tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/jeff-sessions-35199/articlesJeff Sessions – The Conversation2021-03-18T12:20:26Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1550212021-03-18T12:20:26Z2021-03-18T12:20:26ZJesus, Paul and the border debate – why cherry-picking Bible passages misses the immigrant experience in ancient Rome<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/390172/original/file-20210317-19-1spsk7d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=30%2C15%2C5054%2C2466&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Bible contains many stories of migration, including that of Joseph, Mary and Jesus.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/the-flight-into-egypt-1883-by-edwin-long-1829-1891-joseph-news-photo/520831503?adppopup=true">Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Immigration reform is back on the agenda, with <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/14/immigration-bills-on-house-agenda-democrats-hopeful-for-senate-votes/4562678001/">Congress taking up major legislation</a> that could usher in a pathway to citizenship for millions of people living in the U.S. without legal status.</p>
<p>This, and an <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-congress-idUSKBN2B72RU">increase in migrants crossing the southern border</a> to the U.S., has seen many people retreat to two common positions on the issue. <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/02/02/executive-order-restoring-faith-in-our-legal-immigration-systems-and-strengthening-integration-and-inclusion-efforts-for-new-americans/">Advocates</a> for reform generally emphasize the history of America as a nation of immigrants. Meanwhile, <a href="https://www.abc10.com/article/news/politics/ted-cruz-lashes-out-says-biden-immigration-plans-will-put-illegal-immigrants-ahead-of-american-workers/502-9ef853d3-f62a-49c3-9e60-e1988dd2b74b">opponents</a> identify America as a nation based on the <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/01/30/2017-02095/border-security-and-immigration-enforcement-improvements">rule of law</a>, with a sovereign right <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-01-30/pdf/2017-02095.pdf">to protect its borders</a>.</p>
<p>Given the role that Christianity plays in <a href="https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/">many Americans’ lives</a> and <a href="https://www.pewforum.org/2021/01/04/faith-on-the-hill-2021/">in politics in general</a>, it shouldn’t be surprising that people from the religious right and left draw from the Bible to support their immigration perspectives. </p>
<h2>Biblical stories</h2>
<p>Former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, for example, <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/16/jeff-sessions-bible-romans-13-trump-immigration-policy/707749002/">drew upon the Apostle Paul’s view of the government</a> to back his support for <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-bibles-message-on-separating-immigrant-children-from-parents-is-a-lot-different-from-what-jeff-sessions-thinks-98419">child separation immigration</a> policies at the border. “I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order,” he stated. For those in favor of a more progressive policy on immigration, there are <a href="https://sojo.net/22-bible-verses-welcoming-immigrants">numerous passages in the Bible</a> that indicate a willingness to welcome strangers and foreigners.</p>
<p>The truth is, the Bible has many stories of migration, beginning in the book of Genesis with <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+3%3A23&version=NASB">Adam and Eve</a> migrating from the Garden of Eden and concluding with the book of Revelation, where <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+1%3A9&version=NASB">John</a>, traditionally known as the apostle, lives as a deported criminal on Patmos, an island located west of Turkey.</p>
<p>As a New Testament scholar, <a href="https://wipfandstock.com/9781532670862/a-pneumatology-of-race-in-the-gospel-of-john/">my research</a> on how <a href="https://brill.com/view/journals/pneu/39/3/article-p275_3.xml">foreigners</a> are portrayed during the first century has led me to recognize that selecting a few texts from Jesus’ <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt+25%3A35-40%3B+Luke+10%3A25-37&version=NASB">teaching</a> on welcoming the foreigner or the Apostle Paul’s <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rom+13%3A1-4%3B+Titus+3%3A1&version=NASB">teachings</a> on the government does not provide the full story on the immigrant experience.</p>
<p>In reality, their experience was politically and culturally complex. Immigrants in Rome during the time of Jesus and Paul encountered suspicion and hostility from the imperial authorities and Roman natives.</p>
<h2>Unfriendly Romans and noncountrymen</h2>
<p>Many foreigners in the capital of Rome were immigrants. <a href="http://doi.org/10.1017/S0075435800032317">David Noy</a>, a <a href="http://www.open.ac.uk/people/den6">scholar of classical literature</a>, finds that they came to the empire either as captured slaves or voluntarily migrated in search of better opportunities. </p>
<p>Some ancient Roman writers during the time of Jesus viewed the presence of immigrants negatively. Nostalgia for a time when Rome was less influenced by outsiders emerged among Roman elites. Ancient Roman writers <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plin.+Nat.+29.8&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137">Pliny</a> and <a href="https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120106.htm">Seneca</a> believed that as the empire extended, the foreigners culturally <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plin.+Nat.+24.1&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0137">conquered the Romans</a> by negatively influencing the Roman way of life.</p>
<p>There was a “strong sense that Rome was losing vigor and vitality through its luxuries and a fear of being undermined by foreign immigrants from among the subjugated people,” <a href="https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400849567">according to</a> classical literature scholar <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/our-authors/isaac-benjamin">Benjamin Isaac</a>.</p>
<p>To counter this immigrant threat and presence in Italy, the Romans enacted the imperial power of expulsion. The Roman historian <a href="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0166%3Abook%3D39%3Achapter%3D16">Livy</a> remarks that those who introduced foreign religions were frequently expelled for failing to adopt to “the Roman way.”</p>
<p><a href="https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Suetonius/12Caesars/Claudius*.html">Suetonius</a>, another Roman historian, records that emperor Claudius, who ruled in the decades following Jesus’ death, banned foreigners from using a Roman name and expelled the Jews from the city of Rome. Interestingly, this Jewish expulsion also shows up in the New Testament with the expulsion of the Christian missionary couple <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+18%3A1-2&version=NASB">Priscilla and Aquila</a> from Rome in A.D. 49. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Depiction of Ovid among the Scythians." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=364&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=364&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=364&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/390173/original/file-20210317-21-lts1f4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Exile was a common Roman punishment, as the poet Ovid found out.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ovid-among-the-scythians-1862-artist-eugene-delacroix-news-photo/1206223243?adppopup=true">Heritage Art/Heritage Images via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Expulsions were not always permanent or reserved for foreigners. Most famously, the Roman poet <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/ovid-revisited-9780715637838/">Ovid</a> was expelled for writing controversial erotic literature. He was deported to the land of Tomis, current Romania. </p>
<p>[<em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>.]</p>
<h2>Welcoming strangers</h2>
<p>Understanding the reality of immigrants and their status during the birth of Christianity shapes how Jesus’ teachings are understood. At the time when Jesus tells his disciples about the necessity of “<a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matt+25%3A35-40&version=NASB">welcoming the stranger</a>,” this was the righteous response to the political tragedy of a fellow human being. To deny them hospitality would be a death sentence. Not all immigrants migrated for economic reasons – for some it was their only life option because of the imperial act of expulsion.</p>
<p>Knowing that immigrants could be expelled for negatively influencing the Roman culture must also shape our understanding of Paul’s teaching to “<a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Rom+13%3A1-4%3B+Titus+3%3A1&version=NASB">submit</a>” to Roman authorities. Since <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+22%3A27-28&version=NASB">Paul was a Roman citizen</a>, it would have been instinctive to instruct other Christians living in Rome to maintain political peace with the empire. As with Ovid, being a Roman citizen did not exempt them from being treated like foreigners. The empire was indiscriminate in its deportation power, and citizens like Paul who introduced non-Roman religions were not exempt. </p>
<p>The U.S. immigration debate continues to be controversial. Whenever the writings of Paul or teachings of Jesus are introduced into the debate, we need to understand the context of the time. The Roman imperial power of deportation had life-and-death implications for immigrants and citizens. </p>
<p>Furthermore, during the time of Jesus and Paul, both Roman citizens and noncitizens could be deported from Rome. But foreigners who introduced non-Roman cultures in Rome were more likely to be expelled for being perceived as threats.</p>
<p><a href="https://bulletin.hds.harvard.edu/understanding-white-evangelical-views-on-immigration/">Kristin Kobes Du Mez</a>, professor of history at Calvin University, notes that <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-makes-donald-trump-and-john-wayne-heroes-of-the-christian-right-141961">White evangelical Christians</a> appear “more opposed to immigration reform, and have more negative views about immigrants, than any other religious demographic.” Perhaps for some evangelicals, discomfort and suspicion with outsiders lies at the root of anti-immigrant policies as it did during the time of Romans.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155021/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rodolfo Galvan Estrada III does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Many within the political left and right draw on the Bible to inform their views on immigration, but neglect to take into account how foreigners were treated under the Roman Empire during the time of Jesus.Rodolfo Galvan Estrada III, Assistant Professor of the New Testament, Vanguard UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1410112020-07-06T12:12:16Z2020-07-06T12:12:16ZDecades of failed reforms allow continued police brutality and racism<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343877/original/file-20200625-132955-v0z2sj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=48%2C36%2C3977%2C2981&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Black Lives Matters murals on boarded-up businesses in New York City.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/BLM-Murals-are-seen-in-SoHo-in-NYC-6-24-20/e01574f8f05e4028862e465ae350789f/1/0">AP Photo/STRF/STAR MAX/IPx</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Police brutality has a long history of being protected, reinforced and even redoubled for more than a century in the U.S. through a combination of political expediency and racism. </p>
<p>President Donald Trump’s <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-safe-policing-safe-communities/">executive order</a> and the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/06/25/883263263/house-approves-police-reform-bill-but-issue-stalled-amid-partisan-standoff">stalled bills in Congress</a> to curb police misconduct are, at best, attempts to retune an instrument that was orchestrated for abuse. </p>
<p>As a former archivist in charge of the National Archives records for the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/060.html">Department of Justice</a>, <a href="https://www.archives.gov/findingaid/stat/discovery/65">Federal Bureau of Investigation</a> and <a href="https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/129.html">Bureau of Prisons</a>, it is clear to me that the history of police violence in the U.S. informs and influences why the U.S. is again facing protests over violence, racism and unjust death.</p>
<h2>Wickersham Commission</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Police_Misconduct/yWUlDgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=police+corruption+wickersham&pg=PT52&printsec=frontcover">Violence and corruption</a> have long been the mainstay of American police. </p>
<p>In 1929, <a href="https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/presidential-speeches/december-3-1929-first-state-union-address">President Herbert Hoover</a>, stirred by stories of bootleggers who forged criminal alliances with police departments during the <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/Economics_of_Prohibition_The/JXa9MgztR2AC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=herbert+hoover+prohibition+corruption+police&pg=PA134&printsec=frontcover">Prohibition Era</a> (1920-1933), announced that his administration would “make the widest inquiry into the shortcomings of the administration of justice and into the causes and remedies for them.” </p>
<p>Hoover appointed the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, chaired by former Attorney General George Wickersham, to investigate the failure of prohibition laws. In its 1931 report, the commission said that police made frequent use of torture as a method of law enforcement and that “confessions of guilt frequently are unlawfully extorted by the police from prisoners by means of cruel treatment, <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.c004793481&view=1up&seq=439&q1=%E2%80%9Cconfessions%20of%20guilt%20frequently%20are%20unlawfully%20extorted%20by%20the%20police%20from%20prisoners%20by%20means%20of%20cruel%20treatment,%20colloquially%20known%20as%20the%20third%20degree,%22">colloquially known as the third degree.”</a> The Wickersham Commission defined the “third degree” as the “employment of methods which inflict suffering, physical or mental, upon a person, in order to obtain from that person information about a crime.” </p>
<p>Rather than reform the police, however, Attorney General Homer Cummings (1933-1939), who was appointed by Hoover’s successor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, announced in September 1933 that there was a “<a href="https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ag/legacy/2011/09/16/09-11-1933.pdf">real war</a> that confronts us all – a war that must be successfully fought if life and property are to be secure in our country…The warfare which an armed underworld is waging upon organized society has reached disturbing proportions. The prevalence of predatory crime, including kidnapping and racketeering, demands the utmost diligence upon the part of our law enforcing agencies, supported by an informed and aroused public opinion.” Cummings declared a “<a href="https://www.academia.edu/6571615/J._Edgar_Hoover_s_Domestic_Propaganda_Narrating_the_Spectacle_of_the_Karpis_Arrest">war on crime</a>” that aimed to professionalize and militarize the police. </p>
<p>Professionalization was supposed to train police in scientific methods to curtail torture in police work, but militarization armed the FBI and coordinated it with local police departments across the country. The war on crime was a signature program of Roosevelt’s <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Manufacture_of_Consent/cXjDDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=war%20on%20crime">New Deal,</a> designed to win headlines for the president when Americans were hungry for strong leadership amid the Great Depression. </p>
<h2>Kerner Commission</h2>
<p>Thirty years later, President Lyndon B. Johnson mounted his own <a href="http://bostonreview.net/us/elizabeth-hinton-kerner-commission-crime-commission">war on crime.</a> He appointed the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, known as the Kerner Commission, to investigate the source of riots across the country in 1967. </p>
<p>Chaired by Governor Otto Kerner Jr. of Illinois, the commission reported that to “some Negroes, <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015000225410&view=1up&seq=27&q1=brutality">police have come to symbolize white power, white racism, and white repression</a>. And the fact is that many police do reflect and express these white attitudes. The atmosphere of hostility and cynicism is reinforced by a widespread belief among Negroes in the existence of police brutality and in a ‘double standard’ of justice and protection – one for Negroes and one for whites.” </p>
<p>The Kerner Commission documented a reality that remains unchanged: police are trained to keep order in Black neighborhoods with the use of unchecked violence. Among other things, it highlighted the “need for change in police operations in the ghetto, to insure proper conduct by individual officers and to eliminate <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015000225410&view=plaintext&seq=180&q1=need%20for%20change%20in%20police%20operations%20in%20the%20ghetto,%20to%20insure%20proper%20conduct%20by%20individual%20officers%20and%20to%20eliminate%20abrasive%20practices">abrasive practices</a>.” </p>
<p>The problem of police brutality was not untrained or rogue cops, but the design of America’s system of policing. The commission noted that “many of the serious disturbances took place in cities whose <a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015000225410&view=plaintext&seq=180&q1=routine%20police%20actions%20such%20as%20stopping">police are among the best led, best organized, best trained and most professional</a> in the country.” President Johnson ignored its <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/1968-kerner-commission-got-it-right-nobody-listened-180968318/">recommendations</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=525&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=660&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=660&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/344831/original/file-20200630-103636-dn7dm9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=660&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Kerner Commission’s recommendations to address poverty and structural racism in the U.S. were never adopted.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Kerner-Commission-50-Years/f5e0bbebe4e6485da5bbf370ed976f98/8/0">AP Photo/File</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>War on drugs</h2>
<p>The next administration made the problem of <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nixon-adviser-ehrlichman-anti-left-anti-black-war-on-drugs-2019-7">police brutality</a> worse. </p>
<p>In June 1971, President Richard Nixon launched the war on drugs. Borrowing language from the war on crime, Nixon announced that “America’s <a href="https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2016/06/26404/">public enemy number one</a> in the United States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive,” he said. </p>
<p>Nixon’s domestic policy chief, John Ehrlichman, later recounted that the drug war was designed to link the Black community with narcotics and thereby <a href="https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/">“arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.”</a> </p>
<p>The war on drugs not only targeted the Black community but justified the mass incarceration of Black men. <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/why-america-cant-quit-the-drug-war-47203/">Every president since Ronald Reagan</a> has expanded the war on drugs, from programs that equipped police with <a href="https://www.voanews.com/usa/why-american-police-officers-look-soldiers">military gear</a> to patterns of enforcement that disproportionately policed people of color. Such outfitting dressed officers as soldiers and cast Black people as combatants. </p>
<h2>Undone reform, post-Ferguson</h2>
<p>Protests against police violence erupted once again in August 2014 when police in Ferguson, Missouri, killed an unarmed Black teenager and left his body displayed on the street for hours. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/us/michael-brown-a-bodys-timeline-4-hours-on-a-ferguson-street.html?searchResultPosition=1">Angry crowds gathered, protested and rioted</a>. Police responded by showcasing their <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2014/08/14/us/missouri-ferguson-police-tactics/">military equipment</a> including tear gas, rubber bullets, stun grenades, M-16 rifles, M-14 rifles, M-1911 handguns, tactical vests, undercover apparel, riot shields, armored personnel carriers, mine-resistant ambush protected vehicles and high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles. </p>
<p>President Barack Obama issued <a href="https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/publications/LEEWG_Report_Final.pdf">guidelines</a> for the Justice Department in 2015 that prohibited the transfer of some military equipment to local police departments. He explained that Americans have
“seen how <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/05/18/remarks-president-community-policing">militarized gear</a> can sometimes give people a feeling like there’s an occupying force, as opposed to a force that’s part of the community that’s protecting them and serving them.” </p>
<p>Obama also created the <a href="https://time.com/4398392/obama-police-reform-report-task-force-on-21st-century-policing/">Task Force on 21st Century Policing</a> in 2014. It recommended new policies to build trust between racial minorities and the police, but they were sparsely adopted. After <a href="https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/07/07/statement-president">police killed</a> Alton Sterling and Philando Castile in 2016, Obama lamented that “change has been too slow and we have to have a greater sense of urgency about this.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343876/original/file-20200625-132951-1ohdf67.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Black Lives Matter movement began in Ferguson, Missouri, when Michael Brown was shot and killed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/Search?query=ferguson+missouri+riots&ss=10&st=kw&entitysearch=&toItem=15&orderBy=Newest&searchMediaType=excludecollections">AP Photo/Jeff Roberson</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>President Trump rescinded <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/08/31/2017-18679/restoring-state-tribal-and-local-law-enforcements-access-to-life-saving-equipment-and-resources">Obama’s guidelines</a> to demilitarize the police in 2017. Trump’s order reinstated the military gear and sent a “strong message that we will not allow criminal activity, violence, and lawlessness to become the new normal,” said <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-63rd-biennial-conference-national-fraternal">Attorney General Jeff Sessions</a>. </p>
<p>Today, the efforts of the White House and Congress to reform the police is an attempt to <a href="https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_End_of_Policing/Iv2mDAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=reform">reinvent an old institution</a>. Ideas advanced by Republicans and Democrats rely on the police to tear down the <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/policing/2019/01/31/blue-wall-of-silence-policing-the-usa-cops-community/2604929002/">blue wall of silence</a>, an unofficial loyalty oath among police that is customarily respected by judges and prosecutors, and which leads to a lack of accountability for police violence and abuse. <a href="https://medium.com/@OfcrACab/confessions-of-a-former-bastard-cop-bb14d17bc759?fbclid=IwAR1lM0C0fw4AcfYaXN1DIhh8tIRefINJDKmwjIYR-zxy2JsFi1KClFgMTUU">Police culture protects itself</a>. </p>
<p>Like before, America is again scrutinizing the role and function of the police in the wake of public corruption and brutality. But there is no promise that reform efforts now will lead to any more changes than they have in the past. </p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/141011/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen M. Underhill does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What will it take to change a brutal and militaristic style of policing in America? Political will.Stephen M. Underhill, Associate Professor of Communication, Marshall UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1143982019-03-28T10:39:20Z2019-03-28T10:39:20ZWhat you need to know about the Mueller report: 4 essential reads<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/270046/original/file-20190418-28094-d3vbs7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Attorney General William Barr at an April 18 press conference about the public release of the special counsel's report on Donald Trump. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-Russia-Probe/c1f2dd364890466c8d41edd7eb1d08cb/11/0">AP Photo/Patrick Semansky</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The political saga triggered by the special counsel investigation into Donald Trump, which has cast such a long shadow over his presidency, will continue long after the inquiry’s end.</p>
<p>According to U.S. Attorney General William Barr, prosecutor Robert Mueller <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/638169023/robert-mueller-submits-report-on-russia-investigation-to-attorney-general-barr">determined that Trump’s campaign did not collude with Russia</a> to influence the 2016 presidential election. The special counsel did not make a conclusion about whether Trump committed obstruction of justice.</p>
<p>Because Barr has not made Mueller’s more than 300-page report public, his exact findings remain unknown. Congressional Democrats are demanding access to the full report by April 2 to see what Mueller uncovered during his 22-month investigation into the president.</p>
<p>As this federal probe turns into a partisan battle, here are four key threads our experts have been watching.</p>
<h2>1. Obstruction of justice</h2>
<p>In a March 24 letter to Congress summarizing Mueller’s findings, Barr wrote that the evidence collected is “not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”</p>
<p>That differs from Mueller’s conclusion. He wrote that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” </p>
<p>How can two people draw different conclusions from the same evidence?</p>
<p>“Obstruction of justice is a complicated matter,” <a href="https://theconversation.com/trump-and-obstruction-of-justice-an-explainer-114270">writes law professor David Orentlicher of the University of Nevada-Las Vegas</a>.</p>
<p>According to federal law, obstruction occurs when a person tries to impede or influence a trial, investigation or other official proceeding with threats or corrupt intent.</p>
<p>“Bribing a judge and destroying evidence are classic examples of this crime,” Orentlicher says.</p>
<p>But other actions may constitute obstruction too, depending on the context. And some actions that look like obstruction may not be, because the law requires a “corrupt” intention to obstruct justice as well.</p>
<p>President Trump did many things that influenced federal investigations into him and his aides, Orentlicher points out, including firing FBI Director James Comey and publicly attacking the special counsel’s work.</p>
<p>The legal question is: Did he do so with “corrupt” intent?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266184/original/file-20190327-139374-rdwqav.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Barr’s March 24 letter to Congress.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-Russia-Probe/fb81cf81c274490e90b6a3d6b162287c/6/0">AP Photo/Jon Elswick</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>2. Release of the report</h2>
<p>That’s among the many things House Democrats hope to learn from reading Mueller’s report. </p>
<p>But they <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-trump-and-barr-could-stretch-claims-of-executive-privilege-and-grand-jury-secrecy-114166">may never see it</a>, writes Charles Tiefer, professor of law at the University of Baltimore. He expects Trump and Barr will do “everything in their power to keep secret the full report and, equally important, the materials underlying the report.”</p>
<p>Tiefer was special deputy chief counsel of the House Iran-contra Investigation in the 1980s and has worked on many major House investigations.</p>
<p>“I saw the tricks the executive branch can pull to withhold evidence,” he says.</p>
<p>The main legal grounds Barr and Trump will try to use for suppressing the Mueller report, according to Tiefer, are executive privilege and grand jury secrecy.</p>
<p>Trump is likely to argue that executive privilege – the principle that the president can withhold certain information from the courts, Congress or others – permits him to keep much of the Mueller report private.</p>
<p>Executive privilege cannot be used to shield evidence of crime. But that’s where Barr’s exoneration of Trump really helps the White House, Tiefer says.</p>
<p>The attorney general, for his part, has already invoked grand jury secrecy – the rule that attorneys, jurors and others “must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury” – to keep Mueller’s report private.</p>
<p>Tiefer suspects Barr will seek to maximize what’s the law by using “the much-deprecated ‘Midas touch’ doctrine,” which could bury “everything indirectly and remotely having some attenuated whiff of a grand jury” as protected information.</p>
<h2>3. Politics versus the law</h2>
<p>In demanding Mueller’s full report, Democrats have asserted that Barr cannot be trusted to interpret its findings objectively because he was appointed by the president. They say that makes his exoneration of Trump a political, rather than legal, determination.</p>
<p>The question of Barr’s independence first arose during his confirmation hearing in February.</p>
<p>Barr, a veteran lawyer who previously served as President George H.W. Bush’s attorney general, interprets the Constitution as giving the president almost unlimited power. He has referred to the attorney general – the government’s top prosecutor – as “the president’s lawyer.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=345&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/266187/original/file-20190327-139352-s5xr9x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Barr was handpicked by Trump to be in office when the Mueller report came in.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Alex Brandon/Jose Luis Magana</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The question of who the attorney general works for <a href="https://theconversation.com/nominating-a-crony-loyalist-or-old-buddy-for-attorney-general-is-a-us-presidential-tradition-108160">dates back centuries</a>, says Austin Sarat, a political scientist at Amherst College. That’s because the position is not mentioned in the Constitution. </p>
<p>“It was created when the First Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789,” Sarat writes.</p>
<p>That law called for the appointment of a person “learned in the law, to act as attorney general for the United States.” It laid out such limited duties for the role that “the attorney general was to be a part-time official” reporting to the president, Sarat says.</p>
<p>As a result, “Throughout American history, there have been different visions of the role of the attorney general and his or her relationship to the president,” he adds.</p>
<h2>4. Loyalty to the president</h2>
<p>Trump expects <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-does-a-president-demand-loyalty-from-people-who-work-for-him-95199">personal loyalty from his staff</a> – including from his attorney general – reports Yu Ouyang, professor of political science at Purdue University Northwest.</p>
<p>The president fired the previous attorney general, Jeff Sessions, in November 2017, reportedly because Sessions’ recused himself from overseeing the FBI’s probe into Russian meddling – a betrayal that opened the door for Mueller’s appointment as special counsel. That’s how Barr got the attorney general job.</p>
<p>Ouyang, who studies loyalty and politics, says presidents it’s normal for presidents to prefer loyalists.</p>
<p>“Loyalty comes in handy for presidents when they enter office and ask, ‘How do I select the people who will help carry out my agenda?’”</p>
<p>What sets Trump apart, for Ouyang, is his “exceptional emphasis on loyalty.” He values it over other critical qualities like competence and honesty. And he appoints his staff accordingly.</p>
<p>That, say Democratic lawmakers, is why Barr cannot be the only public official to see the evidence Mueller collected on Trump.</p>
<p><em>This article is a round-up of stories from The Conversation’s archive.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114398/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
As the special counsel’s investigation of Trump turns into a partisan battle in Congress, here are four key issues to follow.Catesby Holmes, International Editor | Politics Editor, The Conversation USLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1121592019-02-20T20:30:14Z2019-02-20T20:30:14ZThe revolving door between media and government spins again with CNN’s hiring of Sarah Isgur Flores<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259989/original/file-20190220-148523-15f50gr.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sarah Isgur Flores, Justice Department spokeswoman, being interviewed by CNN's Chris Cuomo in 2018.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vglh6aeiRXQ">Youtube/CNN</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>A common practice in American journalism has, once again, sparked outrage.</p>
<p>CNN recently announced the hiring of Sarah Isgur Flores to be <a href="https://splinternews.com/wyd-cnn-1832727576">“one of several editors</a>” who will help “coordinate [political] coverage across TV and digital.” </p>
<p>Though a CNN spokesman explained <a href="https://splinternews.com/wyd-cnn-1832727576">to news site Splinter that Isgur</a> “is not leading, overseeing, or running CNN’s political coverage,” the new hire will undoubtedly influence the cable network’s coverage of the 2020 presidential election. </p>
<p>Isgur has no professional journalism experience. But she’s been active politically, which may have qualified her for the job.</p>
<p>Isgur most recently worked as the spokesperson for the Department of Justice, where she disseminated information about the department’s new policies under President Trump and Attorney General Sessions in order to inform and influence journalistic coverage. </p>
<p>With a <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/former-fiorina-strategist-joins-sessions-ag-confirmation-team-233052">Harvard law degree, and jobs at the Republican National Committee</a> and on numerous Republican campaigns, she was a reliable purveyor of administration spin. </p>
<p>CNN’s hiring of Isgur immediately <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/2/19/18231993/cnn-gop-operative-2020-election-coverage">provoked criticism</a>. </p>
<p>“Elevating an unabashed partisan to a nonpartisan role is an obvious disservice to viewers at home, who count on the network’s independence,” <a href="https://www.gq.com/story/cnn-sarah-isgur-hire">wrote attorney and GQ columnist Jay Willis</a>.</p>
<p>Media history shows that CNN is simply repeating a time-honored journalistic hiring practice. The revolving door from the White House to mainstream journalism, and from mainstream journalism to the White House, has been used so regularly that we often forget just how common it was – and remains. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=913&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=913&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=913&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1147&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1147&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259991/original/file-20190220-148509-huhtal.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1147&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Bill Moyers, right, was press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Watchf-AP-A-DC-USA-APHS278112-Johnson-Moyers-1965/fc24ba0bd5be4c2e94e92678dc88f333/22/0">AP/William J. Smith</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Prominent figures</h2>
<p>The long list of political operatives who transitioned into journalism includes such well-known figures as Bill Moyers, William Safire, Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most illuminating example of this transition is Moyers. While working as a <a href="https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/the-mythic-rise-of-billy-don-moyers/">special assistant and press secretary for President Lyndon Johnson</a>, Moyers proved to be one of the administration’s most antagonistic tacticians in dealing with the media. </p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1992-05-30-9202180175-story.html">memo he wrote about Vietnam War coverage</a>, Moyers decried “the irresponsible and prejudiced coverage of men like Peter Arnett and Morley Safer, men who are not American and who do not have the basic American interest at heart.” <a href="https://www.pbs.org/weta/reportingamericaatwar/reporters/arnett/">Arnett was from New Zealand</a> and <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/morley-safer-a-reporter-with-canadian-roots">Safer from Canada</a>. </p>
<p>Safer, the legendary CBS News reporter, never forgave Moyers for helping the Johnson administration smear him as a Communist. </p>
<p>FOIA records later revealed that Moyers helped hunt <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/18/AR2009021803819_pf.html">for homosexuals</a> serving in the Johnson administration in order to protect the White House from embarrassing disclosures. Moyers <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2009/02/bill-moyers-responds-to-jack-shafer-s-intemperate-attack.html">has disputed that characterization</a>. </p>
<p>Yet, for all of Moyers’ partisan political behavior, he would transition straight from the White House <a href="https://billmoyers.com/about-us/#bill-moyers-biography">to become publisher of the Long Island newspaper Newsday in 1967</a>. He joined CBS News in 1976.</p>
<p>Following in Moyers’ footsteps were several Republican political appointees. </p>
<p>Diane Sawyer easily moved from <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Diane-Sawyer">working for Richard Nixon to a job at CBS News</a> without much criticism. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/insider/william-safire-opinion.html">William Safire’s hiring by The New York Times as an opinion columnist in 1973</a> sparked a firestorm of controversy both in the newsroom and from critics.</p>
<p>Safire had composed the most memorable phrases uttered by Spiro Agnew in that vice president’s <a href="https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/spiroagnewtvnewscoverage.htm">famous attacks on the press</a>. Just a few years later, <a href="https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/william-safire">he would win journalism’s highest honor</a> – the Pulitzer Prize for his commentary on the Carter administration.</p>
<p>But not all the revolving-door examples would be as famous as Moyers, Sawyer or Safire. </p>
<p>In 1997, for example, David Shipley left a position as special assistant to President Clinton to join The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/07/us/the-times-names-editor-of-op-ed-page.html">as deputy op-ed page editor</a>. Roger Colloff, who served in the Federal Office of Energy under President Carter, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/07/us/roger-colloff-46-led-cbs-flagship-to-several-emmys.html">left the administration in 1979</a> to join CBS, where he would become a CBS News vice president with supervisory authority over all public affairs broadcasts, including “60 Minutes.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259995/original/file-20190220-148513-1ogmyml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Journalist Diane Sawyer, left, was previously a press aide to President Richard Nixon, right. Photo from Nixon’s trip to China in 1972.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7268194">National Archives, White House Photo Office collection</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Journalistic independence questioned</h2>
<p>Isgur won’t simply be a columnist (like Safire) or reporter (like Moyers or Sawyer). Both Shipley and Colloff had previous journalistic experience; Isgur doesn’t. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/2/19/18231993/cnn-gop-operative-2020-election-coverage">danger critics identify</a> is that Isgur, as an editor, could supervise and shape coverage in ways that might allow her evident political biases to go unchecked. CNN characterized her authority as limited, specifically noting that Isgur “<a href="https://splinternews.com/wyd-cnn-1832727576">"is helping to coordinate coverage across TV and Digital – she is one of several editors.”</a>.“ </p>
<p>Yet there are historical precedents for granting far more authority to former political appointees than Isgur will have. </p>
<p>Colloff went from the Carter administration to supervising all public affairs coverage at CBS, including the celebrated investigations of "60 Minutes.” </p>
<p>In 1961, James C. Hagerty moved from his position as President Eisenhower’s press secretary to vice president of news, special events and public affairs for ABC. There’s little evidence that Hagerty’s ABC News management led to significantly more <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=lAdv3youHkYC&pg=PA309&dq=%22Edward+Bliss%22+%22New+Day+at+ABC+News%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjS5uHStcrgAhVM6LwKHZrGD_QQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=%22Edward%20Bliss%22%20%22New%20Day%20at%20ABC%20News%22&f=false">favorable coverage of Republicans</a>, when compared to CBS News and NBC News, in this period. </p>
<p>Do these historical examples demonstrating the smooth interplay between American politics and political journalism apply in the Isgur case? </p>
<p>Today’s context is different. Isgur comes from an administration that has vilified the press to an unmatched degree. President Trump’s rhetorical attacks on the media, which have led to <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/31/politics/pipe-bomb-suspect-doj-letter/index.html">several violent and criminal acts</a>, this line of thinking goes, should therefore disqualify administration appointees from working in journalism.</p>
<p>There’s some truth to the idea that President Trump is uniquely antagonistic towards the media. But he’s not the first high-level politician to be that way. </p>
<p>After more than four decades, it’s easy to forget the power and influence of vice president Spiro Agnew’s attacks on the media during the Nixon administration. And, even before that, at the 1964 Republican convention in San Francisco, <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1964-republican-convention-revolution-from-the-right-915921/">the “right-wing rage”</a> directed toward the media shocked journalists.</p>
<p>Just as Safire’s defection from the Nixon administration to The New York Times raised the issue of hypocrisy, Flores’ parallel move incites many of the same questions. </p>
<p>Why would a Trump administration appointee even be interested in working for CNN, a journalistic outlet the president has accused of purveying “fake news”? Is the move an implicit recognition that the attacks on the media are exploitative, done primarily to rile a political base? </p>
<h2>Questioning the coziness</h2>
<p>There’s always been a close relationship between American political coverage and American political journalism – but to acknowledge it neither endorses nor excuses it. </p>
<p>The First Amendment guarantee of an independent press is philosophically grounded in the ideal of journalistic independence. When the revolving door is utilized, it’s healthy to criticize its use. Noting that political operatives might bring their biases to their coverage, critics can pressure these novice journalists to be more circumspect about their work.</p>
<p>Perhaps ironically, CNN’s public announcement of Isgur’s hiring provides a remedy for the network’s critics of the hiring. Drawing attention to the move will help the CNN audience evaluate her work. </p>
<p>The audience plays an important role in safeguarding journalistic ethics in a democracy. If viewers watch CNN with a more skeptical and critical perspective throughout the 2020 presidential election, the network will be forced to respond. </p>
<p>Should coverage become detectably more in favor of the Trump administration, criticism spawned by vigilance will likely hurt CNN’s reputation for independence, its credibility and its ratings.</p>
<p>That’s a lesson liberals in the United States might learn from conservatives, who have complained about liberal bias for decades. Pressure often works. </p>
<p>In fact, it’s quite possible that such criticism ultimately elevated a person with no journalism experience to one of the most important and coveted jobs in the industry.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/112159/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael J. Socolow receives funding from the Fulbright Scholar Program. He is currently a Fulbright Scholar at the News & Media Research Centre at the University of Canberra (Australia). </span></em></p>CNN has just announced it has hired a former Trump administration official to help direct political coverage. A storm of criticism ensued. But political hacks have long found a home in journalism.Michael J. Socolow, Associate Professor, Communication and Journalism, University of MaineLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1081602018-12-07T11:40:09Z2018-12-07T11:40:09ZNominating a crony, loyalist or old buddy for attorney general is a US presidential tradition<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249089/original/file-20181205-186064-1j6pucg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Sen. Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump on the presidential campaign trail, February 2016.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/GOP-2016-Trump-/5fe6f57bb57245b483189d410676e746/11/0">AP/John Bazemore</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>With President Donald Trump’s announcement that he <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/07/politics/william-barr-attorney-general-nomination/index.html">would nominate former Attorney General William P. Barr to fill the position</a> again, Trump chose a prominent Republican lawyer with extensive government experience to run the Justice Department.</p>
<p>Barr has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/07/us/politics/john-kelly-trump.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage">publicly supported some of Trump’s criticisms</a> of the Mueller investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. It’s not known how Barr would reflect those positions in his interactions with the investigation.</p>
<p>But when Donald Trump <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/17/politics/jeff-sessions-attorney-general-donald-trump-consideration/index.html">announced Jeff Sessions’s nomination as his attorney general</a>, the position was seen as <a href="https://www.npr.org/2017/07/26/539576121/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-has-long-shown-unwavering-support-for-trump">a reward for Sessions’s early endorsement</a> of the president’s 2016 campaign. And the president <a href="http://time.com/5203216/trump-sessions-timeline/">wanted loyalty in return</a>.</p>
<p>“The only reason I gave him the job,” Trump said, “<a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/18/502207098/trump-picks-sen-jeff-sessions-for-attorney-general">was because I felt loyalty</a>. He was an original supporter. He was on the campaign.”</p>
<p>Many people predicted that Trump indeed would have a loyal foot soldier <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-taps-loyalists-for-cabinet-picks-session-for-ag-pompeo-as-cia-director">as head of the Justice Department</a>.</p>
<p>But the president’s wish was not realized. Feeling betrayed when Sessions recused himself from the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, Trump turned Sessions into a <a href="http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/11/history-trump-jeff-sessions-feud.html">regular target for his Twitter assaults</a>.</p>
<p>Trump ended their fraught relationship by <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/sessions-resign/index.html">asking for Sessions to resign</a> after the 2018 midterm election and <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/who-is-matthew-whitaker-the-new-acting-attorney-general/">replacing him with Matthew Whitaker</a>. Whitaker is known as a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/us/politics/whitaker-mueller-trump.html">critic of the Mueller investigation</a> into the Trump campaign’s possible collusion with Russia. </p>
<p>The Whitaker appointment provoked questions among Trump critics, including George Conway, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/08/opinion/trump-attorney-general-sessions-unconstitutional.html">husband of the president’s counselor, Kellyanne Conway,</a> about its <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/whitaker-cant-take-officeand-that-helps-mueller/575770/">constitutionality and its wisdom</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=493&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249091/original/file-20181205-186067-v83639.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=619&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President-elect John F. Kennedy (left) announces the nomination of his brother, Robert F. Kennedy (right), as attorney general in December 1960.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Associated-Press-Domestic-News-Dist-of-Columbi-/5910c29a61e5da11af9f0014c2589dfb/3/0">AP photo</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, others welcomed the alliance between Trump and Whitaker. Margot Cleveland, an adjunct law professor at the University of Notre Dame, argued that “<a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/11/13/donald-trump-matthew-whitaker-no-need-recuse-russia-investigation-column/1968664002/">there is nothing nefarious about the (acting) attorney general loyally serving the president of the United States</a>.” </p>
<p>For me as a legal scholar who has studied controversies surrounding the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/When-Governments-Break-Law-Administration/dp/0814739857">role of prosecutors and prosecutorial decisions</a>, all of this has a familiar ring. </p>
<p>Indeed, throughout American history, there have been different visions of the role of the <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-0530-9.html">attorney general and his or her relationship to the president</a>. </p>
<h2>Part-time official</h2>
<p>The office of attorney general is not mentioned in the Constitution. It was created when the First Congress passed <a href="https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/judiciary.html">the Judiciary Act of 1789</a>. </p>
<p><a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/judiciary_act.asp">That act called for the appointment of a person</a> “learned in the law, to act as attorney general for the United States.” It said that the attorney general’s duty “shall be to prosecute and conduct all suits in the Supreme Court in which the United States shall be concerned, and to give his advice and opinion upon questions of law when required by the President of the United States, or when requested by the heads of any of the departments.” </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=750&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249090/original/file-20181205-186082-1caam88.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=943&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The first attorney general of the U.S., Edmund Jennings Randolph, who was close to President George Washington.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/randolph-edmund-jennings">Department of Justice/John Mix Stanley</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The act gave the attorney general limited duties relating strictly to matters of law. In fact, the attorney general was to be a part-time official, carrying out quasi-judicial functions, but responsible to the president who appointed him. </p>
<p>Two days after the Judiciary Act became law, George Washington appointed <a href="https://history.state.gov/departmenthistory/people/randolph-edmund-jennings">Edmund Jennings Randolph</a> to be the first attorney general of the United States. </p>
<p>Randolph had been a delegate to the Constitutional Convention and Virginia’s attorney general. He was “learned in the law,” but he was also Washington’s confidante and close political ally, having served as the <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/randolph-edmund-jennings">general’s chief of staff and personal secretary</a> in 1775.</p>
<p>During Randolph’s term as attorney general, Washington relied on him for support on matters that went <a href="https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2213&context=facpub">well beyond the formal duties of his office</a>. In one such instance, Randolph helped Washington handle foreign relations with France and Great Britain and, in others, <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-0530-9.html">advised him on his dealings with Congress</a>.</p>
<p>Thus, “from the beginning,” writes law professor Susan Low Bloch, “there were questions about whom the attorney general represented, who should and would control the incumbent attorney general, and what it means to represent the <a href="https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2213&context=facpub">‘interests of the United States</a>.‘”</p>
<h2>Carving out a role</h2>
<p>As other scholars have noted, the role of the attorney general has been variously <a href="https://www.crcpress.com/The-Politics-of-Justice-Attorney-General-and-the-Making-of-Government/Clayton/p/book/9781563240195">defined by the occupants of that office</a>.</p>
<p>Some have followed in Randolph’s footsteps, serving as close political allies of the president. Others have seen themselves as different from the rest of the president’s Cabinet and kept their distance from the president. They acted primarily as <a href="https://www.npr.org/2013/05/29/187079882/the-role-of-the-attorney-general-throughout-history">defenders of the rule of law</a>. </p>
<p>Examples of the first type from the early years of the country include President <a href="https://www.treasury.gov/about/history/pages/rbtaney.aspx">Andrew Jackson’s attorney general, Roger Taney</a>, who worked <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/us-government/bank-of-the-united-states">hand-in-hand with Jackson to end funding</a> for the Bank of the United States. </p>
<p>Jackson subsequently nominated Taney to the Supreme Court, where he wrote the <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1850-1900/60us393">decision in the infamous Dred Scott case</a>.</p>
<p>In the 20th century, President Franklin Roosevelt’s attorneys general regularly helped him in political battles. Some of those battles <a href="http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2010/04/KatyalCaplan.pdf">involved the Justice Department</a> and some did not. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/jackson-robert-houghwout">Robert Jackson</a>, who served as FDR’s attorney general in 1940 and 1941 before being elevated to the Supreme Court, played a key role in <a href="https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/neutrality-acts">the effort to circumvent the Neutrality Act</a>
in order to provide war equipment to Great Britain <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-0530-9.html">before America’s entrance into World War II</a>. </p>
<p>Other close political allies of the president who appointed them include <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/kennedy-robert-francis">Robert Kennedy</a>, who was appointed at age 35 by his brother, President John F. Kennedy, and widely <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/142063/robert-f-kennedy-case-attorney-general">criticized as unqualified for the job</a>. President <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/meese-edwin-iii">Reagan’s second attorney general, Edwin Meese</a>, was a longtime friend of Reagan’s.</p>
<p>So common is this tendency to appoint friends and supporters to be attorneys general that, since FDR, many presidents have chosen their campaign manager or their party’s <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-0530-9.html">national chairperson to be attorney general of the United States</a>. Examples include <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/mcgrath-james-howard">J. Howard McGrath</a>, who served under President Truman, and <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/brownell-herbert-jr">Herbert Brownell</a>, attorney general under President Eisenhower. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=459&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=459&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=459&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=577&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=577&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249101/original/file-20181205-186058-1cdxioe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=577&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">President Harry S. Truman with his new attorney general, J. Howard McGrath, right, and William M. Boyle, Jr., who took over from McGrath as Democratic Party chairman, in Washington, 1949.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Watchf-Associated-Press-Domestic-News-Dist-of-/27d24e1be17743a8906df4c69c5db2c6/12/0">AP/Bill Chaplis</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Attorneys general who have tried to eschew a clearly political role and be bureaucratic servants of the rule of law include, in the early 19th century, <a href="https://wizzwoo.com/download.php?q=memoirs-of-the-life-of-william-wirt-attorney-general-of-the-united-states">William Wirt</a>. </p>
<p>Wirt was attorney general from 1817-1829 under Presidents James Monroe and John Quincy Adams. He insisted that the <a href="https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-0530-9.html">attorney general should not be drawn into partisan activities</a> and should adhere to what he called “the strict limits prescribed for… [that office] by law.’” </p>
<p>Twentieth-century exemplars of this more independent role include <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/stone-harlan-fiske">Calvin Coolidge’s attorney general, Harlan Fiske Stone</a>, and <a href="https://www.justice.gov/ag/bio/levi-edward-hirsch">Edward Levi, who served under President Gerald Ford</a>. </p>
<p>Both of them came to office <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Justice-Government-Political-Institutions/dp/156324019X">in the wake of scandals</a>. Stone took office after the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Teapot-Dome-Scandal">Teapot Dome scandal</a> and Levi after <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/watergate/timeline.html">Watergate</a>. Each restored integrity to the Justice Department by instituting new guidelines designed to limit political interference in its work.</p>
<p>Throughout American history, when presidents have appointed political cronies to be attorney general, they were looking for people only to help them pursue a policy agenda. President Nixon’s efforts to enlist Attorney General John Mitchell in the Watergate cover-up and get one of Mitchell’s successors, Elliot Richardson, to fire the Watergate special prosecutor stand out as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/08/25/trump-is-acting-like-richard-nixon-now-we-need-others-to-channel-the-heroes-of-watergate/?utm_term=.53713fd83d52">important, but rare, exceptions</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-calls-manafort-prosecution-a-hoax-says-sessions-should-stop-mueller-investigation/2018/08/01/8deb579e-958e-11e8-810c-5fa705927d54_story.html?utm_term=.989d9753c406">Other presidents have not expected or</a> asked their attorneys general to shut down investigations or protect them from possible criminal liability. </p>
<p>But that is exactly what <a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com/jeff-sessionss-firing-matthew-whitakers-rise-and-attorney-generals-role-mueller-investigation">Trump’s vision of the attorney general’s role</a> seemed to entail. Like Nixon, he wanted more than a political ally. What he wanted from his attorney general posed a serious threat to the rule of law. With his appointment of Barr, perhaps that will change.</p>
<p><em>This story has been updated to reflect the nomination of William P. Barr as attorney general.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108160/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Austin Sarat does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>President Trump has been criticized for the appointment of political allies as attorney general. But history is filled with examples of AGs who were friends and political supporters of the president.Austin Sarat, Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science, Amherst CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1066142018-11-09T11:44:24Z2018-11-09T11:44:24Z3 things Jeff Sessions did as attorney general that history should remember<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/244667/original/file-20181108-74754-1dyzkyn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Mike Pence administers the oath of office to Attorney General Jeff Sessions.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Trump-100-100-Photos/790340e9197445da8dcc8393b47e89fd/1/0">AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Donald Trump’s sacking of Attorney General Jeff Sessions has raised concerns among those who wish to see the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller continue unimpeded.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1060256623439110146"}"></div></p>
<p>Those same people will likely not lament Session’s ouster based on what he accomplished as attorney general. In my view, his tenure as attorney general saw him on the wrong side of most important law enforcement decisions. On the other hand, many will point to him as a historic champion for “law and order” conservatism at the highest level. </p>
<p>Here are three areas where Sessions will most be remembered. </p>
<h2>1. Controversial from the start</h2>
<p>Sessions’ tenure began back in early 2017. During his <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/02/us/politics/jeff-sessions-russia-trump-investigation-democrats.html">confirmation hearings</a>, Sessions testified incorrectly under oath that he had had no contacts with Russian officials during his active role in the 2016 Trump campaign. When it became public that he had met with the Russian ambassador, <a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2017/03/did-sessions-lie/">he claimed he had not lied</a>. But because of those contacts and his role in the campaign, he recused himself from the Russia investigation.</p>
<p>This caused a rift between him and President Trump, which was ironic, given that Sessions enthusiastically implemented most of Trump’s policy priorities. In the end, the perceived lack of personal loyalty from the recusal – the necessity of which seemed pretty straightforward to most outside legal observers – proved to be Sessions’ downfall. </p>
<h2>2. Crackdown on drugs</h2>
<p>Sessions enthusiastically waged the war on drugs, much to the chagrin of those who considered that war a proven failure. </p>
<p>Sessions <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-issues-sweeping-new-criminal-charging-policy/2017/05/11/4752bd42-3697-11e7-b373-418f6849a004_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e4d64261fdc7">instructed prosecutors</a> to seek the maximum possible sentences for drug offenses and in 2017 <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-prisons-idUSKBN1622NN">reversed an Obama-era Department of Justice policy</a> that barred the Department of Justice from contracting with private prisons.</p>
<p>He also reversed the Obama-era policy against federal enforcement of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-is-rescinding-obama-era-directive-for-feds-to-back-off-marijuana-enforcement-in-states-with-legal-pot/2018/01/04/b1a42746-f157-11e7-b3bf-ab90a706e175_story.html?utm_term=.f2e0b306ebf5">marijuana possession laws</a> in states where marijuana had been decriminalized. This meant low-level drug offenders were subjected to serious federal criminal penalties for dealing a substance made legal under state law. This position highlighted a tension between the dueling conservative principles of being “tough on crime” while also respecting states’ rights.</p>
<p>Sessions’ criminal justice policies would put many more people in jail, exacerbating the perceived problem of <a href="https://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2014/dec/15/jim-webb/webb-says-us-has-5-percent-worlds-population-25-pe/">mass incarceration</a>. America is responsible for 25 percent of the world’s imprisoned persons despite having only 5 percent of the world’s population. As attorney general, Sessions embraced the policies seen by many as major causes of this problem, including harsh mandatory minimum sentences; the use of private prisons which create a for-profit incentive to incarcerate; and imprisoning persons who commit low-level, nonviolent drug offenses. </p>
<p>Sessions and his supporters argued that illegal drugs are a scourge, and that swift and certain punishment was the best means of combating it. This included a Sessions-led crackdown on <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/us/politics/opioids-crackdown-sessions.html">doctors, drug dealers and traffickers</a> whose distribution of drugs through either legal or illegal means fed the nation’s opioid epidemic, one of the signal Sessions efforts which garnered the most bipartisan support. </p>
<h2>3. ‘Zero tolerance’ at the border</h2>
<p>On immigration, Sessions faithfully put into action the tough talk of the president – even where, some would say, supporting evidence was lacking. </p>
<p>Research shows that immigrants commit fewer crimes in the U.S. <a href="https://theconversation.com/immigration-and-crime-what-does-the-research-say-72176">than non-immigrants</a>.</p>
<p>But Sessions often falsely claimed that there was a strong correlation between immigration – including legal immigration – and crime, including terrorism. He pointed out that members of the notorious <a href="https://theconversation.com/central-american-gangs-like-ms-13-were-born-out-of-failed-anti-crime-policies-76554">MS-13 gang</a> came to the U.S. from other countries – although, ironically, the gang got its start here in the U.S. </p>
<p>Sessions used the false connection between immigrants and crime for sharp reductions in the number of <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/10/01/syria-refugee-crisis-congress-hearing/73164432/">Syrian refugees the U.S. should admit</a>, despite the fact that it is IS terrorists that they themselves are fleeing. He also used it to justify a crusade against so-called “sanctuary cities,” cities which forbade local law enforcement officials from enforcing certain federal immigration laws. </p>
<p>As sanctuary city advocates observe, such enforcement might make local immigrant communities less likely to report crimes, serve as witnesses, and otherwise cooperate with local law enforcement to reduce ordinary crime. Sessions’ January 2017 executive order to suspend all federal funding to such cities was eventually <a href="https://www.npr.org/2017/05/22/529560837/justice-department-narrows-scope-of-sanctuary-cities-executive-order">blocked by the courts</a> as unconstitutional overreach.</p>
<p>But the most prominent and devastating aspect of his immigration policy was creating a “zero tolerance” policy at the border – the idea that every undocumented person coming to the border without documentation would be detained and criminally prosecuted, even those pursuing valid and legal asylum claims.</p>
<p>The policy triggered the widely criticized practice of <a href="http://time.com/5268572/jeff-sessions-illegal-border-separated/">family separation</a>, in which federal agents separated <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/6/19/17479138/how-many-families-separated-border-immigration">thousands of children</a> from their parents. Parents <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/21/politics/jeff-sessions-immigration-family-separation/index.html">accused of no crime</a> went months without seeing their young children, talking to them or even knowing where they were. The <a href="https://psmag.com/news/trump-officials-claim-to-be-unaware-of-the-psychological-trauma-of-family-separation">trauma produced lasting effects</a> on many of the younger, more vulnerable children. Many remain separated.</p>
<p>At the same time, the get-tough-on-immigration approach shared by Sessions and Trump resonated with many Americans, especially Republicans. Trump <a href="https://theconversation.com/republican-ads-feature-ms-13-hoping-fear-will-motivate-voters-105474">leaned on it</a> heavily to <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-21/trump-gambles-with-immigration-attack-to-energize-midterm-voters">mobilize his base</a> in the run-up to the midterm elections. </p>
<p>Sessions effectively pursued the conservative goals he had long championed and which his boss favored.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/106614/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Mulroy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>He was a champion for ‘law and order’ policies at the highest level.Steven Mulroy, Law Professor in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Election Law, University of MemphisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1010052018-10-24T10:40:11Z2018-10-24T10:40:11ZMigrant caravan members have right to claim asylum – here’s why getting it will be hard<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/los-migrantes-de-la-caravana-tienen-derecho-de-asilo-en-eeuu-pero-conseguirlo-les-sera-dificil-105636"><em>Leer en español</em></a>.</p>
<p>Roughly 5,000 people, mostly from Central America’s violent and unstable “<a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/central-americas-violent-northern-triangle">Northern Triangle</a>” of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras are reportedly making their way through Mexico with the intention of claiming asylum at the U.S. border. The so-called “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/world/americas/trump-migrant-caravan.html?action=click&module=Uisil&pgtype=Article">migrant caravan</a>” is attracting intense social and political attention, with U.S. President Donald Trump declaring it a “<a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1054351078328885248">national emergency</a>.” He has also claimed, erroneously, that the migrants “<a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1054087893034172418">have to</a>” claim asylum in Mexico first. </p>
<p>Migrants aren’t <a href="http://time.com/5431447/donald-trump-threat-turn-back-caravan-migrants-not-legal/">obligated</a> to claim asylum in any country, but have a <a href="https://www.amnestyusa.org/everyone-has-the-right-to-seek-asylum/">right to seek asylum</a> in a country of their choosing, the <a href="https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-06-26/deporting-asylum-seekers-without-giving-them-chance-make-their-case-would-violate">right to a fair process</a> in that country, and crucially, a right not to be sent back to a country where they will face persecution – or <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/15/when-deportation-is-a-death-sentence">even death</a>.</p>
<p>I’ve been working with asylum-seekers in Europe and the U.S. since 2008. Over the last decade I have witnessed firsthand the increasing pressure on the asylum system to manage complex situations at borders. The reality is that even if the migrants currently traveling through Mexico are able to claim asylum at the U.S. border – a big if, considering they are still more than 1,000 miles away – the legal path to safety is challenging. </p>
<p><iframe id="CXYsp" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/CXYsp/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>What has always been a difficult process has been made more difficult by growing <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-delivers-remarks-executive-office-immigration-review">governmental</a> and <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/09/28/652757441/episode-867-special-report-asylum-crackdown">public</a> concern that asylum-seekers are gaming the system or that asylum itself has become a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-says-people-fleeing-war-torn-syria-aren-t-necessarily-refugees-10480545.html">backdoor route for economic migrants</a>. </p>
<p>Pressures like these lead to <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/10/migrant-families-separated-border-crisis-asylum-seekers-donald-trump/">ever-narrowing</a> legal protections for asylum-seekers. </p>
<p>The asylum system is flawed, and ensuring fair access to genuine protection requires making significant improvements to the broader legal, administrative and social contexts.</p>
<h2>The legal framework</h2>
<p>The international legal framework for asylum is the <a href="http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/1951-refugee-convention.html">1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees</a>, which was developed at the end of WWII by the United Nations. </p>
<p>The convention established five categories on which asylum claims can be based: race, nationality, religion, political opinion or membership in a particular social group.</p>
<p>From the beginning, however, these protection categories were political. Much like recent efforts to limit protections for those <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/us/politics/sessions-domestic-violence-asylum.html">fleeing domestic or gang violence</a>, these categories have always protected some, but not all persecuted people. For example, the 1951 convention excluded Germans expelled from Eastern Europe and those forced to flee partition of India and Pakistan. </p>
<p>Many of the people displaced or persecuted today also struggle to fit their experiences into the boxes created by the law. For example, despite broad global support for the <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/07/01/gender-equality/">rights of women</a> and <a href="https://www.care2.com/causes/global-attitudes-about-lgbt-rights-may-be-more-positive-than-we-thought.html">LGBTQ persons</a>, no specific categories exist for gender or sexuality. </p>
<p>The 1951 Convention is not useless – far from it. However, it contributes to a legal environment in which successful asylum-seekers must have rather narrowly defined experiences in order to be protected.</p>
<h2>The administrative process</h2>
<p>When a person seeks asylum – not just in the U.S., but in any country that is a party to the refugee convention – they have to prove they have been persecuted because of their race, nationality, religion, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. What’s more, they have to prove that they cannot live safely in their country of origin. Their proof depends in large part on being able to <a href="https://www.aila.org/infonet/uscis-guidance-to-raio-officers-on-credibility">demonstrate credibility</a>. In other words, they have to share their experiences in such a way that their claim is believed to be true and their fear of persecution is found to be genuine.</p>
<p>This process is made more challenging by suspicions that asylum-seekers are abusing the system. For example, in January 2018, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which manages the administrative process, <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/affirmative-asylum-interview-scheduling">changed their policy regarding interviews</a> so that those who have claimed asylum more recently are interviewed first. </p>
<p>The assumption by USCIS is that newer applications are more likely to be fraudulent and quicker interviews will <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum/affirmative-asylum-interview-scheduling">deter people</a> from “using asylum backlogs solely to obtain employment authorization by filing frivolous, fraudulent or otherwise non-meritorious asylum applications.”</p>
<p>In the meantime, those who have been waiting years to be interviewed will wait even longer. In January 2018 more than <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-take-action-address-asylum-backlog">300,000</a> people were waiting. USCIS used to publish a bulletin of wait times, but <a href="https://www.aila.org/infonet/uscis-discontinues-affirmative-asylum-interview">discontinued</a> it when the interviewing policy changed in January. The <a href="https://www.aila.org/infonet/processing-time-reports/affirmative-asylum-scheduling-bulletins/2018/affirmative-asylum-scheduling-bulletin-01-04-18">last published bulletin</a> showed that, for example, people in Miami were waiting nearly four and a half years to be interviewed. </p>
<p>In addition to confronting suspicion that they are abusing the system, asylum-seekers face a lack of legal support for making claims, and the reality that decision-makers have a great deal of discretion in deciding their fate.</p>
<p><a href="http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/491/">No legal representation</a> is automatically provided for asylum-seekers. Many manage the entire process, including going before an immigration judge, entirely on their own. Unsurprisingly, those who do have an attorney are <a href="http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/491/">five times more likely</a> to be granted asylum.</p>
<p>Research also regularly shows that the chances of being granted asylum vary considerably <a href="http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/491/">depending on the applicant’s nationality</a> and the <a href="http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/490/include/denialrates.html">location within the U.S. where they seek asylum</a>. In 2017, almost 90 percent of claims from Mexicans were denied, compared to only 20 percent of Chinese cases. All three Northern Triangle countries – El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala – are in the top five most frequently denied, with more than 75 percent of claims being refused. Similarly, a case is more likely to be granted in New York or San Francisco than in those courts closer to the border in Texas or Arizona.</p>
<h2>The social context</h2>
<p>Lastly, asylum has in many ways become an outlet for <a href="http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/07/11/europeans-fear-wave-of-refugees-will-mean-more-terrorism-fewer-jobs/">broader social anxieties</a> about borders, security, terrorism, economic inequality and multiculturalism. Research shows us that migrants and refugees are in fact not more likely to <a href="http://criminology.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264079-e-93">commit crime than citizens</a>. Nor are they <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20734">likely to be terrorists</a>. In fact, they <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05507-0">contribute to local economies</a> in positive ways. But until these social attitudes and assumptions change, the prospect of there being sufficient political will to create workable legal solutions will likely remain low.</p>
<p>The legal and administrative frameworks can only really be addressed once adequate social and political will exists to make the kinds of changes that would support a just and humane asylum system.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101005/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Abigail Stepnitz receives funding from UC Berkeley's Jurisprudence & Social Policy Program and the UC Humanities Research Institute. </span></em></p>A scholar who has worked with asylum-seekers for a decade explains why the legal path to safety is challenging for the migrants currently traveling through Mexico.Abigail Stepnitz, PhD Candidate, University of California, BerkeleyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1008562018-08-30T10:47:53Z2018-08-30T10:47:53ZThis 19th-century argument over federal support for Christianity still resonates<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234095/original/file-20180829-195316-pq5iwf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">President Donald Trump with pastor Paula White during a dinner for evangelical leaders in the White House, on Aug. 27, 2018.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Alex Brandon</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Since taking office, President Trump and his administration have strongly championed religious liberty, but only <a href="https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/7/31/17631110/jeff-sessions-religious-liberty-task-force-memo-christian-nationalism">of a particular kind</a>. At this week’s White House dinner for evangelical leaders, Trump <a href="https://religionnews.com/2018/08/28/white-house-hosts-dinner-to-honor-evangelicals-for-all-the-good-work-they-do/">emphasized</a> that the U.S. is a “nation of believers” and promised to protect religious liberty.</p>
<p>Trump’s proposed policies reflect the political goals of conservative evangelicals. </p>
<p>At a 2018 summit, Attorney General Jeff Sessions <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-department-justice-s-religious-liberty-summit">announced</a> a new “Religious Liberty Task Force” in the Justice Department to protect “people of faith” from “unjust discrimination” in all areas of life. Despite Sessions’ inclusive reference to “people of faith,” what was noteworthy was the presence of conservative Christians like Jack Phillips, the baker in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-supreme-courts-gay-wedding-cake-ruling-wont-resolve-religious-freedom-issues-97759">Masterpiece Cakeshop</a>, who spoke at the summit. </p>
<p>Many critics have <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/08/opinions/trump-religious-liberty-opinion-mikva/index.html">observed</a> that demands for religious liberty do not extend to all religions, which prevents fair treatment. Others have <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/jeff-sessions-religious-liberty-task-force-part-dangerous-christian-nationalist-ncna895941">noted</a> that greater protections might harm women and LGBT Americans.</p>
<p>I recognize the merits of these critiques. However, largely absent from them is an equally powerful argument made over a century ago. Back then, some evangelical Christians argued that demands for government protection for Christianity signaled that their religion had failed. </p>
<h2>The decline of Protestant influence</h2>
<p>My research shows the late 19th century was a <a href="http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/?GCOI=80140100411860">bad time for American Protestants</a>. Agnosticism and atheism became popular, especially among younger intellectuals. Rising numbers of non-Protestant immigrants brought greater religious diversity.</p>
<p>These changes caused Protestants to <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520235618">lose the privileges</a> they had enjoyed in public life, such as their control over many of the nation’s academic institutions. In <a href="http://americanjewisharchives.org/publications/journal/PDF/2002_54_02_00_brumberg.pdf">one notable example</a>, the school board in Cincinnati, Ohio, prohibited Bible reading in public schools. Catholics had objected that schools used a Protestant translation of scripture and officials agreed. </p>
<h2>The evangelical Protestant amendment</h2>
<p>Fearing similar cases, devout Protestants turned to the federal government. They supported an amendment first proposed during the Civil War that would have placed the language of evangelical Protestantism in the Constitution. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=z_JUqFAXzKkC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA135#v=onepage&q&f=false">amendment</a> sought to include references to God and Jesus in the Constitution. It also declared the Bible “the supreme rule for the conduct of nations.” This final point was at odds with Catholic teaching. It made clear that the amendment was intended to placate only Protestants.</p>
<p>Supporters of the amendment had friends in high places. William Strong, a justice on the Supreme Court, led a group advocating its passage. </p>
<p>Much like Jeff Sessions, Strong urged protection for Christianity in the public sphere. The future of the religion was at stake. The justice <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=YL6byrRQ3UIC&printsec=frontcover&dq=proceedings+national+secure+constitutional+amendment&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja4PjR0c7cAhWyslkKHTCfAtgQ6AEIJzAA#v=onepage&q&f=false">warned</a> that the Constitution must be made “explicitly Christian.” Otherwise, Christianity – specifically evangelical Protestantism – would be “obliterated” from the nation.</p>
<p>But other Protestants disagreed.</p>
<h2>The religious critic</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=751&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=751&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=751&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=944&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=944&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/234107/original/file-20180829-195316-127sz2d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=944&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Washington Gladden.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2017656304/">Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Among them was Washington Gladden. He was a minister who had grown up in a <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=pCIoAAAAYAAJ&dq=gladden%20recollections&pg=PA33#v=onepage&q&f=false">very devout family</a>. Though he would become a leading <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-social-gospel-movement-explains-the-roots-of-todays-religious-left-78895">religious liberal</a>, Gladden was well within the mainstream of American Protestantism at the height of debates about the constitutional amendment.</p>
<p>In the 1870s, Gladden had great influence as religious editor of the New York Independent, one of the <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=lm7rSZ2BoK8C&lpg=PA99&dq=history%20of%20american%20periodicals&pg=PA375#v=onepage&q&f=false">most read</a> U.S. periodicals of the day. The paper had strong religious credentials. It <a href="https://search.proquest.com/docview/90214007">proclaimed</a> that in all its coverage it was “bound to the evangelical faith by the firm belief of its editors.”</p>
<h2>The case against religious amendment</h2>
<p>That belief, however, did not include endorsing government support of Protestantism. In his editorials, Gladden <a href="https://search.proquest.com/docview/90139030">railed against</a> the proposed amendment. The state was “not called to the inculcation or confirmation of religious truth,” he wrote.</p>
<p>Gladden <a href="https://search.proquest.com/docview/90139030">invoked</a> religious liberty – the same rhetoric President Trump and members of his administration have used to reassure modern evangelicals – to demand no special protection be made. Citizens should expect “equal footing for their faith, no matter what it may be,” rather than particular privilege.</p>
<p>Most boldly, Gladden argued that a religion that needed protection from government was a religion that had no reason to exist. He <a href="https://search.proquest.com/docview/90178976">wrote</a> on his editorial page, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“If our Christianity is of such a flimsy texture that nothing but a constitutional amendment will save it, the sooner it is obliterated the better for the land.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Simply put, he insisted, religious people had to make their own case for their values. If they could not, they certainly did not deserve greater support. This was a controversial argument in what was largely a Protestant country, but other Protestants <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=pEdIAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA104#v=onepage&q&f=false">amplified</a> it. Other Christian leaders came to see support for the amendment as a sign of weak faith.</p>
<h2>A lesson for the Trump era?</h2>
<p>Despite the backing of powerful men like William Strong, the Christian amendment failed. The nation’s Protestant leaders never came together in support of it.</p>
<p>While the religious critique was <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=z_JUqFAXzKkC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA135#v=onepage&q&f=false">not the sole cause</a> the amendment’s failure, Gladden’s line of argument was powerful. It shamed the amendment’s supporters by arguing that their demands were antithetical not only to American values but to Christian ones as well. Demands for government support only confirmed evangelical Christianity’s impotence.</p>
<p>History suggests it is a rhetorical strategy that critics of the Trump administration’s religious liberty policies might do well to revisit.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100856/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Mislin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>President Trump has promised to protect religious liberty. But there was a time when evangelicals believed that a religion that needed protection from government had no reason to exist at all.David Mislin, Assistant Professor of Intellectual Heritage, Temple UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1004252018-07-24T11:24:14Z2018-07-24T11:24:14ZBritish readiness to allow death penalty for IS ‘Beatles’ suspects shows the need to strengthen the law<p>The British home secretary’s decision to <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/22/uk-drops-death-penalty-guantanamo-opposition-opens-door-execution/">assist authorities in the US</a> with the prosecution of two Islamic State terrorist suspects, <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-isis-beatles-death-penalty-sajid-javid-us-extradition-james-foley-jeff-sessions-a8459556.html">without first seeking assurances</a> that they will not face the death penalty, has attracted criticism from <a href="https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/uk-javid-signals-huge-backward-step-death-penalty-reported-letter">human rights activists</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/jul/23/javid-says-british-militants-can-be-tried-in-us-without-usual-no-death-penalty-assurance-politics-live">other MPs</a>, and <a href="https://rightsinfo.org/isis-beatles-death-penalty/">legal commentators</a>. While some have suggested that Sajid Javid’s actions contradict long-standing British law and policy, I believe they reveal the need to reform British law and policy regarding the death penalty.</p>
<p>Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh, from West London, are accused of being the last surviving members of the so-called “Beatles” gang of British IS fighters. They were <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-42995027">arrested</a> in February by Syrian Kurdish fighters. They are currently detained in Syria on suspicion of committing some horrific atrocities, including the beheadings of US and UK nationals. Britain <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/11/calls-grow-isis-beatles-uk-trial-lord-carlile">could seek custody</a> of the two men, given their links to Britain, but Javid has instead assured his American counterpart that the UK will permit their extradition to the US, and will hand over intelligence to help prosecute them over there on charges that are punishable by death. </p>
<p>In his letter to Jeff Sessions, the US attorney general, which was leaked to the <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/22/uk-drops-death-penalty-guantanamo-opposition-opens-door-execution/">Daily Telegraph</a>, Javid also stated that the UK would not demand assurances that the US would not seek or impose the death penalty on the two men. It is this statement that has inflamed politicians of all parties, lawyers, and activists: they claim that the UK not only has a strong tradition of seeking “no death penalty” assurances, but is also legally obliged to seek such assurances.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1021438831172648962"}"></div></p>
<p>It’s certainly true that UK law, European law, and international law all prohibit states which have abolished the death penalty from extraditing individuals within their jurisdiction if there is a risk that the receiving state will impose a death sentence or carry out an execution. This much is made clear in <a href="https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/187784.pdf">Article 7 of the 2003 extradition treaty</a> between the UK and the US; a decision of the <a href="https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/tag/al-saadoon-and-mufdhi/">European Court of Human Rights in 2010</a>; and in multiple <a href="http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/undocs/829-1998.html">reports</a> of various <a href="http://repository.un.org/bitstream/handle/11176/312168/E_2015_49-EN.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y">UN bodies</a> (see paragraph 57). </p>
<p>And it’s true that the UK has traditionally sought such assurances in extradition cases, including in the <a href="https://rightsinfo.org/how-a-teenage-love-story-turned-into-landmark-torture-case/">notorious Jens Soering</a> case in the late 1980s. US authorities requested the extradition of Soering and his girlfriend to stand trial for murdering her parents in Virginia, and the UK duly sought assurances that Soering would not face a death sentence (his girlfriend pleaded guilty and avoided capital charges).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/lessons-from-history-on-what-to-do-with-foreign-fighters-returning-from-syria-92455">Lessons from history on what to do with foreign fighters returning from Syria</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Rules on ‘mutual legal assistance’</h2>
<p>But when Ben Wallace, a security minister, was pressed in parliament on the alleged incompatibility of Javid’s letter with the law and policy on extradition in capital cases, which could involve a death penalty, he revealed that the <a href="https://twitter.com/JamieGrierson/status/1021407615178428416">present case is not an extradition</a> one. Kotey and Elsheikh used to be British citizens, but Wallace <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/23/uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles">confirmed</a> that their citizenship had been revoked. They are not within the custody of British officials either, so they are not within the jurisdiction of the UK for the purposes of extradition law. </p>
<p>Instead, this is a case about aiding another country with a prosecution, referred to as mutual legal assistance, and the law in this field is not quite the same. The UK’s <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/583304/OSJA_Guidance_2017.pdf">Overseas Security and Justice Assistance Guidance</a> makes it clear that “no death penalty” assurances should be sought before providing intelligence and other assistance. The guidance also makes clear that, on occasion, officials may decide, with ministerial approval, that “there are strong reasons not to seek assurances” and that “given the specific circumstances of the case, we should nevertheless provide assistance”. </p>
<p>In 2017, the National Crime Agency was <a href="https://www.reprieve.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2017_08_29_PRIV-High-Court-Order-NCA-unlawful-action.pdf">rebuked by the High Court</a> for providing assistance to Thai authorities in a case that resulted in the death penalty, but only because the agency didn’t seek ministerial approval first. In the case involving Kotey and El-Sheikh, ministerial authorisation has been given, in the shape of Javid’s letter.</p>
<h2>Strengthen the law</h2>
<p>The problem, then, is not so much the content of Javid’s letter, but the law and policy that has enabled him to take this step. British law and policy is currently premised on a belief that the extradition of a person is qualitatively different to the provision of mutual legal assistance. However, in capital cases, it’s arguable that both extradition and the provision of assistance constitute complicity with the death penalty, and it is unacceptable for an abolitionist state to ever be complicit in a practice that it has roundly condemned. </p>
<p>Up until Javid’s letter emerged, it looked like the UK was aligning its mutual legal assistance policy with its extradition policy. In 2013, the UK followed the likes of Ireland, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Ireland and Norway in <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/DrugProblem/Reprieve.pdf">refusing to provide assistance</a> to anti-drug trafficking initiatives in Iran when it became clear that this assistance was contributing to the execution of drug traffickers. The British government, like the European Union, has also <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/america-is-running-out-of-lethal-injection-drugs-because-of-a-european-embargo-to-end-the-death-10106933.html">enacted export controls</a> to ensure that private companies cannot export the drugs that are needed for lethal injections. Again, this recognises that the UK must not in any way contribute to the use of capital punishment elsewhere, regardless of whether or not the person facing death is in our jurisdiction. </p>
<p>Those who have expressed disgust with Javid’s letter are right to do so – it flies in the face of British moral opposition to state-sanctioned killings, and it hinders the UK’s ability to promote abolition worldwide. But their anger would be better directed towards strengthening British law and policy against complicity with the death penalty.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100425/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bharat Malkani does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The British home secretary has decided not to seek assurances from the US that it wouldn’t use the death penalty for an IS duo arrested in Syria. This must be opposed.Bharat Malkani, Senior Lecturer, School of Law and Politics, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/986152018-06-27T10:43:58Z2018-06-27T10:43:58ZUS ‘zero-tolerance’ immigration policy still violating fundamental human rights laws<p>After public outcry and political pressure, President Donald Trump ended the practice of separating children from their families at the border in an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/affording-congress-opportunity-address-family-seperation/">executive order</a> signed on June 20. </p>
<p>However, he left in place <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth-vs-fact-dhs-zero-tolerance-policy">requirements to prosecute</a> or <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-will-stop-prosecuting-parents-who-cross-the-border-illegally-with-children-official-says/2018/06/21/4902b194-7564-11e8-805c-4b67019fcfe4_story.html?utm_term=.fa8195b9878d">at least detain</a> immigrants who may have entered the country unlawfully – including children and asylum-seekers. On June 25, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/us/politics/border-officials-suspend-handing-over-migrant-families-to-prosecutors.html">border control officials announced</a> that families crossing the border would not be detained until sufficient detention space was made available. Individuals traveling alone will continue to be prosecuted. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, the White House insisted there had been no retreat from its “zero tolerance” policies. The military has agreed to provide additional space to detain 20,000 immigrants <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/health/migrant-families-immigration-detention.html">for extended periods</a>. These policies are unlawful. </p>
<p>Through <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=XoVeOGgAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">my research</a> on human rights, I am very familiar with the pattern of governments exploiting fear to justify rights violations. They nearly always portray their victims as evil, as threats, or as criminals, not worthy of basic human dignity. For example, the George W. Bush administration relied on the fear of terrorism to justify the kidnapping, torture, and cruel and inhuman treatment of detainees. <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2014-0264-judgment.pdf">Courts</a> around the <a href="https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#%7B%22docname%22:%5B%22%22">world</a> have since <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/05/world/europe/05italy.html">condemned</a> these violations of human rights law. </p>
<p>The U.S. is now doing something similar with its immigration policies. This month <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/19/politics/trump-illegal-immigrants-infest/index.html">President Trump defended</a> his “zero tolerance” immigration policies by claiming his opponents “don’t care about crime and want illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and infest our Country, like MS-13.” MS-13 refers to Mara Salvatrucha, an international criminal gang that, ironically, started in Los Angeles and spread across the continent.</p>
<p>These characterizations provide the pretext for allowing the country to defy fundamental principles of international law in the way it treats immigrants.</p>
<h2>Detaining and prosecuting asylum-seekers</h2>
