After Playboy reporter Brian Karem’s emotional appeal to Sarah Huckabee-Sanders to answer questions about the new family separation policy of the Trump administration for immigrants the heat around this issue has reached a near boiling point, but now Chris Hayes has taken it up a few more degrees as he interviewed a worker from an Arizona detention center who quit this week in protest and reveals what it’s really like on the inside.
Antar Davidson who had been interviewed by the LA Times explained to Hayes that many of the recently arriving children who were forcibly separated at the border are traumatized and are acting out with screaming and throwing chairs. Several of them that he was dealing with were from Brazil and spoke Portuguese instead of Spanish so they really didn't understand what was happening and although they are given access to a clinician, those clinicians are little help since they don’t speak Portuguese either.
While dealing with all this the employees are overworked and stressed out — which could lead to a potentially explosive situation, while the CEO banks over $1 Million a year.
Via Rawstory.
“These kids were ripped from their parents and did not understand what was going on. The case that really broke the camel’s back for me, was the Brazilian kids. There was no one speaking to them in Portuguese. So they hardly even understood and they didn’t — nothing was ever explained to them well either,” Davidson said.
When Hayes asked if there were people taking care of the younger children around 4-5-years-old, Davidson said “no.” He said the facility is extremely understaffed.
“Not at all. We received one week of training, and now these kids are extremely traumatized. Workers put them to bed at the end of the shift that ends at 9:30 p.m. As much as the children are suffering, the workers are suffering. They’re kept in temporary positions and meanwhile, the CEO and his wife clear more than a million dollars a year in mostly federal tax money and undercut the services we need.”
He said the facility is being run like a private prison.
“It’s a basic private prison deal in the guise of this shelter. So the people at the end of the day, when they have to put the kids to sleep have already worked an eight-hour shift and are often times asked to stay overtime. On top of that, these kids are running up and down the halls screaming, crying for their mom, throwing chairs. Everyone is tired. The under-trained staff are dealing with an increasingly traumatized population of minors.”
The administration has made quite a few crazy claims of late. They’ve claimed that this is just “following the law” — but there’s a basic logical flaw in that.
Illegally admittance is only a misdemeanor.
The immigration law actually uses the term "improper entry," which has a broad meaning. It’s more than just slipping across the U.S. border at an unguarded point. Improper entry can include:
- entering or attempting to enter the United States at any time or place other than one designated by U.S. immigration officers (in other words, away from a border inspection point or other port of entry)
- eluding examination or inspection by U.S. immigration officers (people have tried everything from digging tunnels to hiding in the trunk of a friend’s car)
- attempting to enter or obtain entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or willful concealment of a material fact (which might include, for example, lying on a visa application or buying a false green card or other entry document).
(See Title 8, Section 1325 of the U.S. Code (U.S.C.), or Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (I.N.A.) for the exact statutory language - www.uscis.gov/laws/immigration-and-nationality-act.)
Criminal Penalties
For the first improper entry offense, the person can be fined (as a criminal penalty), or imprisoned for up to six months, or both. For a subsequent offense, the person can be fined or imprisoned for up to two years, or both. (See 8 U.S.C. Section 1325, I.N.A.Section 275.)
For a first offense, the maximum incarceration period is six months. Technically police could take anyone directly to jail for any misdemeanor, from jay-walking [I've had it happen to me] to an improper lane change or running a red light. Officers can arrest someone for a misdemeanor but it has to take place in their presence.
In most states, an officer can’t arrest an adult for a misdemeanor without a warrant, unless he witnesses the person committing it. In other words, the misdemeanor must occur “in the presence” of the officer. But what does this requirement really mean?
In general, for an officer to make a warrantless arrest for a misdemeanor, courts require that the officer have probable cause to believe that someone has committed a misdemeanor in his presence. As long as the officer has probable cause, the arrest is valid even if the suspect didn’t actually commit a crime or is never convicted. (Atwater v. Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001).)In general, for an officer to make a warrantless arrest for a misdemeanor, courts require that the officer haveprobable cause to believe that someone has committed a misdemeanor in his presence. As long as the officer has probable cause, the arrest is valid even if the suspect didn’t actually commit a crime or is never convicted. (Atwater v. Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318 (2001).)
