Chris Murphy

It's just you're saying you don't. Yes, my conclusion is that I would support those athletes being able to participate in my community, but I would not substitute my judgment and my community's judgment for another community's judgment on the issue of the border and immigration. For me, it's a little different in the sense that I do think because that's unquestionably an issue that.

that arrives at a need for national consensus. You can't just let every community decide for themselves because the border is where the border is. And the process to become an American citizen is a national process. There, I haven't been shy about it. I think the Democratic Party needs to reform its position. I think we have become wildly out of step

that arrives at a need for national consensus. You can't just let every community decide for themselves because the border is where the border is. And the process to become an American citizen is a national process. There, I haven't been shy about it. I think the Democratic Party needs to reform its position. I think we have become wildly out of step

with where the broad American public is, and for good reason. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-racial society, I think you have to have a very certain process by which somebody becomes a member of the whole, a member of the club, a member of the nation. Because it is hard to sort of hold together a melting pot. There are natural retreats to tribalism.

with where the broad American public is, and for good reason. In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-racial society, I think you have to have a very certain process by which somebody becomes a member of the whole, a member of the club, a member of the nation. Because it is hard to sort of hold together a melting pot. There are natural retreats to tribalism.

And so when the rules become pretty murky about how you become a member of this team, this club, in an official sense, I think it makes it hard to keep the tensions at bay. So that's why I would argue that you should have a much more firm, much quicker resolution of asylum that happens at the border, right?

And so when the rules become pretty murky about how you become a member of this team, this club, in an official sense, I think it makes it hard to keep the tensions at bay. So that's why I would argue that you should have a much more firm, much quicker resolution of asylum that happens at the border, right?

rather than what we have today, which is folks coming into the country and waiting 10 years before they get an adjudication. I tried to pass that bill. I ultimately got, you know, most Democrats, but not all, to support it and only a handful of Republicans.

rather than what we have today, which is folks coming into the country and waiting 10 years before they get an adjudication. I tried to pass that bill. I ultimately got, you know, most Democrats, but not all, to support it and only a handful of Republicans.

It was a heterodox position inside the Democratic Party at the time to say that we should essentially not allow people to leave the border before they get their asylum claim determined. But it was the right thing to do for a In part because the rules around how you became an American were becoming really hard to understand.

It was a heterodox position inside the Democratic Party at the time to say that we should essentially not allow people to leave the border before they get their asylum claim determined. But it was the right thing to do for a In part because the rules around how you became an American were becoming really hard to understand.

And I don't think that that's acceptable in the kind of society that we are trying to build.

And I don't think that that's acceptable in the kind of society that we are trying to build.

So you let's do it backwards. You should not remove individuals who right now are playing by the current rules and in line for a determination around legal status. Right now, the Trump administration is removing people who are waiting for their asylum claims. to be adjudicated. If you are here with a pending claim, you should not be removed.

So you let's do it backwards. You should not remove individuals who right now are playing by the current rules and in line for a determination around legal status. Right now, the Trump administration is removing people who are waiting for their asylum claims. to be adjudicated. If you are here with a pending claim, you should not be removed.

If you are an individual who has lived here for a long period of time, have family member, have children who are American citizens, I do not think that you should be removed. The prioritization I think was right during the Biden administration and the Obama administration to focus on individuals who had committed crimes, people who had violent histories.

If you are an individual who has lived here for a long period of time, have family member, have children who are American citizens, I do not think that you should be removed. The prioritization I think was right during the Biden administration and the Obama administration to focus on individuals who had committed crimes, people who had violent histories.

There's then a gray area, right, of people who are not in line for asylum, have not committed serious crimes, do not have American citizen children. Those people are eligible for And I think that's just a question of how many resources you want to devote to that exercise. But there's no question that that category of individuals is legally subject to deportation.

There's then a gray area, right, of people who are not in line for asylum, have not committed serious crimes, do not have American citizen children. Those people are eligible for And I think that's just a question of how many resources you want to devote to that exercise. But there's no question that that category of individuals is legally subject to deportation.

And I don't think there should be a complaint if a government acts to remove that category of people.