In Memoriam — Luna The Dog (2014-2021)

Luna Schmidt
Luna Schmidt
2014-2021
Luna Retrieving Her Duck
Luna Retrieving Her Duck

She was smart, loyal, kind, adventurous, brave, and curly beautiful, if not always perfectly obedient. She had a stubborn streak, to be sure. And she was very strong, as well as strong-willed; so, when she “went on sit-down strike,” we weren’t going anywhere! She was a great companion and family member. Luna loved to retrieve her “flock” of floating throwing ducks and swim around after our kayaks in the cove here in Maine. 

She loved sitting on the top steps of our cabin porch (above picture) and our deck at home, where she could keep an eye on all that was happening around her neighborhood. She loved watching our neighbors, John and Katie, working in their yard. A bounce of the Landivar kids’ basketball, on the other side of our yard, always brought her out of the house and to the fence to see what was happening. 

She also loved the morning “dog club” in our back yard and was always up for the four o’clock in the afternoon dog walk, rain or shine, except on the hottest days when she thought only humans would be dumb enough to leave the air conditioned comfort of home. 

Fall was probably her favorite season because it brought cooler weather, always a “plus” for a curly black dog. She loved to frolic in the autumn woods and also enthusiastically romped in the snow. 

She always looked forward to visits to or from her “grandchildren” and their families, and looked sad when they left and things went back to their normal less active and exciting time with us. She also liked visits from our kids’ dogs and was most upset when one of them showed up without dog in tow. 

She went with us everywhere, from Campobello Island, Canada to the Shenandoah Mountains, and beaches from the Atlantic to Lake Michigan — and many stops in between. Luna was the “perfect traveler” — she would climb into her in-car kennel, curl up, and sleep patiently, not a sound, until the next rest stop or destination. The minute we said the words “car,” Luna’s tail was wagging, and she was raring to go! Wherever we went, she always was happy to return “home” to her spacious back yard and even “her cats” — although not always clear they were as delighted to see Luna!

Luna got us through good times and tough times. Retirements, operations, illnesses, celebrations, family reunions, and the difficult “year of the COVID” when she kept us active and engaged! She even went with us and became “temporary big dog on campus” during my stint as a distinguished visiting professor at our alma mater, Lawrence University several springs ago. 

She also went with me on at least one speaking engagement (although Cathy said “never again” even though everyone at the hotel was happy to see Luna). Most recently, Luna was there at the Kohler Resort in Wisconsin to help us celebrate our 50th wedding anniversary with family (actually 50 + 1 because of a “COVID postponement”). Except for the actual “anniversary dinner,” we ate our carry-out meals at the hotel plaza so that Luna and Anna’s and Daniel’s family dog Rey could join in the fun and the younger grandchildren could romp.

Sadly, Luna left us early this morning, here on beautiful and peaceful Linekin Bar, after a short unanticipated illness (although, to be sure, she had battled through some chronic health problems and was on medications). She was only 7 years old. Active and happy, almost till the end, it’s hard to believe that it was only Wednesday that she and Rey were chasing ducks and kayaks with the families at the “beach” at Barrett’s Park, just at the end of the bay from our cabin (and the place where Anna and Daniel were married in 2009)!

Death is an essential part of life, and particularly life with pets. Intellectually, we know that. 

But, that doesn’t make it any easier. Certainly our family has been through it a number of times before, and it inevitably it will happen again. It’s always toughest on those left behind. 

Indeed, Luna’s predecessor, Coda, died (less unexpectedly) here back in 2013. Luna was a great, humanizing, joyful, presence in our lives, for which we will always be grateful, even if our time together was far, far too short. We hade a great time together, while it lasted, and know you had a good life with family and friends who loved, honored, and appreciated you. We will never forget you, and you will always be a part of our lives and memories.  Rest in peace, oh loyal and beloved friend and companion.

Best wishes, always, 

PWS😰

08-06-21   

🐕‍🦺LUNA, FRIENDS, LOOK FORWARD TO RETURN OF FIRST DOGS, BETTER BREED OF HUMANS TO WHITE HOUSE!

Luna
Luna Schmidt looks forward to Major, Champ, better humans in White House
Hazel Cillis
Hazel Cillis
Pop Culture Reporter
Jezebel
Photo: Twitter

https://jezebel.com/i-want-as-many-pets-as-possible-in-the-white-house-agai-1845596935

Hazel Cillis @ Jezebel:

What does a Joe Biden Presidency mean for America? An era without a fascist in office, for one thing. But it also means a very important figure will once again enter the White House, whose influence across the country can’t be understated: the Presidential pet.

