Yesterday my son turned seven months old.
He can crawl, climb, cry, coo, scream, smile, sit-up, spit-up, poop, pee, play,
and peek-a-boo. He's amazing and everything he does and every facial expression
he makes I take pride and pleasure in. I love this little guy more than I
thought I could love anything.
And I can't help imagining what I would do (or more appropriately, wouldn't do) if a government official took him from my wife and I.
A Class B Misdemeanor in Texas carries a penalty of up to a $2000 fine and 180 days in prison. This is a list of Class B Misdemeanors here in the Great State of Texas:
Criminal mischief
Criminal trespass
Certain types of terroristic threats
Certain types of assault
Indecent exposure
Prostitution
Graffiti
Theft of property worth more than $20, but less than $500
Possession of up to 4 ounces of marijuana, and
Public intoxication
Now, my parents (not to mention my in-laws) won't be thrilled to read this, but, depending on the definition of "terroristic threats," I've been guilty of all of these crimes, other than prostitution, at one point or another in my widely misspent youth. I have never been arrested for or convicted of any of them, thankfully, but that doesn't change my actual actions.
Another crime that carries similar penalties (the fine, under Title 18, maxes out at $5000 instead of $2000) is "improper entry."
"Improper entry" is defined by 8 U.S. Code § 1325 as: any alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
I'm actually guilty of a similar crime as well, just not in this country. I wasn't arrested or convicted of that either.
Obviously I bring this up because of the atrocities that have been created at our southern border. I say "created" because that's exactly what has happened.
The Trump administration, under the leadership (if you can call it that) of President Donald John Trump, Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, and Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Michele Nielsen has manufactured a scenario through willful misinterpretation of the law and executive policy shifts where the United States of America is aggressively separating children, some still breast-feeding, from their parents at the border. I am using these officials' full names because that is how you address misbehaving children who don't seem to have the capacity to understand their wrongdoings.
Maybe that is being too generous. Maybe they completely understand what they have been doing. If so, they are evil, callous, inhuman monsters.
I'm going to choose to believe that the American people didn't elect monsters. (Whether or not we elected them is a rant for another day.)
This started last year when the Justice Department began to ramp up a "zero-tolerance" policy of criminally prosecuting anyone suspected of improper entry at our southern border. Under the new policy, according to the Attorney General, anyone who crosses "the Southwest border unlawfully, then the Department of Homeland Security will arrest you and the Department of Justice will prosecute you."
In combination of a complete misreading of a law that was a result of an extensive court case known as the Flores settlement, this more aggressive and comprehensive prosecution tactic has resulted in the separation of children from their parents. Here's how their logic works:
- Immigrants, including asylum seekers, are a bad influence on this country and we can't afford to allow them to stay here.
- All border crossings and asylum applications should be prosecuted as improper entries, because those who belong here have nothing to fear from due process and will be released.
- Because of the 1997 law (referenced above) it is illegal to detain juveniles in an immigration facility for more than three days.
- Therefore, while we detain their parents in immigration facilities awaiting their hearings, the children must be removed to facilities legally allowed to house them.
- The Democrats are to blame because the Flores law was signed by President Clinton and this president is only restoring the rule of law to an immigration system that President Obama allowed to violate these statutes.
The real motivation here has nothing to do with border security, lawlessness, or any of the other talking points this administration and its lackeys have promoted as a narrative for this action.
The real motivation is the emotional blackmail of crying children to be used to force Congress to authorize the construction of the president's border wall.
Here are the problems with their logic, just in case they weren't already painfully obvious:
- Immigrants, especially asylum seekers, are a long-term economic positive to this country. And even if they weren't, this country is supposedly founded on the ideal of pluralism and providing a haven for those willing to try to make a new life for themselves and their loved ones.
- Apparently, innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to brown people. I specifically call out the racism inherent here because nobody is attempting to separate families at our northern border.
- The 1997 Flores Settlement Agreement was the result of over a decade of litigation responding to the U.S. government’s detention policy of children. The agreement set national standards regarding the detention, release, and treatment of all children in immigration detention and underscores the principle of family unity. It requires that: 1) Juveniles be released from custody without unnecessary delay, and in order of preference to the following: a parent, legal guardian, adult relative, individual specifically designated by the parent, a child welfare licensed program, or, alternatively when family reunification is not possible, an adult seeking custody deemed appropriate by the responsible government agency; and, 2) Where they cannot be released because of significant public safety or flight risk concerns, juveniles must be held in the least restrictive setting appropriate to age and special needs, generally, in a nonsecure facility licensed by a child welfare entity and separated from unrelated adults and delinquent offenders.
