All Things Russia & Ukraine

[PizzaSnake]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

[old salt]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

[PizzaSnake]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Sounds chaotic: https://iowaculture.gov/history/educati ... ato-famine

[Typical Lax Dad]

Americans encouraged relatively free and open immigration during the 18th and early 19th centuries, and rarely questioned that policy until the late 1800s. After certain states passed immigration laws following the Civil War, the Supreme Court in 1875 declared regulation of immigration a federal responsibility. Thus, as the number of immigrants rose in the 1880s and economic conditions in some areas worsened, Congress began to pass immigration legislation.

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor laws of 1885 and 1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States. The general Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics, convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.

These national immigration laws created the need for new federal enforcement authorities. In the 1880s, state boards or commissions enforced immigration law with direction from U.S. Treasury Department officials. At the Federal level, U.S. Customs Collectors at each port of entry collected the head tax from immigrants while "Chinese Inspectors" enforced the Chinese Exclusion Act

[Kismet]

Americans encouraged relatively free and open immigration during the 18th and early 19th centuries, and rarely questioned that policy until the late 1800s. After certain states passed immigration laws following the Civil War, the Supreme Court in 1875 declared regulation of immigration a federal responsibility. Thus, as the number of immigrants rose in the 1880s and economic conditions in some areas worsened, Congress began to pass immigration legislation.

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor laws of 1885 and 1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States. The general Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics, convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.

These national immigration laws created the need for new federal enforcement authorities. In the 1880s, state boards or commissions enforced immigration law with direction from U.S. Treasury Department officials. At the Federal level, U.S. Customs Collectors at each port of entry collected the head tax from immigrants while "Chinese Inspectors" enforced the Chinese Exclusion Act

It didn't stop there. Congress passed a restrictive immigration law in 1917 which implemented a literacy test that required immigrants over 16 years old to demonstrate basic reading comprehension in any language. It also increased the tax paid by new immigrants upon arrival and allowed immigration officials to exercise more discretion in making decisions over whom to exclude. Finally, the Act excluded from entry anyone born in a geographically defined “Asiatic Barred Zone” except for Japanese and Filipinos.

Then there was the Immigration Act of 1924 (The Johnson-Reed Act) which limited the number of immigrants allowed entry into the United States through a national origins quota. The quota provided immigration visas to two percent of the total number of people of each nationality in the United States as of the 1890 national census. It completely excluded immigrants from Asia. In all of its parts, the most basic purpose of the 1924 Immigration Act was to preserve the ideal of U.S. homogeneity. Congress revised the Act in 1952 and it wasn't until 1965 when Congress passed The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also known as the Hart–Celler Act, a federal law passed by the 89th United States Congress and signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The law abolished the National Origins Formula, which had been the basis of U.S. immigration policy since the 1920s and removed de facto discrimination against Southern and Eastern Europeans, Asians, as well as other non-Western and Northern European ethnic groups from American immigration policy.

This country has been at this for a very long time.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Americans encouraged relatively free and open immigration during the 18th and early 19th centuries, and rarely questioned that policy until the late 1800s. After certain states passed immigration laws following the Civil War, the Supreme Court in 1875 declared regulation of immigration a federal responsibility. Thus, as the number of immigrants rose in the 1880s and economic conditions in some areas worsened, Congress began to pass immigration legislation.

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and Alien Contract Labor laws of 1885 and 1887 prohibited certain laborers from immigrating to the United States. The general Immigration Act of 1882 levied a head tax of fifty cents on each immigrant and blocked (or excluded) the entry of idiots, lunatics, convicts, and persons likely to become a public charge.

These national immigration laws created the need for new federal enforcement authorities. In the 1880s, state boards or commissions enforced immigration law with direction from U.S. Treasury Department officials. At the Federal level, U.S. Customs Collectors at each port of entry collected the head tax from immigrants while "Chinese Inspectors" enforced the Chinese Exclusion Act

It didn't stop there. Congress passed a restrictive immigration law in 1917 which implemented a literacy test that required immigrants over 16 years old to demonstrate basic reading comprehension in any language. It also increased the tax paid by new immigrants upon arrival and allowed immigration officials to exercise more discretion in making decisions over whom to exclude. Finally, the Act excluded from entry anyone born in a geographically defined “Asiatic Barred Zone” except for Japanese and Filipinos.