Joe Biden has two dogs, a rescue named Major and an older German Shepherd named Champ who “loves to talk.” For the past four years not only has Donald Trump not welcomed any good boys into the White House, he has openly voiced his disdain for dogs and pets, using the word “dog” as an insult any chance he gets. Mike Pence might have Marlon Bundo and a few other animals, but Trump thought Pence bringing pets to the White House was, according to a 2017 report from The Hill, “low-class.” And anyway, all those Pence pets are complicit in this administration’s horrific policies, misogyny, and xenophobia, make no mistake.

But Presidential pets are a necessity. From Barack Obama’s beloved Bo and Sunny to FDR’s Fala (a beloved Scottish Terrier who actually starred in a small documentary film about his life as a Presidential pup in 1943), pets in the White House just make sense. I think beyond the usual dogs and cats, White House families should fill that sucker up with as many animals as possible. Don’t forget that President Calvin Coolidge was practically a pet hoarder, ushering in a raccoon, a pygmy hippo, and two lions named “Tax Reduction” and “Budget Bureau.”

Even if we don’t get a hippo once again, I for one am excited to have some dogs back in the White House, gnawing on furniture Abraham Lincoln once sat on, and bringing honor once again to this great nation.

*********************

Major & Champ will bring some much needed class and humanity to America’s first residence, which has conspicuously lacked both since January 20, 2017.

As Luna says, “Woof, woof, woof!”

PWS

11-07-20

MY SCARFF DISTINGUISHED VISITING PROFESSORSHIP LECTURE @ LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY, April 4, 2019 — “EXISTENTIALISM AND THE MEANING OF LIFE IN THE U.S. IMMIGRATION COURT: FROM LAWRENCE TO THE WORLD BEYOND”

EXISTENTIALISM AND THE MEANING OF LIFE IN THE U.S. IMMIGRATION COURT: FROM LAWRENCE TO THE WORLD BEYOND

By

Paul Wickham Schmidt

Retired U.S. Immigration Judge

Lawrence University

Appleton, Wisconsin

April 4, 2019

KEY EXCERPTS:

. . . .

In that respect, September 13, 2018 was a highly significant day in Lawrence history. For, on that day President Burstein delivered his Commencement address posing the question “Can We Stand With The Statue of Liberty?” This wasn’t your usual “namby-pamby “welcome to college and life in the big time” sleeper. By comparison, one of the introductory speeches at another institution attended by one of our children focused on the protocols for “stomach pumping” in the emergency detoxification ward of the local hospital. Important information to be sure, but not very inspirational or reassuring.

President Burstein made an urgent call to value knowledge and learning, improve our national dialogue, recognize our undeniable immigrant heritageand culture, and use the learning and skills developed at Lawrence and other great institutions to create a better and more socially just future for all of mankind. Never, in the nearly 50 years since I left Lawrence have I seen those basic, common-sense concepts and universal values of Western liberal democracy under greater attack and daily ridicule by those for whom facts and human decency simply don’t matter!

. . . . 

Folks, unknown to most of you in this room there is an existential crisis going on in our U.S. Immigration Courts, one of America’s largest, most important, little known, and least understood court systems. It threatens the very foundations of our legal system, our Constitution, and our republic. In the words of country singing superstar Toby Keith, tonight “It’s me, baby, with your wake-up call!”

. . . .

Lawrence taught the humane practical values of fairness, scholarship, timeliness, respect, and teamwork which have guided me in life. Lawrence emphasized critical thinking — how to examine a problem from all angles and to appreciate differing perspectives.

I was introduced to informed dialogue and spirited debate as keys to problem solving, techniques I have continued to use. I also learned how to organize and write clearly and persuasively, skills I have used in all phases of my life.

I found that my broad liberal arts education, ability to deal with inevitable ups and downs, including, of course, learning from mistakes and failures, and the intensive writing and intellectual dialogue involved were the best possible preparation for all that followed.  

. . . .

Among other things, I worked on the Iranian Hostage Crisis, the Cuban Boatlift, the Refugee Act of 1980, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (“IRCA”), the creation of the Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL), and establishing what has evolved into the modern Chief Counsel system at Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”).  

I also worked on the creation of EOIR, which combined the Immigration Courts, which had previously been part of the INS, with the BIA to improve judicial independence. Interestingly, and perhaps ironically, the leadership and impetus for getting the Immigration Judges into a separate organization came from Iron Mike and the late Al Nelson, who was then the Commissioner of Immigration. Tough prosecutors by position and litigators by trade, they saw the inherent conflicts and overall undesirability, from a due process and credibility standpoint, of having immigration enforcement and impartial court adjudication in the same division. I find it troubling that officials at todays DOJ arent able to understand and act appropriately on the glaring conflict of interest currently staring them in their collective faces.

. . . .

Now, lets move on to the other topics:  First, vision.   The “EOIR Vision” was: Through teamwork and innovation, be the worlds best administrative tribunals, guaranteeing fairness and due process for all.In one of my prior incarnations, I was part of the group that developed that vision statement.  Perhaps not surprisingly given the timing, that vision echoed the late Janet Reno’s “equal justice for alltheme.  

