https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/trumps-massive-crackdown-on-immigrants-has-begun
Even people in the US legally aren't necessarily safe from deportation, some lawyers say.
As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric was often vague but generally focused on a couple issues: a wall that would (theoretically) keep undocumented migrants from crossing the southern border, and the mass deportation of "bad hombres," i.e. immigrants who had committed crimes. But as president, Trump seems to be encouraging deportation on a much broader scale, and immigration authorities look happy to take him up on that.
Immigration attorney Ajay Singh, who works in New York State, has heard stories recently that point to a crackdown on all immigrants. He met with a client last week who said an officer stopped him driving merely to check his identification; that same week, Singh told me, saw immigration agents raid a factory in Monroe, New York, looking for undocumented workers—a tactic authorities haven't used in years.
But Singh wasn't surprised, given the nature of a recent Trump executive order that targets nearly all immigrants for deportation, not just those who have been charged with wrongdoing.
"Working illegally is considered a crime. Crossing the border illegally is a crime. So for Trump to say the priority cases are people with criminal records can be anything," Singh told me. "People are so scared. There are so many consultations I'm having right now because people say, 'What's going to happen?'"
Though the executive order signed on January 25, "Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States," emphasizes the supposed danger undocumented immigrants pose to the public, it's written so broadly, many lawyers say, that even "removable aliens" who have done nothing wrong could be deported—even if they are in the country legally.
"Almost everyone is a deportation priority," William Stock, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told me of the guidelines, which are a strict departure from the Obama administration's stated focus on removing criminals, undocumented immigrants in the country less than two years, and individuals caught while crossing the border. Trump's order, by comparison, includes a vast range of categories, allowing immigration officers to pick up anyone.
The categories include any immigrant (documented or not) convicted of, charged of, or thought to have committed a crime— that could include undocumented immigrants who crossed the border illegally (a criminal misdemeanor) and legal permanent residents charged with minor offenses.
"The new enforcement priorities also apply to green-card holders and people here on temporary visas," Cornell University immigration law professor Stephen Yale-Loehr told me. "For example, if I am a green-card holder and am arrested for jumping a turnstile in New York City, I am a priority for deportation, even though it is a minor crime."
Yale-Loehr, who warned that the order would likely "have more impact on our immigration system than the travel ban," said that "because everyone is a priority no one is a priority" to deport. That could also lead to immigration officers conducting workplace raids—such as the recent one in Monroe—and targeting easy-to-seize immigrants, since individuals with serious criminal convictions are harder to apprehend.
"Because of the new executive order, officers can round up basically anyone and therefore increase their [deportation] numbers," Yale-Loehr said.
The guidelines also serve a key use in immigration courts: If an individual falls into a priority category, it can be nearly impossible for an attorney to defend his or her case.
"If someone was not a priority before, we could argue that rather than waste enforcement resources, let's let this case lie," Yale-Loehr said. "But now relatively few people are not covered under the immigration priorities, so it's going to be harder to argue that deportation is not appropriate."
I wonder if tourists should be worried.
Apparently we are in some pretty serious immediate danger. Who are we to disagree?
Apparently we are in some pretty serious immediate danger. Who are we to disagree?
The only serious immediate danger is Trump himself.
Offer Mexico statehood and open the border, settlement for back wages and benefits? Talk about extreme views.
This is a sad but justified legal action. Garcia de Rayos shouldn't have come here. She shouldn't have stayed here. She should've been earlier deported when she was arrested for felony ID theft and working illegally in Arizona.
My sister-in-law was evicted from her house last year with 15 minutes to collect belongings because her husband was a deadbeat who for years didn't pay his bills all while painting a rosy picture to friends and family. It was sad, but application of law or adhering to rules is the backbone of our nation and people who violate such are subject to penalties according to law.
Tell me, which laws should I feel free to violate and not suffer the consequences?
although that is a sad story i am more concerned about people who are here legally being affected. green card holders and people with legal visas.
This is a sad but justified legal action. Garcia de Rayos shouldn't have come here. She shouldn't have stayed here. She should've been earlier deported when she was arrested for felony ID theft and working illegally in Arizona.
