in MX until their case is heard.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/may/13/title-42-migration-biden-new-policy-tougher

The problem is that the system is overloaded. People come here because they know someone will give them a job. Who's giving them jobs? Is it the crunchy progressive MOMS shopping liberal? Or is it the R, low tax supporting lawncare company owner?


He can deport using Title 8 like Obama did.
This is what Mayorkas said in May:
"Starting at midnight, people who arrive at our southern border will be subject to our immigration enforcement authorities under Title Eight of the United States Code," Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said at a White House briefing Thursday afternoon. "Here is what that means. If anyone arrives at our southern border after midnight tonight, they will be presumed ineligible for asylum and subject to steeper consequences for unlawful entry, including a minimum five-year ban on reentry and potential criminal prosecution," he warned.

"The transition to Title Eight processing will be swift and immediate," he said.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/title-8-immigration-law/story?id=99226848#:~:text=Title%208%2C%20which%20includes%20decades,were%20afforded%20under%20Title%2042.

Are they doing this? Hell no!

Nothing in our law requires "asylum-seekers" (in quotes because most are not eligible and they know it) to remain in the US. The law reads:

"If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States."
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum#:~:text=If%20you%20are%20eligible%20for,arrival%20to%20the%20United%20States.

In fact, the law requires the US to detain these people:
"The law also mandates that all those seeking asylum in the United States shall be detained, "pending a final resolution of credible fear of persecution, and, if found not to have such a fear, until removed."94 This can mean months of detention in one of the immigration centers or local jails around the country used by ..."
https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/us-immig/Ins989-04.htm#:~:text=The%20law%20also%20mandates%20that,around%20the%20country%20used%20by

Biden could be doing a lot. But, he isn't. So, we can only assume that this is part of his plan - to flood this country with under educated, under skilled people.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The Biden Administration simply needs to enforce current immigration laws. That’s it.

It would improve this nightmare situation greatly.

Current law requires asylum seekers to be able to apply for asylum and have their cases heard. Is the Biden Admin not doing that part?

I do agree that something needs to be done, but which immigration law is the Biden Admin not following?

They even retained the rule that forces asylum seekers to remain in MX until their case is heard.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/may/13/title-42-migration-biden-new-policy-tougher

The problem is that the system is overloaded. People come here because they know someone will give them a job. Who's giving them jobs? Is it the crunchy progressive MOMS shopping liberal? Or is it the R, low tax supporting lawncare company owner?


He can deport using Title 8 like Obama did.
This is what Mayorkas said in May:
"Starting at midnight, people who arrive at our southern border will be subject to our immigration enforcement authorities under Title Eight of the United States Code," Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said at a White House briefing Thursday afternoon. "Here is what that means. If anyone arrives at our southern border after midnight tonight, they will be presumed ineligible for asylum and subject to steeper consequences for unlawful entry, including a minimum five-year ban on reentry and potential criminal prosecution," he warned.

"The transition to Title Eight processing will be swift and immediate," he said.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/title-8-immigration-law/story?id=99226848#:~:text=Title%208%2C%20which%20includes%20decades,were%20afforded%20under%20Title%2042.

Are they doing this? Hell no!

Nothing in our law requires "asylum-seekers" (in quotes because most are not eligible and they know it) to remain in the US. The law reads:

"If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States."
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum#:~:text=If%20you%20are%20eligible%20for,arrival%20to%20the%20United%20States.

In fact, the law requires the US to detain these people:
"The law also mandates that all those seeking asylum in the United States shall be detained, "pending a final resolution of credible fear of persecution, and, if found not to have such a fear, until removed."94 This can mean months of detention in one of the immigration centers or local jails around the country used by ..."
https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports98/us-immig/Ins989-04.htm#:~:text=The%20law%20also%20mandates%20that,around%20the%20country%20used%20by

Biden could be doing a lot. But, he isn't. So, we can only assume that this is part of his plan - to flood this country with under educated, under skilled people.