Sadly, the Immigration Court System now is moving further away from that due process vision. Instead, years of neglect, misunderstanding, mismanagement, and misguided political priorities imposed by the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) have created judicial chaos with an expanding backlog now exceeding an astounding one million cases and, perhaps most disturbingly, no clear plan for resolving them in the foreseeable future.  There are now more pending cases in Immigration Court than in the entire U.S. District Court System, including both Civil and Criminal dockets, with fewer U.S. Immigration Judges currently on board than U.S. District Judges.  

This Administration has added hundreds of thousands of new cases to the Immigration Court docket, again without any transparent plan for completing the already pending cases consistent with due process and fairness. Indeed, over the past several years, the addition of more judges has actually meant more backlog. In fact, notably, and most troubling, concern for fairness and due process in the immigration hearing process has not appeared to be a priority or a major objective in the Administrations many pronouncements on immigration.

Nobody has been hit harder by this preventable disaster than asylum seekers, particularly scared women, children, and families fleeing for their lives from the Northern Triangle of Central America.  

. . . .

My good friend and colleague, Judge Dana Leigh Marks of the San Francisco Immigration Court, who is the President of the National Association of Immigration Judges, offers a somewhat pithier description: [I]mmigration judges often feel asylum hearings are like holding death penalty cases in traffic court.’”

. . . .

From my perspective, as an Immigration Judge I was half scholar, half performing artist. An Immigration Judge is always on public display, particularly in this age of the Internet.”  His or her words, actions, attitudes, and even body language, send powerful messages, positive or negative, about our court system and our national values. Perhaps not surprisingly, the majority of those who fail at the job do so because they do not recognize and master the performing artistaspect, rather than from a lack of pertinent legal knowledge.  

. . . .

Next, Ill say a few words about my judicial philosophy.  In all aspects of my career, I have found five essential elements for success that go back to my time at Lawrence:  fairness, scholarship, timeliness, respect, and teamwork.  

Obviously, fairness to the parties is an essential element of judging.  Scholarship in the law is what allows us to fairly apply the rules in particular cases.  However, sometimes attempts to be fair or scholarly can be ineffective unless timely.  In some cases, untimeliness can amount to unfairness no matter how smart or knowledgeable you are.  

Respect for the parties, the public, colleagues, and appellate courts is absolutely necessary for our system to function.  Finally, I view the whole judging process as a team exercise that involves a coordinated and cooperative effort among judges, respondents, counsel, interpreters, court clerks, security officers, administrators, law clerks and interns working behind the scenes, to get the job done correctly.  Notwithstanding different roles, we all shared a common interest in seeing that our justice system works.

Are the five elements that I just mentioned limited to Immigration Court?  They are not only essential legal skills, they are also necessary life skills, whether you are running a courtroom, a law firm, a family, a PTA meeting, a book club, or a soccer team.  

. . . .

Our Immigration Courts are going through an existential crisis that threatens the very foundations of our American Justice System.  Earlier, I told you about my dismay that the noble due process vision of our Immigration Courts has been derailed.  What can be done to get it back on track?  

First, and foremost, the Immigration Courts must return to the focus on due process as the one and only mission. The improper use of our due process court system by political officials to advance enforcement priorities and/or send dont comemessages to asylum seekers, which are highly ineffective in any event, must end.  Thats unlikely to happen under the DOJ as proved by over three decades of history, particularly recent history. It will take some type of independent court. I advocate an independent Article I Immigration Court, which has been supported by groups such as the American Bar Association, the Federal Bar Association, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and the National Association of Immigration Judges.

Clearly, the due process focus was lost even during the last Administration when officials outside EOIR forced ill-advised prioritizationand attempts to expeditethe cases of frightened women and children from the Northern Triangle who require lawyers to gain the protection that most of them need and deserve. Putting these cases in front of other pending cases was not only unfair to all, but created what I call aimless docket reshufflingthat has thrown the Immigration Court system into chaos and dramatically increased the backlogs.

Although those misguided priorities have been rescinded, the current Administration has greatly expanded the prioritytargets for removal to include essentially anyone who is here without documentation. We had an old saying in the bureaucracy that “when everything becomes a priority, nothing is a priority.”  Moreover, Attorney General Sessions stripped Immigration Judges of their authority to “administratively close” low priority cases and those that could be referred to DHS for possible legal status.  Incredibly, he also directed that more than 300,000 previously “administratively closed” low-priority cases be “restored” to dockets already backlogged for many years.

This Administration also greatly expanded the immigration detention empire,I call it the “New American Gulag.” Immigration detention centers are likely to be situated in remote locations near the Southern Border, relying largely on discredited private for profitprisons.  Have you heard of places like Jena, Louisiana or Dilley, Texas?

