'Where's my mom?' cries girl as immigrant kids separated from parents arrive in Michigan

[Judi Lynn]

Niraj Warikoo, Detroit Free Press
Published 6:01 a.m. ET June 9, 2018 | Updated 11:54 a.m. ET June 9, 2018

Separated from her parents at the southern border, a 9-year-old girl from Guatemala who recently arrived in Michigan often cries out in Spanish: "Where's my mom? When can I talk to my mom? When can I see my mom?"

Her cries of pain are echoed across the United States with a growing number of immigrant children being ripped by U.S. officials from their parents after they cross the border illegally in hopes of getting asylum.

Last month, the administration of President Donald Trump started strictly enforcing the removal of the children of those parents and placing them in separate facilities. In some cases, they are being sent to Michigan to be handled by foster care groups like Bethany Christian Services, based in Grand Rapids.

"These kids have been through really hell on Earth, and now they're separated from their parents," said Chris Palusky, CEO and President of Bethany Christian Services, which has offices across Michigan and works in 36 states.

More:
https://www.freep.com/story/news/2018/06/09/ripped-parents-u-s-immigrant-kids-arriving-michigan/685038002/

[Docreed2003]

1. K&R for exposure

Disgusting and heartbreaking

[defacto7]

2. It's a reprogramming operation.

How sick..

[JayhawkSD]

3. I am certainly no fan of Trump.

I despise the man. But...

The president is charged by the Congress to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is not optional. He does not get to pick and choose which laws are "faithfully executed," he is required to do that for all of them.

It is a law passed by Congress that all persons attempting to enter the United States without permission be prevented from doing so. That law does not grant exemption based on age or piteous condition. It requires that they be detained until a court can adjudicate their status. The president is required to "take Care" that that law be "faithfully executed."

It is a law passed by Congress that children may not be detained in adult detention centers. The president is required to "take Care" that that law also be "faithfully executed."

The "faithful execution" of these two laws creates an inhumane and terrible condition, but that is the fault of Congress, and it is Congress which should be excoriated for it. The presidents who did not enforce these laws were failing to fulfill the duties charged to them by the constitution.

Our president is a monster. But, and this is a big but, our Congress is no less a monster and instead of calling members of Congress to account for their monstrosities we reelect them again and again.

[Demsrule86]

4. There is no such law. No one else before Trump ever did this.

And I can't believe you defend this program.

[JayhawkSD]

6. I most certainly do not defend this program.

Where in my post did I defend it? I called out the Congress which passed it as being monstrous.

And, for the record, several presidents before Trump did this. Obama did it. It is only since Trump has been in office that the media has been screaming about it.

[Demsrule86]

7. You basically said Trump had no choice which actually he does have a choice...than you

said congress...well not all of congress but the Gop Congress who is in charge are indifferent. I can only imagine the suffering of the kids and parents...Trump blames the Democrats you know.

Did I misunderstood...I am no Trump fan but...and then you discuss the law which no other president used to tear kids from parents. How am I wrong?

Also, these folks detained are not awaiting adjudication. The Sessions justice department plans to charge them and put them in hell hole private prisons for big money...what happens to the kids?

[JayhawkSD]

8. Let me see if I understand what you are saying.

How does Trump have a choice when the constitution says that he must enforce the law? The choice he has is whether or not he is going to fulfill his constitutional responsibility.

You accuse Republican Congress,but do you know specifically when this law was passed? What was the Congressional bill number, and what year was it passed? Do you know specifically which party was in control of Congress at the time? I confess that I do not, but do you?

Do you think, then, that children should be detained in facilities with adults, some of whom are criminals? You do not regard that as cruel or inhumane?

Do you know that this year is the first time that this law has ever been followed? Are you sure that no administration prior to this one has ever obeyed the dictate of Congress and enforced this law? If so, what did they do?

You know for certain that Obama told the ICE to disobey this law. What did he tell them to do? Did he tell them to detain children in adult facilities with the parents and criminals? I hope not, as that seems to me to be cruel and harsh conditions in which to house children.

Did he tell them not detain anyone coming in with children? How long did it take, then, for criminals to figure out that in order to get a free pass across the border all they needed to do was have a couple of kidnapped kids with them? Claiming, of course, that the kids were their own.

So were we, in fact, for all these years not detaining anyone who attempted to enter this country without permission if they had children with them? If we were stopping them, what have we been doing about the children?

Please tell me how you can document what you are saying about how unique the cruelty of the Trump administration is, and that prior administrations have been so kind and forgiving.

