Post New

Because literally everything is performative theater. They propose legislation that does serious damage to any number of things just to score some kind of "compassion" points.

Witness...my own embarrassment of a Representative to Congress, Pramila Jayapal:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house...

(This is the actual bill. If you're inclined to whine about "sources", then you're of course being performative yourself). This bill has 122 co-sponsors.

H.R.2760 - Dignity for Detained Immigrants Act
118th Congress (2023-2024)



First, the harmless, but still stupid parts:
(1) IN GENERAL.—On a periodic basis, not less frequently than annually, the Inspector General of the Department (referred to in this section as the “Inspector General”) shall conduct an unannounced, in-person inspection of each facility at which aliens in the custody of the Department are detained to ensure that each such facility is in compliance with the standards established under section 4.



The actual Inspector General has to go around to every single facility in the country every year. Notice the way this is written is to make the poor sap do it personally.

“(1) INITIAL DETERMINATION.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 48 hours after taking an alien into custody pursuant to this section or section 235, or with respect to an alien subject to a reinstated order of removal pursuant to section 241(a)(5) who has been found to have a credible or reasonable fear of return, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall make an initial custody determination with regard to the alien, and provide such determination in writing to the alien.

“(B) LEAST RESTRICTIVE CONDITIONS.—With respect to a custody determination under subparagraph (A), if the Secretary determines that the release of an alien will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the alien as required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community, the Secretary shall impose the least restrictive conditions, as described in paragraph (4).


Since there's no way to guarantee a hearing in 2 days when you arrest, say, a ton of people at once, here's your flaming incentive for THOUSANDS of people to rush the border. The democrats will use this as a poison pill to vastly expand the administrative state like they tried to in the doomed (and equally stupid "immigration bill"). Basically the only way out of this part is to release people...into the country.

Tell me how the democrats value public safety and integrity again? They don't.

Now for the dangerously stupid parts:

“(2) TIMING.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—An alien who seeks to challenge the initial custody determination under paragraph (1) shall be provided with the opportunity for a hearing before an immigration judge not later than 72 hours after the initial custody determination to determine whether the alien should be detained.

This section opens the door for a flood of new immigrant detention cases, where liberal lawyers can gum up the works, file motions, delay things...and basically force the release of the aliens into the country.

Anyone else see a pattern forming?

“(3) PRESUMPTION OF RELEASE.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—In a hearing under this subsection, there shall be a presumption that the alien should be released.

Presumption of Release. At least Jayapal was kind enough to spell this out.

“(B) REBUTTAL.—

“(i) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security has the duty of rebutting this presumption, which may only be shown based on clear and convincing evidence, including credible and individualized information, that the use of alternatives to detention will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the alien at removal proceedings, or that the alien is a threat to another person or the community.

See this part? This basically ensures that anyone we caught just needs to swearsies that they'll appear at their hearing. We know these guys all keep their word, right?

Which leads to...releasing anyone we capture right into the country. Wow, that pattern again.

Here's a great part:
“(ii) CONSIDERATION.—The Attorney General—

“(I) shall consider the totality of each case; and

“(II) may not rely on an alien’s criminal conviction, arrest, pending criminal charge, or combination thereof as the sole factor to justify the continued detention of the alien.

Hear that, twice convicted rapists, murderers and child traffickers? No matter how many times we catch you, your past criminal record can't be used to justify detaining you. Leaving us to...release you into the country.

I continue down this stupid bill:

“(4) LEAST RESTRICTIVE CONDITIONS REQUIRED.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—If an immigration judge determines, pursuant to a hearing under this section, that the release of an alien will not reasonably ensure the appearance of the alien as required or will endanger the safety of any other person or the community, the immigration judge shall order the least restrictive conditions, or combination of conditions, that the judge determines will reasonably ensure the appearance of the alien as required and the safety of any other person and the community, which may include—

“(i) release on recognizance;

“(ii) secured or unsecured release on bond; or

“(iii) participation in a program described in subsection (f).

So the government can't argue that the serial killer's past behavior is justified for holding him, and this section then basically directs judges to...release them into the country.

“(B) MONTHLY REVIEW.—Not less frequently than monthly, the immigration judge shall review any condition assigned to an alien pursuant to subparagraph (A).