<p>The United States agreed to the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/StatusOfRefugees.aspx">Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees</a> when it joined 145 other nations in ratifying the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/ProtocolStatusOfRefugees.aspx">Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees</a> in 1968. These treaties define a “refugee” as a person fleeing her or his country of origin because of a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion. </p>
<p>Under the treaties, refugees have the human right to request asylum. In addition, these treaties forbid countries from expelling refugees or from sending any immigrants to countries where their life or freedom would be threatened on the basis of the same five categories.</p>
<p>These treaties also prohibit countries from punishing refugees for entering illegally if their life or freedom was threatened at home. Despite the fact that our Constitution makes the rules in these treaties <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi">binding U.S. law</a>, the Trump administration is treating asylum-seekers like criminals. When the U.S. government prosecutes or imprisons these asylum-seekers, it violates the rights protected in the two treaties that recognize the human right to seek asylum.</p>
<h2>Indefinitely detaining immigrant children</h2>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/225003/original/file-20180626-112641-1fjcdud.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children in Florida.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Brynn Anderson</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All immigrants, including refugees, are protected by international law, especially children.</p>
<p>Another treaty that protects those caught up in the Trump administration’s immigration policies is the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx">International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights</a>. It was ratified by the United States in 1992. It mandates that when a government arrests, detains or imprisons a person it must treat them humanely and with respect for “the inherent dignity of the human person.” </p>
<p>When the U.S. detains immigrants indefinitely, <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-long-term-separation-from-parents-harms-kids-97515">especially if they are children</a>, it violates the covenant. This is clear from findings issued by the <a href="https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/Pages/AAPStatementOpposingBorderSecurityandImmigrationReformAct.aspx">American Academy of Pediatrics</a>: “Conditions in U.S. detention facilities, which include forcing children to sleep on cement floors, open toilets, constant light exposure, insufficient food and water, no bathing facilities, and extremely cold temperatures, are traumatizing for children.” </p>
<p>According to the academy, the effects of detention on children and parents often include “anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.” </p>
<p>For the 2,300 children <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-21/donald-trump-immigration-executive-order-explainer/9877622">who were separated</a> from their parents at the border, the effects are even more harmful. In a recent article in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1808443">New England Journal of Medicine</a>, pediatrician Dr. Fiona Danaher writes that separation can hinder the development of children and cause lifelong physical and mental illness.</p>
<p>Detaining families, parents or children indefinitely disrupts the very fabric of the family. The covenant explicitly recognizes the fundamental right to family life. It prohibits governments from interfering with the family and requires them to protect children and their connections to their family regardless of their national origin. </p>
<p>The U.S. currently has more than 10,000 children detained, who currently spend an average of 56 days in detention centers, according to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trumps-zero-tolerance-at-the-border-is-causing-child-shelters-to-fill-up-fast/2018/05/29/7aab0ae4-636b-11e8-a69c-b944de66d9e7_story.html?utm_term=.fe79b06f4589">The Washington Post</a>. According to 2017 data compiled by the <a href="https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/countries/americas/united-states">Global Detention Project</a>, the United States has more than 300,000 immigrants detained overall, more than 40,000 of whom are asylum-seekers. </p>
<p>With President Trump’s new order calling for indefinite detention, these numbers are sure to climb, especially when more detention space is made available. The covenant expressly forbids detaining immigrants this way. It guarantees “the right to liberty” and prohibits “arbitrary arrest or detention.” It requires states to allow anyone detained to challenge his or her detention “before a court … without delay.”</p>
<h2>Tenets of US law</h2>
<p>The treatment of immigrants raises a number of conflicts with domestic law as well.</p>
<p>Detaining children indefinitely violates a 1997 <a href="https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/07/06/15-56434.pdf">court settlement</a> that requires the release of immigrant children within 20 days. </p>
<p>On June 24, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/24/us/politics/trump-immigration-judges-due-process.html">President Trump called</a> for the immediate deportation of all unlawful immigrants without any court review. In addition to violating the laws discussed above, this would violate the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment">due process clause in our Constitution</a> which provides that the government may not deprive anyone of their “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” </p>
<p>In February, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/15-1204_f29g.pdf">refused to decide</a> the legality of detaining certain asylum-seekers and other immigrants for extended periods without bail hearings. Justice Stephen Breyer dissented and argued that detaining immigrants for extended periods without any judicial review was unconstitutional. He explained, “The Due Process Clause – itself reflecting the language of the Magna Carta – prevents arbitrary detention,” and “freedom from bodily restraint has always been at the core of the liberty protected” by law.</p>
<p>Unlawful prosecution and detention policies are alive and well. Make no mistake, away from the border, the U.S. will <a href="https://theintercept.com/2018/06/23/deportation-family-separation-ice-barrios-vasquez-immigration-sanctuary/">continue to strip children</a> from their parents by locking them up and deporting them. </p>
<p>There is no international police force to punish the United States for violating its treaty obligations. If recent cases are any indication, the Supreme Court will likely let the government <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-118_97bf.pdf">get away</a> with even the <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-1358_6khn.pdf">most egregious constitutional violations</a>. </p>
<p>These legal principles exist for a reason. History teaches all too clearly that they exist because without them tyranny flourishes and the least powerful among us suffer.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98615/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeffrey Davis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Trump’s executive order to end family separations at the border is too little too late, a human rights expert writes. Indefinitely detaining immigrants is breaking the law.Jeffrey Davis, Professor of Poltical Science, University of Maryland, Baltimore CountyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/986782018-06-25T10:36:51Z2018-06-25T10:36:51ZHow immigration court works<p>When Attorney General Jeff Sessions on June 11 overruled the decision in a controversial immigration case called <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1070866/download">Matter of A-B-</a>, he made it harder for <a href="https://theconversation.com/do-abused-women-need-asylum-4-essential-reads-98223">women escaping sexual and physical abuse</a> to qualify for asylum <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-domestic-abuse-and-anti-gay-violence-qualify-as-persecution-in-asylum-law-98354">in the United States</a>. </p>
<p>Can the U.S. attorney general unilaterally overturn a court case? </p>
<p>Yes, because, as I teach my surprised law students, immigration judges are <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/about-office">not part of the judicial branch</a>. They are attorneys in the Department of Justice. </p>
<p>That means normal assumptions about judicial independence and freedom from political influence do not apply in immigration proceedings. </p>
<h2>How immigration trials work</h2>
<p>People end up in immigration court for various reasons. </p>
<p>Refugees who fled persecution in their country can <a href="https://ijrcenter.org/refugee-law/">apply for asylum in the U.S</a>. People facing deportation may request “<a href="https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-6349.html">cancellation of removal</a>,” which allows them to stay in the country. Other noncitizens may be in the process of becoming a legal permanent U.S. resident. </p>
<p>Their cases will be heard by one of approximately 330 immigration judges who preside over <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/office-of-the-chief-immigration-judge">58 U.S. immigration courts</a>. As of March 2018, these courts had <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1060936/download?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery">345,000 active cases</a>, which averages out to about 1,000 cases per judge. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=407&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224321/original/file-20180621-137711-xdvdfk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=512&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">U.S. Attorney General Jeff Session controls the U.S. immigration court system.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Sessions-Conservative-Summit/326db50aa4a042a68f8d82f36ae3d3e5/25/0">AP Photo/David Zalubowski</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That’s <a href="http://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/data_tables/fcms_na_distprofile0331.2018.pdf">double the caseload of federal district court judges</a>, and immigration courts have <a href="https://immigrationforum.org/article/presidents-fy-2016-budget/">tighter budgets</a> and far less administrative support. </p>
<p>As a result, the immigration court system is <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-the-us-immigration-court-system-broken-75338">congested</a>. Cases can take <a href="http://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/court_backlog/court_proctime_outcome.php">years</a> to complete.</p>
<p>Immigration judges issued 137,875 decisions in 2016, according to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/fysb16/download">DOJ statistics</a>. Just under 70 percent were deportation orders.</p>
<h2>Who does what?</h2>
<p>Immigration proceedings look much like a criminal trial, but the process does not come with the same <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/criminal_procedure">constitutional protections</a>. </p>
<p>Immigrants are not entitled to a court-appointed defense attorney, for example. They may hire a lawyer or, if they’re lucky, find pro bono counsel. </p>
<p>Only 37 percent of all immigrants have an attorney <a href="https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-09-20/new-york-city-lawyers-make-all-difference-immigrant-detainees-facing-deportation">to represent them in immigration court</a>. </p>
<p>Immigrants who’ve been convicted of certain crimes, including low-level offenses, are subject to mandatory detention during their immigration hearings. They are often brought into the courtroom wearing a jumpsuit and shackles. <a href="https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/access-counsel-immigration-court">Eighty-six percent of immigrants who’ve been detained</a> will appear without a lawyer. </p>
<p>Immigration trials also lack other constitutional safeguards required in criminal trials. </p>
<p>The judge is from the Department of Justice, which has law enforcement duties determined by the attorney general. Since the government’s prosecutor comes from Immigration and Customs Enforcement – a Department of Homeland Security agency tasked with immigration enforcement – their political priorities may overlap. </p>
<p>In a normal federal trial, the judge would be an independent member of the U.S. judiciary, a different branch of government. </p>
<h2>The administrative appeals process</h2>
<p>Immigrants may appeal an immigration judge’s deportation order to the Board of Immigration Appeals, a Virginia-based Department of Justice agency. <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/fysb16/download">About 9 percent</a> choose to do so. </p>
<p>The Board currently has 20 members, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/board-of-immigration-appeals-bios">16 full-time and four temporary</a>. Individually or as a panel, they decide roughly <a href="https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/fysb16/download">30,000 appeals</a> per year. </p>
<p>To expedite the process, the Board of Immigration Appeals frequently issues decisions that “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/1003.1">affirm without opinion</a>,” meaning it can confirm a deportation order without providing any reasoning or explanation. </p>
<p>U.S. law permits the attorney general to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/1003.1">intervene</a> in this appeals process.</p>
<p>The attorney general can take over a case at the request of the Board of Immigration Appeals or direct it to refer a case to him. Historically, most have done so just once or twice a year. Sessions <a href="https://www.jeffreyschase.com/blog/2018/3/29/the-ags-certifying-of-bia-decisions">has reviewed four immigration cases in 2018 alone</a>. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/1003.1">Federal regulations</a> also empower the attorney general to overrule the board, decide what types of appeals it can handle and remove members at will. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=377&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/224322/original/file-20180621-137728-1bfjm2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=474&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Immigrants await their deportation hearings in Los Angeles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Immigration-Children/1af1d67f9e954ecb84c094977ae28250/10/0">AP Photo/Amy Taxin</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Federal appeals court</h2>
<p>Immigrants may further appeal decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals to the U.S. Courts of Appeals, the court one level below the Supreme Court. </p>
<p>Very few can afford to do so. Of the roughly 300,000 immigration cases heard each year, only 2 percent are appealed to a federal judge. In 2016, 5,240 immigration appeals were <a href="http://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/us-courts-appeals-judicial-business-2016">filed with the federal appellate courts</a>.</p>
<p>On average, nationwide, just <a href="https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1743&context=facscholar">8 percent of those appeals are granted</a>. That either enables the immigrant to stay or sends the case back to the Board of Immigration Appeals to correct an error.</p>
<p>For some, the victory may come too late. Though immigrants cannot be deported while their case makes its way through immigration court, that protection ends once their appeal reaches the federal level.</p>
<p>Roughly half of all immigrants who will ultimately prevail in a federal appellate court risk being deported <a href="https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1743&context=facscholar">while their appeals are pending there</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98678/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Fatma Marouf is affiliated with the Texas A&M School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic and represents noncitizens in immigration proceedings.</span></em></p>The attorney general can decide immigration cases because immigration courts are part of the DOJ, not the judiciary. This congested system has 345,000 open cases. Most will likely end in deportation.Fatma Marouf, Professor of Law, Texas A&M UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/985992018-06-20T10:25:35Z2018-06-20T10:25:35ZTrump and Sessions can end immigrant family separations without Congress’ help<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223945/original/file-20180620-126534-1d90ejz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Children at an immigrant family separation protest in Phoenix.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A <a href="https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2550">recent poll shows</a> that two-thirds of Americans oppose the Trump administration’s policy of separating immigrant families apprehended along the U.S.-Mexico border.</p>
<p>Amid a firestorm of criticism, President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/6/18/17474816/trump-blames-congressional-democrats-family-separation-us-mexico-border">has blamed Democrats and inaction in Congress</a> for the family separation policy.</p>
<p>Only Congress can provide the <a href="https://theconversation.com/ahead-of-government-shutdown-congress-sets-its-sights-on-not-so-comprehensive-immigration-reform-89998">comprehensive immigration reform</a> that would address the fundamental problems plaguing the American immigration system, including the statuses of undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S. </p>
<p>However, current immigration laws give the executive branch <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-5570.html">considerable discretion</a> in deciding which immigrants to detain and release from custody.</p>
<p>Trump has at his disposal a variety of alternatives – other than separating families – that would promote his stated goal of deterring migration from Central America. Those alternatives could avoid <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-un-rights/un-rights-boss-calls-for-end-to-trumps-policy-of-family-separation-idUSKBN1JE0NA">violating international human rights norms</a>.</p>
<h2>Immigrant detention by past administrations</h2>
<p>Many presidents have used the detention of migrants as a tool to enforce immigration law. At the same time, the courts have rejected heavy-handed attempts to deter migration that infringe on the rights of noncitizens. </p>
<p>For example, in <a href="https://openjurist.org/919/f2d/549/orantes-hernandez-v-thornburgh">Orantes-Hernandez v. Thornburgh</a>, a court of appeals in 1990 found mass immigrant detention and various related policies by the Reagan and first Bush administrations to be unlawful. The policies included detaining immigrants in remote locations where it was difficult for them to retain legal counsel. Together, they formed a concerted effort to deter Central Americans from pursuing asylum claims. </p>
<p>Similarly, in 2014, the Obama administration’s mass detention of Central Americans brought many – and many successful – lawsuits. In <a href="https://caselaw.findlaw.com/summary/opinion/us-9th-circuit/2016/07/06/276908.html">Flores v. Lynch</a> in 2016, the court of appeals found that a settlement agreement in a lawsuit required the release of detained children.</p>
<p>Under Trump’s administration, the policy of separating families in order to detain adults has struck a nerve and generated an unprecedented political outcry. Several <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/06/19/the-facts-about-trumps-policy-of-separating-families-at-the-border/">lawsuits have been filed</a> seeking to end the policy of family separation, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/06/07/617928318/judge-says-yes-to-lawsuit-challenging-trump-administration-family-separation-pol">including one</a> filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in federal court in San Diego. </p>
<p>The courts have played major roles in moderating the Trump administration’s immigration policies. For example, they’ve issued rulings to block Trump’s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/for-muslims-supreme-courts-ruling-on-entry-ban-will-be-statement-of-americas-values/2018/04/24/82db52c0-3f5b-11e8-974f-aacd97698cef_story.html">“Muslim” or “travel ban”</a> and his attempt to <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/immigration/ct-trump-sanctuary-cities-funding-ruling-20171120-story.html">cut federal funding</a> to “sanctuary” cities that refuse to fully cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts. </p>
<p>Although it ultimately may take a court ruling to stop family separations, it doesn’t have to be this way. President Trump has many other policy options available to him that he can implement without any Congressional action.</p>
<h2>Detention without separation</h2>
<p>In 2014, the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-has-the-same-central-american-migrant-problem-as-obama/2018/04/05/c49c78c4-3830-11e8-8fd2-49fe3c675a89_story.html?utm_term=.186da6035f6d">Obama administration faced</a> a large number of Central American migrants crossing the border without inspection. Reports at that time suggest it was a much larger influx than what Trump is facing today. </p>
<p>With increasing numbers of families being apprehended by immigration agents at the border, the Obama administration began using what’s called “family detention.” Entire families were detained together in one facility.</p>
<p>Family detention centers operated in Pennsylvania, Texas and, for a time, New Mexico. Although critics argued that family detention <a href="https://www.detentionwatchnetwork.org/issues/family-detention">was also inhumane</a>, it certainly did not generate the same level of outrage at Trump’s policy of family separation.</p>
<h2>Bonds for immigrants</h2>
<p>Currently, migrants apprehended at the border are placed in detention; migrant families are separated. Detention under the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy is mandatory, without the possibility of being released on bond.</p>
<p>Prior to this policy, when someone was detained by U.S. immigration authorities, they were allowed a hearing and the opportunity to post a bond for release. Rather than remaining detained, they were released into the community until a hearing was scheduled to evaluate their asylum or other claim. </p>
<p>This is the norm for <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/1986/86-87">anyone held in detention</a> in the United States. In fact, the Supreme Court has held that this is a constitutional requirement.</p>
<p>President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/us/politics/trump-immigration-policy.html">have both denigrated</a> the ordinary approach to posting bonds when it comes to dealing with noncitizens who cross the border without documentation, even if they have a bona fide claim to asylum. Trump <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/us/politics/trump-immigration-policy.html">signed a memo</a> to end the release of immigrants into the community in April. </p>
<p>Some critics argue that those who are released fail to appear in court when the time comes. However, <a href="https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/resource/myth-vs-fact-immigrant-families-appearance-rates-immigration-court">data show that</a> the vast majority of families who are apprehended and bond out of custody subsequently appear at their removal hearings.</p>
<p>The Trump administration could allow bond hearings for immigrant families and release them if they are not a flight risk or danger to the community. Children could be bonded out with their families and families would remain together. Devices like ankle bracelets could be used to help ensure court appearances. </p>
<p>Previous administrations have responded to similar situations at the U.S.-Mexico border, but none have resorted to the separation of families as a device to deter migration from Central America. The president has said that Congress should fix it. But the president has the power to do that himself.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98599/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kevin Johnson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Who’s in charge of deciding how immigrants coming over the US-Mexico border are treated? Both Congress and the executive branch have power, a legal scholar explains.Kevin Johnson, Dean and Professor of Public Interest Law and Chicana/o Studies, University of California, DavisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/986122018-06-19T21:49:44Z2018-06-19T21:49:44ZTrump’s act of state terrorism against children<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223924/original/file-20180619-126559-eg7t33.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Children listen to speakers during an immigration family separation protest in Phoenix, Arizona.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>State terrorism comes in many forms, but one of its most cruel and revolting expressions is when it is aimed at children. </p>
<p>Even though U.S. President Donald Trump <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/trump-immigration-children-executive-order.html">backed down in the face of a scathing political and public outcry</a> and ended his administration’s policy of separating migrant children from their parents, make no mistake: His actions were and remain a form of terrorism. </p>
<p>That he was defiant until his back was against the wall points not only to a society that has lost its moral compass, but has also descended into such darkness that it demands both the loudest forms of moral outrage and a collective resistance aimed at eliminating the narratives, power relations and values that support it.</p>
<p>State violence against children has a <a href="https://www.juancole.com/2018/06/dictators-children-sessions.html">long, dark history among authoritarian regimes.</a> </p>
<p>Josef Stalin’s police took children from the parents he labelled as “enemies of the people.” Adolf Hitler, Francisco Franco and Augusto Pinochet all separated children from their families on a large scale as a way to punish political dissidents and those parents considered disposable. </p>
<p>Now we can add Trump to the list of the depraved.</p>
<p>Amnesty International called Trump’s decision to separate children from their parents and warehouse them in cages and tents for months as a cruel policy that amounts to <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/06/usa-family-separation-torture">“nothing short of torture.”</a> </p>
<p>Many of the parents whose children were taken away from them entered the country legally, unwittingly exposing what resembles a state-sanctioned policy of racial cleansing. <a href="https://apnews.com/afc80e51b562462c89907b49ae624e79">Allegations of abuse</a> against the children while detained are emerging. And federal U.S. officials have said despite Trump’s about-face, children who have already been separated from their parents — more than 2,000 of them — will not be reunited with them.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=412&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223928/original/file-20180619-126531-6bgzm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Immigrant children are shown outside a former Job Corps site that now houses them on June 18, 2018, in Homestead, Fla.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In any democratic society, the primary index through which a society registers its own meaning, vision and politics is measured by how it treats its children, and its commitment to the ideal that a civilized society is one that does everything it can to make the future and the world a better place for youth.</p>
<h2>Abuse and terror</h2>
<p>By this measure, the Trump administration has done more than fail in its commitment to children. It has abused, terrorized and scarred them. What’s more, this policy was ludicrously initiated and legitimized by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a notorious anti-immigrant advocate, with <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/06/14/jeff-sessions-points-to-the-bible-in-defense-of-separating-immigrant-families/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.13fc93211747">a Bible verse that was used historically by racists to justify slavery.</a></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-bibles-message-on-separating-immigrant-children-from-parents-is-a-lot-different-from-what-jeff-sessions-thinks-98419">The Bible's message on separating immigrant children from parents is a lot different from what Jeff Sessions thinks</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In the name of religion and without irony, Sessions put into play a policy that has been a hallmark of authoritarian regimes.</p>
<p>At the same time, Trump justified the policy <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/15/politics/family-separation-democrats-trump/index.html">with the notorious lie that the Democrats have to change the law</a> for the separations to stop, when in actuality the separations are the result of a policy inaugurated by Sessions under Trump’s direction. </p>
<p>Trump wrote on Twitter that the Democrats are breaking up families.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1008709364939677697"}"></div></p>
<p>Yet according to the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/15/us/politics/trump-immigration-separation-border.html">New York Times</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Mr. Trump was misrepresenting his own policy. There is no law that says children must be taken from their parents if they cross the border unlawfully, and previous administrations have made exceptions for those travelling with minor children when prosecuting immigrants for illegal entry. A “zero tolerance” policy created by the president in April and put into effect last month by the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, allows no such exceptions, Mr. Trump’s advisers say.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen actually elevated Trump’s lie to a horrendous act of wilful ignorance and complicity.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1008467414235992069"}"></div></p>
<p>This is an extension of the carceral state to the most vulnerable groups, putting into play a punitive policy that signals a descent into fascism, American-style.</p>
<p>The New Yorker’s Marsha Gessen got it right in comparing Trump’s policies towards children to those used by Vladimir Putin in Russia, both of which amounts to what she calls <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/taking-children-from-their-parents-is-a-form-of-state-terror">“an instrument of totalitarian terror.”</a> </p>
<p>Both countries arrest children in order to send a powerful message to their enemies. In this case, Trump’s message was designed to terrorize immigrants while shoring up his base, while Putin’s message is to squelch dissent in general among the larger populace. Referring to Putin’s reign of terror, she writes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The spectacle of children being arrested sends a stronger message than any amount of police violence against adults could do. The threat that children might be removed from their families is likely to compel parents to keep their kids at home next time — and to stay home themselves.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Children screaming for their parents</h2>
<p>Within the last few weeks, <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/us-immigration-children-audio-trump-border-patrol-separate-families-parents-detention-center-a8405501.html">heart-wrenching reports, images and audio</a> have emerged in which children, including infants, were forcibly separated from their parents, relocated to detention centres under-staffed by professional caretakers and housed in what some reporters have described as cages. </p>
<p>The consequences of Trump’s xenophobia are agonizingly clear in reports of migrant children screaming out for their parents, babies crying incessantly, infants housed with teenagers who don’t know how to change diapers and shattered and traumatized families.</p>
<p>The Trump administration <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/06/16/dhs-family-separation-mexico-border-lavandera-dnt-ac.cnn">has detained more than 2,000 children</a>. What’s more, the Trump administration <a href="https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/05/heres-how-the-government-managed-to-lose-track-of-1500-migrant-children/">has lost track of more than 1,500 children it first detained</a>.</p>
<p>In some cases, it deported parents without first uniting them with their detained children. What is equally horrifying and morally reprehensible is that previous studies, such as those <a href="https://www.amazon.com/War-Children-Anna-Freud/dp/1258161877/ref=as_at?creativeASIN=1258161877&linkCode=w50&tag=thedailybeast-autotag-20&imprToken=HKxJiMCzt0SDWl7bH6SvfA&slotNum=0&s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1528998860&sr=1-1&keywords=war+and+children+anna+freud">done by Anna Freud</a> and Dorothy Burlingham in the midst of the Second World War, indicated that children separated from their parents suffered both emotionally in the short run and were plagued by long-term separation anxieties.</p>
<p>It’s no wonder the American Academy of Pediatrics referred to the Trump administration’s policy of separating children from their families as one of <a href="http://www.aappublications.org/news/2018/05/08/immigration050818">“sweeping cruelty.”</a></p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=471&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223926/original/file-20180619-126540-14sf4xl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=591&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Christopher Baker, 3, holds a sign that reads ‘Which baby deserves to sleep in a cage?’ as he attends a Poor People’s Campaign rally with his mother in Olympia, Wash., on June 18.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Trump has mobilized the fascist fervour that inevitably leads to prisons, detention centres and acts of domestic terrorism and state violence. Echoes of Nazi camps, Japanese internment prisons and the mass incarceration of Black and brown people, along with the destruction of their families, are now part of Trump’s legacy. </p>