Individuals detained in such out-of-the-way places are often unable to obtain legal assistance or get the documentation necessary to present a successful asylum case. So-called “civil immigration detention” is used to coerce individuals out of making or appealing claims for protection in Immigration Court and also inhibits the ability of an individual to put on his or her “life or death” case.

This Administration also wants to make it more difficult for individuals to get full Immigration Court hearings on asylum claims and to expand the use of so-called expedited removal,thereby seeking to completely avoid the Immigration Court process.

They also have created and recently expanded what is known as the “Remain in Mexico Program.”  Under that program, which is being challenged in Federal Court, even those who pass initial screening and are determined by an Asylum Officer to have a “credible fear” of persecution are forced to remain in questionable conditions in Mexico while their cases are pending in Immigration Court.

Before he was fired, Attorney General Sessions imposed new “production quotas” on Immigration Judges, over their objection and that of almost all experts in the field. That insures that judges will be focused on churning out “numbers” to keep their jobs, rather than on making fair, impartial, scholarly, and just decisions.

But even these harsh measures aren’t enough. As you have no doubt read or heard, the President is threatening to “close the Mexican border” notwithstanding that Mexico is our third leading trading partner. Just Monday, he said that the solution was to eliminate Immigration Judges rather than provide fair hearings in a timely manner.

Evidently, the idea is to remove without full due process those who arrive at our border to seek protection under our laws and international conventions to which we are party. According to the Administration, this will send a powerful dont come, we dont want youmessage to asylum seekers.

But, as a deterrent, the Administration’s harsh enforcement program, parts of which have been ruled illegal by the Federal Courts, has been spectacularly unsuccessful. Not surprisingly to me, individuals fleeing for their lives from the Northern Triangle have continued to seek refuge in the United States in large numbers.  Immigration Court backlogs have continued to grow across the board, notwithstanding an actual decrease in overall case receipts and an increase in the number of authorized Immigration Judges.

. . . .

Keep these thoughts in mind.  Sadly, based on actions to date, I have little hope that Attorney General Barr will support due process reforms or an independent U.S. Immigration Court, although it would be in his best interests as well as those of our country if he did.  However, eventually the opportunity will come.  When it does, those of us who believe in the primary importance of constitutional due process must be ready with concrete reforms.

So, do we abandon all hope?  No, of course not!   Because there are hundreds of newer lawyers out there who are former Arlington JLCs, interns, my former students, those who have practiced before me, and others who have an overriding commitment to fair and impartial administration of immigration laws and social justice in America.

They form what I call the New Due Process Army!”  And, while mytime on the battlefield is winding down, they are just beginning the fight!  They will keep at it for years, decades, or generations — whatever it takes to force the U.S. immigration judicial system to live up to its promise of guaranteeing fairness and due process for all!

What can you do to get involved now?  The overriding due process need is for competent representation of individuals claiming asylum and/or facing removal from the United States. Currently, there are not nearly enough pro bono lawyers to insure that everyone in Immigration Court gets represented.

And the situation is getting worse.  With the Administrations expansion of so-called expedited removaland “Remain in Mexico,“ lawyers are needed at even earlier points in the process to insure that those with defenses or plausible claims for relief even get into the Immigration Court process, rather than being summarily removed with little, if any, recourse.

Additionally, given the pressure that the Administration exerts through the Department of Justice to movecases quickly through the Immigration Court system with little regard for due process and fundamental fairness, resort to the Article III Courts to require fair proceedings and an unbiased application of the laws becomes even more essential. Litigation in the U.S. District and Appellate Courts has turned out to be effective in forcing systemic change.  However, virtually no unrepresented individual is going to be capable of getting to the Court of Appeals, let alone prevailing on a claim.

. . . .

Finally, as an informed voter and participant in our political process, you can advance the cause of Immigration Court reform and due process. For the last two decades politicians of both parties have largely stood by and watched the unfolding due process disaster in the U.S. Immigration Courts without doing anything about it, and in some cases actually making it worse.

The notion that Immigration Court reform must be part of so-called comprehensive immigration reformis simply wrong. The Immigration Courts can and must be fixed sooner rather than later, regardless of what happens with overall immigration reform. Its time to let your Senators and Representatives know that we need due process reforms in the Immigration Courts as one of our highest national priorities.  

Folks, the U.S Immigration Court system is on the verge of collapse. And, there is every reason to believe that the misguided enforce and detain to the maxpolicies being pursued by this Administration will drive the Immigration Courts over the edge.  When that happens, a large chunk of the entire American justice system and the due process guarantees that make American great and different from most of the rest of the world will go down with it. As the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

In conclusion, I have introduced you to one of Americas largest and most important, yet least understood, court systems:  the United States Immigration Court. I have shared with you that Courts noble due process vision and my view that it is not currently being fulfilled. I have also shared with you my ideas for effective court reform that would achieve the due process vision and how you can become involved in improving the process.