Why isn't this being enforced and an orderly process put in place? People who are trying to follow procedures and use the immigration app that is in place or trying to enter via official ports of entry should be prioritized. People who rush the boarder should automatically be deemed inadmissible. All it would take would be for highly publicized deportation flights to take place to get the word out.
Anonymous
Gov. Abbott is simply following IL law:

Illinois is officially a ‘sanctuary state’ for immigrants
https://www.chicagotribune.com/hoy/ct-hoy-illinois-is-officially-a-sanctuary-state-for-immigrants-20170828-story.html

(Sometimes it is a good idea to think through the consequences of policies that make for good PR)
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Using people as political pawns is sociopathic.


And completely unChristian. Abbott is such a religious hypocrite. Would love to see the pope ex-communicate him over this.


It would be a shame if the wheelchair bound Governor Abbot was left on the street in the Chicago winter to fend for himself.

Me thinks he hasn’t experienced any hardship in a while.


His disability has made him an emasculated, angry, and spiteful man. He’s just rollin on revenge and stickin it to the Dems. He can’t protect himself and he didn’t protect Uvalde.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Gov. Abbott is simply following IL law:

Illinois is officially a ‘sanctuary state’ for immigrants
https://www.chicagotribune.com/hoy/ct-hoy-illinois-is-officially-a-sanctuary-state-for-immigrants-20170828-story.html

(Sometimes it is a good idea to think through the consequences of policies that make for good PR)


+1
Anonymous
What is Texas supposed to do with these people? Better to send them to other states.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:What is Texas supposed to do with these people? Better to send them to other states.


Better yet - Biden get off his duff and start enforcing immigration laws.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.


What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?


What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?


That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.


It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...


DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'







I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?


new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.


"Hold on, I’m confused. What does Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city have to do with caring for the migrants now arriving in large numbers?

Nothing. Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city does not require it to encourage immigrants to move to Chicago nor does the Welcoming City ordinance obligate officials to use taxpayer funds to care for immigrants in Chicago.

In addition, the 18,500 migrants sent to Chicago so far are in the country legally after requesting asylum after fleeing persecution and economic collapse. The ordinance focuses on protections for undocumented immigrants, so it does not apply to any of the migrants.

However, Chicago’s long-standing promise to serve as a haven for immigrants made it a target for Trump, while he was president, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott picked up where his political ally left off."
https://news.wttw.com/2023/10/20/what-does-it-mean-chicago-sanctuary-city-here-s-what-know


Bet you dollars to donuts that Abbott's guys are falsely telling migrants that Chicago all of that, that Chicago will house and feed them to get them to "agree" to get on the bus north.


DP. What are you even talking about? The illegal immigrants given bus rides to NYC and Chicago are the *lucky* ones. Do you actually think they'd prefer to be stuck a border detention center or sleeping on the streets of El Paso? They were given free rides to the city of their choosing, where many of them already have family (other illegal immigrants) living. You are straining credibility by pretending anyone was misled here. Get a grip.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.


What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?


What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?


That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.


It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...


DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'







I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?


new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.


For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.


In other words, we Chicagoans don't think we should have to enforce immigration laws because large groups of immigrants don't affect us. We like to sound kind and welcoming to immigrants. Just don't let too many of them come here. It might overburden our schools and services, but it's fine for Texas and other states to be overburdened.


Exactly.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.


What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?


What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?


That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.


It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...


DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'







I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?


new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.


For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.


In other words, we Chicagoans don't think we should have to enforce immigration laws because large groups of immigrants don't affect us. We like to sound kind and welcoming to immigrants. Just don't let too many of them come here. It might overburden our schools and services, but it's fine for Texas and other states to be overburdened.


It is NOT fine for Texas to be overburdened. It is also NOT fine for Chicago to be overburdened, particularly intentionally and at great cost by another state.


DP. Great, then what Abbott is doing is working. Chicago and NYC are becoming overburdened, much like border states, though to a much tinier degree. They're getting a taste of what many claimed was "not a crisis" and their outrage might FINALLY make Biden sit up and take notice. Because it certainly didn't when the outrage was coming from red states.
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: