With a backlog of 700,000 asylum cases, does anyone think someone released into the u.s. is going to show up years later, especially after they have a couple of now u.s. citizen kids? These cases need to be decided at the border as they show up. In addition, an end to birthright citizenship, which most western countries have eliminated to deter women coming to their country simply to have a kid needs to end.
27
If the US is full could we put them on a bus to Canada? Would they take them?
25
My violin don't play that tune, when I hear these people whining. There is no entitlement to American residency or citizenship. They are earned. Title 8, United States Code, is the law of the land and says that due process must obtain before a person may enter or stay within the borders of the USA. If we don't enforce this very important body of law, we will soon have a billion people here, few of whom speak our language adequately or who share any of our values. I am proud to work for one of the Federal agencies responsible for compelling these people to adhere to our law.
33
People who are fearful for their lives have the option of migrating to other countries. There is no required "waiting period: for getting to a safe place!
I hate to say this, but Trump will win election again unless the Democratic Party strongly comes out against the position that being a crime victim is grounds for entry into the US. There are probably millions of Democrats and Independents who hold liberal positions on every subject EXCEPT immigration. Immigration is the one issue that will again hand the presidency to Trump.
30
Why aren't these people requesting asylum in Mexico?
This need to accept only asylum in the US betrays their motives. They want to live where the benefits supplied to them are more generous. Just read their reasons? "I want to find work and go to university."
UN regulations require "refugees" to stop at the first nation where they are no longer persecuted. Mexico is not persecuting these people.
34
I agree immigration needs to be clamped but Mexico isn't a solution for asylum. Mexico is a corrupt narco-state, no one wants to say I though.
2
The proper message for them it to GO HOME!!! Work to improve your home country, our country is full and mostly the reasons you are trying to come here exists in the US. We have gangs, crime, corruption, spousal abuse, and many other issues that you say justifies your coming here. We also have poverty, lack of opportunity especially for low skilled, and are over populated.
31
I think the USA needs at least two Secretary of States because one traditionally needs to spend much time in the Middle East, China and Europe. We need another one for South American countries alone; to start working on new South American Business Development to generate new profitable economies that create liveable wage employment for the innocent. People like the woman pictured are seeking safety, familial peace and work, wherever they can hope to make good homes. They should be able to hope and seek safe, good standards of living in beautiful South America, not just the USA.
We need an emmisary to promote business development in South America; developments that could generate more healthful prosperity for the two Americas. Ideally, North and South America could "side by side" be importing and exporting goods we can all utilize and earn lawful income selling.
9
I suppose applying for asylum in Mexico (with its minimal social welfare net), where most of these folks have been for weeks, is not acceptable?
35
'I’m sickened by a change like this since my country is a place where gangs extort money from innocents, and if you don’t pay you get a shot in the head,” said Yadira Barrios, 22, a maid from the city of San Pedro Sula in Honduras who has been camping out with her 4-year-old son, Marvin, near the bolder turnstiles in Nogales.'
In that case, getting pregnant at seventeen or eighteen wasn't a very smart move was it? Unless, of course, you intended all along to try to immigrate, legally or illegally to the USA, and you concluded that having a small child in tow would improve your chances.
40
The Customs officers at the border joke that they see the fetal hand of the anchor baby waving a thank-you whenever they let an enormously pregnant mujer into the country...
13
Liberals do know that only asylum seekers who were caught trying to illegally immigrate have their children taken away, right?
It feels to me that liberals think that anyone asking for asylum at a Port of Entry are having their children ripped from them and then being rushed to a jail.
If you are illegally crossing the border you are committing a crime. If I drive drunk, which is the same class of misdemeanor as first time illegal entry, I dont get to bring my kids to jail with me. They get put into protective custody. So why should someone being arrested for committing a crime of illegal entry get to bring their whole family to jail with them?
Also, if you are illegally crossing that means you had no plans to apply for asylum. You are only applying for asylum AFTER getting caught, as any sane person would do to try to stop getting deported. I dont see many illegal immigrants applying for asylum after making it to Denver and not getting caught.
43
Localized violence in El Salvador (no matter how extreme) does not qualify one for asylum in the US. Before trying to enter the United States, would it have been impossible to relocate to another part of El Salvador that perhaps is less violent? How about another country in Latin or South America? Would it have been impossible to move there?
Research shows that most possible from El Salvador are interested in economic opportunities and reuniting with friends and family already in this country. Nearly six-in-ten said they would move to the US if they could including 28% who would move to the US even without any authorization.
http://www.pewhispanic.org/2017/12/07/rise-in-u-s-immigrants-from-el-sal...
38
Salvadoran gangs are firmly in control of El Salvador. Relocating to another area will get you killed as you are assumed to have ties with the gang that controls the area you came from. The country is roughly the size of Rhode Island. The gangs in neighboring countries feel the same. The cartels in Mexico are worse.
These people are fleeing for their lives, whether or not one believes they deserve to be here or deserve the life these humans instinctively fight to live.
The US helped to create the conditions they flee from through failed policies of funding, arming, training soldiers in civil wars in the 80s. I'd like to see us help fix this problem in a meaningful way.
