SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In a legal setback for the Trump administration's immigration policies, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., has ruled that the government may not arbitrarily detain people seeking asylum.
The ruling comes in a case challenging the administration's policy of detaining people even after they have passed a credible fear interview and await a hearing on their asylum claim.
The lead plaintiff in the case is a teacher from Haiti, Ansly Damus, who has been confined in Ohio for more than a year-and-a-half. He fled his homeland fearing violence and political persecution and asked for asylum in the United States. An immigration judge granted him asylum not just once, but twice. But Damus remains locked up indefinitely as the government appeals those decisions.
U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, in his 38-page opinion, said that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement violated its own procedures by not granting Damus release under what's known as humanitarian parole.
"This Opinion does no more than hold the Government accountable to its own policy, which recently has been honored more in the breach than the observance. Having extended the safeguards of the Parole Directive to asylum seekers, ICE must now ensure that such protections are realized," Judge Boasberg wrote.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:23AM (1 child)
Yes, we had Japanese internment camps. A good deal of the reason why is explained by the Niihau incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niihau_incident [wikipedia.org] where a Japanese pilot who was a part of the Pearl Harbor attacks landed his damaged plane on a small Hawaiian island -- and some of the Hawaiian locals of Japanese descent living there helped the pilot try to escape.
They never tell you about that event, do they? Given the evidence that some Japanese-descended people living in the U.S. would assist the Japanese, damn straight they were interned. If they hadn't been, it's likely that many of them would have been killed by U.S. citizens.
Yes, it sucks when you're locked up for nothing you did. Beats being dead, though, and you have bitching rights the rest of your life.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 05 2018, @09:23PM
This tripe gets modded insightful? Here's a hint: Regardless of the circumstances, the government sending people of a certain descent to camps without due process is blatantly unconstitutional. This is due to the 5th amendment, at the very least. It doesn't matter if some members of the group happened to be bad guys. It doesn't matter if some US citizens would have killed some members of the group if they weren't locked up in camps 'for their own protection'. None of that matters. It was blatantly unconstitutional. Full stop. There's not even a valid argument to be had here. You're just wrong.
For trying (and failing) to justify this, you are an authoritarian scumbag of the highest order. You do not care one bit about the Constitution, which is the highest law of the land. In 'the land of the free and the home of the brave', freedom is more important than safety, so we should never sacrifice freedom even if we can attain more safety by doing so.