And your statement that "these folks detained are not awaiting adjudication" is completely in error. They are awaiting an opportunity to see an administrative judge, and so far those who have seen the judge have been granted asylum more often than not. When they are not granted asylum or entry they are returned to their country of origin with their children. They are under no circumstances placed "in hell hole private prisons for big money."

[Demsrule86]

10. He doesn't have to ...the law does not require it...same old crap the GOP are saying and it is

not true.

"A federal judge in San Diego is set to rule any day on the question of whether the government is lawlessly abducting immigrant children at the border. The ACLU is seeking a classwide preliminary injunction to put a stop to the practice. Based on a close reading of legal filings in the case, the public statements of policymakers, and a transcript from a critical hearing last month, it’s difficult to fathom how the judiciary could possibly rule in favor of the government.

In court proceedings last month, Judge Dana Sabraw indicated that the case, Ms. L v. ICE—filed by the ACLU on behalf of Ms. L and other asylum-seeking parents who have had their children taken away—should hinge on the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Under a series of Supreme Court precedents, family integrity has long been considered a “fundamental” due process right. Among other rulings, the ACLU’s lawsuit cited the Supreme Court’s opinion in 2000’s Troxel v. Granville, which stated that there is “a fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child.” This precedent mandates both that the government show a compelling government interest in separating a child and parent—preventing child abuse, for instance—and that it is using the least restrictive means to fulfill that interest.

In the ACLU’s case, the government has not shown a lawful basis for its policy of indefinitely separating immigrant children from their parents at the border. In fact, government lawyers have denied the existence of any such policy at all. In response to Sabraw’s question about whether the government “has a practice, or perhaps even a policy, of separation of families as a deterrence mechanism,” Justice Department attorney Sarah B. Fabian asserted, “There is not such a policy.”

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/06/trumps-child-separation-policy-is-a-moral-and-constitutional-abomination.html

[JayhawkSD]

11. Troxel v. Granville was a child custody case involving divorce.

That "a federal judge in San Diego is set to rule any day" does not mean that the judge has ruled and that they are doing anything other than what the law requires them to do. The judge may rule against the plaintiff and, in fact, probably will since the law that the ACLU is using as precedent is not related to the case at hand.

They are not "taking the children away," as would be the case in a custody issue involving divorce, they are detaining the family pending determination of legal status and are doing so temporarily, over what is legally a short term, and specifically as prescribed by law.

The statement that the goverrnent has a "policy of indefinitely separating immigrant children from their parents at the border" is not technically wrong because there is, in fact, no definite term for the separation, but it is wrong by implication in that it implies that long term separation is intended. The policy is actually one of "temporary separation" pending the adjudication of legal status.

The ACLU claims that the "government has not shown a lawful basis" for it's actions? So the ACLU also claims that children may be housed in adult facilities?

[Demsrule86]

12. undocumented parents who have had their children removed are being told they will never see them

again. The Trump plan is to incarcerate the parents in private for profit prisons for years...so you are wrong...you can defend this if you choose...but it is monstrous in my opinion.

[JayhawkSD]

13. Show me the documentation for this.

Please give me the credible citation which documents the truth that that:

a) "parents who have had their children removed are being told they will never see them again"
or that
b) "Trump plans to incarcerate the parents in private for profit prisons for years"

A credible source; news media such as New York Times, Washington Post, or a named source from within government.

I do not defend the separation of children from their parents. I have said absolutely nothing which can be construed to imply that I approve of or defend the separation of children from their parents. I have merely said that Congress is not blame free and that it is not an evil plot hatched entirely by Trump.

Trump is a monster. I have said that. But not every evil imposed upon the world and upon this nation is a plot devised by Trump.

[Demsrule86]

5. Lets fix this...Republicans who control Congress are monsters. I can say with confidence that no

Democratic Congress would do this..so it is as always the Republicans...who have no idea what to do with these kids being dumped on an already overburdened foster system.

[JayhawkSD]

9. Let me repeat my rersponse to your earlier accusation

Do you know specifically when this law was passed? What was the Congressional bill number, and what year was it passed? Do you know specifically which party was in control of Congress at the time? I confess that I do not, but do you?

Please tell me which Republican-controlled Congress passed this heinous law. I would like to know.

I would also like to know your alternative. What should be done about the children of people attempting to enter this country without permission? If not "dumping them on an already overburdened foster system," what should be done with them?

Or perhaps you think children should be housed in facilities with adults, some of whom are criminals.

We are really good at condemning problems these days, but no one seems able to present solutions.