6
The stories reveal a common theme, an entitlement to cross into the US illegally; or state "fear" of returning home, and asylum will magically be granted. It is shameful that these migrants, hopeful illegal entrants, have been given false information concerning crossings. Our liberal mind-set and compassion have been taken advantage to the benefit to the illegal crossers. All state they all fear for their safety; wish for a better life and opportunity. But could not the same sentiments and desires be applied to those who are waiting legally through proper channels. Regardless of the plights of these would be illegal immigrants, enforcing the current immigration laws should not be seen as inhumane but as a deterrent to those who game our immigration laws. The illegal immigrant play book is common and has been used for years: cross illegally, plea asylum, receive a court date and do not return; hide in the shadows and amnesty will follow! What the current administration has donees an attempt to break the gaming cycle and enforce current laws to deter would be illegal crossers. The US is a finite country; at what point do we reach a saturation point that will transform our nation from a first to a third world country...?
44
For any of these people there is no legal channel. This is because any family member they have here has been trapped in the Temporary Protected Status which does not allow you to bring family members.
The United States created the conditions that these people have been fleeing since the Civil War in the 80s. First they were being massacred by United States trained and financed soldiers and now it is gang members armed to the teeth.
The United States goes in and destabilizes regions all the time. The difference is these people are close enough to walk to the Border.
2
"Us vs. Them"
"Them:" They come from Central America, and are poor, illegal, unwanted, suspect, lairs, etc.
"Us (US):" We are rich, we have papers, we are always honest, we belong here, etc.
Lost in the demands of the "Us(US)," is the absolute fact that only 2% of the US population is Native American.
That means 98% of the US population got here because they immigrated.
Who are you, the 98%, to stand up and demand that "They" don't get to immigrate to "our" country?
You are the "Us(US)" right now, but it should never be forgotten that you come from that group called "Them!"
You can try and run from that fact, but you can't hide it. We all know what happened, and yes, it's still relevant.
For myself, I understand why my family is here.
I read these articles and I see the same theme in the people seeking asylum now, that I see in my own family's decision to come here.
I say let them in! From any country on the Globe!
From the 98% of Us(US), anything less is hypocrisy.
7
A few things to consider:
Many Spanish surnamed families have been in this country long before the US became a nation, but lost their way of life because of illegal immigration, which themselves had inflicted on native Americans.
Back when the now state of Texas was part of Mexico, Stephen F. Austin got the Mexican government to allow a fixed number of Anglo immigrants settle in Texas. They just had to follow Mexican laws, including giving up slavery. Mr. Austin illegally brought many more than the agreement allowed him and kept slaves until the Mexican government got wise. Not much later Texas secede from Mexico, and when Mexico tried to assertain it's authority lost a third of its territory as a result of a devastating war with the US.
Moral of the story, a nation that does not forcefully limit and/or control immigration, loses its identity and way of life.
I would not want to see this country replicate the sad reality of countries south of the border that tolerate impunity, which generates so much injustice. Everyone in those countries is complicit with their system. Don't allow them to short circuit the system now and cut ahead of the line. That would be impunity.
3
You don't seem to understand what an immigrant is. An immigrant is a person who comes to the country from a foreign country to live permanently. Native-born citizens are not immigrants.
It does no good to say we're all descended from immigrants. I'm not. My ancestors founded this country.
George Washington was not an immigrant. He was born a British subject. He committed treason and, in 1776, lost his British status and became a citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia. When the Constitution was adopted in 1789, he became a United States citizen, and of course the first President.
You can't charge me with hypocrisy, because you don't understand the purpose of the United States. Reread the Preamble to the Constitution. (If you're my generation, you can sing it.) See the part about "ourselves and our posterity"? The purpose of the United States is to serve the ordinary happiness of the people of the United States. It's nice to make foreigners happy, and it's nice to make immigrants happy, but it's not the main point. Any American, native-born or naturalized, can, without hypocrisy, advocate limiting immigration.
As for "us versus them," my ancestors came from Britain and France. Those countries consider me an alien. I have a congenital illness that makes me ineligible for a work permit in any other country. If America prospers, I eat. If it doesn't, I starve. America matters more to me than other countries.
I make no apologies for putting it first.
38
You assume every person that came to they US in the past, did so legally.
I understand the distinction of immigrants vs born here, I just don't agree that it's pertinent.
Given that you do, you won't have a problem with the US native born children of illegal immigrants from Mexico, Central America, and South America staying in the US, right?
They're born here.
They're US citizens.
They have right to be here.
They are not immigrants.
They should not be forced to leave, and live outside of their country.
So, do you support them remaining in the US?
If not, why not, and is it possible that your view is less about immigration, and more about something else?
WOW
These comments REALLY show that even the left of the left AREN’T buying the bleeding-heart stories I hear every day on NPR, WNYC…
If you are being chased by a maniac, you don’t run past by cops until you see one you like and ask for help. Why go through these many safe countries and not stop until you reach the U.S border and claim you need protection from your partner?
These things are civil matters. Not our concerns. Criminal charges should be brought again those folks coaching these people. This is fraud perpetrated by U.S citizens
48
They like our benefits
20
The stories are painful to read, heart wrenching and, at times, horrible; yet within these stories reveals the compassion and sympathies of ordinary Americans. We are a just, caring and loving nation. It is a beacon of hope and opportunity; and a magnet for illegal migration into this nation. Stories of woe and despair feed upon our better angels of the American population; fanning our liberal sentiments for forgiveness and acceptance. In Latin American countries, it is widely known that once an illegal crosses, American norms and statues will allow all illegals to stay without repercussion. American immigration law is an inconvenience at best to illegal immigrants and not to be adhered to. The perilous journey, putting children at risk, paying smugglers and determination to enter illegally serve as herculean tasks to be rewarded and as a justification to remain illegally. While millions wait and go through the immigration maze to enter legally, illegal entrants are protected and extolled as people seeking a better life for their children. Illegal immigrants have gamed the system and play the sympathy card to a nation of compassionate people who believe that if illegals have successfully entered, then they must be protected!
