Reason Roundup

U.S. Government Says Migrant Children Deserve Dirty, Traumatizing Conditions

But isn't this really Obama's fault?


For years, U.S. propagandists have spread scare stories about trafficked children being housed in warehouses and forced to sleep on mats or rickety cots, with inadequate nutrition, zero privacy, and a lack of basic sanitation. Thankfully, there's been no evidence of renegade human traffickers actually holding kids in such conditions here.

It's the U.S. government that is doing that.

After snatching kids away from their parents, federal authorities are ferreting children off to secretive warehouse locations where neon lights shine 24 hours per day. Kids are crowded into large cages where they sleep on shared mats—or sometimes concrete floors. They can be denied soap, toothbrushes, and medicine, amid outbreaks of lice and flu.

The more information that comes out about the conditions our government is keeping migrant kids in, the more unbelievably horrifying it all becomes.

Some of the babies, children, and teenagers held in these facilities have been separated from relatives seeking legal asylum here—a.k.a. those who have done absolutely nothing wrong. Others were taken from parents caught trying to illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border. No matter what one thinks of the actions of these parents, surely their children don't deserve an assignation of culpability or the abusive treatment that it entails.

Some sociopaths argue that abusing children is necessary to send a message to their parents or future parents in similar situations. But we don't round up and jail the children of U.S. citizens who have broken the law. That innocent children should not suffer for the sins of their parents has long been a principle civil societies agree on. That adults should not abuse or neglect children—full stop—was once a moral principle shared by almost all.

It's bad enough that some people have let their hatred of immigrants extend to pro-child abuse arguments; worse still is that such abuse is sanctioned by U.S. authorities.

Arguing before a panel of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judges, attorneys with the Department of Justice (DOJ) argued that it's perfectly "safe and sanitary" to deny confined migrant children toothbrushes or anything to sleep on but concrete floors.

The particular case in question started under the Obama administration—a fact that some are using to try and cast these horrors as no big deal (business as usual!) or accuse critics of simply caring about abused kids to spite Donald Trump. In truth:

  • the case is rooted in a class action lawsuit brought by migrant children detained in the Ronald Reagan era, one which resulted in standards for care that many have since sued the government for failing to live up to
  • this particular case originated in 2016 and did challenge Obama-era treatment of minors
  • after a judge ruled against the government's actions, the Trump DOJ has continued to fight back against the judge's ruling

Sadly, many of these abuses simply weren't brought to light or weren't covered as prominently by media during past administrations. But people whose brains and morals haven't been totally warped by partisan politics don't write off contemporary horrors just because The Other Side started them.

As Ken White writes at The Atlantic, the truth may be "more complex" than Evil Trump Stooges Argue for Legal Child Abuse, but the truth is "still appalling. The sheer effrontery of the government's argument may be explained, but not excused, by its long backstory." (If you want more of that backstory, read White's whole piece here.)

President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence both blamed Democrats for the situation, saying it's their fault for failing to pass stricter immigration laws or approve more funding to build a big wall on the southern border. Like civilian criminal counterparts, they're essentially threatening to keep on kidnapping and traumatizing kids until Democrats meet their demands.


  • The first Democratic presidential debate is happening this Wednesday and Thursday.
  • Is Biden really as electable as people think?

NEXT: South Africa Goes Halfway on Pot

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The first Democratic presidential debate is happening this Wednesday and Thursday.

    And into Friday if necessary.

    1. The Democrats and their propagandists are going all out to make sure people pay attention to the Party of slavery when they discuss slavery.

    2. Democrats try to override the law with twisted emotional agendas. What has been encouraged is blatant lawlessness. Which will lead to the country's demise.
      As gleaned from Romans 13:4, Paul states under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, for it [government] does not bear the sword for nothing. Governments are to seek the welfare of their people by punishing evildoers (1 Peter 2:13- 14). People who are illegals are a threat to the welfare of those who are citizens. It is out of an inherent desire imbued by their Designer, that governments want to protect their citizens as a mother does her child — and if they don’t, they should. In terms of immigration, for a government to be pleasing to God and receive His blessing, it has no option but to protect its citizenry from illegal immigration per Romans 13:4 and 1 Peter 2:13-14. It must always protect its borders and punish those who enter illegally. Any governmental response that is less than this violates God’s clearly revealed intention for government and invites chaos (as we now are seeing on our southern borders).

  2. Is Biden really as electable as people think?

    All you need is superdelegates to be electable. Right?

    1. I'll take the soup.

  3. Sen. Kamala Harris wants you to pay no attention to the prosecutor behind the curtain.

    I don't want to live in a country where a prosecutor can't work her way up the political chain on the backs of the over-incarcerated.

    1. And on her own back as well. We are all for legal sex work resulting in highly paid political positions.

      1. But was she trafficked?

      2. She gets Willie Brown's vote.

        1. And his brown willie!

  4. Detroit police arrested a graffiti artist who had been commissioned by the city to do the mural he got arrested for.

    The city was then charged with conspiracy.

    1. To commit mural?

  5. Reason must not shy away from using the term CONCENTRATION CAMPS. Because that's exactly what they are.

    Fortunately our Democratic allies like AOC are committed to fixing this appalling situation. I remain confident the party's 2020 Presidential nominee will explicitly call for open borders, which is the only humane option.


    1. Concentration camps are for innocent people these detention camps are for criminals.

      1. There's nothing criminal about applying for asylum you moron.

        1. There'd be nothing criminal about putting your empty head in a blender, either.

        2. If you apply at a port of entry. Illegally entering the country then applying is criminal.

    2. Technically she is correct. The holocaust museum got upset about it but they should know better.

      In the holocaust there were actually three kinds of camps.

