Trump: We must ‘immediately’ return undocumented immigrants ‘with no judges or court cases’

[roamer_1]

I'm a ranch hand [...] hiking.

That's funny, right there...

[Maj. Bill Martin]

So, let's say I'm a ranch hand on some bordering land in Texas. I am 5 miles inland just hiking. I do not have my ID on me as I'm not doing any activity that requires an ID, such as driving. I am on private property, not on the Roosevelt Reservation line. I am stopped by a border patrol agent who sees me walking. I have no ID to give and as a civil libertarian, I choose to assert my 5th Amendment rights and not answer any questions (I don't lie, I simply don't answer).

Am I assume to be an illegal > detained and deported on the spot with no due process?

Yup.  Buh-bye!

I have zero problem with that, too.  Anyone who is enough of a dumbass to refuse to identify themselves and say "I'm a U.S. citizen" deserves deportation.  Strengthen the gene pool in the Good 'Ol USA!

I would point out that under your logic, any illegal immigrant could refuse to say their name or identify themselves throughout the entire immigration process, and could not be deported because we couldn't prove they weren't a citizen.  It would be creating the largest legal loophole in history.

[roamer_1]

Yup.  Buh-bye!

I have zero problem with that, too.  Anyone who is enough of a dumbass to refuse to identify themselves and say "I'm a U.S. citizen" deserves deportation.  Strengthen the gene pool in the Good 'Ol USA!

That's the point. Without due process, such a declaration would mean nothing.

[txradioguy]

Alright. But then the argument is moot wrt due process - the apprehension is the point. the apprehension requires due process.

Military not having powers of arrest puts them in a strictly support mode. The arrest is the part we are discussing.

Right but they can do everything up to that point to assist in securing the border. They have a lot of cool toys that can aid CBP in addition to air support and GSR capabilities.

[ABX]

Yup.  Buh-bye!

I have zero problem with that, too.  Anyone who is enough of a dumbass to refuse to identify themselves and say "I'm a U.S. citizen" deserves deportation.  Strengthen the gene pool in the Good 'Ol USA!

I would point out that under your logic, any illegal immigrant could refuse to say their name or identify themselves throughout the entire immigration process, and could not be deported because we couldn't prove they weren't a citizen.  It would be creating the largest legal loophole in history.

And there we have it folks.  With thunderous applause too I suspect.

[jpsb]

Yup.  Buh-bye!

Agreed, see ya, bye.

[txradioguy]

What I also believe this means, we really need to control our borders and not let free passage across them.

On this @thackney we are in complete agreement.

[skeeter]

And there we have it folks.  With thunderous applause too I suspect.

How do you address the second paragraph in his answer?

[roamer_1]

Right but they can do everything up to that point to assist in securing the border. They have a lot of cool toys that can aid CBP in addition to air support and GSR capabilities.

I'm good with all that. Hell I am even good with a strict military corridor (well marked and well defined). It is the suspension of due process under the law that I am chewing on.

[roamer_1]

And there we have it folks.  With thunderous applause too I suspect.

Stunning to see. And on a Conservative forum, at that. 

[thackney]

1) Tell them not to lose their passport or I.D.

Great idea.  I think it is a bad idea to wander near the border without a passport, but it is not illegal.  And thief do steal stuff like that.

2) Question them, asked them submit information that would verify they're a U.S. citizen, etc..

A due process then, a way to claim US citizen without having the documentation on you.  I expect that process is going to take more than a few minutes, but it should not kick the citizen back to Mexico for not carrying the ID.

[Sanguine]

Not if you toss them out at/near the border.  Once they are in the interior of the country, they have due process rights not to be removed without some kind of hearing.  Exactly what that hearing must be, though, is largely up to Congress.

Exactly!

[txradioguy]

I'm good with all that. Hell I am even good with a strict military corridor (well marked and well defined). It is the suspension of due process under the law that I am chewing on.

I see that and I'm trying to reassure you that you're chewing on it unnecessarily at this point.

[thackney]

So, let's say I'm a ranch hand on some bordering land in Texas. I am 5 miles inland just hiking. I do not have my ID on me as I'm not doing any activity that requires an ID, such as driving. I am on private property, not on the Roosevelt Reservation line. I am stopped by a border patrol agent who sees me walking. I have no ID to give and as a civil libertarian, I choose to assert my 5th Amendment rights and not answer any questions (I don't lie, I simply don't answer).

Am I assume to be an illegal > detained and deported on the spot with no due process?

If the border was actually controlled, this gentleman wouldn't be a suspected illegal any more than someone in Kansas acting the same way.

[roamer_1]

Great idea.  I think it is a bad idea to wander near the border without a passport, but it is not illegal. 

Speaking from the other border, it is not unusual to be without papers in the deep woods.
my wallet and keys are hid near the truck when I walk off... Don't want to be losing that stuff days into the bush.

[roamer_1]

I see that and I'm trying to reassure you that you're chewing on it unnecessarily at this point.

Seems like plenty here would remove it, so prolly not.

[Sanguine]

Speaking from the other border, it is not unusual to be without papers in the deep woods.
my wallet and keys are hid near the truck when I walk off... Don't want to be losing that stuff days into the bush.

I guess the idea is that you might have to adapt to a busy border where people who shouldn't be are trying to cross all the time.

FYI - Big Bend is one of the most beautiful wilderness places in the world.  It has been a fact for many years that there are areas you don't want to go, because they are drug and other smuggling corridors.  Sad but true.

[ABX]

How do you address the second paragraph in his answer?