23
6,409,861 people live in El Salvador. In 2013, the PEW Research Center conducted a survey there which showed that nearly six in ten Salvadorans would move to the U.S. if they could, including 28% who admitted that they would be willing to enter the U.S. without the legal permission to do so.
The U.S. has trouble housing and educating its own population. We cannot welcome large numbers of people, especially those who would be heavily dependent on government services and subsidies.
reference for survey results: 12/7/17 PEW web page tilted "Rise in U.S. Immigrants From El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras Outpaces Growth From Elsewhere"
37
According to the "migration policy institute" 1 in 4 el Salvadorans currently lives in the u.s. Polls in Mexico suggest 30% of its present population would move here now if they could. That's 40 million people. Clearly Central America has an inexhaustible supply of poor, unemployed, people. The only solution that does not involve letting them all come here is one that involves birth control and economic aid to their home countries. We cannot and should not be expected to absorb this never ending supply of people.
22
Every refuge-seeking person is being allowed into the US...they just have to wait at the border. Small price to pay to enter "The Land of Plenty". Make no mistake about it, the "activists" who encourage the potential immigrants have thoroughly prepared them as to what to say and how to answer the questions immigration officials will ask to justify processing them as refugees.
The whole process is a sham, everyone will get in. Regardless what Trump and Sessions say in public, there is no legal framework in this country to differentiate between a "valid" refugee and someone wanting to enter the US by circumventing the immigration process everyone else is supposed to follow. Just claim gangs are after you or there is no work in your town, and you get to stay in the US, and be entitled to all benefits at taxpayer expense.
Americans voters need to pressure politicians to change this shameful travesty, before it is too late.
32
You are correct. They go before judges with stories, not proof. "Credible fear" -- is the story credible? That's how it gets decided. Judges have nothing else to go on! These asylum seekers are coached by liberal lawyers in order to game the system. I agree with Sessions and with Trump-- this has to stop. Legitimate asylum seekers would apply for asylum in Mexico, where they can be safe and already know the language. These are economic migrants and we cannot afford to take all who would enter.
10
Asylum seekers have to wait a few days at the border. Applicants trying to gain citizenship the old fashioned way have to wait years.
45
Our refugee system is a joke. Dishonest economic migrants use it for backdoor entry. This isn't my opinion. It's fact. Only 20% have legitimate claims. Yes it's sad. But if the political class continues to insist America be Central America's homeless shelter, Trump will win again.
68
The Board of Immigration Appeals decisions are binding on all Department of Homeland Security officers and immigration judges unless modified or overruled by the attorney general or a federal court. To be eligible for asylum in the United States applicants must prove that they are persecuted or have a reasonable fear of persecution in their home countries due to their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. In 2014, the BIA ruled, in effect, that women qualify as a social group because their gender is immutable. It also ruled, in effect, that crime can rise to the level of persecution, thus making crime victims eligible for asylum. Therefore, the BIA ruled, women who are victims of domestic abuse qualify for asylum.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions overruled the BIA for several reasons. Crime victims are not victims of persecution; persecution is punishment based of race, religion, political opinion or membership in a social group, and by social group, the asylum laws apply to ethnic groups. Qualifying women as a social group because of their gender means half of humanity meets the definition of social group for the purposes of applying for asylum. (And by logic, the male of half of humanity would also qualify, since their gender also is immutable.) And lastly, the United States could not absorb the billions of women worldwide who suffer from domestic violence.
47
El Salvador is not at war. There are gangs there but there are gangs in the US too, MS-13, etc, that target Americans. There is gang violence and gun violence in the US, especially Long Island and also particularly Chicago. Should the people of Long Island and Chicago take a cue from El Salvador and claim asylum in Canada? Would Canada accept such claims?
The US should assist El Salvador in combatting their gang problem, the military of El Salvador should step up to the plate and return the country to law and order. The US army could offer training and logistic support.
Asylum applies to persecuted minorities (based upon race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group and political opinion). Unless the gangs are targeting such minorities, most asylum seekers simply will not meet these criteria.
Also, why can't these people claim asylum in Mexico, they traveled the entire length of Mexico to get to the US, or else why not claim asylum in nearby and safe haven Columbia, Costa Rica, or Panama? The majority of Americans want immigration reform. Enough is enough.
63
The problem here is of Obama's making, as with Trudeau in Canada and Merkel in Germany, that when you broadcast to the world that all are welcome, guess what, they will come!
And then you have all these no-borders extremists exacerbating the problem by coaching the migrants "just tell them your [insert patriarchy hate figure here] beats you and they'll let you in"
So that's what many of them are doing, flagrantly abusing the asylum process, so now we have to close that loophole, and the tragedy is that the truly deserving won't get it because the rest were being greedy.
It's as simple as that.
53
What, again? Just in the last two days, there was an article about ICE in Tennessee, plus the opinion by Michelle Goldberg, and now this. Over and over, it's the same thing every time. I mean, really? You have to use the photo of kids with their Mickey Mouse coloring books? This is just too much, it's straight up propaganda. For the love of God, STOP. You're going to blow the Democrats' chances this year and in 2020.
60
The problem with the US Asylum system is that there is no way to verify any of the stories of persecution these people tell. In many ways, US cities like parts of Baltimore or Chicago are more violent and unsafe than the central American countries. Once these asylum seekers enter the US, the whole system is gamed by US immigration lawyers and in any case decisions take years if not decades to work through the bureaucracy. It is better to treat the Asylum seekers as economic refugees. There are jobs in meatpacking, fruit picking and seasonal hospitality industry that Americans are not willing to do. The demand from employers should determine how many economic refugees we let in.
