Immigration Racism

DHS Memos Call for Mass Deportation

JM Ashby
Written by JM Ashby

The Department of Homeland Security published a set of memos today that outline the agency's plans for mass deportation.

The new guidelines will undo Obama-era policy that prioritized violent criminals for deportation and instruct agents to deport virtually every immigrant.

The memos instruct all agents, including Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to identify, capture and quickly deport every undocumented immigrant they encounter.

The memos require undocumented immigrants caught entering the country to be placed in detention until their cases are resolved, increase the ability of local police to help in immigration enforcement, call for the hiring of 10,000 more immigration agents and allow planning to begin on an expansion of the border wall between the United States and Mexico.

Trump and the department have the authority to set their own guidelines and priorities, but building a wall and hiring a deportation force to implement those guidelines will require funding appropriated by Congress.

Will Congress actually fund a border wall and deportation force?

Out of the all the things is Congress is currently being asked to do, from repealing Obamacare to funding the federal government before a continuing resolution expires in April, a border bill may be the only thing that actually has a chance of happening.

It wouldn't surprise me if a border wall and deportation bill is the only significant thing Congress does this year or next. Whether or not such a bill could survive a filibuster in the Senate, and whether Republicans would be willing to kill the filibuster to fund a deportation force, is another story.

For all of Donald Trump's talk about violent criminals crossing the border, these new guidelines will create space for criminals by placing them on equal footing with innocents. It will also give citizen criminals leverage over immigrants.

This could be Trump's first self-inflicted economic wound as the agricultural and service industries crumble under the loss of a significant portion of their labor force.

  • muselet

    Early in his campaign, Donald Trump told the country, out loud and on purpose (as Steve Benen is wont to say), exactly what he wanted to do: deport every undocumented immigrant. Someone in the campaign had a word in his shell-like and he backed off a hair, saying he wanted to deport criminals, which wasn’t particularly believable.

    Anyone who didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton is partially responsible for this mess.

    (Also, Trump keeps harping on the supposed danger to public safety presented by immigrants. Mike Males and Kevin Drum call bullshit.)

    –alopecia

  • Aynwrong

    I despise Trump’s voters for turning my country into this and I despise the far left for not prioritizing stopping this above all else.

    • Dread_Pirate_Mathius

      As a member of the “far left,” I object to your generalization.

      I was far from Clinton’s biggest fan, and I supported Bernie. But I – and many others – saw the shit-taco that was Donald Trump and turned up to vote for her. I even managed to drag my Republican wife into the polling booth to vote for her as well.

      So, please. Let’s not despise the “far left” as a whole.

      That said, I think you’ve got a bit of a strawman here. Only a tiny portion of the “far left” didn’t vote for her because of her GS speeches or her emails or Benghazi bullshit. The “she’s just as bad” meme was a bullshit narrative that hipsters spewed to seem cool – it’s not what kept many of us from the polls.

      They didn’t turn up because they (stupidly) thought it was more important to send an unmistakable message to the DNC to stop taking us for granted. The whole primary was one big fuck-you to the far left. They hamstrung our preferred candidate at every turn in order to run the anointed centrist. And we noticed.

      Was that the right move? I don’t know. Could Bernie have won? I don’t know. I doubt it, but maybe? Who knows. But what we objected to was that the DNC threw us under the bus because they knew – they knew – that we had nowhere else to go and that we’d be so terrified of the alternative that we’d have no choice but to show up. And they were very wrong. We are the core of the Democratic Party and we are not being served by our party. Neglect begets resentment. Enough of us felt it was more important to send a message than to win. What does that tell you?

      • That they’re willing to cut their noses off to spite their faces?

        • Dread_Pirate_Mathius

          If you look at the long view, you could put it differently: the far-left is what’s called a “captured demographic.” That is to say, we have nowhere else to go, so we have to stay loyal to the Democratic Party (because the Republican Party is abhorrent to us).

          But, because we are a captured demographic, the DNC can safely ignore us. They can steamroll us and cheat to ensure a centrist platform and a centrist candidate (and maybe that’s a good thing?). But the upshot is that the far left feels voiceless. Because they are.

          All this comes at t time when the far right has completely taken over their party and here we sit… getting ignored. And we watch the conversation between lunatic right and center and… no true left.

          So many of us (again, not me. I’m not that stupid) decided that they were willing to concede an election in order to make damned sure that, next time, the DNC is going to give them a fair shake.

          I may not agree, but I understand their position. It’s more complicated than just “they were throwing a hissy fit” or “cutting their nose to spite their face.” They were willing to suffer badly in order to ensure a better long-term outcome.. isn’t that “typically liberal” thinking?

          • JMAshby

            They can steamroll us and cheat to ensure a centrist platform and a centrist candidate (and maybe that’s a good thing?). But the upshot is that the far left feels voiceless. Because they are.

            Here’s your boy Saint Bernie praising the Dem platform:
            https://berniesanders.com/democrats-adopt-progressive-platform-party-history/

            You have no idea what you’re talking about.

