Democrats Allege Crimes Ranging from Kidnapping to Human Trafficking to “Crimes Against Humanity” in Migrant Transfers

Below is my column in the Hill on the claims that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) and other governors are committing crimes ranging from kidnapping to human trafficking in shipping undocumented immigrants to other states. The claims are legally baseless. While MSNBC regular Elie Mystal said this week, “kidnapping is a thing,” it is just not “this thing.” While insisting that migrants should be seen as a “blessing,” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has declared the free trips to be “crimes against humanity.” Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Cal.) has also demanded criminal investigations even though Newsom, as mayor of San Francisco, shipped homeless people “back home” to other cities with free bus tickets. There are now threats of some blue states suing as well as New York City but those lawsuits are likely to fail absent evidence of systemic fraud or coercion.  These migrants are allowed to engage in interstate travel and other states can facilitate such travel.

Here is the column:

Moves by Govs. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), Gregg Abbott (R-Texas) and Doug Ducey (R-Ariz.) to transport undocumented migrants to sanctuary cities beyond their states have produced a torrent of denunciation and claims of racism as being (in the words of one writer) the work of “white supremacists, relying on [a] racism-and-spite blueprint.”

Some pundits and Democratic politicians, such as Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.), have called for criminal investigations by the Justice Department on discrimination, fraud, “kidnapping or potential Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) charges.” DeSantis’ Democratic challenger in November, Charlie Crist, echoed calls for a federal investigation of his own state, declaring: “Justice needs to be served here.”

While these objections risk proving the intended political point of the trips, they do not prove a crime. If Attorney General Merrick Garland were to yield to this pressure, he would saw off the very branch of government on which his department sits.

Although Martha’s Vineyard previously declared itself a sanctuary for migrants, it declared a “humanitarian crisis” this week when some 50 individuals were flown there from Florida, and it denounced their arrival as a potentially criminal act.

Other leaders, such as D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, have demanded the deployment of the National Guard when border states shipped migrants to their jurisdictions. In Illinois, Gov. J.B. Pritzker did precisely that — called out the Guard.

The border-state governors have responded that the groups bussed or flown to other jurisdictions are just a tiny percentage of those pouring over their borders, projected to be more than 2 million this year alone.

Yet Newsom’s demand that the Justice Department prosecute such transfers would create a dangerous precedent, one that might backfire on the Biden administration.

The Biden administration has transported thousands of migrants across the country with little public notice, including late-night flights denounced by Republicans as clandestine “ghost flights.” Those transfers have been defended by Democrats and others as standard practice in the past three administrations. This, as thousands of migrants regularly overwhelm border towns despite administration officials — including Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and, most recently, Vice President Kamala Harris — insisting the border is secure.

The trips arranged by the three Republican governors have been denounced as a political stunt. And, indeed, they are — but they are not criminal acts, absent new evidence of compulsion or fraud. There are reports of some migrants demanding to be allowed off buses en route to New York, and some migrants are quoted as saying they were induced with promises of opportunities or care in sanctuary cities. Yet there is no evidence of systemic fraud or misrepresentation. Moreover, even if there was misrepresentation, it would not constitute some of the crimes being claimed on cable television, including Hillary Clinton declaring that it constitutes “literally human trafficking.”

Most migrants do not intend to remain in border communities with a huge influx of migrants and limited opportunities — one reason why the Biden administration has moved migrants elsewhere. Thus, if the administration pursued Newsom’s allegation of a possible “civil rights conspiracy in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 1985,” it would potentially make a case against itself. If these governors are discriminating on the basis of national origin, so is the administration.

Let’s consider a few of the other alleged crimes suggested by politicians and pundits:

Kidnapping, human trafficking

The claim by Newsom and others that this could constitute kidnapping is absurd. Kidnapping requires that the culprit “unlawfully seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, kidnaps, abducts, or carries away and holds for ransom or reward or otherwise any person.” There is nothing unlawful in conveying individuals who are lawfully in the country pending their immigration hearings; the trips are voluntary, and most migrants appear eager to accept free passage to cities like New York or Chicago.

Human trafficking — a charge suggested by some law professors — is prosecuted by the Justice Department when you exploit “a person for labor, services, or commercial sex.” Gov. DeSantis may have overt political motives for transporting migrants to Martha’s Vineyard, but even cable-news programs have not suggested he is doing so for sexual or labor exploitation.


RICO was designed to combat organized crime by allowing criminal charges based on a pattern of underlying criminal acts. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 there is a list of “predicate offenses,” and at least two of those crimes can create the needed pattern for prosecution. But there is no established RICO pattern here because there are no established predicate crimes. An effort by the Biden administration to designate political opponents as “racketeers” would raise deeply troubling concerns about weaponizing the criminal justice system.

Illegal transport

One of the most-cited bases for criminal prosecution has been 8 U.S. Code § 1324, which prohibits transporting or attempting to transport undocumented migrants. The law is designed to combat smugglers, not states offering free trips to those released into the country by the federal government. It requires an act of “knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact” that the migrant “has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law.”

These trips, however, are not in violation of law or “in furtherance of such violation of law.” The Biden administration’s controversial “catch and release” policy means migrants are free to go anywhere or accept trips from public interest groups, the federal government or the states.

In theory, public interest groups arranging for transportation or individuals giving rides to migrants could be prosecuted on the same basis under Section 1324. In reality, if transporting undocumented migrants after they are released into the country is to be judged criminal, then the Biden administration would be the largest “coyote” in history.

None of this, of course, may prevent Attorney General Garland from using these wild accusations to launch a federal investigation. Biden officials are reportedly discussing options for legal action. Garland may yield to such demands. After all, he was criticized for creating a nationwide task force at the behest of school boards to investigate parents who publicly challenged board members over issues like teaching critical race theory or diversity policies. Such a move would magnify concerns about the Justice Department being used for political purposes before the midterm election.

The governors’ critics are correct: These trips are politically motivated. That is precisely why the proper response is also political, not criminal. Using the criminal code to amplify political points is a dangerous precedent. Frustrating though it may be for sanctuary cities to face an influx of undocumented migrants, criminal irony still is not an offense under the federal code.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

312 thoughts on “Democrats Allege Crimes Ranging from Kidnapping to Human Trafficking to “Crimes Against Humanity” in Migrant Transfers”

  1. I told you this would happen! All it took was one….who didn’t consent. Luckily it’s only the dojj who has standing……because immigration is only in the feds realm! So let’s ask hope they get standing….only by violation of the law! The feds can not by violating the law create people with standingg. They can not wi 5th bout violating federal law get standing…….so let’s hear what they say…..they have to lie. All that lies Wil come out in court. So my ppl are not afraid. Whatsoever. At all. If migrant is out in our town….well shut it off! They don’t belong here.

  2. The real problem with Human Trafficking is right on the border!!! The Governor’s shipping people out of those horrible conditions are doing each one of the Illegal Immigrants a favor and sending them away from that!!! Little children are being killed for their Organs right on the Border. Sarah Carter exposed all that in her latest report!!! I wish PEOPLE IN this country would WAKE UP and realize the horrible atrocities that happening every single day to the little children, women & men!!! I PRAY THAT SOMEONE IN THIS COMMUNIST MARXIST ADMINISTRATION WOULD REALLY CARED ABOUT THESE POOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THEM!!!! THEY USE THEM AS POLITICAL PAWNS AND TRY TO MAKE THE GOVERNOR ABBOTT & GOVERNOR DE SANTIS LOOK LIKE HORRIBLE PEOPLE, THEY AREN’T THEY ARE SAVING THEM FROM MURDER, MOLESTAION, STARVATION!!! THE HUMAN TRAFFICKING IS SO HORRIBLE ON THE BORDER, WITH ALL THE DRUG CARTEL SENDING FENTANYL!!! you name it, what they suffer because of these open borders is CRIMINAL!!! Now Venezuela has announced they are emptying their prison’s!!! I wish you all would realize you are not safe either because of these OPEN BORDERS. We in Texas are paying the price with Home Invasions, Murder’s, Car Jackings, People being shot so they can have their cars!!! I WISH SOMEONE REALLY CARED IN THIS COUNTRY AND WOULD QUIT SAYING THAT THIS IS SOMEONE ELSE’S PROBLEM!!! IT ISN’T, IT’S ALL OF EVERY SINGLE AMERICA’S PROBLEM!!! PLEASE CARE & START SPEAKING UP AND HELP OUR COUNTRY!!! PLEASE, LITTLE CHILDREN ARE BEING MURDERED FOR THEIR ORGAN’S, DOES ANYBODY CARE????

