Ron DeSantis' Martha's Vineyard Stunt Might Help Migrants Stay in the U.S. on Special Visas
A Texas sheriff has certified that the migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard were the victims of a crime, which helps clear the way for them to apply for U visas.

In a surprising twist, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' move last month to fly dozens of migrants to Martha's Vineyard may end up putting those migrants on a pathway to obtaining a special visa—and potentially lawful permanent residence in the United States.
Legal questions quickly arose after DeSantis used state funds to transport nearly 50 migrants from San Antonio, Texas, to the island of Martha's Vineyard in September. Several of those migrants filed a lawsuit against DeSantis soon after the flights, alleging that Florida officials "made false promises and false representations" in order to entice them to board the planes.
The sheriff's office in Bexar County, where San Antonio is located, also announced that it would investigate whether the migrants were duped. "They feel like that was done through deceptive means," Sheriff Javier Salazar said. "That could be a crime here in Texas and we will handle it as such."
Yesterday, Salazar certified that the migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard were the victims of a crime. "Based upon the claims of migrants being transported from Bexar County under false pretenses, we are investigating this case as possible Unlawful Restraint," Salazar said in a statement to GBH News. Under the Texas penal code, unlawful restraint, or restricting someone's movement without consent, includes actions that involve "force, intimidation, or deception." Salazar noted that his office had "submitted documentation through the federal system to ensure the migrants' availability as witnesses during the investigation."
The sheriff's certification move is notable because it clears the way for the migrants to apply for a U visa, which is devoted to victims or witnesses of crimes, through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). "Once certified, the crime victim can apply to USCIS for a U visa, which, if approved, allows them to remain in the US in nonimmigrant status and eventually can lead to Lawful Permanent Residence," said immigration attorney Rachel Self, who has been assisting the migrants legally.
But backlogs spell a lengthy process for migrants who hope to obtain U visas. There were over 285,000 U visa petitions pending as of FY 2021, per USCIS data. According to a March report by the Niskanen Center, it would take more than 17 years for the government to process all U visa applications at its current pace. What's more, Congress caps the number of visas at 10,000 annually. But as Politico notes:
Once the Venezuelans submit their applications, they will likely be allowed to work and protected from deportation. Last year, the federal appellate court that covers Massachusetts ruled that a Honduran man could not be removed from the country while his U visa application was pending.
"Ironically by choosing to transport the migrants to Martha's Vineyard…all of these victims are now protected from removal while their U visa application is pending due to the Granados Benitez case," Self wrote in her statement.
This development in DeSantis' Martha's Vineyard stunt speaks to how counterproductive showy immigration enforcement schemes can be. Often done in the name of fiscal responsibility, moves in Texas and Florida have racked up massive bills at taxpayers' expense. The Martha's Vineyard flights have also landed DeSantis in the Treasury Department inspector general's crosshairs: The governor is now under investigation for potential misuse of federal COVID-19 funds to cover the flights.
Judging by his actions, DeSantis is no champion of immigrants. But because of how the migrant flights have backfired, he could prove to be an inadvertent helper to some.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
In a surprising twist, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' move last month to fly dozens of migrants to Martha's Vineyard may end up putting those migrants on a pathway to obtaining a special visa—and potentially lawful permanent residence in the United States.
Good, then they can be transported from that military facility Martha's Vineyard hustled them off to and right back to Martha's Vineyard.
Surprise twist surprise twist: Unlawful restraint against domestic citizens was A-OK 2019-2021.
American politics: More stunts and surprise twists than a women's skateboarding championship.
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I did not ever think it would even be achievable , however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks, easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail.
For more detail visit this site.. http://www.Profit97.com
In only 5 weeks, I worked part-time from my loft and acquired $30,030. In the wake of losing my past business, I immediately became depleted. [res-26] Luckily, I found this occupations on the web, and subsequently, I had the option to begin bringing in cash from home immediately. Anybody can achieve this tip top profession and increment their web pay by:.
.
EXTRA DETAILS HERE:>>> https://workopportunity23.blogspot.com
"hustled" = hosted them for almost 48 hours, giving them free pizza and a place to sleep
…while they called in the troops to deport them.
Wow! ALMOST 48 hours? That must have taken some doing.
Oh sure, joon st gloss right over the fact that THEY WERE FED PIZZA!!!!!!!
Those pizzas were probably $100 a slice given that $5000 per head was spent in those 48 hours. More expensive than drumps one of those h o r e s.
Hmmm, not sure of the cost. I’d have to see a pie chart…
And they are still sanitizing all the surfaces in town after the brown people invasion.
To give a better reply, the city claimed to be a sanctuary, as in indefinite. They provide a day or two of calories, and a night of two of shelter. Now apply this to the principles of indefinite sanctuary and you see the hypocrisy of virtue signaling individuals and communities such as Martha's vineyard.
But….PIZZA!!!!!
"Hosted" them? For less than 48 hours?
The Vineyardians gave them the bums' rush out of their little utopia as fast as their high-priced pols could call in the troops.
You think that pizza makes them humanitarians? There was no way to be less hospitable.
The millionaire proggy Vineyardians made sure that the impoverished Venezuelans each got a slice of the pie!!
Hospitality and compassion at their finest!!
"“Hosted” them? For less than 48 hours?"
What do you call it when people come to visit you in your home? And do you use a different word when they are there for 48 hours or less?
If you broadcast your home as a free and open bed and breakfast, you have different expectations.
Yes, that is one of many problems with this stunt. The homeowners didn’t advertise anything like that.
If you tell people that they have free room and board at someone else’s house when no such offer has been made, you are a bad person.
If the homeowners welcomed the deceived people in anyway and offered them food and a place to stay for a couple days while everyone figures out who lied to them and why the liar didn’t tell the homeowners the deceived people were coming, that is called graciousness. Or being a good person, if you prefer.
And let’s say that they weren’t really being gracious at all. Let’s say that they offered the asylees food and shelter only because they knew the media was watching.
Even then, DeSantis’ stunt failed to catch them in a “gotcha”.
The only people doing victory dances about DeSantis having shown up those MV hypocrites are gullible right-wing echo chamber dwellers.
They were "tolerated" - they wailed when they got off the plane, complained that they had no advance notice, and despite it being off-season claimed there was literally no place to put them.
On 9/11/01 when planes were forced to land at the nearest airfield that could accommodate the plane, people were "hosted" by the Newfoundlander's, as in stated in their houses, ate their food, made friends with the tourists/travelers. That's not what the folks at the vineyard did - they shoved them in a church and threw some food at them while they arranged to get them the hell off their sanctuary island.
Not one guest house, not one Airbnb, not one hotel offered up empty rooms.
And as the migrants boarded the ferry, the locals talked about the 'life-changing impact' those folks had on them.
“despite it being off-season claimed there was literally no place to put them”
So your position is that private citizens should have been required by the government to house the migrants in their private homes on their private property? That sounds like a clear violation of the Takings Clause of the Constitution.
You’ll have to explain why you think a bunch of people, brought without prior warning into a city with no CBP personnel or facilities, are the responsibility of private citizens.
But that was the point of this particular DeSantis political stunt. It’s sad to see that people’s belief in the Constitution, good governance, and basic human decency is so easily discarded when their team postures and performs for them.
"So your position is that private citizens should have been required by the government to house the migrants in their private homes on their private property?"
Nope. That's not at all what KeninTX said.
"You’ll have to explain why you think a bunch of people, brought without prior warning into a city with no CBP personnel or facilities, are the responsibility of private citizens."
They aren't. And that's kind of the point. These people are illegal aliens (not just "migrants"). They entered the country illegally. They have no right to be here. No one should have to pay for them. But, the people up in MV, disagree with me. They think that people should have to pay for these illegal aliens, just as long as it's not them. When the illegal aliens are in poor Texas border towns, at the expense of the poor people in those towns, the MVers are just fine with it. But, not in MV.
"Nope. That’s not at all what KeninTX said."
He referenced the 9/11 flights (the subject of "Come From Away"), where residents put up stranded fliers in their homes. He said, "Not one guest house, not one Airbnb, not one hotel offered up empty rooms". Guest houses and Airbnbs are both private residences and hotels are private businesses. So yes, that's exactly what he said.
"They aren’t. And that’s kind of the point."
So why were they sent to a place with no CBP facilities or personnel? Maybe because it was a stunt?
"These people are illegal aliens (not just “migrants”). They entered the country illegally. They have no right to be here."
They are migrants legally in the US after being processed by CBP in Texas and released until theor hearing.. None of them are illegal aliens.
Your ignorant (the real definition, meaning unaware or uninformed) diatribe and ignorant assessment of the thoughts and beliefs of people you've never met demonstrates you are not a serious person. Unfortunately for America, your are far from unique among cultural conservatives.
"He referenced the 9/11 flights..."
All of which was, to the best of my knowledge, done voluntarily. Not by government coercion.