Then there was the Immigration Act of 1924 (The Johnson-Reed Act) which limited the number of immigrants allowed entry into the United States through a national origins quota. The quota provided immigration visas to two percent of the total number of people of each nationality in the United States as of the 1890 national census. It completely excluded immigrants from Asia. In all of its parts, the most basic purpose of the 1924 Immigration Act was to preserve the ideal of U.S. homogeneity. Congress revised the Act in 1952 and it wasn't until 1965
when Congress passed The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, also known as the Hart–Celler Act, a federal law passed by the 89th United States Congress and signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. The law abolished the National Origins Formula, which had been the basis of U.S. immigration policy since the 1920s and removed de facto discrimination against Southern and Eastern Europeans, Asians, as well as other non-Western and Northern European ethnic groups from American immigration policy.

This country has been at this for a very long time.

But it was less “chaotic” and there was no “catch and release”.

[old salt]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

Yes. We were trained not to hate the USA.

Do you think what is happening on our S border is a rational & fair immigration process or do you just prefer open borders, then adapt to accommodate the results ?

[PizzaSnake]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

Yes. We were trained not to hate the USA.

Do you think what is happening on our S border is a rational & fair immigration process or do you just prefer open borders, then adapt to accommodate the results ?

Just because I can understand its history, warts and all, doesn’t make me hateful, just informed. Is my understanding perfect? No, but more honest and complete than the one you convey here.

Do we need immigration reform?

Most definitely. Wait until the climate “migrations” really start. Going to be unstoppable, short of summary execution. You going to endorse that?

How about the coming neo-DustBowlers, many of whom will be impoverished when they are forced to abandon their homes in the DESERT SouthWest? Internally displaced masses will be brutal. Better hope the Millennials and younger are kindly disposed. We have a “cooperative” system of law, not coercive (with the notable exception of minority policing). Reversal of Roe v. Wade might well rend our social “fabric” asunder. Then what? There are an insane number of weapons and ammunition circulating in this country.

We also need to enforce the current laws; no more “slaves” for the meatpacking industry and agriculture.

Will food cost more? Maybe.

If I have to pay more for food, so be it.

Be ready to deal with reality, because it will most certainly deal with you.

[MDlaxfan76]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

Yes. We were trained not to hate the USA.

Do you think what is happening on our S border is a rational & fair immigration process or do you just prefer open borders, then adapt to accommodate the results ?

I'm sorry, but this is an incredibly stupid response.
And you are way smarter than that.

The right wing has truly lost its mind...many of the people who most love our country are those who insist that we recognize all of the challenges and traumas and mistakes of our beloved country's history. So much as been been overcome, inspired by truly admirable principles, and made real by millions of people along the way who sacrificed, bled, and died to make those principles as close to reality as they could.

And that struggle to make those principle be true and enduring is far from over. Indeed it is love of country over self that animates so many who continue this struggle.

Find the common ground in that, Salty, and then debate how best to achieve those enduring principles.

[old salt]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

Yes. We were trained not to hate the USA.

Do you think what is happening on our S border is a rational & fair immigration process or do you just prefer open borders, then adapt to accommodate the results ?

I'm sorry, but this is an incredibly stupid response.
And you are way smarter than that.

The right wing has truly lost its mind...many of the people who most love our country are those who insist that we recognize all of the challenges and traumas and mistakes of our beloved country's history. So much as been been overcome, inspired by truly admirable principles, and made real by millions of people along the way who sacrificed, bled, and died to make those principles as close to reality as they could.

And that struggle to make those principle be true and enduring is far from over. Indeed it is love of country over self that animates so many who continue this struggle.

