Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Silvanus]

They don't have visas.

Which is not required for legal temporary residence.

You really do just have zero idea how the residency laws work in your own country. The fact remains: these people arrived legally, lived legally, followed all the rules of the US. Committed no infraction or offence. And now they are incarcerated in a max security prison. And you couldn't care less; your concern over how "a crime must be proven" applies to the multi millionaire President, but not to ordinary people.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Which is not required for legal temporary residence.

You really do just have zero idea how the residency laws work in your own country. The fact remains: these people arrived legally, lived legally, followed all the rules of the US. Committed no infraction or offence. And now they are incarcerated in a max security prison. And you couldn't care less; your concern over how "a crime must be proven" applies to the multi millionaire President, but not to ordinary people.

AGAIN, THEY DON'T HAVE A VISA...

There is no such thing as a legal temporary resident that doesn't have a visa.

 

[Silvanus]

AGAIN, THEY DON'T HAVE A VISA...

There is no such thing as a legal temporary resident that doesn't have a visa.

Temporary Protected Status | USCIS

Temporary Protected Status

www.uscis.gov

"During a designated period, individuals who are TPS beneficiaries or who are found preliminarily eligible for TPS upon initial review of their cases (prima facie eligible): Are not removable from the United States [...]"

Asylum | USCIS

www.uscis.gov

" You may only file this application if you are physically present in the United States, and you are not a U.S. citizen. [...] If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States."

These are categories of people eligible to temporarily, legally be in the United States, who do not hold visas. You can repeat "they didn't have a visa" as much as you want, but it's simply not in dispute that they were in the US legally. It's not even the grounds of the government's decision to deport them.

 

[Trunkage]

You seem to be under the impression that if someone enters legally and/or doesn't commit a crime they can't be deported. That is not the case. If you don't have a legal status in the US, you can be removed from the US. Using CBP One means you applied for asylum and were allowed in. If your asylum claim is denied, and the place you came from isn't itself a death sentence, you leave. If you don't leave on your own, you get deported. A person can enter legally, commit no crimes, and be deported.

Well, thanks for masks off approach

As you have pointed out, it has never been about Illegal Immigrants

Edit: Also, can you explain to me why they were sent to prison when they haven't broken any laws in the US? You're talking about deporting. This is prison

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

As you have pointed out, it has never been about Illegal Immigrants

Nope. It's just about finding excuses to get rid of anyone who isn't lily-white.

 

[Trunkage]

Temporary Protected Status | USCIS

Temporary Protected Status

www.uscis.gov

"During a designated period, individuals who are TPS beneficiaries or who are found preliminarily eligible for TPS upon initial review of their cases (prima facie eligible): Are not removable from the United States [...]"

Asylum | USCIS

www.uscis.gov

" You may only file this application if you are physically present in the United States, and you are not a U.S. citizen. [...] If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States."

These are categories of people eligible to temporarily, legally be in the United States, who do not hold visas. You can repeat "they didn't have a visa" as much as you want, but it's simply not in dispute that they were in the US legally. It's not even the grounds of the government's decision to deport them.

Yeah, let's give Pheonix claim that it is a status, not a visa.... that does not mean your same points are valid. IHe's just been playing a semantics game the whole time

Now, Trump goes out of his way to not follow the law. He has broken the 1st, 4th and 5th amendment right here. It's not about logic. It's about some anti-immigrant KPI Trump made up because he didn't beat Obama deporting people last time. Laws and constitutions are not needed

 

[Trunkage]

Nope. It's just about finding excuses to get rid of anyone who isn't lily-white.

Dude, its commies and wokists too

It's not just racism. It's thought crimes

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

AGAIN, THEY DON'T HAVE A VISA...

There is no such thing as a legal temporary resident that doesn't have a visa.

A visa is not a requirement for legal resident status.

Examples:

SPECIAL IMMIGRANT JUVENILE (SIJ) STATUS
A person under the age of 21 may apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile status if he or she meets the following conditions:

- There is a finding by a court in the United States with juvenile jurisdiction that: (1) the juvenile is dependent on the court or placed in the custody of an agency or department of a state or an individual or entity appointed by the state or a juvenile court located in the United States; and (2) reunification of the juvenile with one or both parents is not viable due to abuse, neglect, or abandonment or a similar basis under state law; and
- There is an administrative or judicial finding that it would not be in the best interest of the juvenile to be returned to the juvenile’s or parent’s previous country of nationality or country of last habitual residence.

The dependency case must not have been filed as a sham solely to obtain special immigrant juvenile status. The dependency court must retain jurisdiction until the juvenile is granted SIJ status, subject to exceptions for age related cases and certain other circumstances.

