top | item 46949171

(no title)

medion | 22 days ago

Even with some co-mingling of facts, is 5 months detention still proportionate? That’s the crux of it.

discuss

order

stackskipton|22 days ago

My opinion is probably not but this is ultimately a political conversation.

The article is extremely light on details but fact he doesn't have a Green Card/Lawful Permanent Resident yet would indicate that at some point of his time in United States, he was illegally present, probably for a while.

Sure, he's on path, MAYBE (that's up to immigration courts), to legal status but he's not quite there yet and it's one of those "Are we going to forgive past transgressions?"

nkrisc|21 days ago

> Sure, he's on path, MAYBE (that's up to immigration courts), to legal status but he's not quite there yet and it's one of those "Are we going to forgive past transgressions?"

For a productive member of society? Absolutely, bring him in and let him stay.

There are absolutely some immigrants who should be deported for violent crimes and likewise, but they are a tiny minority of immigrants. So when you set quotas far above that, they start rounding up productive members of society to fill the quotas and ignoring the violent criminals because it’s easier to arrest parents and children.

zarzavat|21 days ago

I know of no other country that locks people up while they process immigration appeals. That's crazy.

Other countries will either summarily deport you and make you resolve your status from outside the country, or let you stay while you appeal and deport you when your appeals are exhausted. Both are sane things to do, this is not.

ryan_j_naughton|22 days ago

> The article is extremely light on details but fact he doesn't have a Green Card/Lawful Permanent Resident yet would indicate that at some point of his time in United States, he was illegally present, probably for a while.

That is absolutely false. I know many people who have lived legally in the USA for many many years with valid visas and have intentionally never pursued a green card. Two people come to mind including one who has over 20 years the US on valid visas -- she intentionally never pursued the green card despite both (a) being married to an American and (b) being legally able to get the green card.

Some of them are now pursuing green cards only because of federal government's immigration enforcement not only going after illegal immigrants or criminals but clearly and intentionally pursing immigrants in general -- even those who are legal and without any criminal history.

rjrjrjrj|21 days ago

> it's one of those "Are we going to forgive past transgressions?"

For ICE enthusiasts, forgiveness is reserved for Presidential candidates.

pavlov|22 days ago

> “at some point of his time in United States, he was illegally present, probably for a while”

How do you conclude that from the facts in the article?

ActorNightly|22 days ago

If someones potential illegal presence justifies ICE to massively overstep any legal due process and break laws, then by definition you are ok if somehow Democrates took over the DHS when they got in power, and used the premise of anti-domestic terrorism to illegally detain any person associated with MAGA for any reason and let them starve/die in prison.