357

History confirms Republicans rejected a once-in-a-lifetime immigration opportunity (thehill.com)

submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

...

If the goal was to entice undeserving applicants, you couldn’t design a worse combination of policy and resources. In comparison, the bipartisan proposal is designed to deny more cases at the initial stage and get final decisions on all cases in a matter of months.

For immigration hardliners, the moment of leverage had finally arrived: More enforcement without amnesty. However, instead of seizing this likely once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, House Republicans and former President Trump argued that the bill was not the hardliner wish list they preferred and successfully convinced most Senate Republicans to block the bill.

This one-sided deal that favors Republican enforcement policy is unlikely to ever reappear. There has never been another moment this century when Democrats agreed to enforcement legislation without meaningful legalization provisions. Nor have they ever agreed to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to anywhere near the level needed to locate and deport millions of individuals already in the country illegally.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Razor-wire fences, and sanctuary cities are both terrible policies, that show the total callousness of the American political system.

The two are not at all equivalent.

Erecting barriers like razor wire are meant to dehumanizing the people who try to get across. We are literally treating them like cattle. Especially when we decide to get rid of the problem by shipping them somewhere else.

There are a bunch of different type of Santctuary City policies, but they all boil down to local law enforcement and municipal employees deliberately not asking about the immigration status of people when applying for services or seeking police protection. Which kind of makes sense, if your goal is to uphold human dignity. If someone who is living here gets their stuff stolen, should they feel afraid to go to the cops because they might be deported? What about those folks who came here as infants and had no clue they weren't citizens? Do they need to present their papers before interacting with the local government?

We have different layers of government in this country for a reason. It is perfectly acceptable for a locality to say "It's not our job to police immigration status, the Federal Government has enough resources to do that and we won't do their job for them".

One policy affirms basic humanity, while the other removes it from a class of people based on where they were born.

this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024

357 points (98.6% liked)

politics

31007 readers

2249 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News