REFUGEE/ASYLEE
The following are the basic conditions for refugee/asylee status:

- The individual has a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion if returned to the home country or country of last permanent residence.
- The individual is not a security risk or perpetrator of persecution.
- The individual has not committed certain categories of crimes.

A person in the United Sates must generally apply for asylum within one year of admission. Once admitted the alien will be allowed to stay in the U.S. as long as expulsion from the U.S. would put them at a safety risk, unless he or she meets one of the grounds for loss of status listed below.

- The individual is able to safely return to the home country or move to another country.
- The individual no longer meets the requirements of eligibility.
- The individual has participated in persecution.
- The individual presents a security risk.
- The individual has been convicted of a serious crime, including conviction of an aggravated felony.

A spouse or child of an alien admitted as a refugee/asylee is admissible if “accompanying or following to join” the refugee/asylee.
- The spouse or child cannot precede the refugee/asylee.

An alien granted refugee/asylee status may apply for LPR status after one year.
- The alien must be admissible, or
- The Attorney General may waive the grounds for inadmissibility, with some exceptions, for humanitarian purposes or to preserve family unity.

VICTIM OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING
There is actually a visa for victims of human trafficking, called a T Visa, however in the time between when a human trafficking victim has been found, and when they are issued a T visa they are still a lawful resident of the US provided that they are eligible for the visa based on the following criteria:

- Is or has been the victim of a severe form of trafficking of persons;
- Is physically present in the United States or its territories as a result of the trafficking;
- Is complying with any reasonable request for assistance in the investigation or prosecution of traffickers, or is unable to comply with such request due to physical or psychological trauma, or is under 18 years of age; and
- Would suffer extreme hardship involving unusual and severe harm upon removal.

CRIME VICTIM OR WITNESS
This is another case where there is actually a specific visa for this class of people, called a U Visa, which is available to individuals who are in the U.S. as undocumented aliens, but in the time between when these people are located and when they are issued the U visa they would be considered lawful residents if they meet the following requirements for the visa.

- The individual has suffered severe physical or mental abuse as a result of being a victim of criminal activity.
- The individual has been, is being, or is likely to be of help to a Federal, state, or local investigation of the criminal activity causing the abuse.
- The individual has certification from a Federal, state, or local judge, prosecutor, law enforcement officer, or other justice system official involved in prosecuting the criminal activity that he or she has been, is being, or is likely to be of help to a Federal, state, or local investigation of the criminal activity causing the abuse.

The U visa applies to the following specified list of crimes: rape; torture; trafficking; incest; domestic violence; sexual assault; abusive sexual contact; prostitution; sexual exploitation; female genital mutilation; being held hostage; peonage; involuntary servitude; slave trade; kidnapping; abduction; unlawful criminal restraint; false imprisonment; blackmail; extortion; manslaughter; murder; felonious assault; witness tampering; obstruction of justice; perjury; or attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit any of the above mentioned crime.

 

[tstorm823]

There are specific grounds outlined for the removal of a noncitizen living legally in the US.

One of the grounds for removal is having neither permanent residency nor a current visa. People on temporary protected status have neither, and are subject to deportation for as little justification as "eh, we changed our mind".

You are defending a scenario in which people followed the rules as laid out, committed no infractions or offences, and wound up in one of the world's most brutal prisons.

Ultimately, yes. And is that fair? Ultimately no. But life is full of scenarios where people follow all the rules and get screwed. Especially when you are making broad policies, it's not possible to be fair. Every individual has unique circumstances, and would need unique treatment to reach perfectly fair outcomes, and attempting to do so for every person is a terrible idea. If you go with a policy like "some gang members from Venezuela have crown tattoos, so lets just deport every Venezuelan in immigration detention with a crown tattoo", you're liable to end up tossing non-gang members caught in a broad net, but you also finally start making some headway cleaning up the disaster that is the US immigration system, which helps most of the migrants who aren't gang members.

Also, can you explain to me why they were sent to prison when they haven't broken any laws in the US? You're talking about deporting. This is prison

Out of suspicion of being gang members. That prison was created for that specific purpose.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

One of the grounds for removal is having neither permanent residency nor a current visa. People on temporary protected status have neither, and are subject to deportation for as little justification as "eh, we changed our mind".