“(C) MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS OF SUPERVISION.—An immigration judge may modify or rescind conditions of supervision imposed on an alien by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

This section says that a liberal judge can just release people whenever they want. For any reason.

Here's a really stupid section:
“(5) SPECIAL RULE FOR VULNERABLE PERSONS AND PRIMARY CAREGIVERS.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an alien subject to a custody determination under this subsection who is a vulnerable person or a primary caregiver, the alien may not be detained unless the Secretary of Homeland Security demonstrates, in addition to the requirements under paragraph (3), that it is unreasonable or not practicable to place the alien in a community-based supervision program.

Hear that, future terrorist? Claim you're the primary caregiver (of a kid you trafficked across the border). You can't be detained!

My God.

This bill is a disaster. It's a backdoor amnesty that basically makes it so the US can be flooded with whomever and there's zero the government can do about it.

Tell me again how the democrats believe in national security. In the rule of law. In...anything good about the United States of America.

Because when you do, you're lying to yourself.

And of course it's not a democrat program unless the taxpayer is on the hook for extra goodies:

“(f) Community-Based case management program.—

“(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish, outside of the purview of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a community-based case management program that—

“(A) provides alternatives to detaining aliens;

“(B) offers a continuum of community-based support options and services, including—

“(i) case management; and

“(ii) access to—

“(I) social services;

“(II) medical and mental health services;

“(III) housing;

“(IV) transportation; and

“(V) legal services; and

“(C) provides services in the appropriate language.

See that? We get to pay liberal NGO's to be the aliens' lawyers. As well as their health care and housing.

They don't need an amnesty bill. This is their amnesty bill.

Jayapal doesn't even hide the grift. She codifies it:

“(4) CONTRACTS.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may enter into 1 or more contracts to operate the case management program described in paragraph (1).

“(B) PRIORITIZATION.—In entering into a contract under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall give priority to direct contracts with qualified nongovernmental community-based organizations that have experience providing services to immigrant, refugee, and asylum-seeking populations.

The actual Inspector General has to go around to every single facility in the country every year. Notice the way this is written is to make the poor sap do it personally.

"No, H.R.2760 does not require the Inspector General (IG) to perform inspections personally. The bill mandates that the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) conduct the inspections, which in practice means the OIG office's auditors, program analysts, and inspectors perform these duties as part of their official function"

Dope should intuitively understand his interpretation is wrong, and question it, but he doesn't

Since there's no way to guarantee a hearing in 2 days when you arrest, say, a ton of people at once, here's your flaming incentive for THOUSANDS of people to rush the border.

"An initial custody determination in immigration is when a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer decides whether an individual should be detained or released after being arrested. This first decision is based on factors like flight risk, national security, and public safety, and is formally recorded on ICE Form I-286, Notice of Custody Determination,. If the individual is not eligible for release or is not granted an alternative, they will remain in custody and can later request a bond redetermination hearing before an immigration judge."

Dope again doesn't understand how to read law, and uses that as a springboard into a RW fantasyland.

“(A) IN GENERAL.—An alien who seeks to challenge the initial custody determination under paragraph (1) shall be provided with the opportunity for a hearing before an immigration judge not later than 72 hours after the initial custody determination to determine whether the alien should be detained.

"Arguments that it is too short a period often center on due process concerns. Critics argue that 72 hours may not allow an alien, particularly one who has just been apprehended, sufficient time to find legal counsel, gather relevant documentation (such as proof of identity, community ties, or valid immigration claims), or prepare a meaningful case for release [1]. This perspective emphasizes that the right to a fair hearing requires adequate time for preparation, which 72 hours may limit [1]."

The judge can grant more time to prepare to the alien.

Not going to continue.

Oh...I thought you were going to say "because they didn't win the election". Which is accurate.

The Act is kinda pointless. The Felon will just ignore it anyway (assuming they could override his imminent veto, assuming it made it to his desk at all). And we already have laws of due process (which the Felon is largely ignoring). Making more laws won't make this administration more concerned about what the law is.

Dope should

...continue to to do the thinking for poor sods who need AI to do it for them.
The statute is poorly written, but ChapGPT doesn't know that. And..neither do you.

Dope again has to explain plain English to people who don't read it very well.
I gave you the literal statute.

The judge can grant more time to prepare to the alien.

Not going to continue.

