Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crossing the border is a crime. ICE is just enforcing the law. What’s so hard to understand.

It’s a misdomenor, not worthy of jail or execution.

It is worthy of detainment and deportation, though. Ask the Deporter-in-Chief Obama.

I guess they were just better in Obama's time.

Not these Nazi cos players

Well, it’s not Obama time, and no one cares about your Nazi reference, literally no one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This five-year-old and his dad are legal. They have an active asylum case.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/21/ice-arrests-five-year-old-boy-minnesota

They WILL be released, you know, because they are legal. In the meantime, Kristi Noem endangered a child who came home to an empty house, endangered a family and neighborhood by leaving a car running, traumatized a five-year-old, and is terrorizing a family who is here legally. Our grandchildren will be paying the legal fees and therapy bills through their taxes.

Asylum seekers who enter illegally are supposed to be detained while their claim is processed. Biden refused to follow the law. He turned asylum into a free-for-all for all of the world’s economic migrants.

So process them in accordance with international law, and if they don’t meet the standard, send them back.

It really baffles me how much the “law and order” people are willing to set aside both law and order if it involves brown people or people standing up for the Constitution. You might want to consider if you’re the baddies after all. Take some time, because I’m sure it will be one of those “ego destroying” moments for you.

Why would we put international law (totally undefined) ahead of own immigration laws already on the books, makes no sense. If Democrats want to campaign on repealing the current immigration laws in favor of open borders, then they should do it. If they win, they can have their way. But not following current law is not an option.

We actually have a very big law, the Constitution, with some very big amendments, like the Fourth. I’d be great if our cops could try following it.

Yeah, it’s also very vague, which is why there are so many Supreme Court cases (hundreds) that try to define it. Any illegal can a get lawyer to press their cause, might be a big payday for them. But, doesn’t seem to happen does it ?

Some may be thinking, well, if that's the approach the DHS is adopted, surely it can be challenged in court, right? But this is less than obvious to me. It may be that there are ways of challenging the DHS policy under the judicial review doctrines of administrative law, like the APA. I don't know. It's not my area, so I will leave that to others.

It seems worth flagging, though, that this is another place where the Supreme Court's gradual cutting back on the scope of the Bivens remedy—the civil action against federal agents for violating the Constitution, including the Fourth Amendment—may make the most obvious form of judicial review unavailable. Even if the policy is unconstitutional, as it seems to be, a person who is illegally searched probably can't sue ICE for violating their constitutional rights.

This will seem weird to a lot of people. And it is pretty weird, I think. Back when the Fourth Amendment was enacted, the most fundamental remedy for an unlawful government entry into your home was a civil suit for trespass against the officers. The Fourth Amendment was about whether there was an affirmative defense to liability for trespass, all against the backdrop of preexisting tort liability under trespass and other torts. These days, though, you need a cause of action. And the Supreme Court has basically said that courts shouldn't provide that cause of action—even though, historically, courts provided the trespass tort. It's all kind of a complicated mess, and I'll spare you the details, but the basic idea is that the federal government generally can't be sued for damages for violating the Fourth Amendment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

They are not legal immigrants. There is no specific definition of 'illegal immigrant' but they are included in nearly every count.
When they entered the country, they did not have a visa, but the government let them in anyway. This did not give them legal status, and they were always in limbo subject to government withdrawing its protection.

We could be humane about it, though. If we set up a legal process for them to move through, in an attempt to gain some sort of authorized status, we shouldn't be pulling it out from under their feet.

Immigration enforcement is necessary. How we do it reflects on our morals and character, not theirs.

If it was ten people, as parole is intended, that would be one thing. Biden let in millions.

So if there are millions of people, our government ignoring the Constitution is OK?

DP

There are over 10 million illegal aliens.

I think the Steven Miller plan is to be so phacking cruel that people will just leave.

We are holding people's children hostage to get them to come out of their house when we don't have a warrant to go get them. It's times like this that a little part of me wants to believe in hell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

They are not legal immigrants. There is no specific definition of 'illegal immigrant' but they are included in nearly every count.
When they entered the country, they did not have a visa, but the government let them in anyway. This did not give them legal status, and they were always in limbo subject to government withdrawing its protection.

We could be humane about it, though. If we set up a legal process for them to move through, in an attempt to gain some sort of authorized status, we shouldn't be pulling it out from under their feet.

Immigration enforcement is necessary. How we do it reflects on our morals and character, not theirs.

If it was ten people, as parole is intended, that would be one thing. Biden let in millions.

So if there are millions of people, our government ignoring the Constitution is OK?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Clinton, Biden, and Harris. I have not and would never vote for the modern Republican party.

I do think they are semi-correct on immigration. The majority of immigrants are here illegally and need to be deported. I would be in favor of pausing immigration and ending birthright citizenship.

I do not support backtracking and denaturalizing citizens who went through the process correctly. ICE is also way too violent. There was no need for them to drive that Hmong man around Minneapolis while he was shirtless in the cold, only to find out that he was a legal citizen.

What do you mean “the majority of immigrants are here illegally”? Where do you get that statistic? There are a number of different statuses that migrants can have and most are not illegal.

A lot of them come here to claim "asylum" falsely. If you're lying about why you need to be here, that's not valid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

They are not legal immigrants. There is no specific definition of 'illegal immigrant' but they are included in nearly every count.
When they entered the country, they did not have a visa, but the government let them in anyway. This did not give them legal status, and they were always in limbo subject to government withdrawing its protection.

