Political pundits have had a glorious time lately, as President Trump has given them one opportunity after another in which to shine. The actions of the current administration have been hotly discussed to the point of saturation.
During the summer of 2018, they were able to latch onto an issue that would be sure to cause controversy. The media truly did make sure that the separation of immigrant families — indeed the caging of children — did not go unnoticed.
The limits of the media
Even as the talking heads on Fox News, CNN and the rest went around in circles debating the history, legality, and ethics of the Trump administration’s handling of border issues, there has been a larger concern at hand.
Are we listening to the right people on this issue? Are political analysts the right ones to be watching? Is this even a political issue?
Once you break free of U.S. media culture, which thrives on hype and feeds off the nationwide polarization that the current administration has engendered, calmer minds can prevail. In fact, we discover that there is an alternative way of looking at this deeply concerning issue: considering it as a human rights issue.
Immigration as a human rights issue
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) wants the U.S. to “preserve family unity” and also address the cause of the migrations through Central America and across the Mexican border into the United States.
The heart-wrenching separation of children from their families at the border was based on actual U.S. law. However, the Trump administration chose to handle this law differently from past administrations.
In 1997, something known as the Flores settlement decreed that migrant families cannot legally be detained for more than 20 days. Trump wants to hold these migrants longer than that. He doesn’t want the parents to go free while they await their asylum cases to be heard in the courts.
Removing the children from the equation places their families outside the jurisdiction of the Flores settlement so they can be detained while they wait out their cases.
By asking the courts to change that 1997 legislation, Trump’s Attorney General Jeff Sessions was asking permission to detain not just the parents but kids longer, too.
His take on the matter? He’s asking to keep the family unit intact. He may have a point. How you see the issue depends on which perspective you take. And, apparently, on which side of the political divide you reside.
But that’s putting children in the midst of a political debate, a place they shouldn’t be. There’s far more at stake since detention has deep, long-lasting effects on kids.
Detentions harm children
In the past, conditions at detention centers where families are held have been called “deplorable”. Unsanitary. This is one of the main issues brought up by supporters of the Flores decision when calling upon leaders to respect the human rights of immigrant children.
The National Academy of Sciences has issued a statement noting the devastating consequences of tearing kids away from their families at the border. Citing scientific evidence of several forms of potential harm and acute stress, among other long-term effects, they place the issue firmly in the realm of human rights.
Escaping disaster
It is important to keep in mind that, even without the issue of the kids at the border, the parents were fleeing life-threatening conditions in the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Conditions that also place their plight firmly within the context of human rights.
How should the world handle waves of displaced people? Many seem to be forgetting that the United States and others have signed international treaties declaring their support for “doing the right thing” concerning people fleeing danger in their own countries. It seems politics are overriding those promises.
Beyond politics
President Trump rode a political wave of fear and reactionary sentiment on his way to the White House. Immigration was a core issue for his campaign and it continues to play a special role in flavoring his decisions regarding asylum seekers and other refugees. It could be said that Trump owed it to his base to respond the way he did. It could also be said that it’s the only remaining issue that galvanizes the populist sector of the population.
However, we should not let that distract from the issue at hand. Pushing politics aside, we are still left with a burning debate over human rights, and that discussion looks nothing like the politically charged conversations so many people see every night on news-related talk shows.
In the age of Trump, where everything is politicized, it is more important than ever to note the distinction. Which conversation will you follow?
To read more about our take on human rights, be sure to visit our cluster page by clicking on the button below.
Edited by Russell Coates
This piece solely expresses the opinion of the author and not necessarily the organization as a whole. Students For Liberty is committed to facilitating a broad dialogue for liberty, representing a variety of opinions.
