OnPolitics Today: Zoning in on zero tolerance

It's Monday, OnPolitics fam, and there's a lot to get through today. So we're going to keep the intro short and just get right to it. Keep up with the latest, get your friends to subscribe and let's go.

The outcry over zero tolerance

Late last week, the Department of Homeland Security announced that nearly 2,000 children had been separated from adults in a six-week period as part of its "zero tolerance" policy. Why is this happening? In short: The Trump administration is cracking down on adult immigrants who cross the border illegally, criminally prosecuting them. Children can't be held in criminal detention, hence the separations.

The news has since come to a boiling point, with the policy drawing more scrutiny, especially with lawmakers showing up at detention centers near the border.  Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen defended the policy on Monday.

"We have to do our job. We will not apologize for doing our job," she said. "This administration has a simple message — If you cross the border illegally, we will prosecute you."

President Donald Trump pressed Democrats to support Republican efforts to "fix the world's worst immigration rules." He blasted German and European border security, but the problem with that? He was wrong.

Meanwhile, over in Congress, every single Senate Democrat has signed onto a bill that would prevent the separations, while House Republicans have crafted their own broader immigration proposal.

Supreme Court punts on gerrymandering

The Supreme Court sidestepped a potentially historic ruling Monday that would have blocked states from drawing election maps intended to help one political party dominate the other, aka "gerrymandering."

The justices unanimously found procedural faults with challenges brought by Democratic voters in Wisconsin and Republicans in Maryland.

"This court is not responsible for vindicating generalized partisan preferences," Chief Justice John Roberts said. "The court’s constitutionally prescribed role is to vindicate the individual rights of the people appearing before it."

But the issue could come back as soon as the court's next term, if justices decide to consider a challenge to North Carolina's congressional map.

Elsewhere in politics

• Senate judiciary panel grills Justice inspector general, FBI director on Clinton email probe
• Trump renews Space Force plan, but Congress lukewarm on plan it must approve
• A week later, President Trump is still defending North Korea agreement
• First Amendment victory is Florida man's second at Supreme Court
• Former Blackwater guard goes on trial for second time for role in mass shooting in Iraq

WSBTV