Regardless, Texas should be held liable for trafficking.
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
159 points (99.4% liked)
News
23296 readers
3394 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 46 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Human trafficking involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to obtain some type of labor or commercial sex act.
How can this be prosecuted as trafficking?
edit: Thank you everyone for all the responses. I appreciate it.
there's no way that texas would lie to these people or force them onto the buses. they're the model state of integrity and human rights.
Putting people onto a bus by use of force, fraud, or coercion, by itself, doesn't seem to meet the definition of trafficking.
Human trafficking involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to obtain some type of labor or commercial sex act.
Am I wrong? What am I missing?
Human trafficking is defined in the UN Trafficking in Persons Protocol, which supplements the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, as "the recruitment, transport, transfer, harbouring or receipt of a person by such means as threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud or deception for the purpose of exploitation".
https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/human-trafficking/faqs.html#h1
I don't think Texas' intent here is benevolent, and I don't think they are doing it without getting what they want.
Pretty sure it fits the definition.
However, it's not a clear cut case. Legally, the exploitation would have to be proven. IE who & how the people behind it are exploiting vulnerable immigrants.
Don't get fooled into "it's only human trafficking if it's transporting for sex/profit". It's a much broader definition
purpose of exploitation
they're being politically 'exploited'. and the republicants and their 'transportation partners' are profiting from it...
does that count?
Don’t get fooled into “it’s only human trafficking if it’s transporting for sex/profit”. It’s a much broader definition
I'll have to think about this. Thanks for responding.
So, just to be clear, you're OK with someone telling you to get on the bus? A bus headed to a location they aren't telling you about?
What if they took you to the train station and loaded you on a box car with a bunch of other people, is that OK?
I'm not defending Abbott's operation.
I agree, not trafficking. It's just run of the mill false imprisonment and kidnapping.
Fine, let's call it what it really is: kidnapping.
https://www.findlaw.com/state/texas-law/texas-kidnapping-laws.html
https://www.findlaw.com/state/illinois-law/illinois-kidnapping-laws.html
I think "smuggling of persons" is the most appropriate charge, but I'm not a lawyer.
Sec. 20.05. SMUGGLING OF PERSONS.
That's not enough to qualify for trafficking, you need the second part about labor/sex. Just sending a bunch of people to another state doesn't qualify.
Again you need to show the second half. Just moving people under false pretenses isn't trafficking. You need to show the intent to exploit them for some sort of gain, and it generally has to be of the forced labor/sex variety. That isn't happening here.
They are lying to the people. It's literal coercion.
What are they telling the people?
That they are bringing them to shelters in states where they will be taken care of, they'll be given jobs, they're going to go be processed for asylum, some said they were given money.
Driving someone to chicago and dropping them off isn't trafficking, but there is most definitely a slew of child-labor happening in this country, and the majority of the children involved are migrants who illegally crossed the border. There's a lot of coverage about this if you look for it. I imagine that Texas might be involved in some part of that process if they're the ones handling these people.
Edit: https://www.npr.org/2023/05/04/1173697113/immigrant-child-labor-crisis
So is this another fabricated case just so that Supreme Court can strip cities of some rights? I wouldn't be surprised if it was.
It does seem like a pretty easy case for them. The law sounds unconstitutional, infringes the right of free travel.
You don't have a Constitutional right to human trafficking.
The law isn't banning human trafficking. They specifically say that in the story. If you or I bought a one way ticket to chicago, the law would require the bus company to annouce that you or I are coming. It's just too broad. And it is what happens when you ask winners of a popularity contest to write and approve laws.
[–]
DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)
(1 children)
It also specifically says it's in response to all of the human trafficking.
And no, it wouldn't do that, it specifies that it applies to unscheduled buses, so the charter company doesn't need to notify Chicago when one person buys a ticket, but nice try.
I missed the unscheduled busses part. But that is still covering plenty of private citizens who have done nothing wrong. And it is easy for the intended target to avoid. They can just schedule the bus to run once a week and cancel any weeks they want due to low demand. So now you are only impacting private citizens.
Yeah, it's a poorly written law for sure. Not really even a good attempt to solve the problem
Sending migrants to new York and Chicago has probably been the best political move any Texas governor has done in a long time.
Using desperate and innocent people as political pawns is a good look in your eyes?
What if your mother/sister/brother/ or child moved to Sweden and she called you and said she got dropped off in a random city with no guidance or resources? You’d be happy with the Swedish government for that?
Forcing cities that claim to not care about illegal immigration to deal with less than one percent of the people Texas is expected to handle, has been great for them to realize the problem. These people are either existing with no resources in Texas, or being dropped off with nothing in New York/Illinois, I can't really say which is worse.
Bussing people is preventing other states from ignoring the southern border problems.
I don't think the issue is them "dealing with the problem", they've been doing exactly that, which has been reported on repeatedly since these shenanigans started. Remember Martha's Vineyard? NY/CHI/etc are upset because Texas is not communicating any of their actions to them, and misleading (trafficking) the migrants under false pretenses. I don't know how you can be on Texas's side here...
Texas doesn't really get a heads up either when migrants are planning to cross the border. It's not about being on sides, expecting any one state to just deal with illegal immigration isn't a realistic solution. You can see the same thing in Europe, with tensions between border and internal countries.
Its the intent that matters though. They dont get a heads up because people show up trying to better their own lives. When they dont give a heads up to other states and drop people off in freezing temperatures, they are intentionally hurting people. If Texas doesn't want to deal with it they should surrender the land a few hundred miles around the border. They won't because land is a valuable resource. They have more of that resource than many other states, dealing with having a border is part of the price of it.
The other problem is the reason they are doing it is to intentionally cause conflict with other states. That is the act of an enemy. Its cold war behavior. There is a reason I think of Texans as enemies of the US. They identify as Texan first, American second. They only care about getting ahead even at the expense of the country. We should absolutely accept refugees from that hellhole but we should also absolutely hold them accountable for being hostile to other states. They also get federal money to deal with it. Other states do not. They are stealing if they are offloading that responsibility on states who do not get funding for it. They can't whine about being solely responsible for it when they get funding and are also actively interfering with border patrol.
I must admit Texas is the best at propaganda and playing victim. It feels extremely dystopian stepping off the plane and immediately noticing the pictures of Texas on everything. It was so wild I couldn't help but laugh at how up their own asses they are. Their propaganda is so effective people in this thread really think they dont get funding and have to secure it on their own. Its just another lie they spin to win support and apparently its quite effective.
Im curious what happens if Texas provides the intent and communicates with the states they are bussing them to and the state says "no". Is it still Texas fault even though they communicated with them prior?
Lmao seems to me the best solution is to seize all of Texas' land around the border. If the border is such an inconvenience, surely they won't mind the feds taking it off their hands? Unless of course its just something for them to whine about. California has more illegal immigrants than Texas yet somehow manages to thrive. Yet somehow Texas can't do the same?
The biggest issue with this is not sending them to other states. Its using people as pawns and making their lives more difficult just to stick it to other states. They should be coordinating for that reason alone. They dont because they care more about sticking it to other states than about being decent humans. In my opinion that is not the act of a "united" state. Its the act of an enemy. Texas has decided to start a cold war with its hostile actions. The intent matters. They are intentionally making this a bigger issue than it needs to be just so they can act hostile toward other states. Thats fucked on so many levels. Im perfectly fine accepting refugees from Texas whether it be healthcare, their trans witch hunt, or their behavior toward illegal immigrants. That isn't the issue here. The issue is their hostile behavior.
Im of the mind they should not receive a federal penny while they are making attacks on other states and preventing the feds from doing their jobs at the border. I didnt elect Texans to oversee foreign policy. Its about time biden nationalized the national guard and reminded Texas that it doesn't run the show. Its about time Texans had to suffer for the suffering they inflict on others. Sucks for those not inflicting it but thats why I support a refugee program. Terrible people can keep being terrible because they never suffer for it. Making them feel the weight of their choices probably won't change them as they are rotten to the core, but enabling them only makes the rest of us complicit in their lack of humanity.
The only problem it makes anyone realize is how inhumane Texas and the people who support this are. Texans aren't very bright if they think its sending any kind of message about immigration itself. Its only showing more people how awful Texans are and how they care more about sticking it to other states than having any basic humanity. Anybody who supports this is a horrible person who thinks its acceptable to use human lives as pawns to throw tantrums with.
I really have wondered why this aspect. If they are illegal, then the feds should be handling them, and footing the bill. If they are legal it sure does get a bit grey. Sure it is a burden on texas for having a border. But they also get a ton of money from commerce generated by being on the border. Seems fair they foot the bill for the legal migrants.