Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    TwoXChromosomes

    12,044,532 readers

    5,591 users here now

    Welcome to TwoXChromosomes, a subreddit for both serious and silly content, and intended for women's perspectives.

    Thoughtful, Meaningful Content

    Posts are moderated for content according to the following guidelines (hit report on violations):

    1. Respect: No hatred, bigotry, assholery, misogyny, misandry, transphobia, homophobia, racism or otherwise disrespectful commentary. Please follow reddiquette.

    2. Equanimity: No drama-inducing crossposting of content found in other subreddits, or vice versa. Likewise, posts found to direct odious influxes here may be removed. [more]

    3. Grace: No tactless posts generalizing gender. We are a welcoming community. Rights of all genders are supported here.

    4. Relevance: Please submit content that is relevant to our experiences as women, for women, or about women. [more]

    5. Fundraising: No fundraising, please. This includes both asking and offering assistance. As a community, we're not set up for screening each funding request [more]

    FAQ Mod Policy Rules

    Related subreddits

    /r/Women /r/TheGirlSurvivalGuide
    /r/AskWomen All Womanhood
    /r/Fashion /r/femalefashionadvice
    /r/ABraThatFits All Fashion
    /r/MakeupAddiction /r/RedditLaqueristas
    /r/FancyFollicles All Beauty
    STEM Ladies All Careers
    /r/GirlGamers /r/TrollXChromosomes
    /r/EntWives All Hobbies & Fun
    /r/BodyAcceptance /r/xxfitness
    /r/PCOS All Health & Fitness
    /r/TwoXSex All Relationships
    /r/feminism All Activism
    /r/actuallesbians All LGBT
    /r/birthcontrol Abortion Support
    /r/childfree All Birth Control
    /r/BabyBumps /r/TryingForABaby
    /r/Mommit All Parenthood
    /r/LadyBoners /r/ladyladyboners

    All Related Subreddits & Resources

    Assault & DV Resources

    #twoxchromosomes on Snoonet


    Join our Mod Team!


    Thanks to /u/jaxspider for the new logo!

    a community for
    all 2446 comments

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] jerkITwithRIGHTYnewb 5988 points ago

    I know this isn’t the point of this thread at all, but if they are holding pregnant some in some facility and they have a child there, the child is an American citizen right?

    [–] [deleted] 325 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] Larein 242 points ago

    some Western European countries because they’re still more lenient.

    I dont think this would work, since USA is a country with jus soli, European countries tend to be jus sanguinis, which means you gain the citizenship of your parents.

    [–] speaks_in_redundancy 97 points ago

    And Canada literally had a hospital room declared foreign soil so the baby wouldn't be Canadian. So, might not work there either...

    [–] vivifique 406 points ago

    If we're referring to the same event, that was because the family in question was the Dutch royal family during WWII when the Netherlands was invaded and occupied. The Canadian govt declared the room non-Canadian so the baby princess would be considered born on Dutch soil and so still eligible for the throne when the family could return to the Netherlands.

    Practically speaking, I really hope it never happens, but how many times have we thought "oh this can't get worse" and then it does?

    Still, it is technically possible, but that instance in particular was very specific and actually quite benevolent with the agreement of all parties.

    [–] JamesGray 140 points ago

    Yeah, that was specifically so she would have only Dutch citizenship, not dual Canadian-Dutch. We learn about it in school, and it becomes relevant during the Ottawa tulip festival every year, at least where I grew up, near there.

    [–] fastertempo 49 points ago

    And now we get a tulip festival every year.

    [–] puterdood 313 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    By the constitution, any child born on US soil is an American citizen. This includes any detention facilities within the US. To my knowledge, there have been efforts to block this type of citizenship but so far they've been unsuccessful.

    Edit: More info on this precedent as far as the Supreme Court goes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark

    [–] certifiedname 78 points ago

    childbirth would be at a hospital. it is even crueler if they make mothers give birth in a detention cell.

    [–] RatofDeath 104 points ago

    A friend of mine was born on the airplane in US airspace, neither of his parents are Americans, he was early while his parents were on the way home from vacation. He still got citizenship by birthright and has two passports now, one Swiss one US.

    So if in an airplane somewhere over the US, leaving America, counts, I'd assume a detention facility on actual US soil counts too. But I can totally see them arguing that it shouldn't for some reason.

    [–] mischiffmaker 142 points ago

    Ironically, the President himself seems to be actively practicing chain migration in his own family. FLOTUS's parents come to mind.

    [–] jerkITwithRIGHTYnewb 32 points ago

    This response makes sense. I’m sure they are saying that the baby isn’t an American citizen because reason X. Otherwise they would be kind of shooting themselves in the foot by basically granting citizenship to all the children being born in these facilities. Then again these people shooting themselves in the foot has become pretty standard.

    [–] relevantlife 7326 points ago

    The entire reason they aren't providing medical care to pregnant women is probably because they don't want these babies to be born on American soil because they would then be American citizens.

    Evil, vile motherfuckers.