  3. I’ve obtained exclusive video recordings of the illegal aliens’ invitation to a party at the home of one of the residents of Martha’s Vineyard during their brief stay on the island. As the video shows, the illegal aliens, some who were disabled, were treated with absolute respect and compassion at all times. The people claiming that the NIMBYs are hypocritical are wrong!

    1. A: By acclaim, the best answer in the card game Cards Against Humanity.

      1. Ah, yes. A seminal moment in woke history. Or is it woke science?

        Al and Tipper Gore are the life of the party compared to today’s progressives!

  4. 117,5K Asylum applications, 40K accepted but 2.35 Mill Encounters: Where are 1.8 Mill people (I deducted 500K removals & returns)?

    Yesterday, john Say took the time and wrote 13 lengthy posts: He provided his insights about the impact of immigration in a broader view. John stated, that government has a constitutional obligation to protect the States from invasion (§ 4 Sec 4). If it complies lies in the eye of the beholder.

    President Biden capped the number of refugees [1] to 125K/year. According to UNHCR, 117,490 asylum applications by refugees were received in 2021 and 39,809 (33.88%) wer granted. USRAP funded FY ’21/’22/’23 (in Mill $) [2]

    Refugee Processing 39.0/70.8/112.7
    Refugee Admission 401.8/457.1/864.4
    Refugee Resettlement 561.0/871.0/1,360.0
    Total 966.8/1,398.9/2.337.1

    IMO 40K granted asylum/year is not a big deal, but its costly [3] But as we have 2.35 Mill Encounters/year [4] deduct 500K removals & returns and 40K asylums it comes down to 1.8 Mill people. Where are they?this iss

    Why don’t we spend more time in discussing these issues, than arguing about asylum seekers or 48 Venezuelans who left San Antonios Migrant Resource Center last week [5]

    [1] Under Section 101(a)(42) of the INA, a refugee is a person who, generally, has experienced past persecution or has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Individuals who meet the statutory definition may be considered for either refugee status under Section 207 of the INA if they are outside the US, or asylum status under Section 208 of the INA, if they are already in the US Both refugee and asylum status are forms of humanitarian protection offered by the US
    [3] The current level of debt ceiling is $31.381 trillion. Experts expect another push after midterms.
    [5] Maybe Javier Salazar (D), the sheriff of Bexar County, TX and Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) are more involved now.

    1. Charlotte, immigration law is technically challenging, so I don’t think anyone who regularly posts on the blog has a good enough handle on the law to state what is true or not.

      The best I can say is that even a person who comes with legitimate asylum claims doesn’t have a right to break the law. When they do, they are criminals. Of course, you can say they are escaping from those that wish to kill them, so they didn’t have time for the formalities. However, that statement doesn’t apply to the illegals crossing the southern border. Most crossed the boundaries of many countries, so that need is gone.

      None of these illegals should be permitted to remain in the country. There was an agreement ‘remain in Mexico’ while the legalities of their claims were managed. These illegals can settle in any of the other countries as well.

      Before you look at me as some type of ogre, recognize that lawlessness creates more death and destruction than following the law. Also, recognize that we are removing the people from nations most willing to push their nations in the right direction. Finally, understand, that I support immigration because the fertility rate in this country leads to a declining population. I think legal immigration is good, but creating terror and drug empires south of the border that helps China destroy America from the inside is not the way to go.

      1. Svelaz’s whole asylum debate is ludicrously stupid.

        Almost 5M illegal aliens in 22 months.
        200K+ asylum requests.

        It is the former not the later that is the huge problem.
        SV is obviously wrong about the law – there are not 4.8M asylum requests. It is that simple.
        If illegal aliens could just request asylum – they would.
        I have argued that they can’t by law.

        Given that with left wing nuts who desparately want to grant all of them asylum are running the show – why a factor of 10 increase in illegal aliens and a 10% increase in asylum requests ?
        Could it be the law is in the way ?

        1. John B. Say,

          “ Given that with left wing nuts who desparately want to grant all of them asylum are running the show – why a factor of 10 increase in illegal aliens and a 10% increase in asylum requests ?”

          Making false claims without evidence.

