According to the donkeys at MSNBC, we are now running concentration camps.

Here4money said:
https://www.newsweek.com/judge-says...urce=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

JUDGE SAYS CONDITIONS AT U.S. BORDER HOLDING CELLS VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION IN 'MONUMENTAL' RULING

Afederal judge in Arizona has ruled that conditions at U.S. border holding cells operated by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency violated the Constitution.

In a case first launched in 2015 over conditions at Tucson sector holding facilities, U.S. District Judge David Bury said on Wednesday that the conditions migrants and asylum seekers have had to face under CBP custody have been "substantially worse than detainees face upon commitment to either a civil immigration detention facility or even a criminal detention facility, like a jail or prison."

"The Court finds that the conditions of detention in CBP holding cells, especially those that preclude sleep over several nights, are presumptively punitive and violate the Constitution," he said.

The court, Bury noted, heard how plaintiffs complained of overcrowding, with cold, hard concrete floors and bench surfaces, cold temperatures, no blankets or mats and unsanitary cell conditions, precluding sleeping.

It also heard that cell conditions were unsanitary, with a lack of waste receptacles, "insufficient housekeeping," a lack of personal hygiene products and shower facilities, as well as insufficient access to food and water.

Bury also said the court was concerned about the lack of a universal medical questionnaire designed by medical professionals, particularly since medical screenings were being "performed by agents without any medical training."

Noting that migrants and asylum seekers had been held in overcrowded and unsanitary conditions for longer than 12 hours, Bury said CBP was not to hold migrants and asylum seekers for more than 48 hours at its Tucson sector going forward.

Condemning CBP for allowing migrants and asylum seekers to be forced to sleep in bathrooms in overcrowded holding areas, Bury said the practice was "unsanitary and degrading" and banned CBP from allowing it to happen again.

"The evidence is undisputed that conditions of confinement at Tucson Sector CBP stations are substantially worse than conditions afforded criminal detainees at the Santa Cruz County jail or other jail facilities, where detainees are medically screened by medical professionals; have a bed with cloth sheets, blankets, and pillows, and an opportunity for uninterrupted sleep; have clean clothing, including second layers for warmth; showers, toothbrushes and toothpaste, and warm meals with a variety of food choices, including fruits and vegetables, accommodating food allergies and religious beliefs," Bury wrote.

"Likewise, the conditions of confinement for civil immigration detainees similarly improve once they are transferred from CBP holding cells to detention centers operated by the United States Marshals, ICE, ERO, Health and Human Services (HHS), and other immigration detention agencies and organization," he said.

The conditions at Tucson Sector facilities, he said, fail to meet the same standards. As such, he said, "there is a presumption that the conditions of extended confinement at the Tucson Sector facilities violate the Plaintiffs' constitutional rights."

The ruling was celebrated by immigration rights attorneys, with Alvaro M. Huerta, staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, hailing the judgment as an "excellent outcome."

"With the court's order we have secured a permanent solution and hopefully the sickening conditions in these facilities will improve," Huerta said. "After years of collecting evidence and preparing and trying this case, the border detention facilities will no longer be allowed to violate the Constitution. Civil detainees in Border Patrol stations have suffered for too long, and this decision will pave the way for systemic change across the country."

"Through this lawsuit, we have been able to shed light on the realities of the inhumane treatment of migrants in CBP detention facilities. In its decision, the court recognized that conditions in CBP's Tucson Sector are 'substantially worse' than those afforded criminal detainees in jail facilities," said Mary Kenney, directing attorney of litigation with the American Immigration Council.

"Today's monumental victory ensures that CBP cannot hold migrants in the Tucson Sector over 48 hours without providing conditions that meet basic human needs and serves as an example of the standards that should apply in all CBP facilities," Kenny said.

Alessandra Navidad, executive director for the ACLU of Arizona, also noted that concerns around conditions at CBP holding cells have continued to grow over the years since the 2015 filing.

"Today's order affirms what our clients and migrants subjected to CBP detention have been saying for years," Navidad said. "Conditions in these facilities are degrading and violate the U.S. Constitution.

"The court found that these conditions violate standards of basic decency and puts migrants at risk of serious harm," the executive director added. "We will continue to ensure that this agency is held accountable for civil rights abuses against migrants in their custody."
More...
Ok H4.... but you bitch about the private prison sector all the time also.
I have to ask, do you have an intelligent solution to this problem? Build more prisons? Then you'll bitch about that. Just turn everyone loose? Bad idea. So speak up. What's gonna make you happy? Letting millions in from here to forever?
 
Here4money said:
I have little patience and limited time to read inane diatribes or opinions not backed by facts and sources. I don't know why anyone would.
More...

We seem on different wavelengths. Anyway, what is a definition of a source? How about informed opinions? Educated guesses?

The author of the article I quoted, and this would apply to most other authors, have taken some information from various sources and organized it into issue or thesis. This requires reasoning skills, either decent research skills and or broad knowledge, and where available, good interview skills.

What you may characterize as my “diatribes” are actually organized posts containing facts from a wide variety of sources. My strong visualization skills allows me to make connections that others may miss. I regularly support my statements with facts or solid reasoning, unlike far too many articles, posts, or broadcasts from the Left.

As far as the quoted article, note I did not say I agreed with it. I meant I appreciated the effort on the author’s part to put their ideas out there while attempting to support them. If you want my feedback on this article, feel free to ask me, and when I have more time, I will take the time to critically evaluate it and post my position.