          • Dread_Pirate_Mathius

            It’s so interesting to me that I only ever get hostility from you.

            Yet I spend hours arguing with extreme right-wing conservatives (StandUpForAmerica.Wordpress.com) and I get nothing but respectful discourse and a debate on the merits. Yet, here (on the most liberal blog I comment on), my every deviation from your perceived right answer is met with condescension and rudeness.

            You are, precisely, the caricature that the right thinks us all to be. Smugly superior, high-mindedly condescending, and intolerantly judgmental.

          • JMAshby

            The merits? Are you shitting me?

            Under a post about mass deportations, you’re still screeching about a non-existent conspiracy during the Democratic primary season.

            I don’t give a shit if I’ve insulted you by pushing back against your evidence-free conspiracy theorizing and victimhood. And if you want to see smug superiority, you should look in the mirror.

            Feel free to stop reading and commenting anytime.

          • Scopedog

            Under a post about mass deportations, you’re still screeching about a
            non-existent conspiracy during the Democratic primary season.

            That’s the problem. We’ve got Trump and the GOP doing the funky chicken–no, scratch that–they are taking s**ts on the Constitution and preparing the @$$rape the country….and some people are still bringing up “But Bernie wuz ROBBED by the evil DNC!!”

            I mean…H.A. Goodman is still spewing out how Hillary is still worse than Trump or anyone in Trump’s Administration, including Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn. And don’t even get me started the bullshit tweets from Stein, the Green Party, and too many other @$$holes.

          • Christopher Foxx

            Yet I spend hours arguing with extreme right-wing conservatives (StandUpForAmerica.Wordpress.co…)

            Under what name? Your Disqus account doesn’t show any comments except to this site for at least the last six months.

          • Dread_Pirate_Mathius

            They don’t use Disqus. I go by Mathius over there. I invite you to take a swing at them the guys over there. It’s a tough place, but it really does force me to think my positions through much better than any echo chamber ever could.

          • Badgerite

            “Better long term outcome”? And how do you figure.
            You were too self absorbed to notice the people being hurt out there. The people being terrorized and families ripped apart?
            Whatever Sanders and his supporters were doing it backfired on them. Susan Sarandon may now be “awake” but those of us with half a brain and any sense of this country were “awake” before this and knew what was coming was going to be very bad. Elizabeth Warren and by proxy Coretta Scott King was told to shut up by the likes of Mitch McConnell. The Consumer Protection Bureau is toast. It is now legal for financial advisers to have no fiduciary regard for their clients interests. To basically lie and self deal.
            The EPA is toast. Environmental regulations are toast.
            And this winter in Wisconsin is like nothing I have ever seen.
            It is 60 degree out today and it has rained this winter almost as much as it has snowed. “Long term outcome”?

          • Dread_Pirate_Mathius

            Hey, I voted for Clinton. Don’t look at me.

            But that doesn’t mean they don’t have a point. They do. We may not agree, but they opted to take the hit in order to gain some political muscle in the next round. I agree the next 4 years are going to blow, but you can be damned sure the DNC is going to listen better to the far-left now. That was their political math. I’m not endorsing it, I’m explaining it.

          • Badgerite

            Sorry. Sore point. It could be longer than 4 years you know.
            We have Jeff Session as the AG now, you know, charged with enforcement of the voting laws. With these guys in charge, we could get hit again by terrorists. And then what?
            They were taking a terrible risk and still are with the republic.
            Their ‘thinking’ sucks.

          • stacib23

            Unfortunately, the ones who decided “to take the hit” are most likely the folks that will be able to recover (if, in fact, any recovery is necessary for them). How about all the people who cannot afford their martyrdom – all the people who will lose their healthcare, get deported or die from all the promises to get rid of regulations. Clean water is so passe.

          • Okay, so let me modify my reply. The far left that voted third party or stayed at home in some cases cut the noses off their face but mostly cut the noses off of everyone else’s face to spite the rest of the left as punishment for a non-existent anti-Bernie conspiracy. I understand what you are saying and I still feel that it’s bullshit (not your reasoning, but theirs). And as for their not having a party that listens to them, what were they doing during the Bush and Obama years? Far too many of them waited until the last minute to become inspired by Bernie and then expected the DNC to kowtow to their last minute demands. Which they really did by including most of their Progressive platform. What they should have done way back under Pres. Bush is build a party from local elections and grow to national ones. But that’s too hard. Better to wait and fuck the rest of us over in a single election. They fucked up and many people are going to suffer. So I have no fucks to give for their “reasons”.

          • Christopher Foxx

            but you can be damned sure the DNC is going to listen better to the far-left now.

            I hope not. The far left have shown themselves to be no more reasonable or non-infantile than the far right. I hope the DNC properly recognizes their better chances lie with utterly rejecting the babies who cry if they don’t get their way, and instead try to explain better to those closer to the center how the Democrats are far better at supporting their interests than the Republicans.

          • Scopedog

            “Better long term outcome”? And how do you figure.

