That is exactly what I wrote originally, see number 3 in the first post. Ask yourself which you would choose in the same situation, given the assurance that you absolutely were going to be deported sooner or later. A chance to come back is much better than absolutely no chance, right? And yes it would save money on apprehension and actual deportation, because by volunteering they would bypass the inevitable court fight lawfare that you know is coming, as well as apprehension costs. The actual plane tickets are basically nothing.
I see what you are saying. As someone who has worked in an immigration clinic and has personally assisted in applications to the USCIS, I know that the current means of gaining legal entry into the states is lengthy. Refugees and asylees are told to expect to wait as long as seven years to gain entry. Iâm just not convinced that those whoâve built lives here would be willing to pack up and go knowing it may take that long to come back. Thatâs all. The current process needs reformed completely, and as that may also take some time, forced deportation may be the only viable option to offer more immediate relief to citizens.
It will be very easy! They ALL got cell phones!!
Then You have been part of the problem!
I worked with refugees from all over the world who had stories that are unconscionable. It was an internship in law school, and I am proud to have had the experience because it gives me insight into the system. I am pushing for mass deportation, because I believe in America first. I prefer to only speak from a place of experience.
We donât need to make it faster for them, or easier. Go to any other country and try to gain citizenship there. We already have some of the most liberal naturalization standards. Itâs a simple ask really. Play by the rules from this point on, or never be allowed to come back once youâre found.
1 Like
To your proposal, if the process is lengthy, taking years to regain entry, then do you still feel immigrants would be properly incentivized to turn themselves in? Perhaps you should remove the word Amnesty from your proposal since by your own admittance, it does not involve Amnesty at all. I am glad that we agree on far more than we disagree.
You are misunderstanding the meaning of the word âamnestyâ. It does not necessarily have the sweeping erasure of guilt that you envision. Iâm using it in a limited, but appropriate, manner. Our policy should be ALL lawbreakers are forbidden from legal entry into the country, however, in light of the fact that they were enticed by elected officials who were ignoring our laws (and Constitution) we should be willing to at least give them another chance IF they will cooperate and accept the offer. The simple fact that they now know how good it is to live here should be incentive enough to get them work toward making it permanent in whatever way possible. Maybe, if we send enough back after they have experienced our ways, they will make positive changes in their own countries also.
1 Like
How are we going to make sure that the people have no criminal record or pending charges? Fake identities exist in those countries as well. Why would a person voluntarily present themselves for deportation when they could just stay in the country illegally and still get government benefits? And why are the tax payers footing the bill to get them back to their home countries only for them to come back over.
The normal vetting process for gaining permission to immigrate into America will do all of that. There is no guarantee they will be allowed to return, only the promise that they will be given the chance to pass through the legal system. They wonât be given that chance if they have to be apprehended and forced out. Also, the âgovernment benefitsâ should not be continued for illegals.