Ayanna Pressley, the at-large city councilor who is running against incumbent US Rep Mike Capuano in the Seventh District, says it's time to bust up ICE, Boston Magazine reports.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
That’s rich
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:09pm
We have an elected individual who’s an anarchist. This isn’t a rational proposal and I hope it stays with her until election time.
You use those words...
By Jedidude
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:12pm
but I don't think you know what they mean.
You know what else isn't rational?
By Will LaTulippe
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:15pm
"You crossed this imaginary line while jogging, so you're going to be locked in a cage for two weeks."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/...
Cedella Roman is 'colored'
By Scauma
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:30pm
Therefore, I wouldn't expect anything different.
And I suppose the Irish electrician
By Roman
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:21pm
who was deported from Boston about a year ago on account of being an illegal was really deported because of latent anti-Irish bigotry on the part of ICE? Couldn't possibly be that laws are meant to be followed, and that border enforcement means border enforcement.
Rule of law?
By boo_urns
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:27pm
Tell me more about Trump and emoluments.
No, you tell me about it
By Roman
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:34pm
What with the burden of proof being on the accuser and all. Then you can tell me what that has to do with border enforcement. And then you can try to tell me with a straight face that if instead of Trump it was the most boyscoutiest guy you could imagine with an R next to his name that you wouldn't be trotting out the swastikas and the holocaust comparisons.
Try to keep up, Roman
By lbb
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:40am
blah blah blah we have rule of law in this country blah blah
Soooo...what about the emoluments clause?
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING HITLER HOLOCAUST RAWR
You are, as always, a clever-but-stupid piece of work.
You said, and I quote,
By boo_urns
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 11:08am
"Laws are meant to be followed." Why isn't the president following the law with regard to the emoluments clause? The record on this is out there in a quick Google search and I'm not going to do your homework for you.
But, also, triggered much, snowflake?
One of our laws states that
By Omri
Wed, 06/27/2018 - 11:57pm
One of our laws states that when people come to a border post and ask for asylum, the guards are supposed to register them and start an asylum application process, and let them in, after evaluating whether they should be detained for the duration, or just let in free.
Trump's BCP on the Brownsville Matamoros bridge has been ignoring the asylum law, and literally ignoring the asylum applicants, which is why they've been crossing elsewhere.
How about we be a little less selective on which laws to enforce and which to ignore?
What kind of libertarian are you?
By Roman
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:17pm
Property lines are imaginary too, if you want to be technical about it. We all just make an effort to imagine them in unison.
If I owned property
By Will LaTulippe
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:47pm
I wouldn't insist that somebody be jailed for two weeks for jogging onto it one time. Nor do I perceive that as any kind of persistent problem, because where I come from, the posting of a "no trespassing" sign is not uncommon and is thoroughly respected.
Hell, I can assure you that the woman in question (or really any female jogger) is welcome to come around my way.
I didn't click the link
By Will LaTulippe
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:09pm
But if she said "they're outta here, word to your mother", I will give her campaign $10.
??
By Gogan
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:35pm
This would never happen. Should we get rid of the borders separating us from Canada & Mexico too? & just make the three of us one big country?? Doesn't make any sense. Trump is too harsh on this issue but there does needs to be some sort of immigration enforcement.
Gosharootie!
By adamg
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:37pm
How ever did we handle immigration and customs issues at the border before ICE was created in 2003?
Not sure what gosharootie
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:51pm
Not sure what gosharootie means but she is advocating eliminating ICE with no plan for an alternative method to offer some sort of border security. Doesn’t sound very responsible but I’m sure it’ll play well in the current climate.
I'm sorry
By adamg
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:33pm
Gosharootie is an old phrase, you know, like darn tootin' and so's yer ol' man, 23 skidoo.
As for her alternatives, consarn it all and tarnation, I provided a link to a Boston Magazine article that explains how she would replace whatever legitimate work ICE does. Would you like some help on how to click on a link?
I did click and I read. I
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 5:16pm
I did click and I read. I saw her plan to continue him at trafficking but no plan for border security or immigration enforcement. So maybe my reading comprehension is poor or you’re just too busy being snarky to read your own article your linked to.
What?
By lbb
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:42am
So maybe my reading comprehension is poor or you're just too busy trying to get a shot back at Adam to write a coherent sentence. Try again?
ICE doesn't even operate at
By Tobasco da Gama
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:52pm
ICE doesn't even operate at the border anyway. That's CBP.
How Did We Fund The Government...
By Suldog
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:55pm
... before the income tax was instituted? May as well ask that. Times change and sometimes solutions do as a result.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Times may change, true...
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:59pm
But disingenuous arguments in favor of an unjust status quo never seem to go away
MY ancestors came here legally, dammit
By Michael
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 2:57pm
They showed up at Ellis Island, confirmed that they didn't have TB or anarchist literature, and that was enough.
