🐱 No, Donald Trump’s separation of immigrant families was not Barack Obama’s policy

CatParty
http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...ald-trumps-separation-immigrant-families-was/

Critics of the Trump administration’s separating of families illegally crossing the U.S. border with Mexico have characterized the practice as a distinctly cruel feature of Donald Trump’s presidency.

But some Republican commentators argue the policy is essentially a continuation of previous administrations.

"You know what's ironic? It's the same way Barack Obama did it," conservative commentator Matt Schlapp said during the June 15 broadcast of Fox News' America's Newsroom. "This is the problem with all of these things, the outrage you see coming from the left. There wasn't outrage over Barack Obama separating kids from adults."

While the Obama administration's immigration approach was not without controversy, it’s simply untrue to say he had a policy of separating families.

Trump policy
Let’s recap what the Trump administration is doing, before turning to Obama’s handling of immigration.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions in April announced a "zero-tolerance" policy, meaning every person caught crossing the border illegally would be referred for federal prosecution.

A good number of these people are adult migrants traveling with children. By law, when adults are detained and criminally prosecuted, their children cannot be housed with them in jail. Instead, kids are placed in a Department of Health and Human Services shelter until they can be released to a legal guardian.

Some 2,000 children have been separated from the adults they were traveling with across the U.S. border, according to the latest figures from the Department of Homeland Security. The children were separated from 1,940 adults from April 19 through May 31 as a result of border-crossing prosecutions.

Obama policy
Immigration experts we spoke to said Obama-era policies did lead to some family separations, but only relatively rarely, and nowhere near the rate of the Trump administration. (A Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman said the Obama administration did not count the number of families separated at the border.)

"Obama generally refrained from prosecution in cases involving adults who crossed the border with their kids," said Peter Margulies, an immigration law and national security law professor at Roger Williams University School of Law. "In contrast, the current administration has chosen to prosecute adult border-crossers, even when they have kids. That's a choice — one fundamentally different from the choice made by both Obama and previous presidents of both parties."

Denise Gilman, a law professor who directs the immigration clinic at the University of Texas School of Law, said immigration attorneys "occasionally" saw separated families under the Obama administration.

"However, these families were usually reunited quite quickly once identified," she said, "even if that meant release of a parent from adult detention."

In Trump’s case, family separations are a feature, not a bug, of the administration’s border policies, said David Fitzgerald, who co-directs the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies.

"The family separations are not the small-scale collateral consequences of a border policy, but rather, a deliberate initiative," he added.

Former Obama officials in recent interviews drew sharp distinctions between Trump’s policy and that of his predecessors.

The Trump administration's current approach is modeled after Operation Streamline, a 2005 program under the administration of George W. Bush, according to Obama spokesman Eric Schultz. The key difference, he said, is that while the 2005 program referred all illegal immigrants for prosecution, it made exceptions for adults traveling with children.

Jeh Johnson, Obama’s Homeland Security secretary from 2013 to the end of his presidency, said such separations occurred in rare cases, but never as a matter of policy.

"I can't say that it never happened. There may have been some exigent situation, some emergency," Johnson told NPR June 9. "There may have been some doubt about whether the adult accompanying the child was in fact the parent of the child. I can't say it never happened — but not as a matter of policy or practice. It's not something that I could ask our Border Patrol or our immigration enforcement personnel to do."

Obama’s top domestic policy adviser, Cecilia Muñoz, said the Obama administration briefly weighed the separation of parents from children, before deciding against it.

"I do remember looking at each other like, ‘We’re not going to do this, are we?’ We spent five minutes thinking it through and concluded that it was a bad idea," she told the New York Times. "The morality of it was clear — that’s not who we are."

Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute, said that, as a deterrent, the Obama administration began prosecuting border-crossers who had already been deported at least once.

"But very few of those people crossed with children, so it didn’t become as visible an issue," he said. "There was some child separation and some pushback by immigrant advocacy groups around that, but the numbers were quite limited.

"The idea of prosecuting people who cross the border illegally the first time they are caught is entirely new," he added. "So we haven’t seen children separated from their parents on anything near this scale before."

The Obama administration’s immigration policy was not without controversy, to be sure.

