New immigrant detention facilities for children

[AspieAlly613]

According to This news story from the Washington post a new detention center specifically for teens aged 13-17 is now open in Texas.  Here's my main question about it:

 

If the center is only for people in that age range, does this constitute family separation, or is this only used for unaccompanied minors who cross the border without parents/guardians?

 

Does anyone here know this detail?

 

[Morays]

7 minutes ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

I've been thinking of this meme a lot lately, far more than I want to.

[Vemmaren]

9 minutes ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

You would think that, because both parties try to blame each other for these things, when truthfully both are equally complicit. 

 

Without enough info we can't say one way or another that this center is a bad thing though. Separating families isn't good, but without knowing the circumstances we can't say for sure that the alternative isn't worse.

 

Its an ugly situation and we need to find better solutions, but pointing fingers at each other helps none of these kids. The same goes for a large number of other issues. 

[RoseGoesToYale]

32 minutes ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

Welcome to the beginning of questioning the entire American political system.

 

1 hour ago, AspieAlly613 said:

If the center is only for people in that age range, does this constitute family separation, or is this only used for unaccompanied minors who cross the border without parents/guardians?

To me, the answer lies in whether said head politician has made campaign money off of people who profit from separating children from families, or if that money came from people who profit off of detaining migrants in general. If the former, child separation will continue (albeit surreptitiously, because Dems don't wanna look like Reps). In either case, child detention will continue. ICE does contract out private companies to build/run/maintain migrant detention facilities, and the people who own them give money to politicians to continue supporting pro-detention legislation.

 

It's just a question of how much to blue vs. how much to red, and from whom. If you dug and found out who built the facility, dug into that company's wealthy hoity-toities, searched em on Open Secrets, figure out which PACs they donated to in 2020, and figure out which candidates the PAC donated to, you'd almost have your answer.

 

No matter what, sounds like another UN human right violation waiting to happen.

[iff]

The caption under the first photo states

 

Quote

 Chairs are set up six feet apart inside an intake building at a facility for unaccompanied migrant children in Carrizo Springs, Tex. Teens began arriving Monday before being placed with a government-approved sponsor. (Sergio Flores for The Washington Post)

 

 

 

 

[AspieAlly613]

47 minutes ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

Well, no.

 

Since you ask about all of this kind of nonsense, that would suggest (to my mind) a de-facto open borders policy, which President Biden did not claim to support.

[AspieAlly613]

29 minutes ago, iff said:

The caption under the first photo states

 

 

Quote

 Chairs are set up six feet apart inside an intake building at a facility for unaccompanied migrant children in Carrizo Springs, Tex. Teens began arriving Monday before being placed with a government-approved sponsor. (Sergio Flores for The Washington Post)

 

Thanks.  I really should have read the caption.

[daveb]

I don't know if this has any bearing on the issue: https://www.npr.org/2021/02/18/969083367/biden-tells-ice-to-chill-new-rules-limit-who-immigration-agents-target-for-arres or if it's totally separate. New administrations make changes, but aren't always able to make all the changes they want (whether for ill or good) or make them quickly, for all sorts of reasons.

[nineGardens]

49 minutes ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

Yes and no?

As in, we have stuff like this: https://www.texastribune.org/2021/01/26/texas-joe-biden-deportation-moratorium-ken-paxton/

 

Biden passes a thing that effects deportations (not the same thing, but similar), and the justice system strikes it down, just as they struck down plenty of the orders Trump put through that were causing seperations.

 

There's also the fact that once you seperate a bunch of families... and then lose the god damn paperwork... it can be really hard to put them back togeather again. If you've got a bunch of kids you've already seperated... and you've got them in substandard facilities... opening a new facility for them may or may not be considered a bad thing (If you stab someone and then give them pain meds, it ain't the pain meds that are the problem... but......)

 

 

Government actions are (deliberately) difficult to change overnight. There's momentum.

Give the abundance of fires to put out, I'm willing to give Biden some time before I start judging him for them not being fixed yet...

Admittedly, when it comes to child detentions and bullshit, it ain't MUCH time I'd be willing to give, but some...

[nineGardens]

6 minutes ago, iff said:

The caption under the first photo states

Annnnndddd... now my own comment seems stupid, thanks to someone with superior reading.

 

Never mind all that guff I said them. Is not relevant. 😕

[uhtred]

1 hour ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

Its not an easy problem.  What is the correct response to people who arrive at the border without permission to enter?  What if they are unaccompanied minors or minors where its not clear the accompanying adults are their legal guardians? 

[Lord Jade Cross]

2 hours ago, Moonman said:

Wasn't all of this kind of nonsense supposed to end under the Biden Administration? 

New rules, doesn't mean new people that will follow said rules, especially if the ones currently there are of the opposite side. 

[rebis]

4 hours ago, SocialMorays said:

I've been thinking of this meme a lot lately, far more than I want to.

 

I feel that, but this topic also makes me think of my upset with the Obama administration for not following through with the promise to close Gitmo ... I was pretty angry about that at the time, but just now referencing the Wikipedia page, I learned that apparently the number of prisoners there was reduced from 245 to 41 under Obama's administration, and that Biden just declared earlier this month to finally close it completely.

 

So, that's good news about Gitmo, but the reason I brought it up really was just to say -- as much as I was critical of Obama for numerous things, look at the administration immediately before and after his. And really, for all that I was and continue to be critical of Clinton for a number of things, you had the Reagan/Bush era prior and W after.

