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
        70
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 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.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          11 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.

        • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          28
          ·
          11 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
            20
            ·
            11 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

            • ares35@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              purpose of exploitation

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

              does that count?

            • AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 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.

          • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            So, just to be clear, you’re OK with someone telling you to get on the bus? A bus headed to a location they aren’t telling you about?

            What if they took you to the train station and loaded you on a box car with a bunch of other people, is that OK?

      • Mystic_Vampire@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Driving someone to chicago and dropping them off isn’t trafficking, but there is most definitely a slew of child-labor happening in this country, and the majority of the children involved are migrants who illegally crossed the border. There’s a lot of coverage about this if you look for it. I imagine that Texas might be involved in some part of that process if they’re the ones handling these people.

        Edit: https://www.npr.org/2023/05/04/1173697113/immigrant-child-labor-crisis

  • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Legally, I would not think it wise to put my business in the crosshairs between two warring states. Not only is the act of transporting immigrants into sub-zero temps without notice to either the immigrants or the receiving state morally repulsive and indefensible, that company has also now made itself a direct legal target of Illinois’ displeasure AND a handy disposable cutout for Texas to discard when Illinois sues it out of business.

    In short, if I’m this business owner, I’ve just made it so that Illinois doesn’t have to fight Texas directly when they can just sue me and ensure I never operate in Illinois again, all at my own cost because the states already have armies of attorneys. And depending on local law, I may well be setting myself up not just for civil suits, but criminal charges, if some aggressive Illinois AG thinks I am actively participating in human trafficking.

    No sane business owner would do this. Which means that Wynne Transportation is probably owned by some MAGA fool who has completely bought the propaganda and lies, and Greg Abbott is laughing because both that MAGA fool and his company are disposable while they stand between the two states and help absorb Illinois’ legal wrath.

  • ExLisper@linux.community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    11 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.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    11 months ago

    It does seem like a pretty easy case for them. The law sounds unconstitutional, infringes the right of free travel.

  • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    40
    ·
    11 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
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 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
        2
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        11 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.

        • _tezz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I don’t think the issue is them “dealing with the problem”, they’ve been doing exactly that, which has been reported on repeatedly since these shenanigans started. Remember Martha’s Vineyard? NY/CHI/etc are upset because Texas is not communicating any of their actions to them, and misleading (trafficking) the migrants under false pretenses. I don’t know how you can be on Texas’s side here…

          • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            11 months ago

            Texas doesn’t really get a heads up either when migrants are planning to cross the border. It’s not about being on sides, expecting any one state to just deal with illegal immigration isn’t a realistic solution. You can see the same thing in Europe, with tensions between border and internal countries.

            • Cowlitz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Its the intent that matters though. They dont get a heads up because people show up trying to better their own lives. When they dont give a heads up to other states and drop people off in freezing temperatures, they are intentionally hurting people. If Texas doesn’t want to deal with it they should surrender the land a few hundred miles around the border. They won’t because land is a valuable resource. They have more of that resource than many other states, dealing with having a border is part of the price of it.

              The other problem is the reason they are doing it is to intentionally cause conflict with other states. That is the act of an enemy. Its cold war behavior. There is a reason I think of Texans as enemies of the US. They identify as Texan first, American second. They only care about getting ahead even at the expense of the country. We should absolutely accept refugees from that hellhole but we should also absolutely hold them accountable for being hostile to other states. They also get federal money to deal with it. Other states do not. They are stealing if they are offloading that responsibility on states who do not get funding for it. They can’t whine about being solely responsible for it when they get funding and are also actively interfering with border patrol.

              I must admit Texas is the best at propaganda and playing victim. It feels extremely dystopian stepping off the plane and immediately noticing the pictures of Texas on everything. It was so wild I couldn’t help but laugh at how up their own asses they are. Their propaganda is so effective people in this thread really think they dont get funding and have to secure it on their own. Its just another lie they spin to win support and apparently its quite effective.

              • Grilipper54@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Im curious what happens if Texas provides the intent and communicates with the states they are bussing them to and the state says “no”. Is it still Texas fault even though they communicated with them prior?

        • Cowlitz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 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.