In 2014, amid an influx of asylum seekers from Central America, the administration established large family detention centers to hold parents and children — potentially indefinitely — as a means of deterring other asylees. The practice eventually lost a legal challenge, resulting in a 2016 decision that stopped families from being detained together.

Schlapp told us that his claim referred to the fact that both Obama and Trump are bound by the same procedures prohibiting family detention.

However, Schlapp’s full comment gives the misleading impression that Trump is essentially continuing Obama’s policy, when in fact Trump’s zero tolerance policy is quite different.

Our ruling
Schlapp said the Trump administration’s policy of separating families is "the same way Barack Obama did it."

Obama’s immigration policy specifically sought to avoid breaking up families. While some children were separated from their parents under Obama, this was relatively rare, and occurred at a far lower rate than under Trump, where the practice flows from a zero tolerance approach to illegal border-crossings.

We rate this False.
 
This whole “yeah well Obama did it too that means Trump is off the hook” circus is not helpful and does nothing to actually solve the problem of America’s broken immigration system.
It doesn't, but thankfully we have an administration that's moving to actually address the problem now, instead of sweeping it under the rug for the 20th time in a row. The only reason people keep bringing it up is because context-sensitive outrage shouldn't be considered legitimate. This problem and these laws have been on the records for years and years and they never kicked up a single fit about it until they could lay the blame on someone else's shoulders. As soon as that criteria was met, the media launched an all-out clusterfuck.

The sum of it is that what they couldn't accomplish through legislation and the proper enforcement of existing laws, the Democrats are now trying to accomplish through political tantrum, and they're using the media as a propaganda tool to whip the public into a literal frenzy over something that should have been addressed a long time ago. None of their outrage is real.
 
It doesn't, but thankfully we have an administration that's moving to actually address the problem now, instead of sweeping it under the rug for the 20th time in a row. The only reason people keep bringing it up is because context-sensitive outrage shouldn't be considered legitimate. This problem and these laws have been on the records for years and years and they never kicked up a single fit about it until they could lay the blame on someone else's shoulders. As soon as that criteria was met, the media launched an all-out clusterfuck.

The sum of it is that what they couldn't accomplish through legislation and the proper enforcement of existing laws, the Democrats are now trying to accomplish through political tantrum, and they're using the media as a propaganda tool to whip the public into a literal frenzy over something that should have been addressed a long time ago. None of their outrage is real.
Basically they’ve thrown themselves to the floor, kicking and screaming and threatening to hold their breath until they get full amnesty.

And Trump looks at them and says “No.”
 
7d7e4f80e10fc74fc6e0f9b37a65257c.png

Aight hol' up. Time out.

That's the fucking "Supreme Leader" Ayatollah Khameini of Iran, the head of the Iranian Mullahs. When the fucking Ayatollah is advocating for the exact same political stance as you, maybe it's time to ask some fucking questions.
 
That's the fucking "Supreme Leader" Ayatollah Khameini of Iran, the head of the Iranian Mullahs. When the fucking Ayatollah is advocating for the exact same political stance as you, maybe it's time to ask some fucking questions.

Not saying Trump is anywhere remotely close to the Ayatollah but one does have to admire this level of shitposting.
 
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but pre-Obama the use of Executive Orders were rare or the president didn't really have the power to use them right? I recall one of the issues when Obama was in office was giving himself extra power to overrule congress or state laws. So in a sense he basically set it up so Trump could swoop in with these EO's if he so wished.

I have seen more in-tune pundits suggest he's done this thinking someone will then go to court to shut the order down as they dislike even more the fact that overruling the Flores case will also mean the state can then hold kids in detention (with parents now) for longer than 20 days.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Johnny Bravo
Thank you for the answer - but then that's confusing. Most of Obama's presidency we heard a lot about how Obama needed congress on hand for a lot of his big media-attention proposals like healthcare ect - why didn't he just EO a lot of that?

Obama didn't use EOs as much as those on my side of the political spectrum would like you to believe. Most of his executive power was used to spy on Americans and kill people.
 
Obama didn't use EOs as much as those on my side of the political spectrum would like you to believe. Most of his executive power was used to spy on Americans and kill people.

