The real problem with ICE detention centers

ICE is holding people for immigration violations at great expense and much controversy. Why?

The solution is obvious to me.

The problem with the detention centers is that they exist.

When a person is found to be in the country illegally, they should be loaded onto a bus and sent back where they came from. Right on the spot. No delay. No foot dragging. Just ship them right off.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

LeopoldBloom · M

What about due process? ICE is picking up US citizens by mistake. But if you wouldn't mind being shipped to Sudan or El Salvador yourself to save money, at least that would be consistent.

SumKindaMunster · 56-60, M

@LeopoldBloom Uh huh. When it's in your interest, due process and the law is sacred.

Flaunting Federal immigration law and setting up "sanctuary cities" is against the law and constitution as well.

Perhaps if the knuckleheads running Minnesota followed immigration laws we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

LeopoldBloom · M

@SumKindaMunster You clearly don't know what sanctuary cities are. They are not places where immigration law is not enforced. When someone is picked up by the local police, they can be locked up, released on bail, or released on their own recognizance. I assume you're aware of that. When the person arrested is found to be an illegal immigrant, the local police will notify ICE. This happens in all cities, including sanctuary cities. The law requires them to hold the person for 72 hours after they otherwise would have been released, to give ICE time to pick them up. Again, this happens in all cities as it's a legal requirement.

In a non-sanctuary city, the police will hold the person past 72 hours until ICE gets there. In a sanctuary city, they release the person after 72 hours even if ICE hasn't picked them up yet, as the law allows. So contrary to the nonsense you hear from the conservative sources you follow, sanctuary cities are following the law, while non-sanctuary cities are exceeding the legal requirements.

SumKindaMunster · 56-60, M

@LeopoldBloom I have no idea where you pulled this from Bloom. There is no one law stating this for sanctuary cities.

It's a patchwork of various laws depending on the municipality. Some offer more benefits than others, but ALL of them do not honor Federal immigration law.

That's what makes them sanctuary cities.

https://time.com/7222159/what-are-sanctuary-cities-why-is-trump-targeting-them/

There is no legal or universal definition of the phrase, but sanctuary cities are commonly regarded as jurisdictions which have policies that limit or define the extent to which a local/state government will share information with federal immigration law officers.

Mark Fleming, associate director of the National Immigrant Justice Center’s Federal Litigation Project, says the term “sanctuary cities” is somewhat of a “misnomer,” considering they are in reference to a variety of jurisdictions and states throughout the U.S., with a wide range of laws in place to limit their cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. For example, one sanctuary policy of New York City bars city officials from sharing information about immigrants unless it is regarding a criminal matter or there is written permission by an individual immigrant to do so.

Democrats have long championed these policies as a way to create safe and welcoming environments for immigrants.