Basically they are treating illegal border crossings as if they have been caught jay-walking and instead of giving them a summons which promises that they return on time for court, they’re arresting them on the spot, placing them in jail and separating them from the kids — and this is happening apparently even when they haven’t crossed illegal, but have instead gone to a standard legal border crossing point and surrendered to apply for asylum.
There are also some cases in which immigrant families are being separated after coming to ports of entry and presenting themselves for asylum — thus following US law. It’s not clear how often this is happening, though it’s definitely not as widespread as separation of families who’ve crossed illegally.
In addition to this, there’s the new Sessions rule that he will not allow those fleeing domestic or gang violence to seek asylum.
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Monday made it all but impossible for asylum seekers to gain entry into the United States by citing fears of domestic abuse or gang violence, in a ruling that could have a broad effect on the flow of migrants from Central America.
Mr. Sessions’s decision in a closely watched domestic violence case is the latest turn in a long-running debate over what constitutes a need for asylum. He reversed an immigration appeals court ruling that granted it to a Salvadoran woman who said she had been sexually, emotionally and physically abused by her husband.
Relatively few asylum seekers are granted permanent entry into the United States. In 2016, for every applicant who succeeded, more than 10 others also sought asylum, according to data from the Department of Homeland Security. But the process can take months or years, and tens of thousands of people live freely in the United States while their cases wend through the courts.
Mr. Sessions’s decision overturns a precedent set during the Obama administration that allowed more women to claim credible fears of domestic abuse and will make it harder for such arguments to prevail in immigration courts. He said the Obama administration created “powerful incentives” for people to “come here illegally and claim a fear of return.”
This is an abusively narrow definition of “persecuted" when it applied to those seeking valid claims of asylum.
U.S. immigration law does not list specific examples of the kinds of persecution that would qualify someone for asylum or refugee status. However, from the law that has been developed through court cases, we know that it can include such acts as threats, violence, torture, inappropriate imprisonment, or denial of basic human rights or freedoms.
-
Historically, for example, the need for asylum or refugee status has been recognized in situations where a foreign government has:
- imprisoned and tortured political dissidents or supposed undesirables
- fired weapons on protesters
- committed genocide against a certain race
- made sure that members of a certain religion were left out of the political process,
- and much more.
Even if a foreign government stands by while someone else commits acts of persecution--for example, if the authorities are unwilling or unable to exercise control while members of a vigilante squad gang up on gays and lesbians or while members of a guerilla group threaten or kidnap people who won't voluntarily join them--this too can qualify as persecution, which would support asylum or refugee status.
Or at least it used to qualify.
So when they say their just “enforcing the law” simply imagine if every traffic stop meant automatic jail time, no summons, no later court date, just jail. NOW.
Just think about that because that’s exactly how they’ve chosen to enforce this law.
I’ve also heard Republicans claim that “80% of Asylum seekers are lying” but they haven’t been able to verify the source of that statistic because DHS doesn’t even provide an estimate according to a study by the right-wing Center for Immigration studies.
Among the findings:
- Expedited removal is intended to facilitate the removal of aliens who entered illegally or through fraud, and who are apprehended at entry or who have been in the United States for a limited period of time. If an alien successfully asserts a credible fear, however, the alien will likely remain in the United States indefinitely.
- The number of asylum applications received by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has increased significantly in recent years, from 56,912 in FY 2014,1 to 84,236 in FY 2015,2 to 115,888 in FY 2016.3
- In addition to the increase in asylum applications, the number of credible fear cases handled by USCIS increased more than eightfold between FY 2009 and FY 2015.
- The evidentiary burdens for aliens seeking asylum and withholding of removal are lower than for aliens seeking other immigration benefits. In fact, "[t]he testimony of [an] applicant [for asylum and withholding of removal] may be sufficient to sustain the applicant's burden without corroboration."
