President Trump's New EO Immigration Memos; Children

Homeland Security Secretary released a new memo outlining immigration and deportation procedures to be implemented in Trump's upcoming revamped Executive Order.

The government just put out the blueprint for President Trump’s immigration crackdown

There's a LOT of stuff in these memos. Here and Here .

But here's the part, in particular, that I would like discuss in this thread.

In recent years, thousands of “unaccompanied alien children,” mostly from Central America, have come to the US, often fleeing persecution or seeking to reunite with relatives living in the country (or both). Because the processes for detaining and processing these children are so different, they’ve exacerbated the immigration court backlog and taken resources away from other immigration enforcement. And, to the consternation of many immigration hawks, most of them have been allowed to stay in the US in one form or another.

The executive order Trump signed last month tells DHS to make sure that unaccompanied children, “when appropriate, are safely repatriated” to their home countries. The DHS memo suggests two ways to do that: by changing the definition of who counts as an unaccompanied child; and by deporting the relatives of children who come to the US to join them

Kelly’s memo cites a statistic that 60 percent of children who arrive in the US unaccompanied end up in the custody of a relative. (The Department of Health and Human Services, which is responsible for the care of unaccompanied immigrant children, usually tries to locate a relative to take care of the child because they have limited capacity.) It suggests that children who are reunited with their parents once in the US should no longer be considered “unaccompanied alien children” within the US immigration system — and should therefore be treated as regular unauthorized immigrants and placed in deportation proceedings.

Okay. I can see that. I don't have a huge problem with that. That is unless, they're talking about deporting legal immigrant whose children, or children of their relatives, have come here to find them. We're talking illegal relatives right? I hope, I hope!!!

Let's read a little further.

Furthermore, it suggests that “parents and family members of these children” who are immigrants in the US, who often pay smugglers to ensure their children make it safely north, should be considered accomplices to human smuggling and trafficking. It recommends that legal immigrants who pay for their children to come to the US be referred for criminal prosecution — and that unauthorized immigrants who do the same be deported.

Oh no. Sigh.
This is a slippery slope, in my opinion. What constitute "payment". Are airline ticket purchases, purchased by an aunt for minor relatives, for example, who then overstay their visit, considered "Human Trafficking?"

Is this really a necessary step, charging legal US residents, or even citizens, with "Human Trafficking" criminal prosecution and deportation for taking in family members?

This feels very much like Nazi Germany! Talk me down ATS!

Is this a portion of the Trump's New EO that will be challenged in the courts? If so, how long will it take, how many legal residents and US citizens will be prosecuted/deported for "Human Trafficking" before courts take a closer look?

They are humans, they are trafficked, what more is there to explain?

There is a legal process for legal immigrants to apply for visas to have their children come to the US, that is not illegal human trafficking. Paying for their children to come into the US illegally is illegal, because illegal stuff is always illegal because it is illegal and forever will be until a law makes it legal, which will never happen.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
They are humans, they are trafficked, what more is there to explain?

Human trafficking is a form of modern-day slavery, and involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to exploit human beings for some type of labor or commercial sex purpose.
www.dhs.gov...

One could start by explaining how attempting to "save" children from the harm inflicted on them in their home country, by giving them a chance in America and paying for their safe transport and upkeep constitutes "slavery or exploitation".

There's enough illegal adults to go after, some who have committed crimes.

We know Trump cares about the numbers, about winning. These children are an easy target to boost statistics because many are registered in the system by relatives trying to get them legal status.

This would be creating Fluff statistics, so Trump can call himsrlf a winner.

Should we really push the relatives to hide them, get them false papers, and make them even more illegal? I don't think that's the right thing to do.

Is this really a necessary step, charging legal US residents, or even citizens, with "Human Trafficking" criminal prosecution and deportation for taking in family members?

What else would you like to call it?
There is a whole underground industry around this practice. It has been shown in several documentaries and "news" specials.
Is it less of a crime because it is committed by a relative?
Are the dangers less to the children because of who pays the bill?

a reply to: windword

Here is what your "sanctuary cities really support and accomplish:

www.dosomething.org...

Globally, the average cost of a slave is $90.

Trafficking primarily involves exploitation which comes in many forms, including: forcing victims into prostitution, subjecting victims to slavery or involuntary servitude and compelling victims to commit sex acts for the purpose of creating pornography.

According to some estimates, approximately 80% of trafficking involves sexual exploitation, and 19% involves labor exploitation.

There are approximately 20 to 30 million slaves in the world today.

According to the U.S. State Department, 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across international borders every year, of which 80% are female and half are children. Tackle a campaign to make the world suck less.

EXPLORE CAMPAIGNS The average age a teen enters the sex trade in the U.S. is 12 to 14-year-old. Many victims are runaway girls who were sexually abused as children.

California harbors 3 of the FBI’s 13 highest child sex trafficking areas on the nation: Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego.

The National Human Trafficking Hotline receives more calls from Texas than any other state in the US. 15% of those calls are from the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

Between 14,500 and 17,500 people are trafficked into the U.S. each year. Human trafficking is the third largest international crime industry (behind illegal drugs and arms trafficking).

