Obviously you don't know what you're talking about, asking me to search for your answer. Either you understand what you're saying or you don't. And if you do share it in your own words, not a link to words of another.
The real question is "DO YOU?"
Yes, and the laws made by men and treaties signed by men oblige us to hear asylum claims and not return people to danger. Change or rid of them if you don’t like them.
True, and it’s our obligation to sort out the “wheat from the chaff,” as one immigration official put it to me when I worked in the field.
That is not what the US law says. They can apply for asylum “irrespective of (their immigration) status” at a border or from within the US. In their wisdom, those who made the laws recognized that people first flee, second decide in which direction, and then may be lied to or exploited by smugglers, that they even may be unaware of what asylum is. This stuff was based on the history of the irregular flight of those fleeing the Nazis and later those who fled communism. Two of the “righteous gentiles” honored by Jews are Raoul Wallenberg and Aristide Mendez, who put together phony documents to save quite a few people. Mendez got fired from his job as a Portuguese diplomat as a result.
Here’s a funny example of a case I worked on. Guy from Somalia fleeing with his young son (who tragically died on the journey) got enough money to get a flight to New Zealand, where he had heard that country welcomed Somalis. I don’t know if that is true, but he was told that by others and wound up detained by US officials when he landed in San Diego with what he thought was a ticket to Aukland. The agent in Italy had sold him a ticket to Oakland by mistake — first US stop was San Diego.
Breaking Down the Immigration Figures - FactCheck.org
Encounters on the southern border of those trying to enter the U.S. without authorization have gone up significantly under President Joe Biden. Government statistics show that in the initial processing of millions of encounters, 2.5 million people have been released into the U.S. and 2.8 million...www.factcheck.org
That should be initiated at a legal entry point.
Anyone who has gained entry to the U.S. by legal means should be allowed to file for permanent residency or asylum, illegal entry should not be made a burden upon taxpayers.
My Daughter has a friend whose Mother is stuck in Korea as she has no passport and therefore unable to get a flight home. Not sure how she got to Korea to begin with but has been working there for many years sending money home to her Daughter who is now staying with my Daughter.
LOL my boy? Youre the one who keeps voting for him.
LOL where have I advocated for a white America since it never existed. You and youre ilk are so full of hate you want to destroy our institutions just to one up those who vote differently than you. Youre everything MLK stood against.
Trump is your boy lol
I believe that might work, that is, setting up camps near the border to adjudicate asylum claims in cases of mass migration. If it were done quickly and the unworthy sent back, it would likely deter frivolous claims. But setting up and staffing such a system would be enormously expensive and politically difficult.
Those granted asylum can do so. As I noted, for good reasons the law does not bar asylum consideration depending on mode of entry.
Issue and personalities. I doubt that many working class folks will voted for Trump because he was unfriendly to workers issues when in office.
The GDP will grow about that much or more with or without any immigrants.