      Concentration camps were places you were held in without trial. There was plenty of death from disease, starvation and murder but they were not operated specifically for mass extermination. Dachau is an example. It was not only Jews at Dachau.

      Extermination camps were specifically set up purely for extermination. Treblinka is an example.

      Forced labor camps were also operated. Again your chance of survival was very low but that was the purpose. My late father in law was in one of those. He lied and said he was an electrician after arrival at Auschwitz. He was put to work assembling bombs. The rest of his family were immediately killed.

      Auschwitz-Birkenau was a combination of those although about 80% of Jews were killed after arrival.

      Anyway there have been other concentration camps in history and it is not specific to the holocaust.

      1. She used the term Never Again on the same breath she spoke of concentration camps. Stop excusing her ignorance.

        1. I said technically, she does not actually understand the context.

          Never Again was a phrase made popular by the Jewish Defense League and it’s founder Meir Kahane. Heh if she knew what that was about she would never say it.

          I know, the JDL guys were kind of heroes then. When the gangs in Chicago were making attacks when I was in yeshiva in Chicago they came around and were there to defend.

          What happened with Kahane, well google and read about him if you want.

          The Hebrew phrases now used translate differently.

          “Le’olam al tishkach, Le’olam lo” which means forever do not forget. Forever no.

          In Jewish history all this means that it is permanent. Like Moses on Sinai it will never be erased from historical memory. Teach it to your children and your children’s children, all that.

          She has no idea about any of this. I know she is just spouting phrases for political attention.

      2. I've never understood the sympathy for those who worked for the Nazis even as slaves. They were literally helping the atrocities occur. Your father in law probably made bombs that killed the Americans trying to save him.

    3. People are lining up and endangering their lives, to get into our "concentration camps": an obvious fact Brown ignores in an otherwise good article. One other thing she misses, is that Democrats don't want to work with Trump regarding the immigration mess, as evidenced by their walking away. This can only be fixed via legislation, but the Democrats don't want any legislation on the issue.

      Open borders is inhumane, in that with current law, taxpayers are forced to support illegal immigrants against their will, and it allows criminals and those with communicable diseases to come in unhindered. And with the Democrats promising government health care for illegals, expect anyone with expensive medical conditions to come here for US taxpayers to pick up the bill, including the foreign rich. Until we eliminate federal government welfare/redistribution, I won't be for open borders, but after yes but only for non-criminals without communicable diseases.

  6. More bad economic news.

    German Business Confidence Dives Again as Economy Wobbles

    Remember what Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman said — Drumpf would cause a global recession with no end in sight. Clearly these problems in Germany are ultimately Orange Hitler's fault.


    1. Maybe they can increase their bond rates to negative 2%.

  7. For years, U.S. propagandists have spread scare stories about trafficked children being housed in warehouses and forced to sleep on mats or rickety cots, with inadequate nutrition, zero privacy, and a lack of basic sanitation. Thankfully, there's been no evidence of renegade human traffickers actually holding kids in such conditions here.
    After snatching kids away from their parents, [...] the state ferreting children off to secretive warehouse locations where neon lights shine 24 hours per day. Kids are crowded into large cages where they sleep on shared mats—or sometimes concrete floors. They can be denied soap, toothbrushes, and medicine, amid outbreaks of lice and flu.

    Just like US public schools.

    You propagandists at reason crack me up.

    1. Has Reason supported mandatory public schooling in the past? No, they have supported charter schools and home schooling.

      1. When reason posts multiple posts per day per week about public schools then I will lean toward what you are saying.

        reason staff lie about a lot of things.

        reason staff go on and on about half-ass drug legalization and never mention that every drug law in the USA is currently unconstitutional.

        Its easy to say you're for something in a half-ass kind of safe way to get click-bait.

        1. They definitely stick to marginal, contemporary issues rather than just hitting the war/fed/BoR drum all day. I think if you asked ENB and others they would probably be on bored with harder hitting issues even if they don't print them.

  8. Why don't migrants get free healthcare, food, water, shelter, and money for the rest of their lives? Anyone who denies these people anything short of a Hollywood mansion with butlers is a heartless bastard.

    1. Allowing a person basic human rights is different from giving them welfare.

      1. "basic human rights"

        No one owes anyone anything. These people can leave whenver they want. Grow the fuck up.

        1. But man it's a non violent crime with no victim. How can we detain them? At least we can send them back or something

          1. Once they have applied for asylum, they can't leave or be sent back until after their case has been adjudicated.

            1. Most of the asylum claims are superficially bullshit. Being poor is not a legal reason for asylum into the USA.

              1. That's why we can't count on them to show up for their hearings if they are not detained.

          2. They don't have to apply for asylum. That is voluntary. Trying to cross illegally is also voluntary.

            I would be fine with sending them back, especially if they wanted to be, but I'm not going to pretend people didn't make voluntary decisions that resulted in their temporary detainment

          3. Non violent except for the migrant attacks on BP, increased disease rates, crimes in high immigration neighborhoods, the 30% of federal incarcerations that are here illegally...

        2. Found the asshole- that didn't take long.

          I guess you're ok with being less than human and not feeling any shred of empathy. All the same, I wouldn't wish terrible conditions upon you like this because guess what, I am a better person than that.

          Maybe something you should aspire to.

          1. True, if anyone deserves to be put in concentration camps, it's white progressives.

          2. Empthy

            Your feelings are useless

          3. How much have you donated in time or money to migrant causes? My guess is zero. So stop talking about empathy you dishonest fuck.

  9. But we don't round up and jail the children of U.S. citizens who have broken the law.

    We also don't allow them to take their children into detention with them. American children of our incarcerated citizens often get smacked by the bureaucracy, too. That's a whole other issue.

    And we have a couple issues here. The immediate one should be the conditions of children under the care of the federal government, because regardless of immigration policy, there will always be migrant children under US detention.