I agree that legally they have the right to deport her, and by all accounts, she was prepared for the possibility of deportation upon this check-in visit. But there is a difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. This woman has a family, children who are citizens, and has contributed positively to the community for decades. She has checked in with ICE regularly for the past 8 years and fully cooperated. She doesn't pose a problem, and while she didn't go through the proper channels to get here, hopefully there will be a path for her to return here to her true home.
although that is a sad story i am more concerned about people who are here legally being affected. green card holders and people with legal visas.
People with legal standing to be here with valid visas and green cards should remain and not be subject to removal. The EO does say aliens and removable aliens. Removable aliens being the ones here illegally and simply aliens applying to all non-citizens. In my opinion, which means nothing really at my keyboard, but I think that simple aliens, legal visa and green card holders should be safe unless they fall into the priorities outlined in the EO
Sec. 5. Enforcement Priorities. In executing faithfully the immigration laws of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)), as well as removable aliens who:
(a) Have been convicted of any criminal offense;
(b) Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;
(c) Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;
(d) Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency;
(e) Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;
(f) Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or
(g) In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/25/presidential-executive-order-enhancing-public-safety-interior-united
Law abiding aliens (visa and green card) shouldn't be subject to removal if I am interpreting that right.
This is a sad but justified legal action. Garcia de Rayos shouldn't have come here. She shouldn't have stayed here. She should've been earlier deported when she was arrested for felony ID theft and working illegally in Arizona.
I agree that legally they have the right to deport her, and by all accounts, she was prepared for the possibility of deportation upon this check-in visit. But there is a difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. This woman has a family, children who are citizens, and has contributed positively to the community for decades. She has checked in with ICE regularly for the past 8 years and fully cooperated. She doesn't pose a problem, and while she didn't go through the proper channels to get here, hopefully there will be a path for her to return here to her true home.
Then it becomes discretionary and ICE officials in different districts may not rule uniformly which may also be a problem in overall enforcement.
Her husband, who I read is also illegal, was not deported because he has no criminal record to my knowledge. That is the key, her felony conviction. One could make the argument that simply working here illegally shouldn't be a felony, but in the state of Arizona, the means to which she achieved that employment is a felony.
I'm not sure we should have ICE officials trying to decide which felonies are bad enough to deport and which ones are not. The conviction is there.
Speaking of felonies and for the record, I feel that employers of illegal immigrants should be subject to felony convictions. This must be a dual purposed policy to go after both criminal illegals and also US employers who hire them.
Unless I am wrong on the part about her husband being illegal as well, the fact that her husband was not deported and she was tells me that this decision exclusively came down to her prior felony conviction. In reality I wouldn't have wished for this to happen, but I don't assign blame to Arizona ICE or the administration, ultimately her actions brought this on.
How about at least giving these folks 30 days notice, to get their affairs in order? Instead of, sorry, new law, yer gettin yanked by the yankees.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Because less than 10% show up for their hearings or court.
This thread's title is missing the most important word.
I'll fix it for you:
Trump's Massive Crackdown on Illegal Immigrants Has Begun.
Being in the U.S. illegally is a crime.
[Edited on 2/10/2017 by Muleman1994]
in case you missed these lines from the article........
The categories include any immigrant (documented or not) convicted of, charged of, or thought to have committed a crime— that could include undocumented immigrants who crossed the border illegally (a criminal misdemeanor) and legal permanent residents charged with minor offenses.
"The new enforcement priorities also apply to green-card holders and people here on temporary visas," Cornell University immigration law professor Stephen Yale-Loehr told me. "For example, if I am a green-card holder and am arrested for jumping a turnstile in New York City, I am a priority for deportation, even though it is a minor crime."
Then it becomes discretionary and ICE officials in different districts may not rule uniformly which may also be a problem in overall enforcement.
Her husband, who I read is also illegal, was not deported because he has no criminal record to my knowledge. That is the key, her felony conviction. One could make the argument that simply working here illegally shouldn't be a felony, but in the state of Arizona, the means to which she achieved that employment is a felony.
I'm not sure we should have ICE officials trying to decide which felonies are bad enough to deport and which ones are not. The conviction is there.
