This is topic JoT of 22 Jun 18 in forum The Joy of Tech at The Geek Culture Forums!.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
Posted by romad (Member # 36425) on June 22, 2018, 14:56:
OK, since almost all Canadians (and Americans) seem to be uninformed on how the US Constitution requires these separations. The actual item is the "Bill of Attainder" ban in Article I, Section 8 (for the Federal government; for state governments it is in Section 10). This ban has been used to prevent the incarceration of innocent family members with those arrested.
Now since it is ILLEGAL to enter these United States WITHOUT permission, federal law requires these lawbreakers to be arrested, HOWEVER the Bill of Attainder ban in the Constitution prohibits their children from being held with the parents.
So what is the solution? We either have to allow lawbreakers to go free or directly violate Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. The current administration only followed the requirements of the Constitution.
Those opposed to the separation may want to push for a constitutional amendment repealing the Bill of Attainder ban but they need to remember that if it ever happened and they were arrested for DUI with family members in the vehicle, those family members could be arrested also.
Judging by the reports of the news media who have visited the children's care centers, those children are getting better care there than they ever did before. Perhaps it is time to build similar custody centers for families in the Federal detention centers.
Posted by Stibbons (Member # 2515) on June 23, 2018, 11:51:
I'm neither American nor Canadian, but I don't really follow your logic here.
Firstly, I presume you're referring so AIS9 (given AIS8 is just a list of the powers of Congress), but as far as I can tell AIS9 can be summarised as:
- Can't ban importation of slaves
- Can't suspend writ of habeas corpus (unless shit is really hitting the fan) i.e. prisoners can report unlawful detention to the courts
- No bills of attainder, i.e. can't just declare someone as guilty for being that sort of person, and you can't make something illegal then charge someone for doing it in the past
- States can't impose taxes (but this was ammended)
- Can't be a prince or king of the US.
I'm not sure how this can be used as justification for separation of migrant children from their parents? A bill of attainder would be declaring all Mexican's guilty of being immigrants and punishing them automatically.
Posted by The Famous Druid (Member # 1769) on June 24, 2018, 01:41:
As Stibbons pointed out - you've misunderstood what a 'Bill Of Attainder' is.
Another mistake is to assert that
quote:The US has signed (and incorporated into US law) the UN Convention on Refugees.
Now since it is ILLEGAL to enter these United States WITHOUT permission, federal law requires these lawbreakers to be arrested
This means it is legal to enter the US and seek asylum, in fact it specifically forbids governments from bringing criminal charges against refugees for entering their countries by irregular means.
Posted by macmcseboy (Member # 1232) on June 28, 2018, 04:51:
romad.... you disappoint... As a Canadian of Mexican decent I do not support whats going on down there. The civil rights and human rights violations are mounting. Also... I do not appreciate my family in California being threatened with deportation on a whim because they are not white.. they are LEGAL BORN ON THE SOIL US CITIZENS. I myself, do not appreciate being grilled extra by US customs at EITHER Northern or Southern borders for being a person of color. also.. what a piss poor intro to the forums...
© 2018 Geek Culture
Powered by Infopop Corporation