Yes and no. Their legal status can be rescinded if they no longer meet the criteria that made them qualified for that status in the first place. For example, in the case of asylum seekers, one of the determinations that would allow their status to be rescinded is if they have been deemed to be "a danger to the security of the United States," which is the basis that the Trump administration is trying to argue. The problem is that they have presented no evidence for their claims. There's a pretty low barrier that needs to be met to deport someone (it's much lower than in a criminal case), but there is still a barrier, and the Trump administration is either too lazy, too inept, or just wants to break the law specifically to push boundaries and see what happens, so they haven't bothered to even attempt to meet that low standard.

And again, these aren't just "deportations." These people aren't being sent back to their home countries, these people are being sent to a foreign prison, and there hasn't been any kind of determination on whether the executive branch can legally even do that, much less do that without any form of due process.

Ultimately, yes. And is that fair? Ultimately no. But life is full of scenarios where people follow all the rules and get screwed. Especially when you are making broad policies, it's not possible to be fair. Every individual has unique circumstances, and would need unique treatment to reach perfectly fair outcomes, and attempting to do so for every person is a terrible idea. If you go with a policy like "some gang members from Venezuela have crown tattoos, so lets just deport every Venezuelan in immigration detention with a crown tattoo", you're liable to end up tossing non-gang members caught in a broad net, but you also finally start making some headway cleaning up the disaster that is the US immigration system, which helps most of the migrants who aren't gang members.

"Life isn't fair so fuck these innocent people. We should let them rot in prison just because we can" is a psychotic world view.

And there's no reason why we can't provide these people with due process to weed out actual dangerous gang members from innocent people. You don't want to, and you've just decided that's a bad idea, without actually giving any reason as to why it's a bad idea.

Out of suspicion of being gang members. That prison was created for that specific purpose.

The FOREIGN prison that we don't control, and on suspicion of being gang members with NO EVIDENCE.

‘60 Minutes’ Calls BS on Trump’s Reason for Dystopian Deportations

The president said “horrible criminals” were transported to El Salvador—but records suggest otherwise.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[thebobmaster]

Having a crown tattoo serves as sufficient evidence of gang activity? Welp, have to toss everyone wearing a red shirt into prison. I mean, sure, you will get some non-Bloods, but that's their problem. At least this way, we can finally start making some headway cleaning up the disaster that is gang activity in the US, which helps most people who aren't gang-bangers.

 

[Satinavian]

Having a crown tattoo serves as sufficient evidence of gang activity? Welp, have to toss everyone wearing a red shirt into prison. I mean, sure, you will get some non-Bloods, but that's their problem. At least this way, we can finally start making some headway cleaning up the disaster that is gang activity in the US, which helps most people who aren't gang-bangers.

We already know they went after Venezuelans with any tattoos, not just crown tattoos. We have cases of football club tattoos, LGBT tattoos and so on.
Not that we can be sure all the imprisoned have tattoos or are Venezuelans and El Salvadorians.

We also have not yet seen a confirmed case of a single person of them actually being a gang member. And as the government would proudly parade any such case, they probably are not sure either of any of them.

Also none of the people put into the prison has a sentence. They are being in there basically for life or until the US doesn't want to pay anymore. Even if they were gang members that is not the kind of crime warranting a life sentence.

--------------------

Currently, if you don't have US citizenship, you should leave the states. Not just illegal immigrants risk being imprisoned, legal immigrants are as well, though not yet sent to El Salvador as far as we know. The US can revoke Green cards and Visas whenever it wants and even without informing the person in question. And suddenly you are an illegal immigrant they can round up to make their quota.

There is a reason so many countries issue travel warnings regarding the US nowadays.

 

[Agema]

"Life isn't fair so fuck these innocent people. We should let them rot in prison just because we can" is a psychotic world view.

I think what's going on here is a sort of "business" mentality (although as many have noted, that mentality is psychotic).

Laws, human rights and all that jazz are really just a form of suffocating regulation or "red tape", getting in the way of the USA Ltd. doing what it wants. USA Ltd. therefore needs to "move fast and break things". Of course, the problem is that the state isn't just answerable to the law as corporations are, it's also responsible for overseeing it. Therefore, there's a very particular problem when the state has contempt for the law.

 

[Silvanus]

One of the grounds for removal is having neither permanent residency nor a current visa. People on temporary protected status have neither, and are subject to deportation for as little justification as "eh, we changed our mind".

"During a designated period, individuals who are TPS beneficiaries or who are found preliminarily eligible for TPS upon initial review of their cases (prima facie eligible): Are not removable from the United States [...]"

^ per the gov.

Ultimately, yes. And is that fair? Ultimately no. But life is full of scenarios where people follow all the rules and get screwed. Especially when you are making broad policies, it's not possible to be fair. Every individual has unique circumstances, and would need unique treatment to reach perfectly fair outcomes, and attempting to do so for every person is a terrible idea.

