Third Country Asylum Decision, How Big a Deal?

[Care4all]

then of course, there will be lawsuits by private parties, proclaiming the agreement is suppose to be a third country agreement with a country that can safely harbor the refugees and that Mexico does not offer that safety and refuge... and this is why the USA was never able to get this Third Country agreement with Mexico all of these past decades....

 

[Care4all]

...The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum...

How ya gonna apply if ya can't get IN ?

fences/walls do not stop anyone from getting in, they simply slow the crossers down, giving border patrol enough time to capture them... is what border patrol claims.

one big toe on our soil, they get to apply for asylum if they are seeking such...

It's a hell of a lot easier now because the US can call Mexico to see if such asylum seeker was offered asylum or applied for asylum in their country. If not, they turn them around to go home.

Fences and walls do work in every place they are tried, including places here in the US. Yes, they slow down some, but stop most of them.

I truly do not understand how the whole program works....???

If Mexico turns them down, can the refugee then come to the USA and ask for refuge?

 

[mudwhistle]

Something you can't seem to admit to yourself about is the fact that what the Democrats are doing is wrong.
Not only is it morally wrong, it is illegal, but it is also a massive expense to the taxpayer.
But I don't think you give a flying-fuck about the expense, or right and wrong as long as you can get Democrats into power.

actually, it's the administration that is breaking the law, according to the suit.... because there is no agreement signed with Mexico for third country seekers, as there is with Canada and the USA...

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

So you think that you're winning this?
From what I'm seeing is your Democrat Party is going to have to figure out some other way to traffic millions of illegals into the US so they can steal elections.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

...The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum...

How ya gonna apply if ya can't get IN ?

fences/walls do not stop anyone from getting in, they simply slow the crossers down, giving border patrol enough time to capture them... is what border patrol claims.

one big toe on our soil, they get to apply for asylum if they are seeking such...

It's a hell of a lot easier now because the US can call Mexico to see if such asylum seeker was offered asylum or applied for asylum in their country. If not, they turn them around to go home.

Fences and walls do work in every place they are tried, including places here in the US. Yes, they slow down some, but stop most of them.

I truly do not understand how the whole program works....???

If Mexico turns them down, can the refugee then come to the USA and ask for refuge?

Refugees are entirely different than asylum seekers. Two different sets of criteria as well. I forget what they are now, but I do recall that refugee status is much more difficult to establish than asylum status.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Something you can't seem to admit to yourself about is the fact that what the Democrats are doing is wrong.
Not only is it morally wrong, it is illegal, but it is also a massive expense to the taxpayer.
But I don't think you give a flying-fuck about the expense, or right and wrong as long as you can get Democrats into power.

actually, it's the administration that is breaking the law, according to the suit.... because there is no agreement signed with Mexico for third country seekers, as there is with Canada and the USA...

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

Mexico has offered asylum status in the past to those in caravans. Many refused that offer, but we still had to let them in to apply for asylum in the US.

Then it was up to the courts. From what I've read, if you applied or were offered asylum in a crossing country, you did not qualify for asylum status here, but that was not law or order, that was a judges deterimination. Now it's on order that the Supreme Court upheld.

So now, you can be denied asylum upon entry without any court hearing. It's simply our law now.

Trump is trying to take away the incentives from people who are manipulating our laws to deceive us, and it's working I'm happy to say.

 

[Obiwan]

Something you can't seem to admit to yourself about is the fact that what the Democrats are doing is wrong.
Not only is it morally wrong, it is illegal, but it is also a massive expense to the taxpayer.
But I don't think you give a flying-fuck about the expense, or right and wrong as long as you can get Democrats into power.

actually, it's the administration that is breaking the law, according to the suit.... because there is no agreement signed with Mexico for third country seekers, as there is with Canada and the USA...

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

Acutally, Mexico HAS been offering them asylum, and they have been turning it down, so they don't need it...