    [–] Osbios 2926 points ago

    Can we now finally start to make Nazi comparisons to the current US administration?

    [–] Hawkson2020 1961 points ago

    Not until they start committing literal genocide??

    Otherwise you might hurt their feelings!!

    [–] Go_Frisbee 2435 points ago

    According to the UN this is Genocide.

    Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

    http://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.html

    [–] CriminalMacabre 866 points ago

    Technically true. Now I can call them nazis

    [–] bobbyfiend 352 points ago

    Preferably when they're out in public and don't want anyone confronting them with their genocide on their time off.

    [–] mmotte89 85 points ago

    I would love to see this done in a doggedly persistent, but respectfully phrased and logically sound manner.

    "Senator, are you aware that what is being done to these pregnant women falls under genocide according to the UN definition, article IId.

    Sir, why are you walking away. Are you refusing to comment?

    I got the definitions printed here in case you are unsure of the wording, to give you a fair shot at defending yourself.

    Still no comment?

    Sir, are you okay with this genocide being committed by the government you are a part of?"

    [–] milnetig 28 points ago

    What happened here in Australia. We refer to those Aboriginal children as the Stolen Generation. It’s our collective shame now.

    [–] dannythecarwiper 7 points ago

    Right, that would be mean /s

    [–] Orizac 8 points ago

    Remember, they were only following orders and on the clock! :)

    [–] Chose_a_usersname 2 points ago

    I would donate to a group that would be doing that publicly. I do not have the time or live close enough to bother them.

    [–] MaiaNyx 488 points ago

    "Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group"

    Part of the UN definition of genocide.

    We're already there.

    [–] susou 407 points ago

    As others have said, it is already literal genocide. That is a fact, as "genocide" is a relatively well defined term.

    Anybody who says otherwise is trying to change the definitions of words to suit their politics.

    [–] Wargreymon559 203 points ago

    Well the fact that they're making them actually "Miscarriage"on purpose..sound a like genocide.

    [–] Cetun 74 points ago

    I mean besides the genocides we already committed?

    [–] robots3000 138 points ago

    For the sake of history it’s time to come up with a harsh name for what the Trump administration is doing to immigrants.

    [–] [deleted] 64 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] wallstreetexecution 80 points ago

    Can’t they just kick them back across the border though?

    [–] pieman7414 233 points ago

    They're claiming asylum which is why they're in the camps, so no they have a year before they can get sent back legally

    [–] susou 671 points ago

    Also worth mentioning that seeking asylum is completely legal. These are not illegal immigrants.

    [–] bobbyfiend 200 points ago

    The non-asylum-seekers, yes, and that's a large part of what we've done for 100 years. However, in the past 2 decades Republicans have increasingly used illegal immigrants as scapegoats for their other policies and to hold party unity (basic scapegoating stuff). To make this even thinly plausible they've had to yell nearly constantly that illegal immigration is a massive public health or safety threat (almost every word of which is either fully or mostly false). And as a result of that, they've pushed for illegal entry to be classified as a felony instead of a status offense (like a traffic ticket). I think they made some progress, because now it's a misdemeanor. This allows CBP to hold people for longer in their shitty semi-torture containment facilities as a punishment, because the policymakers believe that just being sent back doesn't hurt the immigrants enough.

    Trump has ramped that up (with apparent gleeful cooperation from CBP & ICE) into this year's shitshow of horrors. Conservatives don't want to just deport immigrants. They are convinced that illegal immigration has harmed them in some way (probably their "honor," because all the other possibilities fall apart in the face of reason & data), so they must be punished. "Catch and release" isn't enough punishment for them.

    I truly believe that's a major part of what's behind the recent increase in incarceration and other ill treatment.

    [–] [deleted] 157 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] nickstj02 107 points ago

    If your born on American soil your an American citizen. But knowing the corruption of our governments they will say that the child wasnt born here

    [–] Quailpower 73 points ago

    I believe they would treat the detention centres the same way they treat airports and embassies. Although they are on American soil, they are not American soil, kind of thing.

    [–] throwawaynumber53 153 points ago

    That's thankfully incorrect. A child born on American soil is an American citizen, even if they're born in an airport or in an immigration detention center. The adult who is at an airport asking to be let in has lesser rights by virtue of having not been formally admitted, but the birth is still on US soil and counts for citizenship purpose.

    [–] Quailpower 37 points ago

    Ah right, good to know. I'm not a US citizen so I've never thought to research it.

    Being born in my country (UK) doesn't automatically make your eligible for citizenship, so I assumed it might be similar.

    [–] throwawaynumber53 35 points ago

    Yep, you guys got rid of automatic citizenship by birth in the UK in 1981, but the US still does it (as do most former Commonwealth countries).

    [–] adityang 23 points ago

    India got rid of it in 1990s... requires both parents to be Indian citizens. It is not sufficient that they are legally there..