Now is the time to take a stand for fundamental fairness and social justice under law! Join the New Due Process Army and fight for a just future for everyone in America! Due process forever!

***************************************

READ THE FULL TEXT OF MY SPEECH HERE:

Existentialism-—-Lawrence

*****************************************

What is the Scarff Distinguished Professorship at Lawrence University?

The Scarff professorial chair allows Lawrence University to bring to campus distinguished public servants, professional leaders, and scholars to provide broad perspectives on the central issues of the day. Scarff professors teach courses, offer public lectures, and collaborate with students and faculty members in research and scholarship.

Mr. and Mrs. Edward L. Scarff created the professorship in 1989, in memory of their son, Stephen, a 1975 Lawrence graduate who died in an automobile accident in 1984. In the photo, the Scarffs are pictured with G. Jonathan Greenwald (center), former United States minister-counselor to the European Union and the 1998-99 Scarff Professor.

Recent Scarff visiting professors have included William Sloane Coffin, Jr., civil rights and peace activist; David Swartz, first U.S. ambassador to the Republic of Belarus in the former Soviet Union; Greenwald; Takakazu Kuriyama, former ambassador of Japan to the United States; Charles Ahlgren, retired diplomat and educator; and George Meyer, former secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Robert Suettinger ’68, Intelligence analyst and China policy expert, and Russ Feingold, former United States Senator from Wisconsin.

Stephen Edward Scarff Visiting Professors, 1989-2018

1989-90

McGeorge Bundy
National security advisor to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson

1990-91

Edgar Fiedler
Assistant security of the treasury for economic policy

1991-92

Jiri Vykoukal
Professor/scholar of East European history at the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences in Prague

1992-93

Richard Parker
Ambassador to Lebanon, Algeria, Morocco

1993-94

Donald Leidel
Ambassador to Bahrain/deputy director of management operations for the Department of State

1994-95

Karl Scheld
Senior vice-president/director of research, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago

1995-96

William Sloane Coffin, Jr.
Civil rights and peace activist

1997-98

David H. Swartz
Ambassador to the Republic of Belarus

1998-99

G. Jonathan Greenwald
Minister-counselor to the European Union at the U.S. mission in Brussels

2000-01

Takakazu Kuriyama
Ambassador of Japan to the United States

2001-02

Charles Ahlgren
Retired diplomat and educator

2002-04

George Meyer
Former secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

2007-08

Robert Lee Suettinger ’68
Intelligence analyst and China policy expert

2008-09

Robert (Todd) Becker
Former U.S. foreign service officer and deputy head of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Mission in Croatia.

2009-10

George Wyeth, ‘73
Director of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Policy and Program Change Division.

2010-11

Rudolf Perina
Former U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Moldova (1998-2001), head of the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade in the mid-1990s and U.S. Special Negotiator for Eurasian Conflicts, 2001-04. Spent 35 years as U.S. foreign service officer, retiring in 2006.

2011-12

Alexander Wilde, ‘62
Senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., former director of the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), an independent nongovernmental organization concerned with human rights and U.S. foreign policy.

2012-13

Russ Feingold
Former United States Senator from Wisconsin

2013-14

Alexander Wilde, ’62
Senior scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., former director of the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), an independent nongovernmental organization concerned with human rights and U.S. foreign policy.

2015-16

George Rupp
Former President of the International Rescue Committee, the largest refugee resettlement organization in the world. Before leading the IRC he was president of Columbia and Rice Universities and Dean of the Harvard Divinity School.

2016-17

Christopher Murray, ’75
Most recently served as political advisor to the Supreme Commander of NATO forces. Prior to that he was the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of the Congo.

2017-18

William Baer, ’72 and Nancy Hendry
Baer recently stepped down as Associate Attorney General in the Obama Administration. Previously, he was Assistant Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division. Hendry is senior advisor to the International Association of Women Judges where her focus is on sexual harassment law. They are married and both graduated from Stanford Law School.

*******************************************

LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY PICTORIAL:

  1. Professor Jason Brozek, Stephen Edward Scarff Professor of International Affairs and Associate Professor of Government
  2. Fox River from overlook next to Briggs Hall
  3. Main Hall
  4. Atrium connecting Youngchild and Steitz (named for Nobel Prize Winning Biochemist and Lawrence Graduate Thomas Steitz) Science Halls
  5. Main Hall
  6. Residence of Lawrence University President Mark Burstein
  7. “Luna” contemplating early admission on the back steps of Main Hall
  8. Locks area across Fox River from campus
  9. Cathy and Luna about to cross the bridge
  10. Historic Fox River Mills Apartments (where our daughter, Anna, lived during her “Supersenior Year” at Lawrence)
  11. Fox River rapids
  12. Lawrence Memorial Chapel
  13. Another view of the Fox River near campus

PWS

04-09-19

LUNA & LAMBEAU ON A SNOW COVERED NEW YEAR’S DAY 2019 FROM GREEN BAY!