And one group offered to go home for $50K each, so their lives obviously weren't in jeopardy in their home country...

How about if you quit trying to give away MY money (which I work hard for), and ask the Clinton Foundation to step in and help those poor wretches get a windfall???

Oh, wait...

The Clinton Foundation has overhead (e,penses) of 15%, Hillary and the Democrats keep 80% of the remainder in "administrative fees", and their home countries will take them back, but don't accept food stamps (which is all the the Democrats have left to offer)!!!

Can we just appeal to your humanity, and have you meet them at the border, and give them YOUR money???

 

[Care4all]

How about if you quit trying to give away MY money (which I work hard for), and ask the Clinton Foundation to step in and help those poor wretches get a windfall???

I'm not trying to give away your money.... Trump's been doing that in the way he has handled this crisis and exasperated the process.... paying private companies of his friends $700 a day per child to retain these children he separated from their parents or family members... closing down the legal entry points to the refugees, forcing them to cross the border illegally and forcing border patrols in to overtime pay on steroids.... constantly breaking the law with his solutions and then having to pay justice department lawyers for one law suit after another that they end up losing, threatening to shut down the border, causing thousands of refugees to hurry up and make the trip here before it is shut down, not staffing the immigration courts with judges to hear the refugee's cases in a timely manner, causing year long waits to get a hearing, making us pay for these refugee and their children's room and board the next year while the administration keeps them in captivity....

He has F-d up every which way but loose on this issue and cost us Americans a fortune and a half.... so kiss my grits on that one obiwan!

 

[Obiwan]

How about if you quit trying to give away MY money (which I work hard for), and ask the Clinton Foundation to step in and help those poor wretches get a windfall???

I'm not trying to give away your money.... Trump's been doing that in the way he has handled this crisis and exasperated the process.... paying private companies of his friends $700 a day per child to retain these children he separated from their parents or family members... closing down the legal entry points to the refugees, forcing them to cross the border illegally and forcing border patrols in to overtime pay on steroids.... constantly breaking the law with his solutions and then having to pay justice department lawyers for one law suit after another that they end up losing, threatening to shut down the border, causing thousands of refugees to hurry up and make the trip here before it is shut down, not staffing the immigration courts with judges to hear the refugee's cases in a timely manner, causing year long waits to get a hearing, making us pay for these refugee and their children's room and board the next year while the administration keeps them in captivity....

He has F-d up every which way but loose on this issue and cost us Americans a fortune and a half.... so kiss my grits on that one obiwan!

Then seal the border, and deal with LEGAL entries ONLY...

DEPORT the rest...

As a matter of fact, we can follow Mexico's example, and imprison every one that enters illegally for 5 years, THEN DEPORT them (with a 10 year prison sentence if they enter illegally again)...

(That way, we can put them on a chain gang, and the Democrats will have someone to pick their crops!!!)

Problem solved!!!

 

[Care4all]

actually, it's the administration that is breaking the law, according to the suit.... because there is no agreement signed with Mexico for third country seekers, as there is with Canada and the USA...

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

So you think that you're winning this?
From what I'm seeing is your Democrat Party is going to have to figure out some other way to traffic millions of illegals into the US so they can steal elections.

We don't want any illegals here or tons and tons of refugees, we just want them to be treated as human beings during the asylum process and we don't want you to keep killing their children by not giving them the proper and humane care that they need, or mentally scarring their children for life, or stealing their children with no process in place to return them to their parents.... it's really not that hard to understand....is it? Oh and a toothbrush and soap and access to a toilet in a room with a door, and a shower at least once a week with at least a mat and a blanket to sleep on the floor.

We want the State department to do their jobs and help get to the root of this problem of mass exodus to America, down in the countries that the refugees are coming from...

 

[mudwhistle]

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

So you think that you're winning this?
From what I'm seeing is your Democrat Party is going to have to figure out some other way to traffic millions of illegals into the US so they can steal elections.