22
Better yet, accelerate deployment of eVerify and require businesses to use it. Americans WILL take jobs if they are paid a decent wage. Letting in unskilled migrants especially with children will add to local, state and Federal benefit, welfare, educational and healthcare expenses. Unskilled immigrant wages are not enough to offset these additional costs. Jobs that the unskilled can do will continue to disappear due to automation - the unskilled/uneducated already here should have priority.
27
American citizens will work in any industry if the wages and benefits allow them a middle class lifestyle. Illegal immigration stops the laws of supply and demand from delivering good wages to American Citizens.
Even Cesar Chavez complained about the use of unauthorized Mexican migrants. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 aimed to legalize farm workers and stop illegal immigration. But without heavy fines being levied on employers who knowingly hired illegal workers, the legal farm workers never received the promised higher wages and benefits.
17
'There are jobs in meatpacking, fruit picking and seasonal hospitality industry that Americans are not willing to do.'
Simply not true. This is a myth invented by the owners of the meatpacking, fruitpicking and seasonal hospitality industry in order to lobby for more illegal and legal unskilled workers in order to minimise labour costs and maximise profits for the owners. Significantly increase hourly pay rates. Improve working conditions, overtime, and perks. Plenty of endogenous Americans will then apply.
15
The world (and apparently a lot of Americans) needs to accept the reality, however unpleasant, that we, no more than any other nation, cannot accept every single person who wants to come here to live. It is indeed very sad that a lot of countries, including those here in our own hemisphere, are such chaotic places that people prefer to flee; but that historic failure and political corruption does not mean that we must be the eternal safety valve for their most unhappy citizens.
It has nothing to do with disregarding poems on the Statute of Liberty or the "we're a nation of immigrants" line, but an acceptance of conditions in the modern reality in which we live. Our capacity to assimilate and absurd untold millions of low skill, non-English speaking people and their extended families comes with a high cost to the American people, the very people that need to come first in that analysis.
4
Why aren't they making new lives in Mexico? They're safe from the violence in their home countries from which they seek asylum. Mexico is a fine place with a growing economy. The migrants already know the language. IMexico would benefit in all the same ways the U.S. would from the influx of motivated immigrants. It seems like such an obvious win-win solution. Why hasn't it occurred to everyone?
54
why don't any of the asylum seekers go to the border in Costa Rica? It's a nice country and closer than the U.S.
50
Wow. From all the attacks on the few "lefties" or "liberals" expressing outrage on this latest ban on immigration, I can see few recall the role of this country in South America for the past forty years. Specifically the CIA's role in destroying democracies in those countries, supporting dictators, pushing our great "war on drugs", and turning those countries into graveyards. Nicaragua, El Salvador , Guatemala, hundred of thousands killed, millions turned into refugees, orphans and every conceivable form of torture. And of course, we're still at it. Ah, the amnesia of this country....Read history people. Read.
5
The influence of Spain laid the ground work for the failure of much of south and Central America. Perhaps Spain should take them all in? At some point, these countries and their populations have to take responsibility for what occurs in their country. Moving everybody here is not a viable solution.
15
Burdening the hard working middle class is not the way to atone.
14
“Where’s the dignity in treating families this way?” Ms. Rodríguez asked,.... “No one should be forced to live like animals just to cross into the United States.”
I agree, that is an indignity no one should face. But it does not answer the question of who should be obligated to pay for that entry? That is more a political decision and one for the people accepting the burden. The Golden Rule addresses the issue, but not the question of who pays. It is easy for an immigration judge or advocate make the claim of need and desire. That is apparent without adding the cost of the judgment process. How about the sending countries? How about the transit countries? Normally someone fleeing would be aided in the first country but Mexico merely opens its borders for those p assing through and admits very few on the very claims assert here.
So it is easy to say, this should not happen. But it is a throw away comment without addressing the questions of who should pay and is migration the only or best solution? We are deficient on both counts, moral and rational issues are left dangling.
8
My oh my, after reading these comments I never realized there were so many Christians who read the NY Times.
Jesus wept.
6
Always with the “Christian” thing, as if being kind is utterly endless and without also taking care of one’s own. Do you let as many homeless people stay in your home as the walls can hold? Do you donate all of your salary to charity? Do you give anything to someone who asks for it? Or do you strike a balance and recognize that you cannot feed and clothe everyone while still taking care of your family and obligations? We do a lot for other people and countries but we cannot take in or care for everyone in the world who wants to come here...and being Christian or Jewish or Muslim has nothing to do with it.
22
The USA is not a Christian nation, and national policy is set by Congress, not Jesus, the Ayatollah, or the Great Reb. "We are a nation of laws, and not of men" John F. Kennedy, on the occasion of his enforcement of integration laws in Little Rock, AR.
It is amazing to me that Democrats will require that cake bakers, country clerks, and all kinds of people follow the law about treatment of gays to the very smallest comma. But when it comes to 25,000,000 illegals, we are somehow paralyzed and unable to enforce a single federal law. Why is that?
32
Have to feel for these folks, but have toast why do they keep coming ?
4
Why don't they ask for asylum in Mexico?
It's a serious question. If somebody is fleeing violence in Honduras, why do they have to come to the U.S.? Why not go to Belize, which is right next door?
I would like to see the question at least addressed in articles of this nature.
53
There are countries to the South which could be viable for asylum seekers as well.
4
We diminish ourselves when we refuse help to other people who need help so badly.