The people of MV indicated that they were willing to help the illegal aliens, but when put to the test, they didn't. Those people lied. That was KeninTX's point. Instead of helping them out by doing some of the things that KeninTX listed, the MVers just kicked them out. And, in typical leftist fashion, you ignore that point and instead try to imply that KeninTX wants to force MVers to house them in their homes.
What I want, and I suspect KeninTX does as well, is for MVers to either accept those people (in their homes, for example) as they indicated they would OR not try to force others to have to pay for them. Preferably, the second.
"They are migrants legally in the US after being processed by CBP in Texas ... None of them are illegal aliens."
Flat out lie. Why can't you leftists at least debate honestly? Well, you couldn't win debates if you did, so I guess I understand.
These people are all illegal aliens. If they were legal aliens, there would be no point to this, nor need.
They entered the country illegally. That makes them illegal aliens. Getting processed and released doesn't change that any more than if someone robbed a bank, got arrested and released pending trial meant that they weren't a bank robber.
"Your ignorant (the real definition, meaning unaware or uninformed) diatribe and ignorant assessment of the thoughts and beliefs of people you’ve never met demonstrates you are not a serious person. Unfortunately for America, your are far from unique among cultural conservatives."
At least you're good at projection.
"The people of MV indicated that they were willing to help the illegal aliens, but when put to the test, they didn’t."
Which people and how did they indicate such willingness? Because not only have I never heard of anyone stating they would take any migrant into their home, none of the towns of Martha's Vinyard are sanctuary cities.
Boston is, but DeSantis and Abbott have figured out that cities with CBP personnel handle the migrants they keep sending up without a problem. So he had to send them somewhere without any CBP presence.
The second problem with your statement is that they were legal migrants, not illegal immigrants.
"What I want, and I suspect KeninTX does as well, is for MVers to either accept those people (in their homes, for example) as they indicated they would OR not try to force others to have to pay for them. Preferably, the second."
Why? Housing migrants isn't the responsibility of the residents of Martha's Vinyard. And none of them offered to host migrants, but when a bunch suddenly arrived without warning, they graciously provided food and shelter for them.
"Flat out lie."
Right. CBP had them, processed them, and released them pending their court date. That makes them legal migrants, allowed to be in the country and move freely. Since you seem to be a little mentally deficient, I'll make it simple.
CBP released them. CBP is in charge of detaining illegal immigrants. CBP doesn't release illegal immigrants. Why did they release them? Because they were legal migrants, legally on the US.
Go back to the kids table. You aren't serious enough for adult conversations.
I don't see why Reason Editors are still butthurt about this. Everyone got what they wanted. The aliens are getting their visas, DeSantis and Team Red got their moral victory, and the residents of Martha's Vineyard got to pretend to be a sanctuary city without actually having to provide sanctuary.
If you still don't see the reason why this incident keeps churning the news cycle than there is an upper limit to your applicable wisdom of libertarinism that you have reached. Or were you seeking a follow up comment *wink*.
Because as a stunt (and it was a stunt, make no mistake) it was one of the most brilliant stunts in my lifetime, because it was so effective in putting the lie to the virtue signal. Had DeSantis sent a bunch of migrants to a liberal enclave who vaguely supported less restricted immigration but generally supported the meta – concept of recognizing borders and a difference between illegal immigration and legal immigration, then that would have just been nothing but a stunt meant to ruffle feathers. But this was a stunt which effectively put their beliefs on trial, and they failed miserably.
As such, Reason editors feel particularly stung by this, because despite the libertarian harangue about borders being a social construct, they know in their hearts that borders are a meaningful social construct, because they were forced to invoke them by talking about Martha’s Vineyard as if it was some kind of discrete political district which was identifiably separate from Miami. 24 hours ago, these migrants were in Florida, now they're in Martha's Vineyard, damnit! Borders have been crossed, rules have been broken!
No one likes to realize halfway through their own diatribe that they just confessed to half a dozen lies they’ve been telling as they watch the faces of their audience begin to smile and nod.
So where do you get to the part about people being justifiably upset about how these migrants were treated by Team Red as if they were disposable trash?
And no, it's not about the borders. It's about the brazen manipulation of desperate people in the service of an evil agenda.
Here is an example. Take the most ardent pro-lifer that you can find. Someone who thinks that moms who seek abortion should be put in jail. Someone who thinks that even talking about abortion in a favorable sense should be criminalized. The most devoted of the devoted. Then, unannounced, deliver 50 orphan babies on the doorstep of this person. What do you think this person is going to do? Unless this person is independently wealthy, then this person is going to be trying to find homes for these orphans at places that can afford to take care of them. And what is every pro-choice/pro-abortion critic going to say? HA WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!!! HE CLAIMS TO BE PRO-LIFE BUT THEN SHIPS THE BABIES AWAY!!! Do you think that is a fair criticism?
It is a dishonest argument to claim that pro-life individuals are hypocrites if they don't take care of every orphan baby on the planet, and likewise it is a dishonest argument to claim that pro-sanctuary-city individuals are hypocrites if they don't take care of every migrant on the planet.
Stupid analogy. At some point, abortion is murder. I don't get to kill my aging infirm grandmother, even if I can no longer take care of her.
Agreed. It is, at the very earliest, at viability.
it is a dishonest argument to claim that pro-sanctuary-city individuals are hypocrites if they don’t take care of every migrant on the planet.
Bold move making up an argument and then calling the argument you just made up dishonest. You do you.
Especially when his assertion is exactly what he demands of others.
Lying Jeffy sends his trash to Martha’s Vineyard. Hey Lying Jeffy, how much do you pay a month for your trash disposal?
"So where do you get to the part about people being justifiably upset about how these migrants were treated by Team Red as if they were disposable trash?"
What are you talking about? Is Martha's Vineyard such a hell hole that no one would choose to live there?
It was the locals in the vineyard that put them on a ferry and dropped them off in tents at a military base.
When given the choice, I will always chose the vineyard over a national guard base...
Plus, They Crossed State Lines!
The migrants can be sent anywhere else, or just sit in border towns, but as soon as it’s at the feet of the rulers it’s game over, lawyers in. Do these people even see themselves? Or scarily they do and it is an open threat. The hypocrisy is incredible.
Obama's neighbors still have bruises on their hands from clutching their pearls, and it's totally DeSantis' fault!
-jcr
MV should be their new home. At the expense of all the wealthy leftist residents.
It's not about the expense. MV residents could easily afford to build a swanky apartment building containing 50 units and house and feed them for the rest of their lives, and it would be a rounding error on their bank accounts. It's having 50 swarthy, shifty people who haven't been vetted flitting around their neighborhoods they don't like.
Swarthy shifty criminals. Lawbreakers.
Brown Swarthy shifty criminals. Lawbreakers.
That’s the real problem.
Brown….Swarthy…..and their “lived experience” tells them EXACTLY how “well” socialism works.
Now when little brown people don’t support The Narrative….well that’s just UPPITY!!!
Sure. Rent a place for them and let them stay there. No one has stopped Desantis from renting a place there permanently.
We should move in too, there is a city council open to affordable housing development there, right?
DeSantis sent them to the wrong airport. The proper dropoff is the Gosnold landing strip on Nomans Island, three miles south of MV, already under military jurisdiction as a past Warthog firing range, and which began accepting refugees from tyranny a dozen years before the Mayflower hit Plymouth.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35400 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a (ad-13) lot of greenbacks online from $28000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs
Just open the link——————–>>> https://googlejob26.blogspot.com
How funny. Last week Reason pretended political stunts were outrageous. This week political stunts highlighted by LEO corruption in service of political goals is fine.
Whoever could have guessed?
Judging by his actions, DeSantis is no champion of immigrants. But because of how the migrant flights have backfired, he could prove to be an inadvertent helper to some.
This is a very reasonable presumption to make based on DeSantis' actions. Any sober, well thought argument can only come to this conclusion.
Yeah. And refugees. The governors of Florida have a long record of refugee hating. Or so the legend goes.
This only, once more, brings about the ultimate question. Florida is an authoritarian shithole (this is known) and yet people keep moving there. None of this makes sense.
For instance, judging by their actions, Martha's Vineyard as a community is clearly pro-immigration.
Don't know about that, but they didn't do anything that could be interpreted as anti-immigration with these Venezuelan asylum seekers who were dumped on them without warning.
Other than getting the military to take them away, of course.
This is another really weak talking point. It isn't like the National Guard was violent with them or anything like that. They just showed up with some buses to transport them.
I'm sure the plane rides they violently got put on were different though.
"This is another really weak talking point. It isn’t like the National Guard was violent with them or anything like that."
Cannot imagine why some people might think refusing to do what the military wants would be a bad idea...
When the national guard in, say, Florida comes in and helps after a hurricane do you characterize that as use of military force?
Sometimes national guard are used in a non-coercive way.
Unless they were allowed to choose to stay in MV, force was involved.
THEY….GOT….PIZZA!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, they did.
They literally did the exact same thing DeSantis did: put them on a bus and got rid of them. Only they did it in less than 48 hours with 50 of them. Southern border states took 40 years and 20 million illegal immigrants before they tried that.
