Posted in Immigration, Law and order, politics, USA

These are the shocking new powers police will have under Trump’s immigration measures | The Independent

Guadalupe García de Rayos is a felon. Her crime? She used a fake Social Security number years ago to get a job cleaning up after the crowds at Golfland Sunsplash Amusement Park outside Phoenix, Arizona. She was arrested and convicted in 2008 of felony criminal impersonation. Since then, García de Rayos, the mother of two young American-citizen teens, had been informally permitted stay in the US. as long as she checked in regularly with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Source: These are the shocking new powers police will have under Trump’s immigration measures | The Independent

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “These are the shocking new powers police will have under Trump’s immigration measures | The Independent

  1. im not sure how many of these powers are actually new. this part doesnt inspire confidence in the article:

    “Even worse, agents, acting as cop, judge and jury, could round up immigrants who the officers believe committed some undefined act that could warrant charges. This marks a breathtaking expansion of police powers and abandons the hard-and-fast American principle of innocent until proven guilty.”

    look, i lean a little to the left sometimes. if theres a way to have open borders, and national security (in the CONSTITUTIONAL, pre-2001 sense of the phrase) and a financial future, lets open the borders. until then, sending back “undocumented” immigrants is what the government is *supposed* to do.

    no hate for a probably charming and lovely woman who might be really good at her custodial job. and no empty appeal to “thems the rules, it is what it is.” and i suspect the trump administration is putting a slant on all this i dont entirely like– but how much of a change is this really from the actual laws that were already in place? bad reporting for a “good cause” is still bad reporting.

    most importantly, its not “acting and cop, judge and jury” to round up people suspected of a crime. thats exactly what they do, before your case is heard. are they getting a fair hearing? thats actually NOT the cops concern. theyre the delivery guys– its in their job description. the rest, as they say on the cop shows, is “for the judge to decide.”

    and am i in love with the splitting up of families, just because the kids were born here and mom isnt? not at all. but the loophole isnt easy to defend, either. the right and left dont want to be reasonable about this– they will both make outlandish emotional appeals to support their opposite conclusions. no overlooking this worthless bit of non-journalism in the independent, though.

    if i was president? id set up some commission to figure out how to give moms like garcia de rayos a second chance to become a legal citizen. but these unlimited checkins, while being a de facto (but not actually usa) citizen… that couldnt possibly fly forever. “we have a way to become a u.s. citizen– if you get caught 50 times evading our rules, you might have to use it.” im guessing barely half the country is really ok with that.

    Like

    1. Just noting that sharing what I read is not an endorsement of it. Yes, I admit that the article may be inaccurate. I guess I am generally watchful and critical of Trump, particularly his agenda on environmental matters. I try to not get too involved with it, after all, it is on the other side of the world.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. i just tell people trump is a symptom, more than a cause. i kind of hope it stays that way– that he doesnt become more of a cause.

        unless the cause is election reform, because he (along with the other majority party) proves how much we need it.

        Like

      2. He may be a symptom of political apathy or ignorance. I’d say that reform is needed for more than just elections. The current system of parliament in the US, Australia, UK, and other countries, favours a two party system, where parties are adversarial. That needs to change. I think Direct democracy parties and systems such as Online Direct Democracy and Flux are a good step in the right direction to a more collaborative system of politics.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. “He may be a symptom of political apathy or ignorance.”

        yeah– apathy for one party, ignorance for the other. our liberals may have very big hearts when it comes to spending taxpayer money, but they dont hold their own party responsible (or notice, or care at all) when the people they elect lie.

        “The current system of parliament in the US, Australia, UK, and other countries, favours a two party system, where parties are adversarial. ”

        this is much worse in the usa, where we have first-past-the-post. proportional representation would be lovely.

        i have my doubts about direct democracy. what would it do to the constitution?

        our system is elects representatives and is designed to keep things from changing. thats held things together for nearly 250 years.

        of course its coming apart now, and we can all hope for a miracle. it may require one. (i shudder to think what it could be.)

        not entirely throwing our your idea, but i have to say im skeptical.

        Like

      4. “He may be a symptom of political apathy or ignorance.”

        yeah– apathy for one party, ignorance for the other. our liberals may have very big hearts when it comes to spending taxpayer money, but they dont hold their own party responsible (or notice, or care at all) when the people they elect lie.

        “The current system of parliament in the US, Australia, UK, and other countries, favours a two party system, where parties are adversarial. ”

        this is much worse in the usa, where we have first-past-the-post. proportional representation would be lovely.

        i have my doubts about direct democracy. what would it do to the constitution?

        our system is elects representatives and is designed to keep things from changing. thats held things together for nearly 250 years.

        of course its coming apart now, and we can all hope for a miracle. it may require one. (i shudder to think what it could be.)

        Like

      5. The problem is that it is too slow to change to things that change quickly, such as anthropogenic forcing on climate change.

        Yes, first past-the-post is pretty suboptimal. Preferential voting would be better, which is what Australia has. Politicians can be influenced too much by vested interests. The Australian Science Party has interesting (again, I just say interesting, this is not an endorsement as I have not done due diligence to assess the merit of this, although it seems like it has potential at a glance) propositions on how a house of representatives (proportional representation / multi-member seats) and a single national electorate senate could be structured.

        Like

      6. australia is too fascist for my taste. so are we, but imo we have more things in place that slow that down.

        i think we have a pretty great system. as i said, its falling apart. it will be difficult to fix without screwing it up even more. a good start would be bringing the constitution back.

        Like

      7. Changing the rules on funding for elections is certainly important, especially to target limiting large donations, and limiting super PACs. Bernie Sanders campaign shows that a political campaign can be funded with small donations.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s