          I never made any claim that everyone crossing the border illegally is applying for asylum or can. There are simple factors that can determine whether an asylum claim can be valid. Most illegals crossing are from Mexico and it is very clear there is no political turmoil or persecution there. Those from countries where there IS clear evidence of political persecution or threats of violence and abuses of human rights are given more serious consideration and granted temporary stays pending a hearing on their individual cases. That’s the law. Those sent to Martha’s Vineyard ARE legal asylees awaiting their hearings it’s not a “maybe” or “might be”. Their status is confirmed as legal migrants.

          Those who are in the system of pending asylum hearings are granted temporary legal stays in the country. All of it legal. Sending them off to other states and jeopardizing their cases under false pretenses and using funds not authorized for the stunts is pure stupidity.

          The folks at Martha’s Vineyard are not sending them off to a military base because they don’t want them there. That’s a false claim. They are being sent there because they provide long term shelter that MV residents cannot provide. Remember these are asylum applicants who may have family members somewhere else or were supposed to travel somewhere else before being deceived into a flight to MV.

          An interesting debate has popped up regarding a simple solution to fix inflation. Allow more immigrants into the country. It’s an effective way to put pressure on increasing wages which are a big part of inflationary increases.

          1. What is actually happening is documented – by CBP – not me.
            It is also being confirmed by what news is actually covering the story.

            Currently 8,000 people are being observed crossing per day.
            That is almost 3M a year

          2. MV claimed to be a sanctuary.

            Red southern border states can not provide for 3M illegal immigrants per year – 8,000 per day.

            MV can damn well figure out how to deal with 50.

            At the current rate, MV’s share is 200/year – that is based on the permanent residents. It would be 2000/year based on summer residents.

            I do not care whether they think they can handle it or not.

            Southern borders states would be happy to use unused military bases.
            Trump tried to use them, and was not allowed to.

          3. “Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output.”

            Milton Friedman.

            The same people pushing your nonsense are the ones who told us all that we could spend as much as we wanted.

            I would be happy to discuss the positive and negative imparts of illegal immigration.
            But you are just making things up.

      2. On 10/26/06, “W”, with the votes of signed “Secure Fence Act” [1] into law to “help protect the American people”, would “make our borders more secure”, and was “an important step toward immigration reform”.

        14 years later: On 7/8/20, Presidential Candidate Joe Biden presented his 110 pages plan named “Biden-Sanders unity task force recommendations” [2-3], which was widely referenced. No presidential campaign has ever suggested this kind of sweeping reforms since 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. Just as a reminder (pages 38-39): “We will

        * start by righting the wrongs of the Trump Administration.Democrats will rescind President Trump’s fabricated “National Emergency,” which siphons funding away from our men and women in uniform to construct an unnecessary, wasteful, and ineffective wall on the southern border.
        * mmediately terminate the Trump Administration’s discriminatory travel and immigration bans that disproportionately impact Muslim and African people, and invite those
        whose visas have been denied under these xenophobic and un-American policies to re-apply to come to the United States.
        * reinstate, expand, and streamline protections for Dreamers and the parents of American citizen children to keep families together in the communities they have long called home.
        * end the Trump Administration’s shameful efforts to close the door to the world’s most vulnerable refugees.[…]. Admitting refugees helps preserve the stability of America’s partners abroad, strengthens our hand in getting other countries to uphold their obligations, grows our economy, and enriches our society.
        * protect and expand the existing asylum system and other humanitarian protections.
        * reverse Trump Administration policies that prevent victims of gang and domestic violence, as well as LGBTQ+ people who are unsafe in their home countries, from being eligible to apply for asylum. Democrats will end Trump Administration policies that deny protected entry to asylum seekers, put them at great risk, and destabilize our
        neighbors and the broader region.
        * end prosecution of asylum seekers at the border and policies that force them to apply from “safe third countries,” which are far from safe.”

        Nobody should be surprised that President Biden rolled back most of his predicessors action, like constructing the Wall, Migrant Protection Protocolls (aka “Remain in Mexico”) Titel 42, among many others. Consequences were intended.

        Again, if President Biden comply to § 4 Sec 4 of Constitution lies in the eye of the beholder.