<p>Shameless cruelty now marks the neoliberal fascism currently shaping American society. Trump <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/392886-dem-lawmaker-to-trump-stop-holding-kids-hostage-to-build-your">used children as hostages</a> in his attempt to implement his racist policy of building a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border and to please his white supremacist base. </p>
<p>Trump’s racism was on full display as he dug in to defend this white supremacist policy. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1009071403918864385"}"></div></p>
<p>He likened migrants to insects or disease-carrying rodents. In the past, he has also called undocumented <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-44148697/trump-immigrant-gangs-animals-not-people">immigrants “animals.”</a> This is a rhetoric with a dark past. The Nazis used similar analogies to describe Jews. This is the language of white supremacy and neo-fascism.</p>
<h2>Long history in the U.S.</h2>
<p>But let’s be clear. While the caging of children provoked a great deal of moral outrage across the ideological spectrum, the underlying logic has been largely ignored. </p>
<p>These tactics have a long history in the United States, and in recent years have been intensified with the collapse of the social contract, expanding inequality and the increasing criminalization of a range of behaviours associated with immigrants, young people and those populations considered most vulnerable.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/fascisms-return-and-trumps-war-on-youth-88867">Fascism’s return and Trump’s war on youth</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The horrible treatment of immigrant parents and children by the Trump regime signals not only a hatred of human rights, justice and democracy, it lays bare a growing fascism in the United States in which politics and power are now being used to foster disposability. White supremacists, religious fundamentalists and political extremists are now in charge. </p>
<p>It’s all a logical extension of his plans <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-embassy-cables-warned-against-expelling-300000-immigrants-trump-officials-did-it-anyway/2018/05/08/065e5702-4fe5-11e8-b966-bfb0da2dad62_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b8fd2325dc34">to deport 300,000 immigrants and refugees,</a> including 200,000 Salvadorans and 86,000 Hondurans, by revoking their temporary protected status.</p>
<p>His cruelty is also evident in his <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/daca-trump-ends-news-latest-dreamers-act-immigration-renewal-immigrants-jeff-sessions-a7930926.html">rescinding of DACA for 800,000 so-called dreamers</a> and the <a href="https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/immigrants-arent-bludgeons-far-right-use-against-democrats">removal of temporary protected status for 248,000 refugees</a>. </p>
<p>“Making America Great Again” and “America First” morphed into an unprecedented and unapologetic act of terrorism against immigrants. While the Obama administration also locked up the families of immigrants, it eventually scaled back the practice. </p>
<p>Under Trump, the savage practice <a href="https://truthout.org/articles/the-false-choice-between-jailing-children-and-separating-families/">accelerated and intensified</a>. His administration refused to consider more humane practices, such as community management of asylum-seekers. </p>
<p>It all functions as short hand for making America white again, and signals the unwillingness of the United States to break from its past and the ghosts of a lethal authoritarianism.</p>
<h2>Trump’s admiration of dictators</h2>
<p>It’s also more evidence of Trump’s <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-dreams-of-dictators-kim-jong-un-vladimir-putin/">love affair with the practices of other dictators</a> like Putin and now Kim Jong Un. And it signals a growing consolidation of power that is matched by the use of the repressive powers of the state to brutalize and threaten those who don’t fit into Trump’s white nationalist vision of the United States. </p>
<p>There is more at work here than the collapse of humanity and ethics under the Trump regime, there is also a process of dehumanization, racial cleansing and a convulsion of hatred toward those marked as disposable that echoes the darkest elements of fascism’s tenets.</p>
<p>The U.S. has now entered into a new era of racial hatred.</p>
<p>What has happened to the children and parents of immigrants does more than reek of cruelty, it points to a country in which matters of life and death have become unmoored from the principles of justice, compassion and democracy itself. </p>
<p>The horrors of fascism’s past have now travelled from the history books to modern times. The steep path to violence and cruelty can no longer be ignored. The time has come for the American public, politicians, educators, social movements and others to make clear that resistance to the emerging fascism in the United States is not an option —but a dire and urgent necessity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98612/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Henry Giroux does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Donald Trump’s policy to separate children from their migrant parents lays bare his fascism. The time has come for Americans to resist this act of domestic terrorism.Henry Giroux, Chaired professor for Scholarship in the Public Interest in the Department of English and Cultural Studies, McMaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/984832018-06-19T08:52:36Z2018-06-19T08:52:36ZWhat the Bible’s Romans 13 says about asylum – and what Jeff Sessions omitted<p>The US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, kicked up a storm when he invoked a line from the Bible to defend the Trump administration’s policy of separating thousands of parents and children during immigration investigations. </p>
<p>Sessions quoted a line written by the apostle Paul to a small community of Christians living in Rome around 55AD to defend the Department of Justice’s approach. He <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/06/14/jeff-sessions-points-to-the-bible-in-defense-of-separating-immigrant-families/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e5e598811d31">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Sessions used the Bible because one of the most vocal opponents of the crackdown on asylum cases <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/06/13/catholic-bishops-call-trumps-new-asylum-rules-immoral-with-one-suggesting-canonical-penalties-for-those-involved/?utm_term=.424c1e5750c1">has been the Catholic Church</a>. It’s no surprise that Sessions appealed to Romans chapter 13 verse 1 in response: not only did he hope to undermine Catholic authority by using the Bible against them, he cited a statement so broad that one might use it to defend anything a government does, good or bad.</p>
<p>The problem for Sessions is that the historical situation in which Paul wrote his <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=NRSV">letter to the Romans</a> does far more to undermine his policy than to support it.</p>
<h2>The origins of Paul’s letter</h2>
<p>The actual date and origin of the letter is not totally certain, but <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_New_Interpreter_s_Bible_Acts_Introdu.html?id=2i0OAQAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y">scholars think</a> it was sent to the Christian community in Rome around 55AD. This was a few years after the Roman Emperor Claudius exiled Rome’s Jewish community in 49AD. That Jewish community included many people who had become Christians and were connected to other Christians in Rome. Paul himself was a Jew who had become a Christian. After his conversion he began travelling around the Mediterranean, starting Christian communities, and instructing them how to live.</p>
<p>Shortly before Paul wrote his letter to the Christians in Rome, many of the Jewish people who had been forced to leave Rome began to return, the city now safe for them again after the death of Claudius. Paul wrote the letter in part because he was worried that things would go badly when these Jewish Christians tried to integrate back in with the non-Jewish Christians in Rome. Paul feared their earlier exile by the emperor would keep them from being welcomed back.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=446&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223622/original/file-20180618-85840-1ptm1p5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=560&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">St Paul writing his epistles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:File%22-Saint_Paul_Writing_His_Epistles%22_by_Valentin_de_Boulogne.jpg">By Valentin de Boulogne, via Wikimedia Commons.</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It is for this reason that Paul spends so much time in his letter discussing the way Jews and non-Jews should live with one another (see, for example, chapters 2–4, 9–11 and 14). Paul argues that the Romans should openly welcome those Jewish members who had been forcibly removed some time ago; the church should return them to their places within the community and honour them. Perhaps these Jewish people were not completely unknown to the Christians left in Rome, but they were returning after a long absence. They were, for all intents and purposes, immigrants entering a host community that wasn’t sure it could trust them and probably didn’t want them around.</p>
<p>Paul is vehement about one thing that those who remained in Rome should not do: conclude they were any better or different than these Jewish migrants. That is why Paul famously says that “all” – Romans and Jews – “have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Paul <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+14&version=NRSV">marvels that</a> anyone would “pass judgement on your brother or sister” (14.10), for “each of us will be accountable to God” (14.12). </p>
<h2>Love a foreigner</h2>
<p>In the 21st century American context, Paul’s statements serve to emphasise the similarities between immigrants and non-immigrants, not any differences between them.</p>
<p>Sessions argued that the current approach “<a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-addresses-recent-criticisms-zero-tolerance-church-leaders">protects the lawful</a>”. He also suggested the policy was an extension of the revocation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy, which had suspended immigration enforcement against undocumented migrants brought to the US as children. Defending the end of DACA in September 2017, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-daca">Sessions said a failure</a> to enforce immigration laws strictly had “put our nation at risk of crime, violence and even terrorism”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/post-daca-how-congress-can-replace-obamas-program-and-make-it-even-better-83547">Post-DACA: How Congress can replace Obama's program and make it even better</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This particular point makes Romans an even worse defence of the policy Sessions is pursuing. Just before the line Sessions recently quoted from Romans 13, Paul wrote that: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>If your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And just a few lines after requiring respect for the government, Paul sums up his point by encouraging the audience to: “Love your neighbour as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbour; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law.”</p>
<p>Paul’s familiar language about loving one’s neighbour – like Jesus of Nazareth before him – alludes to <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+19&version=NRSV">Leviticus 19</a>, verse 18. While few people today know the content of Leviticus 19, Christian and Jewish audiences in the first century AD would have known it. That texts also commands people to create a system of economic care for migrants from potentially dangerous foreign countries at their own financial expense:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field … Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The command to love a foreigner and to let them freely gather food that belongs to you puts us a long, long way from Sessions’ arguments about obeying governments to ensure safety for Americans.</p>
<p>The logic of Paul’s words might have sounded helpful to Sessions in isolation, but the letter they come from undermines nearly everything Sessions wants them to support.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98483/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Casey Strine does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The US attorney general cited Paul’s letter to the Romans to justify the Trump administration family separation policy. Here’s why that’s a misreading of the Bible.Casey Strine, Lectuter in Ancient Near Eastern History and Literature, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/984192018-06-18T10:52:18Z2018-06-18T10:52:18ZThe Bible’s message on separating immigrant children from parents is a lot different from what Jeff Sessions thinks<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223396/original/file-20180615-85854-fdna94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Jeff Sessions is citing the Bible in defending the Trump administration’s immigration policy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In a <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-addresses-recent-criticisms-zero-tolerance-church-leaders">speech</a> to law enforcement officers on June 14, Attorney General Jeff Sessions cited biblical scripture <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV">Romans 13</a> to claim support for zero tolerance immigration policies, including the Trump administration’s forced separation of immigrant families. </p>
<p>He said:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Illegal entry into the United States is a crime – as it should be. Persons who violate the law of our nation are subject to prosecution. I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Later in the same day, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/dont-you-have-any-empathy-sarah-huckabee-sanders-confronted-over-families-separated-at-border">echoed</a> these sentiments, saying that “[it] is very biblical to enforce the law [and] that is actually repeated a number of times throughout the Bible.” </p>
<p>As a scholar whose <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9795.2012.00542.x">research</a> is on Christian ethics, human rights and obligations to the poor, I would dispute this interpretation. Scripture commands Christians to help the poor, to recognize the importance of the family, and to criticize unjust laws. </p>
<h2>Loving thy neighbor</h2>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223397/original/file-20180615-85840-pcxzl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Bible.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://pixabay.com/en/bible-god-religion-christianity-983105/">JamesNichols</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the Gospels, Jesus repeatedly teaches that Christians should love their neighbors. In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+22%3A36-40&version=NIV">says</a>: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” </p>
<p><a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A31-46&version=NIV">Later in Matthew</a>, Jesus explains what loving your neighbor involves: feeding the hungry, slaking the thirsty, inviting in the stranger, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned. “Whatever you did not do for one of the least of these,” Jesus says, “you did not do for me.” </p>
<p>And in the very passage that Sessions cites, <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13%3A8-10&version=NIV">Romans 13</a>, the Apostle Paul mirrors Jesus’ teaching. “Whatever other command there may be,” he writes, “[they] are summed up in this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.“ </p>
<p>Given the scriptural emphasis on acts of mercy and love of neighbor, Sessions’ claim that Paul’s command is clear is at best dubious. It is at worst indefensible. </p>
<h2>The centrality of the family</h2>
<p>How do mercy and neighborly love relate to the family? Beginning with Genesis, Scripture emphasizes the centrality and importance of the family for individual and social well-being. In Genesis, God <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2&version=NIV">creates</a> Adam and Eve so that they may be companions to one another. God also <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A28&version=NIV">commands</a> them to be fruitful and multiply. </p>
<p>In addition to being placed by Jesus <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+18%3A16&version=NIV">at the heart of the Kingdom of God</a>, children are a <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+127%3A3&version=NIV">gift</a> from God. And parental love aims to mirror for children <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+3%3A15&version=NIV">the love of God</a>.</p>
<p>The import of these teachings is reflected in several contemporary documents, including <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html">Catholic social doctrine</a>, the <a href="http://www.claiminghumanrights.org/udhr_article_25.html">Universal Declaration of Human Rights</a> and the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx">Convention on the Rights of the Child</a>, all of which claim that civil society and the state should prioritize care for mothers and children. </p>
<h2>Forced separation of immigrant families</h2>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/223406/original/file-20180615-85845-twahu9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Demonstrators taking part in the Families Belong Together Day of Action, on June 1, 2018, in Miramar, Florida.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In recent days, the media have reported the painful stories of the forced separation of hundreds of immigrant families at U.S. border detention centers.</p>
<p>What’s conspicuous and morally problematic about these stories, is the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/us/children-immigration-borders-family-separation.html">trauma</a> that forced separation causes to families, and in particular to children. </p>
<p>Sessions’s invocation of Romans 13 is only the most recent example of the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/06/15/sessions-says-the-bible-justifies-separating-immigrant-families-the-verses-he-cited-are-infamous/?utm_term=.f665daf5ba2a">use of this passage</a> which has been used to justify all manner of immoral behavior: imperialism, slavery, Nazism and apartheid. </p>
<p>What Sessions and others have missed is the moral of Romans 13. <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+1%3A17&version=NIV">Care</a> for the most vulnerable, falls to the family <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+5%3A8&version=NIV">first</a> and then to the <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13%3A4&version=ESV">state</a>. Immigrant families fleeing from destitution are attempting to find the means to provide for their themselves. The state must honor this priority if people are to consider their laws just and worthy of the submission Paul enjoins on Christians. </p>
<p>The spirit of charity and hospitality, recognizing that we are all <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter%202:10-12&version=NIV">strangers and sojourners alike</a>, demands caring for the most vulnerable members of the human family. The Trump administration’s rhetoric and action flout these.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98419/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bharat Ranganathan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Sessions ignored the many gospel teaching about love, and used a passagethat has been used historically to justify all manner of immoral behavior, including imperialism, slavery, Nazism and apartheid.Bharat Ranganathan, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Notre DameLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/982332018-06-13T00:02:30Z2018-06-13T00:02:30ZChaos coming to Canada after U.S. decision on refugees<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/222898/original/file-20180612-112627-174hlwz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A group of asylum seekers raise their hands as they approach RCMP officers while crossing the Canadian border at Champlain, N.Y., in 2017.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Ryan Remiorz</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A recent decision by the United States against victims of domestic violence has doomed the Canadian government’s attempts to stem the flow of would-be refugees flooding into Quebec from New York.</p>
<p>The short-term consequences will be more chaos at the border and in the policy units of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada and the Canadian Border Services Agency. The long-term consequences will be more tension between Ottawa and Quebec City, and better fortunes for the Conservative Party.</p>
<p>This wasn’t a deliberate attack. Canada is just collateral damage in the U.S. war on immigration.</p>
<p>U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced June 11 that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/us/politics/sessions-domestic-violence-asylum.html">victims of domestic violence will no longer be able to claim asylum in the U.S.</a> even if authorities in their home country are unable or unwilling to protect them.</p>
<h2>No asylum for domestic abuse victims</h2>
<p>Specifically, he overturned an immigration appeals court ruling that granted asylum to a woman who suffered domestic abuse and who could not get protection from authorities in her own country of El Salvador.</p>
<p>How does this relate to Canada?</p>
<p>Sessions’ proclamation puts U.S. refugee policy in direct conflict with the refugee policy of Canada. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=451&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222900/original/file-20180612-112618-1kb0zfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=567&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">An asylum seeker is searched after crossing into Canada from Champlain, N.Y., near Hemmingford, Que., in 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Ryan Remiorz</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Canada turns back would-be-refugees who arrive from the U.S. because, in theory, the two countries have similar asylum systems based on similar values and international law.</p>
<p>The 2002 <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/mandate/policies-operational-instructions-agreements/agreements/safe-third-country-agreement/final-text.html">Safe Third Country Agreement</a> rests on three pillars: That both countries follow two United Nations treaties, the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1984 Convention on Torture; that both have administrative systems that fairly and properly evaluate refugee claims; and that both respect human rights and have an independent and impartial judicial system.</p>
<h2>Sneaking into Canada</h2>
<p>The agreement requires would-be refugees seek asylum in the U.S. if they land there first, but there are exceptions. One way around the law is to sneak into Canada and ask for asylum without crossing at an official border.</p>
<p>This rule applies to almost anyone who is in the U.S. regardless of how they got there. For example, Central Americans may have entered the U.S. illegally after walking through Mexico. Nigerians may have flown in with a study visa or tourist visa.</p>
<p>In some cases, people may have been in the U.S. legally for years. Realizing they will be killed if they go home, they then come to Canada for protection because they think they have a better chance winning a refugee claim here than in the U.S. Some may even have applied for refugee status in the U.S. and been rejected.</p>
<p>(For example, the Salvadoran woman that Sessions said couldn’t file a refugee claim would have a very good chance in Canada if she came here — but only if she sneaked into the country. If she showed up at an official border crossing, she would be turned back to the United States.)</p>
<h2>Crossings increased after Trump’s win</h2>
<p>It used to be rare that people sneaked across the border to avoid the Safe Third Country Agreement so they could ask for asylum in Canada, but that changed after Donald Trump won the U.S. presidency. </p>
<p>Last year, more than 18,000 people crossed fields, ditches and streams to reach Canada without being screened at an official border station. Most of them crossed from New York into Quebec.</p>
<p>The Quebec government was not amused. It complained about the cost of sheltering the asylum seekers and popular opinion turned against the flood of would-be refugees.</p>
<p>At the same time, internal polling showed Canadians in general were becoming less sympathetic to immigration, partly because of the influx of irregular refugee claimants.</p>
<p>Canadian Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen moved quickly to try to reverse the trend <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/hussen-nigeria-asylum-seekers-1.4668579">with a multinational publicity campaign</a>. </p>
<p>Opposition MPs have seized on the issue, hammering Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to turn back all refugee claimants who come to Canada from the U.S., even if they don’t cross at an official border.</p>
<h2>Trudeau urged to quit agreement</h2>
<p>On the other side, many of Trudeau’s allies have urged him to abandon the Safe Third Country Agreement, saying the U.S. no longer protects refugees as it should. Even members of the Liberal government that originally signed the agreement are <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-lets-ensure-our-border-remains-a-beacon-of-hope/">urging Trudeau to suspend it</a>.</p>
<p>Immigration lawyer Peter Edelmann predicted that Sessions’ ruling will force Canada to act.</p>
<p>“This announcement makes it clear that the minister needs to reconsider if the U.S. is a safe third country,” he said.</p>
<p>“It is clear that for a woman who is facing violence and has a credible fear, sending her to the U.S. is not sending her to a safe place. There appears to be no argument that the U.S. is a safe third country for that claimant.”</p>
<p>Before this week, Trudeau seemed more inclined to toughen the border and the agreement than to abandon it.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/222901/original/file-20180612-112608-1t1kyz5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Ahmed Hussen speaks to reporters outside the House of Commons.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Patrick Doyle</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Hussen recently mused about changing the Safe Third Country Agreement so that Canada could automatically reject asylum seekers even if they didn’t enter Canada at an official border crossing. The new system would rely on fingerprints and eye scans taken when people first arrived in the U.S. and then made what are now called “irregular crossings.”</p>
<h2>It’s messy</h2>
<p>So, it’s messy. But Sessions just made it much messier by flat-out promising to return women to homes and countries where they are likely to be beaten and even killed.</p>
<p>There are other areas of refugee law where the two countries diverge, but this is one the Liberal government will not be able to ignore. </p>
<p>The prime minister has staked the moral authority of his government on gender equality. From the gender-balanced cabinet (remember <a href="http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-trudeau-liberal-government-cabinet-1.3304590">“Because it’s 2015”</a>?) to the G7 focus on female empowerment and economic equality, raising the status of women has been the signature value of his government. </p>
<p>If Trudeau abandons the Safe Third Country Agreement to allow more refugees to enter at the border, he will be going against the trend of public opinion in Canada and handing the Conservative Party a ready-made issue for the next federal election.</p>
<p>If he strengthens the Safe Third Country Agreement, he will knowingly risk the lives of women who are hunted in their own homelands. </p>
<p>If he does nothing, the flow of asylum seekers sneaking into Canada will increase, and he will be labelled weak and indecisive.</p>
<p>Remember <a href="http://time.com/4162306/alan-kurdi-syria-drowned-boy-refugee-crisis/">Alan Kurdi</a>, the Syrian toddler whose death on a beach in Turkey helped turn the election for Trudeau? Someone in the Prime Minister’s Office must be shivering with the thought the next election could feature the body of a woman who was turned away from Canada because we consider the United States a safe country. </p>
<p>Chaos is coming.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98233/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kelly Toughill owns Polestar Immigration Research, which produces journalism and original research reports about Canadian immigration for media clients, foundations and institutions. Professor Toughill maintains accreditation with the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council as part of her ongoing commitment to in-depth immigration research.</span></em></p>A recent decision by the United States to deny asylum for victims of domestic abuse will have unintended consequences for Canada.Kelly Toughill, Associate Professor, University of King's CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/927022018-03-20T10:40:57Z2018-03-20T10:40:57ZMS-13 is a street gang, not a drug cartel – and the difference matters<p>In October 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-international-association-chiefs-police">announced</a> that pursuing the Mara Salvatrucha, a Salvadoran gang also known as MS-13, was “a priority for our Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces.”</p>
<p>“Drugs are killing more Americans than ever before, in large part thanks to powerful cartels and international gangs and deadly new synthetic opioids like fentanyl,” Sessions told the International Association of Chiefs of Police on Oct. 23. He concluded that “perhaps the most brutal of these gangs is MS-13.”</p>
<p>President Donald Trump also cites MS-13 to justify his administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration from Latin America. In his <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/nyregion/ms-13-gang-trump.html">2018 State of the Union address</a>, Trump threatened to “destroy” the group, which is responsible for a spate of brutal, high-profile murders in Boston, <a href="https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/MS-13-Gang-Arrests-Long-Island-New-York-NY-Police-Murder-468791273.html">Long Island</a>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/bodies-found-in-holmes-run-park-are-missing-fairfax-county-teens/2017/12/08/b2420ef4-dc15-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html">Virginia</a> and beyond.</p>
<p>There’s a problem here – and it’s not just MS-13’s violent ethos. It’s that the Trump administration is getting this gang all wrong. </p>
<p>I spent three years at <a href="https://www.american.edu/centers/latin-american-latino-studies/">American University’s Center for Latin American and Latino Studies</a> chronicling the MS-13’s criminal exploits for the <a href="https://www.nij.gov/Pages/welcome.aspx">National Institute of Justice</a>. Our <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/MS13-in-the-Americas-InSight-Crime-English-3.pdf">study</a> proves that MS-13 is neither a drug cartel nor was it born of illegal immigration. </p>
<p>That misconception is fueling failed U.S. policies that, in my assessment, will do little to deter MS-13. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"931538234169069568"}"></div></p>
<h2>MS-13 is no Yakuza</h2>
<p>The Trump administration is not the first administration to mischaracterize MS-13, which conducts vicious but rudimentary criminal activities like extortion, armed robbery and murder across Central America, Mexico and the U.S.</p>
<p>In 2012, the Obama-era <a href="https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1733.aspx">Treasury Department put the group</a> on a organized crime “kingpin” list with the Italian mafia Camorra, the Mexican criminal group the Zetas and the Japanese mob known as the Yakuza. </p>
<p>That designation gave the group a rarefied status in the underworld, which must have pleased its leadership. </p>
<p>But our research found that MS-13 is hardly a lucrative network of criminal masterminds. Instead, it is a loose coalition of young, <a href="https://theconversation.com/central-american-gangs-like-ms-13-were-born-out-of-failed-anti-crime-policies-76554">often formerly incarcerated men</a> operating hand to mouth across a vast geographic territory. </p>
<p>MS-13 was born in Los Angeles in the early 1980s, when scores of Salvadorans, <a href="https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/salvadoran-immigrants-united-states">many of them fleeing</a> the country’s civil war, arrived to California. Like other Latino immigrant groups, the new arrivals formed a <a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-gang-violence-boyle-20151103-pg-photogallery.html">youth gang of the sort proliferating in L.A. at the time</a>. </p>
<p>Then as now, MS-13 acted as a surrogate family for its members, though not a benign one. MS-13 created a collective identity that was constructed and reinforced by shared experiences, particularly expressions of violence and social control. </p>
<p>It has since spread to at least a half-dozen countries on two continents and has become a prime source of destabilizing violence, <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/01/the-teens-trapped-between-a-gang-and-the-law">particularly extortion</a>, in Central American countries like El Salvador and Honduras. </p>
<h2>Inept at drug dealing</h2>
