Illegal vs Inhumane
I understand that
truth and evidence are no longer a consistent standard in today’s partisan
divide; nevertheless, I refuse to intentionally or consciously use lies,
half-truths, inuendo, or implication in sharing my convictions and sincere
values. It’s tempting to make assumptions and forego vetting claims from social
media and cable news; but I have a couple of dependable friends who call me out
when I grow careless.
All that being said,
here is my honest take on events leading up to and erupting in Minneapolis,
Minnesota. Our political process is now based upon narrowly focused obsession
rather than overall good. There are basically honest people who base the entire
scope of their socio/political and moral foundation on one or two issues while
ignoring or even vilifying dozens of other issues that impact people’s lives.
Sadly, some of them are so focused on their one or two issues that they are
willing to adapt an ends-justifies-the-means ethic: “our side has to win, whatever
it takes—even if we have to use unethical and harmful tactics.”
Immigration has
become a major obsession in today’s America. I truly do not know anyone
who advocates “totally open—come on in!—borders” with zero standards or
accounting. That’s a groundless and unsupported appeal to the cult narrative.
On the other hand,
I know many people (indeed, I am one) who advocate humane treatment of all
people, including illegals who are being arrested and detained. Of course, every
sane person understands and accepts that resistance to legal arrest and detention
may require force; moreover, every sane and humane person also understands that
excessive and unnecessary force is never justified. There are valid and
sanctioned standards for the use of force in enforcing the law.
I also understand
that communities along the Mexican border are inundated with immigrants, both
legal and illegal, and that no reasonable or effective solution has been
developed or applied by any party to date. Many responses have been attempted,
but none have resolved the concern.
As a conflict
resolution consultant, I also understand that every problem can be resolved,
but only if all parties truly want to resolve the issue rather than simply to “win
the fight.” I also know that overreaction is never an effective solution to any
problem.
Which brings me to
my current topic, the events leading up to and culminating in the travesties in
Minneapolis.
Being in the USA
without authorization is generally a civil violation, not a felony; it is unlawful
entry that is a criminal offense. First-time illegal entry is a misdemeanor
and repeat offenses or illegal re-entry after deportation are felonies. There
are no entry-related crimes being committed in Minneapolis.
In my observation
the current administration’s approach is a gross, carefully orchestrated
overreaction justified, not by law but by an exaggerated vilification of the previous
administration’s immigration policies. My focus in this writing is not the
relative merits of current or previous administrations’ policies, none of which
have effectively resolved immigration concerns; however, verified data brings
some clarity to that question.
It’s very
difficult to compare apples to apples when comparing the Biden and Trump
administrations. It can be pointed out that removals declined under Biden;
however, when the COVID-related Title 42 expulsions are factored in, the Biden expulsions
were almost three times more than the explosion during the first Trump
administration. Title 42 expired in 2023.
But, to
demonstrate the tricks and games that can be played with numbers, Title 42
expulsions are not directly related to illegal, non-registered non-citizens. Under
Title 42, those who were expelled could return when certain conditions had been
met. The returns also are accounted for, so the numbers really get complicated.
Using the same
factors for consistency and integrity, and going back to the Clinton
administration, expulsions peaked from 1995 through 2000, reaching almost two
million in 2000. After an initial decline in the number of removals under Bush,
there was a brief resurgence in 2004 but, except for Title 42 expulsions the
numbers have decreased almost every year since then. During President Trump’s
first term of office there was a slight increase; however, even with including
Title 42 expulsions in 2021, the peak number remained under 750,000.[1]
But, as I said, my
concern is not whose policies have been more or less effective in resolving the
immigration issue. In the first place, it appears that none have significantly
resolved the conundrum. In the second place, is effectiveness totally evaluated
by the number of expulsions?
I’m much more
concerned about how those policies have been enacted.
Even when
expulsions peaked at almost two million under the Clinton Administration in
2000, and in every ensuing administration except the first term of Donald Trump
and thus far in his second term, bench warrants and due process were observed
as the Constitution requires. Moreover, humans were not put in cages and
treated inhumanely.
The complete
disregard for basic human rights and for constitutionally mandated procedures completely
disqualifies any enforcement in a constitutional system administered with
integrity. But when every level of checks and balances claims—and is granted—total
immunity, when there is no accountability to the law and there are no
consequences for illegal and inhumane actions videoed and seen by most of the
population, the system becomes more of a problem than the number of “illegals.”
That’s the way it
looks through the “Flawed Glass” that is my world view.
Together
in the Walk,
Jim
Comments
Post a Comment