The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

 

More than 2,300 immigrant kids have been taken from their parents and scattered across the country by the federal government, and President Donald Trump seems to have no coherent plan about how to reunite these families.

Even worse, it’s not clear whether the administration has actually stopped carrying out these separations, as Trump has said, or if it the number of children ripped from their parents will only grow.

Trump announced Wednesday that a new executive order would stop the separations from taking place. He said the order would make a lot of people happy and that he hated seeing families torn apart.

But it was not immediately clear if Trump’s proposed alternative to the separations — detaining families together — is either legally feasible or logistically practical.

And then, on Thursday, Trump said many families will still be separated.

“I signed a very good executive order yesterday, but that’s only limited, no matter how you cut it,” he said Thursday. “It leads to separation, ultimately.”

After the order was signed on Wednesday, a Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson said that the children who have already been separated would not be returned to their parents. The department later tried to take that claim back, asserting that the spokesperson had misspoken.

But a Washington Post correspondent noted Thursday that, in practice, reconnecting the families is proving to be incredibly burdensome.

“It is shockingly difficult for immigration attorneys to locate children separated from their parents at the border. Today I spoke to lawyers who represent more than 400 parents,” said Kevin Sieff. “They’ve located two children.”

Meanwhile, there’s no clarity about what’s happening with the Justice Department’s “zero-tolerance” policy, which is the root of all these problems. Once DOJ decided to aggressively prosecute every unauthorized border crossing agents discovered, instead of applying prosecutorial discretion or allowing some to await their court dates outside of federal custody, the family separations were triggered.

The White House and DOJ haven’t officially backed away from the zero-tolerance approach. But theWashington Post reported that border control officials on the ground have stopped referring some cases for prosecutions, creating yet even more confusion.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

U.S. SUPREME COURT

YouTube Screenshot

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade, ending the constitutional right to an abortion after almost 50 years, some conservatives and mainstream media outlets have suggested that anti-abortionists may be willing to support more generous family welfare programs to offset the financial burden of forced birth. These suggestions, whether made in bad faith or ignorance, completely misunderstand the social function of prohibiting abortion, which is to exert control over women and all people who can get pregnant.

In adopting or replicating the right’s framing of anti-abortionists as “pro-life,” these outlets mystify the conservative movement’s history and current goals. Conservatives have sought to dismantle the United State’s limited safety net since the passage of the New Deal. Expecting the movement to reverse course now is absurd, and suggesting so serves primarily to obfuscate the economic hardship the end of Roe will inflict on people forced to carry a pregnancy to term.

Keep reading... Show less

Arizona Republican Senate candidate Blake Masters

YouTube Screenshot

Donald Trump's hand-picked candidate Blake Masters is the latest to endorse the unpopular idea.

The front-runner in the GOP primary to run for Senate in Arizona in November against Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly suggested on June 23 that Social Security should be privatized, an approach to the popular government program that experts say could jeopardize a vital financial lifeline for retired Americans.

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}