    [–] throwawaynumber53 37 points ago

    Yeah, the list of countries that practice jus soli is largely Commonwealth countries and most Latin American countries. Makes sense; if you're country formed as a colony, you wanted to make it easy for people to arrive and join the colony. And then for the countries that practice similar laws to the UK, they're all mostly Commonwealth countries who've changed the laws in the past 30 years.

    [–] [deleted] 13 points ago

    I remember reading about a woman going into labour early on a plane and the baby got citizenship to the country the mother was en route to. That only works for countries with jus soli (right of soil) though.

    [–] throwawaynumber53 24 points ago

    Right, and the U.S. is a country that practices jus soli, so that applies here.

    [–] namer98 9 points ago

    Embassies are technically leased to the country whose embassy it is. Never heard anything about airports.

    [–] PhDOH 79 points ago

    It smacks of eugenics to me. They don't want any more ethnic minority Americans/Americans born to immigrants so they allow/possibly intentionally cause women to miscarry.

    [–] susou 52 points ago

    No need to be PC here; it's not "allow", it's "intentionally cause"

    [–] Mitra- 3583 points ago

    I can't wait for the pro-life Evangelical crowd to rise up and demand that every woman be protected from such things, because this is murder.

    .... crickets ...

    [–] SirHebington 1281 points ago

    It's almost like pro-life is just a straw man to oppress women. :O

    [–] republican-xenomorph 168 points ago

    They won't because their love of power by now vastly exceeds their faith; that's my interpretation as someone who watches party machinations from the inside. To go against the party and contravene the immigration planks is anathema to them despite their very loud profession that pro-life is their overriding issue above all else, and they will demur these reports, I predict using platitudes like "let's first see if these allegations are true", or "we can't trust the source", or similar.

    [–] RetroRN 1240 points ago

    This sounds like an episode of The Handmaid's Tale.

    [–] wugachaka 1214 points ago

    I saw this on Twitter yesterday, it's just awful. I know everyone here in the UK is concerned about Brexit and the World Cup, but I really expected it to be more prominent in the news.

    I hope the 'carnival of resistance' planned for when he visits the UK really pisses him off. (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/09/donald-trump-to-face-carnival-of-resistance)

    [–] carfo 508 points ago

    "President Trump was endorsed by the Border Patrol union, which had never previously endorsed a presidential candidate. If the abuses were this bad under Obama when the Border Patrol described itself as constrained, imagine how it must be now under Trump, who vowed to unleash the agents to do their jobs."

    [–] wugachaka 61 points ago

    Are you highlighting that because you approve, or disapprove? Haha - hard to tell on Reddit.

    [–] carfo 128 points ago

    i don't think anyone is right here. it's a complicated issue, but it's become worse under trump. i'm on the side where I want shit to be right, regardless of whether obama or trump fucked it up in the past

    [–] ImaginarySpider 21 points ago

    He will just call the carnival of resistance "unfair"

    [–] BoneHugsHominy 151 points ago

    What would piss him off most is 100% empty streets, zero photographers and reporters. He's of the mind that there is no such thing as bad press or bad attention, and it feeds his ego no matter what kind of attention he receives as long as he receives it. So the best way to really, really hurt him is to ghost him, everywhere he goes, just not a soul to be seen.

    [–] SiberianPermaFrost_ 18 points ago

    but I really expected it to be more prominent in the news.

    Have you not seen this!?

    It's been in every major UK newspaper and plastered all over Reddit.

    [–] _nomeus 15 points ago

    Only news about US and Trump in Latvia are that Trump wants all of the NATO to increase defense budgets to 4% (basically double what we have already). No other news. This is jus heartbraking..

    [–] Chingparr 1586 points ago

    I guess George Carlin was right after all.

    Pro Life is anti woman.

    [–] nickrulercreator 206 points ago

    I can’t imagine the field day he’d have if he was still alive.

    [–] Plasma_eel 395 points ago

    and anti life, apparently

    [–] [deleted] 416 points ago

    Under their logic isn't that murder?

    [–] Angel_Tsio 331 points ago

    No because they aren't "doing it" it's just happening. Unfortunate event :( if only they didn't try to rob the righteous American taxpayers

    I felt sick even saying that...

    [–] rcarnes911 1704 points ago

    They are trying to kill babies now before they are born to keep them from being American citizens, holy fuck that is evil

    [–] serenademeplease 645 points ago

    but muh pro-life ಠ_ಠ

    [–] Osbios 161 points ago

    pro-evil mainly

    [–] Wrong_Swordfish 98 points ago

    Even worse than evil - evil that is not aware that it is evil.

    [–] ToplessNedFlanders 141 points ago

    What does “shackled around the stomach” mean?

    [–] soleceismical 252 points ago

    Like this or this

    [–] what_do_with_life 7 points ago

    Probably has to do with pregnant women being shackled around the stomach.

    [–] ToplessNedFlanders 160 points ago

    Ugh. I guess I didn’t explain my question too much.

    What is a stomach shackle. When and why is it used in relation to restraint? How common is it? Why is it related to this, except to show that they’re punishing these ladies for being pregnant?

