Maybe don't try to cross the border illegaly then? Seems like a valid deterrent to me.
Inflicting cruelty on innocent children is not a reasonable deterrent in a civilized society that has any intention of being moral or just.
Also this is a great example of static thinking, because it completely ignores dynamic effects. Ban family separation, how humane! Second order effect: incentivize bringing children when committing crimes. A sane and compassionate, as well as moral and just, society doesn’t want to encourage bring your kids to crime day either.
For a misdemeanor the police are absolutely not going to take someone's children and ship them to detention centers in other states with no clear way of getting them back or even getting in touch with them. Most of the time a misdemeanor means showing up to court and paying a fine.
> Also this is a great example of static thinking, because it completely ignores dynamic effects. Ban family separation, how humane! Second order effect: incentivize bringing children when committing crimes.
That doesn't make any sense. Currently, even someone who is charged with one or more felonies does not have their children taken away from them and shipped elsewhere. The only time that would happen is in cases of neglect or abuse.
Does that mean our justice system is incentivizing felonies? No. Bottom line is that the law can be enforced just fine without a barbaric policy that harms children for the sins of their parents.
I'm an American citizen. I don't like that my visits to and from a mall being automatically collected by private company for a federal agency with domestic policing capabilities. One can construct a Fourth Amendment case critical of this practice that is completely agnostic towards the illegal immigration debate.