        [1] House: 283-138; Senate 80-19 [among 26 DEM “Yea” votes were Barbara Boxer (CA), Joe Biden (DE), Hillary Clinton (NY), Diane Feinstein (DA) Barack Obama (IL), and Chuck Schumer (NY)]
        [3] Immigration United Task Force Recommendations (pages 102-110): Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA # 40 Co-chair), Lawyer Marielena Hincapié (Co-chair), Senior Advisor and a member of the Presidential transition Cristóbal Alex, Veronica Escobar (D-TX #16), Latino rights advocate Marisa Franco, Juan Gonzalez, Lt. Gov. Kate Marshall (D-NV), and Javier Valdés (Ford Foundation)

    2. Thank you.
      First and foremost as you point out Svelaz and others are off in lala land on Asylum.
      There appears to be a possibility those sent to Martha’s vineyard MIGHT have been asylees.

      But the debate is not over asylum. Almost no one gives a rats ass over the inconsequential changes Biden has made to asylum.

      Asylum has absolutely nothing to do with the almost 5M illegal aliens that have crossed the border in 22 months.

      Even if you support “open borders” this is lawless chaos and will end badly. It is already going badly.

      I do not recall citing A4S4 nor am I interested in a debate over its applicability.

      I support far more LEGAL immigration.
      I support far broader Asylum.

      But more importantly still
      Without he rule of law we are F’d.

      The way to what I want is by changing the law,
      Not taking the presidency and ignoring the law.

      1. John, you are spot on that 2.4 Mill/year encounters have to be sperated from asylum seeker. However, it’s well documented that those 48 Venezuelans who were flown to Martha’s Vineyard ARE asylum seekers.

        Keep up your good work!

        1. The left has jumped the shark.

          Martha’s vineyard exposed the left as hypocritical virtue signalers.

          MV could have deflated this by taking these people in and then figuring out how to avoid being Flooded by DeSantis deportees in the future.

          No matter what had MV taken the first 50 immigrants they would have had a much stronger position, and held the moral high ground.

          Instead they made is clear to the world – and they were not speaking for Martha’s Vineyard but for the whole of white left elites that they were not even close to believing what they say, and what they expect others to live up to.

          This is an own goal for the left – a very predictable one, which is why it worked.

          The arguments and defenses being raised do not matter.

          We can debate whether DeSantis dotted his i’s and crossed his t’s. None of that alters the FACT that giving 50 venezeulan’s starbucks and shipping them to a military base exposes deep hypocracy.

          There is no defense for hypocracy.

          1. John, most of the time it’s enlgihting to follow the path where the money flow:

            * Depend the rich and famous on protection funded by the government or do they pay for private security?
            * How many shelters other than for animals do you spot at Martha’s Vineyard (maybe they don’t need one because only the rich and famos are there)? Is the Joint Base Cape Cod and 125 National Guard members to help respond to the needs of the 48 asylum seekers.public or private owned/funded?
            * Do the big “open society” donors fund charities to enhance public safety or does the money go to advocates that provide “help” to cirumvent immigration law?

          2. There was big hypocrisy from the left on MV. They did everything right. The false claims regarding they didn’t want them there are just that false. The right is just making stuff up to “stick it to the left” because they thought they were making a point. All they did was prove the right is all a about making false claims over an issue to score political points and breaking laws in the process.

            1. Do you think we are all blind ?

              Not just at MV, but all over the country – when border governors bus illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities – those mayors tell us they can not handle very small increases Yet red border states have no choice but to deal with Millions.

        2. I have consumed a great deal of space addressing point by point Svelaz’s arguments regarding immigration.

          Fundimentally this is not about details.

          The first huge problem is that those on the left will not be honest about what they want.
          Biden once during the campaign mentioned that he had no problem with doubling, even trippling the number of immigrants accepted to the US each year.

          Fine, lets have that discussion.
          Lets not merely consider doing that, but if we decide to do so, how to do so consistant with the rule of law.

          But we are not having that discussion.

          We once again have those on the left seeking to accomplish their goals – often without even admitting what they are,
          through lawlessness. Through the very opposite of what our founders intended, and is morally acceptable.

          The left uses whatever power it acquires to accomplish whatever it wants.

          They control the executive – so the law be damned, they will do whatever we let them get away with to accomplish their goals without even admitting what they are seeking, and without any effort to do so effective.

          almost 5M people. Does it matter if they can get work ? Does it matter that most of them will live in fear of deportation much of the time they are here ? and that it is likely that 50% of them will ultimately be deported ?
          Does it matter that even if we benefit from an additional 2M immigrants per year, we are harmed by the chaotic and lawless means to accomplish that ?

          The left is not even admitting that the mess we have is intentional.