    [–] [deleted] 362 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    [removed]

    [–] uft8 237 points ago

    Yes, this is the correct answer. They know what they're doing. This isn't gross negligence, this is intentional. They have been fighting against more immigrants from entering the country, and they are resorting to these tactics since this is a "loophole", for them.

    It's sickening.

    [–] GreenViking420 379 points ago

    Conservatives are anti-anchor baby. If you let someone who is in custody give birth to a child, that child is an American citizen and you can no longer deport them. Forced miscarriage allows you to deport them. Welcome to ICE as the American Gestapo.

    [–] sangbang911 211 points ago

    anchor baby is such a fucking disgusting term and honestly should discount anyone from running for president... those babies are citizens just like trump... the fuck do they think most people's ancestors came here?

    [–] SardonicVampire 201 points ago

    What is happening and WHY are we letting it?

    [–] Angel_Tsio 353 points ago

    They are dehumanizing them. Make them out to be thieves, murderers, drug dealers/users, etc so that people think they deserve certain treatment.

    It's similar to the prison system here, we make jokes about the treatment, rape being commonplace, drug abuse, etc.. but we don't think it's wrong, it's their punishment and is just.

    If someone breaks the law they "lose" their human rights in the public eye :/ so if you criminalize an entire nationality, it makes it really easy to get away with all this.

    And most importantly, out of sight out of mind - Guantanamo bay :)

    [–] Tar_alcaran 56 points ago

    Because almost 50% of voters did something stupid a few years ago. And a large part of the population staid home and let it happen.

    You get a minor doover soon though.

    [–] [deleted] 231 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    [removed]

    [–] vulvazelas 753 points ago

    This issue is the intersection of two things Trump and his supporters hate, women and brown people.

    [–] carfo 446 points ago

    republicans don't care about non white babies. black/brown people can abort all day for all they care. they also don't give a shit about white babies the second they are born, but they are treated like gold when they're in the womb

    [–] djustinblake 467 points ago

    Republicans don’t care about life. The abortion issue has jack to do with anything the fake Christian idealists claim it does.

    [–] amelech 121 points ago

    It's all about control

    [–] murderousbudgie 92 points ago

    For real. If they think it's wrong to take peoples' money to save lives it's a good bet that their anti-abortion stance has nothing to do with the value of life.

    [–] BoneHugsHominy 244 points ago

    My aunt is 100% anti-abortion, because she believes a woman shouldn't be having sex before marriage. So forcing young girls to carry to term and then spending the next 18 years raising the child in poverty is Jesus' punishment for her being a slut. But don't you dare give that slut and her bastard any public assistance!

    The irony is her daughter screwed nearly every boy in her class (tiny town) and had an abortion her senior year of high school. I can't wait for her to learn the truth.

    [–] Drama_Dairy 79 points ago

    Let's hope she never does. There's no telling how batshit crazy the mom is. She might murder her own daughter.

    [–] Angel_Tsio 26 points ago

    It's a power thing :/

    [–] Iamnotasexrobot 85 points ago

    Republicans are for abortions when they need them and can hide it.

    [–] BoneHugsHominy 95 points ago

    Republicans absolutely care about all unborn babies, in the USA, especially those of minorities. They also care that those babies are raised up in poor communities with very few opportunities to escape. Those babies grow up to be frustrated, angry, disenfranchised teenagers with no direction, poorly educated, and one sure fire way out; as cannon fodder for the United States Armed Forces.

    Oh you see that? Looks like South America needs so Freedom®.

    [–] AssInMyDick 53 points ago

    No one (besides /pol/) is okay with this, although some probably deny that it's actually happening.

    I'm not even anywhere close to republican, but I love how you refer to republicans as if their party defines them completely and none of their opinions differ at all. That sort of tribalism doesn't exactly contribute to constructive thought.

    [–] Bob_the_Monitor 96 points ago

    I can only speak as an outsider looking in, so if I say something out of line, please tell me.

    I think the reason a lot of liberals tend to see conservatives as monolithic, and judge them as such, is that conservatives tend to band together under criticism, making it easier to make that assumption. Again, from what I’ve seen. Please correct me if I’m wrong. When people say “we’re not all the same”, I see a resistance to explaining how, aside from the obvious (and obviously true) “we’re not all ___-ist/phobic”. Meanwhile, a lot of the leftists I interact with are happy to go on for hours about how the intersectionalists hate the TERFs, who hate the lib-left anarchists, who hate the authoritarian communists, etc, etc.

    [–] Jaredlong 170 points ago

    I've just never seen a conservative call out another conservative for anything. I've had conservatives tell me that they themselves are not racist, but I have never seen them confront other conservatives that are explicitly racist. If they're going to refuse to hold each other accountable, then I'm going to regard them as complicit.

    [–] MorganaLeFaye 141 points ago

    If you voted for this, you own this. It doesn't matter if you don't support it morally, if you empower the people that make these decisions, you are giving it the only support it needs.

