“we need to take away children; if care about kids, don’t bring them in; won’t give amnesty to kids; to people with kids” (strikethrough in original)."
NEW: DOJ IG releases report on the zero tolerance policy -- aka the family separation policy -- finding that the Attorney General was the driving force behind it, failed to prepare for it, and that Jeff Sessions knew it would lead to children being separated from their fams.
“we need to take away children; if care about kids, don’t bring them in; won’t give amnesty to kids; to people with kids” (strikethrough in original)."
focus on increasing immigration prosecutions came at the
expense of careful and appropriate consideration of the impact of family unit prosecutions and child separations."
https://t.co/1AvpFa6z6N
"We have now heard of us taking breast feeding defendant moms away from their infants, I did not believe this until I looked @ the duty log & saw the fact we had accepted prosecution on moms with one and two year olds"
response, the courts are turning to us for help with providing contact information to defense counsel."
and his staff were intimately involved in.'"
"USAOs did not understand the zero tolerance
policy to apply to family units & US Attorneys expressed surprise when they learned in early May 2018 that DHS would begin referring family unit adults for prosecution"
"we did not find evidence that DOJ leadership had discussions about the zero tolerance policy or family separations with HHS prior to the announcement."
implemented.…"
"according to Hamilton, DHS unexpectedly withdrew Nielsen from participating in the event “to protect Secretary Nielsen from bearing the wrath of the policy.”
More from Government
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".