This article lists his EOs and memoranda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_executive_actions_by_Barack_Obama

That said, it's interesting to watch this absolute clusterfuck from outside the US and to see just how little good faith discussion is happening about it in both traditional media and online.
 
It's okay because now that Trump signed an EO ending the practice of separating families, the very same news outlets that claimed there were no such policy saying you had to detain them seperately are admitting that holding families together would be illegal.
If this doesn't make it clear that this whole thing has just been a push for return to Obama era Catch and Release I don't know what will.
dac494e789.png
 
Last edited:
The media is constantly call Trump an idiot, and they constantly fall into these little traps where they end up admitting they had an agenda to push all along. The only part I don't like is that most of the plebs seem to carry on swallowing all the bullshit whole regardless.
 
This whole “yeah well Obama did it too that means Trump is off the hook” circus is not helpful and does nothing to actually solve the problem of America’s broken immigration system.
The reason I hang on it when I talk to TDS sufferers isn't to let Trump off the hook. I won't let it go because these people who claim they want to solve the problem are liars. As soon as someone with the letter D next to their name wins the oval office, that president will keep perpetuating the same injustices and these people will fall silent and think all is right with the world. For me it's not about defending Trump, it's about calling out the bad people around me.
 
The reason I hang on it when I talk to TDS sufferers isn't to let Trump off the hook. I won't let it go because these people who claim they want to solve the problem are liars. As soon as someone with the letter D next to their name wins the oval office, that president will keep perpetuating the same injustices and these people will fall silent and think all is right with the world. For me it's not about defending Trump, it's about calling out the bad people around me.
db7813aca94768944f1818165e6854ff.png

c5c643229557c1cd6d840f7ffd605b14.png

That's basically the gist of it. He's talking about this story which is based on this lawsuit, which I believe is an extension of the report that the ACLU put out, detailing all of the abuses and problems that were allegedly being carried on in the detainment centers from 2009-2014. I won't argue that if even a single one of these allegations and reports is true that it's a serious problem that should be addressed, but I'm absolutely going to refuse to let them frame this as something that the current administration should shoulder the blame for, while assigning none at all to the prior, even though it happened on their watch.

As far as I'm concerned, if we're going to have this discussion we're going to do it legitimately. It makes absolutely no sense at all to not only completely ignore the problems with the prior administration, but to shove those problems forwards and blame the next person in line. The simple fact that they completely sat on this kind of thing for eight years and didn't start making a racket until just now leads me to believe that not a single breath of their outrage is real, and not a single bone in their body wants to see this problem fixed, or will even care in the next week or two.

They didn't actually care about the taxes, they didn't actually care about North Korea, the economic numbers, the unemployment rates, the homelessness problem, the Veterans Association problems, the healthcare problem, the gun control debate, or the DACA legislation, so why the Hell should I assume they actually care about this, either?
 
As far as I'm concerned, if we're going to have this discussion we're going to do it legitimately

No we aren't. It was never, ever about having a discussion. It's about using whatever you can to attack your political opponents. Once the media figures they've got enough mileage out of this outrage, they'll find something else. This entire issue will be thrown back under the house. If there was an actual discussion, the Democrats would have to admit that their outrage is half their own fault because they didn't give a shit for 8 years, and that would harm their media image. The media at the moment is little more than the advertising/marketing arm of the DNC.
 
It's okay because now that Trump signed an EO ending the practice of separating families, the very same news outlets that claimed there were no such policy saying you had to detain them seperately are admitting that holding families together would be illegal.
If this doesn't make it clear that this whole thing has just been a push for return to Obama era Catch and Release I don't know what will.
dac494e789.png
This is why I said don’t even let them into the country and stop processing asylum claims for East Indians and Latin Americans.

It was obvious from the start, they just want to let them in and not held because muh feelings.
 
No we aren't. It was never, ever about having a discussion. It's about using whatever you can to attack your political opponents. Once the media figures they've got enough mileage out of this outrage, they'll find something else. This entire issue will be thrown back under the house. If there was an actual discussion, the Democrats would have to admit that their outrage is half their own fault because they didn't give a shit for 8 years, and that would harm their media image. The media at the moment is little more than the advertising/marketing arm of the DNC.

Couldn't have said it any better myself.

Bravo.
 
Back