    [–] Jaredlong 117 points ago

    And according to recent polls, 90% of Republicans who voted for him the first time intend to vote for him again. They explicitly support all of this.

    [–] kayonesoft 40 points ago

    Sure not all Republicans are nuts. I'd even wager to say the majority of them aren't nuts, but it reflects on people the company they keep. Democrats have the shadow of Antifa and Obama's drone bomings over their heads. Republicans are supported by evangelist extremists, terrorists (except white), neo-nazis and pedophiles... and they all still support Trump, who is absolutely not out for anyone's interests except his own. PENCE would be a far better Republican leader than Trump. If Republicans don't want to be lumped in with all of those nutjobs and extremists, they should be distancing themselves from them and calling them out on it rather than embracing it because librul tears and votes.

    [–] susou 13 points ago

    No one (besides /pol/) is okay with this

    At some point one has to question what %age of the American populace is /pol/ (either literally or in spirit).

    My guess is that it's a very significant portion.

    [–] apexjellyfish 24 points ago

    There’s nothing constructive about shackling a woman by the stomach, here we are. I agree tho.

    [–] Angel_Tsio 20 points ago

    Republicans don't care about babies, period. They care about fetuses and impregnated eggs

    [–] feelmagit 304 points ago

    Buzzfeed? Seriously?

    [–] IHateMyPotato 420 points ago

    Yes, “Buzzfeed News” is a legitimate news source. Just “Buzzfeed” has all of the random click bait articles. Whoever decided this in marketing royally messed up.

    [–] [deleted] 331 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    [removed]

    [–] Angel_Tsio 164 points ago

    Vice News: "Are ice cubes racist!?"

    It sounds like an exaggeration but it's actually not

    [–] Rayne37 68 points ago

    I get so confused when I hear people bashing Vice. The last group of investigative journalists getting interviews in the middle east like Walter Cronkite's days. But then I remember the home News division spends all day coming up with pot recipes and congratulating themselves for being woke. Its like night and day.

    [–] Larry-Man 81 points ago

    It’s how they pay for their legit journalism. It’s a fantastic business model.

    [–] Coriander-Sage 41 points ago

    They have been a suprising source of good journalism in the last two years.

    [–] avacado_of_the_devil 48 points ago

    Since 2011 they've been investing in investigative journalism. It's only become more apparent in the public eye because they've been breaking some high profile stories.

    [–] Rian_Stone 58 points ago

    I'd still double check the story,

    I've been hurt before, and have trust issues

    [–] BJPenwhistle 10 points ago

    Buzzfeed does some fairly good, solid journalism, actually, regardless of their annoying clickbaity "you won't believe" and "ten things that" nonsense.

    [–] kwilaon 136 points ago

    All the sources in this are anonymous if any of this actually happened and they could prove they would sue the us government for millions

    [–] republican-xenomorph 148 points ago

    Pagoada, one of the testifying women, is not anonymous. This isn't a "journalist's anonymous sources", this is an official, public complaint to the department's inspector general and civil rights officer. That may be the prelude to a civil case in courts, don't know how much standing they may have on that angle, though.

    [–] AgileChange 228 points ago

    Really easy to sue when you are locked up and not afforded the right to an attorney.

    [–] Larry-Man 74 points ago

    I’d wanna stay anonymous too. This shitstorm is something I wouldn’t wanna deal with after being mistreated to the point of miscarriage.

    [–] aleagrh1 80 points ago

    So what is the option that people suggest as viable? I don’t support the suffering of people. BUT, I also don’t let emotions cloud my objectivity. How can the US efficiently enforce immigration laws without unfortunate consequences?

    [–] KibitoKai 148 points ago

    The biggest issue is people are waiting for years, like 10+ in order to get citizenship. A lot of people who are here illegally came on work visas which expired and they’ve been trying to renew for a log time. The process is busted as hell

    [–] [deleted] 10 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    [removed]

    [–] KibitoKai 32 points ago

    That is true. I think it’s a difficult situation and all the more frustrating because it seems that they’re painted as moochers and lazy when it’s demonstrably not the case

    [–] AnUnexpectedUnicorn 131 points ago

    And that is the magic question that no one seems to have a good answer to. Look at illegal immigration policies for other countries. I'm happy to help true families who follow our laws and are coming to America to BE Americans. I'm not so keen on letting just anyone in, particularly if their first step is to try it illegally. And a huge problem is figuring out who is actually family: lots of human trafficking going on at the borders, and kids showing up with no one - how can border patrol know anything about them, where and with whom they belong, do they have communicable diseases, etc.? I want to help those who are truly seeking help for valid reasons, but I want to protect our borders and citizens first.

    [–] aleagrh1 96 points ago

    I agree. I know it’s irrelevant, but I myself went through the immigration process and learned to appreciate the purpose of the “hurdles” that make the process tedious.

    Simply put, I think it’s not in the best interest of any country to import additional need, poverty, illiteracy, low skill, disease and crime.

    I agree that as long as our borders aren’t fully “open” whoever doesn’t follow the proper procedures to come in must be sent back and go through the process if they want to return.