          Somehow illegal immigration has increased 5 fold – by magic, or because republicans in congress will not cooperate.
          But no one beleives that the left wants to decrease illegal immigration.
          So long as it is NIMBY

          1. John, the left know exactly what they want but hide that in between a headline you expect a different content (as they do with legislation too).

            Just look at “Combating the Climate Crises and persuing environmental justice” [1], the 110 pages Biden-Sanders Task Force recommentations (without offering a table of content), going public three months prior 2020 Presidential election.

            Within this composition, you find a manifesto headlined “Creating a 21st Immigration system” (pages 38 – 41 and 102-107). Some commentators compare it with Stalin’s 1936 USSR Constitution [2] others with “Gleichschaltung”, the german term described a system of totalitarian control and coordination over all aspects of the society by Adolf Hitler’s NSDAP.

            How did major media outlets news desk edit the manifesto for their readers/viewer? You don’t find much coverage other than that Obama’s “DACA” should reestablished.

            Bottom line: Voter’s didn’t know what the bought, which is always questionable if the decider is BECAUSE the opponent is. as Ann Coulter would say, a “douchebag”.


          2. “ Fundimentally this is not about details.”

            It is about the details. The right doesn’t want to focus on the details because it undermines the simplistic arguments they make on a very complex subject.

            We are not having that discussion BECAUSE the right doesn’t want to have it. The argument is “secure the border first. Then MAYBE we can talk about legal immigration”. Congress has spent billions on securing the border but even republicans have balked at the cost. $25 billion is required at present given inflation. Republicans will NOT support the costs.

            Republicans don’t WANT legal immigration. Especially Trump supporters who harbor replacement theory fears.

            You say the left is ignoring the law but the law is useless unless congress (republicans) have back up their claims by supporting increasing funds, fixing the mess in immigration Courts. and streamlining the process so it doesn’t take years for those seeking legal residence and narrow it down to months.

            Republicans love to talk. But when it comes to funding and taking real action they balk.

            The 5 million immigrants claim is suspect. If that were true. Why do we still have a labor shortage? There are still more jobs than workers. If there were indeed 5 million illegals crossing there would be a significant change in the job market. I suspect the claim is an exaggeration for political purposes.

            1. “It is about the details.”
              Nope, but we have debated the details and you have lost.

              “The right doesn’t want to focus on the details because it undermines the simplistic arguments they make on a very complex subject.”
              I am not on the right. I have shredded your claims. This is not all that complex.

              “We are not having that discussion BECAUSE the right doesn’t want to have it.”
              We can have a discussion anytime – but those of you on the left do not discuss, you just shout and silence.

              ” The argument is “secure the border first. Then MAYBE we can talk about legal immigration”.”
              No the REQUIREMENT is follow the LAW.
              That is always the requirement.

              If you do not like the law – Change it.
              But the burdern of changing it is on you. Those who disagree are not obligated to assist you/

              “Congress has spent billions on securing the border but even republicans have balked at the cost.”
              We are spending more per year for the 5M illegal aliens that are now in the US that the Border wall would have cost in its entirety.
              Your the ones wasting money.

              “$25 billion is required at present given inflation.”
              We do not have hyper inflation (yet) – Biden has only been president 22 months. Maybe later.
              Regardless, The american people are well aware of how well the Border can be secured on the current budget.
              We saw what happened from 2017-2020.

              “Republicans will NOT support the costs.”
              Republicans should not authorize an additional dime until Biden does what Trump was able to with the current funds.

              “Republicans don’t WANT legal immigration.”
              Maybe they do maybe they don’t.
              If you want more legal immigration – CHANGE THE LAW!
              Each and every year Trump was president 1M legal immigrants entered the US.
              Under Biden that is about the same – it is set in the law.
              If you want more – change the law.

              “Especially Trump supporters who harbor replacement theory fears.”
              Lots of people believe that democrats are lawless – because they are.

              “You say the left is ignoring the law but the law is useless unless congress (republicans) have back up their claims by supporting increasing funds,”
              Nope. There is no need for more funds to follow the law as it currently is.
              Again Trump managed to do far better than Biden on current funds and build hundreds of miles of wall.

              “fixing the mess in immigration Courts.”
              Democrats will not let republicans appoint immigration judges, Republicans will not let democrats do so – probably because democrat judges do not follow the law.
              There is a problem with the immigration courts – because the backlog of cases slows deportations.