Speaking of felonies and for the record, I feel that employers of illegal immigrants should be subject to felony convictions. This must be a dual purposed policy to go after both criminal illegals and also US employers who hire them.
Unless I am wrong on the part about her husband being illegal as well, the fact that her husband was not deported and she was tells me that this decision exclusively came down to her prior felony conviction. In reality I wouldn't have wished for this to happen, but I don't assign blame to Arizona ICE or the administration, ultimately her actions brought this on.
Let's not fool ourselves, many laws are enforced with discretion. Sometimes speeders are let off with a warning. An small bag of marijuana is ignored. Illegal trading goes uncharged. Every day officers and officials weigh the weight of the situation and the amount of deserved enforcement. This administration considers her a priority.
Her deportation case was pending due to additional court appeals (the raid that lead to her arrest was argued as an unconstitutional which would taint any evidence found). She was likely to be deported regardless of Trump's executive order, she just wasn't a priority compared to more dangerous offenders. Her husband is also illegal and has a check-in in the future. I'm not saying they didn't have the right to deport them, nor that they shouldn't have. I just hope that her children, as citizens, can sponsor their parents to return.
Fine thanks for all the food you were raised on and all the hard work that helped build this country. Extreme view nothing, a lot of mexicans earned more of a right to be here than us spoiled brats. "and the peaches are rotten. . ."
Deportee, sung by the Highwaymen:
Deportee (Plane Wreck At Los Gatos)"
(originally by Woody Guthrie)[Johnny Cash]
The crops are all in, and the peaches are rotten
The oranges are all packed in the creosote dumps
They're flying them back to the Mexican Border
To save all their money, and wade back again[Johnny Rodriguez]
My father's own father, he waded that river
Others before him have done just the same
They died in the hills, and they've died in the valley
Some went to heaven, without any name[Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson and Johnny Rodriguez]
Goodbye to my Juan, goodbye Rosalita
Adios mi amigo, Jesus and Maria
You won't have a name when you ride the big airplane
All they will call you will be "Deportee"[Johnny Cash]
Some of us are illegal, and others not wanted
Our work contracts out, and we have to move on
(Nelson)
Six-hundred miles to the Mexican Border
They chase us like rustlers, like outlaws, like thieves[Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson and Johnny Rodriguez]
Goodbye to my Juan, goodbye Rosalita
Adios mi amigo, Jesus and Maria
You won't have a name when you ride the big airplane
All they will call you will be "Deportee"[Johnny Cash]
The sky-plane caught fire, over Los Gatos Canyon
A fireball a thunder, it shook all the hills
[Nelson]
Who are all these dear friends, scattered like dry leaves?
The radio said they were just deporteesGoodbye to my Juan, goodbye Rosalita
(Adios a mi Juan, adios Rosalita)
Adios mi amigo, Jesus and Maria
(Adios a mi amigo, Jesus y Maria)
You won't have a name when you ride the big airplane
(no tendrá un nombre en el aeroplano)
All they will call you will be "Deportee"
(le llamarán serán "Deportee")Goodbye to my Juan
Adios a mi Juan
Goodbye Rosalita
Adios Rosalita
Adios mi amegos, Jesus and Maria
(Adios a mi amigo, Jesus y Maria)
You won't have a name when you ride the big airplane
No tendrá un nombre en el aeroplano
All they will call you
Le llamarán serán
Will be
va a hacer
Deportee
_______________________________________________________________________________________Nice attempt at deflection from the actual matter at hand.
No one is talking about deporting immigrants. That come from the lies and spin of the left-wing political activists.
If you had read the actual order you would know that it is specific and at no time mentions legal immigrants.
"earned more of a right to be here"?
Where exactly in U.S. law do you derive that?
In which specific statute is that right enumerated?
Majority of Europeans in favor of a Trump-style Muslim ban, poll shows
While European leaders have been outspoken in their dislike of President Trump’s immigration restrictions, a new poll indicates that they are not speaking on behalf of their voters -- and that a majority of Europeans are in favor of a Muslim ban that would go much further than Trump’s order.
Most of those European leaders will be out of office soon after coming under severe pressure from their constituents to deport the so-called refugees.