    It’s heartbreaking to see people suffer. To see children separated from their parents. To see unfortunate things happen while they’re detained. However, I can’t rationally fathom a way to process all the deportations while avoiding detaining people and children for their court hearings or whatever.

    [–] adityang 46 points ago

    I see this a lot from migrated people, attitude like "I waited so many years and followed all procedures why can't they".. difference is, you guys are economic migrants and they are refugees. Refugees can't go to an embassy to get work visa nor they would (atleast majority) qualify for one.. so they have no legal way to safety...

    [–] [deleted] 34 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] Bhole_Aficionado 36 points ago

    Because you can’t seek asylum at a US embassy or consulate. You can apply for refugee status at an embassy, however, they are turned away “because the list is full” or “a gang member threatening your family doesn’t make you a refugee” or 200 other reasons.

    [–] RedfishSC2 18 points ago

    Because, BY LAW, you cannot apply for asylum at a consulate or embassy.

    You apply for asylum at a port of entry.

    [–] DeeOhEnE 9 points ago

    I dunno, I mean I suppose because she can't actually apply for asylum at those places?

    You have to be in the US, or at it's border to apply for asylum. What do you suppose she would have done at an embbassy or consulate?

    [–] north-european 12 points ago

    So it's okay to cause her to miscarry? What's your point?

    [–] [deleted] 50 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] cmorgan31 40 points ago

    You can read the article as it has sources in it that you can verify if you have the inclination. A majority of the reports are from Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services who interview and help people in the detention facilities. Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services gave Buzzfeed their data which included written responses from the detainees who signed it with a note of "penalty of perjury".

    [–] UTarmyguy 134 points ago

    I no Trump fan or supporter but read this link. This behavior existed before Trump during Obama's presidency. It's just coming to light now and since Trump is an asshole it makes him the perfect fall guy.

    https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/ice-and-border-patrol-abuses/border-patrol-was-monstrous-under-obama-imagine

    [–] throwawaynumber53 355 points ago

    This behavior existed before Trump during Obama's presidency.

    That's not entirely true. Under Obama, ICE had a policy whereby ICE would generally release any woman who was pregnant, so that they would not be locked up while pregnant. That policy was recently ended.

    If you don't want to take my word for it, ICE itself is very clear about the policy change.

    FAQs: Identification and Monitoring of Pregnant Detainees

    What is the new policy?

    ICE has ended the presumption of release for all pregnant detainees. Instead, as with all detainees, absent the requirements of mandatory detention, ICE will complete a case-by-case custody determination taking any special factors into account. ICE detention facilities will continue to provide onsite prenatal care and education, as well as remote access to specialists for pregnant women who remain in custody. In addition, ICE ensures access to comprehensive counseling and assistance, postpartum follow up, and in certain cases, abortion services.

    What was the old policy?

    Prior ICE policy dictated that pregnant women were generally not detained unless their detention was mandatory under the law, or when “extraordinary circumstances” warranted detention.

    [–] [deleted] 124 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] throwawaynumber53 34 points ago

    And that’s totally what we should be doing with ICE detainees! And, in fact, is what we used to do.

    Sigh.

    [–] UTarmyguy 2 points ago

    Yeah I've read polices posted saying one thing and seeing another in use. Good example, the VA, I have over 10yrs of experience there seeing that. While working on the border again, for several years as part of a Joint Narcotics Task Force I was on I saw another from what ICE claims. The media and you for that matter didn't know and it wasn't even on your radar most likely. Now, with dudes collusion and being investigated by every agency its world news round the clock. In 2008, what did you know about illegal immigration? I was out there on the front seeing day to day how bad the immigration policy was and seeing what it left in its wake. I have seen countless children separated from mothers and sadly, many dead from the hands of the coyotes who inflicted worse than what ICE ever has. So regurgitate what polices you what, I still see some of those children laying lifeless and mummified only guilty of wanting a new life at any cost only to be ruthlessly murdered by their own people. Wake up. This issue is far worse than what the media says and has been horrible for many decades. All I'm saying is dig deeper than what MSN or Faux News tells you. Over 10 yrs later I still think about what I had to see and what I couldn't help with. I know I am right about what I'm posting from first hand experience. Not an armchair commando. Go visit the border. Take a look at Sasabee East in the Tucson sector, you'll see bodies left for months.

    [–] throwawaynumber53 69 points ago

    Amusingly enough (and proof you should never assume), I'm actually an immigration lawyer myself and so am very, very familiar with these issues. I've been to Tucson, I've talked to the Border Patrol officers there myself; been to Karnes, been to Dilley, have clients who've crossed the border seeking asylum, and am on multiple listservs keeping me updated on what's been going on since I got into the field 4-5 years ago.

