#why penalize innocent families of immigrants

[mwebber]

heyyy i was wondering if u saw marks story around .. 10 hours ago, before he deleted it. it was this reel https://www.instagram.com/reel/CvLWrV3vOr3/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

and obvs he must’ve seen how stupid it was to post that to his story or something but he still liked the post and idk …

i didn’t because i don’t check instagram lmao but ahh hm. how do i address this in a nuanced way.

for context, the vid is a clip of polish european parliament member dominik tarczyński from 2021 in the middle of a debate on the rule of law conditionality mechanism, which to my understanding (in incredibly dummy terms) was the european commission trying to find a way to penalize increasingly conservative places hungary and poland by taking away budget in the condition that such places violated their articles and whatnot. tarczyński obviously goes on the defensive and says that poland rejects the commission’s “leftist ideals” and to focus instead on sweden and germany who have uhhhh allegedly an increased crime rate because of [checks notes] illegal migrants. you can read the whole thing here.

now, mark agreeing with this isn’t like… surprising? our boy literally simped for jordan peterson at one point. but from having grown up conservative, i can tell you that the line of thinking here probably isn’t “i am islamophobic and racist and think all immigration is bad!” it’s more likely that mark subscribes to the rhetoric that immigration needs to be “selective” so that countries can let in the “right quality” of person. this of course is directly tied to the notion that nonwhite people (plus or minus east asians depending on what benefits white supremacy more) aren’t qualified people (or people at all), not even getting into the question of whether the concept of citizenship should even exist. but deconstructing that idea, especially when it’s something that seems so fundamentally innocent and basic—à la “yeah, you shouldn’t let everyone into a country, there should be some regulation”—requires a level of effort and prompting that i’m not sure mark is equipped to tackle, at least not in the communities he’s in/with the people he publicly surrounds himself by.

i will say that instagram/socmed activity isn’t a complete measure of someone’s political or moral compass. like, the chance that mark watched the reel without any of the context, thought it was poland sticking up for itself, posted to his story, and someone else pointed out that it was a stupid racist nonsensical take so he took it down… is not non-zero. alternatively, he could have googled it and thought hm, maybe i don’t want to put in my two cents on european union politics. who knows! only he does.

but i think that all brings me to my main gripe with fandomization of a real person, and the whole thing where we treat these men like fictional characters. it’s easy to fall into the whole fanon thing and think that mark’s offenses are just, y’know, being a “proud heterosexual” and that his laundry list of crimes ends at a couple of stupid misconstrued tweets. and we can add all the context we like of rising transphobia/the phenomenon of trans people as a scapegoat for the right/etc, but i don’t think anything excuses this man for his ignorance and the very real pain he has brought on the community time and time again.

that said, he’s not evil personified. yes, he double tapped a reel on a polish mep scapegoating immigrants. yes, he said jordan peterson’s bullshit book was good. yes, he made a distasteful jab at trans people. he’s still also just a guy who likes animals. he’s still also the bitchy freak we fell for. he’s still also human with family he clearly adores and a compelling life story.

the bigger question is, where do you, personally, draw the line? when do his wrongdoings exceed your tolerance?

to be frank, i’m not entirely sure why you came to me with this—whether you were looking for validation, or for me to jump on demonizing him, or whatever. i have laid out my personal and everchanging opinion of him in painstaking detail on this account, but they’re my opinions based on what i can stand to tolerate. if you vibe with that, cool! but if this has pushed you over your line, that’s equally valid and okay. i’d support anybody saying they’ve decided to stop being a fan, i get it.

bottom line is this: he’s a real person. he’s not going to be someone you like 100% of the time, because nobody ever is. you need to make your own choices here, and whatever you’re comfy with, that’s your path.

[malenipshadows]

  *** On Friday, Judge Sabraw ordered the Justice Department to supply a preliminary list of young children who could possibly qualify for reunification, along with any explanation of obstacles to reunification.    The T-rump administration has “mapped” 86 parents to 83 children under age 5 who remain in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, Justice Department attorney Sarah Fabian said during the court meeting Friday.    Of the 86 mapped parents, 46 remain in federal immigration detention, 19 have been deported, 19 have been released, and two have a criminal history that could potentially disqualify them from reunification, a Justice Dept attorney said.  It isn't clear how much the federal government knows about the whereabouts of "unmapped" parents for nearly 20 children under 5. ***

[nhlabornews]

NH's Congressional Representatives Decry Trump's Decision To End DACA

Today, it was announced that President Trump will end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) that protects 800,000 undocumented immigrants who came to this country as children.

“President Trump’s decision to end DACA is cruel, inhumane and completely unnecessary,” said Senator Jeanne Shaheen. “This decision drives hundreds of innocent Dreamers in the Granite State, and hundreds of thousands across the country, into the shadows of our society. I’m encouraged that several Republicans, including Speaker Ryan, have voiced their support for legislative action to continue DACA. Congress should immediately get to work on a bipartisan plan that protects Dreamers.”

