ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE. By Nolan Rappaport

Rate this Entry


Getty Images

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has brought the campaign to abolish ICE into the mainstream by adding her support to the cause. She is a prominent Democrat who is a possible 2020 presidential contender. Her support may encourage more high-profile politicians to back the idea.

President Donald Trump, however, is sure that ICE is not going to be abolished:



In In any case, it wouldn’t accomplish anything to abolish ICE.

ICE has two separate divisions, Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).
ERO enforces the nation’s immigration laws. It identifies, arrests, and removes deportable aliens.

Reasons for abolishing ICE


Gillibrand has said:

"I believe that (ICE) has become a deportation force … and that's why I believe you should get rid of it.”

She also has said:

“We believe that we should protect families that need our help, and that is not what ICE is doing today, and that’s why I believe you should get rid of it, start over, reimagine it, and build something that actually works.”

She seems to be referring to ERO, which can be described as a “deportation force.” It is not apparent why she thinks that is a reason to abolish it, or why she thinks it should be protecting families who need our help.


Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) has said, ICE is “hunting down and tearing apart families.”


The Immigration and Nationality Act has provisions that provide relief from deportation, but none that provide a blanket waiver for deportable aliens who have families.

Read more at http://thehill.com/opinion/immigrati...abolishing-ice

Published originally on The Hill.

About the author. Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.






Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Facebook Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Twitter Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Google Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to StumbleUpon Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Reddit Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Digg Submit "There's a better response to abuse than abolishing ICE.  By Nolan Rappaport" to del.icio.us

Updated 07-07-2018 at 12:28 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I agree with Nolan's main point that abolishing ICE wouldn't accomplish anything because another agency with a different name would then take over the same functions. I also agree that putting reasonable restraints on abuses by individual officers is more important.

    In a sense, the whole question of whether ICE should be abolished or not is a straw man issue. No one is seriously arguing that there should not be any agency charged with removal and deportation of people who have no right to be here and are a danger to American society.

    But, issue is not whether or not there should be a deportation agency. The question is how should it carry out its mission.

    On July 3, Trump made a speech praising ICE and CBP for being "tough" and "going in swinging".

    Of course, on the surface, he was only talking about MS-13, but most most people understand his references to this vicious gang as a metaphor for all Hispanic or other nonwhite immigrants.

    I am not aware of any evidence that the 4-year old Latino children whom ICE tore away from their parents and put in shackles or locked in cages were members of this gang.

    Most statistics actually show that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than native born US citizens.

    As I pointed out in a recent ilw.com post, Adolf Hitler also wanted Germans to be "as tough as leather", and "as hard as Krupp's steel."

    Trump is not a Nazi, not an antisemite, not a Hitler follower, and is of course absolutely opposed to genocide or mass murder in any form. Therefore, he should think twice before making speeches about immigrants embodying the same kind of "tough" talk that Hitler did in talking about the Jews, only under the guise of law enforcement as a pretext.
    It is not ICE itself that is the problem, The problem is the direction to ICE and other immigration enforcement agencies that is coming from the Oval Office in the White House.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 07-06-2018 at 11:31 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  2. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    I agree with Nolan's main point that abolishing ICE wouldn't accomplish anything because another agency with a different name would then take over the same functions. I also agree that putting reasonable restraints on abuses by individual officers is more important.

    In a sense, the whole question of whether ICE should be abolished or not is a straw man issue. No one is seriously arguing that there should not be any agency charged with removal and deportation of people who have no right to be here and are a danger to American society.

    But, issue is not whether or not there should be a deportation agency. The question is how should it carry out its mission.

    On July 3, Trump made a speech praising ICE and CBP for being "tough" and "going in swinging".

    Of course, on the surface, he was only talking about MS-13, but most most people understand his references to this vicious gang as a metaphor for all Hispanic or other nonwhite immigrants.

    I am not aware of any evidence that the 4-year old Latino children whom ICE tore away from their parents and put in shackles or locked in cages were members of this gang.

    Most statistics actually show that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than native born US citizens.

    As I pointed out in a recent ilw.com post, Adolf Hitler also wanted Germans to be "as tough as leather", and "as hard as Krupp's steel."

