The NY Times delivers two papers in one! The editors deplore the humanitarian crisis at the border and continues to play along with the Administration line that the influx of young illegals has no connection to Obama's executive implementation of the DREAM Act.
Migrants Flow in South Texas, as Do Rumors
By JULIA PRESTON JUNE 16, 2014
While most men are held and processed quickly for deportation, border authorities struggling to manage the influx have been releasing pregnant women and parents with young children, allowing them to join family members living here and issuing them a deportation hearing notice. Migrants have sent word back home they received a “permit” to remain at least temporarily in the United States, feeding rumors along migrant routes and spurring others to embark on the long journey.
“I heard in Guatemala that people were caught by immigration, but then they let them go and gave them a permit,” said Carmen Ávila, 26, who is seven months pregnant and came with her 4-year-old son, Jostyn. “The word got around and that’s why so many people are coming.”
Migrants here said they planned to attend their court hearings and fight for a chance to stay. But officials have no specific plan to monitor compliance, and based on the pace of the overburdened immigration courts, it seems highly unlikely that any of the migrants would be deported soon.
We get this odd detail:
In a perplexing problem for the Border Patrol, many women and youths who cross the Rio Grande illegally now run toward agents rather than away from them, believing that being caught is the first step toward an entry permit.
The Times editors leave their readers with a plea for immigration reform, and a puzzle:
It’s infuriating to see the long-term reform that would ease the problem — by opening more routes to legal immigration, and restoring mobility to a population trapped on this side of the border — being sent to its doom by the short-term political scheming of Congress’s hard-core anti-immigrant, anti-Obama caucus.
In their world, people are ignonring current US law to flee terrible conditions. But if the US law was reformed and their entry remained illegal they would... respect the new law and remain in those terrible conditions? Why?
In my world they are coming becasue they believe there is an excellent chance they will be allowed to stay, and current practive suggests they are correct.
Oh, well - yet more evidence proving I will never have the intellectual agility to be a Progressive.