Lets just put aside the fact the US consulates are for all intensive purposes are legally US soil and are venues for legally applying for asylum, as are border checkpoints.
I'm sorry, but
this is incorrect. Notice I'm not using ad hominems to attack you and your demonstrably false statement. I'd appreciate the same, if you will good sir.
Anyway, turns out you cant apply for asylum in consulates, just like the CIS government webpage I linked to said (perplexing, that).
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-obtain-protection-us-embassy-consulate.htmlAsylum is a form of legal protection available to certain people who cannot or would not feel safe if they tried to live in their home country, because of past persecution or the danger of future persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
Unfortunately, U.S. embassies and consulates cannot process requests for this form of protection because, under U.S. law, asylum seekers can apply only if they are physically present in the United States (or at least at a U.S. border or other point of entry).
There is a common misconception that U.S. embassies and consulates are basically the same as U.S. soil. It is true that international law protects national embassies and consulates from being destroyed, entered, or searched (without permission) by the government of the country where they are located (the host country). However, this does not give those embassies or consulates the full status of being part of their home nations territory. Therefore, U.S. law does not consider asylum seekers at U.S. embassies and consulates to be physically present in the United States (or at a U.S. border or point of entry).
Presenting oneself to a border checkpoint is exactly what these people are doing. So for the final time, I fail to see how seeking asylum in that manner is illegal. It's literally the law. But yet they are still being detained indefinitely.
Are there any on topic subjects you would like to discuss?
Nope, I'm good. But do swing by my thread about the new abortion law, would love to hear your opinion.
So, once again, what is stopping them from applying at a port of entry? Crossing the border any place other than an authorized checkpoint is a crime regardless of your endless equivocation. You don't seem to know what the meaning of an ad hominem is, so please stop using that term, at least until you understand what it means. This is way off subject anyway. It is almost like you know you can't win a debate about the topic at hand so you need to keep bringing up countless other red herrings to argue about to distract from this. After all, you can't have anyone looking too close at how these double standards are applied to "your team" with zero accountability, and how violence is excused against "the other".