6
Each day I feel happier and happier as we see America become GREAT again. Now all we need is the WALL!
20
The majority in this country is steadily becoming the minority. It'll happen by 2020 in Texas. American has always been GREAT and will continue to be GREAT.
2
Under current guidelines, none of the people in this article will qualify for asylum. The best thing is to VERY quickly process them through a perfunctory administrative review, and send them packing. We are no longer the Big Daddy of the World. We are not responsible for the many failed states near us. These countries are mismanaged by their own people, and if we take the losers in this article, the pressure to reform these countries will be removed.
55
What kind of neighbor refuses to help an abused woman or child? Our country was built by immigrants many of them seeking asylum from religious, political and economic abusive situations. We were a greater country when we welcomed those who came and built our railroads, canals, built our cities and worked our factories and fields. We need to stop this economic/race based discrimination.
9
"What kind of neighbor refuses to help an abused woman or child?"
This is an excellent question to ask Mexico, Costa Rica, Panama and the rest of Latin America.
55
Panama habitually holds people being brought through its territory by smugglers for a while, and then sets them loose upon promises to depart Panama within a set number of days. They don't stop them from proceeding north or hear asylum claims.
They are knocking on our door, the response should not be, "ask someone else." They are asking us and we should help.
Why not use all the strength, energy, ingenuity, courage and commitment that it takes to make the journey to the US and use it to improve conditions in your own country so you don't have to come here in the first place?
61
Right, because as an individual it is 100% possible to completely reverse the trend of extreme violence, corruption and economic hardship in a country!
4
Most of the commentors seem to be against the refugees. All Christians I'm sure.
8
Do you man that being christian implies a high standard of ethical values? How naive....
3
I'm a transgender atheist marijuana consultant and I dont want unlimited asylum or immigration. You cant just pawn this off on religion.
34
i don't want unlimited asylum/immigration either and I am not religious. I was being sarcastic!
Another day and sob story from the liberal, globalist, open borders NY Times covering these "refugees" and attempting to create the impression that the president and his administration are evil. Lets be perfectly clear on something. If it wasn't for our most previous so-called president and his soft immigration policies this influx would've never happened in the first place. After five years it rages on with no end in sight and has cost taxpayers at all levels billions while he goes around the word giving speeches in exchange for large checks. Poverty, gang violence and lack of opportunity in Central America didn't start on poor Obama's watch. It existed for decades. What encouraged it is protecting the very illegal aliens that our useless federal government is still debating today and it's no coincidence that as they continue doing so, numbers attempting to cross the border increase. A country that rewards illegal immigration and allows asylum claims for every excuse under the sun will only encourage more of it. It's time for the insanity to end and those politicians responsible permanently thrown out of office. Enough is enough.
In regards to the final sentence about “No one should be forced to live like animals just to cross into the United States” apply for asylum in the very country that you're presently standing in. It's the closest safe place to your own country and where you belong doing so. The fact that you don't is very telling of what your intentions are.
49
Patriot from Wisconsin , Your comment is very obvious where your information is gleaned . Obama was known as the deporter in chief , but he did it quietly , without the bluster on the bully pulpit of your president whose bias knows no bounds . I suppose your ok with all the scoundrels in his administration ripping off the taxpayer ( Scott Pruitt comes to mind , having already ripped 3 million from all of us ) but keep blaming everybody else for this human river and ignore the fact there are many factors involved here , the federal government is easy to put the onus on but you forget Trump and his merry band of thieves are in charge . Sheesh !
9
@SM: What's very obvious here is how misinformed you are. The label of deporter in chief that Obama received from illegal alien advocates is inaccurate and unjustified. He and his administration changed the definition of deportation to include those caught at or near the border and sent back. The result being inflated numbers. Most previous administrations didn't use this definition and their numbers would've been way higher than Obama's if they would've. I encourage you to read the article link below from the Los Angele's Times.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deportations-20140402-story.html
In regards to the rest of your post, I give blame and credit where both are due. President Obama's soft immigration policies ignited this influx and the rest of our elected leaders outside of President Trump and conservatives in congress haven't done a thing to stop it. Yes, Trump and his administration have control of the executive branch. They don't though have powers of the purse and the authority to pass laws and enforce them outside of what congress authorizes. If they don't give him that ability, they belong permanently thrown out of public office. Five years of this insanity is enough.
1
One should apply for asylum in the first country of opportunity. Case Closed.
34
Canada would be very happy if you would apply that idea to the many thousands who show up from the U.S. to claim asylum. They avoid official points of entry, of course. These are people who have been in the U.S. with approved visas, which have now expired. Will you take them back?
Very funny. I think you're referring to failed asylum seekers, here, who decide to try their luck over yet another border! It is not American citizens claiming asylum in Canada. That would be ludicrous, and they would be laughed out of even Canada's asylum system.
I waited two years to immigrate legally, i guess they can wait some weeks
32
People who are fleeing for their lives will not be deterred. What is most amazing is how so many Americans can describe themselves as "pro-life" and "Christians". Yet many of these same pro-life Christians describe migrants as "breeding animals."
6
Wrong. The most flagrant US enablers of illegal immigration are the pro-life Catholic Church and many pro-life evangelical Christian outfits with their "sanctuary" shenanigans, political lobbying, etc. All of it is for the cynical purpose of growing congregations and raking in the cash that will follow.
20
This makes it sound as if having to wait in someplace safe is a worse hell than being forced to stay in violence-plagued El Salvador. Next time call and make a reservation first. I know I’m not a heartless person, just tired to being forced to shed crocodile tears every day when I read a paper with an agenda. The problem is they all do.
