11–20 of 23 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child (which also won’t be able to afford treatment anyway)
I bet you’re real fun at parties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child (which also won’t be able to afford treatment anyway)
What an insanely cruel thought lacking any semblance of basic decency and humanity. Is there really no cure for MAGA mind virus?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He even had leukaemia? Why didn’t they give him and his extended family green cards right there and then? Don't do this... No one here suggested that having leukaemia should be enough to qualify for a green card.
Why not? The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child (which also won’t be able to afford treatment anyway)
Where?
I see it calling out presumed ICE agents “in civilian clothing,” making arrests in “the hallway” of a courthouse (in violation of “a federal court ruling that the new ICE courthouse arrest policy is unlawful and unconstitutional”), allegedly violating “the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution — which guarantee due process and prevent unlawful seizures” while laying bare that this administration has given up on arresting the “violent criminals” we were promised in campaign world.
A boy with leukemia very likely won't live to adulthood and will be a burden on society. We want and need the healthiest, the brightest, the strongest for both their generation's sake and that of succeeding ones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He even had leukaemia? Why didn’t they give him and his extended family green cards right there and then? Don't do this... No one here suggested that having leukaemia should be enough to qualify for a green card.
Why not? The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child (which also won’t be able to afford treatment anyway)
Basic humane considerations and decency really do have a place in how you enforce laws, and their existence makes a difference that can affect any of us at any time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? The article suggests that they should be allowed to stay because it’s an ill child (which also won’t be able to afford treatment anyway)
Aside from the article not suggesting that, even if it did, so what? I'd like to assume that the federal bureaucracy of one of the absolute wealthiest and most powerful nations in human history can manage to avoid economic disaster if it defers some half-reasoned regulatory deportation policy for little kids who are possibly too sick to travel. Basic humane considerations and decency really do have a place in how you…
A boy with leukemia very likely won't live to adulthood and will be a burden on society. We want and need the healthiest, the brightest, the strongest for both their generation's sake and that of succeeding ones.
If one don't have the heart to see the basic decency of not imprisoning a terminally ill child... I'm not sure there is anything they couldn't be convinced to do.
if this boy misses his treatments wouldn't that also mean that the 8th amendment is being violated?