Since there aren't any CBP personnel or facilities on Martha's Vinyard, where should they have been put?
MV was CALLING for them to go there.
You know, the whole "Sanctuary city" thing and all.
You clearly don't know what that phrase actually means.
"Don’t know about that, but they didn’t do anything that could be interpreted as anti-immigration with these Venezuelan asylum seekers who were dumped on them without warning."
Without warning?
Border states get how much warning when they get many multiples of times more?
How about the states that Biden jets them to at the middle of the night? They get no warning either.
Why should my heart bleed for the uber rich MV residents? They WANT these people, unless they are hypocritical liars.
OK. Just have Florida and Texas give up some of the federal funds that pay for CBP personnel and facilities since there isn’t any infrastructure to process the migrants in the new locales (unlike the massive federal investment in and federal funding of the border states).
You don’t get to send the cost away and keep the funding. Pick your pony.
Why would either state do that when the amount they get from the Fed is insufficient with or without these particular 50 immigrants?
And last I checked, that was literally the point of the whole stunt.
If you could keep the funding and ditch all of the migrants, everyone would do it. There is a finite amount of funding (insufficient, as you mentioned), but that doesn't mean that the funds to process and manage those 50 migrants doesn't go with them.
It definitely doesn't mean that DeSantis gets to keep the funding for the migrants he kept, plus the funding for the 50 he ditched. He only gets federal money for the ones he has.
If you don't believe me, try getting paid a per diem by your company for a 7 day trip when you only went for 5. Or, even more fun when you get caught, try to claim 5 kids on your taxes when you only have 4.
These two practical exercises will help you understand the concept.
Florida is a relatively free state. No income tax and minimal plague restrictions.
Florida best upholds the basis of our Founding.
Let’s go Brandon! And usedcarscammer!.
Well, BUCS, I see two possibilities.
One, Everyone freely choosing Florida knows more than your uncited sources.
Two, your parenthetical is false.
None of the narratives pushed by the mainstream make any logical sense as you have to deny past narratives they pushed. (think for oneself instead of differing to experts, don't give those in power any leeway for explanation, etc.) The question I have, is when you are interacting with individuals in your personal life, do you bring these values and principles up? Do many or any, of us libertarians push for this?
Please compare Florida to the authoritarian shithole that is NYC or SF.
Culture: Florida doesn't have the cultural advantages of cities like Boston, New York, Chicago, or San Francisco (although I want to highlight the Dali museum in St. Petersburg, which is excellent if you like his art).
Education: Florida's K-12 education system is worse than Massachusetts, New York, and Illinois (but better than California's) and its best university would be the 6th in California, 3rd in Illinois, 4th in New York, and a distant 3rd in Massachusetts.
Crime: Florida has a higher crime rate (3922 per 100k) than Illinois (3545), New York (3185), and Massachusetts (2415, the second-lowest rate in America). But it is better than California (4720, 19th worst).
Comparing crime in the entire state of Florida to the cities of SF, LA, NYC, Chicago, and Boston specifically, Florida's 3922 per 100k is better than SF and Chicago, but worse than LA, Boston, and NYC.
Cities are worse than states. SF (6917) has the 7th highest crime rate among cities, with Orlando 17th (6206), followed by St. Petersburg (5029), Miami (4751), Chicago (4381), Jacksonville (4168), LA (3332), Boston (2758), and NYC (1987).
Violent crime rates have a slightly different order, with Florida (384 per 100k) being the American average. California (442) and Illinois (426) are worse, but New York (364) and Massachusetts (309) are better.
Like total crime rates, violent crime rates are higher in cities than entire states. Chicago (1099 per 100k, 17th worst in America), LA (761), Orlando (744), Miami (721), St. Petersburg (698), Boston (669), and Jacksonville (631), are worse than Florida as an entire state (384), but SF (365) and NYC (538) are better.
Crime summary: It's a mixed bag, with state-to-state and city-to-city comparisons putting Florida as a state in the middle of Cali, NY, Illinois, and Mass and Florida's cities, in total crime rate, slightly worse (as a group) than the cities in the four blue states.
For violent crime, Florida as a state is better than two and worse than two of the blue states. Florida's cities are in the middle (along with Boston), with Chicago and LA worse and SF and NYC better.
Climate: It has a warm, desirable climate (although the humidity and bugs kinda suck) and no autumn or winter, which is why the baby boomers are retiring down there in droves (the ones who prefer dry heat retire to Arizona). California has everything from warm to temperate (but no winter except in the mountains). Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York all have pretty brutal winters (especially Illinois and Massachusetts). Basically California is as pleasant, but more varied, than Florida. Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York take a stronger person to enjoy, especially in January and February.
Economic: Florida's GDP is $1.2 trillion, fourth best in the US. New York City's is $1.7 trillion, Los Angeles's is $1.13 trillion, Chicago's is $619 billion, San Francisco's is $593 billion, and Boston's is $513 billion. So economically the state of Florida beats all of those cities except NYC, with LA just a small step behind. But since it's an entire state against individual cities, that's not surprising.
I would prefer to live in SF, NYC, Chicago, or Boston than Florida, but not LA. Not because of any of the things discussed above, just because I've been to LA many times and I can't stand it.
Is that a comprehensive enough comparison for you, Kenin?
This is why your participation in the community is golden!
"Look mom, I'm journalisming"
"That's great dear, make sure to wash your hands when you're done."
More Reason obfuscation. Opposition to illegal entry is being "no champion of immigrants". DeSantis is well aware of the Miami Cuban vote. Pretty sure they'll consider him their champion. OMG, stop insulting our intelligence, Reason.
Frankly Desantis can be a champion of immigrants and also score his points with the nativists bu offering free bus rides to illegal immigrants from. Southern border to many more towns. This Martha's vineyard service is too restrictive and no immigrant wants to go there.
It is a win win for both de Santis and immigrants.
#Resistance Twitter legal experts — you know, the same people whose analysis of #TrumpRussia was always fact-based and trustworthy — told me DeSantis is guilty of KIDNAPPING and HUMAN TRAFFICKING. And that's before the manslaughter charges he'll face for being 100% responsible for every death during the hurricane.
#LibertariansForImprisoningBidensEnemies
#LizCheney2024
Alternate headline: Democrats will abuse the law in any way they can to get what they want.
I'm all for allowing as many Muslim immigrants into Dearborn, MI as they can take.
I know, right? Can't wait to see how this splats on the Dems in that district. Popcorn!
It already hit the fan when Muslim parents stormed the local school board meeting and demanded that the district stop teaching their children about LGBTQ sex.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2022/10/11/dearborn-michigan-school-board-meeting-lgbtq-books/10467687002/
And REASON will write admiringly about it, twisting libertarian principles to support the latest cause.
I'm curious how Salazar is asserting Jurisdiction over a Florida Governor who made a phone call from his home state.
The immigrants were in Texas, in Salazar's county. DeSantis sent someone to put them on a bus to MV, and pay the fares. If fraud was used to get them to sign papers and board the bus, they may be crime victims, and the alleged crime was committed in Salazar's jurisdiction. Even if the charges are facially invalid, the "victims" are in a protected class until a court throws the charges out, and that can be dragged out for years...
The charges are definitely politically motivated. I don't think Salazar would be charging a Democrat who recruited an illegal immigrant as a maid or gardener for their Martha's Vineyard home, no matter how bad a deal they fooled the illegal into accepting.
Of course, busing them to MV was also a political stunt - apparently paid for with government funds, which seems like misappropriation to me. (I'd applaud it if DeSantis used his own funds, or collected donations for the stunt.) But embezzling Florida funds is not within Salazar's jurisdiction.
Immigration is nice and all but I doubt the author has ever been to a place with millions of specifically Venezuelan migrants, most of whom are good people but some are not, and when I say “not good” I mean some of them will rob at knifepoint and then kill their victims.
and when I say “not good” I mean some of them will rob at knifepoint and then kill their victims.
And when you say "some" you mean "more than twice as many as Chicago at virtually any point in time".
I love how DeSantis pulled this stunt to try to "own the libs," but the libs have repeatedly ended up being the ones owning him.
Where have the "libs" (progressives, really- they're very illiberal) owned DeSantis? Please cite without resorting to the WaPo or NYT.
I guess maybe allowing these people -- who were never going to get kicked out -- stay in the country is some sort of burn on DeSantis. But this is the least surprising development in this story since the illegals were shipped off to a military base.
Shipped off to a military base, after being hosted by Martha’s Vineyard residents for almost 48 hours, and then offered social services. Horrors!
The only people buying the talking point that Martha's Vineyards' residents did anything that indicated their horrible anti-immigration hypocrisy are people already in the right-wing echo chamber that the talking point came from.
Even if the people of Martha's Vineyard are really horrible anti-immigration bigots, they knew they were being carefully watched, so they did horrible things to the asylees like feeding the free pizza and giving them a place to sleep.
Yes Mike, you keep saying that. And we keep saying those are acceptable terms for the rest of the country, too. But somehow Texas is supposed to house and care for them indefinitely, whereas Martha’s Vineyard gets to act all high and mighty because they GAVE THEM PIZZA FOR A DAY!