You're zero for 3, so yes, you should quit while you're behind.

This gets back to the spirit of the law and the letter of the law, concepts alien to you (but not to the people who write these things, who know damn well what incentives they're creating and how they'll be responded to).

As do you. Deep down...you want the rush to the border.

The Act is kinda pointless. The Felon will just ignore it anyway (assuming they could override his imminent veto, assuming it made it to his desk at all). And we already have laws of due process (which the Felon is largely ignoring). Making more laws won't make this administration more concerned about what the law is.

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).

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).

There you go again, assuming there will be any more "fair and free" elections. His nibs has demanded voter registration info from all the states. Several blue states, including Michigan, have refused to hand over the records. What if his nibs decides that votes from non-compliant states are void, so the only votes that are counted are from red states?

Steve

Several blue states, including Michigan, have refused to hand over the records.

And of course the right question to ask is: What are they hiding? Why they afraid of proving their voter rolls are clean?

Because literally everything is performative theater.

Yet another MAGA accusation as a confession.

Yet another MAGA accusation as a confession.

Yet another coordinated liberal response, always while sucking the actual issues.

Fail.

And of course the right question to ask is: What are they hiding? Why they afraid of proving their voter rolls are clean?

From the Michigan Secretary of State:

LANSING, Mich. – In a video message released today, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson alerts Michigan residents about recent efforts by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to force the Michigan Department of State to unlawfully hand over the private, personal information of millions of Michigan voters. DOJ has sued the State of Michigan, along with seven other states, demanding full, unredacted access to the state’s Qualified Voter File (QVF), which contains protected personally identifiable information, including voters’ Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, and other sensitive personal data.

“Why do they want access to your personal information?” said Benson. “I’ve asked them that. Other secretaries of state – both Democrats and Republicans – have asked them that. They won’t tell us. Nobody – not the president, the DOJ or any other federal agency has the right to your sensitive, private voter information.”

https://www.michigan.gov/sos/resources/news/2025/1...

Indeed, *why* does the DOJ want the records, and WHY does the DOJ refuse to tell the Secretary why? What is the DOJ up to, that is so scummy they refuse to tell anyone?

Steve

Why do they want access to your personal information?” said Benson. “I’ve asked them that. Other secretaries of state – both Democrats and Republicans – have asked them that. They won’t tell us.

That argument is funny. The FedGov already has…your Social Security number and whatnot.

Because it’s a federal ID number!

The DOJ wants to check voter rolls. Nothing more.

The DOJ wants to check voter rolls. Nothing more.

check your name?

check your address?

check your state driver's license number?

Why? And why won't they say why? You are making an assumption. If it was that simple, why don't they say what you are saying?

Read the Secretary's full statement. There is a Federal law prohibiting the Federal government compiling secret databases.

Federal and state laws include strict privacy protections to keep voter data confidential and to keep Michiganders safe from identity theft. The Privacy Act of 1974 was passed specifically to prevent the creation of centralized databases by the federal government and requires government agencies to publish information about how any data systems are going to be used.

Steve

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.

What is the DOJ up to, that is so scummy they refuse to tell anyone?

That is the natural conclusion one would draw from this. Something nefarious. As Dope pointed out, they already have most of our personal information. They know where I live, how much I paid in taxes last year, and probably a lot more.

I think they have more in mind than "just checking the voter rolls", or they would have just said that. I don't think they have the right to the voter rolls, as voting is the province of the states (as dictated by the Constitution, such as no voter tests, no barring women or minorities, etc). The states run the show, as I understand it.

Dems can't govern? LOL

The US is currently seeing the largest number of layoffs since...the last time Trump was President.
And the US national debt increased by $1 trillion over the last two months, the fastest pace since....the last time Trump was President.
Every single Republican president in my adult lifetime has crashed the U.S. economy. Trump will be the first one to do it twice!

Through September 2025, nearly 950,000 job cuts have been announced, marking the highest year-to-date total for layoffs since 2020.

https://www.allsides.com/story/economy-and-jobs-us...

As Dope pointed out, they already have most of our personal information. They know where I live, how much I paid in taxes last year, and probably a lot more.

Do they have our political party registration? Who would want to hand that over to Mr. Retribution?

Do they have our political party registration? Who would want to hand that over to Mr. Retribution?