    1. Funny how US minors can "confess" to crimes without parents or lawyers present and be convicted but minor alien nationals cannot self-deport back to whatever shithole they came from.

      its almost like we went from anchor babies to "anchor kids".

      1. "anchor kids": what Libertarians use to keep their yacht from drifting in the ocean.

        1. And they aren’t very effective, you need a lot of them in a bundle.

      2. "back to whatever shithole they came from"

        Alabama? West Virginia? Wyoming? Mississippi? South Carolina?

        Any town with more pickup trucks, guns, and Confederate flags than average?

        Any community with more backwater religious schools than first- or second-tier schools?

        Slack-jawed, bigoted clingers are among my favorite casualties of the culture war.

        1. You are tiresome, and an asshole.

          1. A tirehole.

            1. +1000

    2. "We also don’t allow them to take their children into detention with them."

      Indeed, if you or I took our minor children on a long walk through the desert without food or water, in an effort to illegally cross the border going South, rather than North, want to bet we'd keep custody of them? Their being separated from the adults they were with, (Who are NOT always their parents!) is not the problem here.

      Though I expect that, if that court order barring their being housed with their parents were lifted, there would be fewer separations.

      The conditions are a serious issue. But it's a serious issue that's being used to try to keep the parents from being held until their hearings, so that they can escape into the population and not be deported.

      1. One would think with all the concern, multiple go fund me's to create luxurious detention centers would have been completed by now. But it's easier to point fingers than to empty wallets.

        1. +100

      2. What if you or I took SOMEONE ELSE'S minor children on a hike thru the desert. While they were seriously ill. Would we be housed together in luxury?

      3. "Their being separated from the adults they were with, (Who are NOT always their parents!) is not the problem here."

        You are right, even aside from the conditions in which the kids are being kept, there's bigger problems here, than the separations themselves.

        1. The location of the kids is being kept secret from the parents.
        2. The parents are not allowed any communication with the kids.
        3. There are multiple cases where the parents were deported without the kids. What right do we have to keep the kids here in the US after deporting their parents?

        "Who are NOT always their parents!"

        Which is not the same thing as saying they are strangers rather than blood relatives. Paternity/Maternity tests would settle that issue relatively quickly and would also be able to identify siblings/uncles/aunts.

      4. The only reason they are heading into the desert for a long walk is because CBP is refusing to accept them just walking up to the border post and requesting asylum - so they have to head far into the desert to get around the wall in order to walk back to the CBP post and request asylum from the US side.

        It's long past time to actually deal with the issue:
        1. Focus on getting rid of the asylum backlog quickly
        2. Force those three sending countries into changing conditions in their own countries. Which means stop supporting the elites who are the ones responsible for the shit that is pushing their own people out of their country.

        1. Well that's a fucking lie. They can also apply for asylum at a consulate in their home countries, an obama program.

    3. We also don’t allow them to take their children into detention with them

      Yeah, they're usually rounded up by CPS and put in foster homes. No, it's not a government warehouse, but the idea that the children of citizens don't ever get fucked over when Mommy and Daddy break the law is an exceptional one.

      Hell, sometimes all it takes is an *accusation* that the law has been broken. Reason had an article on here just a couple months ago about a Air Force nuke employee who was falsely accused of child abuse and subsequently had his life destroyed by the Bernalillo County sheriff's department.

      1. We already went over the last streak of open border hysteria coming from reason staff.

        Americans who are arrested for crimes are not housed with their kids.

        Fun fact: quite a few 3rd World countries allow entire families to live with inmates in prison. Never these shitholes don't have rights to bail, speedy trials, or other defendant rights that Americans have.

        1. And there is a large population of "coyotes" who cross with children who are not their own, maybe be abusive, may be not. Hard not to separate when you can tell the difference.

  10. "Like civilian criminal counterparts, they're essentially threatening to keep on kidnapping and traumatizing kids until Democrats meet their demands."

    How'd the migrant children get here?

    1. How’d the migrant children get here?

      I'm curious to see the medium-term results of the Rapid DNA program, and how many of these kids are actually being brought up by relatives, as opposed to a bunch of orphans or street urchins that are dragged along by Pancho and Javier to use as entry leverage.

      1. Some 3,000 Migrant Kids Are Still Separated From Their Parents. The Trump Administration Is Using DNA Tests to Match Them. Jul 05, 2018

        They started testing these kids in 2018. The fact that the media barely covers the numbers of unaccompanied, accompanied with parents, and accompanied with non-blood relative is very telling about how these fucking Lefties are using these non-American kids as pawns.

        1. Migrants kidnap and traumatize children in order to cross the border, and Reason thinks those people should be free to roam about however they'd like

          1. I have always been amazed at how reason staff justify what a crime is and is not.

        2. Uh oh. Mama's gonna have some splaining to do.

  11. Have I mentioned how much I hate Glenn Greenwald? Here he is mocking the struggles of a prominent woman of color:

    I hope that at least some of these candidates are pledging to devote more law enforcement and FBI resources toward apprehending the hacker who wrote those horrific articles & retroactively inserted them into [Joy Reid's] blog. Let us not forget, please, that this hacker remains at-large

    A right-wing hacker planted offensive comments in an attempt to smear one of MSNBC's brightest stars. And Greenwald thinks it's funny. He's just despicable. I think he's jealous of anyone who works at MSNBC since that network got #TrumpRussia right and he got it wrong.


    1. When can I preorder your book?

  12. Artificial Intelligence may not take your job, but it could become your boss

    In reason's case, the bot trolls reason uses to get more web traffic deflect from shitty writing by staff writers.

    1. Hey, that was an interesting link; thanks!

  13. But people whose brains and morals haven't been totally warped by partisan politics don't write off contemporary horrors just because The Other Side started them.