<p>What MS-13 has not done is establish any real foothold in the international drug trafficking market. </p>
<p>It’s not for lack of trying. Our study found that MS-13 leaders have made several attempts to get into the business of running illicit drugs. </p>
<p>In the early 2000s, one MS-13 boss named Nelson Comandari <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/investigations/ms13-drug-trafficking-project-entrepreneurism/">tried to use the gang’s national criminal infrastructure</a> to establish a drug distribution network. Comandari was well positioned to do it. He was powerful in L.A., had underworld family connections from El Salvador to Colombia and enjoyed strong ties to the feared <a href="http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-mexican-mafia-jail-assault-charges-20170630-story.html">Mexican Mafia</a>, a U.S.-based prison gang with connections to Mexican cartels. </p>
<p>Yet within a few years Comandari was frustrated. MS-13 members turned out to be inept at drug smuggling and resistant to the whole idea. Our research found that the gang frowns upon those who put their personal business above the collective’s. </p>
<p>Comandari eventually went into the drug business on his own <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/feds-have-been-hiding-evidence-wiretap-courts-their-war-gangs/">and was captured</a> along the Texas-Mexico border in 2006. </p>
<p>A few years later, one of Comandari’s former lieutenants <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/investigations/how-the-ms13-got-its-foothold-in-transnational-drug-trafficking/">also tried to establish</a> an international distribution pipeline between MS-13 and the Mexican drug cartel La Familia. The deal was <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/13-linked-mexican-mafia-and-la-familia-indicted-after-investigation-reveals-plot-join">thwarted by U.S. law enforcement in 2013</a>. </p>
<p>Subsequent efforts have <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/investigations/how-ms13-tried-failed-create-single-gang-us/">gotten nipped even sooner</a>. In 2015, a midlevel MS-13 leader named Larry Naverete – spelled Navarrete in some federal documents – began smuggling small loads of methamphetamine into the U.S. via an MS-13 member operating from Tijuana. </p>
<p>Within two years, police on each side of the border had captured Navarete, who was operating from the California State Prison System, and <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/news/analysis/mexico-arrests-ms13-leader-busting-up-latest-gang-trafficking-ring/">his Mexican partner</a>.</p>
<h2>Why MS-13 fails at drug trafficking</h2>
<p>One reason MS-13 has failed so roundly at becoming a drug cartel is that it is <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/investigations/ms13-gang-truce-social-criminal-capital/">more of a social club</a> than a lucrative criminal enterprise. Its members benefit from the camaraderie and support that comes with membership – not the heaping monetary rewards that never arrive. </p>
<p>Entrepreneurs who hope to leverage its network for their personal financial gain see the same strong resistance that scuttled Comandari’s plans.</p>
<p>Perhaps more critically, MS-13 is a <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/investigations/ms13-case-studies-hierarchy-federation/">decentralized organization</a> with no clear hierarchy. The gang is broken into local cells called “cliques” – or “clicas” in Spanish – that are more loyal to each other than to the various leadership councils that operate around Central America and the U.S. </p>
<p>Put simply, it has no leader. So what looks on paper like a tremendous built-in infrastructure for moving illicit products across borders is actually a disparate, federalized organization of <a href="https://www.insightcrime.org/investigations/ms13-case-studies-hierarchy-federation/">substructures with highly local, even competing, interests</a>.</p>
<p>Finally, MS-13 is mostly about immediate gratification. It helps members eke out a living and get some perilous criminal thrills. That’s why extortion is a staple. Complex supply chains? Not so much. </p>
<h2>Failed US policies</h2>
<p>These findings suggest that the U.S. could <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/former-gang-members-offer-advice-on-how-to-combat-ms-13">fight MS-13 by better protecting the vulnerable young Latino kids who become its recruits</a> – funding social and educational programs in immigrant neighborhoods, for example, or financing more early child intervention programs.</p>
<p>Instead, the Trump administration has used MS-13 as a foil to push its political agenda. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=800&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/211002/original/file-20180319-31624-1waa2sd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">MS-13 members allegedly killed several people on Long Island, New York, in 2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Claudia Torrens</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To justify imposing draconian immigration restrictions, Trump and Sessions <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/03/07/the-dangerous-game-donald-trump-is-playing-with-ms-13/?utm_term=.844f20b8d9e8">link MS-13’s crimes to the issue of illegal immigration</a>. Their rhetoric suggests that the group is staffed with undocumented migrants, thus proving that migrants are dangerous. In fact, <a href="http://www.sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Immigration-and-Public-Safety.pdf">statistics</a> confirm that immigrants commit crimes at far lower rates than native-born U.S. citizens.</p>
<p>Conflating the gang with the sophisticated cartels currently waging a bloody war in Mexico likewise serves the administration’s goal of tightening border controls. It makes MS-13 seem like a <a href="https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-01-31/alien-threat-street-gang-ms-13-was-actually-made-usa">foreign invader</a>, not a homegrown threat. I suspect this rhetoric may also help Trump make the case <a href="http://time.com/5205467/donald-trump-death-penalty-drug-traffickers-opioid/">that the U.S. should impose longer jail sentences for drug trafficking-related crimes</a>.</p>
<p>What harsh law enforcement tactics aimed at ending immigration and breaking up drug cartels won’t do is address the real problems posed by MS-13 and other very violent, very American street gangs.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92702/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven Dudley is the co-founder and co-director of InSight Crime, a think thank based in Medellin, Colombia. InSight Crime receives funding from Open Society Foundations, as well as the U.S., Canadian, British and Swedish governments, among others. </span></em></p>Trump justice officials portray the Salvadoran gang MS-13 as a powerful drug cartel staffed with criminal undocumented immigrants. That’s a dangerous mistake if you actually want to prevent violence.Steven S. Dudley, Senior Fellow, Center for Latin American and Latino Studies, American UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/917382018-02-28T11:38:21Z2018-02-28T11:38:21ZWhy deporting the ‘Dreamers’ is immoral<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208179/original/file-20180227-36680-1s5aobn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Immigrants and activists demonstrate in front of the Republican Party headquarters in Washington</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Luis Alonso Lugo</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Feb. 26, the U.S. Supreme Court <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/02/26/588813001/supreme-court-declines-to-take-up-key-daca-case-for-now">refused to review</a> a federal judge’s order that the Trump administration continue the <a href="https://www.ice.gov/daca">Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.</a></p>
<p>It was back in September 2017 that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/us/politics/trump-daca-dreamers-immigration.html">President Donald Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced</a> the end of the Obama-era program that shields hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-daca">Sessions argued</a> that this program rewarded those who disobeyed the laws of the United States. The United States has an obligation to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-sessions-delivers-remarks-daca">“end the lawlessness”</a> of DACA, he argued, by winding down the program and, at the same time, making a case for the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/23/us/daca-dreamers-shutdown.html">deportation of the “Dreamers”</a> or those previously protected by DACA. </p>
<p>For now, the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/02/26/588813001/supreme-court-declines-to-take-up-key-daca-case-for-now">leaves the program in place</a>.</p>
<p>As a scholar, who has tried to understand <a href="https://phil.washington.edu/people/michael-blake">how morality should be applied to politics and law,</a> I do not agree with Sessions.</p>
<p>Respect for the law entails respect for moral values. Protecting the Dreamers isn’t about rejecting the rule of law. Rather, it reflects respect for the morality that the law proclaims. </p>
<h2>Can children be held morally responsible?</h2>
<p>The people covered by DACA came to the United States <a href="https://www.ice.gov/daca">when they were children</a>. Even if their entry into the United States was unlawful, the violation was committed by a child. The law of the United States affirms the common sense thought that children are unlike adults in the degree to which they morally responsible.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208181/original/file-20180227-36689-iu4a6y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Dreamers came as children.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/mollyswork/36982427456/in/photolist-Ym1BeA-JJKm8k-cJP653-8nrVuo-cJP5Xy-FYje5w-8noASe-23dz3oU-XmPKNb-YCLfBP-24ftkHU-244sjCL-YCLg1e-YnzxWs-22cHJxv-9skxBR-XoMUbp-Y2BtGj-9soxf7-Ym131w-GavK2Y-9skBuM-XmPC79-9skBqM-gs3EvG-Ym1mGE-24ftkUW-YCKuyD-Z1wrTU-8nsuwE-8nmsc6-YYrU5Q-FYjdXN-YCLbSV-cPEAeu-YqfwZr-Ym1jwN-cmcN8o-23dz4du-23dz3Z3-Y2BiEq-npKsn3-XoMZyt-23Fzof2-XoMYri-XmPK7m-XoNsHt-9soBGf-gs36Ju-8nnV38">Molly Adams</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The laws of the United States do not, for example, <a href="http://www.cs.xu.edu/%7Eosborn/main/lawSchool/contractsHtml/bottomScreens/Briefs/Restatement%2012.%20Capacity%20to%20Contract.htm">let children create binding contracts</a>. Children are not allowed to perform many actions open to adults: They cannot <a href="http://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-260-21.html">smoke tobacco, get tattoos, drink alcohol</a>, <a href="http://nysdmv.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/173/%7E/the-driving-age-in-new-york-state-and-the-graduated-licensing-law">drive automobiles</a>, nor <a href="http://www.elections.ny.gov/votingregister.html">vote in federal elections</a>. Nor are they liable to the <a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/graham-v-florida/">same sorts</a> of criminal punishments as adults. </p>
<p>Their degree of culpability for criminal acts is generally taken to be lower than that of adults – and some punishments, such as the death penalty, <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2011/10-9646">are taken off the table for children entirely</a>. </p>
<p>In the case of DACA, however, deporting the Dreamers would involve subjecting people to a significant punishment. And it would do so in response to an action people took when they were children. This is exactly the sort of action the law itself regards as morally inappropriate. </p>
<h2>Punishment and deportation</h2>
<p>One response to this argument against deportation might be to say that deportation is not, in fact, a punishment. It is simply refusing to provide a benefit - namely, the right to remain within the United States. The foreign citizen who is refused the right to migrate to the United States is inconvenienced – but that’s hardly the same as being punished. And, indeed, deportation is generally understood in law to be a <a href="https://www.law.upenn.edu/journals/conlaw/articles/volume13/issue5/Markowitz13U.Pa.J.Const.L.1299(2011).pdf">“civil penalty,”</a> rather than a punishment. </p>
<p>Even a civil penalty, though, is something whose imposition must be justified morally. The justices of the Supreme Court of the United States have sometimes emphasized that being expelled from one’s home involves the <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/149/698/case.html">destruction of much of what one values</a>. It is the destruction of all that one has built. </p>
<p>This fact was recognized early in the history of the American legal system. Founding father James Madison, in discussing the <a href="https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Alien.html">Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798</a>, argued strongly against deportation. <a href="http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=004/lled004.db&recNum=566&itemLink=r%3Fammem%2Fhlaw%3A%40field">He said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“… if a banishment of this sort, be not a punishment, and among the severest of punishments, it will be difficult to imagine a doom to which the name might be applied.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Supreme Court agrees. It recently reaffirmed its commitment to the thought that deportation, even if a mere penalty, is <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-651.pdf">“a uniquely severe”</a> one.</p>
<h2>Residency and rights</h2>
<p>The DACA opponent might, in reply, argue that the morality of the law applies only to those people who are legitimately subject to the law. The laws of the United States might insist, in other words, that the United States has no particular obligations to those people who have entered into <a href="https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/illegal-immigrant">the political community, defined by its jurisdictional limits</a>, without any right. </p>
<p>Here, too, the law of the United States disagrees.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/208182/original/file-20180227-36696-1t42n01.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The law itself gives certain rights to the undocumented.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/131830793@N03/16989650198/in/photolist-rTjp6q-9ivJBr-SzAECv-RhWYzS-SzACjn-RauRDh-XUuX2L-85Ypi4-sYdpN-5AgqmS-4LxJF1-eutPcQ-Jwd66-4Ltwtn-4vpMvQ-7pBKdX-4LxJFQ-4Ltvjc-nXyyV3-4Ltvk2-8kub3D-RcstVR-Q9ptKe-spQNRh-RjAEBC-SzADDX-SzADqv-RhWZUf-RhWZ7U-RZMwQy-RhX3Ws-RZMwVU-N6xyS3-SkJRPU-Q9ptCa-Q9ptyc-Q6CbAC-Q9ptnR-RjAEFq-RjAEAW-Q9ptF6-RjAEHu-QNHXfs-RjAEx9-Q6CbGE-RjAEuU-RcstS4-Q9ptsk-Q6CbyJ-RjAEwh">David Davies</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The mere fact of being found within the United States – whether rightfully or not – <a href="https://www.nilc.org/get-involved/community-education-resources/know-your-rights/">provides one with significant rights</a> under the Constitution. The law itself gives the undocumented legal rights to bring claims in vindication of their constitutional rights.</p>
<p>Undocumented children, for instance, have a constitutional right to be provided with public schooling. The Supreme Court, in defending this principle, argued that all people within the state’s jurisdiction - <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/457/202/case.html">“even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful”</a> – are guaranteed due process under the law.</p>
<h2>Morality and migration</h2>
<p>Yes, nothing in the law requires the opening of all borders. And it is true that the United States does not have an obligation to provide the right to enter or stay in the country to all who might desire that right. </p>
<p>However, the Dreamers are not like other people. The simple fact of where they are now provides them with constitutional standing denied to outsiders. </p>
<p>And, as emphasized earlier, whatever wrong they might have done in crossing into the United States, they did as children. The revocation of DACA, however, would announce that they are rightly subjected to a significant – indeed, a devastating – punishment, in virtue of an act committed in childhood. </p>
<p>Law is not the same as morality. <a href="http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674554610">But morality can sometimes look to law</a>, in determining where its deliberations might begin. If the deportation of the DACA recipients would violate the moral principles that underlie the American legal system, there is at least some reason to think that such deportation is morally wrong. </p>
<p>Contrary to Jeff Sessions, I believe that the United States would not respect the law best by deporting the Dreamers. It would respect it best by living up to the moral ideals that make the law worth following.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91738/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Blake receives funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities.</span></em></p>Conservatives on migration claim that allowing the DACA recipients to stay shows disrespect for the law. The moral principles that underlie the American legal system, however, tell a different story.Michael Blake, Professor of Philosophy, Public Policy, and Governance, University of WashingtonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/898342018-02-06T11:33:20Z2018-02-06T11:33:20ZSessions’ war on pot could speed up marijuana legalization nationwide<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/204888/original/file-20180205-14083-tsabfi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Customers lining up to legally buy recreational marijuana in West Hollywood, Calif.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/California-Marijuana/5f28e6094b7f466394ecfe1f49b0fa84/5/0">AP Photo/Richard Vogel</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Attorney General <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1022196/download">Jeff Sessions</a> recently clarified how the Trump administration intends to treat states that have legalized pot, which remains illegal on the federal level.</p>
<p>The Obama administration eventually took a relatively hands-off approach to this enforcement conundrum. But Sessions instructed all United States attorneys to treat cannabis-related activities like any suspected crime, instead of making them a low priority if they comply with state laws. </p>
<p>This bureaucratic salvo is stirring fears that the Trump administration could be on the verge of a crackdown that could potentially jeopardize the nation’s growing number of <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jeff-sessions-marijuana-policy-announcement/">legally operating pot businesses</a>. However, based on my research and what I’ve learned while teaching the first U.S. <a href="https://paulseaborn.wordpress.com/business-of-marijuana/">college course on the marijuana business</a> at the University of Denver, I see no reason for supporters of legalization to panic.</p>
<p>In fact, I believe that Sessions may have actually accelerated the process toward federal marijuana legalization.</p>
<h2>Obama’s approach</h2>
<p>First, a little history.</p>
<p><a href="https://saclaw.org/articles/marijuana-laws-in-california-edl/">California</a> became the first state to legalize medical marijuana in 1996. <a href="https://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.timeline.php?timelineID=000026">Alaska, Oregon</a> and other states soon followed.</p>
<p>Since the federal government considers pot to be a <a href="http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/federal-marijuana-laws.html">Class 1 controlled substance</a> and makes using and selling marijuana for any reason <a href="https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/federal-marijuana-laws.html">a crime</a>, this put the authorities in an awkward position. Key members of the Clinton administration responded with <a href="https://www.c-span.org/video/?77530-1/medical-marijuana">harsh rhetoric</a>. General Barry McCaffrey, the drug czar, said at the time, “We should ask ourselves whether we really want Cheech and Chong logic to guide our thinking about medicine.” Raids and <a href="http://www.laweekly.com/news/cannabis-connection-2129736">high-profile indictments followed</a>.</p>
<p>President <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/bushs-war-on-pot-20050811">George W. Bush’s administration</a> also expressed hostility toward medical marijuana, making its growing number of raids on legal dispensaries come as no great surprise. In 2005, as his second term began, the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/06/scotus.medical.marijuana/">Supreme Court ruled</a> that federal powers trumped states’ rights in this regard. </p>
<p>As a <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Marijuana-Policy-and-Presidential-Leadership_Appendix-1.pdf">presidential candidate</a>, Barack Obama suggested that he might not interfere with the power of what was by then about a dozen states to allow medicinal marijuana sales and use. In 2009, his deputy attorney general, David Ogden, <a href="https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/memorandum-selected-united-state-attorneys-investigations-and-prosecutions-states">released a memo</a> that furthered this impression. It said that small-scale operators in states where medical marijuana was legal were a low enforcement priority. </p>
<p>But Obama’s administration executed <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Marijuana-Policy-and-Presidential-Leadership_Appendix-1.pdf">dozens of dispensary raids</a> anyway, disappointing <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/obamas-war-on-pot-20120216">legalization proponents</a>.</p>
<p>During Obama’s second term, the number of states that had <a href="http://www.thirdway.org/infographic/timeline-of-state-marijuana-legalization-laws">legalized medical marijuana</a> climbed past the 20 mark. A handful, starting with <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/07/news/economy/marijuana-legalization-washington-colorado/index.html">Colorado and Washington</a>, also legalized recreational weed. Meanwhile, support for legal pot <a href="http://news.gallup.com/poll/1657/illegal-drugs.aspx">continued to build</a> in general. </p>
<p>Four years after the Ogden memo, <a href="https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis-101/what-is-the-cole-memo">James Cole</a>, another deputy attorney general, issued a more comprehensive memo. It directed all <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao/about-offices-united-states-attorneys">U.S. attorneys</a> to treat marijuana businesses operating “in clear and unambiguous compliance” with state marijuana laws as a low enforcement priority.</p>
<p>While still somewhat ambiguous and falling short of support for full federal legalization, Cole’s guidance made cannabis businesses in states that had legalized the product feel less vulnerable.</p>
<p>Rather than fight for more protection against federal raids, marijuana entrepreneurs and social activists at that point instead generally chose to focus on compliance within state laws and continuing to increase public support.</p>
<p>The strategy seemed to pay off with additional states legalizing pot for medical and recreational purposes. While full legalization remained an appealing long-term goal for many Americans, the status quo during Obama’s second term seemed quite workable for states with legal markets. And it took away the impetus to push for more rapid federal change.</p>
<p><iframe id="16j0H" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/16j0H/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Trump takes over</h2>
<p>As soon as President Donald Trump named Sessions as his pick for attorney general, the Alabama Republican’s <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/18/trumps-pick-for-attorney-general-good-people-dont-smoke-marijuana/?utm_term=.b392951e3dec">long-held anti-pot views</a> triggered speculation that the federal government would <a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/jeff-sessions-coming-war-on-legal-marijuana-214501">crack down in states where it was legal</a>.</p>
<p>Instead, Sessions waited almost a full year to make a move. Meanwhile, legal cannabis businesses continued to <a href="http://www.thecannabist.co/2017/10/11/colorado-marijuana-sales-august-2017-tax-data/89751/">generate tax revenue</a> and create jobs. <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-marijuana/california-launches-legal-sale-of-cannabis-for-recreational-use-idUSKBN1EQ0WF">California launched its recreational marijuana market</a>, the world’s largest. And more and more Americans were exposed to the industry in their home states or while traveling.</p>
<p>Indeed, a Pew Research Center poll conducted in October found that <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/01/05/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/">61 percent of Americans supported legalization</a> – up from 57 percent a year earlier and nearly double the backing for legal pot in 2000. For the first time, Gallup polling determined, a <a href="http://news.gallup.com/poll/221018/record-high-support-legalizing-marijuana.aspx">majority of Republicans</a> support legalization. </p>
<p><iframe id="8FUgO" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/8FUgO/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Even when Sessions finally acted, he took a relatively mild step. Rather than launching a more severe crackdown, such as immediately raiding marijuana businesses, he merely rescinded Cole’s guidance.</p>
<h2>Bigger coalition</h2>
<p>The way state lawmakers, attorneys general, industry participants and other stakeholders reacted to even this small gesture demonstrated something that Sessions seems to have failed to consider – that the coalition in support of marijuana legalization had <a href="https://mjbizdaily.com/coalition-sues-us-government-aim-legalizing-cannabis/">grown considerably</a>.</p>
<p>State lawmakers in <a href="http://www.record-bee.com/general-news/20180119/california-leaders-are-fighting-back-against-sessions-marijuana-crackdown">California</a>, <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2018/01/04/cory-gardner-jeff-sessions-marijuana-policy/">Colorado</a>, <a href="http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2018/01/massachusetts_gov_charlie_bake_26.html">Massachusetts</a> and other states, and even some of the <a href="https://www.civilized.life/articles/republican-congressman-jeff-sessions-marijuana-witch-hunt/">Republicans in Congress</a>, objected. A group of <a href="https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/01252018%20Letter%20to%20Trump%20on%20Sessions'%20withdrawal%20of%20the%20Cole%20memo.pdf">54 House and Senate Democrats</a> <a href="https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/01252018%20Letter%20to%20Trump%20on%20Sessions'%20withdrawal%20of%20the%20Cole%20memo.pdf">sent Trump a letter</a> urging him to reverse course.</p>
<p>“This action has the potential to unravel efforts to build sensible drug policies that encourage economic development as we are finally moving away from antiquated practices that have hurt disadvantaged communities,” they wrote.</p>
<p><a href="http://kdvr.com/2018/01/04/colorado-ag-says-dont-freak-out-after-sessions-marijuana-order/">State attorneys general</a>, who do not report to Sessions, such as those serving in <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/04/us/states-react-to-jeff-sessions-memo-marijuana/index.html">Colorado</a>, <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/jeff-sessions-marijuana-war-washington-state-776246">Washington</a>, <a href="http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018/01/22/pennsylvania-attorney-general-defends-medical-marijuana-law/">Pennsylvania</a> and <a href="http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2018/01/09/michigan-attorney-general-sessions-marijuana/109287138/">Michigan</a>, have shown no interest in modifying their current practices.</p>
<p>And <a href="https://mjbizdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Banking-Letter-to-Congress.pdf">19 of them</a> urged Congress to <a href="https://mjbizdaily.com/19-attorneys-general-urge-congress-give-cannabis-states-access-banking/">change banking laws</a> so that marijuana businesses in their states would no longer have to rely solely on cash to handle billions of dollars in legal pot transactions. That way, they wrote, their revenue could be fully tracked, aiding taxation and limiting criminal activity that targets cash-intensive businesses. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/204895/original/file-20180205-14111-9pm1gu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Jerred Kiloh, owner of the Higher Path medical marijuana dispensary, getting ready to pay his monthly tax payment in cash in Los Angeles.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Marijuana-Cash-Business/cae7ad4375d045099d865178ae0c8a78/9/0">AP Photo/Jae C. Hong</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All in all, the fierce reaction across the political spectrum reaction shows two things: Sessions’ memo is an empty threat and pot’s days as an illegal drug are numbered. </p>
<p>To be sure, the Sessions memo does seem to have <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/01/29/581503200/federal-crackdown-on-states-legal-marijuana-drives-private-investors-away">scared away some investors</a> who were considering new pot investments. But by adding to the air of uncertainty around marijuana businesses, Sessions seems have only strengthened the resolve of pro-legalization forces.</p>
<p>I believe it will ultimately bring about federal legalization sooner rather than later.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89834/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Seaborn does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The attorney general’s memo portended an end to a hands-off approach to this enforcement conundrum. It could backfire.Paul Seaborn, Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Daniels College of Business, University of DenverLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/900782018-01-19T11:39:39Z2018-01-19T11:39:39ZIs the FBI’s latest probe of the Clinton Foundation a ‘witch hunt’ – or something more?<p>With <a href="https://millercenter.org/president/carter/life-after-the-presidency">few exceptions</a>, most presidents fade from public life once they step down.</p>
<p>Bill Clinton, however, has shunned leisure time since his administration ended in January 2001. Instead, he has whiled away the hours toiling for an <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-do-the-clinton-charities-actually-do-and-where-does-their-money-go-65287">eponymous foundation</a> he established with his wife Hillary Clinton. At least initially, the foundation seemed well-suited for cleaning up his legacy, after the ugliness of the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the <a href="https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123653000">subsequent impeachment</a> and Senate trial tarnished it.</p>
<p><a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/367541-fbi-launches-new-clinton-foundation-investigation">But now the FBI</a> has reportedly reopened an investigation of the foundation’s alleged “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/the-push-for-investigations-of-the-clinton-foundation-and-christopher-steele/549860/">pay-to-play</a>” politics while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state. </p>
<p>At first blush, this might appear to be a purely partisan witch hunt launched by the <a href="https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/09/conservative-media-dominated-coverage-of-2016-campaign-report-finds/">Clintons’ conservative political enemies</a>. Based on my scholarship regarding relationships between the government and <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/voicefornonprofits_chapter.pdf">nonprofits</a> as well as <a href="https://histphil.org/2017/05/26/are-foundations-part-of-the-resistance-challenges-to-elite-donors-in-a-neo-populist-age/">philanthropists</a>, I believe it’s fair to say that large foundations tend to be scandal-free. </p>
<p>That is not the case for the <a href="https://www.clintonfoundation.org/">Clinton Foundation</a>, however, which has repeatedly stirred controversy over its unusual fundraising practices.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/g33Q5fDUY8g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Following reports that the FBI and Justice Department are ramping up new Clinton Foundation probes, MSNBC News host Joy Reid and her panel debated the ethics of federal agencies investigating the president’s enemies.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Influence peddling</h2>
<p>The Clintons launched their primary <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-do-the-clinton-charities-actually-do-and-where-does-their-money-go-65287">public charity</a> in 1997. It has since grown from an organization to raise funds for the Clinton Presidential Library into one of the nation’s most visible foundations. It runs ambitious programs in such areas as HIV/AIDS, climate change, healthy children, economic development and Haiti earthquake relief, along with a variety of other initiatives.</p>
<p>If reports that the FBI reopened its investigation are accurate, it would be the first time the foundation has been investigated since 2016 – and the first time since <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/358772-timeline-trump-calls-for-clinton-to-be-investigated">Donald Trump</a>, whose campaign demonized his opponent Hillary Clinton with “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQpvbyXNi0w">lock her up</a>” chants at his rallies, took office. </p>
<p>While it is highly inappropriate for a sitting president to call on his own Justice Department to investigate his political opponents, Trump has nevertheless openly pushed for investigations of the Clintons while in office. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, on the outs with his boss because of his recusal in the Russia investigation has, according to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sessions-tries-to-impress-trump-with-moves-at-justice-it-hasnt-worked/2018/01/10/e2053d84-f478-11e7-91af-31ac729add94_story.html?utm_term=.c29c81435f69">The Washington Post</a>, begun to look “into matters that Trump has publicly complained are not being pursued.”</p>