Chatham House, the most respected European polling organization poll of over 10,000 citizens across 10 European countries:
https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/what-do-europeans-think-about-muslim-immigration
Listening to Europeans and their opinion on this is as relevant as listening to your opinions on Constitutional Law. They live under different border rules.
Most of those European leaders will be out of office soon after coming under severe pressure from their constituents to deport the so-called refugees.
Chatham House, the most respected European polling organization poll of over 10,000 citizens across 10 European countries
U.S. policy isn't dictated by the misplaced fears of some Europeans. The poll's finding show the more rural and uneducated, the more likely the respondent was to support a Muslim travel ban. Regardless, opinions aren't facts.
Also interesting that you would cite the Chatham House. The 2016 Chatham House Prize was awarded to John Kerry and Mohammad Javad Zarif (of Iran). The 2012 Chatham House Prize was awarded to Muleman's #1 Special Lady Crush: Hillary Clinton.
Listening to Europeans and their opinion on this is as relevant as listening to your opinions on Constitutional Law. They live under different border rules.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Yet the effect of uncontrolled immigration is the same worldwide.
Caos, crime, degradation of quality of life and national security problems have grown to the point that the people have had enough.
This particular issue is one of the top three reasons why Donald Trump is now President.
That point was lost on the left and yet another reason why the Democrats no longer have any power at any level of government.
The People have had enough.
So, sit back son there in the cheap seats and cry for the next 8, 12, 16 years or more.
You and the left have been relegated to a level where no one cares what you think any longer.
If you would like more proof, watch what comes from this month's DNC leadership meeting as the liberals figure out they no longer have any leadership.
Listening to Europeans and their opinion on this is as relevant as listening to your opinions on Constitutional Law. They live under different border rules.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Yet the effect of uncontrolled immigration is the same worldwide.
Caos, crime, degradation of quality of life and national security problems have grown to the point that the people have had enough.This particular issue is one of the top three reasons why Donald Trump is now President.
That point was lost on the left and yet another reason why the Democrats no longer have any power at any level of government.The People have had enough.
So, sit back son there in the cheap seats and cry for the next 8, 12, 16 years or more.
You and the left have been relegated to a level where no one cares what you think any longer.
If you would like more proof, watch what comes from this month's DNC leadership meeting as the liberals figure out they no longer have any leadership.
I guessYOU and trump are too dumb to realize, this "executive order" is illegal and unconstitutional.
No, Trump realizes it. He said he won't take it to SCOTUS. Back to the drawing boards.
Deport his wife!!
How about at least giving these folks 30 days notice, to get their affairs in order? Instead of, sorry, new law, yer gettin yanked by the yankees.
The law is not new . Existing law is being enforced.
Let's not fool ourselves, many laws are enforced with discretion. Sometimes speeders are let off with a warning. An small bag of marijuana is ignored. Illegal trading goes uncharged. Every day officers and officials weigh the weight of the situation and the amount of deserved enforcement. This administration considers her a priority.
Her deportation case was pending due to additional court appeals (the raid that lead to her arrest was argued as an unconstitutional which would taint any evidence found). She was likely to be deported regardless of Trump's executive order, she just wasn't a priority compared to more dangerous offenders. Her husband is also illegal and has a check-in in the future. I'm not saying they didn't have the right to deport them, nor that they shouldn't have. I just hope that her children, as citizens, can sponsor their parents to return.
The administration considers criminal aliens a priority – the law is faceless and nameless; she personally wasn't singled out as a priority, instead she fit the criteria that they are prioritizing.
Maybe somebody could inform me and save me the google time, but why would work place raids be unconstitutional? They should inquire at the HR department too and anyone responsible for hiring an illegal alien should be arrested as well. I say more workplace raids.
I would suspect her criminal conviction may limit the chances of the sponsorship opportunity. Like I said knowing the details surrounding here specific case, these are not the kind of cases I think ICE should be focusing on, but they have a felony conviction sitting in front of them and the order is prioritizing removal of such. If they are or were allowed to consider circumstances then yes, I think she isn’t who I would be targeting, but the law is what it is. So I am not going to blame the administration for wanting existing law enforced. And I am not going to blame the ICE agent in the moment to have to make decisions outside of their authority – if an ICE agent wants to do that on their own and make judgement calls that is up to them. Ultimately the person in question here that was deported put themselves in that position.