Then, a few years after they got here, for some reason* that wasn't enough anymore.
*because the immigrants started to be Chinese and other not-European
Irish
By BostonDog
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:03pm
It wasn't all that long ago that the Irish (among other European groups) were looked down upon and somewhat feared the way Latinos are viewed today by a sizable amount of the population.
Let's be honest
By Scauma
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:06pm
There are a lot of white people (not all, and probably not most, but still a lot) who are afraid of losing their majority status. That is what unifies Trump's base largely. And this is why they hate Latinx's.
If all you see is hate
By Roman
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:26pm
that's because you have hate on the brain.
In your mind, is it possible let for anyone to be in favor of strict border enforcement for any reason other than hatred? Is it possible in your mind for people to be motivated by philosophical reasons, like the need to maintain the rule of law that we all (I think) agree is essential to our material prosperity, physical security, and intellectual liberty? Does that at all compute for you, or are those just more dog whistles and nothing more?
"Strict border enforcement"
By lbb
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:44am
"Strict border enforcement" doesn't mean arresting and detaining asylum applicants and taking away their children. It never has.
It has also never meant raiding fields in Hatfield for agricultural workers but never taking a pass through the IV.
"If all you see is hate..."
By boo_urns
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 11:09am
That's all I needed to read from the guy who foams at the mouth when it comes to anyone to the left of him.
There's that pesky rule of law again. Please see my comment, to which you painfully whined about, regarding following the law written about the emoluments clause.
That's nice
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:06pm
Now tell us about the Irish Exclusion Act.
True
By Michael
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:14pm
No doubt they were looked down on - my Italian ancestors dealt with the same thing. But only the Japanese and now the Central American immigrants have been thrown into camps, as far as I've ever heard. Being distrusted by the "natives" and being persecuted as a matter of course by the government are two pretty different things.
Hungry for instance Camp Kilmer in fact
By nino nitti
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 6:55am
1956
Really?
By lbb
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:49am
If you meant to cite Camp Kilmer's use to house refugees from Hungary as equivalent to what's happening now on the southern border, you blew it.
"In the fall of 1950, with hostilities in Korea, the camp was reactivated. It was placed on inactive status again in June 1955. In November 1956 it served as an initial place for housing for refugees from the 1956 Hungarian Revolution until June 1957. In March 1958, Camp Kilmer became Headquarters for the U.S. Army II Corps, the controlling headquarters for United States Army Reserve units across the northeast. Camp Kilmer also housed a maintenance and repair facility supporting the Nike/Hercules missile sites in the greater New York metropolitan area. This facility included large, armored rooms with heavy blast doors where missile engines and conventional warheads were stored and maintained.
"During the Cold War after the failed 1956 Hungarian Revolution 30,000 refugees were resettled at Camp Kilmer. Many settled in New Brunswick, which had a thriving Hungarian American community in its Fifth Ward.[4]" from wikipedia
IOW, they were housed in a formerly deactivated military base to initially accommodate them. They were allowed to resettle. They were not separated from their children.
And the American Frontier has
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:09pm
And the American Frontier has faded away. That changed too.
Wait
By Waquiot
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:45pm
Did you just call Slavs and Italians "not-European?"
Please read up on the Immigration Act of 1924 and the work of the Immigration Restriction League before commenting on the changes in the immigration laws in the early twentieth century.
Apparantly you are unaware
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:52pm
Many 'white' immigrants in that period were quaranteened (sp?) to prevent possible epidemics of diseases. And many died and buried in mass graves, sometimes unmarked.
You are also apparantly unaware that no welfare state 'entitlements' existed prior to 1965 (minus social security), and legal limmigrants had to be vouched for by a responsable U.S. citizen. This sponsor was responsible to care for this immigrant if they couldn't find gainful employment, became homeless, etc., not the government.
You also failed to mention that from the 1920s onwards immigration was reduced to a trickle due to a poor economy and the desire to get the many millions of immugrants the U.S. had to assimilate. From 1965 onwards, after the Immigration 'Reform' Act, it's become very difficult for Europeans to immigrate to the U.S., and easy for immigrants from 'poor' and predominately people of color countries. 52 years this has been the situation. And correspondingly, our welfare state was created during this exact same time period.
Finally, the U.S. is not the so called developing nation it was 150-100 years ago. We're a developed, 1st world post-industrial nation with very real limited need for millions of semi and unskilled, poorly educated people.
And apparently you are unaware
By adamg
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 5:01pm
That attempted migration over the southern border was at a 40-year low even before Dear Leader got all cagey, and that without migrants, our crops will rot in the fields and our meals will not get cooked/served in our restaurants.