Because that's already the case, not a 'could have'. You can't force someone to speak. You can't beat an answer out of them. They already can simply choose not to answer and yes, it is up to the government to prove they aren't a citizen before deporting them (although they constantly fail at that, even with the bureaucratic nightmare we have now).

The answer is not either extreme. We don't need months or years of courts and paperwork but we also don't need to just strip out rights and become exactly what we became a nation to get away from. With current technology and biometric identification, it can be much easier to expedite the process. It may not be as fast as some want or 'shoot them on sight' as some want, but we always should err on protecting individual rights.

What if the person wasn't just unwilling to speak but couldn't?

There are many cases like the George Jimenez case- a legal US citizen who was mentally disabled. He was picked up on a simple trespassing charge but got caught up in the legal mess of rapid deportations under Obama (even with all his liberal policies). It wasn't that he refused to answer the questions, it was that he simply couldn't even understand them in the first place.

Even with all of Obama's liberal policies, he was deported and only was 'rescued' (for lack of a better term) when a church in Mexico found him homeless and tried to help him.

So even with all the 'bleeding heart' liberal policies, that US Citizen was wrongly deported. What happens if we strip away any due process? 

I'm sure some will say it is 'good for our gene pool' and he was just 'too stupid'.

[ABX]

If the border was actually controlled, this gentleman wouldn't be a suspected illegal any more than someone in Kansas acting the same way.

Sure they will. Even in areas where we have some of the best security, illegals have already found ways around it and under it. An entire rail system was found bringing in illegals in San Diego- much deeper than the proposed wall. Even the famed 'Gaza wall' that we use as an example, is now plagued with tunnels under it.

Not to  mention, only a fraction of illegals come across the border like that. Most arrive through standard channels- air, bus, car, and simply let visas expire or disappear into the system.  Almost 70% of illegals who come here are visa over-stays and only a fraction of the rest physically 'walked' across the border.

If a wall popped up tomorrow, it would barely make a dent in the problem.

[Oceander]

Sure they will. Even in areas where we have some of the best security, illegals have already found ways around it and under it. An entire rail system was found bringing in illegals in San Diego- much deeper than the proposed wall. Even the famed 'Gaza wall' that we use as an example, is now plagued with tunnels under it.

Not to  mention, only a fraction of illegals come across the border like that. Most arrive through standard channels- air, bus, car, and simply let visas expire or disappear into the system.  Almost 70% of illegals who come here are visa over-stays and only a fraction of the rest physically 'walked' across the border.

If a wall popped up tomorrow, it would barely make a dent in the problem.

Harsh, man.  Next you’ll be telling us that rainbow-colored unicorns don’t actually exist. 

[Sanguine]

Sure they will. Even in areas where we have some of the best security, illegals have already found ways around it and under it. An entire rail system was found bringing in illegals in San Diego- much deeper than the proposed wall. Even the famed 'Gaza wall' that we use as an example, is now plagued with tunnels under it.

Not to  mention, only a fraction of illegals come across the border like that. Most arrive through standard channels- air, bus, car, and simply let visas expire or disappear into the system.  Almost 70% of illegals who come here are visa over-stays and only a fraction of the rest physically 'walked' across the border.

If a wall popped up tomorrow, it would barely make a dent in the problem.

I don't think that's correct, @AbaraXas.  I laid out the argument here:  http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,321602.msg1722572.html#msg1722572

There's also the issue of the number of illegal aliens in federal prison.  I'll make that point when I have time to do so.

[skeeter]

Because that's already the case, not a 'could have'. You can't force someone to speak. You can't beat an answer out of them. They already can simply choose not to answer and yes, it is up to the government to prove they aren't a citizen before deporting them (although they constantly fail at that, even with the bureaucratic nightmare we have now).

The answer is not either extreme. We don't need months or years of courts and paperwork but we also don't need to just strip out rights and become exactly what we became a nation to get away from.

Thanks for the food for thought- makes wading through all the superfluous worthwhile.

[ABX]

I don't think that's correct, @AbaraXas.  I laid out the argument here:  http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,321602.msg1722572.html#msg1722572

There's also the issue of the number of illegal aliens in federal prison.  I'll make that point when I have time to do so.

The entire federal prison issue is probably a big topic for another thread. What do you do with an Illegal MS13 member, for example, in prison for murder? Depending on where you deport him, that may be akin to setting him free. He may also not be accepted back by the host country. That's going to be a complicated issue to address.

[thackney]

Sure they will. Even in areas where we have some of the best security, illegals have already found ways around it and under it. An entire rail system was found bringing in illegals in San Diego- much deeper than the proposed wall. Even the famed 'Gaza wall' that we use as an example, is now plagued with tunnels under it.

Not to  mention, only a fraction of illegals come across the border like that. Most arrive through standard channels- air, bus, car, and simply let visas expire or disappear into the system.  Almost 70% of illegals who come here are visa over-stays and only a fraction of the rest physically 'walked' across the border.

If a wall popped up tomorrow, it would barely make a dent in the problem.

It seems your examples give reason the citizen on private property 5 miles from the border should not be treated differently than the one in Kansas.

[Sanguine]

The entire federal prison issue is probably a big topic for another thread. What do you do with an Illegal MS13 member, for example, in prison for murder? Depending on where you deport him, that may be akin to setting him free. He may also not be accepted back by the host country. That's going to be a complicated issue to address.

That link makes the point that the numbers, from Pew, Feds, MSM, etc., do not add up.  Not even close.