Find the common ground in that, Salty, and then debate how best to achieve those enduring principles.

Yeah sure. None of this sanctimonious diversionary whataboutism is relevant to the mess on our SW border which urgently needs correcting so we can welcome the migrants we need without all the negative unintended consequences which our current defacto open borders policy facilitates.

Our well intentioned asylum laws are being cynically perverted. The current admin not only accepts this work-around, but works to make it even more efficient in bringing in even more illegal migrants & distributing them throughout the country. It makes a mockery of our entire immigration process & the laws behind it. It undermines the entire rule of law in our nation when the accepted, & even tacitly encouraged, means of entry Is itself unlawful.

[MDlaxfan76]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

Yes. We were trained not to hate the USA.

Do you think what is happening on our S border is a rational & fair immigration process or do you just prefer open borders, then adapt to accommodate the results ?

I'm sorry, but this is an incredibly stupid response.
And you are way smarter than that.

The right wing has truly lost its mind...many of the people who most love our country are those who insist that we recognize all of the challenges and traumas and mistakes of our beloved country's history. So much as been been overcome, inspired by truly admirable principles, and made real by millions of people along the way who sacrificed, bled, and died to make those principles as close to reality as they could.

And that struggle to make those principle be true and enduring is far from over. Indeed it is love of country over self that animates so many who continue this struggle.

Find the common ground in that, Salty, and then debate how best to achieve those enduring principles.

Yeah sure. None of this sanctimonious diversionary whataboutism is relevant to the mess on our SW border which urgently needs correcting so we can welcome the migrants we need without all the negative unintended consequences which our current defacto open borders policy facilitates.
And exactly how is this "welcome the migrants we need" going to happen?

Our well intentioned asylum laws are being cynically perverted. The current admin not only accepts this work-around, but works to make it even more efficient in bringing in even more illegal migrants & distributing them throughout the country. It makes a mockery of our entire immigration process & the laws behind it. It undermines the entire rule of law in our nation when the accepted, & even tacitly encouraged, means of entry Is itself unlawful.

Then stop making stupid insulting comments...assuming you actually care about the country, and don't just want to take another nativist position for the thrill it gives you to do so.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The US was founded on, expanded, and thrived on the wholesale exploitation of labor from a series of disenfranchised groups. Period.

“he's saying the GOP refuses to fix the problem at all. Just want the cheap labor for business and no responsibility to verify status...and want an issue to rile up their racist, nativist base voters.“ Who is that attributed to ? That is not an honest interpretation of my position.

Political parties employed to maintain this system have varied, but the strategy is unerringly consistent.

Don’t insult your intelligence or strain my credulity with objection, please. Just own it. At least that will nake you honest. Now, as to other shortcomings, that's between you and your choice of invisible sky pilot.

Agree. Immigration is what a growing & expanding country needed, & still does, in a smaller, more selective version.

It was regulated by current citizens working through their lawmakers. It was not perfect, by current woke standards, but it worked.

It was also enforced & was nothing like the chaotic hunger games playing out on our southern border that brings negative unintended consequences.

Don't insult your intelligence or strain my credulity by failing to acknowledge the obvious.

Are you really this obtuse?

There were plenty of people here, unless they don't count if they aren’t European.

The country and economy need to figure out a non-growth dependent economic model, and fast.

Current citizens? Like say women prior to 1919? 3/5 “persons”? Were their interests considered?

I imagine the people in the slave markets found the “immigration” system rather chaotic.

Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

Yes. We were trained not to hate the USA.

Do you think what is happening on our S border is a rational & fair immigration process or do you just prefer open borders, then adapt to accommodate the results ?

I'm sorry, but this is an incredibly stupid response.
And you are way smarter than that.

The right wing has truly lost its mind...many of the people who most love our country are those who insist that we recognize all of the challenges and traumas and mistakes of our beloved country's history. So much as been been overcome, inspired by truly admirable principles, and made real by millions of people along the way who sacrificed, bled, and died to make those principles as close to reality as they could.