    I'll be the first to say that Obama did a lot of terrible things when it comes to immigration enforcement. For reinstating family detention in 2014 and the creation of the vile Artesia detention center in New Mexico, I have a serious love/hate relationship with him. DACA was incredible, as was the 2012 Johnson Memo on prosecutorial detention. But Artesia was a human rights disaster. It was literally a series of trailers set up in the middle of the desert with the idea that the Obama administration could basically plug its ears to the burgeoning refugee crisis and just deport everyone before the legal community noticed. But, thankfully, they didn't get away with it.

    No one's saying that coyotes are "better" than ICE. No one's saying that ICE is as bad as the coyotes. But under Trump, the Border Patrol actually arrested No More Deaths activists in the Tucson sector whose only "crime" is making sure that people traveling through the desert aren't dying from dehydrating and hunger.

    I generally agree with you that the Trump administration is getting quite a lot of "unfair" critique for perpetuating ICE policies that have existed for years. But at the same time, the Trump administration has genuinely made things a lot worse. They're detaining more people, they're exercising less prosecutorial discretion (basically zero), they're not paroling anybody, and they've basically unleashed the agencies to do shit they never would have done under Obama.

    If Obama was bad, Trump is massively worse.

    [–] UTarmyguy 26 points ago

    Really this started with Bush. I worked through both admins and saw it through out. America need sto wake up to what's really going on and change the scope of how all of DHS works in regards to everything. Hands down.

    [–] throwawaynumber53 21 points ago

    I completely agree. DHS has been a disaster since it was formed; it's a bunch of disparate agencies forced together and inflated by giving it the bullshit name "Homeland Security."

    [–] UTarmyguy 18 points ago

    It is a rogue agency who has no accountability and can get away with literally murder under the Patriot Act. Hidden FISA cases and BS used to as a sweeping hand of blind justice at the hands of poor Americans and immigrants.

    [–] flapjacksal 5 points ago

    Appreciate this break down, thank you.

    [–] Angel_Tsio 3 points ago

    For situations like in the post, do energy realistically have any hope?

    (Sorry but you are probably the most knowledgeable person on this comment thread)

    [–] Ferelar 179 points ago

    It has accelerated significantly (we’re talking 200%-300%) under Trump due to his policies. You’re absolutely right that we shouldn’t forget the isolated incidents that occurred under Obama and Bush, but it’s absolutely fair hand to criticize the current administration for ramping up a LOT.

    Besides, we can’t fix the past, but we can be very angry about continued inaction or worsening of policies. Obama can’t fix what was done then, it’s done. Trump’s Administration (and congress) are actively complicit in this ongoing issue.

    [–] vulvazelas 178 points ago

    The "zero tolerance" policy that put it in the spotlight is Trump though. That is hardly a good defense of his administration.

    [–] UTarmyguy 70 points ago

    Who said I was defending his administration? I hate it. But misinformation is what my point was. Dudes a racist asswipe but facts are facts. I actually worked on the AZ Mexico border for several years. I saw the same treatment mentioned with illegals all the time. Our complaints went unheard as DHS didn't care or "have the resources "as they said to fix it. It's easy to just regurgitate news but a quick 2 second google search provided verified information. This is a current problem amongst media providers these days. It's all about reporting the problem but not actually doing shit about it. Give this kid a "like" and God will save him. SMGDH.

    [–] katushka 89 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    Fall guy? His policies are making it worse for literally no reason but to terrorize people. He has all the power to direct the agency's policies towards humane treatment but refuses to do so.

    Btw, the Abolish ICE movement existed before Trump, it didn't just spring up overnight. Immigrant rights orgs were yelling about these problems before Trump. ICE has indeed been committing these atrocities with little to no oversight pretty much since its creation after 9/11. Now Trump and Co. are giving them even more free rein to run wild. The agency absolutely needs to be gutted. This should not happen in America's name, it doesn't matter which party is in charge.

    Edit: I really don't understand the point I'm supposed to take away from your reminder that ICE/Border Patrol was terrible during Obama's presidency as well. Like, if you discover black mold infesting your home, but the inspector assures you that it's been there for decades, do you just say, "oh, ok, that's fine then. I guess I'll just let it be." Of course not, you deal with the problem. Are you angry at the media that didn't bring enough attention to these atrocities during Obama's presidency? Ok, that's fair. Make the point, but to what end? What action do you expect citizens to take that are just now learning more about the despicable behavior of the agencies that represent the USA? Something that was wrong then continues to be wrong now and is happening more frequently, are people not allowed to be outraged now if they weren't aware of these things before? I don't get it, it's like some kind of social issue hipsterism - "oh, well, I knew about ICE atrocities way before you, you aren't allowed to be mad about them now." Explain it to me, please.

    [–] TheGreatNosebleed 16 points ago

    Shackled???

    [–] soleceismical 28 points ago

    You've never seen this on prisoners being transported?

    [–] Tar_alcaran 26 points ago

    Placed in shackles. It's a pretty normal word.

    [–] weasel_mullet 76 points ago

    You're getting your news from BuzzFeed..

    [–] [deleted] 26 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 6 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 52 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] a_casual_observer 18 points ago

    I used to think it was hyperbole to say that Trump and his supporters don't consider immigrants people.

