Subject: Re: Why democrats can't govern
This bill is a preview of what gets passed if there's a democrat House, Senate, and White House. It's literally a codification of all that your party believes with respect to immigration law (as in, there really shouldn't be any).

I don't agree with that characterization. It appears, on the surface, to be codifying rights of people that may have interactions with ICE and BCIS (does BCIS still exist, or did it get merged/changed?). I don't see it saying that we shouldn't have immigration law, and Dems would never pass it if it did. A small minority of the Dems favor something resembling open borders. But not most of them, and I haven't seen anyone on this board advocate for that, either. Similar to a "presumption of innocence", this appears to have a "presumption of release". But that gets it in front of a judge, which is where it should be. That's what judges are for.

I couldn't get a solid number quickly about "open borders". For some reason, I did find that only 9% favor no immigration. I presume those are all on the RW. In 2025, polling shows only 21% favor reduced immigration (Gallup), while 77% want it to be the same or increased. That number must include a lot of Reps, since Dems do not make up 77% of the population. And a 2024 Harris poll showed that 79% of Americans want a secure border (a different question than levels of immigration). That number must include a lot of Dems since Reps do not make up 79% of the population.

I conclude your characterization is faulty, likely fueled by consumption of RW media sources. Most people want secure borders, and most people want current or increased immigration. Those that want either zero immigration or open borders are tiny minorities, and no bill that did either would be able to pass.

I also conclude that this is mostly a messaging bill, since it has no chance to being signed by the Felon. And they almost certainly couldn't override the veto, even if they could get it to his desk. Which they almost certainly couldn't, at least not in its current form. It's messaging for the election next year.