“This decision is morally wrong and cruel. It also would hurt our economy, which is why a wide range of American businesses are speaking out,” said Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter. “I agree with Speaker Paul Ryan: decisions about the future of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program should be made by Congress. These are young people who were brought to the United States as children through no fault of their own. They are showing their dedication and commitment to our country by pursuing higher education, working in our communities, or serving our nation. Penalizing the 966 New Hampshire young people who take part in this program is harmful to our local economies and denies these students, workers, and veterans the opportunity to strengthen the communities they grew up in.”

“Immigration enforcement should focus on people who are criminals and threats to public safety, not young people who often have no significant connections to the countries of their births, and whose energy, hard work and innovation are vital components of our economic future,” said Senator Maggie Hassan. “President Trump’s decision to go back on his word to protect these young people is harmful and wrong. I strongly support the bipartisan DREAM Act and previously joined my colleagues in urging President Trump to protect these young people who have great potential to continue contributing to our society and economy. Members of both parties have expressed support for continuing this program, and I urge my colleagues to come together across party lines immediately to support these young people.”

“I’m deeply disappointed by President Trump’s decision to end DACA, which allows people brought to the United States as children the opportunity to work legally and live without fear of deportation,” said Congresswoman Annie Kuster. “The young people protected by DACA are contributing to our nation in countless ways: they are serving in our military, paying taxes, and helping to create jobs and grow our economy. Diversity strengthens our fabric as a nation and this ill-advised decision is nothing more than political pandering that will hurt real people and families. Congress must act as soon as possible to reform our broken immigration system and extend protections to Dreamers across the country, including the hundreds in New Hampshire.”

Last week, a group of business leaders sent an open letter to President Trump expressing their opposition to ending DACA. In the letter the groups writes, “All DACA recipients grew up in America, registered with our government, submitted to extensive background checks, and are diligently giving back to our communities and paying income taxes. More than 97 percent are in school or in the workforce, 5 percent started their own business, 65 percent have purchased a vehicle, and 16 percent have purchased their first home. At least 72 percent of the top 25 Fortune 500 companies count DACA recipients among their employees.

The letter continued, “Unless we act now to preserve the DACA program, all 780,000 hardworking young people will lose their ability to work legally in this country, and every one of them will be at immediate risk of deportation. Our economy would lose $460.3 billion from the national GDP and $24.6 billion in Social Security and Medicare tax contributions.”

“DREAMers, many of whom are still children, are a part of our American family,” said NH Democratic Party Chair Ray Buckley.  “Today, the Trump administration kicked this hardworking, inspiring group out of our shared home. So many DREAMers know no other country, flag or allegiance and came here through no fault of their own. DACA is simply a chance for DREAMers to work hard and stay in the country they deservedly call their own. Today’s decision by the Trump administration and the way in which they handled it are vindictive, cowardly, counterproductive and wrong-headed. It’s not how we’ve ever behaved in America and it is hypocritical for a country founded by, built by, and prosperous because of immigrants.”

The people at United We Dream put out a guide about what this new news means for Dreamers.

NH’s Congressional Representatives Decry Trump’s Decision To End DACA was originally published on NH LABOR NEWS

[number48]

Excerpt GOP 2016 Platform re Immigration

“America’s immigration policy must serve the national interest of the United States, and the interests of American workers must be protected over the claims of foreign nationals seeking the same jobs. With all our fellow citizens, we have watched, in anger and disgust, the mocking of our immigration laws by a president who made himself superior to the will of the nation. We stand with the victims of his policies, especially the families of murdered innocents. Illegal immigration endangers everyone, exploits the taxpayers, and insults all who aspire to enter America legally. We oppose any form of amnesty for those who, by breaking the law, have disadvantaged those who have obeyed it. The executive amnesties of 2012 and 2014 are a direct violation of federal law and usurp the powers of Congress as outlined in Article I of the Constitution. These unlawful amnesties must be immediately rescinded by a Republican president. In a time of terrorism, drug cartels, human trafficking, and criminal gangs, the presence of millions of unidentified individuals in this country poses grave risks to the safety and sovereignty of the United States. Our highest priority, therefore, must be to secure our borders and all ports of entry and to enforce our immigration laws.

That is why we support building a wall along our southern border and protecting all ports of entry. The border wall must cover the entirety of the southern border and must be sufficient to stop both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. We insist upon workplace enforcement of verification systems so that more jobs can be available to all legal workers. Use of the E-verify program — an internet-based system that verifies the employment authorization and identity of employees — must be made mandatory nationwide. We reaffirm our endorsement of the SAVE program — Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements — to ensure that public funds are not given to persons not legally present in this country. We demand tough penalties against those who engage in identity theft, deal in fraudulent documents, and traffic in human beings. The Department of Homeland Security must use its authority to keep dangerous aliens off our streets and to expedite expulsion of criminal aliens. Gang membership should be a deportable offense. Any previously deported illegal alien who continues to show a lack of respect for our borders and rule of law must be penalized. This is why we support stiffer penalties, such as a mandatory minimum sentence of five years, for any illegal alien who illegally re-enters our nation after already having been deported.