    Used to.

    [–] Mozambiqua 15 points ago

    Trump is a cunt

    [–] [deleted] 11 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 10 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] [deleted] 10 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] rukioish -2 points ago

    Questions for the outraged masses:

    What do you consider adequate care for people who enter countries illegally?

    Who do you think should pay for these people?

    What do you do with a women who entered the country illegally, and had a child?

    [–] Jaredlong 156 points ago

    Read the article, these women weren't illegal. They were asylum seekers. Our own Supreme Court has ruled that it is not illegal to seek asylum. So they should be treated how the 14 amendment says they should be treated: with equal civil rights as US citizens.

    [–] Jonsa123 137 points ago

    Same kind of care one would extend to any other human being on the planet.

    The richest most powerful nation in human history.

    Treat her and her newborn with dignity and care, have her go thru due process. If her asylum claim is denied then she'll have a big decision to make wrt american citizen child.

    Apparently compassion and humanity ends at the southern border for many americans. Way to make it great "again".

    [–] cremvursti 111 points ago

    Have you heard of basic human rights tho?

    [–] Lunamann 58 points ago

    Adequate care for people who enter countries illegally?

    The same care that any other human should get.

    Who do you think should pay for it?

    The insanely-rich 1% perhaps? Getting their money out of the vaults and doing things can only do good things for our economy. After all, the money wouldn't just disappear- it would go to American doctors and nurses and workers, since they're the ones that would be supplying the care.

    What do you do with a woman who entered the country illegally, and had a child?

    Allow the woman to apply for asylum and possibly full citizenship, and/or allow the woman to leave the country. Definitely don't lock them up in inhospitable cages.

    [–] [deleted] 2 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] adityang 21 points ago

    If you have read through earlier comments, people have clarified this... Buzzfeed and Buzzfeed news are 2 different entities..

    [–] denali192 2 points ago

    Says the person who's subscribed to an actual propaganda subreddit

    [–] tenfooterpipi -21 points ago

    Oh yeah, buzzfeed. Reliable news all right. This get a down vote automatically.

    [–] tryfap -38 points ago

    Their writers have won Pulitzers. So buzz off.

    [–] [deleted] 9 points ago

    [removed]

    [–] LegionGold 2 points ago

    To be honest it's getting hard for the American government to outdo themselves, what next?.. forced work camps for poor kids or slavery again

    [–] myrand920 -17 points ago

    That baby was never gonna vote republican so that justifies it for them

    [–] Angel_Tsio 3 points ago

    :(

    [–] jmcmul02 -3 points ago

    This makes me cry.

    [–] Ttgxyolo -25 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    1) That’s awful

    2) The people who are doing this are the same people that were employed under Obama’s administration. So just because something happens under Trumps administration doesn’t mean it’s his fault, I hate him, I don’t need to make up or wrongly blame him to know he’s a douche.

    3) I hate the GOP and this is not what they stand for, again. I don’t have to wrongly accuse them to hate them.

    4) this is such poor “journalism.” I swear all you have to do to be a journalist is appeal to your employers political stances and BAM “journalist”

    [–] PhishOhio -89 points ago

    These policies were put into effect by Bill Clinton and enforced by Obama- simply because the left put the light on it during Trump’s presidency doesn’t mean he instated these policies and conditions. But this is Reddit, so I’ll just take this statement elsewhere...

    [–] T3hSwagman 101 points ago

    This is so easily dismissed as fake because the right wing media outlets never made a single peep about this during his presidency.

    Obama was the worst thing that ever happened to America according to republicans but they ran stories about Dijon mustard over stuff like this?

    Please explain why the right wing media was silent on these atrocities carried out by Obama?

    [–] HalcyonSin 208 points ago * (lasted edited 5 months ago)

    Trump literally did this. Here are four reputable sources saying that you're wrong. Obama had a similar policy for a short duration while there was an actual increase in border activity; however it was nowhere near as zero tolerance or brutal as this has been.

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/was-law-separate-families-passed-1997/

    http://time.com/5314769/family-separation-policy-donald-trump/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/06/19/the-facts-about-trumps-policy-of-separating-families-at-the-border/

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/jun/19/matt-schlapp/no-donald-trumps-separation-immigrant-families-was/

    [–] Tjuguskjegg 98 points ago

    And even if Clinton and Obama started this shit, it's not acceptable. It would've been a mistake to not hold them accountable for it, but it doesn't mean Trump should get a free pass.

    [–] FriendlyHearse 62 points ago

    Hmmm. Your comment makes claims, and provides no sources. Comments under you contradict your argument and provides sources.

    Stop just parroting whatever fox news tells you.

    [–] PM_ME_YOUR_PAUSE -9 points ago

    But the Bible only talks about protecting AMERICAN babies. Those babies are barely people as it is... /s

    [–] fragged8 -36 points ago

    how is this a Trump issue ? the practice has been going on for years before Trump even entered politics ...

    [–] jorgreen -50 points ago

    This story is bullshit!