It reportedly generates a profit of $32 billion every year. Of that number, $15.5 billion is made in industrialized countries.

The International Labour Organization estimates that women and girls represent the largest share of forced labor victims with 11.4 million trafficked victims (55%) compared to 9.5 million (45%) men.

a reply to: shooterbrody

What else would you like to call it?

Human Trafficking or Illegal Immigration? I'll stick with Illegal Immigration, thank you.

Is it less of a crime because it is committed by a relative?

It's less of a crime if "slavery, force, fraud, or coercion to exploit human beings for some type of labor or commercial sex purpose" are not involved.

a reply to: everyone

I'm not suggesting that those who actually engage in Human Trafficking should not be prosecuted. I'm suggesting that expanding the definition of "Human Trafficking" to "payment for safe passage and/or upkeep" is dangerous, possibly bordering on Nazi style fascism, when harboring illegal Jews was a capital offense.

a reply to: windword

The amount of human trafficking from neighboring countries is being enabled by having these so called "sanctuary cities" with their lacks immigration laws. People who dare to mention that a lot of mexicans are trafficking these people into those places are called racists and fascists and bigots on the spot. Its a career killer in sanctuary cities.

Start there.

a reply to: everyone

This has nothing to do with Sanctuary Cities. Sanctuary Cities are about city and county officials refusing to perform certain ICE related duties with local municipalities, employees, resources and funds.

This thread is about prosecuting relatives, whether illegal, legal or citizen of the US, for paying for safe transport of minor children, and/or their upkeep, for "Human Trafficking".

Gee, I wonder why Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego might be considered high sex trafficking areas.

ALL port cities, all international airports, good roads/fwy system, year 'round good weather, cultural/ethnic melting pot, no check points.

I'm gonna guess LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION.

I kind of don't like the last part. If your brother is not able to take care of the kids and sends them to you here in america, you shouldn't have to worry about getting thrown in jail for paying their bus fare from a town next to the boarder. You can't just leave those kids starve in Arizona, that would not be the right thing to do.

I see that there are some people paying for their relatives to come here illegally.

To fix this problem we should streamline immigration and take the process out of the hands of private lawyers who charge way too much to process immigrants. The government should have departments to handle this to at least try to get good people residency. Criminals should by no means be allowed into our country, we got enough of those already.

if you're smuggling someone in the US..... you deserve the punishment

Isn't illegal like... illegal and stuff, man?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: everyone

This has nothing to do with Sanctuary Cities. Sanctuary Cities are about city and county officials refusing to perform certain ICE related duties with local municipalities employees, resources and funds.

This thread is about prosecuting relatives, whether illegal, legal or citizen of the US, for paying for safe transport of minor children, and/or their upkeep, for "Human Trafficking".

It has everything to do with sanctuary cities as i already pointed out. They are the ones the most guilty of enabling this. By having such lacks immigration laws and lacks enforcement of them they enable human trafficking more so then anywhere else. Where do you think human trafficker likes to operate the most? Sanctuary cities, for obvious reasons as stated.

Trafficking people for payment is trafficking no matter how you attempt to spin it. The amount of money people pay for this trafficking is also many times higher then it would cost them to do it legaly so right of the bat that is a real shady motive to do it in that manner and on top of that those traffickers also often get paid by someone who is paying them to traffic very unwilling woman and children because they are intended for the sex industry. So how do yo wish to define paid trafficking now then ?

Human trafficking is human trafficking and it only creates more victims , not less. El punto final.

originally posted by: GreenGunther
Isn't illegal like... illegal and stuff, man?

Aren't children like... children and stuff, man?

What if it was you? What if you lived in a bullet riddled war zone and had a chance to get your child out of there?

I worked with a guy from El Salvador. His parents were still there. All living essentials, such as food, etc had to be kept at floor level. So, when the shooting started you could still survive by being prone on the floor for days.

a reply to: windword

Makes no difference. Kids or adults that can get away with claiming to be younger than 18 just have to keep claiming that they don't have a parent or legal guardian in the US.

A cousin or uncle/aunt or just a friend picking them up gets around the requirement:

An unaccompanied alien child, as defined in section 279(g)(2), Title 6, United States Code, is an alien who has no lawful immigration status in the United States, has not attained 18 years of age; and with respect to whom, (1) there is no parent or legal guardian in the United States, or (2) no parent of legal guardian in the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.

To be honest they just need a reason to be let out of custody and then drop from the radar.

Just another dog and pony EO.

a reply to: Annee

So the emotional argument makes it legal?

a reply to: everyone

Gripe about Sanctuary Cities all you like, but this issue has NOTING to do with them. Sanctuary City issues rest mostly on undocumented people who have been arrested and are in the system waiting deportation.

This issue has nothing do with that. This is about changing the definition of "Human Trafficking" in order to try and handle the problem of unaccompanied and/or undocumented children, by blaming the adults they're seeking and/or who are aiding them. This isn't about city officials who look the other way.

Please stick to the topic.