    Nor should they be used solely to bash The Other Side, which is what this cynic sees as going on today. No one is actually interested in fixing the problem. Otherwise, we would spend a little less time making a show of animus from unearned moral high ground and a little more time trying to promote some kind of cooperation.

    1. Wouldn’t it be great if humans put as much energy into solving problems as they’re willing to put into assigning blame?

      1. Wouldn’t it be great if humans put as much energy into solving problems as they’re willing to put into assigning blame?

        No. It would be better if the solutions were as simple and easy as assigning blame.

        We don't need a bigger boat, we need a smaller shark.

        1. You're clearly not from Texas.

        2. Not sure if you coined that phrase yourself, but I very much like it. Very apt, and your point is well taken.

          1. Not sure if you coined that phrase yourself, but I very much like it. Very apt, and your point is well taken.

            I can't take credit (third illustration and alt-text).

            It's funny how often people wish for an imperfect solution to a symptom when they could just as easily and effectively wish for a cure to the underlying cause or problem.

      2. Many humans do, but they're not members of the press.

        1. Just the press gang 😉

      3. The solution doesn't even take much energy, enforce the NAP.

        1. enforce the NAP

          Preemptively and unilaterally across society in some sort of one-sided contract?

    2. We are getting better at bashing the other side, but getting worse at actually understanding them.

      But I guess this is cause and effect (in both directions).

      One fun tidbit from this poll: among self-declared Republicans, education has little effect on perception of Democrats. Among Democrats, education makes their perception more biased and wrong.

      Another fun tidbit: increasing media consumption makes people more biased (and wrong), and some specific sources are worse. The new NY Times readers are more wrong than Fox News fans.

    3. The Democrats won't spend any money to house illegals in detention, so they are to blame for the conditions

      1. +100

  14. Still think the patriarchy isn't real?

    Deodorants were created to solve a fake problem and thrived thanks to the patriarchy.

    Some people mocked Bernie Sanders' comments about excessive choices in deodorant. But maybe he was onto something.


    1. drawin' the line at smelly chicks, dude.

    2. I see the Slate writers are on the verge of learning how to code.

  15. Buttigieg town hall devolves into shouting amid anger over South Bend police shooting

    "We don't trust you!", said one resident.

    reason staff hardest hit?

    1. The DNC assured white males running as Democrat candidates that the Niggas would support them.

    1. Swalwell is consistently excellent on issues of racial justice.

      The original sin of this country was slavery. There is generational suffering. We need to explore reparations and address our wrongdoings, to make communities around this country whole.

      As depressing as the Drumpf Era has been, one of the few positive developments has been watching Democrats embrace not only open borders, but also reparations for slavery. I expect at least a few trillion dollars to be set aside for reparations in 2021 when a Democrat is back in the White House.


      1. Paid for with a "whiteness" tax?

      2. Didn’t Lincoln die for our sins?

    2. Get me from descendants of white as hell Europeans to brown.

  16. Supreme Court set to deliver ruling on census citizenship question

    Revised 2016 election votes has Trump with electoral college win (304 to 227) AND popular vote win by 5 million with illegals removed.

    1. In all seriousness how do they come up with that 5 million number?

      1. Nobody really knows and guessing is all you can do.

        A Census citizenship question would give more hard data on number of illegals inside the USA.

        Lefties and illegal immigration advocates know this, which is why they dont want it added to the 2020 Census. These people want the good points of immigration without the bad points of illegal immigration.

        1. Do you have a link for the revised 2016 election vote count? I've heard Trump make the claim that he won the popular vote, with illegal voting removed, but I'm curious if that's more of Trump spouting off or if there's a reputable source.

          I obviously can't fact-check it myself, but I'd like to see if I can at least understand the methodology.

          1. It's from a 2014 study on illegal voting estimates.


            Just apply the rate to 2016 numbers.

  17. "Arguing before a panel of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judges, attorneys with the Department of Justice (DOJ) argued that it's perfectly "safe and sanitary" to deny confined migrant children toothbrushes or anything to sleep on but concrete floors."

    I'm noticing a conspicuous lack of links to where they did that.

    1. The larger issue is what is the alternative to detention? There isn't one except letting everyone who wants in in the country no matter what. And that of course is what reason and many of its readers want but are too dishonest to admit.

      1. Huh? Of course that's what we Koch / Reason libertarians want. And we're not reluctant to say so.


      2. >>>too dishonest to admit

        i don't care one way or the other because none of this affects me daily. but i also don't think we're @overload-defcon4 on people here

        1. There is another alternative to detention, just immediately deport them back where they came from. If these detention centers are just "concentration camps" wouldn't sending them back home be a better option than what we have and in fact a moral imperitive? Funny how ENB and the rest of the open borders crowd never seem to consider that option. It is just unbelievable how dishonest the debate about immigration has become.

          1. >>>just immediately deport them back where they came from

            also a fine argument. i feel like there's a nicer solution but by leaving it in hands of people w/power and desire to use the masses we're going to get what *they* want

          2. Isn't that what Trump called for but a liberal Judge said you can't.

          3. An even better alternative is to change asylum law to make it just like how we deal with Mexican and Canadian asylum seekers. That would get to the root of the problem, but Democrats have no interest in alleviating the suffering of those children.

            1. Lefties never let a tragedy go to waste.

          4. "Roman Maroni deported to Sweden, protests he's not from there"

            1. +1 "ima gwyna kill ya ima gwyina putyer bells in a sling"

          5. Under current law, once they have applied for asylum, they cannot be sent back until after their hearing and a decision on their claim. Congress would have to change the law to allow that option.

      3. I also don't think that I have ever seen reason staff mention that anyone detained for being an illegal alien can self-deport and be on the next bus/plane leaving the USA.