We don't want any illegals here or tons and tons of refugees, we just want them to be treated as human beings during the asylum process and we don't want you to keep killing their children by not giving them the proper and humane care that they need, or mentally scarring their children for life, or stealing their children with no process in place to return them to their parents.... it's really not that hard to understand....is it? Oh and a toothbrush and soap and access to a toilet in a room with a door, and a shower at least once a week with at least a mat and a blanket to sleep on the floor.

We want the State department to do their jobs and help get to the root of this problem of mass exodus to America, down in the countries that the refugees are coming from...

Yet you still don't understand why they keep coming here.....not because life for them is so terrible.....it's because our Democrats are offering them $3600/mo to come here. That's a half a year's pay in some countries.

 

[Obiwan]

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

So you think that you're winning this?
From what I'm seeing is your Democrat Party is going to have to figure out some other way to traffic millions of illegals into the US so they can steal elections.

We don't want any illegals here or tons and tons of refugees, we just want them to be treated as human beings during the asylum process and we don't want you to keep killing their children by not giving them the proper and humane care that they need, or mentally scarring their children for life, or stealing their children with no process in place to return them to their parents.... it's really not that hard to understand....is it? Oh and a toothbrush and soap and access to a toilet in a room with a door, and a shower at least once a week with at least a mat and a blanket to sleep on the floor.

We want the State department to do their jobs and help get to the root of this problem of mass exodus to America, down in the countries that the refugees are coming from...

I actually work in a field that uses a lot of "green card" workers...

I'm not really opposed to letting people work here if we need them (or letting them settle here if they are vetted and can contribute)...

What I am against is the Democrats' position of PAYING ANYBODY TO COME IN ILLEGALLY AND UNVETTED (INCLUDING POSSIBLE CRIMINALS AND TERRORISTS), and then having to SUPPORT THEM WITH MY PAYCHECK!!!

If you think that I'm being unrealistic, then you should see how Obutthole's buddies in Iran deal with that situation...

They just shoot them and be done with it!!!

 

[william the wie]

Mexico has agreed to act as asylum. So, yeah, the Ds are just getting the Jones over their lost opportunities to buy slaves

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What law is the administration breaking?

in my post above...

The Refugee Act says that any noncitizen in the US can apply for asylum “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and “irrespective of [their immigration] status.” The only exceptions are for those who were “firmly resettled” in another country before they arrived in the US or if they passed through another country with which the US had a “Safe Third Country” agreement. A Safe Third Country agreement is a bilateral treaty under which one country can reject and return an asylum seeker to another safe country.

The US currently only has a Safe Third Country Agreement with Canada. The Trump administration is working on negotiating such agreements with the Northern Triangle countries, as well as Mexico and Panama, but immigrant advocates say that those countries are far from safe for asylum seekers.

Opponents also argue that the Trump administration also skirted rule making requirements by issuing the rule without giving the public notice and the opportunity to submit comments on it.

He made the order, and the court ruled that it sticks. You will not be eligible for asylum if you crossed into the US via another country that offered you asylum. Given the fact that the problem is on our southern border with Mexico, that means nobody is allowed in that crossed Mexico, offered asylum, and declined the offer.

Mexico has to sign an agreement with the USA to offer all of them asylum, then we are all set.... the admin is working on that, but the fat lady ain't sung yet.... there has been no signed agreement yet.... from what I hear, they are getting close to it.

So you think that you're winning this?
From what I'm seeing is your Democrat Party is going to have to figure out some other way to traffic millions of illegals into the US so they can steal elections.

We don't want any illegals here or tons and tons of refugees, we just want them to be treated as human beings during the asylum process and we don't want you to keep killing their children by not giving them the proper and humane care that they need, or mentally scarring their children for life, or stealing their children with no process in place to return them to their parents.... it's really not that hard to understand....is it? Oh and a toothbrush and soap and access to a toilet in a room with a door, and a shower at least once a week with at least a mat and a blanket to sleep on the floor.