- You can't take people into custody and they claim their children were unaccompanied because you've taken their parents into custody and then turn around with your hands in the air saying there's nothing to be done about it. At least not if you don't want to be shamed out of restaurants.
- You also can't blame your political rivals because YOU changed a policy in YOUR administration and YOUR executive enforcement goes beyond any previous measure and purposefully reads a law inaccurately. I mean, I guess you can, because that's what this administration is doing, but it's incredibly stupid. And the people defending it have imbibed a children's sugary drink embodied by a large anthropomorphized pitcher that enjoys the destruction of structural building elements.to a degree more ridiculous than this description.
The goal has always been the wall. This administration has called this policy a negotiating tool. They've defended it by misquoting the Bible. They've attempted to justify it by saying the children are "just fine." They've tried for a week to put all the blame on the party with virtually no political power in Washington today. And they've done it all to try to get a legislative bill that includes funding for the least responsible use of tax dollars imaginable.
I know this type of rant isn't going to change anyone's mind. But over the course of the past few days in discussions on Facebook, the phone and in person, I've been physically threatened (that doesn't really happen in person too often, as I am 6'2" and 390 lbs.), called a "libtard," called "ignorant" and told by loved ones that if I committed a crime, I wouldn't get to take my son to jail with me.
This country has tried improper entry violations in civil courts for most of the past forty years, and before that, we didn't really prosecute anyone at all for immigration violations. We have militarized the southern border to such an extent that we are barely jarred by the images of children in detention centers crying for their parents, who, as of yet, have been convicted of no crime (as much as people like to call them criminals for crossing an imaginary line in the desert). Children, some no older than my son.
If I committed a violent or serious crime and was imprisoned for it, I shouldn't have rights to my son during my imprisonment. But if I streaked down the street in the middle of the night after having too much to drink and trespassed onto the grounds of the private dorm only a few blocks from here and nakedly spray-painted a giant poop emoji on the wall (because who doesn't think poop is funny), I would have committed at least five Class B Misdemeanors... and nobody would even consider taking our son away from us. If they did, I'd probably make some "terroristic threats" and probably perform a few "types of assault" on the people who tried.
We need to be better than this.
And I can't help imagining what I would do (or more appropriately, wouldn't do) if a government official took him from my wife and I.
A Class B Misdemeanor in Texas carries a penalty of up to a $2000 fine and 180 days in prison. This is a list of Class B Misdemeanors here in the Great State of Texas:
Criminal mischief
Criminal trespass
Certain types of terroristic threats
Certain types of assault
Indecent exposure
Prostitution
Graffiti
Theft of property worth more than $20, but less than $500
Possession of up to 4 ounces of marijuana, and
Public intoxication
Now, my parents (not to mention my in-laws) won't be thrilled to read this, but, depending on the definition of "terroristic threats," I've been guilty of all of these crimes, other than prostitution, at one point or another in my widely misspent youth. I have never been arrested for or convicted of any of them, thankfully, but that doesn't change my actual actions.
Another crime that carries similar penalties (the fine, under Title 18, maxes out at $5000 instead of $2000) is "improper entry."
"Improper entry" is defined by 8 U.S. Code § 1325 as: any alien who enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
I'm actually guilty of a similar crime as well, just not in this country. I wasn't arrested or convicted of that either.
Obviously I bring this up because of the atrocities that have been created at our southern border. I say "created" because that's exactly what has happened.
The Trump administration, under the leadership (if you can call it that) of President Donald John Trump, Attorney General Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III, and Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Michele Nielsen has manufactured a scenario through willful misinterpretation of the law and executive policy shifts where the United States of America is aggressively separating children, some still breast-feeding, from their parents at the border. I am using these officials' full names because that is how you address misbehaving children who don't seem to have the capacity to understand their wrongdoings.
Maybe that is being too generous. Maybe they completely understand what they have been doing. If so, they are evil, callous, inhuman monsters.
I'm going to choose to believe that the American people didn't elect monsters. (Whether or not we elected them is a rant for another day.)
This started last year when the Justice Department began to ramp up a "zero-tolerance" policy of criminally prosecuting anyone suspected of improper entry at our southern border. Under the new policy, according to the Attorney General, anyone who crosses "the Southwest border unlawfully, then the Department of Homeland Security will arrest you and the Department of Justice will prosecute you."