And that struggle to make those principle be true and enduring is far from over. Indeed it is love of country over self that animates so many who continue this struggle.

Find the common ground in that, Salty, and then debate how best to achieve those enduring principles.

Yeah sure. None of this sanctimonious diversionary whataboutism is relevant to the mess on our SW border which urgently needs correcting so we can welcome the migrants we need without all the negative unintended consequences which our current defacto open borders policy facilitates.

Our well intentioned asylum laws are being cynically perverted. The current admin not only accepts this work-around, but works to make it even more efficient in bringing in even more illegal migrants & distributing them throughout the country. It makes a mockery of our entire immigration process & the laws behind it. It undermines the entire rule of law in our nation when the accepted, & even tacitly encouraged, means of entry Is itself unlawful.

[old salt]

Then stop making stupid insulting comments

Insulting ? You mean like this.

Are you really this obtuse?
Did they teach any US history at Annapolis, or just American fables?

...assuming you actually care about the country, and don't just want to take another nativist position for the thrill it gives you to do so.

Thrill ? ...& you scold about stupid insulting comments.
I make an attempt at a serious discussion about an obvious problem. Those are the insults in reply.

And exactly how is this "welcome the migrants we need" going to happen?

For starters, closing the recently exploited loopholes in our asylum law. Then gaining control of our border & Congress getting back to immigration reform, including expanding legal immigration & establishing a process leading to temporary &/or permanent residence for non-criminal, self-supporting illegal migrants currently in the US.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/immigratio ... qualifies/

Who qualifies for U.S. asylum and how does the process work?
by CAMILO MONTOYA-GALVEZ

UPDATED ON: JUNE 3, 2022 / 6:10 PM / CBS NEWS

Who qualifies for U.S. asylum?
For decades, U.S. law has allowed the government to grant asylum to immigrants who suffered or have a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country because of their nationality, race, religion, political views or membership in a "particular social group."

The persecution must come from government authorities or someone the home country is unable or unwilling to control. Poverty, scarce economic opportunities, displacement caused by natural disasters or a desire to reunite with family are not grounds for asylum under U.S. law.

While it uses the same legal threshold, refugee status is offered to individuals abroad. Asylum, on the other hand, is only available to those on U.S. soil. Barring some exceptions, U.S. law allows migrants in the U.S., including those who entered the country unlawfully, to request asylum as a means to halt their deportation.

Why is the asylum system broken?
For years, liberals and conservatives have said the U.S. asylum system is broken, though they have offered different solutions to fix it.

Conservatives have said the asylum system is abused by economic migrants who use it to stay and work in the U.S. indefinitely, which they say encourages illegal immigration. Liberals have also criticized the delays in deciding asylum cases, saying they place legitimate asylum-seekers in a years-long legal limbo.

What is undeniably true is that a backlog of hundreds of thousands of unresolved cases has crippled the government's ability to decide asylum cases in a timely manner — and the years-long processing delays have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, which curtailed in-person court hearings and USCIS interviews.

Because of the massive backlog, immigrants wait an average of 1,621 days — or more than 4 years — for a hearing in immigration court...
Overall, asylum grant rates in immigration court have hovered around or below 20% since 2015...
...89% of the court cases of Central American migrant families who crossed the U.S.-Mexico border between fiscal years 2014 and 2019 remained unresolved.

How has asylum policy changed under Biden?
Through multiple regulations and international deals, the Trump administration limited asylum eligibility and allowed border officials to quickly deport migrants or require them to wait in Mexico for their hearings.

Soon after taking office, President Biden suspended some Trump asylum restrictions, including the so-called "Remain in Mexico" program and deals that allowed the U.S. to reroute asylum-seekers to Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador with instructions to seek protection there.

The Biden administration, however, kept Title 42 in place, defending it as a public health policy for over a year. While it made exceptions to the expulsions, the Biden administration has used Title 42 longer and more often than the Trump administration, carrying out over 1.4 million migrant expulsions in its first 15 months.