Your position is respectful Bob. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It can have dramatic effects seeing videos on TV of the actions necessary to enforce the laws. Bottom line, for anyone who doesn’t like what is happening should look toward changing the law, not ignoring aspects of the existing law. And it may in fact have a dramatic effect on illegals who are here or are thinking of coming here...knowing they are in greater danger of being deported, the law and the potential punishment that accompanies it should be a deterrent. Now we need strong and damaging penalties for employers, how about mandatory prison and a fine equaling the worth of their company – that might have a drastic impact on those hiring illegals (so long as they have the tools necessary to properly verify prospective employees).
Nice attempt at deflection from the actual matter at hand.
No one is talking about deporting immigrants. That come from the lies and spin of the left-wing political activists.
If you had read the actual order you would know that it is specific and at no time mentions legal immigrants.
Muleman, actually the EO doesn’t say legal or illegal, well it says “illegally” once. It almost exclusively says “alien” and “removable alien’ throughout the EO Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States. An alien is any noncitizen in the US...it isn’t lies or necessarily spin to say that aliens or non US citizen immigrants here legally could be targeted. Hemp and I have posted a few things on that in this thread. If a legal visa or green card holder (alien) falls into a priority category then they could be “removed”. Read the EO with this in mind and I think you will see the issue relating to legal (alien) and illegal (removable alien) both being subject to deportation should they find themselvs in certain circumstances.
its been poorly handled so far. i'd like to think is because of inexperience, but i'm really having hard time thinking that. he's writing a new EO that i think will work better even without knowing what it is yet.
i learned my lesson about giving any president blind devotion after GWB. i thought that was what a good citizen should do, lol, even at 40 whatever years old.
Trump needs to sell me....so far he hasn't.
this isn't a game.....and.......i'm afraid Trump is being played by some of the people around him....scary sh!t
[Edited on 2/11/2017 by LeglizHemp]
Read this article from June 2016, it could've been written now except Obama was President, and while that President and this President have much different views on enforcement, still, low level illegal immigrants were deported under the last administration.
Low-Priority Immigrants Still Swept Up in Net of Deportation
By JULIA PRESTONJUNE 24, 2016
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/us/low-priority-immigrants-still-swept-up-in-net-of-deportation.htmlWASHINGTON — Three agents knocked on the door of a modest duplex in a Wisconsin town just after dawn. The Mexican immigrant living on the ground floor stuck his head out
They asked his name and he gave it. Within minutes José Cervantes Amaral was in handcuffs as his wife, also from Mexico, silently watched. After 18 years working and living quietly in the United States, Mr. Cervantes, who did not have legal papers, rode away in the back seat, heading for deportation.
It is a routine that continues daily. The Supreme Court on Thursday effectively ended initiatives by President Obama that would have given protection from deportation to more than four million immigrants in the country illegally, most of them parents of American citizens. Mr. Obama showed his frustration with the decision, saying his goal was to help immigrants who had raised families here and helped the country with their work. The president said immigrants who might have qualified for the programs would still be safe from deportation.
Still, deportations continue, thousands every week.
In November 2014 when Mr. Obama first announced the protection programs, he also set new priorities for enforcement. Since then, immigration authorities say, their focus is on removing convicted criminals and foreigners who pose national security threats. But the administration’s priorities also include deporting migrants from Central America, including children, who came in an influx since 2014. And immigrants who committed minor offenses — or none at all — are often swept up in the operations.
.
.
.
May 2016, this must've been Trump's fault too.
Alright then. This goes both ways.
Was Obama weak on immigration...or not?
There's this interesting trend where the default conclusion in attempts at this respectful bi-partisan discourse is simply trying to call out liberals for perceived hypocrises.
Trump ran on many things, but a big one was how Obama and the liberals have been letting anyone and everyone pour across our borders, giving the country away.
So which was it?
Alright then. This goes both ways.
Was Obama weak on immigration...or not?
There's this interesting trend where the default conclusion in attempts at this respectful bi-partisan discourse is simply trying to call out liberals for perceived hypocrises.
Trump ran on many things, but a big one was how Obama and the liberals have been letting anyone and everyone pour across our borders, giving the country away.
So which was it?
Well it is both, really it is.
High deportation numbers under President Obama led him to be called “Deporter-in-Chief” by some Democrats and immigration activits. After a peak in 2012 there were dramatic decreasing in each successive year to the point that in 2015 and 2016 there were a very dramatic drop off in deportations. As we know the President took executive actions to try and protect some people from deportation. He seemed embarrassed about the deportation figures more than anything.
So, deportations ran high in years of Obama’s first term, the left was upset, he tried to limit deportations, numbers dropped dramatically, the right was upset.
It is both. President Obama was in a lose-lose, if ICE enforcements and deportations remained high, his base would hate him for it. If enforcements and deportations drop, as they did, the right would hold it against him. Both are true.
i think some of the drop was because alot of immigrants were heading home on their own also but in general i agree.
Here is a story from this morning tied into what we are discussing
Opinion: On ICE Deportation Surges, Separating Facts from Speculation
by Victoria DeFrancesco Soto
Let me be clear, I am no fan of President Trump's immigration rhetoric and recent immigration executive orders. But in looking at the recent immigration enforcement surge we need to take three deep breaths and separate known facts from speculation as we remain vigilant.
First, the facts. During the week of February 9, 2017 there was an Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) surge. Preliminary information from ICE indicates that this was a targeted enforcement sweep of immigrants defined as criminals.
Coordinated ICE sweeps targeting undocumented criminals are nothing new. Such surges took place routinely during the Obama administration.
For the sake of comparison let's zoom in on the Los Angeles sector - one of the most immigrant populous regions of the country. Less than a year ago, in mid July of 2016, 112 foreign nationals were apprehended in an ICE sweep targeting at-large criminals. About half of these individuals had felony convictions and the remaining had misdemeanors. Last week in the same Los Angeles sector, 160 foreign nationals were apprehended; of which 150 had criminal histories and five had final orders of removal.
A quick comparison of the Los Angeles Sector ICE surge from July 2016 and February 2017 doesn't show a big difference. This most recent ICE surge looks like those in the past couple of years that have prioritized the removal of criminal foreign nationals. In the following weeks and months we will be better able to compare past and current apprehension rates but as it stands now the surge was a routine ICE operation.
The fact is that thus far we cannot say that the Trump administration is substantively doing anything differently than the Obama administration. Stylistically, though, Obama and Trump are worlds apart. President Obama did not publicize ICE surges, instead letting ICE carry out policy, whereas President Trump is highlighting the surge on twitter as his fulfillment of campaign promises.
More significantly, as with most things, the devil is in the details. An important fact is that under President Trump's executive order enhancing public safety in the interior of the U.S., the criminal status of an immigrant is not clear.
Under the Obama administration there was a prioritization of criminals with more violent offenders being top priorities. Under the Trump administration there does not seem to be a clear prioritization. This means that immigrants with a deportation order and no other criminal record could technically be classified as criminal.
"One crucial thing to look at is whether the Trump administration will expand the definition of a “criminal” offense to include an immigrant with a traffic violation."
It is too early to know whether the Trump administration's expanded definition of criminal ends up targeting non-violent offenders and those who may just have a traffic violation.
Relatedly this expanded definition could quickly inflate the numbers of ICE deportations.
This may very well happen, but that is speculation based on his rhetoric rather than factual confirmation.
For better or worse, only time will tell if this speculation is correct.
The point about not giving speculation too long a leash is that the most undeniable fact is that emotions and fear in the immigrant community are running high. This issue of deportation is one that tears apart families and that represents cultural, economic, and social uprooting.
Because of the delicate nature of this issue, we need to proceed with caution and not let speculation get the best of us.
Immigrants and immigrant advocates need to prepare for the worst, hope for the best, and in the meantime not let a paralyzing panic set in.
Lol. Sounds like conservatives liked Obama. I keep hearing Trump and his supporters justify his actions by saying "Obama did it too".
well, i don't know about that. when obama got elected and passed a the ACA, dems always reminded repubs it was their idea. our gov't tends to stay the same mostly between administrations except for a few tweaks. we'll see how much trump upsets the balance but i'm still sticking to.....not much.