        This fact puts a serious damper on their hyperbole comparisons to Hitler, prison, etc.

        1. You know who else didn't mention that people could leave voluntarily?

          1. Am I being detained?

          2. Volunteer-Man?

        2. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that someone who illegally enters the country is free to leave if they have not been charged, but not if they have been charged with illegal entry or other crimes, or if they have applied for asylum.

      4. The Democrats in Congress could help those kids by providing the resources to better house them, if they would do their fucking job instead of blathering on about an impeachment they're never going to do.

        1. the republicans did propose a bill that would have brought in a lot more judges and attournys to speed up the process but the democrats killed it, proving they don't care about the migrants other than as a political tool

          1. To be fair, Congress is full of political Tools.

    2. That is not the American way. The American way is letting them move into a 3 bedroom house with 25 people so mom and day can begin their 6 day a week roofing job for unscrupulous employers who care nothing of their safety and pay way below market rate undeterred.

      1. And beat them. Don’t forget the beatings.

      2. If I wanted to read the Marxist analysis, I'd log in to The Nation or The Daily Worker not Reason.

    3. I get the feeling that the Reason staff has given up on journalism and have just become full-blown activists at this point. Pathetic.

      1. Activists actually do stuff for whatever cause they are in to.

        Most reason staff are propagandists. They write lies.

        1. True that.

  18. a thousand easy jokes exist about just wanting to make them feel like they're @home.

    1. +1

  19. I agree - showing migrants that our government officials are at least as useless and incompetent as the government officials from where they came from is disheartening.

  20. Kids are crowded into large cages where they sleep on shared mats—or sometimes concrete floors. They can be denied soap, toothbrushes, and medicine, amid outbreaks of lice and flu.

    But enough about public kindergarten...

    1. yeah, kind of sounds like what universal preschool would be like

    2. thats so true they have naps on concrete floor and are denied all medicines other than abortions and the schools are all caged in by fencing

    3. Don't forget the neon lights! There are neon lights shining 24 hours a day, just like in our 50 largest Concentration camps, where 10s of millions of kids are detained, places called New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston....

      1. Is it possible having the area lit improves safety, for everyone? Or is "torture" the best explanation?

  21. U.S. Government Says Migrant Children Deserve Dirty, Traumatizing Conditions

    Did the government actually say this? Or has ENB gone over the edge?

    1. ENB and reason staff have been over the edge dangling by a finger for years.

      Trump's election got these Lemmings to step over the edge on their way to Canada and the fact that they walked over a cliff has yet to dawn on them.

      its fun to laugh at them though.

    2. Well the government didn't not say it, so...

  22. We have an intractable problem of an overwhelming number of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers straining the capacity of our facilities to process them. The last president got a pass for this and many other things because the press generally liked him and his policies and was loathe to criticize him. The current one is catching blame for the existing system because the pundit class tends not to like his preferred solution to the problem.or anything about him at all.

    Of course, none of that deals with the actual problem or what to do with these children and no solution is offered by ENB for what to do with them while the parents are being and. It will only exacerbate the problem if you give the children and their parents a free pass

    1. Somehow moral hazards do not exist when it comes to borders or something. If the US really did say "anyone who wants to come can", it would create an enormous humanitarian crisis at the border that would dwarf even what we have.

    2. The problem is that solutions are hard. Pretty much everyone believes that the way things are right now is the way things have to stay. Solutions like reining in government spending and cutting welfare programs or cutting California in half and giving the southern half back to Mexico won’t ever be considered as serious proposals.

    3. Does anyone else remember ENB referring to this as a "manufactured crisis" just a week ago?

      Reason has opposed or ignored every solution to this problem (except one).

      Reason opposed building a wall.
      Reason opposed Trump threatening tariffs against Mexico.
      Reason ignored Trump's attempt to get a "third safe country" agreement (Has anyone seen any Reason writer even mention the term "third safe country"?)

      I opposed two out of three of those solutions. I opposed building a wall because I think it's likely to be expensive and ineffective.

      I opposed using the threat of tariffs against Mexico because holding our own economy hostage is like threatening to hold our breath until we turn blue.

      I don't believe Reason opposed either of those solutions for my reasons, and I think the real reason they opposed them was for the same reason that they ignored Trump's attempt to get a "third safe country" agreement . . .

      I think they oppose these solutions because the only solution in their mind is to let all the asylum seekers in and give them citizenship regardless of whether doing so is against the will of the American people or can only be done over their objections.

      They can try to hide their elitism behind a diatribe about suffering children, but average libertarians should just call bullshit on tactics like that. The progressives are wrong when they drag out their victims of the week--and big, sad eyed bunnies aren't about to be any more convincing just because libertarians point at them either.

      1. Except... the threat of tariffs seems to actually be working.

        Right now, the "border crisis" mostly affects border states. By applying tariffs to Mexico, the impact of the crisis is spread across the entire US. Seems pretty democratic to me.

        1. As I've mentioned elsewhere, yes, the threat of tariffs appears to have lit the fire under Mexico's ass either to get the asylum seekers crossing their border with Guatemala under control or introduce legislation to become a "third party country".

          I still oppose Trump gambling with our trade agreements in a hand of blackjack that way--even if he drew an ace and a ten. In addition, I give Trump credit for that in this case. He was right and I was wrong, and I'm glad he was right and I was wrong--especially if it bring an end to the asylum crisis without any tariffs actually being imposed, without any wall needing to be built, without any executive orders needing to be signed, and within the context of an international agreement that is thoroughly constitutional.

          I don't see much for a libertarian not to like about that outcome, and I'm glad for it.

          I'm just being honest about why I opposed what Trump did.

