Migrant kid labor brutality wrought by Vice President Kamala Harris

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

53% : In response, ICE was required to share with HHS information contained in ICE databases on the criminal and immigration histories of the potential sponsors and all adult members in sponsor households so that HHS could make informed suitability determinations before handing a child off to a sponsor.
48% : She issued a press release announcing legislation to prohibit immigration enforcement on UACs, their potential sponsors and any other adult living at the address where a child might be sent to live.
47% : But then-Sen. Harris said it was "outrageous" that ICE was arresting potential sponsors of UACs.
34% : Not only did Harris' bill effectively give an amnesty to dangerous criminal illegal aliens, it also would have transferred $220 million out of ICE's already-appropriated 2019 budget to non-profit organizations for providing social services (e.g., "acculturation", "therapeutic", and "legal services") to the UACs and their sponsors.
34% : Just as congressional Democrats prohibited ICE from making arrests of UAC sponsors via a funding bill, congressional Republicans can require ICE to make these arrests via a funding bill.
24% : During the first two years of the Trump administration, then-Sen. Harris was angry that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was working with US Health and Human Services (HHS) to run background checks on unaccompanied alien children (UACs) and their sponsors, and making arrests where appropriate.
16% : Under Harris' legislation, if ICE was to discover through cooperation with HHS that a potential UAC sponsor was in the United States illegally with multiple convictions for child sex abuse on their record, Harris would require ICE to look the other way and never arrest or deport the criminal.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.