In Michigan, you don't declare a party affiliation when you register. For a vote suppression program, you could select the people in Dem leaning districts for scrutiny, but, as others have said, the government already has your address, so they can figure out the affiliation of the people most in your area vote for. Maybe they have more elaborate data sifting in mind, by age, race, gender? I just looked at my Michigan driver's license. It shows DOB, gender, and eye color, but not race. Maybe sift by name, looking for non-WASP names, then correlate the non-WASP names with districts represented by "the enemy"?

Why is the DOJ keeping their intentions secret, even from the state government officials, they are demanding the information from, if their intentions are not nefarious?

Steve

Democrats and Republicans, recently, who HAVE GOVERNED just to name a few.... and this doesn't mean like i'm you tribals where I gotta agree with everything they say or do. I'm just stating - they have indeed governed, versus just flinging the latest pod-cast partisan bullshit cooked up by some tattoo'd bro or crucifix wearing low cut dressed lady or blue haired woke shithead, all of whom have gone from being basement dwellers to wealthy, on the backs of you people and your tribalism.


Governor Beshear, R Kentucky (nominate him.....c'mon Dems get a clue )

Governor Shapiro D, Pennsylvania

Governor Glenn Youngkin, R Virginia

Senator Mark Warner, D - Governor and Senator - Virginia

Governor Grisham, D - Governor of New Mexico i think.

Governor Kemp, R - Georgia

I admittedly haven't watched the day to day politics of you tribalistic has-beens in a long time but based on cursory things i've read or heard about, these are a few people - both parties - who i feel have indeed, governed -- as if we were a first world country.

I conclude your characterization is faulty, likely fueled by consumption of RW media sources.

I conclude that your response is in bad faith.

Your party absolutely threw open the southern border during Biden’s term and the partisans on this board - fueled by their biases - pretended that what everyone saw with their own eyes wasn’t happening. Whether that pretending came from ignorance (partially), consumption of bad information (sl chance) or outright malicious partisanship (highly likely) I’ll leave that as an exercise.

The bill says exactly what it says and creates the incentives that it creates. Given that no liberal has disagreed with anything in it…we know where this board stands.

Indeed, *why* does the DOJ want the records, and WHY does the DOJ refuse to tell the Secretary why? What is the DOJ up to, that is so scummy they refuse to tell anyone?

Trump's DOJ is not known to be 1. competent, 2. relatively transparent, and 3. on the u and up. With this administration, we have seen the disdain they have for norms and the law, the ruthlessness with which they will rifle through your privacy, and while screaming election fraud attack the basic requirements for the transfer of power. They cannot be trusted to not use the info for a nefarious purpose.

In Utah, where I live, it is public info and available on request.

Do they have our political party registration?

That argument is funny. The FedGov already has…your Social Security number and whatnot.

Let them work with that. Since Jan 6, Trump is suspect on anything to do with elections. I assume the normal barriers are down at his whim. Republicans are famous for throwing voters off rolls when there is little time to get them back on - just one voter suppression technique. We already know California is going to go blue. Cheaters are caught every year, but it's sooo teeeny it never has an effect - we should be proud of that. So we have the Tamperer in Chief wanting to delve into info he doesn't need, unless he wants to help with voter suppression or throw monkey wrenches into California gerrymanders, while the Texas gerrymander is now approved by the Surpremes.

Dope again has to explain plain English to people who don't read it very well.
I gave you the literal statute.

It isn't the Proposed statute that's the problem. It is your interpretation of it and I can see why you're defensive. You honestly think the Inspector General can't delegate, that he has to do all of the inspections individually? Your defending that?

You honestly think we have to have the alien in front of a judge in 48 hours and then in front of a judge 72 hours later? And never even looked up what was in the statutes themselves to find out the first one is filing a form? Never were even curious as to what some of those references were?

So your following your hero, doubling down? Everyone sees it Dope, everyone.

Still trying, eh?

Well, keep trying. Maybe one day that elusive clue will be yours to have.

It is your interpretation of it

No. That’s not the problem. The problem is that you don’t like my opinion and want it silenced.

Things would so much better if you didn’t have to read things that made you think, amirite? So much easier to feel comfort.

Welp. Too bad.

I conclude that your response is in bad faith.

It really wasn't.

Your party absolutely threw open the southern border during Biden’s term...