              “and streamlining the process so it doesn’t take years for those seeking legal residence and narrow it down to months.”
              This is off in never never land.
              If you cross the border illegally – you are not getting legal residence.

              “Republicans love to talk.”
              Trump talked alot.
              He did less than he promised.
              But the problems at the border were about half that of Obama and 1/5th those Biden has created.

              No one beleives democrats WANT to secure the border.

              “But when it comes to funding and taking real action they balk.”
              Trump took real action.
              Why is it that democrats responses to everything are spend more money ?
              How well did that work for education ?

              “The 5 million immigrants claim is suspect.”
              Yes, the number could be much higher.
              4.8M is the number that CBP has observed.

              “If that were true. Why do we still have a labor shortage?”
              Because they can not work legally,.
              Because they are unskilled labor that does not speak the language.
              “There are still more jobs than workers.”
              BZZT Wrong, the unemployment rate rose in August – we are in a recession.
              The first 2 qtrs have been mild, but it appears to be getting work.
              I laid of half a dozen people in september and do not expect to be able to bring them back this year.

              “If there were indeed 5 million illegals crossing there would be a significant change in the job market.”
              Not in the legal job market.
              All the data you are referencing is entirely about legal employment.
              These 4.8M people can not get jobs legally.
              “I suspect the claim is an exaggeration for political purposes.”
              Take that up with CBP -= that is where the numbers come from.

              Regardless, the number is 5 times higher than when Trump was president.
              It is more than twice as high as when Obama was president.

              We also know that drugs accross the border have increased dramatically – and we have more than twice as many drug overdoses.
              These things are tied together.

  5. Breaking: Migrants flown by DeSantis to Massachusetts have filed a class action lawsuit in federal court against DeSantis and other Florida officials.

    1. I hope this comes not as an surprise: On the day they arrived, Ivan Espinoza, of the nonprofit Lawyers for Civil Rights, said attorneys on Martha’s Vineyard are providing legal help to the immigrants, including assessments of what kind of relief each of them might qualify for.

      Meanwhile, Florida House Democrats say the governor wasn’t playing by rules set forth in Florida’s budget when $12 million was allocated for migrant transports.The funds were allocated to “facilitate the transport of unauthorized aliens from this state consistent with federal law, where ‘unauthorized alien’ means a person who is unlawfully present in the United States.” Democratic lawmakers argue that the migrants were actually refugees and asylum seekers, who, according to federal law, may stay in the United States while the asylum process plays out.

      1. Charlotte:

        Are all 5 million of the illegal immigrants anticipated to arrive this year supposed to stay in TX? They are free to move about the country. There are orders of magnitude too many for TX to handle. The ones sent to Martha’s Vineyard were sleeping in a parking lot because shelters were overcrowded. Yet, instead of making good on their public promises, sanctuary cities are outraged at illegals arriving.

        Fairweather Liberals. If all they have to do is write a check or disown a conservative family member, then it’s cool. If an elite Liberal has to actually open up their neighborhood and schools to illegals, then they promptly deport them to a military base like riffraff.

        It’s time for those who’ve complained about the downsides to illegal immigration to show instead of tell.

        It’s time for Democrats to admit that there are legitimate negative consequences to illegal immigration, and to stop labeling critics as racist xenophobes.

        1. We have 120K Assylum applications, 40K granted. Budget for 2022/23 is 1,399/2,337 Mill.

          According to CBP: 2.35 Mil encounters at SW border/per year. Deducte 500K removal and returns; There are 1.86 Mill people nobody likes to talk about.

    2. ATS, you are now supporting people entering our country illegally and then suing. You are something else.

    3. Breaking news! People who paid violent drug cartels thousands of dollars to break our immigration laws, were sleeping on the street because our shelters were overcrowded with all the other law breakers. They were given food, shelter, clothes, water, signed their consent, and received a ride to a very wealthy part of America. In response to this outrage, they have sued. Although they, obviously, cannot be expected to follow the law, by golly, they will comb through every statute on the books to find a way to profit off punishing anyone else. Now, they’ve got the Democrats who invited them to pay those violent drug cartels to come here, telling them they’ve been victimized, and will help get them reelected. Cough. I mean they will strike it rich!!!

      Come one, come all! Sneak into America, breaking numerous laws, and sue!!

Comments are closed.