Really?
By Roman
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 11:30pm
Your motivation for lax border enforcement is that you want people to do menial I labor for you? What contortions do you need to put yourself through to convince yourself that's not slavery in all but name?
My motivation for more lax border enforcement
By Will LaTulippe
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 12:00am
Is that somebody doesn't get locked in a cage for two weeks for jogging. Note my use of "more."
There's a middle ground between somebody walking past in a ski mask with a rifle without anybody batting an eye and shutting down 93 to check everybody's nationality when most of the folks are just trying to enjoy a nice summer weekend. For Chrissakes, let's as a people (expletive) occupy middle ground one Goddamn time in 2018.
Well...
By berkleealum
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:34am
there’s the whole payment for their work thing, and that it’s voluntary labor.
Other than that, I totally see your point.
My motivation for lax border
By Omri
Thu, 06/28/2018 - 12:00am
My motivation for lax border enforcement is so that my tax money doesn't go towards institutionalized child abuse.
In the 1920s
By Waquiot
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 7:58pm
Immigration slowed to a trickle due to the law I referenced above. It was the first establishment of a quota system for immigration. Agree with or disagree with it, you cannot deny that the quota reduced immigration. Trust me, the refugees fleeing the real Nazis in the 1930s would have kept the numbers up if it were possible.
Still doesn't make sense....
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:03pm
Dismantle ICE, the laws still stay the same and the Justice Department (who along with Customs was in charge of this before ICE) will just absorb former ICE employees and they will then enforce the same laws that are still on the books.
Is she pulling a Tito here and just realizing she has nothing left and wants to take the long shot approach?
If it's a longshot
By Michael
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:11pm
Nobody's informed current Congressman Mark Pocan of Wisconsin, who just announced he will introduce a bill to do exactly this
Well I had to look it up but....
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:17pm
This guy has been in office since 2013. He has the political room to grandstand and not be affected by it.
Still, he would be better off changing the actual law (from a crime to a civil infraction that isn't arrestable.)
Oh, Pete dear
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:51pm
IT IS A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR
We know you are a fascist, but at least get your legal situation straight - Drumpf unilaterally declared it to be more than that.
Which he legally cannot.
I hope you are hitting the gym so that you can keep up with that arm salute thing.
Lol you still mad anon......
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 5:06pm
Are federal misdemeanors arrestable or not......in MA most are, and carry house of correction terms up to 2.5 years in prison.
Your ad hominem attacks are cute, but still desperate.
The point is that eliminating Ice does nothing. Nothing.
If time served in office is the only thing not making it
By boo_urns
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:19pm
"grandstanding," then maybe it's not grandstanding to begin with.
Now, now
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:17pm
Pete's just having some trouble containing himself at that thought that any one person can just make up laws that congress hasn't passed and enact them using lots of guys with lots of weapons pushing people around.
This is like icehub for him.
Guess what?
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:31pm
Presenting at the border and asking for asylum is legal.
Crossing the border is a Class B Misdemeanor.
Congress has the right to make these laws, not Beauregard, not Drumpf. Congress has not changed these laws.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title18/...
See above....
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 5:08pm
Are misdemeanors arrestable like they are in MA?
That is the question.
Pay attention, dear
By lbb
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:52am
You're really not up on current events, are you?
"At the U.S. border, asylum seekers fleeing violence are told to come back later"
What does that have to do with anything I mentioned?
By Pete Nice
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 8:20am
All that article says is that people who come to border checkpoints to seek asylum are not arrested but told to come back later. No crime committed. Different story and different issue.
"Presenting at the border and
By Omri
Thu, 06/28/2018 - 12:02am
"Presenting at the border and asking for asylum is legal.
Crossing the border is a Class B Misdemeanor."
And the reason these migrants are doing the latter is that when they present themselves at the border and ask for asylum, they are ignored. WHICH IS ITSELF ILLEGAL
"He'd be better off changing the law."
By boo_urns
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 8:42pm
Um, what reality are you living in that he could even get that passed with a Republican controlled house, senate, and presidency? Might as well shoot for the moon.
Isn't he requesting the same thing "defunding" ice?
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 9:07pm
That's the whole point of this article. Just cheap talk going on.
?
By boo_urns
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 10:59pm
I don't know why you consider it "cheap talk." Attacking ICE may be low hanging fruit, but there are two things to consider if you concede that. One, they don't provide much value to either law or immigration enforcement, and, two, the notion already has legitimate momentum.
It's cheap because it's not practical.
By Pete Nice
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 8:46am
First, every country needs some sort of enforcement of immigration issues. People just aren't happy with the way this agency is being run.