            Maybe it’s an offshoot of the underpants gnome meme:

            –Beat up on the Dems/Clinton and let Trump win.
            –Trump and the GOP destroy progressive programs and achievements.
            –??????
            –Progressive utopia, the better long term outcome!

            …the problem, of course, is that many will not live to see that “better long term outcome”.

            I heard this kind of screwy thinking from Naderites after Bush II “won” in 2000. I rejected it then, and I reject it now.

          • Badgerite

            Really, when you consider the issues, particularly that of global warming, where they come up with “better long term outcome” is beyond me.
            Al Gore was the politician who brought the issue of global warming into the public debate. I believe he had a lot to do with the Kyoto Treaty that went down the tubes when GW was appointed by the Scalia and company Court to the presidency of the United States. There was an article by one Joe Brewer at the Medium website which pointed out the fact that heat that was absorbed into the ocean in the 1980’s is only now starting to affect the the atmosphere and climatic makeup of the Earth. 94% of global warming initially is absorbed into the oceans. And “just as it takes time for a hot cup of coffee to release heat into the air” the same is true for the oceans. So there is a lag effect that is only now starting to be felt and will continue. A lot of definitive tipping points have already come and gone. So what “long term outcome” are these idiots talking about anyway? The Pentagon has done studies on this and they have predicted massive disruptions world wide. And progressive values do not tend to thrive when the question becomes who do you throw out of the boat to save yourself. Their political theorizing is idiotic and brought us the mess we have today.

          • Christopher Foxx

            They were willing to suffer badly in order to ensure a better long-term outcome.. isn’t that “typically liberal” thinking?

            No. Inflicting disaster on their fellow citizens so they can get what they want in the end is typical entitled snowflake thinking. If they were truly interested in making progress eventually (as you suggest) then the way to do that, the way it always comes about, is by making steady, incremental progress. It is not by inviting disaster and then expecting everything suddenly reverses itself all at once.

            Extreme example to emphasize the point: people in the civil rights movement didn’t say “let’s not protest hope they bring back slavery so that people will see how really bad it is and then they’ll all suddenly pass the Civil Rights Act”. No, they slowly, steadily, relentlessly worked on gradual progress. There were occasional larger steps forward, sure. But they didn’t think the way to success was to burn the house down.

      • JMAshby

        I remember when you said you and your wife were going to vote for 3rd party candidates to cancel each other’s votes out. Now you’re saying the DNC conspired against your “preferred candidate,” Saint Bernie?

        Let me tell you what’s really insulting. Implying that the DNC “anointed” a centrist who actually won the majority of votes fair and square thanks largely to minority voters who saw straight through Bernie. No grand conspiracy caused 80 to 90% of black voters to choose Clinton.

        The DNC actually has very little power. It raises and distributes money and occasionally organizes debates. How exactly did the DNC throw you “under the bus?” Democrats actually adopted nearly all of Bernie’s policy platform at the Dem convention.

        This goddamn DNC conspiracy theorizing and sour grapes bullshit is insufferable.

        Speaking of strawmen.

      • Aynwrong

        It tell me that you are far more reasonable than the people I was describing. I just find difficult to believe that influence of Jill Stein & Glenn Greenwald did play a role in the God awful results that we just witnessed.

        If you felt slighted by my words, apologies. You were certainty not my intended target.

      • Scopedog

        I’m sorry–while I thought what you have written here was quite good, you lost me with the “DNC threw us under the bus” line.

        The DNC vs. Bernie nonsense has to f**king stop. No one has offered any real, concrete proof of this except to wave around emails hacked by Russia and squeezed out Wikileaks’ anus.

        Just sayin’.

      • Christopher Foxx

        It’s not often you see a commenter start a comment rejecting generalizations and strawmen and then end up putting forth a few of their own. I mean, c’mon, DPM.

        We are the core of the Democratic Party and we are not being served by our party.

        Then you’re far more a Democrat that Sanders. Even after he declared himself in the running for the Democratic nomination he continued to list himself as an Independent. How odd is it that folks might look more favorably toward a lifelong member of their party than toward someone who found it suddenly to his advantage to jump on board so he could make use of their resources?

        Not that that was anything new for Sanders.

        After calling it “ideologically bankrupt,” Sanders lobbied for admission into the Democratic caucus for practical reasons (getting coveted committee assignments, mustering votes for bills), according to news reports from his first year in Congress. But party leaders wouldn’t let him join as he refused to become a Democrat.

        And immediately after the convention he returned to insisting he’s an Independent, not a Democrat.

        It’s the goal of the Democratic Party, and the chairperson of the DNC, to ensure a Democrat, an actual one, is elected. An argument could be made that Sanders got far more support from the DNC than he should have.

        Enough of us felt it was more important to send a message than to win. What does that tell you?

        That you started by objecting to the characterization of those on the far left who didn’t vote for Clinton (i.e. against Trump) did so for petty or irrational reasons and ended by declaring that to actually be the case.

  • Username1016

    He is a chimpanzee with an ax.

    • Draxiar

      With apologies to chimps.