          I don't think Reason is being honest at all. I think they oppose ending the asylum crisis through constitutional means without tariffs or walls--if Trump's solution means that asylum seekers won't be entering the U.S. by the millions.

          1. Ken,

            I usually just lurk and read. You must be, hands down, the fastest typist in the world, or at least the US, and your posts are well written and coherent. I have two sons. Thanks to the internet, both can type over 100 wpm.

            Change the asylum laws in the US to eliminate the get out of jail free card and a large part of the border crisis would be solved. We have an immigration crisis because that is what our politicians want.

      2. They are not for open borders Ken, they are just against everything that is not open borders.

        1. reason is also for making sure Democrats win elections and that will only happen if more immigrants are allowed into the USA have their votes bought with free shit.

        2. Its the chemjeff argument. "I'm not for open borders, I'm just not against open borders and I'm certainly not for not open borders, but don't say I'm for open borders, because I'm not!"

          1. Quicker jeff: I once read a headline that said open borders are good. Therefore without any further analysis, I'm an open border nut.

    4. "The last president got a pass for this and many other things because the press generally liked him "

      No shit. he set the record for deportations and i never heard a peep about how racist that made him.

      1. He is darker than most of those deported, therefore racism is impossible.

        1. +100

  23. Some of the babies, children, and teenagers held in these facilities have been separated from relatives seeking legal asylum here—a.k.a. those who have done absolutely nothing wrong.

    Dragging kids hundreds of miles across desert to put them in "dirty, traumatizing conditions", when instead you could have just gone to the nearest US embassy to apply for asylum, isn't doing something wrong?

    1. They're against helicopter parents but dragging your child across the desert makes you a hero

  24. The more information that comes out about the conditions our government is keeping migrant kids in, the more unbelievably horrifying it all becomes.

    Nobody is "keeping" those parents or those kids against their will; they can leave any time they want to, the US even provides them a trip home free of charge.

  25. Is Biden really as electable as people think?

    Yes, and if you're a part of the D-team, that's a problem.

    1. Because Big Red has been such a libertarian success

      1. I wasn't exactly suggesting that people should believe in libertarianism or switch to Team R as point out that if you're party is crafted around a message of diversity and your alternatives are batshit crazy socialists the one slightly less crazy touchy-feely white guy who's slightly less orange and slightly more popular than the orange man who's axiomatically evil is not a great place to be.

        There are some more palatable democrats out there, IMO, they just aren't anywhere near as electable as Biden.

        1. No kidding. After all of this they still end up with Obama/Clinton.

  26. But we don't round up and jail the children of U.S. citizens who have broken the law."

    Tell that to a parent who has had CPS un leashed upon them for no reason at all and yes if you break the law and go to jail the government does take your kids and hands them over to child predators and perverts

    1. That's quite different AND Reason just published an article on this topic.

      1. That’s quite different

        Well, yes, it is quite different: parents who have their kids taken away by CPS or go to jail are forced to be separate from their children.

        Illegal migrants can enjoy freedom with their children any time they want by leaving the US.

  27. So, we house some of these kids under "horrendous" conditions. But at least for some, it must be an upgrade, right? Aren't all the humanitarian arguments for compassionate open borders based on just how awful things were back in the home country?

    1. No, they are based on detaining someone for committing a non-violent, no-victim crime. Or is that not important to us anymore?

      1. Not as important as maintaining sovereignty. Open borders, when you have millions of people anxious to get on the dole, is simply stupid.

        1. That's true. Turns out I'm not a fan of the welfare state either. Also, a wall wouldn't deprive people of their rights...

      2. No, they are based on detaining someone for committing a non-violent, no-victim crime. Or is that not important to us anymore?

        They are not being detained at all. They can choose to leave any time they want, just not onto the territory of the US.

      3. "no-victim crime"

        Please tell me how many illegal immigrants will cause our welfare system to crumble so that we can allow that number minus 1 into the US, because it sounds like there won't be any victims until we achieve financial collapse.

        1. Yeah, I agree that the welfare state is an issue that illegal immigration contributes to, but that's our fault not theirs. Boy, do we have a lot of problems or what?

          1. Its only our fault if we allow that to happen

  28. Anyone among the "Religious Right" who is in favor this mistreatment of children, or who look the other way, will have quite a shock when they face their maker. This policy is among the most anti-Christ things one can imagine. There is a special circle of hell meant for them.

    1. For real, dragging a kid through 1000 miles of desert and/or selling them to someone to use as a free pass at the border crossing is about as low as it gets.

    2. God will punish us for the mats on floors? Everyone involved with kindergarten will burn

    3. Indeed, the Democrats will be in a lot of trouble with god for preventing adequate funding to fix this issue.

    4. I think god will be more pissed at the athiest pretending they know what he wants.

  29. Anybody interested in looking at the facts? Here are the number of people (adults + children) apprehended for crossing the border between entry points in all of calendar year 2018:

    Number of Mexicans: 155,000
    Guatemalans + Salvadorans + Hondurans: 226,000

    155,000 + 226,000 = 381,000 apprehensions for all of 2018.

    Here are the numbers for May of 2019 alone:

    People apprehended for illegal entry: 132,887 (Increase of 34% from April)
    Number of those traveling in family groups: 84,542
    Number of unaccompanied children: 11,507

    For analysis purposes, let's assume that the average family is traveling with both parents and that the average family group has two children. This assumption would mean that half of the 84,542 people apprehended crossing the border between checkpoints that were traveling as a family were children (42,271 people). Add those to the 11,507 children who were traveling alone, and you get 53,378 children apprehended in May of 2019 alone.

    53,378 * 12 means that children are being apprehended at a rate of 645,336 children a year for all of 2019.

    645,000 children apprehended coming into the country between border crossings in 2019 divided by the total number of people (both adults and children) who were apprehended in 2018 means that children are coming in now at a rate that is 170% higher than adults + children were entering in 2018.