Because “sanctuary cities” violate federal law and endanger their own citizens, they should not be eligible for federal funding. Using state licenses to reward people in the country illegally is an affront to the rule of law and must be halted.

In light of both current needs and historic practice, we urge the reform of our guest worker programs to eliminate fraud, improve efficiency and ensure they serve the national interest. In light of the alarming levels of unemployment and underemployment in this country, it is indefensible to continue offering lawful permanent residence to more than one million foreign nationals every year. The Supreme Court has correctly recognized that states have the constitutional authority to take steps to reduce illegal immigration. We condemn the Obama Administration’s lawsuits against states that are seeking to reinforce federal law. We support the right of the states to enact laws deterring illegal aliens from residing within their states.

From its beginning, our country has been a haven of refuge and asylum. That should continue — but with major changes. Asylum should be limited to cases of political, ethnic or religious persecution. As the Director of the FBI has noted, it is not possible to vet fully all potential refugees. To ensure our national security, refugees who cannot be carefully vetted cannot be admitted to the country, especially those whose homelands have been the breeding grounds for terrorism.”

https://gop.com/platform/reforming-government/

Read the Whole Thing, as they say

[malenipshadows]

 *** The pres-ident’s immigration policies, long a point of contention with his critics, have drawn extra scrutiny in recent weeks amid the controversy over the Trump administration’s policy of referring all illegal border-crossers for prosecution, a practice which resulted in the separation of thousands of children from their parents.    After initially, and falsely, insisting that the separations could be ended only by Congress, T-rump signed an executive order last month, ending the practice. It remains unclear how quickly separated families are being reunited.   Even after the pres-ident’s executive order, protesters marched last weekend in Washington and around the USA in opposition to the administration’s immigration policy, which critics have lambasted as heartless. ***

[malenipshadows]

((( Immigrants who sought asylum from U.S. were threatened with losing their children. They reportedly were told to turn back, else their children would be seized and put up for adoption by U.S. families.  Not refused entry with their parents -- but babies taken away from parents. )))

[malenipshadows]

*** Some of the service members say they were not told why they were being discharged. Others who pressed for answers said the Army informed them they'd been labeled as security risks because they have relatives abroad or because the Defense Department had not completed background checks on them.    Spokespeople for the Pentagon and the Army said that, due to the pending litigation, they were unable to explain the discharges or respond to questions about whether there have been policy changes in any of the military branches.    Eligible recruits are required to have legal status in the U.S., such as a student visa, before enlisting. More than 5,000 immigrants were recruited into the program in 2016, and an estimated 10,000 are currently serving. Most go the Army, but some also go to the other military branches.***

[malenipshadows]

  *** Health and Human Services uses about 100 shelters in 14 states. In congressional testimony in May, Steven Wagner, acting assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families, told a Senate subcommittee that children have spent an average of 57 days in custody during fiscal year 2018. After that, minors are placed with a sponsor, who could be a parent, another relative or a non-family member.  ***

[malenipshadows]

 *** The girls knew that the U.S. Supreme Court would soon decide whether pres-ident T-rump’s ban on entry into the United States by citizens of seven countries, five of them majority-Muslim, including Yemen, would stand. They knew that the ruling would determine whether they and their mother — whose visas were granted on the eve of the ban and then revoked — could finally join their father, a U.S. citizen, in America.    Tuesday’s Supreme Court ruling felt like a hammer’s final blow to Almansoob’s lingering hopes. For him and the thousands of other American citizens and permanent residents who have been waiting anxiously for the court’s word, the justices’ decision to uphold the ban presented a verdict not just on the fate of their families, but also on what it means to be American. ***

[malenipshadows]

 *** Immigration authorities on Friday issued a notice that they may seek up to 15,000 beds to detain families. The Justice Department has also asked a federal court in California to allow children to be detained longer and in facilities that don't require state licensing while they await immigration court proceedings.  ...    The proposed expansion comes days after a public outcry moved the administration to cease the practice of separating children from their migrant parents on the border. More than 2,300 children have been taken from their parents since Homeland Security announced a plan in April to prosecute all immigrants caught on the border.It also comes as the Pentagon is drawing up plans to house as many as 20,000 unaccompanied immigrant children on military bases. ***

[malenipshadows]

  *** Government officials on the call did not go into detail about where the children are being held. Once children are separated, they are treated as unaccompanied minors under the care of the Department of Health and Human Services, which houses them in government facilities, puts them in temporary foster care, or releases them to adult sponsors in the United States.    The moves by the government to separate families have been widely decried by medical professionals, the United Nations, and a wide swath of U.S. religious leaders. ***