Dubai Stu

You can fly without ID. They put you through an "S" inspection. I did it a few years ago when I accidentally left my driver's license at home.

chollie

I imagine it's a bit trickier when a TSO is trying to clear undocumented immigrants. They can't settle for Costco cards. The only real solution is a full grope-and-swab (time-consuming).

TSA doesn't want to come out and say that if the screening process is done correctly, it doesn't matter whether or not the pax have ID, there's no threat to aviation security.

If TSA says that (which is true), then it prompts the question: why is the US the only country in the world that does this unnecessary-for-aviation-safety ID check.

Centurion

The entire ID check is guise to protect airline revenue so people do not fly on another ticket that will be worthless for non use or so gain an high elite status. The entire ID check is joke. All that matters is the individuals on the flight do not have weapons or devices to cause harm to others.

relangford

I have no problem with illegal aliens boarding flights without ID since the sole purpose of theTSA is to prevent weapons onboard. IMHO, few of these children present an air threat to the U.S. However, wouldn't it make more sense to fly them to Mexico City (or, wherever) than anywhere in the U.S.? This isn't OMNI, so I won't go on beyond saying that teaching children it is OK to break the law (enter unlawfully) and reap benefits from that act is not the best thing to do. One law, then another, then ....

bobunf

George Will: “We have to say to these children, 'Welcome to America. You're going to go to school and get a job and become Americans.’ We have 3,141 counties in this country. That would be 20 per county. The idea that we can't assimilate these 8-year-old criminals with their teddy bears is preposterous.”

Also most of the kids are seeking reunification with their parents or other family members, many of whom are legal residents. Maybe we only have to worry about 5 per county.

And really? Quoting breitbart as a responsible source? Weird.

You want to go where?

I have to disagree with this. While an ID check does protect airline revenues, that isn't the reason why the government does it. They do it in a misguided belief that people identified as potential terrorists will use their real identities when they fly, thereby enabling the TSA to thwart their efforts. Unfortunately, the only people they will catch are those people who aren't actually terrorists, just misinterpretations of their poorly assembled watch list.

catocony

These kids aren't Mexican. The Border Patrol can pretty much immediately repatriate a Mexican, after processing, by a simple bus ride back to the border. For non-Mexicans, it's a flight, and that takes time.

As to the rest, did you find that going over the speed limit when you first got your driver's license was the harbinger of your life of crime? Or did it start earlier, when you crossed a street without using the crosswalk? Did your path to being a crime lord really start when you slandered little Mary Jane Rottencrotch on the playground in the 1st grade when you called her a poopyhead when, in fact, her head had no poop on it at all?

China Clipper

This is valid logic, as well as being characteristically polite. If you went over the speed limit even once in your life, even by 1mph, then you must permit your country to be overrun by as many illegal immigrants as want to come in. Even if it's billions! Unassailable logic.

relangford

Going over the speed limit is a little different than entering a country unlawfully. By the way, have you checked to see what the penalty is in Mexico (just as an example, as I know these children are not from Mexico for which there are different rules) for being an "undocumented alien"? It is prison.

It doesn't matter if it is 20 or 5 per county; it is obeying a very serious law. BTW, I sponsored by sister-in-law to emigrate legally to the U.S. in 1973. When her number came up in 1988, she had married and had children, so no wish to move the the U.S. If we had known, she could have flown to Mexico and walked across the border. Were we and she stupid for doing the legal route? I guess it comes from your perspective. Also BTW, my wife was a LEGAL ALIEN, who waited almost a year after we were married to be able to get a LEGAL visa, but we both waited to obey the law.

catocony

Well, you seem to imply that if a kid enters the country illegally, they will then go on to break a lot of laws. That's a very silly assumption to make.

relangford

Of course, most won't go that route, but some - at least, some - will. It might seem silly to you, but when I lived on the Arizona-Mexico border and regularly saw the"children" with gang tatoos climbing over the fences near my backyard, it seemed that at least some had already decided on what kind of life to follow. IMHO, the answer is: make legal immigration much easier since we need these workers anyway, but keep some standards in place as to health (BTW, my wife had to bring chest x-rays and a doctor's sworn health status statement to first enter the U.S.), any criminal background, etc. And, the biggest problem isn't the children from El Salvador, etc., it is who else is coming in.

chollie

Unless the US has a direct connection to the doctor(s) in question, I wouldn't trust any health clearances, more so if they're from doctors in third world countries.

Too much opportunity for a doctor to start making $$ off 'clean' xrays and health certificates.

Of course, I'm sure you could find a doctor to do the same thing here in the US if you know where to look.

Blogndog

The law is crystal clear -- if you fear for your safety, you have the right to seek refuge in another country, and that country is obliged to give you such refuge. So the only laws being broken are by ICE agents and immigration judges who illegally repatriate refugees.

Wherever you are from, that's something your country's education system should have taught you as a child.

Blogndog

Again, arriving in a foreign country without documentation, when you are in fear of your safety is not "illegal." Refusing to provide such refuge, however, is a violation of law.

FlyingDesi

I am sure there is a difference here. When you fear for your safety, you cannot just *go* to any other country. You have to be at their borders at a legal checkpoint and apply for asylum. While the asylum process is pending, the host country can detain the refugee claimant. The claimants have to prove a credible and documented threat to their life. They cannot say that Mexico is filled with criminals, I might get shot 20 years later so I am here. Same way I cannot say, there have been bombings in various public places in India, I am scared I will be caught in one of them, hence I am applying for asylum.