 

******************************

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

🎈 😎👍🏼🍻🏈🍾❄️☃️🥳🎊🍺🇺🇸🏀🏒🛷🏂⛷🥂🍷🍺🍸🍽

PWS

01-01-19

TAL @ CNN EXPOSES ADMINISTRATION’S IDIOCY ON TPS! – Ignoring Informed Advice! — Nobody But the Racist/White Nationalists Thought Ending TPS Was A Good Idea!

Documents reveal DHS knew ending protections could cause more, not less, illegal immigration

By Tal Kopan, CNN

The Trump administration was warned by intelligence analysts that ending protections for hundreds of thousands of Central Americans living in the US would likely drive a spike in illegal immigration. They did it anyway.

That intelligence assessment was made public late Tuesday as part of an ongoing lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security over the termination of Temporary Protected Status for citizens of multiple countries, many of whom have lived in the US upwards of two decades.

Questions have swirled since the administration began systematically terminating the majority of TPS designations on the books, impacting more than 400,000 immigrants who have lived in the US for years. The administration justified the moves by citing the law, saying that the Department of Homeland Security was compelled to end the protections because conditions from the original disasters that precipitated the protected status had improved.

But the intelligence report and another email from the acting secretary last year to White House chief of staff John Kelly add to other uncovered documents that raise serious questions about whether the Trump administration ignored its own experts’ analysis and recommendations to fulfill a pre-ordained objective.

The email explains that the administration was intending to “send a clear signal that TPS in general is coming to a close.”

The analysts’ report and email were revealed as part of a dispute in the lawsuit over the production of the internal documents that were used to come to the decision. Attorneys representing the immigrants suing in the case argue the government has been too slow to produce the documents.

More: http://www.cnn.com/2018/07/18/politics/internal-dhs-tps-documents-elaine-duke-email/index.html

***********************************

Much like Sessions’s uncalled for action in overruling Matter of A-R-C-G- on domestic violence, the Administration took a part of the immigration system that was working well, benefitting both the U.S. and migrants, and causing no harm, and made it a problem. Guided by White Nationalism, rather than the law, sound advice, or pragmatism, this Administration’s immigration policies aim to “ramp up” undocumented immigration to build the unneeded “Wall.” Then, when that also predictably fails to stem the tide, they will claim that there is a fake “immigration emergency” and seek to impose extraordinary measures to deal with mess that they created.

It’s like the “Reichstag Fire” over and over again. Don’t let them get away with it!

PWS

07-18-18

 

THE SLATEST FROM THE SPORTS WORLD — #16 UMBC Pulls “Upset For The Ages” Over #1 UVA In March Madness! — 135 Game Losing Streak For #16 Seeds Ends In Emphatic Fashion! 🏀🏀🏀🏀🏀

https://slate.com/culture/2018/03/how-no-16-seed-umbc-beat-virginia-and-made-the-mount-rushmore-of-sports-upsets.html

Nick Greene reports for Slate:

“Yes, Virginia, There Is a Cinderella

How No. 16 seed UMBC pulled off the biggest upset in NCAA Tournament history.

CHARLOTTE, NC - MARCH 16: Jairus Lyles #10 of the UMBC Retrievers reacts after a score against the Virginia Cavaliers during the first round of the 2018 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament at Spectrum Center on March 16, 2018 in Charlotte, North Carolina. (Photo by Streeter Lecka/Getty Images)
Jairus Lyles #10 of the UMBC Retrievers reacts after a score against the Virginia Cavaliers during the first round of the 2018 NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament at Spectrum Center on March 16, 2018 in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Streeter Lecka/Getty Images

It happened. It actually happened. At the 136th time of asking, a No. 16 seed finally beat a No. 1 seed in the NCAA Tournament. And it wasn’t even close. The University of Maryland, Baltimore County Retrievers absolutely pantsed the top-ranked Virginia Cavaliers, 74-54.

How did this happen? Forgive me for getting technical, but the Retrievers kicked Virginia’s butt.

Virginia plays slow. No one in the country plays at a slower tempo. Given the environmental predicament in which we currently find ourselves, calling them “glacial” would be woefully inappropriate. They operate on a cosmic timeline. They grind you into dust with defense and wait for that dust to evaporate. But the Retrievers were impatient. They were having none of Virginia’s slow-cooked nonsense.

Teensy Retrievers point guard K.J. Maura kept pushing the pace and setting up his teammates in rhythm for three-pointers. Against Virginia’s all-universe defense, UMBC went 12 for 24 from behind the arc.

There was no shortage of great individual performances. Forward Arkel Lamar scored 12 points and pulled down 10 rebounds. Joe Sherburne added 14.

