Tennessee passes 'mass deportation bill' banning immigration sanctuary policies
Source: Independent
The state is 'now committed to using state resources and state governments to help fuel mass deportations'
Clark Mindock New York @ClarkMindock 4 hours ago
Tennessee is set to become the latest state in the US with prohibitions on so-called sanctuary policies, which immigrant advocates say serve to cultivate an environment of fear for undocumented immigrants living in American communities.
Governor Bill Haslam is going to let the bill which also requires local police to comply with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement requests become law without his signature, even though the state currently does not have any sanctuary cities as a result of a previous law on the subject.
I think the best thing for the state to do with this decision is to move on from it, Mr Haslam told reporters on Monday, according to the Tennessean.
The decision was made in spite of criticism on a variety of fronts from stakeholders who say that the law is of questionable constitutional merit, and could have unintended consequences that spreads fear of government entities throughout vulnerable populations in the state.
Read more: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/sanctuary-cities-tennessee-law-mass-deportation-bill-haslam-a8362591.html
Docreed2003
(16,858 posts)I pray she's not elected. (And Tennesseans will note, not sure what part of Old Hickory Lake that was filmed on but it sure as shit is not near her megamansion!!
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)All average Joe and Jill Doe hear is "They favor people breaking the law".
I'm not talking about Republicans. I'm talking about swing voters. It's really hard to argue that point too.
Judi Lynn
(160,515 posts)It's not useful to anyone's spirit to treat people viciously in order to gain something from monsters.
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)What most people hear is that we're supporting people who broke our laws to get here. You see it in campaign ads all the time and it resonates with people. Not just Republicans.
How do we, from a legal or political standpoint, argue that and have it actually work?
Jedi Guy
(3,185 posts)It gives the opposition a club in the form of "See?? The Democrats have no respect for the rule of law!" It's an endless talking point for them, as well as a way to rally their base.
WhoWoodaKnew
(847 posts)we're doing the opposite with sanctuary cities.
Jazzgirl
(3,744 posts)I'm sure this will get reported and deleted. I'm just this side of canceling my subscription to this site.
Jedi Guy
(3,185 posts)How dare people disagree with you?! Quick, delete your account and burn your computer, then your desk, then salt the earth they stood upon. Then collapse onto your fainting couch and clutch your pearls.
Less flippantly, one can't take one's opponent to task for breaking the law when one is also breaking the law. That's hypocrisy. As stated, it gives the other side very effective talking points.
Also (and flame away if you wanna) I have a hard time being sympathetic to immigrants who ignore the law. I immigrated to Canada and I did so legally. I was offered work off the books, which really would've helped my wife and I make ends meet, and I turned it down. Because it was illegal, and it could've resulted in never being allowed into the country again.
That's not to say I'm against DACA, because those kids didn't do anything wrong, they were just along for the ride. I don't agree with separating families. I don't agree with treating immigrants as less than human. But I don't agree with the idea that people should just be able to skip across the border any old time they want to, either.
If they're fleeing war, violence, etc., then they can request asylum, and should be welcomed into the American family. But just dashing across the border when no one's looking? Yeah, not a fan. If that opinion makes me insufficiently pure for someone else's taste, so be it.
haele
(12,646 posts)Undocumented crossings at the southern border is at an all time low. The percentages of crime (with the exception of not having documentation) committed by the undocumented is at an all time low, especially compared to the percentages of those same crimes committed citizens.
And the local police will arrest and convict people for committing those crimes (hopefully) based on the evidence available, no matter if they're documented or undocumented. Just being undocumented does not mean one is going to commit other crimes.
Honestly, Mexico and Central America actually have a worse problem with firearms from the U.S. being smuggled across the boarder to support the gangs and cartels in their country than we have with drugs and criminals being sent across the borders.
Most immigrants that are undocumented and remain undocumented in the U.S. come across legally and overstay visas. Others - especially those who come over in the border states - come over to visit U.S. citizens who are relatives and stay, for whatever reason.
I have lived on the southern border most of my life - and amongst immigrants. Spouses and adopted children are also an issue - getting a green card because one is married or because some nice American Family adopted one has never been immediate or automatic as it is in most other countries, and many U.S. citizens don't seem to realize this or don't seem have the time to go through the hoops - and don't tell their kids or spouses that maybe they shouldn't act like they're U.S. citizens and able to have mental issues or small violations on their records because they're going to get deported as soon as the government found out their "sponsors" never filed the paperwork for the to make them naturalized citizens.