27
Liberals have lost their collective minds and will continue to lose elections if they continue to want everyone else to pay to bring in more people with no means of support from poor countries simply because they are poor.
69
I wonder when the message will get through. American workers need jobs in America, not Mexican illegals. American workers want to change beds in hotels, not just Mexican illegals. American workers do not want illegals to take jobs from American workers.
28
The NYT and other media consistently use the terms "immigrants" and "migrants" (and, increasingly, "asylum seekers"), and usually fail to make a distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens.
The US has laws and procedures governing immigration that allow foreigners to seek entry and citizenship. Those who do not follow these laws and procedures are in this country illegally (i.e., lawbreakers) and should be detained and deported, though if eligible they should be allowed to follow legal procedures and requirements to seek entry and citizenship to the US after they return to their home countries.
The US cannot afford to support its own citizens: the poor, the ill, elderly, disabled, veterans, et al. It is therefore utterly impossible for US taxpayers to support the millions of people from other countries who would like to come to the US. That is why there are laws limiting the numbers of immigrants legally allowed into this country each year.
The cruelty lies not in detaining and deporting illegal aliens, or forcing them to wait in Mexico or Canada for processing. What is cruel, unethical and probably illegal is teaching foreigners how to try to game the system to enter the US by falsely claiming asylum, persecution, abuse, etc.
49
I see the NYT is once again engaging in labored euphemisms to describe illegal immigrants, moving on from labeling them "undocumented immigrants" to "migrants" and now using the phrase "asylum seekers" as part of its continuing effort to put lipstick on a pig. You guys still aren't fooling anybody with the double-talk.
43
Another day, another crying towel story from this paper.
It's all about the refugees, immigrants, DACAs and illegals, all day, every day. Let's take into our country endless millions of poor, uneducated, foreign, unskilled, single mothers with multiple children. We have nobody suffering withing America to care about, right? And we have unlimited natural resources, free medical care and plenty of available affordable housing too.
44
Does it really make sense to be taking in single mothers from other countries, on the basis that being a poor single mother warrants amnesty?
I don't think it does. And honestly, Mexico isn't that bad. If these people were truly in danger, they wouldn't feel compelled to get into the United States. The reason they want to come here is for the higher wages, the better schools, the better housing, and the better healthcare. But in doing this, they drive wages down for our low skilled workers, they crowd our schools and make them worse, they make low rent neighborhoods harder to afford for our poor - who then wind up in tent cities, and they increase our healthcare wait times and costs by flooding ERs with no ability to pay for the care they receive.
And then should they get in, they usually wind up having even more children, who like their parents wind up as lifetime wards of the state.
Because of all this, I think making them wait at the border before sending them away is perfectly reasonable. So is separating them from their children. And should they attempt to storm our borders like the Gazans attempted in Israel, I think having the National Guard shoot at their legs - with the understanding that there may be some casualties - would also be appropriate. A country is allowed to use as much force as necessary to protect its borders, and I'm glad Trump is putting Americans first!
53
There is no reason to admit to the United States victims of domestic abuse or other crimes from other countries. The Department of State should begin an advertising campaign in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala that the fact that these people live in lawless and ungoverned countries does not mean that they may live in the United States. Assylum should only be granted to individuals fleeing Communist dictatorships like Cuba or Venezuela.
The "victims" of crime should consider walking south to close by Panama or Costa Rica, two peaceful and well governed countries. They would not have to learn a new language; not that speaking English is required in the United States. Additionally, Panama and Costa Rica offer similar Hispanic cultures.
79
Migrant, immigrant, refugee.
A migrant worker follows the crops or, in the old days, was a cowboy following the herds.
An immigrant is someone trying to come to our country to work or live or become a citizen.
A refugee, as defined by a 1951 UN treaty signed by over 150 nations, including the USA, is "... is someone who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence. A refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. Most likely, they cannot return home or are afraid to do so."
There is a HUGE difference between following the crops and fleeing for your lives.
We seem to have forgotten this.
23
"Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me."
The cruelty with which GOP leadership is treating innocent children and their families is unGodly and inhumane.
I gave up believing in Hell decades ago, but I might have to reconsider it. God will have something to say about these rabid wolves in sheep's clothing.
10
@Sarah
I am with you, and I am a devout Atheist. It is one thing to turn away people at the border, but completely another to rip away children (and babies) from their mothers/fathers all in an effort to dissuade future asylum seekers. Never mind that the practice is against the law, yet no one is doing anything about it.
My heart weeps.
Are you going to welcome any of these asylum seekers into your home? If not, spare us the crocodile tears and vindictiveness for those of us who believe that it is up to other nations to step up for a change when it comes to asylum and its costs to U.S. taxpayers.
6
Your quoting those scriptures now is testimony to why they have endured the test of time. It still doesn’t mean they mean anything, it’s just fun to do and the act of quoting anything is all we have left that’s unique to convince ourselves that we’re still above the rest of the animals regardless of how similarly we behave. The comforting fact about Hell turning out to be real is that then the other stuff is too. It’s that irony that makes Hell, Hell.
1
Oh dear, they have to wait a few days. Why don't they apply for asylum in Mexico?
74
Mexico has closed its borders; it is now directing these people to the U.S. borders.
2
Boo-hoo.
We have enough people, enough problems.
43
They have to wait?
Oh my God, the horror.
57
It’s probably really not that bad judging from the photos of women and kids camped out like they’re waiting on the sidewalk for the Rose Parade, as opposed to being caught in rival gangs’ gunfire like in El Salvador. Still, watchdogs just feel as if they need to bark at anything that moves, even if it is the postman delivering a fat check.
