In response to Madeleine Baker’s letter ("This immigration debacle must not stand," The Daily News, May 30): I believe the fault does not lie with the U.S. government for separating children from their parents who are here illegally. I think the fault needs to be directed to the moms or the dads, for coming into our country illegally, with children in tow.

They know when they cross our border illegally, the chances of getting caught are real. They know that if they get apprehended they might be separated from their children because they are here illegally. The fault lies with the parents of these children, not the government of the United State of America because they took a huge chance when they came here illegally.

We have laws in our country for a reason and they need to be followed, and if they’re not — there are consequences. Just saying.

Vicki Kenworthy

Santa Fe

Locations

(38) comments

Randy Chapman

You are absolutely correct.

Paul Hyatt

Bravo! I agree....

Carlos Ponce

The Liberals are doing us a big favor. By making a big deal of this situation the word is being spread to other parts of the world that the US will take your child from you if you come here illegally.[scared] Maybe they will stay put and fix their own country. Opportunity knocks but illegals don't. Thank you Liberals!

Barbara Sexton

Thank you! About time someone made that very obvious and greatly ignored point. Kudos!!

George Croix

Vicki, how do you exepct to confuse the usual suspects with facts, once their minds have been made up?
[smile][beam]

Paula Flinn

And the families coming from desperate situations as refugees?

Randy Chapman

Paula, there are lots of desperate folk on this planet. Just because we share a border with a country that refuses to enforce their own entry laws does not mean we should let everyone who can walk across the border unfettered stay here. The U.S. cannot support the Planet and become the catch-all for everyone who is unhappy with their current country and the mess that their governments have made. We have legal immigration laws and they need to be followed. It's really very simple.

Randy Chapman

Sorry. The answer to your question is to let them apply for permission to stay here, not creep in under the cloak of darkness.

Carlos Ponce

If they are that desperate, Paula, why don't they fix their own country? It may take a revolution but our country and many others have done precisely that. Our forefathers pledged their LIVES, their FORTUNES, and their SACRED HONOR to secure LIBERTY. If they are that desperate, Paula, they will do the same to fix their country. Look at the number of lives lost to end slavery. Do you think it wasn't worth the effort?

George Croix

PF, a 'desperate situation' doesn't require a pod of activist attoney/coaches at the boarder giving on-the-spot tutorials in legal buzz words...
There's also the issue of what desperate situation.
Is your country being invaded and you need to get away before it is?
Is your country a basket case because you and your forbears sat by for decades while it became one?
Are you desperate to put the American federal taxpayers on the hook for your maternity, medical, education, and living costs.

There's desperate can't help it.
There's desperate helped cause it.
And then there's desperate to rip off others - or, 'Buzzy desperate' as it's known locally when the folks here do it...

Jim Forsythe

Is there a reason to separate family's . In some of the cases children are shipped off too other parts of our country, and not reunited with their mothers and fathers. If someone is in favor of family values, how can they be fore separating family's. Some say that they should not bring their children with them, even if they are seeking asylum. My children would be with me if I was seeking asylum, so they could also receive the same protection I was seeking and to be away form the reason I was trying to escape .Why would I leave them behind ?
Why are we not making sure if parents are deported, that the family's are able to be reunited before they are deported . It does not change the outcome of hearing that determines if they are to receive asylum. When someone is seeking asylum , it does not make them a criminal.
"Some groups want the commission, part of the Organization of American States (OAS), to require the United States to reunite parents and their children immediately, to ensure that no parent is removed from the country without being allowed to decide whether to take their child with them and immediately stop prosecuting parents and separating them from their children."

George Croix

Jim, that 'family values' is a dodge that's awful close to a cheap shot.....
In this country, if a parent commit's a crime, say, enters your home without your permission, we don't just let it go because he/she has a kid(s). The child is not allowed to go to jail with the criminal.

The 'asylum' claim is little more than the latest attempt at end running the legal immigration process - and NO substitute for applying for it properly versus showing up at the border with an 'activist' giving directions to them.
The OAS would spend it's time better working to clean up some of those AS's in the O, than trying to circumvent our laws.

Carlos Ponce

The propaganda being spread is that they all are seeking "asylum". Left wing activists from the United States contacted them while they were traveling in Mexico. If they were REALLY seeking asylum - they're in MEXICO, out of the country they are leaving. Why don't they seek asylum in Mexico? The Leftist Americans tell them to go to the border and say, "I am seeking asylum". They are being trained and used by Left wing anti-Trump activists. But are they really "refugees"? Are they really seeking "asylum"? The Leftist media only shows the women and children which make up a SMALL part of the caravan. The majority are young men. Young men can be "refugees" but look to see how many wind up in MS13. And anyone who speaks up in favor of these gangsters needs to look at the atrocities committed by them in this country to American citizens. Don't be gullible.

Jim Forsythe

If your take is that Mexico should stop the asylum seekers before they reach the USA, should we be stopping the one's leaving the USA for Canada
"Over the last year, Canada has seen what has been called an "unprecedented" surge of asylum seekers, with more than 25,000 people intercepted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as they crossed from the US since January 2017 to March 2018."
Carlos, calling names id below you.

Jim Forsythe

You and I see it different. If someone was trying to sneak in, they would not flag down the Border Patrol, knowing that they will de deported if asylum is not granted. This is after traveling many miles.
"In Southern Arizona, parents and their children illegally cross the border near Lukeville and flag down agents or otherwise surrender, according to the Border Patrol’s Tucson Sector."
Seeking asylum, is part of our legal immigration process. It's up to the Judges to decide if they meet the test of a person that should be granted asylum. If this process is wrong, then we need to change it. Just because someone disagree with a law, does not let us, not enforce it.
Of the people that are found to have credible fear, about one third are granted asylum.
Total Annual asylum grants averaged 23,669 between FY 2007 and FY 2016.
In Fiscal Year (FY) 2017, USCIS found 60,566 individuals to have credible fear. These individuals, many of whom were detained during this screening process, will be afforded an opportunity to apply for asylum defensively and establish that they meet the refugee definition.

Elin Orrellana, a 23-year-old pregnant woman from El Salvador, said she is fleeing the violent MS-13 street gang. She said her older sister had been killed by the gang in El Salvador.
"Some caravan members decided to stay in Mexico. Of the 1,500 who were reported in the caravan at the beginning of its journey, a little over 200 came to the U.S. border together to request asylum."
"Why don't they seek asylum in Mexico?"
"Mexico may not be a safe place for everyone fleeing persecution in other countries."
"Certain groups of people —people with indigenous heritage, and foreigners in general — frequently report persecution in Mexico and seek asylum from Mexico itself. Some Central Americans report being followed by the gangs they fled back home through Mexico."
"Organizations that monitor Mexico’s adherence to its own asylum laws have found human rights violations and failures by immigration officials to follow the process."


Carlos Ponce

" If someone was trying to sneak in, they would not flag down the Border Patrol, knowing that they will de deported if asylum is not granted."
Jim, they've been instructed to do so by American no-border activists who went down to Mexico and gave them rhetoric to memorize.
Some is legit but most is BS. And the gullible on this side say, "Yup, yup, must be true, must be true."

Carlos Ponce

chump - an easily deceived person
Do you buy every story told by everyone crossing the border asking for asylum?
There's a reason why they're also called "bleeding hear Liberals".

Carlos Ponce

chump - an easily deceived person Do you buy every story told by everyone crossing the border asking for asylum? There's a reason why they're also called "bleeding heart Liberals".

Jim Forsythe

What would anyone gain by traveling thousands of miles, stepping into the USA, because it is required to be able to ask for asylum, and not going anywhere but straight to a boarder agent to give themselves up. What do they gain by this action, except the chance for asylum for themselves, and their family's?
Name anyone that knows how to seek asylum without instruction from someone ?
"Some is legit but most is BS." What percent?
" Do you buy every story told by everyone crossing the border asking for asylum?" It's up to our system to determine who is deserving of asylum. This is the system we have in place, and until we change it, anyone asking for asylum has a right to do so. If you do not like what is in place, work to change it.
Carlos, name calling is below you.

George Croix

Jim, the point is, they need to fix the mess they helped create in their own country(s) and stop bringing the same practices or complacency or a just plain DGAS attitude that led to such a mess here.
We have quite enough domestically grown people already on the What's In It For Me list for government assistance and really, really do not need to be importing any more for the purpose of marking an x in some box on a political checklist.
At some point, you cannot just keep letting people into your backyard bar-b-q or you'll run out of food or money or turn your invited guests into waiters and caretakers.
There's a difference between compassion and self-destruction.
How about some compassion for the legal citizens and the folks who follow the laws to legally immigrate to this country. You know, the ones paying the bills.
Central America has been a third world poop hole, with a few exceptions where American Tourist Money rules, for decades, so this latest 'asylum' stuff is a day late and a dollar short.
BTW, what do you suppose the cost of 'determining who is deserving' is to the legal federal taxpayers. Maybe we should be concerned for those folks, who may not want to see their recent, and finally, tax break to be able to keep-more-of-their-own-money-in-their-own-pocket spent on people who decide they want a chunk of it.
We just got rid of a terrible 'new normal' low, and don't need to bring another one back
Perhaps we should take a harder look at the European countries who threw open their doors, and what they got in thanks for that......
Here's a thought...let advocates for them SPONSOR one or more of the 'refugees' as they await the get-in-line for legal entry process. Talk it, walk it.
Wanna bet a case of cold Diet Coke how quick THAT happens?[wink]
America is a land of opportunity, but that should not be a synonym for come-one-come-all-and-we'll-pay-for-it.....

Jim Forsythe

George, my point is not that any of the asylum seekers should be let into the USA without going thru a intense investigation. It is that we are a country of laws that need to be followed. We are a country that recognize Asylum, along with many other's. If we do not want to this type of country, we need to change our laws.
If as you say "Central America has been a third world poop hole" would you not try to go some where else, if you lived like that..
For me, there is a big difference between someone that seeks asylum (legal) and someone that crosses illegally

Carlos Ponce

"my point is not that any of the asylum seekers should be let into the USA without going thru a intense investigation."
Jim, in their own country they can apply for asylum at the US Embassy which then has the capacity to properly vet and grant an entry Visa if their story is verified. Their "story" can then be corroborated with local databases. When they enter the US they can give ANY name. Verifying identification is difficult from 1000s of miles away. Yes, Jose Jaime de Forsythe is an upstanding person but is that REALLY Jose Jaime de Forsythe who is trying to enter the US? Is he using the name of someone who has a clean record?

George Croix

Jim, old friend, one sentence at a time:
1) Good
2) Yes
3) We recognize the conditions calling for asylum, not just the word anybody can be coached to say.
4) Yes
5) Yes. AND I would expect resistance to an ever increasing number of, well, my numbers, too, same as if I showed up at my neighbors demanding to be taken in. Asylum seekers generally go to the first country they can get to that's not their own. That would be Mexico for the last 'caravan'....why do you suppose Mexico would not offer them 'asylum', when that country, too, recognizes it?
Going for the bigger pockets and another 1000 miles or so is NOT exactly the mark of desperate escape.
6) I agree. To me, seeking is not necessarily the same as deserving, and neither entitles anyone to break our laws. Let the 'activists' house and feed their charges while awaiting the decision on, what was, the one in three found genuoinely deserving, else they all melt away into the country rarely to be found again.
Freebie:
The CURRENT law, that's been in place for many many years IS being followed. If we don't like it, I quote 'we need to change' it. It's about the only thing that AG Sessions has managed to do right so far, and exactly one more thing than the previous AGs managed to do right for years now....
If the 'activists' were smart, they'd all go to CA, where Jerry Brown will treat any 'immigrants' better than his opwn citizens, as proven by who ends up paying for who.

Jim Forsythe

Affirmative Asylum Processing With USCIS
To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States.
You must apply for asylum within one year of the date of their last arrival in the United States,
Defensive Asylum Processing with EOIR
A defensive application for asylum occurs when you request asylum as a defense against removal from the U.S. For asylum processing to be defensive, you must be in removal proceedings in immigration court with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).
Individuals are generally placed into defensive asylum processing in one of two ways:·
They are referred to an Immigration Judge by USCIS after they have been determined to be ineligible for asylum at the end of the affirmative asylum process, or
They are placed in removal proceedings because they:
Were apprehended (or caught) in the United States or at a U.S. port of entry without proper legal documents or in violation of their immigration status,
OR
Were caught by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) trying to enter the United States without proper documentation, were placed in the expedited removal process, and were found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture by an Asylum Officer. See Questions & Answers: Credible Fear Screenings for more information on the Credible Fear Process.

George Croix

Jim, somewhere in this jumbled up mess, you commented that one does not get asylum just by stepping across the border.
Then, you just a few minutes ago posted "Affirmative Asylum Processing With USCIS"
Which the first two sentences of states the following:
"To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States. You must apply for asylum within one year of the date of their last arrival in the United States..."
???
Jim, the goal IS step across - get here. Once inside, the chances are 2 in 3 at least to become another of the 12 to 20 or likely even more million illegal aliens already here. Then nature being nature, it's likely that along comes an anchor baby that most likely is paid for by federal taxpayers and there ya go - anchors aweigh....
That second sentence says ONE YEAR to apply. What do you suppose would happen during that year - absent a sponsor, and even with one? Who feeds, houses, clothes, educates, and medicates those waiting? Yes - we do.
I repeat, compassion is not a synonym for self-destruct....well, change that to should not be, because it sure looks like it's ending up that way.
The rest of that post amounts to federal taxpayer funded legal wrangling that benefits attorneys.
There oughta be a law.....!!!??? Ya know, anyone reading this subject should be able to see the absolute fallacy of expecting any...ANY...law to actually prevent anything absent a fear of the prescribed punishments on the part of its targets.
Build The Wall. Then let the embassy personnel there and here do the processin

Carlos Ponce

"To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States."
A US Embassies and consulates ARE CONSIDERED PART OF THE UNITED STATES.
"U.S. embassies and consulates abroad, as well as foreign embassies and consulates in the United States, have a special status. While the host government is responsible for the security of U.S. diplomats and the area around an embassy, the embassy itself belongs to the country it represents."
https://diplomacy.state.gov/discoverdiplomacy/diplomacy101/places/170537.htm
So by seeking asylum in a US embassy or consulate you are "physically present in the United States" by law.

Jim Forsythe

Just as being at the boarder. Both have the same outcome, as far a seeking asylum .

Jim Forsythe

George, I got lost in posting, so if I did not get them right , sorry.
"Build The Wall." will not change much, as far as asylum seekers are concerned. Most use the embassies.

"Jim, the goal IS step across - get here" That is the first step.
The majority of applications for resettlement to the United States are made to U.S. embassies in foreign countries and are reviewed by employees of the State Department. In these cases, refugee status has normally already been reviewed by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and recognized by the host country. For these refugees, the U.S. has stated its preferred order of solutions are: (1) repatriation of refugees to their country of origin, (2) integration of the refugees into their country of asylum and, last, (3) resettlement to a third country, such as the U.S., when the first two options are not viable.

The number of defensive asylum applications before EOIR was 65,218 in 2016. Of these 8,726 individuals were granted asylum defensively by the Department of Justice (DOJ). During 2016, 11,729 individuals were granted asylum affirmatively by DHS I could not find the total number l that applied for asylum with the DHS. The leading countries of nationality for persons granted either affirmative or defensive asylum were China, El Salvador, and Guatemala

"You must apply for asylum within one year of the date of their last arrival in the United States..." which is true


Carlos Ponce

No, Jim. Much more efficient to vet on their home turf. Too much fraud, assumed identities etc. on the BORDER thousands of miles from their "patria". And also easier to send "home" if their vetting turns out negative.

Jim Forsythe

The rules would have to be changed to not allow asylum seekers to seek asylum at the boarder.

Gary Miller

Jim! Would free room and board be enough? Add free health care, education. Pretty good package just for stepping over the line.

Jim Forsythe

Gary, do you wish the USA not to follow the laws that are in place? International and domestic laws.
The USA must follow the "the credible fear and reasonable fear" standard.
Asylum seekers are not quaffed to stay in the USA, by just by stepping over the line. We have laws that must be followed.
"Noncitizens who are encountered by, or present themselves to, a U.S. official at a port of entry or near the border are subject to expedited removal, an accelerated process which authorizes DHS to perform rapid deportations of certain individuals.
To ensure that the United States does not violate international and domestic laws by returning individuals to countries where their life or liberty may be at risk, the credible fear and reasonable fear screening processes are available to asylum seekers in expedited removal processes."

Carlos Ponce

Let them apply for asylum through their US embassy or consulate. Thaty's the LEGAL way, Jim.

Jim Forsythe

Carlos, is it illegal to ask for asylum at the boarder? If it was , then they could not do so.

Jim Forsythe


The question is not are they coached, but when they knock on our door, we are required to say we hear you, and you can apply for asylum. To do any different would be in violation of law. Just as one Minister told me , if you are going to offer a service , you must offer it to all to make sure the one's that the one's that need it, will get it.
AG Sessions has not changed the asylum law. What has done has tried to make it quicker and more efficient.
As far as how to apply for asylum, that has not changed.
"seeking is not necessarily the same as deserving," is why we have the court system to decide if they meet the test
of asylum, for our country.
Mexico did offer asylum and some refused because of the potential for harm or death.
Of the 1500 that started in the caravan, a little over 200 came to the U.S. border together to request asylum.
"Mexico may not be a safe place for everyone fleeing persecution in other countries."
"Certain groups of people —people with indigenous heritage, and foreigners in general — frequently report persecution in Mexico and seek asylum from Mexico itself. "Organizations that monitor Mexico’s adherence to its own asylum laws have found human rights violations and failures by immigration officials to follow the process."
If your take is that Mexico should stop the asylum seekers before they reach the USA, should we be stopping the one's leaving the USA for Canada
"Over the last year, Canada has seen what has been called an "unprecedented" surge of asylum seekers, with more than 25,000 people intercepted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as they crossed from the US since January 2017 to March 2018."


Jim Forsythe

Affirmative Asylum Processing With USCIS To obtain asylum through the affirmative asylum process you must be physically present in the United States. You must apply for asylum within one year of the date of their last arrival in the United States, Defensive Asylum Processing with EOIR A defensive application for asylum occurs when you request asylum as a defense against removal from the U.S. For asylum processing to be defensive, you must be in removal proceedings in immigration court with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). Individuals are generally placed into defensive asylum processing in one of two ways:· They are referred to an Immigration Judge by USCIS after they have been determined to be ineligible for asylum at the end of the affirmative asylum process, or They are placed in removal proceedings because they: Were apprehended (or caught) in the United States or at a U.S. port of entry without proper legal documents or in violation of their immigration status, OR Were caught by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) trying to enter the United States without proper documentation, were placed in the expedited removal process, and were found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture by an Asylum Officer. See Questions & Answers: Credible Fear Screenings for more information on the Credible Fear Process.

Paul Hyatt

What I do not understand about progressives who hate the thought of the US controlling our own borders is do you have locks on your doors? If so why? After all people do not have as much as you so they should be able to come in and take what you have....Problem is most progressives have not the ability to understand what I just wrote....

George Croix

Well, what the heck, then.....enough.......
It's only money.....ours.....
I should be happy knowing all those years of rotating shift work are buying people I'll never meet and who will likely never bother to become citizens here a chance to rip off the taxpayers for their livelihood...and not give a fig about who they take it from....
Whoopeeee.......

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.