Short Answer is….yes.
The issue of comprehensive immigration reform is one that troubled presidents over the last several decades. Indeed, President George W. Bush and even the so-called "deporter in chief," President Barak Obama expressed frustration with not passing some form of immigration overhaul. Now it's President Joe Biden's turn–as most seem to recognize, President Trump's vision of reform was largely a hostile "enforcement only" approach to reform.
Last week the House of Representatives followed President Biden's campaign promise of an overhaul of our immigration system, with the passage of two immigration reform bills. These bills if passed, would provide would provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of DREAMers, Temporary Protected Status holders, and farm workers. The American Dream and Promise Act and the Farm Workforce Modernization Act would grant young undocumented immigrants, known as DREAMers, Temporary Protected Status holders, and farm workers a legal status they could eventually convert to citizenship.
I am far from optimistic because even under the best of circumstances, we have witnessed similar bills in the past. And we are far from being in the best of circumstances, political or otherwise. Unless you have been under a rock or lost all electricity or the ability to listen, read, or watch any news over the last several weeks, you know of the unaccompanied minors border crises. By latest accounts–and leading the opening of each of today's Sunday morning news staples: This Week, Meet the Press, and the Sunday Morning Show, there are over 15,000 unaccompanied minors at our border facilities—but far from the hundreds of thousands claimed by former President Trump last week (why does the man either lie or remain so profoundly ignorant? Well, it did work for him once!?!?).
While I am far from a prophetic political prognosticator, volunteering for Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and Joe Biden (.333 pretty good for major league baseball, but not elsewhere), I am fairly confident no comprehensive immigration bill will pass the U.S. Senate without a plan or amendment addressing the border crisis debate. “It doesn’t help, that’s for sure,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R. Penn.), on whether the situation at the border made it harder for Republicans to support the proposals. “We need to control the border, and we need to fix the problem in a comprehensive manner.”
Partisan politics aside, the treatment of unaccompanied minors at our borders is a legitimate vexing issue that has immigration scholars like myself scratching their heads. If we are going to take off our party hats, many of us need to realize this is a difficult issue with neither the republicans nor the democrats wearing black hats.
At the risk of criticism (hasn't stopped me yet) if I were Czar, I would immediately order Health and Human Services (HHS) and its equivalent state partners to provide alternative facilities for children in custody over 72 hours. I would put enormous pressure on Mexico and other Latin American partners to secure their borders, and provide resources and funding on their side of the border with similar facilities (I would demand such actions and threaten to withhold aid if such facilities were not created and opened immediately. On our side, I would use HHS and Homeland Security to commence processes to locate family members in the U.S. of children detained that demonstrated a basis for political asylum (Yes, I would provide translators and counsel for these children–a separate basis for criticism and legal attack—a future essay, article, or book on my part). For the other children (I continue to scratch my head on this one) I would seek state and private partners to see if these children could be placed in adoptive homes (only after the families of these children that reside in their home countries are contacted and provide consent to adoption). I would not otherwise allow non-ayslum-seekers to enter the U.S. during the pandemic (indeed, easier said than done). All of the above will obviously take time, and in the meantime pressure and criticism will continue to mount. Thus, the unaccompanied minors issue will likely have moderate democratic and republican senators fearful of supporting comprehensive immigration reform while the border issue remains influx.
Don't be so hard on yourself, Ediberto, you are batting 1.000 on the popular vote.
Only a Lubet could convince himself that 100% of the public agrees with him on immigration policy. That conclusion, based on the evidence, is delusional.
The solution to this "problem" (that word doesn't begin to describe the long history of the dysfunctional relationship between the legacy of England and Spain's colonization in this hemisphere) is not to import as many migrants from Central and South American as possible.
Please don't pretend that encouraging the migration of low wage workers to boost the profits of big business, swell personal staffs of the wealthy and increase the ranks of Democratic votes is done for some noble purpose.
Ediberto: Please describe how this endless migration helps the people left behind in Central and South America. Do you really believe that allowing this migration — indeed, encouraging it — will improve the circumstances that motivate so many in those countries to want to come to the US? have you given any thought to how to help the people left behind and improve conditions in those countries? Or, should we just declare those countries hopeless, and seek to depopulate them, bringing all that we can here?
