This seems sensible:
Elizabeth Warren has an immigration plan. Here are the highlights:
- Decriminalizes unauthorized immigration and returns to the civil enforcement we had before George Bush began Operation Streamline.
- Eliminates abusive immigration enforcement and keeps law enforcement at arms length from CBP and ICE.
- Reduces and reforms immigrant detention.
- Reforms immigration courts.
- Raises the refugee cap to 125,000 and affirms refugee protections.
- Reforms legal immigration and creates a path to citizenship.
Another very good Warren plan, substantially improving the status quo while being reasonable enough that one can imagine a united Democratic Congress passing something like it. Glad that liberals can agree…
This is a curious plan. As near as I can tell, it recommends no actions to improve border law enforcement in any way. There’s nothing about either a wall or a “virtual wall.”
I dunno, I actually find it quite easy to explain why a Democratic candidate for president isn’t endorsing the most famously racist symbol of Donald Trump’s racist immigration policies, myself.
There’s nothing about E-Verify. There’s nothing about “smarter” or “more efficient” enforcement. No one will ever be deported—except, presumably, for serious felons, though Warren doesn’t even say that explicitly. Expedited removal will be ended. The Border Patrol will be reshaped from “top to bottom,” and will focus their efforts on “homeland security efforts like screening cargo, identifying counterfeit goods, and preventing smuggling and trafficking.” The whole thing is very similar to Julian Cástro’s plan.
Um, right, what am I supposed to be finding objectionable here?
I have previously criticized Republicans who accused liberals of wanting “open borders.” President Trump tweets about this endlessly. But I have to admit that it’s hard to see much daylight between Warren’s plan and de facto open borders.
This is…howlingly wrong:
Christ on a crutch. Moderate Dems are letting themselves get duped by patently dishonest nativist framing, which redefines "open" as "not hermetically sealed." It's a total grift, as I detail here… https://t.co/PE8kpTfrPI https://t.co/I8WLJIOODF— Will Wilkinson 🌐 (@willwilkinson) July 12, 2019
Calling that "de facto open borders" requires either complete dishonesty or monumental ignorance of comparative immigration policy.— Will Wilkinson 🌐 (@willwilkinson) July 12, 2019
“Using patently dishonest Republican talking points to describe an entirely sensible Democratic immigration plan” is something that professional liberal pundits probably shouldn’t be doing.
I’m not sure what’s going on with K-Drum — I wouldn’t say this post about how if you average together the housing price trends in San Francisco and East St. Louis it shows there’s not actually any housing crisis is a winner either. Maybe he’s been hanging out with Kaus.