Second, If you "defunded" it, what do you think would happen in reality? Every ICE worker just doesn't show up to work some day and everyone goes free? Does the criminal drug trafficker just get to come in? We can't do what every other country does because every other country has an enforcement entity in some form or the other.
In the end this is about Pressley ending her political career in a desperate fashion like Tito did.
"Ending her political career."
By boo_urns
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 11:14am
We'll track this issue and see if it ends it or not. That's entirely your take on it and I haven't heard anyone else going nearly as far. And, like I said, this isn't grandstanding and there are other politicians onboard with doing something similar with ICE.
With regard to your first two paragraphs, I offered nothing as to what happens with immigration enforcement or what happens to those employed by ICE afterwards. Mainly because I wasn't speaking to that. But immigration enforcement happened before ICE and it will happen still if ICE is broken up. ICE doesn't exactly have a great track record since its inception, but I don't think it's worth my time, or yours, to get into an argument on the merits of ICE or its history in this comment chain. All I'll say is that ICE was formed as a reaction to a perceived need for elevated "national security" after 9/11, not in response to an immigration crisis. I think that speaks for itself.
Exactly
By Pete Nice
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 2:43pm
Neither was she. That is why this is political grandstanding.
In the big picture, Pressley is an outsider, and outsiders do not fare well once they challenge the establishment and give up their previous position in doing so (See Yoon and Tito who isn't even an outsider). Just my opinion.
That would have been the INS
By Waquiot
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:13pm
An agency which those who felt that illegally entering the country wasn't a big deal had an issue with in the 1980s and 1990s.
It is foolish grandstanding to say that the agency that enforces our immigration and customs laws should be done away with. A real leader would instead point out positive ways ICE could be reformed to do their jobs without being immoral. Or conversely, a real leader would be able to craft a bill that somehow handles issues with our current immigration law that has the entire political spectrum up in arms (for vastly different reasons, of course.)
Dismantling ICE is the left wing version of dismantling the IRS as the right crows. It's the same thing.
I think we should abolish both
By Will LaTulippe
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:17pm
So why can't I fly, since I have two wings?
Postwar Germany needed a police force
By necturus
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:33pm
...but that didn't mean they should keep the Gestapo.
ICE has become evil. It's time for it to evaporate.
Stll probably not fair to compare...
By Pete Nice
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 3:57pm
A police force who puts people in an oven or shoots them in the head versus ICE. (I would be for prison time for anyone who negligently lost a kid or abused one in this current system).
But still, Germany changed their laws, and put war criminals on trial.
And like I said above. You get rid of the "gestapo", Trump will put those same people in other positions.
It's a reasonable comparison
By erik g
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:04pm
Which is exactly what we're advocating for here. Kidnapping a child? 20 year sentence. There are thousands of kids missing, thanks to our very own army of brown shirts. Disband the organization and prosecute the offenders for their crimes.
No, it's not
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:24pm
The goal of ICE is sending people home. Exterminating people nazi-style is not the same as deporting them back to their home countries, where they hold all the benefits and privileges of citizenship.
The extreme left of the immigration debate seems to hold a mentality that Life in the USA: good. Life south of the USA: bad. As if sending people home to Central/South America is worse than death. It's like "white man's burden" on a national scale.
PSSST
By SwirlyGrrl
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:29pm
Have I got a deal for you - there's this land that is kind of sort of just off shore and a little wet and you can buy it cheap and build there and ....
I'm only mentioning this because you seem to be the sort of person who could believe in this ...
No, that's not the goal of ICE
By adamg
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 4:29pm
The goal of ICE is whatever the government tells it to be. And right now that goal is blocking people from legally seeking asylum and locking them up in cages. The goal temporarily is no longer to put take children away from parents and lock them up in separate cages, but that could change just as easily soon.
As if sending people home to Central/South America is worse than death.
In some cases, it is. You might want to read up on why people seek asylum in the US - and why, until recently, we often granted it.
ICE's methods may have
By anon
Mon, 06/25/2018 - 5:00pm
ICE's methods may have changed. It's goal and mission has not.
[it]In some cases, it is. You might want to read up on why people seek asylum in the US - and why, until recently, we often granted it.[/it]
Often granted? The vast majority of asylum claims are denied. Guatemala and El Salvador both have an unemployment rate of a few percent, and both have populations growing at a steady rate. They're not wastelands or bombed out war zones. People live there.
And that's bullshit right there
By lbb
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 7:55am
It's not supposed to be. That's not what our Immigration and Customs Enforcement is supposed to be for. Not turning away asylum seekers. Not detaining asylum seekers and taking their children. "Sending people home" is NOT what ICE is supposed to be doing.
The question is what is 'home
By anon
Tue, 06/26/2018 - 8:29am
The question is what is 'home' for any particular
person: inside the USA, or in a foreign country.
Pages