- Although there have been a significant number of high-profile cases involving multiple cases of asylum fraud in recent years, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has not completed an assessment of the extent of fraud in the asylum context.
- Aliens with ties to terrorist organizations have attempted to enter illegally and claim asylum fraudulently. Hundreds of aliens to whom the terrorist bar to asylum may apply have been found to have a credible fear
It seems that the 80% of Asylum seekers lie, comes from a claim being made by Breitbart about Syrian asylum seekers in Germany, not in the U.S.
An undercover report has revealed some of the tactics migrants use to game Germany’s immigration system, and that 80 per cent of those seeking asylum in the country have no papers.
The journalist, who after his time working at the reception centre believes there are “far too many people living in Germany”, regularly found himself suspecting people claiming to have fled fighting in Syria were actually economic migrants.
Mr. Khan noted some of the most common tricks migrants use. He recounted: “Many pose as minors travelling alone, because word has spread that they will qualify for more benefits. … To lie about their age, many people use false passports and other identity documents.”
So that’s where that BS comes from.
They’ve also said the implementing the laws is supported by the Bible. Well, first off we aren’t a theocracy where we implement our laws based on scripture, and even if we didn’t this is a highly selective reading of that scripture.
“We’re about to go to church,” Velshi explained. “Sticking with the spirit of what would Jesus do, we actually did dig through the Bible to find passages that lent themselves to the current border practice of separating migrant children from their parents.”
Velshi said the White House “has forced this discussion upon us, because they have said it’s the biblical thing to do.”
“I don’t think there is a Christian, a Muslim, or a Jew in this country who can find me in their holy book references that suggest that that is appropriate,” Velshi concluded.
“I think you’re right,” said James Martin, a Jesuit priest. “I think what they’re doing is called proof texting, you take a verse of the gospels or the Old Testament out of context and throw it at people, weaponizing the Bible.”
Once separated the children are only supposed to be held at the border crossing station for not more than 72 hours, but that rule is being violated because — understandably — things are totally overcrowded.
WASHINGTON — Border agents and child welfare workers are running out of space to shelter children who have been separated from their parents at the U.S. border as part of the Trump administration's new "zero tolerance" policy, according to two U.S. officials and a document obtained by NBC News.
As of Sunday, nearly 300 of the 550 children currently in custody at U.S. border stations had spent more than 72 hours there, the time limit for immigrants of any age to be held in the government's temporary facilities. Almost half of those 300 children are younger than 12, according to the document, meaning they are classified by the Department of Homeland Security as "tender age children."
The stations, run by the Border Patrol and meant only as the first stop for children detained at the border, often lack adequate bedding or separate sleeping rooms for children.
Eventually, they’re taken to one of the HHS centers where Antar Davidson worked. However, since even those centers — of which there are about 100 in 17 different states and are currently holding 11,313 children — are now reaching capacity and HHS is looking at erecting tent cities for detention on U.S. military bases.
The Trump administration is evaluating military bases around Texas as possible sites for additional temporary shelter for the growing number of migrant children separated from parents, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.
While the HHS' Administration for Children and Families confirms a need for more "temporary shelters for unaccompanied alien children," the McClatchy news service says officials are considering erecting "tent cities" for between 1,000 and 5,000 children at a military facility.
In the coming weeks, officials will be evaluating Fort Bliss Army base near El Paso as a potential site, along with Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene and Goodfellow AFB in San Angelo.
These tent cities will be set up during the summer in the blistering Texas heat. They won’t be licensed with staff that has even the meager training that Davidson and his former co-workers received.
Let me also point out the most famous tent city prisons in the country were those run by bigot ex-Sheriff Joe Arpaio before he was convicted for refusing to abide by a court order to stop discriminating in his enforcement. Well, it just so happens that an amazing number of his inmates died in custody due to incompetence, neglect, and suicides because of the harsh conditions.