    Trump is not a Nazi, not an antisemite, not a Hitler follower, and is of course absolutely opposed to genocide or mass murder in any form. Therefore, he should think twice before making speeches about immigrants embodying the same kind of "tough" talk that Hitler did in talking about the Jews, only under the guise of law enforcement as a pretext.
    It is not ICE itself that is the problem, The problem is the direction to ICE and other immigration enforcement agencies that is coming from the Oval Office in the White House.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Roger's comment confirms my suspicion that the main objection to ICE is that they are arresting aliens who just came here for a better life. As I explain in my article, Trump knows that the law can't be enforced if it only applies to the aliens liberals like Roger think should be deported, so his enforcement program applies to all deportable aliens. See my article for a more complete explanation.

    Nolan Rappaport
  3. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I am not surprised that Nolan does not respond to the main point of my comments, which is about the causes of ICE's brutality and how to stop it, regardless of whom ICE may or may not be prioritizing for deportation how widely Trump's deportation net may be spreading compared to that of President Barack Obama, who at least for now, still holds the unenviable distinction of being America's all-time leader in mass deportation of non-white immigrants, at least as far as total numbers are concerned.

    As Nolan himself points out in his article, the calls to abolish ICE are not because of the types of people that ICE is trying to deport, or how many total immigrants are being targeted, but because of the inhuman way that detainees are being treated - especially with regard to asylum seekers who are permitted to remain in the US under current US law while their cases are pending, but whose children are being torn away from them in a brutal manner which, at least faintly, bears resemblances to Nazi Germany.

    I have, of course, been careful to point out that neither antisemitism nor mass murder is an issue with Trump, and I have always made this crucially important difference between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler clear.

    That does not in any way excuse the horrendous way that ICE has been treating many of its detainees - something for which one person alone bears the ultimate responsibility - the person who is at the very top of the entire system and who is calling all the shots.

    Again, this is not an issue of whether everyone who is in the country without permission should be targeted for deportation or only some.

    The issue is whether the people whom ICE chooses to arrest should be treated like human beings, or whether they should be treated like "animals" or vermin, to quote the president of the United States of America.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 07-06-2018 at 05:07 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  4. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    I am not surprised that Nolan does not respond to the main point of my comments, which is about the causes of ICE's brutality and how to stop it, regardless of whom ICE may or may not be prioritizing for deportation.

    As Nolan himself points out in his article, the calls to abolish ICE are not because of the types of people that ICE is trying to deport but because of the inhuman way that detainees are being treated - especially with regard to asylum seekers who are permitted to remain in the US under current law while their cases are pending, but whose children are being torn away from them in a brutal manner which, at least faintly, bears resemblances to Nazi Germany - even though neither antisemitism nor mass murder is an issue with Trump, of course, and I have always been careful to point out this crucially important difference between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Roger, have you read the fable about the boy who cried wolf?

    You have made outrageous accusations of extreme misconduct so many times that I stopped paying attention to them a long time ago.

    Nolan Rappaport
  5. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Unfortunately, the extreme cruelty and brutality with which the families of the more than 2,300 children torn away from their parents, held in cages and shackled like animals, not to mention conditions at immigration prisons around the country which are beginning to bear more and more resemblances to Buchenwald and Dachau (though not there yet, to be sure) are matters of public record which even the Trump regime is making no effort to deny.

    Many of these children may never see their parents again and are being scarred for life.

    And it is not only the children, There has already been one suicide to protest horrible conditions in an overcrowded, ill-equiped California immigration prison just a few weeks ago.

    https://www.alternet.org/somebody-co...-1000-migrants

    Whether or not ICE remains in its present form or continues under some other name is totally beside the point.

    Nor does it make the slightest difference whether Nolan feels that these abuses are worth his attention or not (even though he has just taken the trouble and made the effort to write an article about them - see above).

    The point is that this horrible pattern of sadism and brutality directed against brown immigrants whose biggest "crime" of all is being from countries which are not "like Norway" is the lasting legacy of Donald J. Trump, 45th president of the United States of America.

    Nothing Nolan or anyone else can say can erase this record which will shame America for as long as this country's history continues to be recorded.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 07-06-2018 at 08:35 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  6. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    It's good that Roger has compassion for the 2300 children who were separated from their parents when their parents were arrested for making an illegal entry. But what about the children who have been separated from their American parents when their parents were incarcerated for criminal convictions?

    More than half of the people who are incarcerated in the United States have children under the age of 18, including more than 120,000 mothers and 1.1 million fathers. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...usa/586974001/

    Or is his compassion limited to separations that can be attributed to Trump?

    I know what I think the answer to that question is.

    And what is the solution to this problem? The only way to stop it from happening is to limit criminal prosecutions to people who don't have children.

    Nolan Rappaport


    Updated 07-07-2018 at 02:22 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: