Although some crimes require mens rea ("guilty mind" ), others use a "strict liability" standard, under which the act itself regardless of intent, is all that matters. This often includes minor offenses such as parking tickets and driving infractions, as well as a few more major things like statutory rape and manslaughter.

But unlawful presence in the US is not a crime, it's a civil offense. That's why, aside from what's supposed to be a brief detention to confirm legal status and make arrangements, we don't imprison illegal immigrants, we simply remedy the civil offense by ending the unlawful presence (deportation). When you think of it as a civil offense, it's easier to understand why intent is irrelevant. Think about other civil offenses. The traffic cop doesn't care that you simply lost track of time, you still have to pay the ticket for parking at an expired meter. The IRS doesn't care that you made a math error, you still have to pay your taxes (although they might reduce or waive any additional penalties if you convince them it was an honest mistake and fix it promptly). Unlawful presence falls into a similar category. It's not a judgment as to someone's worth or value as a person, it's a simple statement that a person is somewhere they aren't supposed to be, and a remedy of that by removing them.

@cmadler I was under the impression that crossing the border undocumented was a criminal offense and that overstaying a visa or simply presence was a civil offense. That was my purpose in mentioning age of consent and the need for intent.

That aside, once the government has acknowledged the presence of a youth and allowed them to remain for years, the government has created a situation where it is immoral to displace individuals who have done everything most American citizens have done for their entire lives, except falling out of their mother on the right side of a border. It would be the moral equivalent of deporting Trump to Scotland or Germany now. Although that sounds wonderful, I have to be consistent and claim that would be immoral. I am not stating that we should have allowed them to stay or that we should allow more to register. I am stating that those who have grown up here are now our problem. This is not a statement on whether we continue DACA or not, but that the people in this status are our problem now.

@DJVJ311 Yes, it's the distinction between the crime of improper entry (punishable by imprisonment) and the civil offense of unlawful presence (remedied by deportation).

Passing the DACA violated existing immigration laws. Fixing that problem is a legal requirement. If the government continues to pass conflicting laws then what's the point in having laws? I support its repeal on that principal.

If you never repealed Jay walking laws but decided to add a law that said it was illegal to use cross walks, then you have created a legal paradox. Granted the repercussions are quite disperate, but it is an accurate analogy of the legal ramifications.

The great thing about America is the fact that you can start any nonprofit organization that you want. That means that instead of appealing to the government, you can take action to get these kids visas, scholarships, food and housing. That way you're not undermining the law and you save tax payers money. As a bonus it shows that you are capable of affecting change regardless of the will of people you disagree with. If this approach was taken instead of passing the DACA these kids would be better off and we could focus on important things, like balancing the budget so the government doesn't shut down ever 11 months.

@jayneonacobb As I said, I am not commenting on why DACA happened. The problem is that DACA created a group of people that the American government has allowed to grow up as Americans and the American government is now responsible for having created this group of people. Even if DACA is rescinded moving forward, the DREAM act(in principle) is the morally correct response of the government that created the problem by deferring action.

@DJVJ311 Morality is subjective, who's morality are we talking about? What makes the deportation of these people immoral? What about all the people who had to wait years and pay tens of thousands of dollars to come here legally? What about not undermining the foundation of our society? Be careful when arguing from the authority of morality, it is very easily beaten.

BTW, you forgot to mention that to become a USA Citizen is not mandatory. A person can be a Legal Alien until he/she dies. (Green card must be renewed every 10 years).

@twshield I'd love to see the people responsible for this legal blunder get sent to jail, but we all know they won't put Obama where he belongs. Or anyone else involved for that matter.

Your post is excellent....but a country CAN'T be run on emotions.

@jayneonacobb Trump is in the Whitehouse. Morality is certainly easy to beat. It is however far more dangerous to abandon it fully, because then we can just easily say things like "Why not undermine the foundation of society?" Moral relativism is more of a mud pit than a slippery slope.

Therefore, arguing from the perspective of normal conversational English, we created a group of youths who have lived there lives as Americans and the only thing that separates them from natural born citizens is where they fell out of the uterus. If a child was born 5 minutes after an illegal crosses the border, it's a US citizen and if it is born 5 minutes before we can deport it. That is fine when the child is a year old. When we have allowed that child to live here for 10 years, documented but illegal, deporting them based on a 10 minute difference is wrong by many sets of values.

@DJVJ311
Let me tell you an anecdote. Rosa is 18, she's pregnant and her family has decided to hire a coyote and illegally immigrate to the United States. They are doing this in order to give her soon to be born son, Juan, a better life through giving him American citizenship by birthing him in the United States. They make the dangerous trek, which endangers the lives of everyone, especially Rosa and baby Juan and they get into the U.S. just in time. Juan is born right there in the desert. The boarder patrol agent that caught them only a 5 minute walk from the boarder helped birth Juan. Juan is an American citizen because he was born 5 minutes inside the boarder. Rosa and the baby are taken to a hospital near by. Her parents are deported the next day. When Rosa is deemed fit for deportation, she too is sent back to Mexico. Juan is placed in foster care and raised by strangers.

Who's immoral in this story? Why are they immoral? Rosa and her parents are immoral. They first had to plan to break a law. Then they had to hire the coyote, which breaks yet another law. This is clear intent to commit an unlawful act. Because they hired the coyote they had to risk their lives crossing the desert. They also had to trust they wouldn't get double crossed by the coyote. Pregnant women are very vulnerable at 9 months, and so is the baby. This makes the hike very dangerous for Rosa and Juan. They also knew that if they were caught after Juan was born in America they would likely never see him again. Those choices do not sound like they are consistent with modern western morality, which is what I think you mean by "normal conversational English." *edited for two spelling errors, one clarifying verb (only) and quotation accuracy (normal).

@DUCHESSA
I agree, countries shouldn't be run on feelings. I tend to base my opinions on evidence. The evidence says Obama broke the law. Green cards are perfectly legal, and I don't understand why these people couldn't have been put into the process of getting one while in the DACA program. It would have made this debate pointless. Granted it may have raised another, but I think it would have been harder to oppose.

Sometimes suspending a law is the only option, but the way the DACA was written and implemented created a lot of problems. This is the same problem I have with the ACA, things could have been done in a smarter, legal way. But they weren't and now I'm being called a racist because I think forethought is important when governing a country. Not that any of you have acused me of racism, but it has been implied in this topic on another comment.
*edited for clarity on the last point.

@twshield
I agree, they do need to reach an agreement and they need to do so within the confines of the law, weather that means changing or nullifying other laws or not. The argument I'm making is that people are blaming the wrong people. I don't like Trump either, but i don't let it cloud my judgment. I don't like any politicians, but I hate bad arguments and baseless assumptions.

@jayneonacobb I actually meant a generic morality on values that are shared wider than modern Western morality, but modern Western morality is a fine context for the discussion.

I very clearly and repeatedly stated that I was not discussing the moral or legal implications of illegal entry. In the context of your anecdote, what I claim as immoral is keeping Juan in foster care for 6+ years and then deporting him. Regardless of how we find ourselves in that situation, many common values should cause that to be judged as a negative.

I have inherited many terrible projects at work. Regardless of how we ended up in the horrible situation I am handed, I put on my big boy pants and move forward. Trump and the Republicans need to do the same. Crying about interns and previous employees and the horrible decisions that landed us here is irrelevant. That's how business and most things work. If only we could elect a business man...

@DUCHESSA This is not about emotion. This is about taking responsibility for decisions made. Every leader in business or government inherits a situation. They often disagree with the decisions that lead to the situation, but the fact that they are assuming an office means they are assuming the onus of decisions made by that office. The president made this mess and the president must accept responsibility for that decision. It means nothing that the person occupying that office has changed.

@DJVJ311
I agree with your philosophy regarding the politics. I don't like Trump either. My point is by claiming Juan as an American citizen and keeping him here in the first place is tantamount to kidnapping. This causes me to reassess immigration law as a whole. As a result of that I need to know what went wrong and when.

The DACA went wrong in 2012 By being passed, then became a problem in 2018. That is what were discussing, the ramifications of an unconstitutional law. Not what to do with these people. They are here, many of them will grow up and be successful. That's awesome for our country. I'm not denying that. Im just saying the wrong people are being blamed. This could have been avoided if we weren't so divided as a nation and we reformed our laws appropriately. Not only that, but we have a better, legal solution to the problem already. Green card programs through nonprofit backing for one.

@DJVJ311 Yes, to cross the border into USA w/o papers is a crime. Needless to say the DACA kids -because their ages- can't be seen as criminals (their parents are) but they are, regardless, illegally in this country.

@MrLizard Although many Americans think of the DACA kids as "legal immigrants" the fact is they are illegal immigrants. Did you ask yourself why their parents sneaked then into USA? Because no USA but their own governments were the shitty ones.

You may help a neighbor but you are not obligated to support him forever.

@DUCHESSA My original comment that all these replies are on clearly states the illegal immigrant status. The rest of this thread has already responded to the rest of your last reply.

It’s funny you say that because when he was visiting Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Island he asked to speak to the President of the Country. The person at the helm has no clue that he is the President of both Territories. If he gets another 4 years I’m moving to Cancun

@Patti1955 That's right! I forgot about that. He totally didn't know. Isn't it remarkable that there are so many examples of his ignorance that we start to forget about individual instances?

As an immigrant myself, dear, I know a little bit more than many Americans born citizens about immigration....and I voted for trump (for very specific reasons).

Yes, he knows.....and didn't trow them toilet paper but rolls of paper towels. Without a doubt DT lacks manners and has the big mouth that scares everybody....because everybody has something to hide.

@macrobius I love your post, it is right one. While tRump called Africa and Haiti shitholes and decided he will throw out most of the people from El Salvador who came here seeking asylum and will be killed if they are forced back. Heir tRump wants to know why more people who live in the European Countries which have Aryans. He is a racist and he makes me sick

@WizardBill thanks for the laugh.

@macrobius Who knows....maybe because people have the right to decide who enters their homes....and who doesn't.

@macrobius Check again...

@macrobius Native Americans, my friend, ARE USA CITIZENS...and yes, they should have said right.

"And the kids they dance and shake their bones, and the politicians are throwin stones singing ashes to ashes all fall down"

@DelilahJones33 where is that line from?

"Throwing Stones" Grateful Dead@Rudy1962

<a href="https://play.google.com/music/preview/T77ooxzmqgzz2xftburukez22im?lyrics=1&utm_source=google&utm_medium=search&utm_campaign=lyrics&pcampaignid=kp-songlyrics&u=0#@Rudy1962" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" class="forumlink">[play.google.com]

@DelilahJones33 Thanks. Strange I never really listened much to the Grateful Dead. I believe I'm around the right age.

Get on it then @Rudy1962

That's a strong opinion. Did you read the DACA before you formed it? What is your evidence that not supporting this piece of legislation is purely based on ethnocentric bigotry?

Tell that to those that are waiting for yearsssssss to enter LEGALLY to USA.

Good point DUCHESSA.
I'm still waiting to find out if this belief is founded on faith or if the OP did research before forming an opinion. I'd also like to know why he thinks I'm "ethnocentric" (racist) for not supporting the DACA. Just so you know OP, you can dress up a personal attack any way you like, but it still means you've lost the debate, especially when it's your only point.

@MrLizard What evidence" The behavior of those opposing DACA.

@wordywalt
Ok, I'm not going to discuss things with you anymore because you have failed to supply any evidence for your claim. You didn't even attempt to justify it, but you're acting as if you hold some sort of moral high ground. I find that behavior childish and not worth engaging in. I truly do hope that you start to learn about civil debate conduct. I think you're probably an intelligent person, and I'd like to see you use that intilect for something more than trolling people on the internet. I'd also appreciate you not assuming that people with differing views than you are automatically bigoted. A lot of us have legitimate arguments that have nothing to do with race.

@jayneonacobb Obviously, I have hit a sore spot. "Methinks thou protesteth too much.

@wordywalt
*"The lady doth protest too much, me thinks." - William Shakespeare

Now I troll you.

See, it's really not that fun, is it? The difference between you and me is that you don't demonstrate a basic understanding of tact or logic, despite the fact that I know you are capable of doing so. Take my advice and sharpen your whit with knowledge. It will help keep you from being embarrassed like this in the future. That, and learn some manners, polite people are taken more seriously. The worst part of all this is you and I both knew you would make another off hand comment, and that if you did I would make you look foolish again, but you did it anyway. This is the last time I will interact with you until you show intillectual growth and maturity. I honestly do hope that you take my advice and that you learned from this lesson. Reason and rationality, my friend, I wish you well.

Most of the people against DACA are the Spanish speaking legal residents / citizens. Do you want to find out "why"?

@DUCHESSA Your statement is false.Your behavior is proving my point..

@jayneonacobb I was called ethnocentric / racist because I don't like to dress in black. The OP may be affected by the same way of thinking.

@twshield The Italians / French / Portuguese, Spaniards ...are also Latinos (many don't like to know it but they are) and nobody is afraid of them.

@wordywalt Dear...talk to Spanish speaking -legal- residents / citizen and then come back and tell us yout new info.

@twshield Did you mean "too many"? We are not referring to all of them but to the illegals. Please, guys, understand the difference.

Dear, if they were citizens they wouldn't need DACA.

@DUCHESSA I think your missing the point. The Dacca kids have lived in the US the majority of their lives. They are fully Americanized. They have proven themselves to be productive citizens.

@steve148 But they are not USA Citizens....regardless of their perfect command (not all) of English and a very Americanized way of life. Why is so difficult to understand that if a person didn't do the required paperwork he/she is not a citizen?

@steve148 No, thyey have proven to be "productive illegal immigrants".

@DUCHESSA Exactly what paperwork were you capable of filling out at age 2?

@steve148 Your answer is baseless....The fact is they are here illegally BECAUSE their parents entered USA also illegally. They don't have rights in USA....

@DUCHESSA They were put on the Dacca list because they complied with all the conditions required. Then shit hole Trump negated the agreement they made. Technically your right currently they have no rights. Ethically and morally they have every right.

@steve148 If those kids had fulfilled ALL THE REQUIREMENTS they would have became USA Citizens long time ago. The main requirement -to enter legally- can't never be fulfilled.
BTW, did you ask yourself why Obama didn't sign DACA? Everything was ready for his hancock

@DUCHESSA you really don't know what your talking about

@steve148 If that's what you feel....i guess 20+ years of volunteering to help many to regularize their status are nothing to talk about.

Dear, don't talk by the side of the mouth. As an immigrant myself...and from a country made big by legal immigrants...I see the need to know who enters the land. BTW, you have fun with your TV Guide....while I enjoy my Masters and beyond education.

@Stevil Pay taxes too. Not quite the boogeyman as pictured as. The government if any gives less to immigrants and none to refugees. I did the ration challenge last year. The entire week from scratch cost about $8 and I had bought more than in the kit. I had to weigh the ingredients and so on. I tried having maple syrup on a couple savory pancakes (plain flour and water + little olive oil) week after. So much pain.

Immigrants are illegal when they enter the country w/o visa as well. What you said is another way to be illegally in USA.

Refugee is an status the Mexicans entering USA don't have.

Refugee is an status granted by the DoJ....and if a person comes to USA from a country where the lives of its nationals are not in dangerous said person can't apply for refugee status.

Most DACA "members" don't get anything....the same with most illegals. I used to work for the DSS and, trust me, is almost impossible to fool the employees.

Are you aware the wall between Mexico and USA began to be built in Reagan's time.....that there is a wall between México and Guatemala (built by the Mexicans)...that after 9/11 several countries un Europe built walls to prevent illegals from entering their lands?

@DUCHESSA It would just be a misappropriation of tax dollars to build a wall the logic to construct it is failed logic. People that want to be here will find another will to take a long boat ride to the coast lines that are unprotected. look what happened and happens is some Asian countries people packed in like sardines to try and escape. Back it 1999 when I was in the Navy, we rescued a boat of 140 people escaping from Vietnam they were out in the ocean floating around on a disabled boat for like a month. They need to have a summit and find a better solution.

@azzow2 May be so...but to said the wall is an idea that originated with DT is ridiculous. I remember the wall between Mexico and USA was being built at the same time Reagan was saying: "Mr. Gorbachev tear this wall down (referring to the Berlin wall).
DT, doesn't want a wall...What he wants is NO to renew DACA and TPS...and is using the wall to achieve his real goal.

@azzow2 About entering USA I heard it all; remember I speak Spanish and people talk in front of me w/o realizing I understand what they say. No wall, body of water, mountains, valleys, jungles...will ever stop people from reaching their goals....but one thing is for sure: THE INFLUX OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (SOUTH BORDER) HAS GONE DOWN 56%.

While "illegal entry" is only a misdemeanor and carries up to six months in jail and deportation....it also means the person will never be allowed to enter USA again.

Is only the "illegal" side of the issue.

@twshield A CNN reporter researched some Republicans family immigration. Very interesting article.

[google.com]

they entered illegally (yes, they were kids) but illegally anyway.

@twshield Darling, that wall will never be finished. DT doesn't want the wall but to stop those engulfed in DACA. He's playing a good one here.

@twshield And about taxes paying for the wall...Whose taxes but yours were the one paying for the miles of said wall started by Reagan?

@twshield The ones who reject the undocumented the most are the legal / naturalized citizens....because the illegals make the decent ones to look bad....and this goes for every illegal regardless his/her country of origin

@twshield I assumed you were an American born.

You didn't read the DACA, did you?

See. if you enter a country w/o papers you are illegal. Sorry, but that's exactly the case.

they pay taxes

@twshield that doesn't change their legal status in the slightest. Lots of drug dealers pay taxes too, doesn't make dealing drugs legal. Not only that, but they were always illegal as the DACA is in conflict with pre-existing immigration laws.

I get and agree with what you say in the first paragraph of your post. There are legitimate arguments to be made against the DACA though, and they should be made. I don't agree with what I call the "immigrant crimminal argument." I think it weakens good arguments by association. I'm just clarifying the terminology.