And then there’s Jairus Lyles. The senior guard was nothing short of heroic. He went 9 for 11 from the field, drove at will, and finished a variety of circus shots at the rim. Lyles played through cramps throughout the second half, but he still finished with 28 points. All that’s left is to figure out who will play him in the movie.

I mean, just look at this guy.

The game was tied at halftime, 21-21, but it only took four minutes for the Retrievers to burst to a 14-point lead in the second half. It was the biggest deficit Virginia had faced all season. That deficit would get bigger. The Cavaliers are supposed to be the boa constrictor, not the hare—forgive me, Aesop—and they had no clue how to catch up. UMBC was relentless, and it was a joy to watch.

Sure, Virginia played without the injured De’Andre Hunter, the Cavaliers’ most versatile defender, but cutting them any slack would be needlessly charitable. They came in as the tournament’s overall No. 1 seed, yet you’d struggle to pick a single moment from Friday night in which the Cavaliers looked to be worthy of sharing the floor with the mighty Retrievers, who needed a last-second shot against Vermont to even make it to the NCAA Tournament. In the end, the Cavs were lucky to only lose by 20.

After the game, Virginia coach Tony Bennett said his team, which finished the year 31-3, had a “historic season.” If there’s a bright side for Virginia, it might be that the Cavaliers had already suffered what’s widely considered the biggest upset in college basketball history, losing to tiny Chaminade as the nation’s top-ranked team in 1982. Naturally, a storied institution like Virginia will take pride in honoring such a cherished tradition.

With its win on Friday night, UMBC improved to 25-10, and they’ll have a chance to make the Sweet 16 with a win over Kansas State on Sunday. Going into the tournament, you would’ve been hard pressed to pick the Retrievers’ best games of the season. Yes, that three-point win over Vermont in the America East title game was nice. But what else? That squeaker against Northern Kentucky in December? Their well-rounded effort against Coppin State?

Now, UMBC can claim the most amazing performance in NCAA Tournament history. But even that’s not going far enough. After the game, TNT’s Kenny Smith compared UMBC over Virginia to Buster Douglas over Mike Tyson and the Miracle on Ice. That’s not hyperbole. The Retrievers just made the Mount Rushmore of sports upsets. Hell, let’s put them on there twice.”

Read the rest of Slate’s coverage of the 2018 NCAA Tournament.

We Failed Grayson Allen by Not Hating Him More

How Good Was Loyola-Chicago’s Last-Second Game Winner?

Cody or Caleb? How to Tell Nevada’s Twin Basketball Stars Apart.

**************************************

What a “bracket busting stunner!” Go Retrievers!

It’s been a “different” March Madness this year. For the first time in about two decades, my Wisconsin Badgers are “out of the dance” — quite properly since they had their first losing season in about 20 years.  Wait till next year!

The good part, is that I’ve been able to follow the NCAA Men’s BB Tournament with a little more “objectivity” and less stress than usual. And, one of the many “bennies” of being a Federal retiree is that I can now 1) watch every game live on TV, and 2) enter any pool I want to without any of those tiresome (but necessary, I guess) Ethics Office warnings about all the potential civil and criminal penalties for getting “March Madness” at the office! I guess stuff like that doesn’t apply if you’re employed by someone like Warren Buffet. But, hey, want does he know? At any rate, at least Warren’s potential million dollars annually for life payout for the perfect bracket is safe for another year, thanks to the Retrievers! And, “Luna the Dog” our curly coated retriever was pleased with the outcome.

PWS

03-18-18

ANTH 375 @ BELOIT COLLEGE: Professor Jennifer Esperanza & Her Students Blaze Path To Understanding Migration In The Liberal Arts Context — Every College In America Should Be Teaching These Essential Skills!

Back in 1973, when I graduated from the University of Wisconsin Law School and  joined the staff of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) at the U.S. Department of Justice, nary a law school in the U.S. taught a course in immigration law. The handful of law school courses on the subject were taught almost entirely by Adjunct Professors. Indeed, shortly after I joined the Board, they sent me to what was then the premier law school immigration course at Georgetown Law taught by none other than Charles Gordon, the legendary General Counsel of the “Legacy” INS.

Today, thanks to a great extent to the efforts of such noted “scholar/public servants” as Professor David Martin of the University of Virginia Law School, Professor Alex Aleinikoff, former Dean of Georgetown Law, and Professor Stephen Legomsky of Washington University Law School, some form of immigration law or immigration clinic is offered at most major U.S. Law Schools.

But, a serious void remains at the most critical level of education: undergraduate institutions. However, at Beloit College in Beloit, Wisconsin, Professor Jennifer Esperanza is blazing the way for the future. Her “ANTH 375: Migrants, Immigrants, and Refugees” Summer Session class is jumping head-on into creating constructive dialogue, understanding, and action on the most important issue facing America today: migration.

