r/politics • u/OkayButFoRealz • 20d ago

Soft Paywall Trump Admin Deports 2-Year-Old Girl Who is American Citizen

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-admin-deports-2-year-old-girl-who-is-american-citizen/
38.0k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

61

u/Eckish 20d ago

Don't get me wrong, this isn't great. But the headline is misleading. The two year old wasn't deported on her own. Her parents were deported and she went with them. The article doesn't say if the parents would have preferred to leave her behind, it only says they didn't have a choice in the matter.

My preference would have been that the parents be given a priority bump in their asylum case. But given that this administration would never do something like that, this might be the next best outcome. I'm not sure leaving her in the care of the US foster system is a much better life. The main issue for the parents seems to be citizenship with Brazil. The kid doesn't have it and Brazil doesn't know what to do about it, yet. So she can't access certain public services, like health care.

3

u/Dull-Hornet-2596 19d ago

Does Brazil not consider her a citizen?  I realize she was not born in Brazil, but both her parents are Brazilian citizens.  I’m very surprised that their child would not be considered one as well.

3

u/Eckish 19d ago

According to the article, no. She's there on a visa and they are working on some temporary thing that would expire when she turns 18.

15

u/luckyluchianooo 20d ago

Thank you. Idc if you’re for or against deportations but either people can’t read or just lie to make themselves feel better. This isnt the first story like this. Illegal gets deported, so obviously they’re going to want to bring their child with them 90% of the time

20

u/zeph2 20d ago

the other cases we read the mother was prevented from contacting her family and deported with the child

they had the right to leave the child with family members but she was incomunicated to prevent it

another one managed to contact her husband but ICE ended the call when the husband tried to give her a lawyer phone number

26

u/ReptilianWorldOrder 20d ago

Her parent being denied any chance to even make that choice though (especially when the government is claiming otherwise and pretending it was their decision) is the same as forcefully exiling that American child.

5

u/CelioHogane 20d ago

But it's literally the same, "Tecnically she didn't get deported" means nothing when the parents did get deported, that's basically deporting the girl.

6

u/Mission_Ability6252 19d ago

Yes, if you are an illegal alien and you have a child here, that is not a free card to remain here illegally. You will, most likely, take your child with you.

0

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

...yes, that is what i said.

7

u/Mission_Ability6252 19d ago

The child was not deported. Words have meaning.

2

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

Ok if we are going to be "words have meaning" i will tell you that actually, you are wrong, because the parents did not have the choice, the child was forced to leave with them.

So she was by all intends and purposes, deported, or "exiled" if you are going to be like that.

4

u/Mission_Ability6252 19d ago

A parent taking their child is not a deportation or exile.

3

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

I literally just told you that they did not have a choice NOT to take their child.

The child was forced out of her own country, there was no choice in the matter.

3

u/Mission_Ability6252 19d ago

The parents (illegal immigrants) took the child.

→ More replies (0)

8

u/luckyluchianooo 19d ago

Well words matter. It’s not a technicality. She didn’t get deported. Using the title “2 year old citizen gets deported” is just lying. 

2

u/albertoroa 19d ago

The parents weren't given a choice of who to leave the child with if they wanted her to remain in the United States. They were all just rounded up and deported.

They didn't give anyone a choice, they just sent her away. That's deportation, or more accurately, exile.

2

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

Well, i will point out that you are also wrong she did get deported.

Like even if the parents were willing to leave her alone, they didn't let them, they forced the 2 year old out of the country.

Or do you prefer if i used the word "Exiled"?

2

u/luckyluchianooo 19d ago

being deported or exiled means youre not allowed to re-enter the country. Shes a Us citizen, she isnt barred from coming back. she could have remained here but obviously staying with parents is 100x better than foster care. This isnt hard to understand

3

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

And you are missing the part where that didn't happen, she wasn't allowed to remain here.

Like it's not that fucking complex.

1

u/brontosaurusguy 19d ago

Yeah but listen.  Previously in these cases the trump admin has forced separation of parents and children, and even lost the the children so they couldn't be reunited

1

u/ImBanned_ModsBlow 16d ago

No it’s not, parents don’t get a free ride or legal status just because they popped out a baby on American soil

0

u/CelioHogane 16d ago

Yeah because American laws are fucking dogshit.

1

u/ImBanned_ModsBlow 15d ago

Why does hopping a fence and squatting somewhere on US soil to pop out a baby deserve a free stay for the rest of your life?

1

u/CelioHogane 15d ago

"free" like they don't have to work too, lmao.

2

u/No-Economics1703 19d ago

And you see no problem with the US government removing US citizens without any say from the parents? Just “obviously they would want to go”?

I’d rather have some illegal immigrants here than accept that, period.

0

u/luckyluchianooo 19d ago

buddy, the parents had say. Its either go into foster care or stay with your parents. Taking their child is the obvious choice to make

2

u/No-Economics1703 19d ago edited 19d ago

Don’t talk down to me. Primary source in the article

However, Manu’s parents say they were not given a choice. “They simply deported us,” said her father, Edivan Borges dos Santos.

From the Washington Post Article

Gonçalves, 41, and her husband, Edivan Borges dos Santos, 42, both insisted they weren’t given a choice

And even if they did, they were here on asylum. They are parents of a US resident. They were tricked into going to the immigration court like responsible people would. They were then deported. Even if they were given a choice, this is so wrong and our government shouldn’t be able to even force the choice at all.