 

I mean, we should hold Democrats to a higher standard, absolutely, but lets not pretend there's no difference between the two parties. There are massive, world-changing differences. One party could do better. The other threatens to collapse civilization as we know it. I wish that was exaggeration. I really, really wish that ... but the R's almost elected Trump a second time, and will likely run him in 2024, if his being old and not particularly healthy doesn't do him in first.

[Still]

Nothing is really going to change under Biden, nothing substantial that is. That's the whole reason he was pushed as the Democratic candidate, and then you need to take a look at his record and realize that he's been involved with just about every terrible US policy of the last 40 or so years.

[Sally]

The new facilities were built to take care of the children who were already there, separated from their families.  They may also have been children who were unaccompanied -- we don't know.  However, they were there, and must live somewhere until their cases are adjudicated, and what has been built is a hell of a lot better than Trump's cages.

[Morays]

10 hours ago, rebis said:

I feel that, but this topic also makes me think of my upset with the Obama administration for not following through with the promise to close Gitmo ... I was pretty angry about that at the time, but just now referencing the Wikipedia page, I learned that apparently the number of prisoners there was reduced from 245 to 41 under Obama's administration...

 

I mean, we should hold Democrats to a higher standard, absolutely, but lets not pretend there's no difference between the two parties. There are massive, world-changing differences. One party could do better. The other threatens to collapse civilization as we know it.

All of this is completely fair, and I can't pretend to know the entire context behind the opening of this new facility, or how much better, if at all, the standards will be. Memes are inherently reductionist, and this one was much more an expression of general frustration at Democratic inertia than an in-depth summary of my political philosophy. The two parties are obviously not equal, but I also don't want to handwave away any complicity in ongoing abuses.

[Tetus]

19 hours ago, rebis said:

I mean, we should hold Democrats to a higher standard, absolutely, but lets not pretend there's no difference between the two parties. There are massive, world-changing differences. One party could do better. The other threatens to collapse civilization as we know it. I wish that was exaggeration. I really, really wish that ... but the R's almost elected Trump a second time, and will likely run him in 2024, if his being old and not particularly healthy doesn't do him in first.

Yeah, voting to me feels a lot more like the traditional trolley problem. I can vote for the party who has consistently failed to deliver on social improvements and is continuously bowing to corporate interests over the common welfare, or I can not vote and let the white nationalist, anti science brigade run things. Where is the option to throw my body upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers?

[rebis]

6 hours ago, SocialMorays said:

All of this is completely fair, and I can't pretend to know the entire context behind the opening of this new facility, or how much better, if at all, the standards will be. Memes are inherently reductionist, and this one was much more an expression of general frustration at Democratic inertia than an in-depth summary of my political philosophy. The two parties are obviously not equal, but I also don't want to handwave away any complicity in ongoing abuses.

Yeah, understood that a meme is not exactly a political essay, and definitely do not mean to come at you personally. Apologies if it seemed that way. More just reflecting on how my views have changed over time. I was not originally on the Hope and Change train at all, but have to admit I got swept up in at some point, so I was pretty unhappy with Obama through much of his administration. It is difficult to have any kind of faith in a politician, but over time I have seen him talk about how change is incremental and not a straight line and all that, and ultimately I came to think that, for all that he is a moderate politician compared to my own further left opinions, he actually believes what he is saying ... and as far as it goes, I would obviously need to acknowledge that he understands the political machine much better than I do.

 

Agreed that we should not just shrug off any political corruption or abuse. But I was also aware of how obstructionist the Republican party was to absolutely everything Obama's administration tried to do, so when we speak of complicity, I think it's only fair to ask what realistic options are available for any politician who is trying to act in good faith? They are not able to act unilaterally -- anything accomplished will have to be done so within the existing framework, including those who will do everything in their power to obstruct and sabotage.

 

I think a key thing that has shifted my view has been to see how people will criticize the ACA, as if Democrats just wanted to make it a crappy fix from the start -- but I was paying attention through that entire process, and the Dems acknowledged it was a very flawed patch that would need continued work, but also stressed how it was the most that could be accomplished at the time. And that was not just empty talk -- they started with a much stronger bill, with a single-payer option included. The ACA was just all that was left, by the time the fight with the opposition was done.

 

 

2 hours ago, Epic Tetus said:

Yeah, voting to me feels a lot more like the traditional trolley problem. I can vote for the party who has consistently failed to deliver on social improvements and is continuously bowing to corporate interests over the common welfare, or I can not vote and let the white nationalist, anti science brigade run things. Where is the option to throw my body upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers?

I think that option requires our believing that all of us non-wealthy people collectively have the ability to counter the corporate influence. This is why I think it is vital that we do not feed into the narrative that all politicians are the same, that all are equally corrupt and that things cannot and will not ever change. I think that it is deceptively easy to become cynical or disillusioned in face of all the continued graft and injustice, but I also think that -- in agreement with president Obama, however grudging -- we have seen positive change over time, however slow it has been. If you consider how unjust the country was in every nearly way when it began, or a hundred years ago or honestly even as recently as the 70s and 80s, it requires almost willful blindness to say there has been no progress.

 

That progress will not have been an accident; people have had to fight for it, every step of the way. And for as much as our general opinion is that few to none of the political class are acting in good faith, I think the evidence of our social and political progress suggests this is not the case. I definitely don't mean to suggest any politicians have been saintly or infallible, but they cannot all have been just Machiavellian evil-doers, either.

 

The monied corporate interests are the worst, but the apathy of the general public is what allows the worst of the havoc they wreak. There might be a few hundred billionaires in a given area who can get a politician's ear, but if there's a few million non-rich folks who can make it clear they're not down for whatever bullshit the rich folks want? I think the millions win.

 

[Euna]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-build-cages-immigrants/