Edit: I think maybe my favorite part is they were hosted "almost 48 hours". Well, gee, what swell people!
Texas wasn't supposed to house and care for them indefinitely. They were supposed to be assigned to various areas in the country, when Perla Huerta walked up to them and messed it all up at DeSantis' bidding.
But Biden ‘assigning’ them and shipping them around the country is somehow better than the illegals being able to choose where they go?
One seems objectively worse to me, but I look forward to listening to your ‘reasoning’ excusing the 'assignment' of people via the federal government.
So, let me get this straight. If they stay in Texas that's a burden on Texas.
But they aren't all being dumped on Texas, and that is also bad.
Biden created a bad situation. Which you wholeheartedly support and defend.
Bigoted, immigrant-hating faux libertarians are among my favorite culture war casualties.
And no problem that replacement won't solve.
Carry on, clingers . . . so far and so long as your betters permit, that is.
Awww, all the shitlibs are posting in this thread.
Leave it to you to end up at the dumbest possible take.
DeSantis sent these people where they asked to go. You claim that Biden assigns them to various parts of the country.
How is being assigned a part of the country better than choosing your destination?
DeSantis interrupted their participation in a Congress ally—approved asylum seeking process.
You were just complaining about Texas having to host them, and now you are complaining that they are being moved to other places besides Texas.
Stop calling them "illegals". They are human beings, just like you and me. No human being is illegal.
being able to choose where they go
Demonstrate where any of the migrants were given a free choice to decide where in the country they wished to go.
"Stop calling them “illegals”."
OK, they're criminal aliens. Better?
They are illegal aliens by the definition of law. Immigration is a legal process, sneaking over the border is not.
So......... Illegal illegal illegal illegal.
If it walks and quacks like a duck, then it is a duck.
Regardless of your infantile attempts to control want speech is acceptable.
They are illegal immigrants, Jeff. The people arent illegal, their actions are. There is no such thing as an illegal person.
But if they came to America without gping through the entry process, they are illegally entering the US. Hence illegal (the modifier) immigration (the action).
A person who illegally immigrates into the US (as opposed to legal immigrants, naturalized citizens, resident aliens, asylum seekers, and others who have entered legally) is an illegal immigrant.
The "no one is illegal" nonsense is just that: nonsense. Regardless of the reasons they think they are justified in entering illegally, the only way they stop being illegal is if they enter one if the legal paths to citizenship.
They are, they submit false asylum claims - about 95% of asylum claims are denied - but since they don't show up for their court dates, they just stay.
They enter the country illegally.
They lie about their asylum claim.
They fail to appear for their asylum hearing.
Which part of this demonstrates they are law-abiding?
Wasn't Kamala supposed to fix their countries (you know, "root causes") so they would stop coming here? WTF happened?
Wasn’t Kamala supposed to fix their countries (you know, “root causes”) so they would stop coming here? WTF happened?
Was the problem that not enough dicks were being sucked? That's the only problem Kamala has ever solved.
Uh, no Episiarch. They are not "assigned" anywhere unless its for family reunification. Good god you are stupid.
They were supposed to be assigned to various areas in the country, …
Now there is some real freedom for ya.
Mike lies once again. Border towns seeing 10k illegals a day. Many there for years. Often under interstate underpass.
"Yes Mike, you keep saying that."
It's cool for right-wingers to endlessly repeat right-wing talking points, even when they've been discredited. But, I'm not allowed to repeat myself in response to the repetition.
Just on this page alone, three or four people have repeated the weak talking point that the Martha's Vineyard residents supposedly "hustled" them away quickly. They didn't.
You're allowed to say it -- in fact you should keep saying it. The idea that the richest area in the country hosted immigrants for ALMOST 48 WHOLE HOURS should be shouted at the top of your lungs whenever possible.
Remind everybody, over and over. Immigrants were in MV for ALMOST TWO FULL DAYS!
Let's also talk about the fact that the asylum seekers aren't allowed to work for a year after applying for asylum. Which means they cannot be given jobs.
Also incorrect. The aclu and border groups are using loopholes such as this story to grant work permits. Many have used assaults by coyotes as a crime to get around the 1 year requirement.
Again Mike lies.
Do they need jobs to stay in the Vineyard?
Yeah, I didn’t think so.
What exactly do you want the MV residents to do for them? When have they treated them well enough that you aren’t trying to pass off some right-wing “gotcha” about how MV residents acted like anti-immigrant hypocrites?
The only people swallowing these right-wing taking points are fellow right-wing echo chamber inhabitants. Regular people see that MV treated the asylees OK.
"What exactly do you want the MV residents to do for them?"
Provide them sanctuary. AS they have said they want to do.
They are asylees. They already had sanctuary arrangements before DeSantis disrupted the process.
I think it's pretty clear that damikesc has no clue what is meant by a "sanctuary city". Or he takes the word of the various idiots in the conservative chattering class.
Apparently he thinks that living in a sanctuary city means the citizens are offering to house immigrants.
I'd bet good money he, along with the other folks who believe this is a great "own the libs" moment, think the migrants shipped to Martha's Vinyard were illegal immigrants.
There are examples on this page of people calling them illegal immigrants.
They haven’t caught on that DeSantis and Perla screwed up their publicity stunt by accidentally picking up a bunch of legal immigrants.
It's cool for people rubbing your little faggot bitch nose in your hypocrisy to keep doing it, Episiarch. It's equally cool of you to own goal yourself by reinforcing their talking point for them because you're such a stupid bitch.
It’s cool for left wingers to lie, divert, obfuscate, and propagandize everything in the name of their unholy agenda.
I have yet to see a single citation from you on this discrediting.
Remember. Mike can also call anyone else and their arguments right wing. Just do not call him left wing.
Then kicking their asses out, pronto. Even with available housing and at least 50 entry-level job openings, some needing bilingual skills! Just crawl under a rock.
Yes but they fed them plain cheese pizza. While the locals were offered goat cheese, walnut, apple, rosemary chicken, smothered in a brandy vinaigrette pizza
I love how you got banned from this site for posting dark web links to hardcore child pornography, shreek.
What happens when you win an argument with the Stormfront-rejects who haunt this comment section... their only recourse is to hurl invective because they know they're just hateful, empty-headed sons of bitches...
the libs have repeatedly ended up being the ones owning him.
What color is the sky on your planet?
-jcr
Only in the fevered mind of retarded shitlibs like you.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha
So not only did DeSantis fly them somewhere they were more welcome, he helped them get visas?
What a dirtbag.
"A Texas sheriff has certified"
Lol.
case. fucking. closed. ~~Fiona.
Believe all cops. #copstoo
Was his badge cam on?
Finally! A sheriff who totally deserves qualified immunity!
So what is the actual crime? I bet team DeSantis was smart enough to video record the invite, the acceptance, and the signing of waivers before boarding the the plane to MV - this is the sheriff that said DeSantis comitted a crime, but couldn't name it and admitted he most likely didn't commit a crime, but now tgat he gets to be on the news again, he's sure there's a crime in there somewhere...
"I bet team DeSantis was smart enough to video record the invite, the acceptance, and the signing of waivers before boarding the the plane to MV"
You would lose that bet. Not.only dod they not document it, they tried to hide the factbthat they were directly recruited by a DeSantis agent by distributing inaccurate and misleading literature. I'm sure the conversations from the agents were straight-up lies.
"admitted he most likely didn’t commit a crime"
Do you believe anything that your echo chamber tells you? Is it because you have no principles or because you will betray any ideal if it discomforts those you dislike a smidge?
I think in some ways I’m very moderate. In my opinions, no so much. I’m wonky and weirdo anarchist/liberarian/Catholic/sleepy. I think I’m fairly moderate in my partisanship and in my temperament though. So, when DeSantis first did this move, I did think he overstepped. I think sending them to Boston or some other city would have proved the point better. Though I also saw the humor in Martha’s Vineyard I thought it was less good of a move than the Abbott and Ducey moves. Martha’s Vineyard removing them so quickly was an embarrassment for them, but overall this was more obviously a stunt then others, which I think could be argued more strongly and proved the point better.
But, man, the reaction from Reason on this is fucking embarrassing. I really want to know who these articles are appealing too because they take theatrical way to highlight a very real border crisis and make it somehow a greater grievance than the border issue itself.
So, when DeSantis first did this move, I did think he overstepped. I think sending them to Boston or some other city would have proved the point better.
I disagree. That would have been lost in the noise of Boston, and no one could argue, not even Boston that they "didn't have room" for 50 migrants. But 50 migrants to a self-declared sanctuary city of the whitest, richest elites in the country? *finger-kiss* magnifique...
From what we've seen on Chicago, Boston probably would have exploded as well.
Which, to give a reference, I don't really like political stunts at all, as I think things should be as boring as possible in politics.
I'm also not greatly offended by DeSantis move. Unless something really abusive comes out, it seems a reasonably fair stunt.
So, my point is just that I'm amazed at the reaction to it all.