We could be humane about it, though. If we set up a legal process for them to move through, in an attempt to gain some sort of authorized status, we shouldn't be pulling it out from under their feet.

Immigration enforcement is necessary. How we do it reflects on our morals and character, not theirs.

If it was ten people, as parole is intended, that would be one thing. Biden let in millions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crossing the border is a crime. ICE is just enforcing the law. What’s so hard to understand.

It’s a misdomenor, not worthy of jail or execution.

It is worthy of detainment and deportation, though. Ask the Deporter-in-Chief Obama.

I guess they were just better in Obama's time.

Not these Nazi cos players

Well, it’s not Obama time, and no one cares about your Nazi reference, literally no one.

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Clinton, Biden, and Harris. I have not and would never vote for the modern Republican party.

I do think they are semi-correct on immigration. The majority of immigrants are here illegally and need to be deported. I would be in favor of pausing immigration and ending birthright citizenship.

I do not support backtracking and denaturalizing citizens who went through the process correctly. ICE is also way too violent. There was no need for them to drive that Hmong man around Minneapolis while he was shirtless in the cold, only to find out that he was a legal citizen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crossing the border is a crime. ICE is just enforcing the law. What’s so hard to understand.

It’s a misdomenor, not worthy of jail or execution.

It is worthy of detainment and deportation, though. Ask the Deporter-in-Chief Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Clinton, Biden, and Harris. I have not and would never vote for the modern Republican party.

I do think they are semi-correct on immigration. The majority of immigrants are here illegally and need to be deported. I would be in favor of pausing immigration and ending birthright citizenship.

I do not support backtracking and denaturalizing citizens who went through the process correctly. ICE is also way too violent. There was no need for them to drive that Hmong man around Minneapolis while he was shirtless in the cold, only to find out that he was a legal citizen.

What do you mean “the majority of immigrants are here illegally”? Where do you get that statistic? There are a number of different statuses that migrants can have and most are not illegal.

A lot of them come here to claim "asylum" falsely. If you're lying about why you need to be here, that's not valid.

On what your you basing your claim that the asylum claims are false?

Because it is. You think every person who comes here from South or Central America is in imminent danger of being killed by gangs? They all claim that. And then they freak out at the idea of MPP. Idk about you but if I truly thought I was about to be murdered, I'd be fine staying in Mexico instead of b itching about how I need to come to the US.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We can debate all day long how many illegals there are, but can we agree that those who are illegal, should be deported?

Immigrants are detained appearing in court for routine immigration hearings. What else are they supposed to do? They’re appearing regularly as asked.

You didn’t answer the question, if they’re here illegally should they be deported ? It’s not a trick question.

I did above. Once again, "sure."

Now your turn. Can we agree that ICE going to courthouses where legal immigrants are going through the normal process and yet still being abducted by ICE is proof that they are not only going after illegal immigrants, and that this is bad?

They are not legal immigrants. There is no specific definition of 'illegal immigrant' but they are included in nearly every count.
When they entered the country, they did not have a visa, but the government let them in anyway. This did not give them legal status, and they were always in limbo subject to government withdrawing its protection.

We could be humane about it, though. If we set up a legal process for them to move through, in an attempt to gain some sort of authorized status, we shouldn't be pulling it out from under their feet.

Immigration enforcement is necessary. How we do it reflects on our morals and character, not theirs.

What does it reveal about their character that they made a deliberate choice to break immigration laws?

What does it reveal about your character that you make a deliberate choice to speed on the highway? Nothing, right? If I had a goal of living in the US I would see immigration laws as an arbitrary, artificial impediment the way speeding laws are. Who exactly is harmed by my living in the United States? The entire “oh you broke the law” discussion is so stupid because all of us break these types of laws all the time if it serves our purposes. It’s up to the government to come up with a justifiable and effective enforcement scheme.

Many people who aspire to live in this country follow our immigration laws. A family I know who are legal immigrants/naturalized citizens voted for Trump, because they were ticked off they had to wait to come here, pay fees, go through health screenings, etc. to come here while Biden was letting the whole world enter illegally at our border.

Apparently, you believe we should be a country with open borders and there are no harms to society from mass illegal immigration. Keep pushing these policies and see how you lose to Vance or another Republican you deem unacceptable in 2028.

I also find this argument absurd as an immigrant. You went through the legal process, and you got the benefits of that, which includes the ability to get the benefits of citizenship. You think the people who come here without that protection and could be shipped away at any time got the better deal? Bizarre.

Because you want to give out that protection.

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Clinton, Biden, and Harris. I have not and would never vote for the modern Republican party.

I do think they are semi-correct on immigration. The majority of immigrants are here illegally and need to be deported. I would be in favor of pausing immigration and ending birthright citizenship.

I do not support backtracking and denaturalizing citizens who went through the process correctly. ICE is also way too violent. There was no need for them to drive that Hmong man around Minneapolis while he was shirtless in the cold, only to find out that he was a legal citizen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crossing the border is a crime. ICE is just enforcing the law. What’s so hard to understand.

Crossing the border is not in itself a crime. It is only illegal if the person doesn't get properly processed through BP. If someone does enter illegally, the first offense is usually just a misdemeanor. Every other type of visa irregularity is a civil offense, not a crime. The penalty is deportation.

Most people caught get deported quickly rather than facing full criminal prosecution, but jail time is possible, especially for repeats.

Anonymous wrote:Well, crossing the border is a crime. ICE is just enforcing the law. What’s so hard to understand.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, crossing the border is a crime. ICE is just enforcing the law. What’s so hard to understand.

It’s a misdomenor, not worthy of jail or execution.