Last year, the Biden administration revoked a Trump policy that generally disqualified victims of domestic and gang violence from asylum and said it would issue a regulation to define the "particular social group" ground for asylum that has been contested for decades. The rule has yet to be finalized.

How can the system be fixed?
Conservatives have proposed narrowing asylum eligibility, detaining asylum-seekers while their cases are reviewed and ramping up deportations. Liberals, meanwhile, have advocated for connecting asylum-seekers with lawyers, hiring additional asylum officers and speeding up case processing.

The Biden administration's attempt to overhaul asylum processing along the southern border aligns with the latter approach. It is designed to accelerate adjudications by assigning USCIS officers to decide asylum cases, rather than funneling all requests to the backlogged immigration courts.

But it remains to be seen whether officials will be able to hire enough asylum officers and allocate sufficient resources, including deportation flights for those whose cases are rejected, for the rule to achieve its objective of delivering more expeditious asylum grants or denials. The rule could also be blocked in court.

Recognizing that many migrants who travel to the U.S.-Mexico border do not ask for asylum or do not qualify for it, experts have also suggested expanding legal immigration, such as work and family-based visas, to allow would-be migrants to come to the country legally and thus reduce pressure on the asylum system.

"Asylum is not going to solve everything at the border. Many of these people just want to come to work. If we need people in this country to work, they should be able to come legally and they should also not compromise our asylum system," said Muzaffar Chishti, a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute.

At the same time, Chishti said, the U.S. needs to find durable solutions to the challenges plaguing its asylum system to ensure it's providing refuge to those fleeing persecution, in accordance with U.S. and international refugee law.

"Our asylum system doesn't serve anyone," Chishti said. "It doesn't serve people who deserve to get it because we don't give it to them for years, and it doesn't remove people from the country who don't deserve it."

This standard does not require proof, just a "a well-founded fear", which makes it easy to game the system

For decades, U.S. law has allowed the government to grant asylum to immigrants who suffered or have a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country because of their nationality, race, religion, political views or membership in a "particular social group."

The persecution must come from government authorities or someone the home country is unable or unwilling to control. Poverty, scarce economic opportunities, displacement caused by natural disasters or a desire to reunite with family are not grounds for asylum under U.S. law.

While it uses the same legal threshold, refugee status is offered to individuals abroad. Asylum, on the other hand, is only available to those on U.S. soil. Barring some exceptions, U.S. law allows migrants in the U.S., including those who entered the country unlawfully, to request asylum as a means to halt their deportation.

[MDlaxfan76]

Yeah, I find you incredibly dismissive of the history of immigration in our country, all through a very consistent lens of the nativist throughout our history. Indeed consistent with so many other positions you've taken.

Likewise, the "I wasn't taught to hate our country" crack...

But put that aside, I think the asylum law challenge will only be able to be "fixed" through comprehensive immigration reform, not "control of our borders" which is a fool's errand IMO. Valid goal, but unachievable through force, unless overwhelming and brutal such application.

"Control" will only be achieved when we provide reasonable, legal access to those who wish to migrate, whether to stay and become citizens, or to work short term. Yes, in large part, what you bolded. But without such reform, focus on asylum rules is insufficient.

The right wing nativists have throughout much of US history sought to apply racial/ethnic/religious and related tests to determine who is 'desirable' and who is not; and the asylum challenge is very much in this stream of nativist restriction.

Want to deal with immigration pressure? Don't give any oxygen at all to the nativists, often simply white nationalists; and address the challenge comprehensively not piecemeal.

[old salt]

Yeah, I find you incredibly dismissive of the history of immigration in our country, all through a very consistent lens of the nativist throughout our history. Indeed consistent with so many other positions you've taken.
Oh, so you find me dismissive of the history of immigration in our country ? How so, specifically ?
Other than Native Americans, we are all immigrants or their descendants.
How is it nativist to expect our immigration laws to be enforced.

