The Good and the Bad of the Week: Migrant Housing and Supreme Court Changes

read transcript

♪♪[música]♪♪[música]♪♪[música]♪♪[música]eduardo: we’re back withour last segment of theis the time when ourpanelists highlight “the good andthe bad” of the week.vianca.week has to be the factthat we have migrants whohave recently crossed fromirregular shape the border andthey are offering them housingtemporary in schoolsNY. for me it is bad. isworrying. I understand theparental concern thatthey do not know and do not know thesepeople and feel that they aresending their children toschools to learn butit seems they are distractedthat they are not going to learnenough. that they still knownew york restrictionsduring the pandemic and nowstudents have acritical situation witheducation. it seems that notthey care. looks like ericadams only care about thelast and gives priority tothe migrants who arearriving.to schools where there are children.adonias: i am a critic of themayor.I think I disagreein this initiative. they can beuse other resourcescity ​​convention centerand gyms to housethese migrants.for my part I will highlight the42 came to an end. althoughthere is a lot of work to be done,It’s not a secret to anyone thatCongress needs to takesome kind of legislationfigure out what’s going on.this week we saw that one diedgirl in a detention center.there are many things that must beimprove. but we see that thebiden administration breaks thenarrative and the idea of ​​manypeople who thought thatapproximately two years oldthe administration wantingfinish this programit works and it was notsolving the problem. we sawthis week a decrease of 60%of immigrants crossing theborder. still to godo, but the administrationoverlaps with the narrative ofconservative media and manychaos.edward: donald rump said thatit would be a day of infamy.franklin: there are quite a few numbersthat can generate anoble and genuine concern inmany americans.more entered this weekthan 80,000 immigrants for thesouthern border. that is, it istrue that perhaps it was not enoughnegative expectations, butstill have to put a lotattention to the situation.I’m going to bring the badweek.it happened that this week, theTuesday, a group of Democratsintroduced a billWhat would the Supreme Court change?of justice and I would add fouradditional chairs, I would spendnine to 13 days.this is important because thejustification is constitutional.currently treats halfof the houses he treated in1869 and with the same amount ofchairs. the justification ispolicy. they want to change theSupreme Court of Justicebecause they do not benefit theirintentions and trickspolicies. obama, bush, trump,the supreme court was not alwaysnice to them butthey.eduardo: next time you couldConservatives do it.heidy: i agree on somethingwith him, what are reasonspolicies. unfortunatelymany judges in courtif they were politiciansunfortunately they are notimpartial or objective and toswing the supreme courtwe need to add othersjudges. I agree withthe democrats. although joethey agree. neither didthey can do for the filibuster.Eduardo: what was it for you?good and bad”.heidy: for me it is that II joined the team of “line offire”, a program that addressesthe most important issues ofpolitics and that helps theLatino community to understand whatwhat happens in this countrythree years ago I did not believe thatwould do this. but i saw a videodeath of george floyd and i decidedthat I couldn’t keep quietand I had to speak to doa change and contribute to thesociety. in my opinion we havea lot to change and that’s whyI started in the world ofpolicy. I am grateful tothe “line of fire” team andthe people behindfrom the screen.without them we could not dothis work.Edward: Welcome.excellent.