We want the State department to do their jobs and help get to the root of this problem of mass exodus to America, down in the countries that the refugees are coming from...

Well for your information, these kids that come in get the best care most of them ever had in their lives. They are treated in detention centers for illnesses, sent to the hospital for more serious ones, provided new clothing, well fed, and clean environment.

And yes, kids died under DumBama just like under Trump. The difference is thanks to Democrats putting that huge WELCOME MAT on our southern border, our agencies became overwhelmed with intruders.

When parents send their daughters here, they do so with a bottle of birth control pills because it's likely these girls will be repeatedly raped along the way. In half the cases they send their kid with strangers posing to be the actual parents. They come here uncertain if they'll survive the trip, and many of them die. And you're worried that not having a toothbrush might traumatize them?

Trump understands that we don't have the resources for these people, and also understands the best thing he can do for these children is create a solid enough deterrent for them not to make that trip in the first place. As far as the children go, that's a hell of a lot more than Democrats have ever done for them.

 

[Care4all]

It's the Republicans in congress who want the slave labor of these illegal immigrants.... why do you think for the first 2 years of Trump's presidency when the Republicans were in charge of both houses of Congress, DID NOTHING on immigration reform? for 2 years nothing, Dems have had the HOuse for only 7 months.

Why do you think Reagan's proposal on amnesty requirements and new laws were watered down to mean nothing, when amnesty was passed under Reagan? It was the Republicans who KILLED Reagan's proposal for jail-time and strict punishments for employers that hired illegals? The Republicans in congress were lobbied by the small business association to kill the penalties on employers.

Republicans want all of these Mexicans to be illegal and stay illegal, so the businesses can pay them sh*t.... they want the employer to be able to hire them, with very little consequences....

----------------------
Refugees is a different topic... there are major problems south of the border, causing them to flee and overwhelming us with their flow up here. We need to figure out how to keep them from believing the escape from their country and making it to America, is their only hope in life... I don't know if that can be done by our Church/religious ministries, or the State department or other non-profit organizations or what? but if we do not get to the root of the problem, they will likely keep trying to get here, come hell or high water.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's the Republicans in congress who want the slave labor of these illegal immigrants.... why do you think for the first 2 years of Trump's presidency when the Republicans were in charge of both houses of Congress, DID NOTHING on immigration reform? for 2 years nothing, Dems have had the HOuse for only 7 months.

Why do you think Reagan's proposal on amnesty requirements and new laws were watered down to mean nothing, when amnesty was passed under Reagan? It was the Republicans who KILLED Reagan's proposal for jail-time and strict punishments for employers that hired illegals? The Republicans in congress were lobbied by the small business association to kill the penalties on employers.

Republicans want all of these Mexicans to be illegal and stay illegal, so the businesses can pay them sh*t.... they want the employer to be able to hire them, with very little consequences....

----------------------
Refugees is a different topic... there are major problems south of the border, causing them to flee and overwhelming us with their flow up here. We need to figure out how to keep them from believing the escape from their country and making it to America, is their only hope in life... I don't know if that can be done by our Church/religious ministries, or the State department or other non-profit organizations or what? but if we do not get to the root of the problem, they will likely keep trying to get here, come hell or high water.

Which is why we need to fight even harder, and Trump is doing just that.

A 60% decrease of border crossings from May to August thanks to Trump's efforts to stop these people coming here. Yes, we have some RINO Republicans who got in the way when Trump first came in, and Democrats did what they could to stop Trump. What they couldn't do, their commie activist judges did, or delayed his efforts.

Federal judge blocks Trump from deporting hundreds of thousands of immigrants under TPS

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...ylum-ban-migrants-who-enter-illegally-mexico/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...c83cfe-adba-11e9-8e77-03b30bc29f64_story.html

Federal Judge Temporarily Halts Trump Order on Immigration, Refugees