-6
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2024
-6 points (28.6% liked)
Conservative
383 readers
9 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
States should control immigration according to their needs, their ability to process, or even their politics, and the federal government has a baseline law that says on how to process them. It is just common sense.
Too bad about the literal fucking law
The federal government does not follow the law, otherwise we wouldn't have this problem in the first place. It became a state problem when the federal government failed to do its duty. It is called pragmatism, which is sometimes better than the law.
What law does the federal government not follow in this case?
The federal government is supposed to handle the migrants, not the locals, and not the state. When states and local governments have to handle migrants that is the duty of the federal government, why do the locals, and the state have to spend money for something it has no jurisdiction over? The federal government can't fund the administration of its own laws. That is a fundamental government failure.
I still don't know what law you're talking about. Most of the people crossing the border are requesting asylum and doing so in compliance with the law
That is not the problem for the states or cities, that is the problem for the federal government. It is a federal policy, not a state, or city policy, so why are cities and states the de facto customs & border agency? Because the federal government fails in the duties it has given itself. You defeat your own argument.
It sounds like you're advocating increasing funding so the federal government can house all these people. Or maybe you're advocating we let them have work.permits so they can house themselves, since they're coming here looking for work anyway
No, illegally immigrating is a seperate act from requesting asylum. They can request asylum at a port of entry. Any official border crossing will do.