Likewise, the "I wasn't taught to hate our country" crack...
I'm not afflicted with guilt over our history of immigration.
Every country has immigration laws, many more restrictive than ours.
We have the largest immigrant population in the world.
We still need to enforce our existing immigration laws, not matter the supposed evils of our history you were taught.

But put that aside,( you can't put it aside. You keep scolding me about it when it was in response a personal insult)
I think the asylum law challenge will only be able to be "fixed" through comprehensive immigration reform, not "control of our borders" which is a fool's errand IMO. Valid goal, but unachievable through force, unless overwhelming and brutal such application.
Why does it require comprehensive reform to fix the asylum loophole. It was not a problem before the caravans started within the past decade.

"Control" will only be achieved when we provide reasonable, legal access to those who wish to migrate, whether to stay and become citizens, or to work short term. Yes, in large part, what you bolded. But without such reform, focus on asylum rules is insufficient.
I've repeatedly said it is only part of the solution. It's one that can be addressed quickly & will have an immediate impact. There's no need to use comprehensive reform as an excuse to addressing the asylum loopholes & the abuse of the asylum process.

The right wing nativists have throughout much of US history sought to apply racial/ethnic/religious and related tests to determine who is 'desirable' and who is not; and the asylum challenge is very much in this stream of nativist restriction.Oh BS ! That's just an excuse for non-action & giving a wink & a nod to the current abuse.

Want to deal with immigration pressure? Don't give any oxygen at all to the nativists, often simply white nationalists; and address the challenge comprehensively not piecemeal.Oh good grief. You see white nationalist boogeymen everywhere. Look at the election results in south Texas, there are a lot nationalist boogeyman voters who are not white.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Old Bill



https://douglasibell.com/2013/06/03/gan ... xperience/

“In fact, the vast majority of Americans probably do not even realize that 19th century Irish immigrants were degraded by white Protestant Americans of English and German decent.”

[Kismet]

Yeah, I find you incredibly dismissive of the history of immigration in our country, all through a very consistent lens of the nativist throughout our history. Indeed consistent with so many other positions you've taken.
Oh, so you find me dismissive of the history of immigration in our country ? How so, specifically ?
Other than Native Americans, we are all immigrants or their descendants.
How is it nativist to expect our immigration laws to be enforced.

Likewise, the "I wasn't taught to hate our country" crack...
I'm not afflicted with guilt over our history of immigration.
Every country has immigration laws, many more restrictive than ours.
We have the largest immigrant population in the world.
We still need to enforce our existing immigration laws, not matter the supposed evils of our history you were taught.

But put that aside,( you can't put it aside. You keep scolding me about it when it was in response a personal insult)
I think the asylum law challenge will only be able to be "fixed" through comprehensive immigration reform, not "control of our borders" which is a fool's errand IMO. Valid goal, but unachievable through force, unless overwhelming and brutal such application.
Why does it require comprehensive reform to fix the asylum loophole. It was not a problem before the caravans started within the past decade.

"Control" will only be achieved when we provide reasonable, legal access to those who wish to migrate, whether to stay and become citizens, or to work short term. Yes, in large part, what you bolded. But without such reform, focus on asylum rules is insufficient.
I've repeatedly said it is only part of the solution. It's one that can be addressed quickly & will have an immediate impact. There's no need to use comprehensive reform as an excuse to addressing the asylum loopholes & the abuse of the asylum process.

The right wing nativists have throughout much of US history sought to apply racial/ethnic/religious and related tests to determine who is 'desirable' and who is not; and the asylum challenge is very much in this stream of nativist restriction.Oh BS ! That's just an excuse for non-action & giving a wink & a nod to the current abuse.

Want to deal with immigration pressure? Don't give any oxygen at all to the nativists, often simply white nationalists; and address the challenge comprehensively not piecemeal.Oh good grief. You see white nationalist boogeymen everywhere. Look at the election results in south Texas, there are a lot nationalist boogeyman voters who are not white.

None of your solutions are imminent. Telling that you fix the blame on the current administration (like the problem just began while they were in charge) and we didn't hear this diatribe when the last administration was in place either.

