Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Even though they tend to be more conservative than the average US-born Democrat?
Who tends to be more conservative than the average US-born Democrat?
Illegal aliens are on neither side since they cannot vote.
1) Shoplifting doesn't make somebody dangerous
They still shouldn't be here able to steal. Not all criminals are dangerous, but they are still criminals.
It's all about deportation because the vast majority of them do not appear because they know they will get deported.
Them being here illegally should already mandate detention.
States should be able to sue the Federal Government for not doing its job.
I haven't heard any yet.
Unauthorized presence is not by itself a crime.
If by "vast majority" you mean 17% then sure.
Due process applies to non-citizens just as much as citizens. You can't simply lock up somebody while a court case is pending against them.
That goes against the principles of both federalism and separation of powers. Except where the Constitution specifically states otherwise the federal government and state governments are separate sovereigns, and in the few cases where federal and state interests overlap, federal law is supreme. As for the separation of powers, inherent to the power of executing the law is the discretion of when and how to do so. Giving courts the ability to force certain actions takes away that discretion. And while you support the idea now, it sets a dangerous precedent.
I can see by your selective wording that you are referring to overstays - and they commit all kinds of fraud to continue to live and work in the US - so if any of them are caught shoplifting - they should most definitely be detained and deported.
What does this figure refer to and where did you get it?
Lots of people are locked up while pending trial.
How so?
Why can't a border State sue the Federal Government for not enforcing its own Immigration Laws?
People can sue police officers for not enforcing the law - so why can't States sue the Feds?
Courts force people to keep and enforce laws all the time.
What "dangerous precedent"?
That's not true. It's way way more than 17%. Where do you even get that figure
While this is separate from the question of whether this law is a good idea or not, in the context of cutting the bloated federal budget... detaining people costs money. Increasing the number of detainees will require additional government spending. This law is an 'unfunded mandate'.
If we stopped paying for illegals food and housing - and all the resources they siphon through fraud - we can pay for their deportation.
You would hear that from me - yes.
Trump wants to increase the number of detention centers, so we will provide even more food and housing rather than stopping it.
This is a good thing, though, as farmers (having their wares subject to retaliatory-tariffs, effectively shutting them out of foreign markets), can sell to good ol’ Uncle Sam to feed the millions!
That's because there's a need to house these people briefly until ICE can show them the door. Trump is not interested in housing them indefinitely, as you seem to be claiming.
Is there to be no “due-process”?
Detention centers are not homes - they will be leaving them shortly for their countries of origin.
Some people just can't take a win without being negative. The bill passed with bipartisan support. It's a major win for Republicans
If this will all be so efficient, why is Trump looking to increase the detention space? I already know why the prison-industrial complex is licking its lips at the idea.