<p>The charges against the foundation have ranged from ridiculous to serious. Two days after the initial reports of the Trump administration’s new probe, <a href="http://www.blingnews.com/22-clinton-foundation-employees-arrested-on-first-day-of-new-investigation/">multiple conservative websites</a> falsely claimed that 22 of the foundation’s employees had been arrested. There were <a href="https://www.snopes.com/22-clinton-foundation-employees-arrested/">no arrests</a>.</p>
<p>Many charges are trivial. <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/14/pay-to-play-at-clinton-state-department-exposed-in-new-emails-watchdog-says.html">Fox News reported</a> that a donor to the foundation, Terrence Duffy, asked then-Secretary Clinton for help in setting up business meetings in Singapore and Hong Kong. Yet <a href="https://jp.usembassy.gov/business/us-exporters/">U.S. embassies</a> do this routinely.</p>
<p>Other accusations are far more troubling. <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/feb/26/american-crossroads/conservative-group-claims-hillary-clintons-foundat/">Human rights-abusing governments</a>, including Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Oman, have donated millions to the Clinton Foundation. <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/07/fact-checking-donations-clinton-foundation/">Saudi Arabia</a> alone has contributed US$10 million to $25 million.</p>
<p>Ukrainian steel magnate <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/trump-foundation-donations-controversial-ukrainian-clinton-donor/story?id=43728278">Victor Pinchuk</a> also gave the foundation $10 to $25 million. And he was by many accounts not shy about <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clinton-presidential-campaign-charity.html?_r=00">asking for help</a> from Hillary Clinton when she served as secretary of state. While there’s been no indication of what the new FBI investigation is looking into, over the years these probes have usually focused on influence peddling allegedly enabled by the Clinton Foundation’s fundraising. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=892&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=892&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/202363/original/file-20180117-53328-v77dty.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=892&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Chelsea Clinton, center, and Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk look at a 3-week-old baby during a 2012 visit to a neonatal center in Kiev backed by donations from Pinchuk.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Ukraine-Chelsea-Clinton/67425fca572448ff80a56afa09788ee4/2/0">AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Poorly Endowed</h2>
<p>Why does the Clinton Foundation find itself in the position its in? Its structure under federal law regulating foundations has a lot to do with it.</p>
<p>The Clinton Foundation differs from most prominent foundations in that it is an <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-do-the-clinton-charities-actually-do-and-where-does-their-money-go-65287">operating public charity</a>, which means it <a href="https://www.thebalance.com/the-history-and-types-of-foundations-2502444">raises money on an ongoing basis</a> and then funds its projects with those donations. </p>
<p>Like the nation’s largest foundations, such as <a href="https://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/25-largest-foundations-in-the-us-by-total-assets">Gates, Ford, Robert Wood Johnson and Packard</a>, which push for goals such as environmental protection, expanded access to health care and social justice, the Clinton Foundation largely promotes <a href="http://as.tufts.edu/politicalscience/sites/all/themes/asbase/assets/documents/berry/donorsForDemocracy.pdf">liberal causes</a>.</p>
<p>But those institutions are backed by substantial endowments donated by families with vast fortunes. The Gates Foundation’s endowment, worth at least <a href="https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Who-We-Are/General-Information/Foundation-Factsheet">$40 billion</a> is the biggest. It funds much of what it does from the income that the endowment’s investments in stocks, bonds and other assets produce every year.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.clintonfoundation.org/sites/default/files/2016_ar-financials.pdf">Clinton Foundation’s endowment</a>, worth only $109 million, is puny by comparison. Its investments returned just <a href="http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/311/311580204/311580204_201512_990.pdf">$2.9 million in 2015</a>. Given the foundation’s ambitions, $2.9 million doesn’t go very far. From donations, though, the foundation has raised north of $2 billion over its lifetime, allowing it to <a href="https://www.clintonfoundation.org/sites/default/files/2016_ar-financials.pdf">spend more than $200 million a year</a> on its programs. </p>
<p><iframe id="hIkV4" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/hIkV4/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Despite its vast donor base – more than <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/politics/hillary-clinton-presidential-campaign-charity.html">200,000</a> have contributed since its 1997 inception – much of its funding comes from major donors, including other foundations, wealthy individuals and, of course, foreign governments. The <a href="https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors?category=%2410%2C000%2C001+to+%2425%2C000%2C000http://example.com/">foundation’s own records</a> show that it has received seven gifts of more than $25 million and another 19 worth $10 to $25 million.</p>
<h2>Impressive score</h2>
<p>The foundation has made notable contributions in global health, HIV/AIDS and women’s empowerment. Perhaps its most <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/9/22/12893444/clinton-foundation-effectiveness">notable success</a> was in negotiating a significant drop in the price of drugs used to fight AIDS and then bringing those drugs to Africa, where an epidemic was ravaging the continent.</p>
<p>Despite the suspicions conservatives have long raised about the Clinton Foundation, Charity Navigator, a group that rates the fundraising and spending practices of nonprofits, gives it <a href="https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=16680">high marks</a>. The foundation spends 87 percent of what it raises on the programs it supports, a <a href="https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=1287">higher share</a> than most of its peers. </p>
<p>But Charity Navigator doesn’t assess or compare the motives of donors. I believe that the foundation’s high ambitions and thirst for funds make it too open to unsavory gifts that, in turn, damage its reputation. </p>
<p>Foreign governments find the foundation attractive because they are limited in what they can otherwise do to improve their access and influence with American policymakers. The law prohibits their donations to <a href="http://www.uky.edu/electionlaw/analysis/foreign-contributions-us-elections">American political candidates</a>, although they may <a href="http://kleptocracyinitiative.org/2016/12/a-quick-guide-to-u-s-foreign-lobbying-laws/">hire lobbyists</a>.</p>
<p>With or without an indictment, fines or other punishment, the Clinton Foundation’s outlook will remain murky as long as its endowment remains small. Should the Clinton Foundation ultimately fold, its legacy is likely to be its fundraising practices, not its good works.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90078/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jeffrey Berry does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The foundation initially seemed well-suited for cleaning up Bill Clinton’s legacy after the Monica Lewinsky scandal’s ugliness. That’s no longer true.Jeffrey Berry, John Richard Skuse Professor, Department of Political Science, Tufts UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/898212018-01-18T11:24:33Z2018-01-18T11:24:33ZRe-criminalizing cannabis is worse than 1930s ‘reefer madness’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/202156/original/file-20180116-53317-13dl23o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C283%2C805%2C417&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A still from the 1936 propaganda film 'Reefer Madness.'</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ReeferMadness_13.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the 1930s, parents across the U.S. were panicked. A new film, “Reefer Madness,” suggested that evil marijuana dealers lurked in public schools, waiting to entice their children into a life of crime and degeneracy. </p>
<p>The propaganda film captured the essence of the anti-marijuana campaign started by Harry Anslinger, a government employee eager to make a name for himself after Prohibition ended. Ansligner’s campaign demonized marijuana as <a href="https://www.pearson.com/us/higher-education/program/Inciardi-War-on-Drugs-IV-The-Continuing-Saga-of-the-Mysteries-and-Miseries-of-Intoxication-Addiction-Crime-and-Public-Policy-4th-Edition/PGM294306.html">a dangerous drug</a>, playing on the racist attitudes of white Americans in the early 20th century and stoking fears of marijuana as an “assassin of youth.” </p>
<p>Over the decades, there’s been a general trend toward greater social acceptance of marijuana by a more educated society, seeing the <a href="https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/smart-justice/war-marijuana-black-and-white">harm caused</a> by the prohibition of marijuana. But then, on Jan. 4, Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-update-marijuana-enforcement-policy">an Obama-era memorandum</a> suggesting federal agents should let states regulate control of marijuana and focus their efforts on other drugs.</p>
<p>Re-criminalizing marijuana in light of current research findings, including <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520293472">my own research of more than 15 years</a>, makes Sessions’ proposed crackdown on legal marijuana look worse than reefer madness. </p>
<p>Researchers like myself, who regularly talk with people who are actively using hard drugs, know that legal cannabis can actually <a href="http://harmreduction.org/about-us/principles-of-harm-reduction/">reduce the harmful effects</a> of other drugs.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sbjHOBJzhb0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A trailer for “Reefer Madness.”</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Reefer madness</h2>
<p>Re-criminalizing marijuana is a decision that makes little sense unless we consider the motives. History can shed some light here.</p>
<p>Media mogul William Randolph Hearst supported <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639625.1984.9967643">the criminalization of marijuana</a>, in part because Hearst’s paper-producing companies were being replaced by hemp. Likewise, DuPont’s investment in nylon was threatened by hemp products. </p>
<p>Anslinger’s tactics included <a href="https://www.vanderbilt.edu/ctp/The_New_Jim_Crow.pdf">racist accusations</a> linking marijuana to Mexican immigrants. His campaign included stories of urban black men who enticed young white women to become sex-crazed and instantly addicted to marijuana.</p>
<p>Anslinger’s campaign succeeded beyond his aims. His fearmongering was based more on fiction than on facts, but it made him head of the Bureau of Narcotics for 30 years. The social construction of cannabis as one of the most dangerous drugs was completed in 1970, when marijuana was classified as <a href="https://www.dea.gov/druginfo/ds.shtml">a Schedule I drug</a> under the Controlled Substances Act, meaning it had high potential for abuse and no acceptable medical use. </p>
<p>Almost 50 years later, the classification remains and Anslinger’s views endure among many policymakers and Americans. </p>
<h2>Spurious relationships</h2>
<p>Today, marijuana critics often cite studies that show a connection between marijuana use and a host of negative outcomes, like use of harder drugs, criminality and lower IQ. Anslinger used the same tactics to incite fear. </p>
<p>But a correlation does not mean a causation. Some of these studies used flawed scientific methods or relied on false assumptions.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=442&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=442&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=442&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201785/original/file-20180112-101514-1knb8dw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A 1935 U.S. government advertisement warning about dangers associated with marijuana.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://origins.osu.edu/article/43/images">origins.osu.edu</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One popular myth, which started in Ansligner’s campaign and continues today, is that marijuana is a gateway to heroin and other opioids. Despite <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00280.x">research dispelling this as a causal connection</a>, opponents of marijuana legalization continue to call marijuana a <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-are-politicians-still-referring-to-marijuana-as-a-gateway-drug-39348">“gateway drug.”</a> </p>
<p>Studies on the brains of long-term marijuana users suggested a link between marijuana use and lower IQ. But later investigation showed that low IQ might actually be caused by smaller orbitofrontal cortices in the brains of children. Children with smaller prefrontal cortices are significantly <a href="http://www.businessinsider.fr/us/long-term-marijuana-use-effects-on-the-brain-2014-11/">more likely to start using marijuana early in life</a> than those with larger prefrontal cortices.</p>
<p>One well-designed study that looked at marijuana use and brain development on adolescent twins over 10 years found no measurable link between <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/01/twins-study-finds-no-evidence-marijuana-lowers-iq-teens">marijuana use and lower IQ</a>.</p>
<p>In a review of <a href="https://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000884">60 studies on medical marijuana</a>, over 63 percent found positive effects for debilitating diseases – such as multiple sclerosis, bipolar disorder, Parkinson’s disease and pain – while less than 8 percent found negative health effects. </p>
<p>The most harmful effect of criminalizing marijuana may not be its restriction on medical uses, but its devastating cost to American society, which experienced a <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/10/cory-booker/how-war-drugs-affected-incarceration-rates/">500 percent increase in incarceration due to the war on drugs</a>.</p>
<h2>The Portugal experiment</h2>
<p>The tragedy in this policy is that decriminalizing drugs has shown to lower drug use – not increase it.</p>
<p>In 2000, Portugal had one of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it">worst drug problems in Europe</a>. Then, in 2001, a new drug policy decriminalized all drugs. Drug control was taken out of the criminal justice system and put under the Ministry of Health. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/drug-decriminalization-portugal-lessons-creating-fair-successful-drug-policies">Five years after Portugal’s decriminalization</a>, drug use by young people was down. Teenagers between the ages of 16 and 18, for example, were 27.6 percent less likely to use drugs. What’s more, the number of people going to treatment went up, while drug-related deaths decreased. </p>
<p>Fifteen years later, Portugal still had lower rates of heroin and cocaine seizures, and <a href="http://hdl.handle.net/10419/170879">lower rates of drug-related deaths</a>, compared to the rest of Europe. Cannabis use in Portugal is now the lowest among all European countries. Moreover, Portugal’s policy change contributed to a reduced number of drug addicts with HIV. </p>
<p>The “Portugal Experiment” shows what happens when we take an honest look at a serious societal drug issue. Taking a tactic used by Anslinger, opponents of marijuana legalization claim it will lead to more use by young people. However, in states that legalized medical marijuana, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08897077.2017.1389801">use by young people</a> did not increase or even went down. Recent data show that use of marijuana by teens decreased even in states that <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/21/one-of-the-greatest-fears-about-legalizing-marijuana-has-so-far-failed-to-happen/">legalized marijuana for recreational use</a>.</p>
<p>As the U.S. battles an <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-opioid-epidemic-in-6-charts-81601">opioid epidemic</a>, states where marijuana is legal have seen <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w21345">fewer deaths from opioid overdose</a>.</p>
<p>More studies are finding medical marijuana patients were using marijuana as <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.01.011">a substitute for pain pills</a>. After a medical marijuana law was passed, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1661">use of prescription medication</a> for which marijuana could serve as a clinical alternative fell significantly.</p>
<p>Faced with a deadly opioid epidemic, more of the medical establishment is beginning to acknowledge the potential of marijuana as a <a href="http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.13677">safer therapy for pain than opioids</a>.</p>
<h2>Listening to those who are suffering</h2>
<p>In <a href="http://clcjbooks.rutgers.edu/books/women-on-ice/">my own field research</a>, I’ve conducted hundreds of interviews with people who used heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and other really dangerous drugs. Most of them used drugs to address <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520293472">social isolation, and emotional or physical pain, which led to addiction</a>. They often told me that they used marijuana to help them stop using more problematic drugs or to reduce the side effects of withdrawing. </p>
<p>“In a lot of ways, that was my sanity,” said <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4283845/">a young man</a> who had stopped all drugs but cannabis. </p>
<p>Marijuana became <a href="https://doi.org/10.3109/16066359.2011.566654">a gateway out</a> of heroin, cocaine, crack and other more deadly drugs. </p>
<p>While the Institute of Medicine released a report in 1999 suggesting the development of <a href="https://doi.org/10.3928/00485713-20170424-01">medically useful cannabinoid-based drugs</a>, the American Medical Association has largely ignored or dismissed subsequent studies on the benefits of cannabis.</p>
<p>Today, <a href="http://www.governing.com/gov-data/state-marijuana-laws-map-medical-recreational.html">in many states</a>, people can use marijuana to treat illnesses and pain, reduce withdrawal symptoms, and combat cravings for more addictive drugs. They can also choose to use cannabis oil or a variety of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0022042615580991">healthier ways than smoking for consuming cannabis</a>. This freedom may be jeopardized by a return to criminal marijuana.</p>
<h2>Worse than ‘Reefer Madness’</h2>
<p>Almost a century after Anslinger’s campaign, “Reefer Madness” is <a href="http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archives/article_54e46818-95d2-5f18-83b8-8e312714f832.html">mocked in the media</a> for its flagrant propaganda, and Anslinger’s influence on drug policy <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/harry-anslinger-the-man-behind-the-marijuana-ban/">is shown as an example of government corruption</a>. The ignorance and naiveté of “Reefer Madness” is seen as a bygone era.</p>
<p>So we have to ask, what kind of people want to re-criminalize cannabis today? What are their motives? Who profits from continuing to incarcerate people for using marijuana? Whose power will be diminished when a drug that has so many health benefits is provided without a prescription? </p>
<p><em>This article has been updated to clarify that ‘Reefer Madness’ is a film, not a documentary.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89821/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Miriam Boeri receives funding from the National Institutes of Health. </span></em></p>Research from the last few decades suggest marijuana helps more than it harms. But Jeff Sessions’ proposed crackdown would take us back nearly a century.Miriam Boeri, Associate Professor of Sociology, Bentley UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/899412018-01-12T11:22:45Z2018-01-12T11:22:45ZWhat Jeff Sessions doesn’t understand about medical marijuana<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201647/original/file-20180111-101518-r6l8pl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Patients in 29 states can legally use medical marijuana to treat their symptoms.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/medical-marijuana-buds-arranged-prescription-pill-298206137?src=qy_BTOUmwE-q_Rdj3ehhSQ-1-20">SageElyse/shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Jan. 4, Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-update-marijuana-enforcement-policy">the Cole memo</a>, a 2013 document that limits federal enforcement of marijuana laws.</p>
<p>This opens the door for <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-issues-memo-marijuana-enforcement">a crackdown in the nine states</a> with legal recreational marijuana. </p>
<p>The Cole memo is one of two documents that prevent the U.S. Justice Department from treating marijuana as <a href="https://www.drugs.com/article/csa-schedule-1.html%5D">a Schedule I drug</a>, defined as a substance with no accepted medical treatment and high potential for abuse. The other is the 2014 <a href="https://www.vox.com/2014/5/30/5763654/the-house-just-voted-to-protect-medical-marijuana-patients-from">Rohrabacher–Farr amendment</a>. This legislation bars the Department of Justice from spending any funds to keep states from implementing their own laws about “the use, distribution, possession or cultivation of medical marijuana.”</p>
<p>The amendment’s language needs to be reinserted into law each year – and it’s currently set to expire on Jan. 18. That would leave patients in the 29 states with legal medical marijuana without their treatments and at risk of prosecution.</p>
<p>I have researched a number of drugs of abuse and natural products for safety and effectiveness. Just because a drug has abuse potential doesn’t mean it’s always bad and just because it’s natural doesn’t mean it’s always safe. While I’m no fan of legalizing recreational marijuana use, I believe there has to be special dispensation for patients with a legitimate medical need. </p>
<h2>Medical marijuana works</h2>
<p>There are approximately <a href="https://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005889">1.2 million users of medical marijuana</a> in these 29 states. <a href="https://mjbizdaily.com/chart-of-the-week-most-common-medical-conditions-of-registered-mmj-patients/">Some of the most common ailments</a> include pain or muscle spasms, nausea and vomiting, cancer, PTSD, seizures and glaucoma.</p>
<p><iframe id="qfaVN" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/qfaVN/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The body has a system of receptors that can be stimulated by the chemicals in marijuana, called cannabinoids. In animal studies, <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1124%2Fpr.58.3.2">cannabinoids have been used</a> to treat symptoms like harmful weight loss, vomiting, seizures and fluid pressure in the eyes.</p>
<p>There isn’t much human research on medical marijuana, thanks to the product’s illegal status and a lack of federal research funding. Large trials are nearly impossible to conduct, since products are <a href="https://lcb.wa.gov/publications/Marijuana/BOTEC%20reports/1b_Best_Practices_Contamination-Final.pdf">often adulterated</a> and the concentrations of cannabinoids <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1124%2Fpr.58.3.2">vary from plant to plant</a>.</p>
<p>Even so, human trials from around the world and pockets of the U.S. offer modestly strong <a href="http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1611618">evidence of marijuana’s benefits</a> in a number of disorders, such as intractable nausea and vomiting, chronic pain and severe muscle spasms and epilepsy. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1611618">a study published in May</a> looked at the effects of cannabadiol – an active marijuana compound that does not cause euphoric high or hallucination – on children with Dravet syndrome, a rare genetic disorder characterized by frequent, severe drug-resistant seizures. Those who took cannabadiol cut their median number of convulsive seizures per month in half, from 12 to six. These findings may be applicable to <a href="https://www.epilepsy.com/learn/treating-seizures-and-epilepsy/other-treatment-approaches/medical-marijuana-and-epilepsy">other people with hard-to-treat seizures</a>.</p>
<p>I bring up this example because it uses the highest quality study design. Also, seizures are not subjective symptoms like pain or nausea that critics may be skeptical of. </p>
<h2>When patients become criminals</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/201641/original/file-20180111-101505-1r4pgze.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Different types of THC-infused confections on display at a pot dispensary in Eugene, Ore.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Oregon-Pot-Stores/82d93409185c4befa386f10bffce1963/20/1">AP Photo/Ryan Kang</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In my home state of Connecticut, medical marijuana is legal. Doctors are required to certify that <a href="http://www.ct.gov/dcp/cwp/view.asp?a=4287&q=503670&dcpNav=%7C&dcpNav_GID=2109">potential medical marijuana users</a> have a disease for which there is adequate medical evidence for marijuana’s benefit. The patient then visits a licensed dispensary facility, where a pharmacists helps to select the type of product that would work best.</p>
<p>In such a dispensary, pharmacists know the exact amount of the active chemicals that each product contains. Unlike illegal marijuana, their products <a href="https://www.cannabis-med.org/data/pdf/en_2008_04_2.pdf">aren’t contaminated</a> with heavy metals, bacteria, fungi, herbicides or pesticides.</p>
<p>What if patients can no longer access these products? They will either have to go without and lose the benefits of their treatment, leading to moderately intense <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2147%2FSAR.S109576">marijuana withdrawal symptoms</a>, such as insomnia, chills, shakiness and stomach pain. </p>
<p>Or, they might try to switch to the black market, where products may be inconsistent and prosecution is possible. In so doing, they would be supporting organized crime and exposing themselves to additional dangers. I especially worry about children with epilepsy who might have to use illegal marijuana that gives them a high due to the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) rather than a legal version with little to no THC.</p>
<h2>A balanced approach</h2>
<p>Since 2014, the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment has been routinely included in the appropriations language with support from both parties. But in the past year, things have broken down. So far, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-joint-resolution/124">the amendment has survived</a> through resolutions to extend government spending, but it’s unclear whether it will appear in the new federal budget.</p>
<p>Sessions has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/13/jeff-sessions-personally-asked-congress-to-let-him-prosecute-medical-marijuana-providers/">already written to members of Congress</a> asking them not to support this amendment, saying it inhibits the department’s authority. <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-jeff-sessions-updates-united-states-attorneys-and-doj-component-heads">A new subcommittee</a> at the Department of Justice plans to assess the legalized use of marijuana.</p>
<p>Legal recreational marijuana comes with potential benefits and drawbacks to society, and I’m not sure yet that we know what the impact will be over the long term. But the research on medical marijuana is clear: Marijuana has legitimate medical uses. It should not be a Schedule I drug and should not be denied to patients. There’s virtually no upside to banning a potentially effective therapy for patients with diseases like cancer, multiple sclerosis and epilepsy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/89941/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>C. Michael White does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Patients in 29 states rely on medical marijuana to treat pain, nausea, seizures and other ailments. But all that could change.C. Michael White, Professor and Head of the Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of ConnecticutLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/848192017-10-02T23:28:20Z2017-10-02T23:28:20ZDonald Trump’s passion for cruelty<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188456/original/file-20171002-12163-10nwp9t.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=217%2C0%2C4415%2C3119&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">U.S. President's apparent passion for cruelty speaks to a greater American illness. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Donald Trump seems addicted to violence. </p>
<p>It shapes his language, politics and policies. </p>
<p>He revels in a public discourse that threatens, humiliates and bullies.</p>
<p>He has used language as a weapon to humiliate women, a reporter with a disability, Pope Francis and any political opponent who criticizes him. He has publicly humiliated members of his own cabinet and party, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-mcconnell-john-mccain-health-care-alabama-election-2017-9">and a terminally ill John McCain</a>, not to mention the insults and lies he perpetrated against former <a href="https://www.truthdig.com/articles/trump-versus-comey-the-politics-of-lawlessness-lying-and-fake-news/">FBI Director James Comey after firing him.</a> </p>
<p>Trump has humiliated world leaders with insulting and belittling language. He not only insulted North Korean leader Kim Jong-un with the war-like moniker “Rocket Man,” he appeared before the United Nations and blithely threatened to address the nuclear standoff with North Korea <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/19/donald-trump-expected-rebuke-states-enabling-north-korea-debut/">by wiping out its 25 million inhabitants</a>. </p>
<p>He has attacked the mayor of San Juan, Puerto Rico for pleading for help in the aftermath of a hurricane that has devastated the island and left many Puerto Ricans without homes or drinking water.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"914089003745468417"}"></div></p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"914089888596754434"}"></div></p>
<p>He has emboldened and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/trump-defends-white-nationalist-protesters-some-very-fine-people-on-both-sides/537012/">tacitly supported</a> the violent actions of white supremacists, and during the presidential campaign <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/5/donald-trump-gives-supporters-permissions-be-viole/">encouraged right-wing thugs to attack dissenters</a> — especially people of colour. He stated that he would pay the legal costs of a supporter who attacked a black protester. </p>
<p>During his presidential campaign,<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/26/waterboarding-absolutely-works-donald-trump-discusses-torture/"> he endorsed state torture</a> and pandered to the spectacle of violence that his adoring crowds treated like theatre as they shouted and screamed for more. </p>
<p>Violence for Trump became performative, used to draw attention to himself as the ultimate tough guy. He acted as a mafia figure willing to engage in violence as an act of vengeance and retribution aimed at those who refused to buy into his retrograde nationalism, regressive militarism and nihilistic sadism.</p>
<h2>‘Lock her up’</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/22/a-brief-history-of-the-lock-her-up-chant-as-it-looks-like-trump-might-not-even-try/?utm_term=.7bf4f77037de">endless call at his rallies to “lock her up”</a> was more than an attack on Hillary Clinton; he endorsed the manufacture of a police state where the call to law and order become the foundation for Trump’s descent into authoritarianism.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188017/original/file-20170928-22252-2gikz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Donald Trump supporters in Virginia in November 2016.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On a policy level, he has instituted directives to remilitarize the police by providing them with all manner of Army surplus weapons — especially those local police forces dealing with issues of racism and poverty. He actually endorsed and <a href="https://www.democracynow.org/2017/8/3/trump_s_call_for_police_brutality">condoned police brutality</a> while addressing a crowd of police officers in Long Island, New York, this summer. </p>
<p>These are just a few examples of the many ways in which Trump repeatedly gives licence to his base and others to commit acts of violence.</p>
<p>What’s more, he also appears to relish representations of violence, suggesting on one occasion that it’s a good way to deal with the “fake news” media. He <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/02/business/media/trump-wrestling-video-cnn-twitter.html?mcubz=3&_r=0">tweeted an edited video</a> showing him body-slamming and punching a man with the CNN logo superimposed on his head during a wrestling match.</p>
<p>And recently, he <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/17/politics/trump-tweet-clinton/index.html">retweeted an edited video</a> from an anti-Semite’s account that showed Trump driving a golf ball into the back of Hillary Clinton’s head.</p>