And you give a complete pass to the elected representatives in Congress who have opted to do NOTHING about any of it for the past 20+ years. Hell, they even reneged and failed to deal with a simple fix for Dreamers.

We have a labor shortage currently, especially at the low end of the wage scales and given our depressed birth rates over the past 20 years, increased immigration is critical to our future economic growth and prosperity. You only need to look at the historical record.

[Peter Brown]

Yeah, I find you incredibly dismissive of the history of immigration in our country, all through a very consistent lens of the nativist throughout our history. Indeed consistent with so many other positions you've taken.
Oh, so you find me dismissive of the history of immigration in our country ? How so, specifically ?
Other than Native Americans, we are all immigrants or their descendants.
How is it nativist to expect our immigration laws to be enforced.

Likewise, the "I wasn't taught to hate our country" crack...
I'm not afflicted with guilt over our history of immigration.
Every country has immigration laws, many more restrictive than ours.
We have the largest immigrant population in the world.
We still need to enforce our existing immigration laws, not matter the supposed evils of our history you were taught.

But put that aside,( you can't put it aside. You keep scolding me about it when it was in response a personal insult)
I think the asylum law challenge will only be able to be "fixed" through comprehensive immigration reform, not "control of our borders" which is a fool's errand IMO. Valid goal, but unachievable through force, unless overwhelming and brutal such application.
Why does it require comprehensive reform to fix the asylum loophole. It was not a problem before the caravans started within the past decade.

"Control" will only be achieved when we provide reasonable, legal access to those who wish to migrate, whether to stay and become citizens, or to work short term. Yes, in large part, what you bolded. But without such reform, focus on asylum rules is insufficient.
I've repeatedly said it is only part of the solution. It's one that can be addressed quickly & will have an immediate impact. There's no need to use comprehensive reform as an excuse to addressing the asylum loopholes & the abuse of the asylum process.

The right wing nativists have throughout much of US history sought to apply racial/ethnic/religious and related tests to determine who is 'desirable' and who is not; and the asylum challenge is very much in this stream of nativist restriction.Oh BS ! That's just an excuse for non-action & giving a wink & a nod to the current abuse.

Want to deal with immigration pressure? Don't give any oxygen at all to the nativists, often simply white nationalists; and address the challenge comprehensively not piecemeal.Oh good grief. You see white nationalist boogeymen everywhere. Look at the election results in south Texas, there are a lot nationalist boogeyman voters who are not white.

Regarding your last point about Latinos crossing over to now vote Republican (no surprise to me), guys like MD are only four months out from calling Latinos ‘white supremacists’. Democrats have been desperately grasping for a new growing demographic to replace the family-oriented, pro-business, conservative culture Latino for ten years. They initially thought they had it with Muslims. Then they thought they had it with Asian Americans. Funny things happened along the way: Muslims, like everyone else, aspire to a better life for their kids so they’ve been switching to Republicans, and Asians have been getting violently assaulted all over the country by the most bedrock of Democratic bases, causing Asian Americans to question why they affiliated with Democrats in the first place.

Humans by and large aspire to success and security and pride. Democrats offer them the exact opposite. MD on some thread here just yesterday said when he visits Gettysburg he sees darkness. Ayfkm?

It’s easy to see this amazingly clear divide of Republican optimism versus Democrat pessimism simply here at Fanlax where the Democrats don’t understand where their policies are so noxious to folks, and why. They double down. Worse, they end up assigning meaningless phraseology like ‘fascist’ ‘racist’ ‘sexist’ to folks who literally couldn’t be any further from that. The Republican Party has its own warts, I grant that, but being proud of the greatest country in history and helping others reach that next ring isn’t a wart, it’s a tonic to immigrants who want the same. Immigrants aren’t embracing CRT, DEI, and ESG like our enlightened Democrats. In fact, they recoil from those acronymed wastes of space.

I’ve said for years that ultimately July 4 would strictly be a Republican event. Every day that reality becomes closer to happening.