- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/42834907
“The reason we’re here is because the government of the United States wants you to leave the United States,” Judge Ubaid ul-Haq, presiding from a courtroom on Varick Street, told a group of about a dozen children on a recent morning on Webex.
The parties included a 7-year-old boy, wearing a shirt emblazoned with a pizza cartoon, who spun a toy windmill while the judge spoke. There was an 8-year-old girl and her 4-year-old sister, in a tie-dye shirt, who squeezed a pink plushy toy and stuffed it into her sleeve. None of the children were accompanied by parents or attorneys, only shelter workers who helped them log on to the hearing.
Immigrant advocates and lawyers say an increasing number of migrant children are making immigration court appearances without the assistance of attorneys, which they say will lead to more children getting deported.
“That child will be ordered deported from this country — that could all happen without that child ever speaking with an attorney and given the opportunity to obtain representation,” Shah said. “The cruelty is really apparent to all of us out here in the field.”
holy shit
Judge Ubaid ul-Haq should be ashamed for even presiding over that farce.
They can preside over it, but they should just have dismissed the case with prejudice for the government not providing a lawyer.
Unfortunately the law does not obligate the govt to provide a lawyer.
Edit: In immigration court. This is not a criminal court.
Edit edit: The number of people unable to comprehend the difference is giving me insight into just how bad the education system is in the states.
Edit edit edit: Apparently me explaining the facts of the matter makes me a bad guy 🤦
deleted by creator
No argument there, this is a farce of a kangaroo court
In fact it does, the sixth amendment guarantees, and I quote, “to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”
This is not a criminal court. From the article:
That doesn’t matter
The constitution doesn’t make convenience exceptions.
The constitution specifically states criminal trials, which this is not. 5 seconds of googling would tell you as much, instead of making baseless claims here.
They didnt even need to googlr it, their own link specifies “criminal” defendants
Apparently it does?
It doesn’t as it is a major human rights violation
In the US there are certain human rights you can’t just wave way. They are alienable by definition. It is only a matter of time before these “trials” get challenged
Oh would you just read the article before spouting off already?
Haha your bio is spot on
It’s always hilarious when idiots speak with confidence. Makes my day
“Yet the immigration system does not provided [sic] court-appointed counsel to immigrants facing deportation who are unable to afford a lawyer.”
https://immigrantjustice.org/issues/access-counsel
Everyone’s right. It’s horrible, but it’s the way it has been. It’s just getting and will continue to get worse.
checks upvotes
Looks like lemmy is just as poorly informed as the rest of the internet
Funny you should say that…
I would read the bill of rights. It is very important to know as a US citizen.
This is about IMMIGRATION court. They are not US citizens, and the constitution specifically states the right to an attorney is only for CRIMINAL court, which this is not.
My own reading of that amendment is that it puts requirements on the US government, period. It does not limit things to US citizens.
Of course, I know that’s not the way the courts interpret the amendment. 😔
It’s not about citizens or not. It’s limited to criminal cases. Immigration cases are a different thing.
Why did you mention them not being US citizens then? 🤔
Ah. Yeah that bit’s irrelevant. I was just dashing a quick reply off to the other guy, and the last thing he mentioned was US citizens so I guess that wormed its way into my reply.
I emphasized the key word there. There is no guarantee in civil or other courts (which sucks - try finding a divorce lawyer once your ex saps the bank account lol).