Oh, this is some prime bullshit. Nobody is asking for 100%, flawless, perpetual fairness; merely that extreme and arbitrary cruelty and unfairness be avoided. This deportation was not a result of administrative error resulting from broad policy. ICE drew up these guidelines for identifying "gang membership" and included completely innocuous identifiers. The administration decided to bypass due process, & went out of its way to rush the deportations through before courts could stop them. This was not collateral or in error; it was targeted. And then they fucking gloated about it.

 

[tstorm823]

And there's no reason why we can't provide these people with due process to weed out actual dangerous gang members from innocent people.

There's a really obvious reason why we can't do that: the last administration had like 10 million border crossings and offered temporary protected status to like 2 million people. It'd be like saying we need to carefully vet the entire population of Arizona in 4 years before Democrats reverse course. And the more care we give, the more we say "anyone who isn't in a gang is cool by us", the more we encourage people to come, to pay coyotes to get them here, to abandon their home countries. Millions of people shifting around creates instability in both their origin and destination, which is not great for either place. So I feel bad for the guy wrongly caught up in this, and I hope they get him out of that prison, but these are cautionary tales that are going to make the entire hemisphere better.

"During a designated period, individuals who are TPS beneficiaries or who are found preliminarily eligible for TPS upon initial review of their cases (prima facie eligible): Are not removable from the United States [...]"

^ per the gov.

Ok, now tell me what that "designated period" is.

This deportation was not a result of administrative error resulting from broad policy. ICE drew up these guidelines for identifying "gang membership" and included completely innocuous identifiers. The administration decided to bypass due process, & went out of its way to rush the deportations through before courts could stop them. This was not collateral or in error; it was targeted.

This seems an illogical conclusion to me. You think they are specifically targeting non-criminals? Not just involving some, but specifically targeting them? Why?

 

[tstorm823]

Having a crown tattoo serves as sufficient evidence of gang activity?

While also being a Venezuelan national in US immigration detention is a pretty big qualifier.

 

[Silvanus]

Ok, now tell me what that "designated period" is.

Presumably, it refers to the period during which a country holds TPS status. Venezuela still does.

This seems an illogical conclusion to me. You think they are specifically targeting non-criminals? Not just involving some, but specifically targeting them? Why?

That's not what I said. I said it was targeted and intentional. Presumably it was targeted at Venezuelan asylum seekers and TPS beneficiaries because the administration believes Venezuelans shouldn't be eligible.

It may have also been targeted at people who used CBP One because Biden introduced it, and Trump seems to derive pleasure from dismantling things Obama and Biden did.

The main point, though, is that this wasn't in error. You characterised it as merely a byproduct of broad policy. But this wasn't broad policy: it was a specific set of three flights rushed through before courts could stop them, to avoid due process; with bullshit guidelines introduced to allow non-gang-members to be swept up on flimsy grounds. They made a concerted effort to avoid accuracy, oversight, and due process.

 

[tstorm823]

That's not what I said. I said it was targeted and intentional. Presumably it was targeted at Venezuelan asylum seekers and TPS beneficiaries because the administration believes Venezuelans shouldn't be eligible.

It may have also been targeted at people who used CBP One because Biden introduced it, and Trump seems to derive pleasure from dismantling things Obama and Biden did.

The main point, though, is that this wasn't in error. You characterised it as merely a byproduct of broad policy. But this wasn't broad policy: it was a specific set of three flights rushed through before courts could stop them, to avoid due process; with bullshit guidelines introduced to allow non-gang-members to be swept up on flimsy grounds. They made a concerted effort to avoid accuracy, oversight, and due process.

"I know they did it for specific, malicious reasons, I just don't know what they are" is one hell of a delusion.

 

[Agema]

"I know they did it for specific, malicious reasons, I just don't know what they are" is one hell of a delusion.

This is just another straw man.

There is no greater indication of how little reason you have to offer here than your refusal to engage with Silvanus's points honestly.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Temporary Protected Status | USCIS

Temporary Protected Status

www.uscis.gov

"During a designated period, individuals who are TPS beneficiaries or who are found preliminarily eligible for TPS upon initial review of their cases (prima facie eligible): Are not removable from the United States [...]"

Asylum | USCIS

www.uscis.gov

" You may only file this application if you are physically present in the United States, and you are not a U.S. citizen. [...] If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States."

These are categories of people eligible to temporarily, legally be in the United States, who do not hold visas. You can repeat "they didn't have a visa" as much as you want, but it's simply not in dispute that they were in the US legally. It's not even the grounds of the government's decision to deport them.