Yes I am amazed as well, by Team Red's response. They show utterly no remorse nor shame about treating these migrants like disposable trash. To the ardent defenders of this stunt, these migrants are not full human beings, at least in a moral sense. At least not to the same extent that they regard themselves to be.
Awful, prosperous Martha's Vineyard vs. the comfort of a Texas underpass. The horror.
Of course you are, because you’re a collectivist and a partisan.
It’s ok, we all have our biases and quirks.
"To the ardent defenders of this stunt, these migrants are not full human beings, at least in a moral sense."
Stop. Just stop. There are so many reasons this is wrong that surrendering to self-righteous hyperbole and putting false motives on people just shows you are as intolerant as those you oppose.
Appeals to people who think it is pretty scummy to use asylum seekers as pawns in a publicity stunt.
To be fair, DeSantis was trying to "gotcha" the people of Martha's Vineyard by sending them illegal immigrants, but he fucked up and didn't consider the possibility that he might accidentally grab a bunch of immigrants who were here legally.
Yeah, DACA was pretty absurd, Episiarch, glad you agree.
They volunteered.
No, they were approached by a DeSantis operative and recruited using false information and misleading documents. That is the opposite of volunteering.
Well, BUCS, some of us here are upset that these migrants were used as mere pawns, as trash to be disposed of in someone else's backyard in order to try to score political points.
The way these migrants were treated by both teams IS a bigger issue than the border itself, because it cuts to the REASON why immigration is such a divisive issue - because one tribe sees these people as disposable human beings scarcely better than trash, and the other tribe sees these people as puppets and totems upon which to project their own virtue, but NEITHER team truly sees these people as the individuals that they are.
Fundamentally, for both teams, the issue of immigration boils down to how to use migrants and the border to preserve their own positions of power and privilege. It's not about the welfare of the migrants themselves, and it certainly isn't about fundamental liberty.
Well we could secure the border to discourage if not stop people from making the trek.
"Secure the border" is a meaningless slogan. Kinda like "common sense gun control".
What do you suggest to "secure the border" more than it already is? Build the wall? Then migrants will just find a way around the wall by, say, entering via air or sea. Or, they will find the inevitable gaps and holes in the wall and enter that way. Is this wall going to be patrolled 24/7? How are you going to build the wall in the middle of the Rio Grande river? Oh wait, it really means building the wall on the American side of the border about a mile away from the river, stealing private property and effectively ceding land to Mexico. This is starting to sound expensive. "But, walls work, just look at Israel!" Yes walls can work if they are patrolled 24/7 and - and here's the important point - if they are backed by the use of deadly force. Are you willing to go there - shooting migrants? Do you think the public at large is willing to go there?
Trying to suppress the free movement of free people is no different than trying to suppress the free movement of anyone or anything else. Prohibition doesn't work with drugs or guns, and it doesn't work with migration either. The only thing that Prohibition creates is rich smugglers and a deprivation of liberty for everyone else.
Securing the border was making great progress under the Orange Bad Man. Then again, it's never too early for partisan lefties to start revising history.
Some things:
-More border patrols and agents
-The wall
-Faster deportations
-No benefits to illegals
Episiarch beat you to the talking point by 5 minutes and yet you still posted it, cytotoxic? You guys are going to have share that 50 cents now.
some of us here are upset that these migrants were used as mere pawns
You really prefer they stay under bridges indefinitely?
Yes. They do.
I prefer that all people be treated with the dignity and respect that all human beings are entitled to. What do you think?
You want cheap labor to provide the lawn-care services that the Overstuffed Class needs; fat protects fat, fatty.
And he goes for the ad hominem. A tacit admission of losing the debate.
Are you claiming that there isn’t an obesity crisis? Remarkable!
Gracile, feeble millennials, obese gen-xers and their bloated progeny can barely budge their cellulite-crusted ham hocks out of their gaming chairs and require Democrat-supported exploitation of illegal immigrants to do the work that their pudgy selves can’t bear to attempt.
Fat protects fat, and Fat exploits the fit.
A free trip to Martha’s Vineyard seems fairly dignified.
Treat them in a dignified manner means spend government resources on them. But only in border states.
Yet jeff will also lie that he doesn't support government welfare for illegals.
"I prefer that all people be treated with the dignity and respect that all human beings are entitled to. What do you think?"
...which is being put under a bridge in Texas, as they've been doing and got pissy when a Fox station in TX dared to tape the criminal aliens (see, jeff? Not calling em illegal) being kept there.
I had no idea that Martha’s Vineyard was such a massive shithole that sending people there VOLUNTARILY was treating them like trash.
Interesting redefinition of "voluntarily". Most people would call it "active recruitment using disinformation and lies".
Unless they forced them to get on the plane (absolutely no evidence to back that up), yes it is still VOLUNTARY if you choose to accept what someone is telling you.
Wow. That's downright sociopathic. So fraud is acceptable in your world? False assurances and fake documents are the fault of those who are misled, not those wha are misleading them? Exactly what sort of bad behavior is unacceptable to you? Violence only?
So far as I can see, REASON writes for an audience of about 90% libertarians who think that REASON is a consistently left-wing rag pretending to be libertarian.
Then there is another 10% of REASON readers who applaud the fact that it is a left-wing rag pretending to be libertarian.
No, after observing this forum for a number of years I would say that there are possibly 10% libertarians and 90% Alt-whatevers from left and right (mostly right).
This makes it almost entirely useless as a forum for libertarian discussions (or anything else), so I have no idea why Reason keeps it going.
This statement is shared by most of the liberals cosplaying as libertarians here. Strange.
Sheriff Salazar is a Dem operative. Naturally, Reason approves of his particular brand of law enforcement misconduct.
If you truly think Reason are a bunch of Democratic shills, why are you on their website?
force of habit, maybe reminiscing of a time with better articles. Even though they benefit from clicks or comments, sometimes we just can't scroll past a BS headline and resist the temptation to vent. I mostly still only come here for the brickbat and Remy.
Same reason you keep coming here even though you're a poor persecuted little piss baby surrounded by MAGA Republicans, Episiarch. LUB IT OR LEEB IT!!!!!!! Right little bitch?
why are you on their website?
The endless comedy.
^+10
The hot chicks and disco!
To remind people who wander here what actual libertarianism is, not dnc lite.
Jesse, you wouldn't recognize individual liberty if it walked up and bit you. Paleoconservatism is about as antithetical to libertarianism as possible. Rather than the ethos of "live and let live", you prefer "live the way we want you to live". Enforced by the government.
The rich progressives of MV couldn’t get < 60 people off MV fast enough. Stunt?! What stunt? You mean a free flight to sanctuary state? Not sure that’s a stunt unless you consider calling yourself a progressive and make sure TV is there to witness your compassion. Then as soon as the camera is turned off kick them out cause we can’t accommodate these people here. Oh unless it’s between June and September then they can mow our lawns and serve us food. Then MV seem to be able to find them a place to crash. A stunt as well.
“off MV fast enough”
Uh huh. They were there nearly two days. The talking point that Martha's Vineyard supposedly hustled them off to somewhere else quickly is really weak.
how long were they in TX before they were provided transportation? If TX had them for more than 48 hours and provided food and shelter you would have to consider them saints right?
I don't consider anyone a saint.
It is others who are trying to foist a talking point that the Martha's Vineyard residents somehow mistreated these asylees. I'm just pointing out that the talking points are weak, and they weren't mistreated at all.
If, as the article says, they were victims because they were given false representations, then shouldn't the people of MV be the guilty party for that misrepresentation? That "mistreatment" is merely the residents acting in opposition to their publicly stated position. Is it really mistreatment? IDK, but it seems it was certified a crime by law enforcement.
They were given resources MV and Massachusetts put on their own websites.
Cite?
I’ve already given you multiple links to the packets they were given including an admission from the NYT on the packets. This is sea lioning. You can easily search for Martha vinyard packets and get multiple links to them including a NYT article about them. Multiple news agencies have them.
This is why you’re a dishonest shit.
The alleged misrepresentation was on DeSantis’ part.
They offered sanctuary to all illegal immigrants through open statements then rejected them within 48 hours. The immigrants said yes to the flights due to the speech of these cities.
The immigrants said yes because they were desperate and penniless. Team Red took advantage of their desperation to rob them of their dignity.
Do you even understand this, Jesse?
LOL. Rob them of their dignity? By taking leftists at their word?
I can see how the episode strips hypocritical leftists of their dignity, but the immigrants were fine. They had almost 48 hours at MV and free pizza. (Didn't you read Mike Laursen about how well they were treated?)
Yeah you're right. Those migrants don't have any dignity in the first place, because they're just filthy dirty illegals. Isn't that right?
That sure seems to be MV's position.
If YOU were desperate and homeless and penniless, would YOU want some stranger to come along and attempt to take advantage of your desperate situation by promising you stuff in exchange for your unwitting participation in someone else's agenda?
The natural right to get what you want.
In someone else’s country.
And yet you still do not see the irony of your statement. They are here because of the promises of the progressive agenda. So look to your own ass first.
