Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

enkonta t1_j1wqiqa wrote

The thing I find interesting about this case, compared to the student loan issue is, in this case, is that the Biden Administration is claiming the pandemic is essentially over, while the republicans are arguing that the pandemic still poses a threat and that is why Title 42 should remain in effect. However, in the student loan case...the current administration is arguing that the impact of the pandemic still affects borrowers and that's why relief is warranted, however, republican plaintiffs are arguing that the pandemic is over and relief is not justified or legal on these grounds...

123

producerd t1_j1x6tpb wrote

Thank you! I was scrolling to see if anyone on any similar threads would mention it. You are the first one I found so far. I am afraid they (scotus) will decide the " health emergency" is over by the time they get to the student loan forgiveness. 😬 ...because who can tell them they can't?

24

Dolos2279 t1_j1xbx1n wrote

This appears in every single aspect of U.S. politics today. It's a level of tribalism that is just fucking bizarre.

23

Gryzzlee t1_j25pl10 wrote

Nah. If Republicans think title42 is still necessary then they should also believe in the lingering economic impact of the pandemic.

It's easy to understand how old mandates might no longer be necessary but the effects of the cause for those mandates are still being felt.

1

Dolos2279 t1_j25rzhl wrote

The Biden admin is now requiring anyone traveling from China to have a negative COVID test so clearly it is still a concern of theirs that people from other counrries could be spreading it here. It is quite literally impossible to require that for people illegally crossing the border so Title 42 would be a great option for an administration supposedly concerned with the spread of COVID. Due to the tribal stupidity I mentioned in my initial comment, they have boxed themselves into not being able to implement any type of immigration restrictions so despite it being wise policy, and despite them being fully aware that it is wise policy, they have to be against Title 42.

2

Gryzzlee t1_j2623wm wrote

Yeah but that mandate is completely different from title 42 which covers land borders and is specifically for air trips from China a country where we know the virus is seeing a resurgence AND is known for their disinformation.

With that said the restriction mandates all air trips from China require a negative covid test. If the test is passed then it's business as usual similar to the immediate post pandemic mandates.

Title 42 gives the authority to expel migrants without any exception in the interest of public health. Dropping it back to title 8 like the Biden Admin wants isn't going to see any spike in Covid as immigrants will still be tested when they invoke asylum seeking privileges.

And this does nothing about illegal immigration anyways.

−1

[deleted] t1_j1y332s wrote

[deleted]

17

enkonta t1_j1y3zne wrote

I think the eviction moratoriums are a little different in the sense that you have different levels of government. With title 42 and student loan debt relief, you see contradictory arguments from the same level.

4

zanzabarism t1_j1wx7s3 wrote

Yeah it doesn’t make sense unless the debate is being consciously shifted in concert to disabuse both sides from their viewpoints while exchanging them for more congenial views that include maintaining the status quo.

15

low_dmnd_phllps t1_j1zbaqw wrote

As far as I'm concerned, there are two fundamentally different issues at stake. There is no doubt that people are still feeling the economic impact of COVID and that the student loan payment pause is helping to mitigate this. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that there is a mass influx of COVID cases being brought into America by people entering the US at the southern border. And there never was. It makes sense to keep the payment pause in effect while opening the border to asylum seekers. It's not that hard to differentiate the two issues.

8

[deleted] t1_j1zbn4p wrote

[deleted]

−4

low_dmnd_phllps t1_j1zd20x wrote

COVID can still be declared a national emergency without completely shutting down the border. Title 42 is an overly extreme measure that has no scientific basis whatsoever. If there is no evidence of an uptick in COVID cases brought into the US by asylum seekers, the fact that we have a COVID emergency has no bearing at all.

Keep the COVID emergency in place and reopen the border to asylum seekers.

5

enkonta t1_j1zqg5w wrote

> Keep the COVID emergency in place and reopen the border to asylum seekers.

And on a personal level, I’m fine with that, but that’s not the argument the administration is using.

0

WonderWall_E t1_j1zho5h wrote

It's not the same argument with contradictory stances. It's different responses to the same crisis because they address different aspects of that crisis. You can't argue that all responses to the pandemic should end because we've adequately addressed the problem in one specific arena.

2

[deleted] t1_j1zqmtg wrote

[deleted]

0

WonderWall_E t1_j20vxd2 wrote

Here's the entire section of Title 42 pertaining to the case:

>§265. "Suspension of entries and imports from designated places to prevent spread of communicable diseases >Whenever the Surgeon General determines that by reason of the existence of any communicable disease in a foreign country there is serious danger of the introduction of such disease into the United States, and that this danger is so increased by the introduction of persons or property from such country that a suspension of the right to introduce such persons and property is required in the interest of the public health, the Surgeon General, in accordance with regulations approved by the President, shall have the power to prohibit, in whole or in part, the introduction of persons and property from such countries or places as he shall designate in order to avert such danger, and for such period of time as he may deem necessary for such purpose." (July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §362, 58 Stat. 704.)

If you can show me where that rests on any sort of emergency declaration, you'll convince me. Until then, you can drop the bullshit you're spouting.

0

enkonta t1_j211eok wrote

Fair enough, I deleted my prior response...I was under the impression that HHS needed a state of emergency to have the power delegated to them. Regardless....I think it's a little disingenuous for each party to argue out of both sides of their mouth when talking about the state of Covid.

2

SirAwesome3737 t1_j1zlznr wrote

I think boths sides are wrong. If there is a an emergency, then both have to stay. Should not be picking emergecies when it benefits you and ignoring them when they don't.

1

Gryzzlee t1_j25qb2v wrote

The issues are fundamentally different.

One refers to the impact that the pandemic had and how it is still lingering.

The others are mandates to reduce the potential spread of said pandemic in the moment.

One is cause and effect the other is limiting the cause.

0

user_dan t1_j203q6h wrote

And, there are several Republican governors who have not released or set a timetable for lifting COVID emergency powers.

At the beginning of the pandemic, Republicans were screaming it was fake and just the flu. Comrade Joe has declared the pandemic over and the Republicans just can't accept it.

0