Congress has a moral duty to address the border crisis

From the start of Donald Trump’s presidency, his excesses have prompted calls for Congress to exercise its oversight powers to rein in the worst of them. Never has that responsibility been as grave or the need as urgent as with the national disgrace unfolding

at the Mexican border.

The images are unbelievable, but they are real: children separated from their families and penned in cages without basic sanitation or enough food. Others sleeping on the ground outside Border Patrol stations. Sick people dying in U.S. custody without adequate medical attention.

At this point, whatever combination of policies and practices, past and present, got us to this point is less important than restoring basic decency to a situation that is out of control. Trump has demonstrated over and over that no amount of suffering at his administration’s hands, no degree of damage to the reputation of the United States, will dissuade him from his fixation on blocking entry through our southern border.

The extremity of his approach is visible even 1,500 miles from the border in central Ohio. Edith Espinal, one of 40-some immigrants across the country known to have taken sanctuary in churches to avoid deportation, has been living in Columbus Mennonite Church since October 2017. The administration has targeted her and others in similar situations with steep fines — in her case, nearly $500,000.

The fines stem from a little-used section of immigration law. An attorney representing Espinal said she believes they are retribution for those who have spoken out about their cases.

Meanwhile, a 16-yearold girl who was born and raised in Columbus can’t get an Ohio driver’s license or identification card allowing her to work because the state Bureau of Motor Vehicles insists on a parent or guardian’s signature to issue those cards to minors; the girl’s mother doesn’t have proper identification to sign because she crossed the Mexican border without documents more than 20 years ago.

State law is unclear on the parent-signature requirement, but the BMV’S practice has, according to advocates, blocked more than 3,000 young Ohioans, all citizens or legal residents, from getting jobs to help support their families.

Lawmakers should provide a clear remedy. Young

messages, personal attacks, content constituting spam, etc.)

• abuses or discriminates on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability, etc. , or refers to such matters in any manner prohibited by law;

• infringes any party’s intellectual property rights, including without limitation copyrights and trademarks;

• impersonates another person or misquotes another person;

• violates or inappropriately encourages the violation of any municipal,

state, federal or international law, rule, regulation or ordinance or violates any party’s rights; or

• offers, promotes or advertises any goods or services or solicits any funds or consideration, except in areas of the website specifically designated for such purpose.”

We have heard from some frequent commenters who are upset that some of their comments have been blocked. And to that we say: Keep it clean and civil, and your comments won't be blocked.

The auto-moderation system will not preclude readers from flagging objectionable comments and triggering a review by a staff member.

Our goal is to create a healthier, more inclusive place for conversation. We want to encourage thoughtful discussion and create an environment where people feel safe to make comments without fear of being attacked.

Occasionally, people who have been temporarily banned from commenting on Dispatch.com for bad behavior — an online version of time out for adults who can't hold a civil conversation — will complain that we are violating their right to free speech.

Not at all. They are free to go stand at Broad and High and say whatever they want. But when on this newspaper's website, commenters agree by their participation to follow the rules we set for civility. If they do not, we will block them. One particularly obnoxious commenter is on the verge of being banned for life.

But we would prefer that he and others who are passionate about their opinions would keep it civil and engage in ways that are productive rather than destructive.

In another form of reader engagement, we are using Google forms to ask for feedback and input on stories and editorials.

We used a form last Sunday, for example, with the editorial on the 2020 presidential race. In print and online, we asked readers to go to Dispatch. com/2020candidates and describe the qualities you want to see in the next president. The responses were impressive, and there is still time to weigh in, if you would like to do that.

Reporters are attaching Google forms to some of their stories to solicit story ideas or questions readers want to see answered in upcoming stories. A recent Q&A story about the new gas tax in Ohio was built with questions readers gave us in a Google form.

As a community, we are smarter and better when we work together, listen to and thoughtfully consider other perspectives, and keep it civil even when emotions run high. We appreciate hearing from and talking with you.

Alan D. Miller is editor of The Dispatch. amiller@dispatch.com @dispatcheditor