For someone with as many posts as you have, I would hope you appreciate posts that are truly fact based or at least have sound reasoning applied.
 
vanzandt said:
Ok H4.... but you bitch about the private prison sector all the time also.
I have to ask, do you have an intelligent solution to this problem? Build more prisons? Then you'll bitch about that. Just turn everyone loose? Bad idea. So speak up. What's gonna make you happy? Letting millions in from here to forever?
More...

You realize I opined none about the article posted? So where do you even get "bitching" from it?

I haven't changed my opinion on the topic. Immigration only became topic du jour after 911 as right wingers found a scapegoat that would not punch back, right as we "coincidentally" started seeing the militarization of DHS & extra expansion of the private prison system.

What would make me happy?

Mandatory e-verify on all employers with hefty fines for not abiding. Good luck getting the GOP to agree.

Expanded guest worker program to deal w/the low-skill needs of small & large businesses, with priorities to small businesses as large corps usually gobble these up. Permanent stays weren't as fashionable in the brazero days as guest workers were free(er) to travel back and forth.

Complete abolishment of the private prison system (including border detention), as profit motive has no place or say in the incarceration of people in a civilized society. Yes I'd rather the government build more appropriate detention centers than dump billions into a wall.

Return of the border patrol model, with better agents vetting. These aren't hardened criminals they're dealing with 90% of the time, so hiring every flunky w/a power trip is inappropriate. There is a huge recruitment problem, as no one wants the job, and here's where automation should come in. I'd rather have a well vetted bro in Seattle flying drones over the border & monitoring cameras & sensors than have miserable trigger happy Paco waiting for his "dirty Harry" moment inside an SUV in 100F AZ weather.

Going back to shortened detention periods, as these people have the same constitutional rights to a speedy trial as you or me, no matter who it pains to admit it. This means expanding judicial appointments by orders of magnitude, a cost that we could've afforded instead of a wall.

Scrapping the bond model, this only keeps people incarcerated and goes against the point above.

Return of "catch and release" as it was proven effective enough to deal w/an overwhelmed system and in dealing with family units. This in of itself wouldn't be a necessity if there were more judges to expedite cases & removals.

Harsher punishment to gun runners & fire arm sales that fuel this supply; enough of this shit, what can I say?

Overall, more electronic surveillance & satellite imaging. Walls do slow traffic, our main beef isn't w/the stupid wall, it's getting hammered about it as the stop all be all solution & using it as a political rallying cry rather than dealing w/it as adults. It's ridiculous that we can't have a laser/camera grid from coast to coast triggering anytime something moves across the border. Yeah, we can stop mach 10 rockets from anywhere in the world, but can't spot a fat abuela moving across the border? Give me a break.

Lastly, easing permanent residency to people....this whole notion that "we're full, fuck off" is asinine. You've paid your dues, and your taxes, come on in.
 
Here4money said:
You realize I opined none about the article posted? So where do you even get "bitching" from it?

I haven't changed my opinion on the topic. Immigration only became topic du jour after 911 as right wingers found a scapegoat that would not punch back, right as we "coincidentally" started seeing the militarization of DHS & extra expansion of the private prison system.

What would make me happy?

Mandatory e-verify on all employers with hefty fines for not abiding. Good luck getting the GOP to agree.

Expanded guest worker program to deal w/the low-skill needs of small & large businesses, with priorities to small businesses as large corps usually gobble these up. Permanent stays weren't as fashionable in the brazero days as guest workers were free(er) to travel back and forth.

Complete abolishment of the private prison system (including border detention), as profit motive has no place or say in the incarceration of people in a civilized society. Yes I'd rather the government build more appropriate detention centers than dump billions into a wall.

Return of the border patrol model, with better agents vetting. These aren't hardened criminals they're dealing with 90% of the time, so hiring every flunky w/a power trip is inappropriate. There is a huge recruitment problem, as no one wants the job, and here's where automation should come in. I'd rather have a well vetted bro in Seattle flying drones over the border & monitoring cameras & sensors than have miserable trigger happy Paco waiting for his "dirty Harry" moment inside an SUV in 100F AZ weather.

Going back to shortened detention periods, as these people have the same constitutional rights to a speedy trial as you or me, no matter who it pains to admit it. This means expanding judicial appointments by orders of magnitude, a cost that we could've afforded instead of a wall.

Scrapping the bond model, this only keeps people incarcerated and goes against the point above.

Return of "catch and release" as it was proven effective enough to deal w/an overwhelmed system and in dealing with family units. This in of itself wouldn't be a necessity if there were more judges to expedite cases & removals.

Harsher punishment to gun runners & fire arm sales that fuel this supply; enough of this shit, what can I say?

Overall, more electronic surveillance & satellite imaging. Walls do slow traffic, our main beef isn't w/the stupid wall, it's getting hammered about it as the stop all be all solution & using it as a political rallying cry rather than dealing w/it as adults. It's ridiculous that we can't have a laser/camera grid from coast to coast triggering anytime something moves across the border. Yeah, we can stop mach 10 rockets from anywhere in the world, but can't spot a fat abuela moving across the border? Give me a break.

Lastly, easing permanent residency to people....this whole notion that "we're full, fuck off" is asinine. You've paid your dues, and your taxes, come on in.
More...
Well there are certainly some things that are open for discussion in your post, but at least you spent some time with it. I'll return to this later.
 
upload_2020-7-7_9-23-33.png

upload_2020-7-7_9-24-1.png

upload_2020-7-7_9-24-20.png

upload_2020-7-7_9-24-49.png

upload_2020-7-7_9-25-13.png

upload_2020-7-7_9-26-20.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top