The article should read .
Democrats butt hurt after having their own political pawns used against them.
Of course all of your posts ignore that their dignity was so maligned that multiple safe countries didn’t offer them asylum and instead shipped them to the Southern border.
And they definitely don’t get any dignity in the Democrat run holding facilities full of cages, children starving and dying of thirst.
Yet no criticism of Biden flying them around. Just not capable of self-analysis, hm?
They were equally desperate and penniless in texas
Only to you dumbass.
I think it's absolutely fantastic this is the talking point you were handed.
I bet the next batch gets hustled off faster.
Now they know the phone number to the Pentagon.
>>potentially lawful permanent residence in the United States.
great! then they could all legally goto Martha's Vineyard and tell those nimby fucks to chupa chupa.
I love me some Chupa Chups.
Sheriff Javier Salazar...
Fiona, you forgot part of that. It should be, Sheriff Javier Salazar, Democrat. And a showboating, partisan Democrat at that. He's not doing this for the rule of law. It's for his own partisanship and spotlight.
Nah, when it's a democrat you either don't mention their political affiliation (or hide it multiple paragraphs deep, mentioned only once) or you just call them an "elected official."
If they're republican, it goes right into the headline.
Democrats don't pounce like Republicans. They kinda slouch.
I prefer the verb "infect".
And a showboating, partisan Democrat at that.
Good thing there aren't any showboating, partisan Republicans.
We're not talking about Marjorie Taylor Greene here Jeff, try and stay on topic.
WHATABOUTWHATABOUTWHATABOUT?!?!?!?!
Which ones are using their office to persecute political rivals?
We have an Attorney General of New York who ran for office on a platform of using the power of the state to go after a single person and anyone associated with him for completely unspecified crimes. The promise was "I will dedicate my office to prosecuting these political enemies".
We see our illustrious and distinguished AG Garland using his office in the same way.
Texas has a history of left wing democrats using the AG office to target political rivals for spurious reasons.
This is the highest abuse of office possible in a democracy. Yet the democrat party and their media allies actually cheer and celebrate this desecration of office and destruction of legitimacy of the government.
"He’s not doing this for the rule of law. It’s for his own partisanship and spotlight."
You spelled Ron DeSantis wrong.
It sure would suck if this same sheriff had been in charge when multiple 18 wheelers were found in his county full of dead “migrants”.
Can this logic then be applied to all flights and busing done by the federal government?
No.
(D) vs. (R)
Completely different things.
Have a particular flight or bus ride of immigrants in mind that you want to discuss? Otherwise, your question is so vague as to be unanswerable.
Only to the willfully ignorant. Dumbass.
Well gee Episiarch, it's just so cryptic. He might mean the Trail of Tears or the Montgomery bus terminal or he might mean the hundreds of covert flights transporting migrants against their will to random cities all over the United States. It's just so hard to tell.
The ones under Obama where the children ended up working as unpaid labor on farms. Let us start there.
Cite?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/obama-administration-placed-children-with-human-traffickers-report-says/2016/01/28/39465050-c542-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html
Comments?
Here's the thing about not being someone who lies like you do jeff. I can back up what I say.
I notice Jeff didn’t bother to respond to you.
If my comment comes off as too vague for you, you aren't informed enough to be commenting on this subject.
God, I love Reason reporting.
A certification by a democrat sheriff in the big blue dot of Austin says they are crime victims; so DeSantis, using a seldom seen technique of having the legislature approve spending, gives these unfortunate victims a free trip to a welcoming and loving sanctuary city, and this is somehow evil?
Only to democrat operatives and Reason.
using a seldom seen technique of having the legislature approve spending
[Schadenfreude Out Loud]
This free ride disrupted the legal processing of the asylum seekers, including making it harder for them to show up at destinations they had already been assigned to. But, hey, let's pretend we never heard that part of the story.
How could it disrupt the legal processing of the asylum seekers when they were legal immigrants who had already been processed and were lawfully present as per your previous posts, Episiarch? But hey, let's pretend we didn't read what you posted 5 minutes ago. Stick to the PDF you fucking clown, it's vicariously embarrassing when you try to go it on your own.
How? They've been assigned phones woth supposed tracking software and they were provided how to switch locations for immigration courts in their packets
Well, Jesse's been given his right-wing talking points, that is for sure.
Did you read that on Breitbart or on Federalist?
Cite?
This is all information jeff has already been given multiple times. But this is one of the tactics of a sea lion. Repeatedly ask for the same information and citations over and over until your opponent grows tired of it, then the sea lion pretend he is victorious.
It was in one of the many links he gave you when this story broke. Jesus H Science.
If it was a "stunt" for DeSantis to send 50 illegals to Martha's vineyard, what do you call the "Biden" "Administration's" sending thousands of illegals all over the country?
Following legal procedure.
In the dark of the night?
Cite?
Here you go.
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/orr/about/ucs/sponsors
That’s not what we are discussing.
Weird how that wasn't the legal procedure for the previous 50 years.
DeSantis sent the Venezuelans to MV. The MVers weren't happy, Joe Biden is now sending Venezuelans back to Mexico. Coincidence?
The State of Florida explicitly stated that the illegal border crossers would be better off in a sanctuary city than in a non sanctuary state like Florida. And it turns out they are. So what exactly is the problem here?
Well I think it's a small price to pay for the enormous public service these illegal immigrants performed.
What illegal immigrants? The asylum seekers DeSantis picked up off the street in Texas were in the United States legally.
Cite?
And yet DeSantis flying them to Martha's Vineyard disrupted processing them? Uh oh, Episiarch tried to think again.
Easy to see how jeff and Mike love lying by how they can't keep their own narratives straight.
If they were here legally how is it criminal to transport them willingly?
I don't know if Perla's or DeSantis' actions were criminal or not. But it was an absolutely scummy thing to do.
A free plane flight offered to new arrivals to travel to a rich welcoming locale replete with residents of a city actively offering “sanctuary” for these kinds of newly arrived people?
You hate immigrants and want them to suffer, obviously.
It is a scummy thing to do when dems are made to deal with their own shit?
Or is it scummy when exposing leftist lies about sanctuary?
Jeff believes they should stay in underpass. Taking migrants to sanctuary cities where he might run into one is wrong.
NYC declaring an emergency over 10k in a year when much smaller towns get 10k a day doesn't matter.
Jeff truly doesn't want these people near him. And he wants others to make the cost sacrifice for his virtue signaling.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Temporarily pending their asylum hearing. They were processed and released by the federal border patrol and free to move around at will
As you pointed out they were on the streets of Texas because federal facilities are overcrowded so there is no difference whether they are in Texas or mv
Problem is most claiming asylum don’t qualify but know that claiming it allows them to stay here
How did the migrants get to FL? Cross the border from GA?
Fiona. Get out while you still can with some shred of dignity left. Reason doesn't love you. It will use you up and spit you out like the last open boarders gal whose name I can't remember.
You mean Shikia?
Shikha. The lovely and talented Ms. Dalmia. We all miss her.
Great article
It’s outrageously funny how many of you “clear thinkers” absolutely and totally missed the point of the moving of migrants to sanctuary cities and liberal elite enclaves. It’s not because Abbet or DeSantis hate migrants. although I can see how weak minded partisans are going to position it that way because their brains can only digest issues in absolute terms.
For decades, the left side of the aisle has lectured border states on how we have to deal with migrants. They conveniently, without any skin in the game, declare themselves high holy “sanctuary cities“ with no earthly idea whatsoever how many immigrants flood across our southern border on a daily basis. Those moved to Chicago, DC and Martha’s Vineyard not evenAmounting to a drop of gnat piss in a bucket.
Suddenly, the elitists in Martha’s Vineyard or xenophobes, and Northeastern, primarily liberal “sanctuary cities” have no idea what they’re going to do with this handful of immigrants invading their city.
They don’t know jack squat about what small border cities go through every day. Being overrun by migrants, crime, trying to help people, the drug traffic, the human trafficking… But then again I guess Lightfoot has her own issues with people gunning each other down in the streets at a record pace so she doesn’t need A smattering of immigrants distracting her from not doing anything about that problem.
The purpose is to prove a point, not keep these people from getting visas. Although the wayreason.com is headed I completely understand that went totally over the head of their empty headed reporting
If Florida and Texas surrender some of their federal funding to create the same infrastructure and support that the border states enjoy, there is no problem.
If they ship the migrants to places that have facilities, stopgap facilities like a military base wouldn't be necessary.
If they coordinate with officials in the destination city, personnel and processes can prepare for the incoming migrants.
But do you really think they will do that? It would make the processing and management of the migrants smooth and effective. And it would decrease the funds available to DeSantis and Abbot. Ineffective stunts and less funding? We can'r have that!
"If they coordinate with officials in the destination city, personnel and processes can prepare for the incoming migrants."
Like how Biden warns places he ships criminal aliens off to in the middle of the night?
Joe Biden does that? All by himself? Damn, that's a hard-working guy. Taking a second job as well as President? Amazing for a guy his age.