    645,000 / 381,000=1.69.

    I don't know how Homeland Security could be expected to cope with children being detained at a rate that is almost twice as high as the number of all apprehended adults + children just last year.

    In the short term, the Democrats could agree to fund Homeland Security to help these children without insisting on additional legislation that gives citizenship to so called "Dreamers" or they could throw in $5 billion for wall funding. I think that argument for Dreamers, in particular, has lost a lot of steam with the huge number of children being brought across our border by their parents every month.

    The long term solution is for Mexico to enter a "third safe country" agreement like the one we've had with Canada for decades, which would make people from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras ineligible for asylum if they first set foot in Mexico. The Mexican government has already agreed to introduce such a bill into the Mexican senate if the number of asylum seekers hasn't dropped to the Trump administration's satisfaction within 45 days of June 7.

    Any opinion columnist who isn't chastising the Democrats or Trump for refusing to give in on the wall or Dreamers in order to fund care for these children probably isn't doing them any good. Oh, and any opinion columnist who isn't supportive of Trump's efforts to get a "safe third country" agreement because they're TDS is so bad they'd rather see children suffer than give Trump credit for permanently solving a problem--they should all be ashamed of themselves.

    1. I was told there would be no Math in this debate.

    2. Since Trump has been successful at getting money for border security, the Lefties switched strategies to overload the immigration system.

      If the system can be overloaded enough, Americans will beg for a solution that Lefties can give, which is of course citizenship.

      Trump says fuck that and is rounding up as many illegals as he can and deporting them.

      Another funny thing that can happen if Trump threatens to shut down the federal government for FY2020, the district judges will be sent home after a period of time. Then no judges will be available to stop mass deportation of illegals in detention centers.

    3. Democrats in the House could introduce an immigration bill, but you're right, they would rather see these children suffer than actually do their job.

  30. The more information that comes out about the conditions our government is keeping migrant kids in, the more unbelievably horrifying it all becomes.

    The only way it could get worse is if there were gang members recruiting out of these detention centers. Then they wouldn't be any better than the shit holes these kids migrated from. We should put some sort of barrier around these detention centers to keep the undesirables out.

    1. We need a moat - with alligators.

      1. And sharks with laser beams. Don’t forget those.

        1. Definitely lasers.

  31. Yet another clown has thrown his big floppy shoes into the democratic party clown car: Joe Sestak announced yesterday that he’s running for president. Try not to laugh too hard.

    If you’re thinking to yourself “Who??”, he was a somebody in Pennsylvania for about a minute or two like ten years ago, but Pennsylvanians got tired of him pretty quickly.

    1. Never heard of him until now. But I'm sure he's better than Tulsi Gabbard.


  32. There's an excellent example of how progressives are anti-liberty and elitists pieces of shit brewing in San Francisco.

    Of all the states that have legalized recreational marijuana, i.e., Alaska, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, the only state where it was done by the legislature is Illinois. In all the rest of them, it had to be done by referendum--by the people, over the objections of lawmakers, in order to get by at all. Even in deep blue states like California, Massachusetts, Oregon and Washington, where Democrats are firmly in control of the legislature, they couldn't get their progressive political class to support letting people make their own minds up about something as important as marijuana! In fact, it goes against the whole progressive philosophy to let average people make choices for themselves.

    If there was any doubt about that before, it should have died with the failure of both New Jersey and New York to pass recreational marijuana legislation. Progressives in those deep blue states control the legislature two to one--and they still refuse to legalize marijuana. They introduced it and failed! Anyone who supports Democrats because they imagine that they're big on letting people make choices for themselves is a fucking moron. There is simply no compelling reason to believe that--and plenty of good reasons to scoff.

    Here's the latest:

    "San Francisco is expected to become the first city in the U.S. to ban e-cigarettes this week"

    Progressives do not look better than Republicans on personal liberty by way of comparison to social conservatives. Progressives don't even look good on persona liberty in comparison to social conservatives! They only want you to be free to make choices that they have approved, which isn't really being free to make choices for yourself at all. Fuck all the progressives on personal liberty, and fuck all the shitheads who imagine progressives are somehow better than social conservatives on the issue, too.

    In fact, what do you think of as being better from a libertarian standpoint, someone who thinks your choices should be limited by the laws of God or an elitist who thinks that God role should be filled by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors?

    1. " In fact, it goes against the whole progressive philosophy to let average people make choices for themselves."

      Literally . This was the original progressive movement's STATED goal. And they still have that philosophy.

      Except for abortion of course. Everything else you do with or to your body must be strictly controlled.

      1. Literally . This was the original progressive movement’s STATED goal. And they still have that philosophy

        You're confusing progressivism and liberalism. Liberalism advocated "letting people make choices for themselves". Progressivism advocates government intervention in all aspects of life for the purpose of achieving progress.

        1. He used the word progressive... I even quoted it before my response.

    2. +100000

    3. Progressives are the new social conservatives, they're just as stodgy and inflexible, just as anti-liberty, morally superior, quick to condemn, completely ignore empirical evidence, totally disregard outcomes of their preferred policies even when they conflict with the stated goals, etc. They just care about different issues than the social conservatives do.

      1. I should probably mention that I know progressives have been around for quite some time. I'm talking more about today's progressives and their new-found influence in the age of social media.

    1. Pence tried to point that out on one of the Sunday morning shows. All he got for his trouble was "why do Republicans hate children?"

  33. But people whose brains and morals haven't been totally warped by partisan politics don't write off contemporary horrors just because The Other Side started them.

    Perhaps they're much worse now because the fourth estate gave these conditions a pass for eight years.

