Things That Matter

The Dangerous Way Trump Wants To Deal With Undocumented Immigrants And Their Children

After strong backlash from Democrats, Republicans and the general public, President Donald Trump agreed to reverse his administration’s zero tolerance policy that called to separate families that tried to cross the border illegally.

“We’re going to have strong — very strong — borders, but we are going to keep the families together,” Trump said on June 20 at the Oval Office. “I didn’t like the sight or the feeling of families being separated.”

The president spoke at the press conference about having compassion for the families, some of which are trying to gain asylum.

However, we’ve gotten a better sense of how the Trump Administration is planning to deal with the undocumented immigrants in detention centers, away from their children, and the incoming undocumented immigrants that attempt to cross the U.S.-Mexico border.

This is how the Trump Administration plans to reunite an estimated 2,000-2,400 kids with their undocumented parents.

CREDIT: Twitter/ @TexasTribune

Three days after Trump officially said that he would reverse his own policy of separating families, his administration released information that details how they would go about reuniting them.

All reunifications will take place at the Port Isabel Service Processing Center in Los Fresnos, Texas. Parents are informed that they can locate, and/or communicate with their child by calling the Detention Reporting and Information Line for assistance, which is staffed Monday through Friday between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.

“The information provided by these parents to the call operators will be forwarded to Health and Human Services (HHS) for action,” the Office of Public Affairs states. “Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and HHS will coordinate a review of their custodial data to identify where each child is located, verify the parent/child relationship, and set up regular communication and removal coordination, if necessary.”

Furthermore, ICE has completed the following steps toward reunification:

“Implemented an identification mechanism to ensure on-going tracking of linked family members throughout the detention and removal process;

Designated detention locations for separated parents and will enhance current processes to ensure communication with children in HHS custody;

Work closely with foreign consulates to ensure that travel documents are issued for both the parent and child at time of removal; and

Coordinate with HHS for the reuniting of the child prior to the parents’ departure from the United States.”

That last sentence is where things get a bit complicated.

Reuniting families is only for adults that have agreed to be deported.

CREDIT: Twitter/@cnni

“The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and HHS have a process established to ensure that family members know the location of their children and have regular communication after separation to ensure that those adults who are subject to removal are reunited with their children for the purposes of removal.”

All of that means that if parents want to fight to gain asylum–which can take years–they will not be reunited with their children. If they wish to reunite with their children, they have to agree to return to their native country as a family unit.

The Office of Public Affairs also makes a point that some adults choose to be deported but not with their children. That means their kids will remain in U.S. custody until their court proceedings.

“We have people in there who are considering not continuing on with really strong asylum claims because they think they’ll get reunited with their kids faster if they give up their claim,” civil-rights lawyer Sirine Shebaya told the Washington Post.

This doesn’t mean all of the children in a U.S. immigration detention facility will ultimately be reunited with their family. The New York Times reports that thousands may continue to be processed without any family member.

One of the biggest factors that seems to concern President Trump is how much time and effort undocumented immigrants put on the judicial system. In order for undocumented immigrants to be properly processed, whether they are claiming asylum or being deported, they must still go through the courts and be processed as the law requires. But Trump would rather do away with all of that.

On June 23, a day after the reunification details were released, Trump tweeted that undocumented immigrants should be deported without due process.

CREDIT: Twitter/@wsbtv

“We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came,” the president tweeted. “Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order. Most children come without parents. Our Immigration policy, laughed at all over the world, is very unfair to all of those people who have gone through the system legally and are waiting on line for years! Immigration must be based on merit — we need people who will help to Make America Great Again!”

According to ABC News, Trump alleges that he’s been proposed to hire 5,000 judges in order to meet the needs of the influx of undocumented immigrants.

“They came into see me last week they said we’d like to hire 5,000 more judges. 5,000, have you heard of a thing like that?” Trump said, according to ABC News. “Where do you find 5,000 people to be judges?”

