A charter bus company hired by the state of Texas to transport migrants to Chicago is trying to flip the script on the border crisis in a federal lawsuit against the city alleging that its ordinance banning unannounced migrant drop-offs is unconstitutional and punishes transportation companies working with Texas, court documents show.

Wynne Transportation LLC is fighting new restrictions in Chicago against buses dropping off one-way passengers without prior notice.

The ordinance does not specifically mention immigration, but city leaders have acknowledged it is in response to the influx of more than 30,000 migrants arriving from Texas on government-contracted charter buses, often dropped off on street corners with little or no notice.

      • ares35@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        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.

        • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          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?

          • towerful@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            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

            • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              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.

            • ares35@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              purpose of exploitation

              they’re being politically ‘exploited’. and the republicants and their ‘transportation partners’ are profiting from it…

              does that count?

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          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.

  • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Sending migrants to new York and Chicago has probably been the best political move any Texas governor has done in a long time.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      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?

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        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.

        • Cowlitz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          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.

  • ExLisper@linux.community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    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.