2
Why not seek asylum in Mexico?
66
Because Mexico is no better. Eventually we’ll all be pushed up into Canada. Then let’s see Canadians put their money where their mouth is. It’s unfortunate that name calling only stops when there’s no one left to call them.
4
The USA needs to affirmatively select those we wish to have join our nation. Just because a woman makes a bad marriage choice and gets beat up at the hands of her husband is not a reason for admittance. First of all, it is not our responsibility to rescue domestic violence sufferers around the world and second they bring nothing of value to the US. None of these claims can be verified and it is none of our business anyway. It refugee/ legal complex wants to keep the flood gates open by coaching these applicants with the talking point they think will allow them in. People should be turned away immediately and asked to apply like everyone else, with no judicial review what so ever. When the history of this period is written Mr. Trump will be recognized as the man who saved the nation from the deep state and restored the rule of the people.
61
They are coming here for Economic Reasons if Mexico had generous Welfare and Freebies like we give away they would stay there/ this article should be finding out what the leadership is doing in their country to make its citzens safe not putting Guilt trips on the already over burden American Tax payer who can not even take care of the 2 million homeless in its own country!
67
They should not be allowed to cross our borders. We pay enough for illegals; time to clean house and lock the piggy bank.
Democrats will continue to lose elections if they keep illegals and DACA as their big issues
75
It isn't illegal to apply for asylum. There are no illegal people. When you jay walk, you don't become an illegal walker do you?
3
The Con Don and his Robber Baron brethren in OUR U.S. cabinets, regulatory agencies and every other segment of OUR lives are destroying OUR social safety net and every social good every second of every day.
They are finally seeing the fruits of their 40+ year hostile financial takeover of OUR country and lives.
The male power-over model of fear-anger-hate-Lies,Lies,Lies- WAR-death-destruction-rape-pillage-plunder must die. NOW. Organized religion - which is only meant to keep the peons under control so the Robber Barons can continue to rob 99% of us blind - must die.
The civilization destroyers are old men. WE THE PEOPLE must stop them right now and create a Partnership Society where Socially Conscious Women and men share power and create governments that protect 99% of us from the Robber Barons.
NOW it the time - in OUR United States and around the world. There are just a few of them. WE are many and can destroy them in a few days if we work collectively to take away their stock market, consumer and retirement money power. Boycott, move your money to local banks and credit unions, buy from brick and mortar local retailers, march, demonstrate and above all VOTE.
7
Why aren't these migrants seeking asylum in Mexico, Costa Rica, Nicaragua or Columbia? The answer is simple! Those countries do not provide the social welfare benefits the U.S. taxpayer is forced to pay for their well-being. When is the NYT going to profile the leaders of the so-called "triangle of Central America" and ask what they are doing with the millions of U.S. aid sent to them annually? Who ARE their leaders? Where is their accountability to our government? Where is their responsibility to their citizens? Why is the MSM silent on this subject?
106
Their leaders are ALL puppets of the U.S. doing our bidding.
1
Actually their puppet leaders are doing the bidding of the capitalist and political elites of the U.S. NOT the bidding of the average U.S. citizen, which is becoming increasingly obvious.
When are we going to acknowledge decades of US involvement in Central America has contributed to the modern wave of immigration? We've acted as enablers, trainers, funders, and suppliers to authoritarian ring wing regimes who committed untold amounts of human rights violations that would shock any decent human being to their core. So your empty platitudes about tax payers and how our money is currently being used rings hollow. The result of our misguided meddling in the affairs of these countries will continue to be felt in the coming decades regardless of the draconian policies the Trump regime puts in place. Also, you couldn't bother doing a quick search to see asylum requests have risen by 150% in Mexico since 2017? Facts buddy, they matter.
3
This asylum gaming has gone too far and has been usurped by the left for purely political purposes. Life can be tragic but it is not the sole responsibility of the USA to save billions of people from whatever their tragedy may be. There are over a dozen countries in South and Central America these people can go if they are troubled by where they live, but they chose to double, triple and quadruple their journey because they think they can think the USA is a better deal. With other avenues to safety, it is disingenuous to claim this is anything but an economic play. It is correct and imperative that our government disabuse them of these thoughts.
93
Where are your ancestors from, TED338?
WE THE PEOPLE must send you back to where they came form.
People who think like you could get on board to DEMAND real immigration reform - instead of destroying the lives of those who also want to come here for a better life. Your ancestors would not agree with what is happening now because our ancestors were ALL immigrants.
2
Not sure why my reply to TED338 shows up three times. I only posted it once.
Someone or something is interfering with comments on the NYT. Hope they can figure out the problem soon. OUR voices are very important - especially right now.
The U.S. is not responsible for all the ills of the world; we cannot absorb all the world's poor. The EU monitors its borders; Mexico, Chile et al monitor their borders. We do not have the right to monitor ours? The women pictured in the article do not look as if they are starving. And, what skills do they bring to a high tech, high skilled work force? How many motels, hotels and restaurants are hiring? Enough to absorb this inflow? This is nonsense; it is an economic migration; we have our own homeless and unemployed. The U.S. does not need or want this crowd at the border, being shunted here by Mexico et al.
There are four things that need to happen immediately, otherwise the problem of human migration, displacement and refugee seekers is only going to get worse.
1. The failed war on drugs needs to end, coupled with the west (U.S.) contributing to the eradication (and replacement) of the coca and poppy plants for economically sound crops in those areas.