Your argument is that DHS is rogue and Biden has no control?
No. I think his argument is that Adolf Hitler was not responsible for the Holocaust.
Ni, I'm saying that Biden doesn't tell anyone anything about what to do with migrants. Because he's the President. He doesn't do planning for DHS.
Hence my post about him taking a second job. Because the person who schedules those flights and plans their destinations is so far below the President that he would never know who the person was, never mind what their daily tasks were.
IOW, typical leftist obfuscation.
More like the way the world actually works. Do you think CEOs clean the office floors at night?
You know, it must be interesting to live in a world where there's even approximately enough federal funding to the border states to deal with these migrants. How much LSD did you have to take before you started inhabiting it?
I never said there was enough. Like everything else the government funds, there's never enough.
What I said was that if they want someone else to manage these migrants, they need to give up the money the federal government provides them to manage those migrants.
Awesome, so you agree that this bolus of migrants is a burden on places where they arrive, which the Democrats, in control of the White House and Congress, have refused to take adequate measures to relieve. Your wholehearted support for Abbot and DeSantis taking action that finally brings attention to this issue is accordingly noted.
Now, how, exactly, are you expecting Texas and Florida to "give up" funding that never touches state coffers? The Federal migrant relief funds go directly to local non-profits in affected areas. Are you suggesting that Texas and Florida tax their local nonprofits, or what?
"Awesome, so you agree that this bolus of migrants is a burden on places where they arrive"
The federal government has invested its money in the places that have the largest migrant demand. So major cities, ports (air and sea), and the borders. The vast majority of the money goes to the southern border states.
So basically, your complaint is that geography exists. If we were an island nation like Australia, we wouldn't have this problem, according to your argument.
Also, note that Florida isn't a border state. California and New York have more legal and illegal immigrants each year than Florida.
"which the Democrats, in control of the White House and Congress, have refused to take adequate measures to relieve."
We have had immigration issues for our entire history. The only major difference is that Rs don't deport as many illegals as Ds because their party needs a immigration to be a "crisis". Having millions of illegal immigrants back in their home countries doesn't help the R's narrative. That aside, Republicans have been as successful (or, if you prefer, unsuccessful) at preventing illegal immigration as Democrats.
"finally brings attention to this issue"
Everyone is aware of the issue. It's not like people are shocked to suddenly realize we have millions of immigrants (both legal and illegal). These performances by DeSantis and Abbot aren't helping people discover the issue for the first time.
"Now, how, exactly, are you expecting Texas and Florida to “give up” funding that never touches state coffers?"
If you believe that there are no federal funds going to border states, you are too removed from reality for a reasonable discussion. And that doesn't even take into account the second-order money that all of those federal employees living in the border states bring into state coffers through taxes. They don't want to give up the cash and people necessary to manage migrants because it is both a direct and indirect infusion of cash for the state.
Federal employees now qualify as funding for border control? Fucking seriously?
No, federal employees living and working in the border states provide a secondary benefit to the states that they live in. As I said above.
In addition, there are direct funds provided to the states from the federal government. That is the funding.
Two different things, but fiscally beneficial to the states. If they want to surrender some of the funding, facilities, and personnel that federal dollars provide to them, it"s all good. If they want to keep the benefits but ship out the migrants, not so good.
As I pointed out, if states could keep all the funding and ditch all the migrants, they would all do it in a heartbeat.
So if you want to lose some migrants, you will have to give up some funding as well. If you want to lose a lot of migrants, you will have to give up funding, facilities, and people.
If Florida and Texas (or any border state) want to make that trade-off they should definitely do it.
“Yesterday, Salazar certified that the migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard were the victims of a crime. ”
Oh, is that how criminal justice works in the USA now? A sheriff “certifies” people guilty of crimes? Ah, well, then. Hold on while I go find a cooperative sheriff…
I swear, the Orwellian shit journalists will spew without a second thought is staggering to behold.
It's almost like judge shopping. But that sort of thing never happens.
And to help you with your literacy problem, he didn't certify anyone as guilty of a crime. He certified the migrants as the victims of a crime. But if you keep working hard, your language comprehension should get better.
Courts deal with guilt and innocence. Local law enforcement deals with victims.
Bullshit. Local law enforcements deal with investigations. Declaring someone a victim “certifies” a crime was committed without a jury.
When they won’t even bring charges against the easily established perpetrators of the “certified” crime, I call bullshit.
"Declaring someone a victim “certifies” a crime was committed without a jury."
That is what happens in law wnforcement every day. There are victims long before a case ever gets heard by a jury. Many cases never get to a jury. Are you suggesting that if a jury doesn't hear a case, there are no victims?
"When they won’t even bring charges against the easily established perpetrators of the “certified” crime, I call bullshit."
Who sats they aren't bringing charges? Having a crime and victims is the beginning of the criminal justice process, not the end.
Do you think the police just investigate everything everyone is doing all the time? Or, maybe, someone reports a crime and the police investigate it.
For your feeble mind, I'll make it simple:
1) A crime is committed
2) A report of that crime, including who the victims are, is made <--- we are here
3) The police investigate.
4) The evidence the police collect is given to a prosecutor.
5) The prosecutor chooses to either try the case, settle it, or decides that there isn't enough evidence for a trial.
6) If the prosecutor chooses to prosecute and the accused doesn't make a deal, the case goes in front of a jury.
7) The jury reaches a verdict.
Notice that victims are identified at the very beginning of the process and a jury is involved (if it ever is) at the very end.
A jury has nothing to do with identifying victims.
I’m sorry, but those are not the steps. You’re absolutely wrong.
1. Something happens
2. Someone thinks it could be a crime and the police find out
3. The police decide wether or not to investigate
4. The police investigate <— we are here
5. The DA determines whether or not they can prove a crime was committed and, if so, who did it
6. They bring charges
7. A jury decides if the alleged crime was actually committed and if the defendant is the guilty one.
In your step 1. A crime occurred, you’re assuming that, at the start of every police investigation , a crime occurred. That’s not the correct initial condition. Given causality, whether or not a crime occurred must be established through investigation, but you’re assuming that one occurred three steps before an investigation took place. You’re literally assuming the facts. That’s not how actual justice works.
For example, the Kenosha riot shooting. The police and the DA tried to prove that it was a crime, but it was ruled self-defense: no crime was committed.
You don’t start an investigation knowing someone’s already a victim of a crime. That’s just basic justice.
Are you really saying that anyone whose case wasn't heard by a jury isn't a victim of crime? Because that's what your posts say.
When you start with the conclusion you want to reach and work backwards, you end up saying stupid stuff like this.
My point is that whether any crime was committed is based on the facts, not the mere accusations of police or DAs, and the start of a criminal investigation doesn’t assume that a crime was committed. That’s part of the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Assuming at the beginning of an investigation that a crime occurred, as your steps demonstrate , is literally “starting with the conclusion you want to reach and working backwards.”
Here, let me Google that for you: https://gprivate.com/61d1g
If the police determine that there is no crime, they don't investigate. If they determine that there is a crime, they do.
You are asserting two thkngs that aren't accurate: that law enforcement doesn't come to the conclusion that a crime has been committed before investigating it and that only a jury trial determines if a crime has been committed.
You are trying to say the sheriff did something he isn't qualified or authorized to do because you don't like him or what he did. But he didn't.
You are using semantics and sophistry to try to make your case, but it lacks substance because you are trying to reach the conclusion you want as opposed to analyzing the facts.
Also, if you have to strawman, you already lost.
Yes. You should stop doing that.
", unlawful restraint, or restricting someone's movement without consent, includes actions that involve "force, intimidation, or deception."
Does it include locking them up on cages. At a military base? Flying them across the country by CBP?
Are you arguing that migrants should have free movement within the country? If so then I guess that makes you pro-"Open borders".
Don't give them any ideas.
Leaving them to die in the back of an 18 wheeler is more Salazar's speed
(1) Another abuse of the law by the Biden administration
(2) It makes no difference since Biden wouldn’t have deported deported them anyway
(3) At least they are “making a blue state more diverse” now
Really? Over the last four presidencies, which Presidents were more diligent about deporting illegal immigrants?
It wasn't the Republicans.
Diligent?
Or who invited in millions and deported hundreds of thousands versus who said "don't come" so hundreds of thousands came and tens of thousands got deported.
TLDR, your metric is screwed uom
No one has to invite illegal immigrants. They have been coming for the entire history of our country. At least one of my forbears was an illegal Irish immigrant. Probably more, but I am certain about one.
The difference between the parties is that Republicans need to have more illegal immigrants in America to bolster their political rhetoric, so they don't catch and deport as many.
Now there is a good argument for strict immigration enforcement.
I am making $35 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $9,000 a month by working on a laptop, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply.
Everybody must try this job now by just using this website …http://www.workonline1.com
Under the Texas penal code, unlawful restraint, or restricting someone's movement without consent, includes actions that involve "force, intimidation, or deception."
There better be an exception for government actors in that law or, hooo boy, taxpayers in Texas pay the salaries of a lot of criminals.