That is the perception. Biden didn't change the law, but he perhaps wasn't as aggressive at enforcing it his first two years as he was his last two years. The data show that removals increased in 2021, and continued to increase all the way through 2023, reaching levels not historically seen (in 2022, specifically), before declining in 2023. This also is a function of attempted border crossings (which increased dramatically in 2020 to 2022). Here's a monthly chart of "repatriations":

https://usafacts.org/answers/how-many-people-were-...

We were deporting more people than during the Felon's first term.

The bill says exactly what it says and creates the incentives that it creates.

It's a messaging bill. I skimmed your excerpts, and did a little side research. But I didn't read the whole bloody thing, because it's a messaging bill. However, you mischaracterized at least some of the points (as I said). For example, I'll pull this straight from your OP:

“(II) may not rely on an alien’s criminal conviction, arrest, pending criminal charge, or combination thereof as the sole factor to justify the continued detention of the alien.

Hear that, twice convicted rapists, murderers and child traffickers? No matter how many times we catch you, your past criminal record can't be used to justify detaining you. Leaving us to...release you into the country.

The section II says "sole factor". You then said "your past criminal record can't be used to justify detaining you". You see what you did there? The section II does not preclude using your criminal history to detain you. It says that can't be the only reason. I happen to disagree with that, as written. It's intent is clear (i.e. detaining you for something minor is not a great use of resources, which I would agree with).

I think this board stands for due process, and a presumption of innocence. Like is says in the Constitution.

The section II says "sole factor". You then said "your past criminal record can't be used to justify detaining you". You see what you did there? The section II does not preclude using your criminal history to detain you. It says that can't be the only reason. I happen to disagree with that, as written. It's intent is clear (i.e. detaining you for something minor is not a great use of resources, which I would agree with).

Uh, huh.
The entire bill is nonsense on stilts. If someone is a serial killer, there shouldn't need to be any other justification to hold the guy right then and there. (Or not throw him off a cliff, for that matter).

This bill removes that.

What IS interesting about it is that 122 other democrats in Congress signed off on it...which makes this back door amnesty the effective position of the democrat party. This after them denying that policy position for years...and yet here we are.

You are correct, Biden "removed" many people. But also because they played fast and loose with the numbers, as did his boss Obama back in the day:
https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-obama-deporta...

WASHINGTON — Immigration activists have sharply criticized President Obama for a rising volume of deportations, labeling him the “deporter in chief” and staging large protests that have harmed his standing with some Latinos, a key group of voters for Democrats.

But the portrait of a steadily increasing number of deportations rests on statistics that conceal almost as much as they disclose. A closer examination shows that immigrants living illegally in most of the continental U.S. are less likely to be deported today than before Obama came to office, according to immigration data.

Expulsions of people who are settled and working in the United States have fallen steadily since his first year in office, and are down more than 40% since 2009.

In other words, the Obama/Biden administration fudged the numbers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nearly-two-third...
The Biden administration’s open border policies allowed in a record net of 8.3 million migrants, nearly two-thirds illegally, according to a new analysis of U.S. Census data detailing the Democrat’s disaster.

About 5.4 million migrants crossed into the U.S. illegally over the past four years, making former President Joe Biden the record-holder for the worst border enforcement ever.

The study that backs that up is
At 15.8 percent of the total U.S. population, the foreign-born share is higher now than at the prior peaks reached in 1890 and 1910. No U.S. government survey or census has ever shown such a large foreign-born population.
The current numbers have rendered Census Bureau projections obsolete. Just two years ago, the Bureau projected the foreign-born share would not reach 15.8 percent until 2042.
The 53.3 million foreign-born residents are the largest number ever in U.S. history; and the 8.3 million increase in the last four years is larger than the growth in the preceding 12 years.
The above figures represent net growth. New arrivals are offset by outmigration and deaths in the existing immigrant population. Our best estimate is that 11.5 to 12.5 million legal and illegal immigrants settled in the country in the last four years.
Although some immigrants are missed by government surveys, our preliminary estimate is that there are 15.4 million illegal immigrants in the January 2025 CPS, an increase of more than 50 percent (5.4 million) over the last four years in the survey.

+5.4 million illegals in the last 4 years.

It's just not possible to assimilate that many people that quickly...and bills like this - don't help.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.