This hits very much home for me as my neighbors and several other people who identify as "Californio" - as in a family that has been living in the state of California since before it was a state have relatives across the border. I know a family of five siblings all born at home over the 1950's and 60's where the youngest two are Mexican citizens just because when the border was last re-drawn - in the mid 1960's, putting their house and half their land in Mexico. So when a Mexican sibling is close enough to help for a U.S. sibling during a family emergency for a couple months, they can't just head over the border like the rest of us can - they need to get a visa. And visas to visit family members are much harder to get now, because of DSH's crackdown on brown people.
Not to mention there's quite a few U.S. citizens living across the border while they work here, because that's all they can really afford. About a quarter of my shipyard workers lived around Tijuana or Tecate and were constantly getting hassled by DHS or ICE at the border crossing, no matter their California driver's licenses, DoD identification, work badges with the required citizenship status indicators, or Social Security/VA cards indicated, because of Hispanic surnames or because they looked vaguely Mexican.
I can understand your point- it's always been against the law, and we should all be careful to follow the law like responsible people do. People just shouldn't decide that due to culture or tradition, or need, that they can just break the law and get away with it.
But the law needs to be reasonable and also applied equally. And it's not being applied equally, it's being targeted against ethnicities for political expediency.
Not to sidetrack your position, but what I suspect is happening is that a manufactured crisis of undocumented labor is actually an effort to get rid of the people doing critical shit jobs (agricultural/field labor, heavy manufacturing, service work) and replace it with prison labor. There's more money to be made by investors using tax dollar subsidized rehab (i.e., parolees or trusted prisoners) or prison labor in general to do the work than there is hiring undocumented labor to do the work. And investors are leveraging out the smaller shoestring agricultural and light manufacturing businesses that have been the primary employers of undocumented workers.
Prison labor is already being used (and has been for at least two decades) for call centers, light skilled and semi-skilled component manufacturing; just wait until they have trustees out in the fields and in the slaughterhouses - or in chain restaurants and hotel rooms - doing work under an overseer who probably gets kickbacks for turning a blind eye to regulations or oversight of the workers. All for around dollar a day, and the investment corporations that have their subsidiaries use such labor get all sorts of tax breaks on top of the subsidies the government pays for the "use" of that labor.
Haele
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"I have a hard time being sympathetic to immigrants who ignore the law..."
Hunger and fleeing violence and poverty is indeed, a trivial matter compared to imaginary borders on a map.
On the other hand, I too have a hard time being sympathetic to people maintaining the pretense of progressivism while nurturing and forwarding an inverse narrative. Not that you would ever allege to doing such a thing...
Jedi Guy
(3,185 posts)In your haste to eject your verbal diarrhea, you clearly missed the bit where I said that I'm absolutely open to asylum for people fleeing war, violence, etc. You see, "etc" is an abbreviation of "et cetera" which is used at the end of a list to indicate that further, similar items are included. Those fleeing famine can certainly request asylum, and I welcome them.
Secondly, your "imaginary lines on a map" is childish nonsense. Every country on Earth has borders, and those should be respected. If you can't grasp that, then I don't know what to say to you beyond a tired sigh and a roll of the eyes.
Also, you're not the gatekeeper of progressivism, and my stance on immigration is far, far from that of conservatives, so cram your insinuations where the sun don't shine.
sandensea
(21,620 posts)They hear "they favor brown people breaking the law."
Rapepublicans know this, and have dog-whistled this issue to death. You're right: We should avoid engaging them on that whenever possible.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I especially like how you support your allegations with objective evidence... well, maybe next time; or not if consistency is your thing.
"It's really hard to argue that point too...."
Only for those whose minds are wedded to a narrative. The rest of us can easily, swiftly, and succinctly argue those points without any problems at all.
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)I reject you first, Tennessee!
NickB79
(19,233 posts)Prepare to watch your crops rot in the field for lack of farm laborers.
dembotoz
(16,799 posts)rockfordfile
(8,701 posts)Send them to live in Russia.
sinkingfeeling
(51,444 posts)Takket
(21,552 posts)Elections have consequences.
Vinca
(50,255 posts)requires a large number of immigrants to keep the states farming enterprises running. This will be another case of Trumphumpers driving out the "other people" and then driving part of the state into bankruptcy.