DoJ doesn't want to protect immigration detainees from rape in custody.

[EFerrari]

ACLU is circulating a petition

President Obama and Attorney General Holder:
Protect Women Held in U.S. Custody from Rampant Sexual Abuse

The Department of Homeland Security and ICE have consistently downplayed the problem of sexual assault of immigration detainees. And now, the Department of Justice has proposed regulations that would exclude immigration detainees from protection under the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003.

This is an unthinkable attempt to deprive a specific and vulnerable group of people from protection against rape and sexual assault. And it comes despite Congress's clear intent to protect all people in government custody from such abuse.

Take action now. Urge President Obama and Attorney General Holder to make sure all immigration detainees have the full protection of the Prison Rape Elimination Act.

https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3733

I don't even recognize this country most of the time.

[Ship of Fools]

1. Done. Un-fucking-believable.

[EFerrari]

2. Thank you.

[msanthrope]

6. Not really. If you read the rule change, Holder correctly points out the conflict of law issue that

Congress failed to resolve--and in fact, failed to resolve in this summer's hearings.

Can you tell us how YOU would have the Executive branch solve a conflict of laws problem originating from the legislature?

I mean, instead of reading the petition, and knee-jerk Obama-bashing, you might try reading the proposed rule.

Then, you could perhaps formulate something more constitutionally relevant than a petition. You know, like a solution.

[Ship of Fools]

28. Um, I'm pro Obama, always have and will be.

No, I didn't read the rule. I don't have to read the rule. Rape is rape. Solution? Rapists suffer legal consequences, if not getting their balls whacked off.

Just one woman's opinion.

[msanthrope]

29. Had you read the rule, you would note that rapists are punished.

ICE's rules preclude sexual abuse of detainees. This is not the perfect solution, but if Congress will not act what should be done? Do we set PREA up for a court strike?

[FiveGoodMen]

3. There's no low that Obama won't sink to.

Yes.

It is HIS fault.

His, personally.

He's the guy in charge and he picked Holder.

[msanthrope]

5. Well, conflict of laws of Congress isn't Obama's fault. How would you have the executive branch

resolve the easily-noted conflict of laws from the legislature???

I think the ACLU is correct in questioning this, but can you tell us how YOU would resolve this constitutional issue?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msanthrope]

15. Downthread, you couldn't distinguish between federal agencies and federal laws.

I suggest reading the proposed rule.

Then you can tell us all what you propose to solve the conflict of laws.

But I suggest you try naming the laws, first. Not the agencies.

[LanternWaste]

19. Using my bully pulpit to bring it to the awareness of the public

"but can you tell us how YOU would resolve this constitutional issue?"

Using my bully pulpit to bring it to the awareness of the public, the legislature, and all relevant governmental agencies. Hammer the message incessantly until appropriate action is taken. Use my position as President to advertise this far and wide.

It's a start... much like the ACLU bringing this to out attention. :shrug:

(However, I do realize the existence of the simplistic belief that many people think the President is unable to affect or pressure laws of Congress in any capacity ay all)

[msanthrope]

21. Well, it's a bit late--comment period has closed, and the Senate's hearings this summer

didn't resolve either the conflict of laws issue, or the collective bargaining issue.

If you think the President is going to convince this Teabagger Congress to back down on the unfunded mandates issue, I can only say, bless you.....

Look, there's very little the Executive can do to make Congress do its job. Madison sort of set it up that way.

[dionysus]

17. lol. yes, he's pro prison rape.

:crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:

[msanthrope]

22. Of course. I apparently am, too, because I correctly pointed out that the AG

of the US recognized a conflict of law originating out of PREA, and thus proposed a rule as a work-around.

I mean, damn those pesky laws and separation of powers!!!! Why can't the Executive rule by fiat???? That's what Chavez does when he has these problems.

[msanthrope]

4. How would you suggest the DOJ handle the conflict of law issue and the union issue without seeking

exemption?

I think that the hearings over the summer put the onus on Congress to resolve the conflict. How would you have the DOJ do it without violating their own constitutional mandates?

I love the ACLU, and I think that they are right to question this....but Congress is responsible for resolving the conflict of laws, here.

Instead of Obama-bashing, can you comment on how you expect the Executive Branch of government to implement a conflict of laws from the Legislature?

(Hint--try reading the proposed federal regulation. Sure, it's more dense than a petition, but if you have any suggestion on how to solve this constitutional question, please let us know.)

