trpmb6 wrote:An illegal immigrant is a huge flight risk. No known history, very little background, no permenant residence or known associates.
We have discussed ankle bracelets and other options. ICE does use ankle bracelets to some degree. I dont know how effective they are. If they are quite successful let's go that route.
Haven't checked the source myself, but it's been said that the "catch and release" policy (which means you catch them, serve them a court date, then let them go until that date - maybe with an ankle bracelet, maybe with mandatory meetings, whatever) had a 99.6% success rate at getting those illegal immigrants back into court. At a fraction of the cost of detaining them, no child separation necessary.
trpmb6 wrote:The law is the law, break it and pay the consequences. Every single person crossing may have a legitimate claim to asylum, and that's great, let them in. But you dont get a free pass if you crossed illegally. Wait in like all the other people did at the port of entry. Or if you're going to pay 5000 dollars for a coyote just fucking fly in and claim asylum at the airport.
You can't fly in if you don't have a visa already.
Anyway, like you said, the law is the law, and they will have to go to court. In the case of those claiming asylum, they must show that there was a legitimate fear or something they were running from to get that protection. That does not necessarily mean they need to wait in jail until the court date. They could have tried to go through this process legally, but the system is backed up enough that it can take a very long time. Probably the better route, I agree, but obviously some think the risk is worth it if they can't afford to wait. The question is, what do we do with these people? Is it such a big deal that we need really harsh punishments for anyone who tries to cross the border without permission? (I think you would agree that sitting in jail for a couple months counts as a really harsh punishment).
All that said, the thing that bothers me most is that this was a conscious effort to deter people from crossing illegally. They could have increased the punishment after one was found guilty. They could have changed it from a misdemeanor to a felony. I don't think those are good ideas, but they're a hell of a lot less evil than intentionally separating parents from their children as a deterrent.