<h2>Trump’s domestic policies instill fear</h2>
<p>The violence has found its way into Trump’s domestic policies, which bear the weight of a form of domestic terrorism — policies that instill in specific populations fear through intimidation and coercion.</p>
<p>Trump’s call <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/daca-trump-ends-news-latest-dreamers-act-immigration-renewal-immigrants-jeff-sessions-a7930926.html">to deport 800,000 individuals</a> brought to the United States as illegal immigrants through no intention of their own — and who know no other country than the U.S. — reflects more than a savage act of a white nationalism. This cruel and inhumane policy also suggests the underlying state violence inherent in embracing the politics of disappearance and disposability. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188021/original/file-20170928-1442-83k1ii.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In this Sept. 6 photo, Karen Caudillo, 21, of Florida and Jairo Reyes, 25, of Rogers, Ark., both brought to the U.S. as children, attend a Capitol Hill news conference in Washington. DACA has shielded them from deportation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There’s also <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/25/politics/sheriff-joe-arpaio-donald-trump-pardon/index.html">Trump’s pardon</a> of the vile Joe Arpaio, the disgraced former Arizona sheriff and notorious racist who was renowned by white supremacists and bigots for his hatred of undocumented immigrants and his abuse and mistreatment of prisoners. </p>
<p>This growing culture of cruelty offers support for a society of violence in the United States. Before Trump’s election, that society resided on the margins of power. Now it’s at the centre.</p>
<p>Trump’s disregard for human life is evident in a range of policies. They include withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change, slashing jobs at the Environmental Protection Agency, gutting teen pregnancy prevention programs and ending funds to fight white supremacy and other hate groups.</p>
<h2>Budget punishes poor children</h2>
<p>At the same time, Trump has called for a US$52 billion increase in the military budget while arguing for months in favour of doing away with Obamacare and leaving tens of millions of Americans without health coverage.</p>
<p>Many young, old and vulnerable populations will pay with their lives for Trump’s embrace of this form of domestic terrorism.</p>
<p>He’s added a new dimension of cruelty to the policies that affect children, especially the poor. His proposed 2018 budget features draconian cuts in programs that <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/education/342394-trump-budget-is-an-attack-on-the-nations-poor-children">benefit poor children.</a> </p>
<p>Trump supports cutting food stamp programs (SNAP) to the tune of US$193 billion; slashing US$610 billion over 10 years from Medicaid, which aids 37 million children; chopping US$5.8 billion from the budget of the Children’s Health Insurance Program which serves nine million kids; defunding public schools by US$9.2 billion; and eliminating a number of community-assisted programs for the poor and young people. </p>
<p>These cruel cuts merge with the ruthlessness of a punishing state that under Trump and Attorney General Sessions is poised to implement a <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/29/politics/trump-law-order-jeff-sessions/index.html">law-and-order campaign</a> that criminalizes the behaviour of the poor, especially Blacks. </p>
<p>It gets worse. At the same time, Trump also supports policies that pollute the planet and increase health risks to the most vulnerable and powerless.</p>
<h2>Violence an American hallmark</h2>
<p>Violence, sadly, runs through the United States like an electric current as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/us/las-vegas-shooting.html?_r=0">terrible events in Las Vegas</a> have proven once again. And it’s become the primary tool both for entertaining people and addressing social problems. It also works to destroy the civic institutions that make a democracy possible. </p>
<p>Needless to say, Trump is not the sole reason for this more visible expression of extreme violence on the domestic and foreign fronts. </p>
<p>On the contrary. He’s the endpoint of a series of anti-democratic practices, policies and values that have been gaining ground since the emergence of the political and economic counterrevolution that gained full force with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, along with the rule of financial capital and the embrace of a culture of precarity.</p>
<p>Trump is the unbridled legitimator-in-chief of gun culture, police brutality, a war machine, violent hypermasculinity and a political and social order that expands the boundaries of social abandonment and the politics of disposability — especially for those marginalized by race and class.</p>
<p>He’s emboldened the idea that violence is the only viable political response to social problems, and in doing so normalizes violence.</p>
<p>Violence that once seemed unthinkable has become central to Trump’s understanding of how American society now defines itself. </p>
<p>Language in the service of violence has a long history in the United States, and in this current historical moment, we now have the violence of organized forgetting. </p>
<h2>Violence as a source of pleasure</h2>
<p>As memory recedes, violence as a toxin morphs into entertainment, policy and world views.</p>
<p>What’s different about Trump is that he revels in the use of violence and war-mongering brutality to inflict humiliation and pain on people. He pulls the curtains away from a systemic culture of cruelty and a racially inflected mass- incarceration state. He publicly celebrates his own sadistic investment in violence as a source of pleasure. </p>
<p>At the moment, it may seem impossible to offer any resistance to this emerging authoritarianism without talking about violence, how it works, who benefits from it, whom it affects and why it’s become so normalized.</p>
<p>But this doesn’t have to be the case once we understand that the scourge of American violence is <a href="https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/08/18/to-see-or-to-nazi-trumps-moral-blindspot-is-americas/">as much an educational issue</a> as it is a political concern. </p>
<p>The challenge is to address how to educate people about violence through rigorous and accessible historical, social, relational analyses and narratives that provide a comprehensive understanding of how the different registers of violence are connected to new forms of American authoritarianism. </p>
<p>This means making power and its connection to violence visible through the exposure of larger structural and systemic economic forces such as the toxic influence of the National Rifle Association, U.S. arms exports, and lax gun laws.</p>
<h2>‘Dead zones’ of imagination</h2>
<p>It means illustrating with great care and detail how violence is reproduced and legitimized through mass illiteracy and the dead zones of the imagination. </p>
<p>It means moving away from analyzing violence as an abstraction by showing how it actually manifests itself in everyday life to inflict massive human suffering and despair.</p>
<p>The American public needs a new understanding of how civic institutions collapse under the force of state violence, how language coarsens in the service of carnage, how a culture hardens in a market society so as to foster contempt for compassion while exalting a culture of cruelty. </p>
<p>How does neoliberal capitalism work to spread the celebration of violence through its commanding cultural apparatuses and social media? </p>
<p>How does war culture come to dominate civic life and become the most honoured ideal in American society? </p>
<p>Unless Americans can begin to address these issues as part of a broader discourse committed to resisting the growing authoritarianism in the United States, the plague of mass violence will continue — and the once-shining promise of American democracy will become nothing more than a relic of history.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>A version of this analysis was originally published on <a href="http://billmoyers.com/">Moyers & Company.</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84819/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Henry Giroux does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Donald Trump seems to have a passion for cruelty, often publicly celebrating his investment in violence as a source of pleasure. Those tendencies represent symptoms of a broader American sickness.Henry Giroux, Chaired professor for Scholarship in the Public Interest in the Department of English and Cultural Studies, McMaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/819732017-09-18T01:05:58Z2017-09-18T01:05:58ZHow the government can steal your stuff: 6 questions about civil asset forfeiture answered<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186223/original/file-20170915-4751-1m3uwx3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The authorities don't need a conviction or even for a suspect to be charged with a crime before seizing a car, cash or even a house.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/confused-young-man-car-stopped-by-326490668?src=BLnKw0rBmzBYdpKmWYQMSw-1-1">Photographee.eu/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Editor’s note: Should someone wearing a badge have the power to relieve a suspected drug dealer of his Maserati on the spot without giving him an opportunity to flee or liquidate and launder his assets? Known as civil asset forfeiture, this practice might sound like a wise policy.</em></p>
<p><em>But <a href="https://raskin.house.gov/media/press-releases/house-approves-walberg-raskin-amendment-curb-civil-asset-forfeiture-abuse">lawmakers on both sides of the aisle</a> in Congress <a href="https://www.alec.org/article/states-seize-on-improvement-of-asset-forfeiture-laws/">and the states</a> are challenging the Trump administration’s embrace of the arrangement, which strips billions of dollars a year from Americans – who often have not been charged with a crime. Law professor and criminal justice expert <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=159728">Nora V. Demleitner</a> explains how this procedure works and why it irks conservatives and progressives alike.</em></p>
<h2>1. What is civil asset forfeiture?</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.justice.gov/afp/types-federal-forfeiture">Civil asset forfeiture</a>
laws let authorities, such as federal marshals or local sheriffs, seize property – cash, a house, a car, a cellphone – that they suspect is involved in criminal activity. Seizures run the gamut from <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2017/06/13/poor-neighborhoods-hit-hardest-by-asset">12 cans of peas</a> to <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1988-05-21/news/mn-3136_1_coast-guard">multi-million-dollar yachts</a>. </p>
<p>The federal government <a href="https://oversight.gov/report/doj/review-departments-oversight-cash-seizure-and-forfeiture-activities">confiscated assets worth a total of about US$28 billion</a> during the decade ending in 2016, Justice Department data indicate.</p>
<p>In contrast to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/afp/types-federal-forfeiture">criminal forfeiture</a>, which requires that the property owner be convicted of a crime beforehand, the civil variety doesn’t require that the suspect be charged with breaking the law.</p>
<p>Three <a href="https://www.justice.gov/afp/participants-and-roles">Justice Department agencies</a> – the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) – do most of this confiscating. Most states also permit local prosecutors to take personal property from people who haven’t been charged with a crime. However, <a href="https://ij.org/activism/legislation/civil-forfeiture-legislative-highlights">some states</a> have begun to limit that practice.</p>
<p>Even when there are restrictions on when and how local and state authorities can seize property, they can circumvent those limits if the federal government “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.02.010">adopts</a>” the impounded assets.</p>
<p>For a federal agency to do so requires the alleged misconduct to violate federal law. Local agencies get up to 80% of the shared proceeds back, with the federal agency keeping the rest. The divvying-up is <a href="https://www.justice.gov/criminal-mlars/equitable-sharing-program">known officially</a> as “<a href="http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/federal-equitable-sharing/">equitable sharing</a>.” <a href="https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-afmls/legacy/2015/01/26/victims.pdf">Crime victims</a> may also get a cut from the proceeds of civil forfeiture. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3kEpZWGgJks?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">John Oliver’s ‘Last Week Tonight’ segment on civil asset forfeiture in 2014 used humor to help viewers understand the practice.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>2. Can people get their stuff back?</h2>
<p>Technically, the government must demonstrate that the property has something to do with a crime. In reality, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/?utm_term=.a60881a1ed0a">property owners in most states</a> must prove that they legally acquired their confiscated belongings to get them returned. This means the burden is on the owners to dispute these seizures in court. Court challenges tend to arise only when something of great value, like a house, is at stake.</p>
<p>Unless an owner challenges a seizure and effectively proves his innocence in court, the agency that took the property is free to keep the proceeds once the assets are liquidated. </p>
<p>Many low-income people don’t use bank accounts or credit cards. They carry cash instead. If they lose their life savings at a traffic stop, they <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/criminal-justice/reports/2016/04/01/134495/forfeiting-the-american-dream/">can’t afford to hire a lawyer</a> to dispute the seizure, the Center for American Progress – a liberal think tank – has observed.</p>
<p>And disputing civil forfeitures is hard everywhere. Some states require a cash bond; others add a penalty payment should the owner lose. The process is expensive, time-consuming and lengthy, deterring even innocent owners. </p>
<p>There’s no comprehensive data regarding how many people get their stuff back. But over the 10 years ending in September 2016, about 8% of all property owners who had cash seized from them by the DEA had it returned, according to a report from the <a href="https://oversight.gov/report/doj/review-departments-oversight-cash-seizure-and-forfeiture-activities">Justice Department’s inspector general</a>. </p>
<h2>3. Who opposes the practice?</h2>
<p>Many <a href="https://www.cato.org/events/policing-profit-abuse-civil-asset-forfeiture">conservatives</a> and <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/news/2019/04/16/what-supreme-court-ruling-could-mean-civil-asset-forfeiture">progressives</a> dislike civil asset forfeiture. Politicians on the left and right have voiced concerns about the incentives this practice gives law enforcement to abuse its authority.</p>
<p>Critics across the political spectrum also question whether different aspects of civil asset forfeiture violate the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment">Fifth Amendment</a>, which says the government can’t deprive anyone of “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” or is unconstitutional for other reasons.</p>
<p>Until now, the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-ruling-on-civil-forfeiture-2014-11">Supreme Court</a> and lower courts, however, have consistently <a href="http://law.jrank.org/pages/1231/Forfeiture-Constitutional-challenges.html">upheld civil asset forfeitures</a> when ruling on challenges launched under the Fifth Amendment. The <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-1091">same goes for challenges</a> under the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/eighth_amendment">Eighth</a> Amendment, which bars “excessive fines” and “cruel and unusual punishments,” and the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv">14th Amendment</a>, which forbids depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”</p>
<p>In 2019, the <a href="https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-1091">Supreme Court</a> unanimously found for the first time that these constitutional protections against excessive fines apply not just to the federal authorities but to the states as well.</p>
<p>Some concerns resonate more strongly for different ideological camps. Conservatives object mostly about how this impounding <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444813/trumps-civil-forfeiture-position-violates-constitution-pleases-sheriffs-who-profit">undermines property rights</a>. </p>
<p>Liberals are outraged that the poor and <a href="https://www.aclu.org/news/new-aclu-report-shows-philadelphia-da-seizes-1-million-cash-annually-innocent-philadelphians">communities of color</a> tend to be disproportionately targeted, often causing great hardship to people accused of minor wrongdoing.</p>
<p>Another common critique: The practice encourages overpolicing intended to <a href="http://ij.org/report/policing-for-profit/following-the-funds/">pad police budgets</a> or accommodate <a href="https://doi.org/10.3386/w10484">tax cuts</a>. Revenue from civil asset forfeitures can amount to a substantial percentage of local police budgets, according to a <a href="http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/2015/04/above-law-groundbreaking-new-dpa-report-finds-extensive-civil-asset-forfeiture-abuses-n">Drug Policy Alliance study</a> of this practice in California. This kind of policing can undermine police-community relations.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-118000-ag-guidelines-seized-and-forfeited-property">Justice Department</a>’s guidelines state that forfeitures “punish and deter criminal activity by depriving criminals of property used in or acquired through illegal activities.”</p>
<p>However, the <a href="https://oversight.gov/report/doj/review-departments-oversight-cash-seizure-and-forfeiture-activities">Inspector General’s office</a> noted “without evaluating data more systemically, it is impossible for the Department to determine … whether seizures benefit law enforcement efforts, such as advancing criminal investigations and deterring future criminal activity.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/186226/original/file-20170915-29578-ewukjl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Critics of civil asset forfeiture argue that it can make policing more about raising revenue than improving public safety.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/rear-view-traffic-officer-cautiously-approaching-554652241?src=BLnKw0rBmzBYdpKmWYQMSw-1-0">vincent noel/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. What is the scale of this confiscation?</h2>
<p>The federal revenue raised through this practice, which emerged in the 1970s, mushroomed from $94 million in 1986 to a high of $4.5 billion in 2014, according to the <a href="https://www.justice.gov/afp">Justice Department</a>.</p>
<p>The Justice Department says it returned <a href="https://oversight.gov/report/doj/review-departments-oversight-cash-seizure-and-forfeiture-activities">more than $4 billion</a> in forfeited funds to crime victims between 2000 and 2016, while handing state and local law enforcement entities at least $6 billion through “equitable sharing.”</p>
<p>The scale of seizures on the <a href="https://ij.org/report/forfeiture-transparency-accountability/#key_findings">state</a> and local level is less clear.</p>
<h2>5. What happened during the Obama and Trump administrations?</h2>
<p>Under the leadership of <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-findings-two-civil-rights-investigations-ferguson-missouri">Attorney General Eric Holder</a>, the Obama-era Justice Department determined that civil asset forfeiture was more about making money than public safety. It then <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-prohibits-federal-agency-adoptions-assets-seized-state-and-local-law">changed the guidelines for asset adoption</a>.</p>
<p>Beginning in 2015, joint state-federal task forces could continue to share forfeiture proceeds but <a href="https://oversight.gov/report/doj/review-departments-oversight-cash-seizure-and-forfeiture-activities">state agencies were no longer permitted</a> to ask the federal government to forfeit property they had taken on their own.</p>
<p>“<a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sessions-welcomes-expansion-of-asset-forfeiture-i-love-that-program/">I love that program</a>,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in 2017. “We had so much fun doing that, taking drug dealers’ money and passing it out to people trying to put drug dealers in jail. What’s wrong with that?” </p>
<p>Attorney General William Barr, Sessions’ successor in the Trump administration, has also <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/william-barr-confirmation-hearing-attorney-general-watch-live-stream-today-2019-01-15/">defended this policy</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_utq58zyZ7E?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Attorney General Jeff Sessions has expressed astonishment regarding the unpopularity of civil asset forfeiture.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>6. Congress and the states</h2>
<p>When Sessions changed the policy, legislative changes seemed possible. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman <a href="https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/misleading-and-wasteful-us-marshals-service-and-assets-forfeiture-fund">Chuck Grassley</a> sent Sessions a memo about how the federal funds obtained from seizures were wasted and misused. In some cases, Grassley wrote, the government provided “misleading details about some of these expenditures.”</p>
<p>The House of Representatives <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/350353-house-votes-to-curb-asset-seizures">voted in 2017 for an amendment that would restrict</a> civil asset forfeiture adoption.</p>
<p>The House also approved a <a href="https://walberg.house.gov/media/press-releases/house-approves-walberg-raskin-amendment-curb-civil-asset-forfeiture-abuse">bipartisan measure</a> restricting civil forfeiture on June 20, 2019. This one goes further though and would substantially curtail the federal government’s powers.</p>
<p>State governments have also tried to discourage this kind of confiscation. <a href="http://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/evolving-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws.aspx">New Mexico, Nebraska and North Carolina</a> have banned civil forfeiture. <a href="https://www.mackinac.org/mackinac-center-applauds-michigan-civil-asset-forfeiture-reforms">Michigan</a> has made it easier to challenge these seizures. <a href="http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/2016/09/california-governor-brown-signs-bill-protecting-californians-civil-asset-forfeiture-abu">California</a> limited equitable sharing, and <a href="https://www.alec.org/article/illinois-legislature-proposes-to-reform-states-civil-asset-forfeiture-laws/">other states</a> have increased the <a href="http://cjonline.com/news-state/2015-10-15/forfeiture-reform-aligns-likes-billionaire-charles-koch-aclu">burden of proof the government must meet</a>. But in many states, <a href="https://taken.pulitzercenter.org">investigative reporting</a> has shown that innocent owners continue to lose their property.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3028074">Georgia Law Review</a> article, I gave examples of other ways to keep police departments and municipalities funded, such as increasing fines and fees. </p>
<p>Unless the police pursue some alternatives, funding woes will continue to contribute to abusive policing practices that fall most heavily on those who can the least afford them: the poor and communities of color.</p>
<p>[ <em>Like what you’ve read? Want more?</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=likethis">Sign up for The Conversation’s daily newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/81973/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nora V. Demleitner is affiliated with the Prison Policy Initiative as a board member.
</span></em></p>Politicians on the left and right object to this practice, which the Trump administration is championing.Nora V. Demleitner, Professor of Criminal and Comparative Law, Washington and Lee UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/835472017-09-06T19:44:36Z2017-09-06T19:44:36ZPost-DACA: How Congress can replace Obama’s program and make it even better<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184990/original/file-20170906-7455-1mz9tbv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Democrats call for Republicans to stand up to President Trump's DACA decision.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Donald Trump has asked Congress to do what former President Barack Obama and his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program could not: Provide permanent protection from deportation for more than one million undocumented immigrants brought to this country as young children by their parents.</p>
<p>DACA, which Trump has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/us/politics/trump-daca-dreamers-immigration.html?mcubz=0&_r=0">ordered dismantled</a>, is widely viewed as the Obama administration’s most successful <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-politics-of-immigration-9780190235307">immigration policy initiative</a>. A year of field research among DACA recipients convinced me that helping them stay on the right side of the law is not just a moral imperative – it’s smart policy and economically beneficial to the United States.</p>
<p>Here’s how Congress might build on DACA’s successes.</p>
<h2>What DACA did well</h2>
<p>A large <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2016/10/18/146290/new-study-of-daca-beneficiaries-shows-positive-economic-and-educational-outcomes/">body of data</a> from national and local surveys confirms that during the last five years, DACA recipients took advantage of their protection from deportation to advance themselves and contribute to American society. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=411&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/184981/original/file-20170906-9875-1xsmzmn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=517&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Immigrant Jose Montes attends a DACA event.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/Nick Ut</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For example, a <a href="https://cdn.americanprogress.org/content/uploads/2017/08/27164928/Wong-Et-Al-New-DACA-Survey-2017-Codebook.pdf">2017 survey</a> of more than 3,000 DACA recipients found that 97 percent are currently employed or enrolled in school. Many have started their own businesses.</p>
<p>DACA recipients interviewed by my research team in San Diego County in 2014 reported that <a href="https://ccis.ucsd.edu/publications/books.html">DACA enabled them</a> to get higher-paying jobs. This made college more affordable and increased their tax contributions. DACA had encouraged them to invest more in their education because they knew legal employment would be available when they completed their degree.</p>
<p>Even temporary protection conferred important <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-daca-affected-the-mental-health-of-undocumented-young-adults-83341">psychological benefits</a>, including stronger feelings of security, belonging and normalcy. Our interviewees expressed satisfaction that they were able to do the things that everyone else their age was doing – like getting a driver’s license, buying a car or first home, or traveling within the United States.</p>
<h2>Room for improvement</h2>
<p>DACA worked well, but our <a href="https://ccis.ucsd.edu/publications/books.html">field interviews</a> revealed it had significant limitations.</p>
<p>Some employers were reluctant to invest in training DACA recipients, whose work authorization would end if they were unable to renew their permit every two years. </p>
<p>DACA recipients were ineligible for federal financial aid, which discouraged some from attending four-year universities.</p>
<p>They were also <a href="https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/DACA-and-health-care-2013-09-25.pdf">barred from coverage</a> under the Affordable Care Act, sometimes forcing them to choose between seeking needed health care and paying for college. </p>
<p>They could not travel abroad without advance permission from the government.</p>
<p>Enabling DACA recipients to gain permanent legal resident status would eliminate these and other hardships. It would make it easier for them to plan for the future. But is Congress up to the task?</p>
<h2>What’s on the table</h2>
<p>At least <a href="https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/DACA-and-2017-legislation-compared-2017-08-10.pdf">four pieces of legislation</a> have been introduced in Congress this year to provide protection from deportation for qualifying undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as minors. The most likely to gain traction among members of both parties is the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3591?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22HR+3591%22%5D%7D&r=1">2017 Dream Act</a>, sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin, Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Lucille Royball-Allard. </p>
<p>This legislation would grant “conditional permanent residency” to an estimated <a href="http://www.migrationpolicy.org/content/mpi-estimates-who-might-benefit-under-2017-dream-act-bills-congress">1.8 million undocumented immigrants</a> who arrived in the United States before age 18 and can meet requirements similar to those under DACA. It requires applicants to have been admitted to an institution of higher education, have earned a high school diploma or GED certificate, or be enrolled in a secondary school or GED program.</p>
<p>After eight years in conditional status, they could apply for permanent legal residence if they had advanced their education, met certain employment standards and committed no serious crimes. They would be eligible to become U.S. citizens after another five years. Altogether, it would create a 13-year path to citizenship.</p>
<p>Once they achieved permanent legal residency, so-called Dreamers could petition to have their parents admitted legally to the United States. This may become a sticking point for anti-immigration members of Congress, who have long opposed “chain migration.”</p>
<p>The reality is that in most cases, the parents of Dream Act-eligible young people are already here. Contrary to hard-liners’ claim that they will self-deport if immigration enforcement becomes sufficiently draconian, neither the parents nor their Dream Act-eligible children are likely to “go home.” Most have no family or economic base in their country of origin to return to. </p>
<p>Moreover, if the Dream Act is passed there is still no guarantee that Dreamers could successfully sponsor their parents for permanent residence. If a parent is undocumented, getting a green card requires the government to grant her a waiver for unlawful presence in the United States, which is granted only in cases of “extreme hardship.”</p>
<h2>Poor track record</h2>
<p>While there is a compelling case for some type of legislation to fill the gap created by DACA’s demise, Congress’s track record on this issue is dismal. After all, it was many years of congressional gridlock on immigration reform that led President Obama to create DACA in the first place. Legislation resembling the Dream Act has been introduced in Congress eight times since 2001, either as a stand-alone bill or part of comprehensive immigration reform legislation. It failed each time. </p>
<p>There is absolutely no assurance that congressional Republicans can now resolve their deep differences on this issue. It’s especially uncertain they will meet the March 5, 2018 deadline Trump has given Congress to pass a replacement bill before he completely shuts down DACA.</p>
<p>If the 2017 Dream Act fails due to Republican obstruction or a presidential veto, GOP leaders will have some explaining to do. Polls show nearly eight out of 10 Americans – including more than two-thirds of Republicans – <a href="https://morningconsult.com/2017/09/05/despite-daca-reversal-voters-tend-to-support-citizenship-for-dreamers">support granting</a> citizenship or legal permanent residency to Dreamers. They will want to know why Congress could not devise a way to stop punishing those who <a href="http://time.com/4927100/donald-trump-daca-past-statements/">even Donald Trump</a> has called “incredible kids” for the misdemeanor of unauthorized entry committed by their parents.</p>
<p>There is a risk that providing protection for Dreamers could become a bargaining chip. In return for signing DACA replacement legislation, Trump might insist that Congress appropriate billions of dollars to build his border wall or enact the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/354">RAISE Act</a> – a scheme that would cut legal immigration by half with the goal of reducing the country’s supply of supposedly “unskilled” labor. Evidence shows that passing the Dream Act is the right thing – the smart thing – to do, and the American people know it.</p>
<p><em>Hillary S. Kosnac, a public educator in Kansas City who has interviewed DACA recipients, and Jonathan Tamez, an immigration attorney practicing in Portland, contributed to this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/83547/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wayne Cornelius does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Congress has an opportunity to build on DACA’s success. An immigration expert explains how.Wayne Cornelius, Distinguished Professor of Political Science and U.S.-Mexican Relations, Emeritus, University of California, San DiegoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.