Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D) Introduces Bill: Border Patrol+ICE Must Document Every Stop

[Deleted member 457759]

Holy hell, you really decided to go full throttle with this thread's squabbling over misspellings. This is an almost impressively terrible butchering.

Anyways, regardless of attempts toward slowing down ICE, it is balancing against that consideration a very real concern about abuse of discretion, lack of accountability, and trampling of constitutional rights. I did some immigration law work years ago, and the unfettered power given to ICE agents and unelected government officials is truly scary, especially now that Trump is politicizing immigration judges to an extent unheard of in previous administrations.

Illegal immigrants have constitutional rights?

 

[Trotsky]

Illegal immigrants have constitutional rights?

(A) yes

(B) not every citizen who gets or could be molested by ICE is an undocumented immigrant. Plenty are citizens and LPR's

 

[Deleted member 457759]

(A) yes

(B) not every citizen who gets or could be molested by ICE is an undocumented immigrant. Plenty are citizens and LPR's

Undocumented immigrants are citizens? How does B qualify A? I'm not talking about legal immigrants being detained by ICE, if that's happening it's wrong.

Are you saying that illegal immigrants specifically have constitutional rights?

 

[Quequeg]

The border patrol is out of control, there was a story a while back where they set up a roadblock 70 miles or so from the Canadian border and unconstitutionally searched the people they stopped.

 

[Seano]

Undocumented immigrants are citizens? How does B qualify A? I'm not talking about legal immigrants being detained by ICE, if that's happening it's wrong.

Are you saying that illegal immigrants specifically have constitutional rights?

You're both half right. They do have some rights but not the same rights as a citizen.
http://www.cultureoflife.org/2018/01/16/illegal-immigrants-constitutional-rights/

 

[Trotsky]

Undocumented immigrants are citizens? How does B qualify A? I'm not talking about legal immigrants being detained by ICE, if that's happening it's wrong.

Yes, this does happen fairly often, but to what extent we do not know. Hence, bills like this. Just look at Joe Arpaio's conduct: and he wasn't even tasked with immigration control.

Are you saying that illegal immigrants specifically have constitutional rights?

Yes, albeit limited ones

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Yes, this does happen fairly often, but to what extent we do not know. Hence, bills like this. Just look at Joe Arpaio's conduct: and he wasn't even tasked with immigration control.



Yes, albeit limited ones

Is there tangible evidence this occurs more than a few anecdotes? A source like that could end this thread.

 

[JamesRussler]

k

 

[waiguoren]

I am baffled that these people think illegal aliens need more protection under our laws. And they wonder why Trump won. Personally, I'd favor immediate deportation, with mandatory executions for anyone caught more than once.

Mandatory executions? Nah, that's far too extreme for me.

Also, I'm interested in protecting civil rights here, but it has to be balanced with allowing ICE/CBP to do their jobs unfettered.

 

[Jack V Savage]

No. It seems you missed the point. IYou appear to be unaware of Gillibrand's history on the immigration issue. As a member of the House, her voting record aligned closely with the views of Jeff Sessions and other immigration hardliners---for example, she voted to defund sanctuary cities, to refuse drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, and for the SAVE Act.

As soon as she ran for the Senate in New York she flipped to the other side. She knows she will be targeted by the other Democrats in the upcoming primary. It is reasonable to suspect that she is trying to preempt the opposition and secure a talking point for the upcoming debates.

And again, I did not assume that the bill will be badly written. I do predict that reasonable opposition to the bill will cause it to fail to pass, that Gillibrand knows this, and that her primary motivation for proposing the bill is political considerations related to the facts outlined in the previous paragraph.

So Gillibrand's history of being a strong supporter of a tight border means ... her civil-rights support is a front for her secret plan to undermine border security? And that's a reasonable suspicion IYO. And you make no assumptions about the bill, but you say repeatedly that it shouldn't be judged on the merits of the ideas discussed because the bill will probably be bad, and it will be defeated by reasonable opposition.

I disagree with your assumptions and with your high regard for the reasoning skills of the majority of Congress.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

I like the idea as long as its polished. If somebody is being detained or specifically questioned then I support this. If their vehicle gets stopped and they are a sort of "collateral damage" then a report shouldn't have to be made.

Maybe make it a single report per event. This ensures documentation without being an unreasonable burden

 

[Jack V Savage]

Also, I'm interested in protecting civil rights here, but it has to be balanced with allowing ICE/CBP to do their jobs unfettered.

Do you recognize any tension between your belief that law enforcement should be allowed to do their job unfettered and your position on the special counsel? Or does tribalism (and how you feel about the suspects) outweigh any principle?

You also didn't answer if you think it's good that law enforcement pried into the home of a suspected non-violent offender with guns drawn and pointed at children (who, NB, were not suspects) while refusing to show a legal right to enter.

 

[Kframe]

Excellent idea. It's the sort of thing I would expect from conservatives, since they would ostensibly desire lots of data in order to measure a program's effectiveness, and it's a check against potential violations of constitutional rights. It's a shame that conservatives have burdened progressives with their traditional duties like this.

Ignoring your partisan attacks, I fail to see why the Democrat left would put forth this law that has no chance of passing and even if it did, wouldn't help them in the first place.

Also, I fail to see how more paper work is a conservative thing.

 

[oldshadow]

Simple if you can get open borders then bury them in paper work to slow down those guarding the border as much as possible.

I have no problem with making sure they document interactions but only to a degree that makes sense.

 

[oldshadow]

The border patrol is out of control, there was a story a while back where they set up a roadblock 70 miles or so from the Canadian border and unconstitutionally searched the people they stopped.

Read.

They were legal.

https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

 

[Quequeg]

Read.

They were legal.

https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

Terrible law, in any event the court in Plymouth NH disagreed, look it up

 

[spamking]

Excellent idea. It's the sort of thing I would expect from conservatives, since they would ostensibly desire lots of data in order to measure a program's effectiveness, and it's a check against potential violations of constitutional rights. It's a shame that conservatives have burdened progressives with their traditional duties like this.

Isn't there already data out there to support the effectiveness of ICE/Border Patrol?

And I'm actually sort of surprised that with Trump in office folks haven't tried to get all of those decisions granting illegals constitutional rights (well, except for voting, gun ownership and some federal employment) overturned.

 

[spamking]

They dont already have to do this...?

Every stop/interaction? Doubtful . . . but those that result in folks being detained until deported? Most likely.

 

[Fawlty]

Ignoring your partisan attacks, I fail to see why the Democrat left would put forth this law that has no chance of passing and even if it did, wouldn't help them in the first place.

Also, I fail to see how more paper work is a conservative thing.

It's obvious why Democrats would be interested in increased accountability along with increased enforcement.

The conservative political party should be all about crunching the numbers to see if programs are delivering as promised. Especially since we're spending more money and hiring more agents.

This seems like something both parties should want.

 

[spamking]

if they question 40 people, they do paperwork for 40 people. i have no problem with it.

Of course you don't . . . you aren't the one doing it.

I don't care if they're just talking to someone and don't need to see a write-up for each one unless they're taken into custody.