Legal Or Not?

The Trump administration engages in a policy of extrajudicial killings of purported narco terrorists in the Gulf of Mexico and Eastern Pacific.  The legal justification goes like this:  The US is engaged in an "armed conflict" with the specific drug cartels, designating them as "unlawful combatants" and "foreign terrorist organizations" (FTOs).  Consequently, the President can order them rubbed-out.  Judge, jury and executioner sans trial and process.

I sorta get this - presidents have rubbed-out bad dudes by means of drone strikes all day long; nevertheless, we've not been attacked by or exist in a state of war with the country of Venezuela.   Nicolás Maduro Moros is a Venezuelan politician and former union leader who has been serving as the president of Venezuela since 2013.  He's a dictator, cartel leader and all-around bad dude who, unlike former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, hasn't been worthy of a Trump presidential pardon.  A singularly vexing conundrum for which not a single MAGA adherent can offer me a rational explanation.  There's something more at play here.  Millions upon tens of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of untraceable Trump Meme Coins to launder a deal?  I can't quite put my finger on it.  But I digress.  Back to the narco terrorist boat strikes.

Set-aside the high tech standoff nature of the strikes for a moment and consider this:  How would Americans respond if our law enforcement on the high seas simply interdicted and boarded the boats, summarily executed everyone aboard, and then sank the evidence including the boat, bodies and the cargo? 

The horrors of this policy haven't changed - only the methodology - raising serious concerns about the legality of this stratagem.

Now it is reported that the military "double-tapped" survivors of an initial strike on a boat on September 2nd.  That's right; if factually true, someone ordered the killing of a couple of shipwrecked survivors.

That would very likely be criminal under the UCMJ.    

Nevertheless, according to Karoline Leavitt survivors clinging to floating wreckage constitute an imminent threat to the US.  But let's face it, her body language is a terrible look, dontcha think?

Gonna be interesting how this plays-out.  

And nobody's talking about Jeffrey Epstein trafficking young girls for billionaire perverts.... 

Enemy Of The Good

A dozen years ago there were 300,000 pending asylum cases in the whole of the United States.  Today there are that many alone in the whole of the state of New York.  There are more than three million asylum cases clogging the immigration courts today.

That, gentle reader, is the gist of the immigration problem.

Sure, it's easy to just flippantly suggest that we have an open border.  But that is lazy thinking. 

Our immigration law was written decades ago to deal with young Mexicans attempting to sneak across the border seeking employment.  Nowadays, thousands upon thousands of individuals from all corners of the world stream across the southern border just as eager to work and they willingly surrender to border control for purposes of being processed thru a facility and setting into motion the first step to staying here.

Under the law, anyone who crosses over the border and makes it to US soil, legally or illegally, is allowed to claim asylum.  Making a claim for asylum has now become the surest path for migrants to stay in the United States; even if only a very few eventually win their case. 

To make an asylum claim all you have to do is state that returning to your home country would result in harm or death on the basis of nationality, race, religion, political beliefs or social group.

If a migrant admits to living in desperate poverty and is seeking work they are promptly deported.  If they make an asylum claim they can remain in the United States until their case is concluded.

You may not like it but that is the law. 

The truth of the matter is that most asylum claims are ultimately rejected; many years from now when our antiquated and overwhelmed immigration court system ultimately hears the case.  Of course by then the undocumented can disappear into the shadow economy.  Any children born in the US automatically receive birthright citizenship.  And deportation is nigh impossible as immigration authorities have their hands full identifying, arresting and expelling criminals and other bad actors. 

A wall will fix this, right?  I dunno.  World history is replete with failed walls.  Why?  People always find a way to go over, under, around or otherwise avoid them.  Consider this.  Only about 80 miles of new barrier was constructed during Donald Trump's entire four year term of office.  This included 47 miles of primary fencing and 33 miles of secondary fence.  Mexico did not contribute a single peso to build it.  Our southern frontier stretches thousands of miles.  It is estimated that it would require an investment of $25 billion for a Great Wall. 

Solution?

Our immigration system has not had a major overhaul in almost four decades.  Today we find ourselves overwhelmed by a stampede of migrants making asylum claims with a tiny fraction of the judges and personnel needed to make a quick determination of who has a legit reason to stay and who is returned to their homeland.

Over a period of four months the senate drafted bipartisan legislation that includes many significant reforms to our asylum policy.  While not a comprehensive overhaul it is a pretty good border security bill.  Mr. Trump has determined this crisis is key to his reelection playbook and has scuttled it. Is anyone surprised?  

Politicians like to support visible stuff.  More border agents.  More national guard troops.  More razor wire.  More wall.

In a functioning system there needs to be stuff behind the scenes such as additional capacity to conduct more interviews to quickly winnow the credible claims for asylum and rapidly deport those without.

Let's face it.  Our country continues to be the land of opportunity.  Migrants come here seeking a better life and will do whatever it takes to achieve that end.  Even if it means filing an unsupported asylum claim.

Maybe we need a system like that of our friendly neighbors to the north.  Canada sets immigration quotas based-upon skills it need to fill along with a manageable number of asylum seekers.  If I attempted to immigrate to Canada I would be turned away.  They don't need another old retired guy.

Perhaps killing this legislation lays the foundation for serious law-making on Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.  And another year, or more, of chaos at the border.  Voltaire had a saying for this:  L'ennemi du bien est le bien.  Loosely translated: Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the the good.

Sunday Morning Migration

Last weekend Sid and Braumeister and I had an opportunity to chat it up about the immigration, asylum and migration conundrum we face.  (I deliberately list these as three separate issues because they as similar but not one and the same.)  Looking at this chart the operative questions that come to mind:

• Are the increased apprehensions under Biden evidence of progress?

• Are the smaller number of apprehensions under Trump lack of progress?  Or the inverse?
  

• Apprehensions + detention = deportation?  Or catch and release?

• Are our borders open, closed or porous?  

• Is it deliberate or a broken system?
  

There's a lot of data here to unpack in this chart.  

Here's a stab.

It is obvious that the number of apprehensions at the border is evidence of a surge.  Immigration activists oftentimes emphasize the events in other countries (gang crime, political oppression, war) as having an outside influence on migration.  

Think:  PUSH.

Factors such as the strength of our economy also play a role.  We enjoy a plethora of job opportunities.  Door, Kewaunee, Brown and Outagamie Counties are relevant examples of this. 

Think:  PULL

Nevertheless, when we make it difficult for people to enter the country fewer individuals make an attempt.  Donald Trump was out-front in his opposition to immigrants and immigration.  A likely cause of a smaller number of apprehensions under his watch.  Joe Biden did not manifest that level of hostility and that might explain a surge in apprehensions under his watch.

Think:  SIGNALING

Border policy is complicated stuff.  More so because I believe that both parties use it as a device to keep their respective base constituents in a near-constant state of agitation and turgid arousal.  As a consequence the nuance and complexities of the subject matter get lost in the tumult of emotional misinformation

Democrats seem to avoid the difficult questions.  And a lax (or seemingly welcoming) immigration attitude/policy brings with it all manner of problems. Including, but not limited to:  dangerous and life-threatening travel, exploitation by smugglers all resulting in the overwhelming of social services and shelters creating dangerous conditions on both sides of the Mexican/American border. 

Simultaneously, immigrants and their families have ascended the economic ladder and thrived in the US.  In their book Streets of Gold: America's Untold Story of Immigrant Success by economists Abramitsky (Stanford) and Boustan (Princeton) have defused much of the fearmongering. 

The bottom line is no country in its right mind should have open borders.  Nevertheless, refugees with a legitimate asylum claim should have a resolution in less than an eight to fourteen year wait time  Those who wish to come to this country for a job should have a legal opportunity to do so.  Dreamers, born here of undocumented immigrants are already birthright citizens.  (Yes, it is in the Constitution).  They should have a legal path to permanence.

According to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests and deportation of undocumented immigrants increased in the second year of the Biden administration. Although numbers remained below Trump and Obama averages this crackdown has had its intended effect with apprehensions dropping.  Alas, Title 42, with its pandemic restrictions, expired last Thursday and appears to have had the unintended effect of migrants interpreting this as an opportunity.  Joe Biden has sent additional troops to the border for purposes of logistical support.  Nevertheless, he's facing some humongous challenges with the migration influx and surge of border crossings.

It's a shit show for sure.

Like I said, this is hard stuff and requires commitment to solutions and successful outcomes from serious leaders on both sides of the aisle.  

I do not believe there is sufficient critical mass to roll that boulder up hill.  Yet.  All of which explains the current fixation over bullshit subjects like  gender dysphoria, election denial and wokeness over Bud Light.

Sheesh.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary

― H.L. Mencken