Yeah, let's give Pheonix claim that it is a status, not a visa.... that does not mean your same points are valid. IHe's just been playing a semantics game the whole time

Now, Trump goes out of his way to not follow the law. He has broken the 1st, 4th and 5th amendment right here. It's not about logic. It's about some anti-immigrant KPI Trump made up because he didn't beat Obama deporting people last time. Laws and constitutions are not needed

A visa is not a requirement for legal resident status.

Examples:

SPECIAL IMMIGRANT JUVENILE (SIJ) STATUS
A person under the age of 21 may apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile status if he or she meets the following conditions:

- There is a finding by a court in the United States with juvenile jurisdiction that: (1) the juvenile is dependent on the court or placed in the custody of an agency or department of a state or an individual or entity appointed by the state or a juvenile court located in the United States; and (2) reunification of the juvenile with one or both parents is not viable due to abuse, neglect, or abandonment or a similar basis under state law; and
- There is an administrative or judicial finding that it would not be in the best interest of the juvenile to be returned to the juvenile’s or parent’s previous country of nationality or country of last habitual residence.

The dependency case must not have been filed as a sham solely to obtain special immigrant juvenile status. The dependency court must retain jurisdiction until the juvenile is granted SIJ status, subject to exceptions for age related cases and certain other circumstances.

REFUGEE/ASYLEE
The following are the basic conditions for refugee/asylee status:

- The individual has a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion if returned to the home country or country of last permanent residence.
- The individual is not a security risk or perpetrator of persecution.
- The individual has not committed certain categories of crimes.

A person in the United Sates must generally apply for asylum within one year of admission. Once admitted the alien will be allowed to stay in the U.S. as long as expulsion from the U.S. would put them at a safety risk, unless he or she meets one of the grounds for loss of status listed below.

- The individual is able to safely return to the home country or move to another country.
- The individual no longer meets the requirements of eligibility.
- The individual has participated in persecution.
- The individual presents a security risk.
- The individual has been convicted of a serious crime, including conviction of an aggravated felony.

A spouse or child of an alien admitted as a refugee/asylee is admissible if “accompanying or following to join” the refugee/asylee.
- The spouse or child cannot precede the refugee/asylee.

An alien granted refugee/asylee status may apply for LPR status after one year.
- The alien must be admissible, or
- The Attorney General may waive the grounds for inadmissibility, with some exceptions, for humanitarian purposes or to preserve family unity.

VICTIM OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING
There is actually a visa for victims of human trafficking, called a T Visa, however in the time between when a human trafficking victim has been found, and when they are issued a T visa they are still a lawful resident of the US provided that they are eligible for the visa based on the following criteria:

- Is or has been the victim of a severe form of trafficking of persons;
- Is physically present in the United States or its territories as a result of the trafficking;
- Is complying with any reasonable request for assistance in the investigation or prosecution of traffickers, or is unable to comply with such request due to physical or psychological trauma, or is under 18 years of age; and
- Would suffer extreme hardship involving unusual and severe harm upon removal.

CRIME VICTIM OR WITNESS
This is another case where there is actually a specific visa for this class of people, called a U Visa, which is available to individuals who are in the U.S. as undocumented aliens, but in the time between when these people are located and when they are issued the U visa they would be considered lawful residents if they meet the following requirements for the visa.

- The individual has suffered severe physical or mental abuse as a result of being a victim of criminal activity.
- The individual has been, is being, or is likely to be of help to a Federal, state, or local investigation of the criminal activity causing the abuse.
- The individual has certification from a Federal, state, or local judge, prosecutor, law enforcement officer, or other justice system official involved in prosecuting the criminal activity that he or she has been, is being, or is likely to be of help to a Federal, state, or local investigation of the criminal activity causing the abuse.

The U visa applies to the following specified list of crimes: rape; torture; trafficking; incest; domestic violence; sexual assault; abusive sexual contact; prostitution; sexual exploitation; female genital mutilation; being held hostage; peonage; involuntary servitude; slave trade; kidnapping; abduction; unlawful criminal restraint; false imprisonment; blackmail; extortion; manslaughter; murder; felonious assault; witness tampering; obstruction of justice; perjury; or attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit any of the above mentioned crime.

So where's the story that these people are protected immigrants anywhere in a news story?

Here's a story about one guy being deported to El Salvador that was a mistake as he just couldn't be deported there vs he couldn't be deported at all. And the media's framing is very misleading because years ago in a court of law, the guy was already shown and accepted to be a gang member. He had due process and still shown to be a gang member.