In combination of a complete misreading of a law that was a result of an extensive court case known as the Flores settlement, this more aggressive and comprehensive prosecution tactic has resulted in the separation of children from their parents. Here's how their logic works:
- Immigrants, including asylum seekers, are a bad influence on this country and we can't afford to allow them to stay here.
- All border crossings and asylum applications should be prosecuted as improper entries, because those who belong here have nothing to fear from due process and will be released.
- Because of the 1997 law (referenced above) it is illegal to detain juveniles in an immigration facility for more than three days.
- Therefore, while we detain their parents in immigration facilities awaiting their hearings, the children must be removed to facilities legally allowed to house them.
- The Democrats are to blame because the Flores law was signed by President Clinton and this president is only restoring the rule of law to an immigration system that President Obama allowed to violate these statutes.
The real motivation here has nothing to do with border security, lawlessness, or any of the other talking points this administration and its lackeys have promoted as a narrative for this action.
The real motivation is the emotional blackmail of crying children to be used to force Congress to authorize the construction of the president's border wall.
Here are the problems with their logic, just in case they weren't already painfully obvious:
- Immigrants, especially asylum seekers, are a long-term economic positive to this country. And even if they weren't, this country is supposedly founded on the ideal of pluralism and providing a haven for those willing to try to make a new life for themselves and their loved ones.
- Apparently, innocent until proven guilty doesn't apply to brown people. I specifically call out the racism inherent here because nobody is attempting to separate families at our northern border.
- The 1997 Flores Settlement Agreement was the result of over a decade of litigation responding to the U.S. government’s detention policy of children. The agreement set national standards regarding the detention, release, and treatment of all children in immigration detention and underscores the principle of family unity. It requires that: 1) Juveniles be released from custody without unnecessary delay, and in order of preference to the following: a parent, legal guardian, adult relative, individual specifically designated by the parent, a child welfare licensed program, or, alternatively when family reunification is not possible, an adult seeking custody deemed appropriate by the responsible government agency; and, 2) Where they cannot be released because of significant public safety or flight risk concerns, juveniles must be held in the least restrictive setting appropriate to age and special needs, generally, in a nonsecure facility licensed by a child welfare entity and separated from unrelated adults and delinquent offenders.
- You can't take people into custody and they claim their children were unaccompanied because you've taken their parents into custody and then turn around with your hands in the air saying there's nothing to be done about it. At least not if you don't want to be shamed out of restaurants.
- You also can't blame your political rivals because YOU changed a policy in YOUR administration and YOUR executive enforcement goes beyond any previous measure and purposefully reads a law inaccurately. I mean, I guess you can, because that's what this administration is doing, but it's incredibly stupid. And the people defending it have imbibed a children's sugary drink embodied by a large anthropomorphized pitcher that enjoys the destruction of structural building elements.to a degree more ridiculous than this description.
The goal has always been the wall. This administration has called this policy a negotiating tool. They've defended it by misquoting the Bible. They've attempted to justify it by saying the children are "just fine." They've tried for a week to put all the blame on the party with virtually no political power in Washington today. And they've done it all to try to get a legislative bill that includes funding for the least responsible use of tax dollars imaginable.
I know this type of rant isn't going to change anyone's mind. But over the course of the past few days in discussions on Facebook, the phone and in person, I've been physically threatened (that doesn't really happen in person too often, as I am 6'2" and 390 lbs.), called a "libtard," called "ignorant" and told by loved ones that if I committed a crime, I wouldn't get to take my son to jail with me.
This country has tried improper entry violations in civil courts for most of the past forty years, and before that, we didn't really prosecute anyone at all for immigration violations. We have militarized the southern border to such an extent that we are barely jarred by the images of children in detention centers crying for their parents, who, as of yet, have been convicted of no crime (as much as people like to call them criminals for crossing an imaginary line in the desert). Children, some no older than my son.
If I committed a violent or serious crime and was imprisoned for it, I shouldn't have rights to my son during my imprisonment. But if I streaked down the street in the middle of the night after having too much to drink and trespassed onto the grounds of the private dorm only a few blocks from here and nakedly spray-painted a giant poop emoji on the wall (because who doesn't think poop is funny), I would have committed at least five Class B Misdemeanors... and nobody would even consider taking our son away from us. If they did, I'd probably make some "terroristic threats" and probably perform a few "types of assault" on the people who tried.
We need to be better than this.