2. The wars need to end, that are in large part due to the crops that warlords, gangs and governments are displacing their citizens to keep control of.
3. The first world is going to have to help the 3rd much more than it is, otherwise the walls will not be high enough under any circumstances. The 3rd world is being mismanaged dramatically and pillaged for its resources in the same manner by the 1st.
4. Human population growth needs to come under control in some way that is ethically responsible. This planet simply cannot support the billions now, let alone in 20 years from now.
The globe, since the history of man begun has created tribes, and now arbitrary lines on a piece of paper to divide them up even more.
We need to come together as one populace or we are going to become extinguished as one populace. Our choice.
29
Keeping the United States is a permanent state of undeclared war IS what American politics is all about because our rulers can thus use this contrived situation as an excuse to suppress the civil rights of U.S. citizens at home. And most Americans seem to have no problem with continually throwing the dead bodies of American soldiers on the trash heap of history, and throwing the living bodies of American veterans on the trash heaps along our streets. In fact, this IS the conservative way to Make America Great Again.
6
Just singing Kumbaya takes a lot less breath and will do as much good as trying to ask for all that. The sun goes down at the end of everyday, regardless.
1
We can not come together as one populace in one political entity. People across the globe have fundamentally incompatible ideas about what sort of nation they want, who should be able to vote, what the status of women should be, what constitutes rape, how often one should wash, how important indoor toilets are, who if anyone gets to vote, whether or not germ theory is real, and a boatload of other quirks that make up our various cultures.
You can not move large numbers of Group A into a place occupied by members of Group B without serious conflicts.
18
Our generous hearts and open minds made America Great. We are a country of asylum seekers, people fleeing religious and political persecution, famine and wars were welcomed here, they came, built canals, railroads, dug mines, cleared forests and planted fields. We need to welcome Asylum seekers if we want to stay a great country. What kind of neighbor would not help a battered woman or child escape an abuser? We can and should do better.
15
Thank you, finally a comment with compassion.
7
The problem is, there is no end to the misery and suffering all over the world. If we take in all the people who are fleeing violence, injustice, rape, domestic violence, hunger, poverty, and lawlessness, our borders would explode. We cannot possible stanch the flow of desperation. We could eradicate every bit of greenery in this country and displace or kill all the wildlife trying to build housing for everyone, and still not stem the tide of despair. The only difference is that we will have destroyed the environment and plundered our resources in the process.
89
It's as if everyone in this comment section forgets that they are here, one way or another, becuase their parents/grandparents/ancestors sought to make a better life for themselves in the United States.
12
Not at all..but conditions 50 or 100 years ago were not the same as today!
6
I don't know about you, but my ancestors came to the US legally, which is the case with most Americans.
I--and I think the great majority of Americans--welcome immigrants who come to the US legally, under established procedures and laws. The problem is with those who enter or attempt to enter the US illegally; they should be deported immediately.
22
What you say may be true, but it's also irrelevant. The u.s., in the past, like many countries had lax or non existent immigration laws. That was a long time ago. The world has changed. Neither world nor the u.s. is empty anymore in need of mass immigration. Every country on earth has the right, in fact their citizens demand, that their governments strictly control who comes and goes thru their borders. The ongoing mess in Europe shows what happens when countries foolishly open their borders to anyone who just shows up. We are no different.
19
To people who live here in the US and can't understand that many immigrants just want to survive: This is a human instinct. How many of the righteous who have written about asylum seekers as scammers have survived years of death through war, earthquakes, mudslides, violence and poverty? Yes, poverty. And to those who want to exclude economic immigrants think about what it would be like to have no adequate food and other basic needs for survival. Central Americans are making the life risking journey in order
to survive. To remain humane Americans must recognize the human instinct to survive and show compassion to those at our borders. The quasi-legal arguments are inhumane.
14
So how many poor people should we take in?
BTW the US also has mudslides, earthquakes, volcanoes and crime (just ask anyone living in CHicago) and we have hundreds of thousands of homeless and millions of poor people
There are 7,600,000,000 in the world - less than 1,800,000 live in 1st world countries (US, Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia etc)
The other 5,600,000,000 live in poor countries with limited opportunity for most of their citizens or oppressive countries
How many should we take?
The US is ONLY 4.3% of the world's population (326,000,000).
We can NOT support 74% of the world
We can't even take 4.3% of the world
The US is the abnormal as compared to the majority of the rest of the world.
So how many should we take in?
46
"To remain humane Americans must recognize the human instinct to survive and show compassion for those at our borders."
I don't know what this means. Does it mean that anyone who opposes open borders lacks compassion and is a bad person? If it does, I have to disagree.
Consider this: I assume you live above the poverty level. Why don't you give everything you have to the poor? There are a billion people in extreme poverty in the world. They lack food and other basic needs. You have to recognize the human instinct to survive and show compassion. Otherwise, by your argument, you are inhumane.
Don't think so? Then being humane is compatible with limits on compassion. Yes, we must show *some* compassion. The question is, how much? How many impoverished economic immigrants should we admit? Keep in mind we admit a fair number under family class. And how many asylum seekers (which is not the same thing)?
Reasonable people can disagree. That doesn't necessarily make people who disagree with you bad people. Liberals on the immigration issue are constantly saying their opponents lack compassion. It's a divisive argument, and it's unfair. It's a personal attack. It persuades no one.
Scarcity is a basic economic fact. We cannot take every prospective immigrant who shows up at our borders, even if we might wish we could. There are just too many of them. Sensible immigration policy requires us to recognize that reality.
37
We are not talking here about immigrants safe at home but likely to be killed at home. Do you have an alternative?