I don't really have words to describe the feelings this news has left in me. It's not enough people, it's too slow, there's so much more to be done... but I am overwhelmed with joy that one of the most horrifically cruel policies in a generation is finally coming to an end.
The Trump administration's "clever" move after the disaster of family separation was to outsource the cruelty.
No longer would CBP agents tear children from their parents' arms; they could just toss families to the wolves and let the cartels do their dirty work.
We spent so much effort in 2019 trying to get the nation to share our outrage with what was happening with MPP.
But after family separation and "kids in cages," the externalization of the harm, out of sight of the general public, meant that the horrors never really sunk in.
Except for Stephen Miller, almost no one will publicly defend tearing children from their parents' arms in the name of border security.
But because MPP left the cruelty up to the cartels, it still has vigorous defenders. People will earnestly argue it "worked." But at what cost?
I want to ask those who still defend MPP if the women who were raped repeatedly after we sent them back to Mexico were "protected." I want to force them to listen to the recordings of a man we sent to Mexico being tortured to extort his family in the US. nytimes.com/2019/12/21/us/…
Above all, I want those who defend MPP to truly reckon with what they did; destroy thousands of lives in an impossible effort to stop people from doing that most basic thing that all human beings have done since the dawn of time—seek protection for themselves and their family.
MPP was like the cruelty of a batterer, who declares that his abuse is really an act of love. It was cloaked in lies and gaslighting—and with the full force of the federal government.
But cruelty is not a strategy. Cruelty is a rot. It is a cancer. And it cannot be contained.
So yes, what happened today is not enough. But it's a start. And once everyone is out of MPP, we have a chance to do better. We have a chance to acknowledge the wrongs of the past. And we have a chance to actually live up to the promises this nation has made for so long.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We are finally getting the new ICE priorities! My first thought is that they are undoubtedly better than what we had under Obama, but they still leave out a lot of people who have long ties to the community, such as certain individuals with felon records who've served their time.
The new interim enforcement priorities, which will last for 90 days, are harsher than the ones from January 20th:
- Terrorism/espionage
- Recent entrants (after Nov 1)
- Anyone with an "aggravated felony" or ties to certain gangs who ICE determines is a public safety threat.
In order to determine if someone in that last category is a "public safety threat," ICE officers must "consider the extensiveness, seriousness, and recency of any criminal activity, as well as mitigating factors..." such as communities ties, rehabilitation, and family in the US.
We finally have the U.S. Citizenship Act Bill Text! I'm going to go through some portions of the bill right now and highlight some of the major changes and improvements that it would make to our immigration system.
Interesting poll! But it gets the Census EO wrong.
- Undocumented immigrants have ALWAYS been included in the Census. Biden changed nothing.
- Trump's EO didn't exclude undocumented immigrants from the Census. It excluded them from apportionment calculations for House districts.
This is a continual problem with polling the public on immigration issues. If the pollsters get the basic details wrong, or simply echo the talking points pushed by the politicians who are also getting the details wrong, it makes the poll results incoherent.
A key problem with polling on immigration is that for most Americans, the details of immigration policy are an entirely abstract issue divorced from day-to-day life.
That means what you end up actually polling is not policy, but sentiment as filtered through media consumption.
I tuned back in to this and got a bizarre digression from Castor into why the "excited utterance" hearsay exception exists, for reasons entirely unclear to anyone except himself.
Castor's impeachment defense opening argument is just incredibly incoherent. We've gone from brief academic discussions of hearsay rules, to asking whether anyone remembers what a record player is, to a long digression about Everett Dirksen and why US Senators are "gallant."
Now he's... telling Senators how great they are? Just like as a general matter, how he believe Senators are important people and do good thing, and then says that he personally knows both of PA's senators.
"The people you represent are proud of their senators" which, uh....
On to the Legal Immigration Executive Order (thanks @DLind for emailing).
It begins by affirming that "Our Nation is enriched socially and economically by the presence of immigrants, and we celebrate with them as they take the important step of becoming United States citizens."
The first portion of the legal immigration executive order calls for the creation of a Task Force of New Americans to be run out of the White House Domestic Policy Council, with will "coordinate the Federal Government's efforts to welcome and support immigrants."
Next, the EO calls for a full review by the AG and the Secretaries of DHS & State Dep't of "existing regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies, and any other similar agency actions that may be inconsistent" with the welcoming policy of the Biden administration.
On to asylum processing, the part I'm most interested in. First, the DHS Secretary and the CDC Director are required to "promptly begin consultation and planning" with NGOs "to develop policies and procedures for safe and orderly processing of asylum claims."
Nothing concrete.
Next, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the AG, the HHS Director, and the CDC Director, "shall promptly begin taking steps to reinstate the safe and orderly reception and processing of asylum seekers."
As part of that review, the HHS Secretary and CDC Director, along with the DHS Secretary, are directed to "promptly review and determine whether termination, rescission, or modification" is necessary for the Title 42 Process, as well as the underlying Trump-era CDC order.