In response to Trump’s tweet about doing away with due process for undocumented immigrants, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said: “What President Trump suggested here is both illegal and unconstitutional. Any official who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws should disavow it unequivocally.”

By denying people due process, the Trump administration would be able to act without court interference. Due process is vital to a democracy, even appearing twice in the U.S. Constitution. It guarantees everyone their fair day in court to argue their side of a case. Without due process, people do not have a chance to state their case before a judge.


READ: President Trump’s Executive Order To End Family Separations Could Mean Indefinite Detention For Migrant Children

Share this story with all of your friends by tapping that little share button below!

Notice any needed corrections? Please email us at corrections@wearemitu.com

Women Are Speaking Out About What Changed Their Minds About Abortion

Fierce

Women Are Speaking Out About What Changed Their Minds About Abortion

Mark Reinstein / Getty

With so much at stake this election year, it’s important to understand the circumstances behind some of our biggest beliefs. Currently there are little questions as to whether Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett is in opposition to a person’s right to abortion. Her Catholic faith, her academic writing, and accounts from friends affirm that she has opposes the medical procedure. During a 2017 confirmation hearing for her current position as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, Coney Barret stated that she was bound to follow the Roe decision as an appeals court judge stating “Roe has been affirmed many times and survived many challenges in the court… And it’s more than 40 years old, and it’s clearly binding on all courts of appeals. And so it’s not open to me or up to me, and I would have no interest in, as a court of appeals judge, challenging that precedent.”

There’s likely no chance of changing her mind, but we were curious about how women felt.

A recent post on Reddit posed the question: What changed your mind on abortion?

Check out the answers below!

“Being pregnant (with a very much wanted baby). I’ve always been pro choice, but learning about how much can go wrong in a pregnancy made it very apparent abortion is far from a black and white issue. For example, say the fetus has some defect where it can be carried to term, but will 100% die shortly after birth. There is no reason the mother should be forced to carry out the whole pregnancy. There are so many other nuances like this that are not possible to legislate.” – kittyinparis

“having one myself. i was religious, orthodox christian once upon a time. i hate to be one of those people who didn’t understand something until i experienced it myself but it is what it was. i extremely naive and ignorant because i thought that it was as simple as “don’t get pregnant if you don’t want a kid”. but it’s really not. and you never know what someone’s story is. and even then, regardless of their situation i think if someone doesn’t want to be pregnant it’s immoral to force them to be.” – Reddit user

“Honestly? Biology class. They went over sexual reproduction step by step and I just couldn’t buy the whole “humanity begins at conception” thing anymore. Then I started reading what all those scary buzzwords meant and I got a bit pissed off. Turns out the evil “partial-birth abortions” are usually called D&Es and they’re usually only done to babies with no chance of survival or in the cases of miscarriages. That’s not evil. That’s sad. I felt lied to, in a big way.” – Moritani

“I learned more about the concepts of bodily autonomy and consent and decided that it’s wrong to force people to remain pregnant against their will.” – enerjem

“When I first learned about the concept it seemed like a terrible thing but even after just 20 minutes of research (I did a lot more clearly, but this is just to emphasize how simple this decision was) I became pro-choice at 14ish, and I’ve had that stance ever since. So I only barely changed my mind really, but I think it counts because without looking into it I could’ve gone on believing it to be morally repugnant just because of what it sounds like and because it’s a subject that’s so easy to get carried away on and not look at objectively.” – ypical_Humanoid

“Paying my own bills. It’s a lot harder to feed two mouths than one.” – Reddit user

“Having kids. Pre-kids i was very prolife. Went to rallys and everything. Would have stressed and felt guilty if i got pregnant and dont knownwhat i would have chosen though. 4 kids later and several oops…im very pro choice.” – Strikingachord

“I was pro-life until I was about 13. I figure my brain developed more and I was then better able to see the issue in a more global and expansive way and determined that pro-choice was the most ethical stance.” – searedscallops