Lacey’s recent story, “Prisoners Hang Themselves in Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Jails at a Rate That Dwarfs Other County Lockups,” is explosive, and not just because he uncovered an alarming suicide rate in Maricopa County jails. Lacey also probes, without much help from county administrators, the number of jail deaths in general. He stumbles into a sick universe of crime and denial, but nothing we should be surprised about given what we know about Sheriff Arpaio.
The number of suicides is off the charts, which is sadly understandable when you consider the proven mistreatment of inmates and the conditions in places like Tent City. The food is atrocious, Tent City can reach 145 degrees in the summer, and one federal judge ruled twice that the medical care and other conditions are unconstitutional. So, while most big county lockups have suicide rates ranging from 6 to 14 percent, the percentage of deaths in Arpaio’s jails from suicide is 24 percent. And, as Lacey says, it’s probably higher, except nobody really knows.
From 1996 to 2015, the suicide rate among jail deaths in Sheriff Joe Arpaio's lockups was an astounding 24 percent, with 39 of the 157 hanging themselves.
Furthermore, of the 157 deaths listed on the sheriff's watch on the M.E.'s chart, 34 simply are tagged as having been found dead with no explanation as to cause of death. More mysteriously, another 39 died in the county hospital without explanation. That's 73 deaths — nearly half of all deaths — that county authorities list as "who knows?"
It gets worse. Arpaio’s guards kill inmates or just let them die at a chilling rate. Last year Felix Torrez was picked up for riding his bike to work on the wrong side of the street, taken to jail, and died from a bleeding ulcer while jailers ignored his cries. Or in 2011 Gulf War veteran Marty Atencio was manhandled and Tased by eight guards, then left to die (warning: graphic video). County residents have shelled out more than $140 million to pay for these criminal fuck-ups—one of the earliest and largest being the $8.25 million that Scott Norberg’s family received after the victim died while being restrained.
Lacey’s account describes other inmates who were hauled into one of Joe’s jails, then died for lack of attention—like a diabetes shot.
For the next 60 hours, Deborah Braillard suffered the agonies of hell as she went into a diabetic coma. She died because jailers did not administer insulin.
What’s even more appallingly misleading is that in some cases, the records state that the inmate died at the hospital, not in Arpaio’s corrupt hell hole, because the victim was transported to the hospital after dying in jail. So, we don’t really know how many died in the sheriff’s custody, but it’s a big, unacceptable number.
So when we start talking “Tent Cities” this is what our prior experience with them has been. Basically, they’re death camps.
And to those who say calling them potential death camps is “over the top” let’s just remember that we’re counting on the HHS department to keep these kids safe when they’ve already lost over 1,500 of them.
(CNN)The federal government has placed thousands of unaccompanied immigrant children in the homes of sponsors, but last year it couldn't account for nearly 1,500 of them.
Wagner is the acting assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families, which is part of the Department of Health and Human Services. ORR is a program of the Administration for Children and Families.
CNN reported earlier this month that, in his testimony, Wagner said during the last three months of 2017, the ORR lost track of nearly 1,500 immigrant children it had placed in the homes of sponsors.
So that doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.
Even when their parents are released, whether they are allowed to remain after being granted asylum or removed, there isn’t a clear process for how they will be reunited again — Ever.
This is a recipe for absolute, total disaster and permanent emotional damage for these kids. It’s a tragic inhumane treatment and likely illegal and unconstitutional, but it will continue — until Congress musters up the gumption to change it, and somehow Trump get finally shamed into doing the right thing because right now he’s been falsely blaming Democrats for this while saying he doesn’t even approve of the Republican House Bill which might do some minor amount’s of good.
“I’m looking at both of them. I certainly wouldn’t sign the more moderate one,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News Channel in front of the White House. “I need a bill that gives this country tremendous border security. I have to have that.”
So this is a big game of chicken with no apparent endgame in sight using immigrant children, both the Dreamers and the separated, being dangled n the crosshairs and used as hostages for Trump’s Wall funding.
This is what America has come to.