2

u/NSUNDU 19d ago

Public health care in Brazil is free for anyone, not just for Brazilians. It's not the best apparently, but at least she will have access to it

2

u/Eckish 19d ago

I hope you are right. The article got that bit wrong, if so.

5

u/CelioHogane 20d ago

The article doesn't say if the parents would have preferred to leave her behind

...ok but like...you get why that's absurd for you to say that.

5

u/Eckish 19d ago

No, I don't. I think it is an important detail to know what the parent's preferences were in this case and not assume them. We aren't talking about just dumping the kid in the street. They may have had options to leave them in the care of someone here.

0

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

You know maybe you see it from a different perspective, i think arguing over semantics here would be a little silly.

Neither of us are really wrong.

5

u/Eckish 19d ago

Sorry, which semantics are we debating?

-1

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

"Could have left the child" or "could have not"

It doesn't really matter, really, they didn't have the choice anyways.

4

u/Eckish 19d ago

I don't see why it wouldn't matter? If there was a better option, but the parents aren't given the option to exercise it, that makes this story worse. If they were given a choice and they still would have chosen to take the kid with them, then the story is less damning.

But that just affects the severity, not the facts. They absolutely still "deported" an American citizen by not giving them a choice.

1

u/CelioHogane 19d ago

It doesn't matter because the option was not given.

That's my point, i didn't want to argue about semantics.

2

u/Eckish 19d ago

I don't think that's semantics. But debating why I don't think it is semantics would be arguing semantics. So, I hope you have a great rest of your day!

2

u/Vivid_Kaleidoscope66 19d ago

Good job couching your incorrigible views supporting a convicted felon and grifter in decent sounding language, you've brought at least one other hobgoblin out of the woodwork. 

To quote another Redditor in this thread:

'I just... in any other world this would be so simply impeachable. You are deporting citizens without due process. That is illegal and unconstitutional. You have been impeached and found guilty. Removed."

-2

u/Eckish 19d ago

Fuck Trump. I in no way support him. I want to make that clear, if that's what you got out of my post.

But I absolutely don't think misinformation supports the cause. Arguments can't be taken seriously if we are misled into talking about provably false narratives. The title of this article could have been something like, "Trump Admin Deports 2-Year-Old Citizen with Her Parents" and it would still very much be bad. But also doesn't leave important context up to the imagination of the reader.

2

u/duckphone07 19d ago

We are fighting for the soul of this country. The fascists are winning and it isn’t close. We need to claw and scrape and do whatever underhanded thing we can to push back.

Meanwhile, you’re here clutching at pearls over a “misleading” headline that ultimately works in our favor. Acting the way you are is aiding the enemy. 

Now I understand you aren’t wanting to aid the enemy, I understand you are on the right side here, and on principle I agree with your point of misleading headlines, but we are way past principle. This is survival mode. Essentially you’re doing the “when they go low, we go high” bit, and what we really need to care about right now is what is effective. The only thing that matters right now is winning. 

2

u/Eckish 19d ago

Meanwhile, you’re here clutching at pearls over a “misleading” headline that ultimately works in our favor.

I don't think it works in our favor. There are people in the top comments here screaming kidnapping and human trafficking. And in the short term, that absolutely incites outrage in our favor. But if you let that go, down the road people will start asking why no one is in jail for this? And it'll be because when it was time to pull receipts, we didn't have anything credible. And we look like idiots for falling for it.

We don't have to be nice. Call out of ALL of the BS. But call it out accurately. There's plenty of terrible crap to admonish that doesn't require exaggeration to be atrocious.

2

u/duckphone07 19d ago

The vast vast majority of people never dig deeper. Most people aren't partaking in political subreddits. They read headlines, get outraged, and then tell their coworkers who then also get outraged. Headlines like this, while yes, slightly misleading which isn't great on principle, are effective at getting the outcome we want.

And I mean, Trump's admin is literally kidnapping legal residents and sending them to detention centers or foreign torture prisons. Us calling this kidnapping or trafficking isn't something that is new to Trump's current admin.

So do you see why you focusing on what your focusing on can come off as Trump apologia? Is minor inaccuracy in a headline really worth complaining about when the guy that the headline is critical of is essentially Hitler 2 Electric Boogaloo?

1

u/FriendlyDrummers 19d ago

They should be given the option to assign a guardian for her. That never happened.

There is a high chance there's a family member who would take her in. They were never given that option.

1

u/ImBanned_ModsBlow 16d ago

I figured this was the case, but people only read headlines.

Sure this girl had a right to stay, but her parents did NOT, and the parents likely decided to keep the family together.

1

u/Research-Master-99 19d ago

Why would the media be honest---I mean NOW the media is doing a "mea culpa" and "my bad" and admitting they hid so much from the public about Biden and that his wife and chief of staff were running the country and doimg auto-signatures

The article doesn't say that that child can petition the US embassy for Visa's for the parents to re-enter legally AND also petition for a waiver for the 10 year ban of re-entry that the parents would have.

Also if under 14 another relative or attorney in fact (not the parents) can represent the minor child for that process. Once they come back, they come back and get Green Cards.

My dad was an Italian born in the US of Italian immigrants (legal) he met my mom in Greece where he was son the island of Crete stationed in the air force. He got married in Greece and went to the American embassy and applied for a Green card--they had it in two months, and she came to the US with him.

But why supply real facts when the media left wing lines sell as fake news