"Judging by his actions, DeSantis is no champion of immigrants."
"Immigrants"? DeSantis is no champion of illegal aliens, not immigrants.
CB
But the migrants he shipped to MV weren't illegal aliens. So what is your point?
Yeah, Nelson, they were. Sorry.
CB
You may want to actually read facts provided by reputable sources.
They were *legal* migrants in the middle of the *legal* process for being granted asylum. They were *legally* released by CBP pending their hearing and were *legally* allowed to be in the United States.
So no, Crackers. They were not illegal immigrants. Although that hasn't stopped some "news" outlets from claiming otherwise.
They crossed into the country illegally. That makes them illegal migrants. They have no basis for an asylum claim either. The fact that the Biden admin grants them asylum is itself a violation of law.
It’s now a crime to transport Law-Breaking USA invaders? You’ve got to be kidding me. Reminds me of when it became a crime not to have cable TV and Steak dinners in prison.
Democrats, "Why can't you just give all your stuff to criminals! Just give them everything they want.."
Well someone (or several someones, like the entire (D) crowd) has been saying that there was a crime. And it sounds like this particular kind of visa is meant to let people stay around if they'll be helpful for an investigation (as either victim or witness).
Humorously the 'crime' was that act of taking care of illegal immigration (i.e. crime).
No. You don't get to turn this around on behalf of the leftists like that.
The Martha's Vinyard debacle exposed, absolutely and completely, for all the world to see, that the left never expected to follow the rules they're forcing on us.
They fundraised off of those people, kept the money for themselves, then got rid of them immediately.
The quickness and aggressiveness with which they got rid of those people shows their utter contempt for them, and their utter contempt for the rest of us.
The reason the left doesn't follow their own rules is because they know they're scamming us with those rules. Why would they fall for their own scam? The scam is to be forced on us, not forced on them.
They didn’t get rid of them quickly.
You can keep pretending that less than 2 days is not quickly, but that is a laughable claim.
It’s not quick. It’s only “quick” to people in the right-wing echo chamber.
In what universe is less than 48 hours not quick?
In Russia, the trains to Siberia run twice a day!
It was within a day. How long is quickly in your world?
“They didn’t get rid of them quickly.”
Of his original post, you’ve addressed about 1%. I assume you’re good with the other 99%?
So what's the problem?
The immigrants get moved to a place that says it will welcome them, and then they get to stay longer. I thought Reason was pro-immigration.
Not sure the blog post said anything about the current turn of events being a problem. Sometimes a blog post isn’t about a problem.
The Woke Folk outrage over DeSantis's "stunt" to demonstrate how the Democrat Administration is running roughshod over their presumed responsibilities to uphold the USA, not specifically their voter base. Let's see, they promote, hardly "just allow" open-borders that flood the southern states where folks are not so inclined to the Democrat's socialistic, "progressive" objectives and methods, and that's just fine as long as it doesn't land un in THEIR backyards! Right I get it - that's why so many Democrat elites live in gated communities - so they can live free of the impact of their "voter harvest fertilization" practices. Now it makes sense... just found my rose colored glasses.
Have news for you. Democratic and Republican elites tend to live in gated communities.
Do you even recognize that you are being a partisan shill?
This is not a libertarian analysis. This is not even a fact-based analysis. This is MSNBC level drivel.
"Legal questions arose."
Really? Did they?
Or did partisan actors publicly announcd that they were going to attempt (once again) to use their office as political weapons and find some way to attack a political enemy using the law.
Because that is what happened. They declared who was guilty and then they spent weeks running around trying to fake up a crime.
This is not new. Remember Tom Delay? Same people. Same tactic.
There is only one place for libertarians to stand in moments like this, and it is not shoulder to shoulder with those who are using state power to silence political opponents.
BTW, the bit about covid funds shows just how far the democrats will go to abuse their office for politics... the DeSantis administration cleared the use of interest on deposited covid funds with the exact same office before they did it.
This also demonstrates that this article is nothing more than a partisan propaganda piece. This point is two days old. In pulling in your talking points this had to come up. So including it in your article as an own is dishonest and exposes this as straight DNC propaganda.
There might be two kinds of pro immigration crowd
The reasonable but few
"I support immigration and path to citizenship for certain undocumented individuals. But I also concede that massive and unceasing migration will have real life impact on society"
The American left
"Immigration is always good and always a plus on economy, no matter WHAT! They bring us things like momo! We have to let in as many of them as possible and make it difficult for the government to regulate the borders!"
Desantis exposed the hypocrisy of the latter. They engaged in moral absolutism, and the folded when taken to task. And this was in the backdrop of an ongoing migration crisis near the border. Chemjeff and Mike thinks this "stunt" was no different than some crank dumping garbage in front of city hall to make points government inefficiency. To most active voters, it was more than that.
Most of the electorate fall in the middle of the immigration issue. The ruling class has to obsess over the stunt being inhumane to detract from the points it raised. Again, if a bunch of wealthy libs believed immigrants are an absolute asset to the economy, why did they reject 50 of them? If someone gave me a car for free, I won't turn it back because the upkeep might cost me money in the future. Right? Simple enough?
Why did NYC, supposedly one of the greatest cities of the world, declare emergency over Texas dropping off migrants at their location? Why do libs so often fear the homeless, poor immigrants, or even building projects encroaching on their neighborhood?
By and large Americans are wary of the massive migration crowding the nation. They don't ignore 50 people dying in trucks BUT get mad at Desantis for pulling his stunt. Resolving this is not a matter of "ok then just let everyone in then" It's stupid, not a way to run a country, and many know that sudden growth in population will result in rises in traffic, housing cost, etc. The republicans are gaining trust on this issue in polls because they at least recognize that there IS a problem. They don't say "what's the deal, just let them in by the thousands, they'll pick up crops for you"
Did person who read the law to the Sheriff skip the text between the first and second comma?
(1) "Restrain" means to restrict a person's movements without consent, so as to interfere substantially with the person's liberty...
What were they precluded from doing in Martha's Vineyard that they could do when they were in Texas?
Better let all the criminals go.. Certainly can’t restrict them. /s
Sounds to me like it was the Texas Sheriff's stunt, not DeSeants'.
Reason: DeSantis helped these 'migrants'.
Film at 11.
Judging by his actions, DeSantis is no champion of immigrants.
Seriously, just fuck off.
Fiona is probably right. "Have you been the victim of a crime in the USA?" is a perfectly routine question in cases involving er... invaders. It the idea is to fill These States with economic refugees from Kleptocracy-backed prohibitionist caulillo regimes--rather than competent individuals possessed of valuable skills and granted entry visas--the news is great. For a reproduction of the Martha's Vineyard sanctuary declaration and invitation to sneak in, see realclimatescience.com
The illegals were staying here anyway and everyone including TReason.com knows that. This is to try and make a Republican look bad and take the focus off Biden's terrible border policy. TReason.com immediately bought into it. What a joke!
Apparently your reading comprehension is as bad as your paleo pals. They were legal migrants, not illegal immigrants.
They crossed into the country illegally. Most of them are not going to show up for their asylum hearings. Most of the ones that do will not be granted asylum. None of the few granted asylum will not be entitled to it.
Yes, objectively, they are all illegal migrants.
You know, I'd think a libertarian might be inclined to wonder how the hell a sheriff can "certify" that a crime took place. One would think that making that determination would be the purview of the courts. Granting that authority to the executive (i.e. sheriff) would be pretty damned close to making the executive judge, jury and executioner. That principle, fully extrapolated, might be a lot of things. But, libertarian isn't one of them.
Your analysis was already put out there by someone else above. He was as wrong as you.
No, Nelson, you're a lying hack. In addition to ascertaining whether someone is guilty of a crime, the judicial branch is responsible for deciding whether a crime was, in fact, committed. Your imbecilic model is nothing less than a recipe for the executive to rule by fiat.
No one said anything about determining if anyone was guilty. That is for the courts. But if the police don't believe a crime has been committed, are you saying they investigate anyway? Every anonymous tip? Every claim that a chinese restaurant didn't give them enough duck sauce? Every drunken fool who wants their Uber driver arrested because they threw the customer out for throwing up in the car?
After the police determine that there is actually a crime, they investigate that crime. When their investigation concludes, they hand it over to the prosecutors. Then it goes to the courts. Long, long, long after the police determjned it was a crime worthy of investigation.
You are confusing the determination of a crime with the determination of guilt. Two very different things, decided by two very different organizations.
The whole point of the stunt was to highlight that individual states should not be made to suffer disproportionately for a national problem. More importantly, that national problem is magnified greatly by Federal laws and regulations and very bad policies. For example, the national immigration policy should be very simple: anyone who wants to visit or reside permanently in the United States should be allowed to do so without condition except for relatively basic ID procedures and perhaps tracking (current address, occupation if any, etc.) and as long as they support themselves while here. The fact that the "stunt" might have resulted in the immigrants being allowed to remain here doesn't bother me at all although that might or might not have been DeSantis' goal.