In the meantime, please don't pretend that the treatment of migrants from these areas is any better under Democratic regimes. They won't even allow the cameras into the detention facilities! The treatment of migrants is ruthless and exploitative. I would argue it is worse under Democrats.
When will you folks wake up?
Hi Steve, that average and 35 cents in my day, would get me a cup o' Joe– you hipsters (as both of you are), probably pay $7.00 for yours (haven't had a cup in roughly 50 years). More to point, Steve, I hope I bat zeroes on this prediction.
Anon, no pretending here. But the facts are the minors are also here, so to speak. Something has to be done. As a righty, you should be pleased by my criticism of this administration–but in truth, neither they not another administration have or likely will get it right. And here is one for you Anon: your critique is actually 100% consistent with the far left, it can actually be construed as Gramscian in tone and focus. I am sure that one will give you hives.
One other item you might address, Ediberto, if you are interested in solutions.
You say you watched "This Week" … during the panel discussion, the apologist for the migrants was basically addressing how it is that "minors" sometimes literally little kids, are crossing countries and borders alone.
No matter how hard he tried to spin it, the bottom line was he admitted that these kids are abandoned by their family in order to get foothold in the US. THey are not "torn away" –they are willing given up: just like the majority of the kids you claimed a while ago were "torn away" until you had to confront a NYT piece telling the truth: their parents didn't want them back. (As I recall, you had no response after your "torn away" claim was refuted.)
So, I for one would love to hear you explain: What do you think of a parent who would surrender a little child to a coyote or worse, just send them out alone, just to get a foothold in the US thru chain migration and amnesty?
And, before you tell us how sorry you feel for this desperation, ask whether you would send your little one into the risk of physical abuse, sexual abuse, indentured servitude, etc. What kind of person allows this to happen?
If you actually naively believe that the entire populations of three Central American countries qualify for "sanctuary" (actually, more than 80% of these claims are rejected when the matter finally is adjudicated) and therefore the persons subjecting their kids to this cruel and negligent treatment have no choice (which is false) then what do you say about a political party that entices these kids to come without their parents, by saying "adults, rejected, kids, open arms." Is that not a policy of "separation" more cruel than any?
The other day, the admin said "we check their pockets for phone numbers."
Can you believe this? Can you actually sit there and defend all this just because it is Democrats doing it?
It's not simply Gramscian… It's what the Left has said and fought for since the 1830s… It was adopted by what gets called "liberalism" in the United States since – at least – the early 20th century, too.
It's also what the Paleoconservatives have argued for since the 1990s, too. (NOT that you'd see that on Fox News. Not that you read the right, or really watch Fox either so that you'd know the difference).
It's also why the right, both in the United States and abroad, KNOWS that the Democrats (note that I do not contrast them with "the Left") aren't just complete hypocrites (some of the naive ones simply are), but are rather thoroughly disingenuous about their true policy preferences on this matter. You are patently lying about your true policy agenda here.
"Social" justice which is anything but.
But go ahead. Flood the country with more uneducated poor as your middle class shrinks and your existing poor get poorer. Raise the income tax rates by a pittance. Replace the (protestant) religious flyover people with an even larger underclass. Become the post-industrial third-world oligarchy that Blue Team "progress" demands.
On the other hand, it will at least help to expedite America's removal from the center state in world affairs…
PS
Like most people in the Democratic sphere these days, if you don't agree, in lockstep, with everything they say, you are a "righty."
Nope. Not even close. I don't believe that the political parties are functioning properly.
But, I will say this:
1. This site is just a load of leftist propaganda (you are a bit better Ediberto). So, my comments, when critical, are perceived as "right" because I am critical of "left." As I'm sure you know, that is faulty logic worthy of a fifth grader, not a law professor.
2. The left is the party trying to silence all viewpoints that disagree. As such, the adherents to this fascist totalitarian authoritarian stance should be called out every at every juncture. the right are subjected to the nonstop vicious spewing by leftists all day every day in nearly every outlet, so, it seems to me that they should be able to withstand a few negative comments on an obscure website like this one.
". . . volunteering for Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and Joe Biden (.333 pretty good for major league baseball, but not elsewhere)."
Don't be so hard on yourself, Ediberto, you are batting 1.000 on the popular vote.