Life\x27s Adventures
The New York Times
comments
Comments by "Life\x27s Adventures" (@bigphillyed) on "Trump Is Building Tent Courts Along The Border. Here's What They Look Like. | Visual Investigations" video.
4
2
NYT I call you out on another one of your hidden opt ed pieces. First question, how many federal immigration judges did Obama hire? How many federal immigration judges did Trump hire? Fact is Trump hired twice the amount as Obama, in an effort to speed up the asylum process. So those migrants truly in need of asylum were given a speedy trial. Next question, do migrants still in Mexico entitled to due process? What does SCOUTUS say on that topic? Even in one of your own articles you stated migrants in Mexico ARE NOT entitled to due process, only those migrants on American soil are entitled to due process. Your next comment was how video conference hearings are intangible and do not afford judges to see the same as they would in person. So why is it that the majority of American cities use some type of video conference for criminal hearings? One, SCOTUS has yet to hear a case that would label video conference trials as unconstitutional. Two, migrants awaiting asylum hearings in Mexico, again are not entitled to due process, so the topic is void. With asylum cases growing more daily then the courts can hear cases, the amount of immigration judges now hearing cases, there is no other viable option but video conference's. The cost to relocate hundreds of judges to the proper places along the border with the appropriate facilities is not an affordable option, especially considering the majority of asylum cases are denied. So your entire video here is debunked and with your own articles, stop spreading your false biased narrative, that is what is responsible for the divide in this country.
2
@himagainstill well someone has their Google immigration law degree. First of all there is no law saying we have to accept asylum seekers. Second Trump signed an executive order barring entry until their asylum case is heard by a federal immigration judge. Non-citizen migrants not on US soil seeking asylum have no right to due process. SCOTUS has already made that determination. SCOTUS also found Trukps executive order does not violate us law or the constitution. This article is more about the use of video conferencing for immigration hearings then anything else. The reality is, that if migrants would simply stop falsifying asylum claims, that would allow for those migrants who truly need it, to enter quickly. The only citizens in central America that are legally entitled to asylum into the US is Nicaraguans, those fleeing street level crime in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras are not entitled to asylum in the US and this is what is creating the bottleneck of migrants at the border. If migrants were truly in legitimate danger they would seek shelter in a nearby country such as Costa Rico, Panama, Belize or Mexico. But we know as a fact, from television interviews of migrants that they are migrating for economic reasons. That in itself is 100% reason for denial, and when they are denied they anger illegally. Keep in mind, we are discussing those migrants awaiting a hearing in Mexico. Illegal aliens caught in the US are detained, while they apply for asylum. If their case is found to have some merit, they are released to family in the states while an investigation is conducted, and a second hearing defines their status. You need to stop watching CNN my friend.
1
1
1
1
@himagainstill what you fail to understand is that Trump signed an executive order requiring all asylum seekers wait in Mexico. California, New York and a few other states challenged that in the 9th circuit court. Where the court found that Trump can sign the order and that it is legal and binding. There is no way you can spin any of these migrants as all either being refugees, they are not oppressed due to color, race, religion or special group. Gang members do not count as an oppressor, corrupt police do not count as oppressors. No matter what way you spin it, they are migrants, and 90% will most likely be turned down for asylum because there is no credible danger. Then they will all cross illegally and some will die crossing, their children may be harmed, or worst killed by drug mules, coyotes or gang members. America can not be responsible for citizens of other nations. There are limited resources that we must use for American citizens, period.
1
1