  34. It's possible to be both in favor of a much more open immigration policy and not outraged by current illegal-immigration enforcement efforts. Enforcing the border is not a new development. Democrat partisans acting like somehow before Trump the feds were just a bunch of pussy cats on illegal immigration. The truth is this has been going on a long time and escalating over the years to the point it is now.

    The outrage is outrageous in my opinion. If you weren't outraged in 2015 I just can't take anything you say seriously.

    In my opinion, legal immigration should be pretty much come one come all. "Are you a terrorist? no? Welcome to the USA" sounds about right to me.

    But if you're going to have a border then it's going to be enforced and I don't think any of the people outraged about Trump right now actually advocate for an wide-open unpatrolled border. NONE.

  35. Not Surprising: Google is a highly politicized activist group committed to their definition of "fairness", which is ensuring only 1 side of a conversation gets out.

    <a href=""Jen Gennai

      1. I am not adding spaces, our machine overlords are

        <a href=""link

  36. Gee what a shocker.

    100+ comments of right-wingers making light of the state abusing children.

    Because hey it's not like they're *American* children or anything.

    This is the brain-rotting effect of nationalism that I was describing earlier. Nationalism is more than just "democracy". Nationalism is essentially a belief that citizens are simply better people than non-citizens. It can only be sustained by creating a false division between the good, virtuous tribe of citizens, standing against the evil heretical tribes of foreigners, via demagogic tactics. Because if a citizen actually believed that there was no essential inherent difference between fellow citizens and foreigners, then why should that citizen feel a special kinship for fellow citizens over foreigners? There would be little justification for it.

    I am not a nationalist because I don't think that just because a person was born in America means that this person is a superior human being compared to everyone else not born in America. I don't believe that treating people not born in America, based on this alone, as inferior beings, can be justified on any ethical level. And I certainly don't think that government abuse of children should be minimized or dismissed just because the kids aren't American kids.

    1. Are you ever going to post that link?

      Of course not. You'll spend hours explaining WHY NOT but never link to it.

      Which says everything anyone needs to know.

      Now scurry away fucktard.

    2. You left out the part about how much you hate adults that abuse children by dragging them through the desert, a lot of the time with trafficers

      Tell us all about how much you hate those people, Jeff. Those terrible child abusers...

      Get Em Jeff!

      1. Shorter Ryan:

        "Child abuse by the state is okay because some migrants die sometimes"

        1. That post was stupider that your usual dreck. Over the limit on glue sniffing today?

  37. I read these comments and see why I have such a dim view of "conservatives" or "libertarians" or whatever anybody here pretends to be at a given moment- you can be as soulless and heartless as you want and take pride in it.

    It's absolutely disgusting and I'd say you should feel shame but I know you can't or won't. So go ahead, take pride in it. Hillary may have been right- definitely deplorables lurking around.

    1. She was right about the deplorables. She was wrong about the number of them.

    2. Please give examples of "comments" from "conservatives" that you consider to be "soulless".

      And, while you're at it, since you're probably referring to immigration, give your preferred "non-soulless" immigration policy. Caveat: said immigration policy must not involve mass tonnage of dollars, which this particular government is in no position to spend.

    3. Libertarians believe that all human beings share the same natural rights regardless of citizenship.

      Clearly separating families this way and keeping these children in filthy conditions without proper medical care or sanitation is a violation of everything a libertarian should stand for.

      If someone wants to make a case for restricted immigration fine. There is no way to make a case for cruelty such as this. Like any other function you want it to do you need adequate funding, facilities, and laws to do that.

      This is not a new problem but it is one of long and shameful neglect by our government and needs to change.

      1. Yes, the libertarian position should be that these people should be free to leave and go back the way they came at any time.

  38. We get it, ITS TRUMPS FAULT. Everything wrong or bad in the world since the beginning of time is Trumps fault.

    Fuck individual responsibility or rule of law, we are a global collective now...english language immersion classes, growth of the legal system to represent migrants, reparations, free daycare, free college, free healthcare, green new deal, open borders, modern monetary theory, increasing taxation, banning private ownership of land and automobiles, federal jobs guarantee, free housing, mandates on anything that is left and finally rations.

    1. You forgot fuck those children.

  39. " they're essentially threatening to keep on kidnapping and traumatizing kids until Democrats meet their demands."

    They're "threatening" to enforce the tiniest sliver of immigration law, and separate minors from adults in government detention facilities.

    The pants shitting hysteria over "separated families" is the most moronic bit of faux outrage currently in fashion.

    Thousands of US families are separated daily by the criminal justice system.

    We don't put children in detention facilities with grownups. Duh.

  40. […] progress on migrant-child detention centers follows an AP […]

  41. […] progress on migrant-child detention centers follows an AP […]

  42. […] progress on migrant-child detention centers follows an AP […]

  43. […] progress on migrant-child detention centers follows an AP […]

  44. A week ago the story was that Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had gone over board with comments that the US was running concentration camps on the border. After the stories this week it appear she was right. Score another success for AOC.

  45. […] Six children have died due to poor conditions. Infants and children aren’t allowed to bathe, toilet facilities aren’t working, necessary items like soap and toothbrushes aren’t provided, and dangerous overcrowding is taking place. Diseases are rampant, but health care is minimal. Fear not, the guards have adequate face masks to protect themselves from the unhealthy air. They’re also punishing kids for losing their lice combs. Thousands of children were sexually abused. The government has argued that all of this is acceptable. […]

  46. […] thwarted donations were motivated by recent reports about nasty conditions at immigrant detention […]

  47. […] thwarted donations were motivated by recent reports about nasty conditions at immigrant detention […]

  48. […] thwarted donations were motivated by recent reports about nasty conditions at immigrant detention […]

  49. […] thwarted donations were motivated by recent reports about nasty conditions at immigrant detention […]

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.