I had the pleasure of working with Professor Esperanza and her fourteen “super students” as a “Guest Professor” during three days in late May. The students hailed from different backgrounds and entered the class with varying levels of immigration experience and interest.

Some were there because of their own backgrounds or prior work with migrants; others were there . . . well, just because they were there. But, funny thing, by the end of my three days I couldn’t tell the difference. Everyone pitched in as a team, demonstrated sharp analytical skills, asked incisive questions, showed creativity and originality, and made spectacular group presentations on some very tough subjects. In other words, it was all the things I love: fairness, scholarship, timeliness, respect, and teamwork!

Among our exercises: we watched and discussed the documentary “Credible Fear;” broke the group into two teams which designed and presented their own refugee systems based on competing “Mother Hen” and “Dick’s Last Resort” principles; and read, analyzed, and discussed two cases I had been involved in: the BIA’s landmark precedent Matter of Kasinga, 21 I&N Dec. 357 (BIA 1996) recognizing for the first time “female genital mutilation” (“FGM”) as a basis for asylum in the United States, and another decision (which was published on the internet) from my time at the Arlington Immigration Court where I granted “particular social group” asylum to a family from El Salvador.

I teach as an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown Law, one of the top law schools in the country. To my pleasant surprise, I found that Esperanza’s Beloit students were able to discuss the issues in a manner very similar to the class dialogue produced by some really great second-year, third-year, and graduate law students. Amazing!

I’m reproducing the results of the “Create Your Own Refugee System” exercise below, along with a class picture and some other pictures of my stay at Beloit (where my son-in-law, Daniel Barolsky, is a Professor of Musicology).

I also note that Professor Esperanza’s system and “real-world-oriented” approach to undergraduate education produces results, as in jobs in the real world! As featured in the Fall 2015 issue of Beloit College Magazine, Esperanza’s students were making an immediate difference: Jessica Slattery ’12, as a paralegal for the New York Legal Assistance Group in the Bronx, NY;  Dan Weyl ’10, with the Heartland Alliance, an international human rights organization that provides resources for LGBT refugees resettling in the United States (as a footnote, following retirement I have been helping out the Heartland Alliance Washington, DC, office with various projects); Jane Choi ’14, working on the political team at the British High Commission in Cape Town, South Africa; Key Ishii ’12, working with African refugees in Israel; Angela Martellaro ’10, a licensed real estate agent at Chief Properties in Kansas City, MO, specializing in helping refugee families from Myanmar buy their first home; and Nikki Tourigny ’10, working for Hot Bread Kitchen, a wholesale nonprofit bakery in NYC that trains immigrant and minority women to work in the restaurant industry.  Impressive!

On a personal note, I graduated in 1970 from Lawrence University, just up the road from Beloit in Appleton, WI. Like Beloit, Lawrence is a member of the Associated Colleges of the Midwest.

I majored in History, minored in German, and spent a semester abroad in Germany. I found that a broad research and writing intensive, liberal arts eduction that promoted critical analysis and effective dialogue was the best possible preparation for all that followed: U.W. Law School, government attorney, private practice of immigration law, and several Senior Executive Service positions with the U.S. government, as well as Adjunct Professor positions. I spent the last 21 hears of my career as a U.S. Immigration Judge at the appellate and trial levels and served as Chairman of the BIA for six years. I can’t imagine a better preparation for the global perspective, analytical ability, and research and writing skills needed for judicial work than what I received at Lawrence. I just wish that someone like Professor Esperanza had been teaching her innovative approach to cultural anthropology when I was an undergrad!

Finally, I might add that Professor Esperanza and her husband Paul, who works in Administration at the College, are part of a a group of talented young professionals, which includes my daughter Anna, who teaches middle school English in the Beloit Public Schools, her husband Daniel, and their children, who have chosen to make their homes in Beloit, near the College. They enjoy and actively participate the in Beloit community and are big supporters of the “Beloit Proud” movement.

Here’s the pictorial version of my “tenure” at Beloit.

ANTH 375: Migrants, Immigrants, and Refugees” – Professor Jenn Esperanza — May 2017 — Beloit College, Beloit WI

Back Row:

Dan Arkes, Me, Joe Enes, “The Talking Statue,” Mark Hauptfleisch, Cynthia Escobedo, Yoon Ja Na, Rosa Ennison, Keila Perez, Gabe Perry

Front Row:

Jamie Manchen, Professor Jennifer Esperanza, Leanna Miller, Terra Allen, Abby Segal, Matt Tarpinian

Here are the results of the “Create Your Own Refugee System” Exercise. Click on the links for some really “great stuff:”

For “Dick’s Last Resort:”

The GreatHermetic Principles

For the “Mother Hens:”

ANTH 375- Mother Hen Refugee Program

And, here’s what the class looked like “in action,” as well as a picture of our dog Luna in front of the historic “Middle College Building” at Beloit.

 

PWS

06-04-17