“Meeting someone in college who had had one in the past, and who spoke openly about it. She didn’t regret it or torture herself with guilt and shame over it, but she wasn’t a depraved monster, either. She was a wonderful person who did what was best for herself and her situation.” –coffeeblossom

“Having to get one myself.” –aj4ever

“I don’t know that I was ever pro-life in the same way I don’t think I was ever really Christian. I grew up in an Evangelical Protestant denomination, and until about middle school I mostly parroted things I heard. Things like “hate the sin love the sinner” for anything from being gay to probably having an abortion.

Sometime around middle school I started questioning all of it, forming my own opinions on things. I landed on atheist pro-choice feminist and have stayed there since.” – DejaBlonde

Notice any needed corrections? Please email us at corrections@wearemitu.com

Joe Biden Walks Away With Final Presidential Debate On Healthcare, Covid, And Many Issues

Things That Matter

Joe Biden Walks Away With Final Presidential Debate On Healthcare, Covid, And Many Issues

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden sparred during the final presidential debate. The two presidential nominees debated on issues ranging from healthcare to immigration to Trump’s finances. President Trump started controlled and quickly lost control of his temperament and spiraled for much of the debate.

First, people are giving the praise to the moderator, journalist Kristen Welker.

Welker is a reporter and White House correspondent for NBC News. As moderator of the final presidential debate, Welker kept the conversation moving forward. She was also able to stop President Trump on numerous occasions when he began spiraling as the debate went on.

One of the most stunning moments was President Trump claims that low IQ immigrants show up to court dates.

“Only the really – I hate to say this, but those with the lowest IQ. They might come back,” Trump said.

That was President Trump’s response to a question about catch and release. The catch and release program allowed for immigrants to come to the U.S., declare their intent for asylum, and be released to, usually, family members. They are then given a court date to plead their case for asylum. An overwhelming number of asylum seekers do show up to their court cases to make sure they have the chance to seek asylum.

The Trump administration eliminated the program and began what is called “Remain in Mexico.” The current plan forces migrants to wait in other countries while waiting for their day in immigration court.

When given a chance to address the 545 migrant children missing their parents, President Trump claimed they were being taken care of.

President Trump dodged questions about healthcare.

The rushed confirmation of Supreme Court Justice pick Amy Coney Barrett could have serious repercussions for people and their health care. The Trump administration is going to be challenging the Affordable Care Act, also called Obamacare, in hopes of overturning the healthcare law. This would eliminate protections for people with preexisting conditions, including diabetes, cancer, and pregnancy.

There is currently a lot of debate over whether or not a Covid-19 diagnosis would become a preexisting condition. More than 220,000 Americans have contracted the virus and the Affordable Care Act is in jeopardy because of the Trump administration.

President Trump still hasn’t released his tax returns.

Recent news about President Trump’s taxes made national headlines. Americans learned that President Trump recently paid $750 in taxes and that the president has a private bank account in China. According to his own tax returns, Trump paid more than $188,000 in taxes to the Chinese government. The bank account was previously unknown information.

Joe Biden appealed to the American voters and families.

Biden avoided getting into arguments during the debate and kept focused on the issues and how they impacted the American family. From Covid to the economy, Biden touched on all of the issues that keep American families up at night. Biden offered plans to stop the spread of Covid-19 but promoting the use of masks and safely reopening the U.S. economy to boost the economy and save lives.

Viewers are calling the debate a victory for the Biden campaign.

Several snap polls form different organizations show that people consider Biden the winner of this debate. Biden told the American people that is was running to be the American president, not a Democrat president. Biden promised to be the president for all American people and to take care of everyone, regardless of whether or not they voted for him.

READ: The First Presidential Debate Went Off The Rails Fast And The Internet Had Fun With It

Notice any needed corrections? Please email us at corrections@wearemitu.com