And I haven't even touched the ICE collective bargaining issue. Which I suppose you probably have an answer to, which you will share.

[EFerrari]

7. There is no conflict of law. Holder's argument is that DHS

and HHS operates some of these facilities and not DoJ.

That doesn't preclude him from getting off of his bureaucrat's @ss and putting a system in place.

Your post is bullshit as per usual.

[msanthrope]

13. Um, no. That's not the conflict of laws. Why don't you read the regulation proposal, and

then name the two federal laws in conflict?

Unless you want me to name the two laws?

FYI--HHS and DoJ are not laws--they are agencies of the federal government.

[FiveGoodMen]

8. "the Department of Justice has proposed regulations that would exclude"

Some here are blaming Congress.

Is the quoted line correct or not?

"the Department of Justice has proposed regulations that would exclude"

[msanthrope]

24. Well, the Executive is charged with implementation of the laws of Congress.

Thus, each law has rules and regs regarding that proposed by the agency that oversees its enforcement.

When the Executive gets two laws in conflict, this does not relieve the Executive branch of its duty to enforce both laws. In a perfect world, Congress would see conflicts and amend. ha, ha, ha......

When Congress doesn't act, the executive will propose rules that try to resolve two competing agendas. These rules can be struck by the courts, modified by Congress, etc....

Here, you have a conflict with PREA and unfunded mandates. What Holder proposes is exempting these detention facilities so as not to disturb the laws on unfunded mandates to locals. He correctly points out that the detainees would then be covered under ICE rules, and submits them. (I'm not a fan of this, but this is what happens when you have a Congress that refuses to do its job.)

Of course, Congress could just fund it. Ha ha ha ha .....

[EFerrari]

9. Prison Sexual Assault Reforms Won't Cover Immigrant Detention Centers

WASHINGTON -- Time is running out for the public to weigh in on a proposed Department of Justice rule that would not include immigrant detention centers in corrections-system standards designed to prevent rape and other forms of sexual assault.

Based on a report from the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission created under President George W. Bush, the new policy would apply a broad range of hiring and workplace standards to adult prisons and jails, local-level lockups and community confinement areas, as well as juvenile facilities. The policy would require background checks on new hires, for example, and forbid hiring workers with a history of sexual abuse. It would also mandate the development of systems to facilitate the reporting of sexual assault in such facilities.

But the new standards would not apply to immigrant detention centers or facilities that house unaccompanied immigrant children -- because, the Justice Department says, they are principally under the purview of other federal agencies -- despite reports of sexual assault.

snip

But logistical issues do not obviate the need for protections against sexual abuse, advocates say. Although there is no empirical data on the rates of sexual assault in immigrant detention centers, there have been numerous reports of such incidents.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/03/prison-sexual-assault-immigrants_n_843871.html

[msanthrope]

20. Interestingly, your article is pre-hearing on this matter. What happened after the comment period

was closed and the Senate held hearings on this matter this summer?

Did they address the rule change, and suggest a fix for the conflict of laws that Holder outlines in the rule change?

[dembotoz]

11. did not realize bush was still president

[msanthrope]

18. He's not...but Obama can't make the Congress resolve conflicts of law

if they refuse to.

In the draft regulations, Holder correctly points out that 'unfunded mandates' to the states are in conflict with a 1995 law.

If anyone on this board is smart enough to figure out how to resolve said conflict, I think they should tell the Senate.

[EFerrari]

12. Here is a link to the Senate Judicary Committee.

Dems include Franken, Feinstein, Durbin, Whitehouse

http://judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm

[msanthrope]

16. Kindly tell these Dems how you would resolve the conflict of laws for them?

[Bobbie Jo]

27. Facts and Reality be Damned.

The standards for truth and accuracy have taken a nose dive around here.

Lots of headline readers and rec'ers.

[EFerrari]

14. Link to House Judiciary Committee

Democrats include Conyers, Nadler, Lofgren, Cohen, Waters, Berman

http://judiciary.house.gov/about/members.html

[msanthrope]

23. Awesome. Let me know when they get back to you. nt

[Romulox]

25. Recommend. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. Done. K&R

[fascisthunter]

30. Institutionalized Snuff

how many wierdos in our government actually get off on rape and breaking human beings? Don't tell me... it's part of their "Enhanced Interrogation" process.