Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BeauBo

Doesn’t our stupid law require that they are released here to await hearing IF they set foot in the country?

What prevented us from releasing them to mesico, besides mesico if that, before now?

My point is to ask, isn’t returning them to mesico to await their asylum hearing circumventing our own law, not that I am in favor of that law at all.

What about the accompanied or unaccompanied minors thing?

It all sounds like the dims and cheap labor lovers have made up a bunch of laws that require us to keep and host the invaders.


115 posted on 06/08/2019 5:26:07 PM PDT by Sequoyah101 (It feels like we have exchanged our dreams for survival. We just hava few days that don't suck.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies ]


To: Sequoyah101

“Doesn’t our stupid law require that they are released here to await hearing IF they set foot in the country?”

Out Constitution entitles them to due process, if they set foot in the country. Under the Constitution, they are considered “US Persons” (not citizens), and that entitles everyone in our jurisdiction to some objective legal treatment.

They do not (constitutionally) have to be released prior to their adjudication though - other factors lead to their release.

Ratified treaties (The United Nations 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees) establish a right to request asylum, and lay out some requirements for handling such cases.

Those treaties don’t require that applicants be released before their cases are judged either.

No legislation requires release of asylum applicants pending their adjudication either.

The interpretation of some US judges, and the sheer number of cases backlogged, is why they are released. Hundreds of thousands of cases are backlogged, and the wait is typically years for cases to be heard and settled. Just too many to house and feed.

Also, a Judge decided that it is too harsh/unjustified to hold children in detention for so long, and the Government entered into a consent decree (under President Bill Clinton/AG Janet Reno), called the Flores Agreement, that children would not be held longer than 20 days, if they could be placed with someone in the USA.

Other court rulings restricted family separation, which resulted in adults being quickly released, if they had a “Get Out of Jail Free” child with them. There was also a rash of people falsely claiming to be under 19 to qualify for release.


125 posted on 06/09/2019 7:33:17 AM PDT by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson