Or less.

Now do race.

“We see (the millions of you) have trouble paying off your debts, and are therefore likely to file more claims for minor incidents, thus costing us money.  We are going to ignore that and charge you rates that are too low for us to actually survive as a business.”

These are people with final deportation orders, or who illegally re-entered, or who are high risk criminals.  If we have immigration laws, we should enforce them.

As always, looking at the arguments of the other side is instructive. https://www.aclum.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/20180521_Calderon_Opposition-to-PI-Motion.pdf

An analogous situation might illuminate the legal issue. If someone is on death row and has a final execution order, is it unlawful to execute them, simply because the person could pursue a writ of habeas corpus?  Nope.  Until an order is issued granting the writ (or in our case, granting a green card) the execution…

I’d have to really dig into the statute, but the fact that there is the regulatory back door (pushed through apparently in 2016 before Obama’s term ended), doesn’t mean that the “FINAL” deportation order is invalidated and can’t be enforced. Presumably, the deportation orders were properly issued and can be enforced.  

As for prosecutorial discretion (eg, the whole dreamers thing), the ACLU and others are challenging Trumps power to change that as well.  It’s much less about the legalities and more about the outcomes.

Thanks for the link.

Insightful.  You should join the ACLU’s legal team.

Errr....

Right, which is why these “stings” are limited in the class of people that they are being applied to.

It seems the Obama administration was the one confusing regulations and prosecutorial discretion. The law is clear that these folks are subject to deportation - even the sobbiest of the stories was about a women who had a final deportation order issued against her, that she evaded for a decade. A regulation can’t…

To the extent that “Obama era regulations” directed ICE to not enforce the law, that doesn’t change the law. These are people who were ordered deported, or were deported and then illegally reentered, or are criminals (above and beyond their immigration crimes). They are subject to deportation - which is what ICE…

“already been ordered for deportation, had re-entered the country illegally or were considered “an egregious criminal alien.”

Uncle Mike, is that you?  I asked you to stop being so mean to me.

Show me ONE picture of kids in cages under Trump.  Just one.

Perhaps he is. So are MANY politicos. But (close) family members going after them in personal, ad hominem attacks, is still a dick move, IMO. But it’s ok I guess because Trump is an asshole too. That’s pretty much the “whataboutism” you seem eager to dismiss as per se unacceptable.

You brought up “kids in cages” which was under the prior administration. There have been ZERO incidents under the current administration (at least that I’ve seen). How is that “whataboutism”? It’s actually more of a “your premise is wrong” or “you are pissed at the wrong people” or “you have no clue what you are…

Humanitarian concerns were part of the reason for the policy. They wanted to discourage the flood of people crossing with young children in the hope that would get them a better outcome (release instead of detention). Yes, the attempt at deterrence by separation was harsh, but it was a reasonable policy decision. The…