DISORDER IN THE U.S. IMMIGRATION COURTS: SESSIONS “DECLARES WAR” ON HIS OWN IMMIGRATION JUDGES! — JUDGES’ ASSOCIATION (“NAIJ”) REPORTS MEMBERS REACTING WITH “DISBELIEF, SHOCK, CONFUSION, AND OUTRAGE” TO THE CONDESCENDING “McHENRY MEMO!” — NAIJ DEMANDS BARGAINING ON CASE QUOTAS!

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am a retired member of the National Association of Immigration Judges (“NAIJ”). In that capacity, I received the following e-mail from our President, The Honorable A. Ashley Tabaddor (who is resident in the U.S. Immigration Court in Los Angeles California), acting in her NAIJ capacity. I republish that e-mail below with Judge Tabaddor’s permission. 

“Dear NAIJ Members,

 

We have been hearing much from our members regarding the recent Director’s email, dated January 17, 2018, publishing purported “Case Priorities and Immigration Court Performance Measures.”  Many have expressed their disbelief, shock, confusion, and outrage as to the published standards, in light of the severe backlogs in our courts.  We share your concerns.  NAIJ has demanded to bargain on implementation of “numeric based performance measures on Immigration Judges”, and the Agency had provided assurances to NAIJ that no individual IJ based quotas and deadlines will be imposed until they have fulfilled their obligation under labor law to bargain with us.  And under the law, the Agency is prohibited from imposing such standards until all our bargaining rights have been properly exhausted.   NAIJ is also fighting any infliction of quotas and deadlines on Immigration Judges through outreach to the public and Congress, and is investigating the possibility of legal action.

 

In addition, NAIJ is currently evaluating the memo to determine if there has been any breach in law with the issuance of this memo or any further action we can take under labor law with respect to it.

 

NAIJ is working diligently to fight the implementation of any “numeric based performance measures” on Judges, and ensure that any future standards that may be imposed on Judges or the Immigration Courts are legally defensible, fair, and would not encroach on our independent decision making authority.  Please stay tuned for further development.

 

If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to myself or any of our NAIJ representatives.

The Honorable A. Ashley Tabaddor, President

National Association of Immigration Judges

DISCLAIMER:  The author is the President of the National Association of Immigration Judges.  The views expressed here do not necessarily represent the official position of the United States Department of Justice, the Attorney General, or the Executive Office for Immigration Review.   The views represent the author’s personal opinions, which were formed after extensive consultation with the membership of NAIJ.”

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

I’ve already noted the total preposterousness and tone-deafness of setting arbitrary “case completion goals” for a court system that is already working overtime but crumbling under incredible backlogs and outdated procedures and technology.

Make no mistake about it: those backlogs are not because of Judges, immigrants, or immigrants’ attorneys. They are the direct result of: 1) years of mismanagement and continuing improper political meddling by Sessions and his predecessors going back over several Administrations; and 2) an irresponsible lack of restraint and common sense priorities by DHS enforcement that has been encouraged, aided, and abetted by this Administration.

Under the Trump Administration, DHS line enforcement agents have been freed from any semblance of priorities and given essentially carte blanche to arrest anyone they feel like arresting and placing them into an already overwhelmed and crumbling U.S. Immigration Court System. Meanwhile, the Immigration Judges, who are struggling to provide due process, and have been stripped of any meaningful control over their own dockets, are treated like “assembly line workers” subject to “production quotas.” That’s no way to run a Due Process Court System, and it’s showing in some of the incorrect and unfair results that I report on regularly!

We need an independent Article I U.S. Immigration Court, now! But Congress, which can’t perform the basic functions of governance, apparently isn’t interested in cleaning up the mess they created and enabled. So, with the system fast heading for complete collapse, it looks to me like, willing or not, the Article III U.S. Courts will be stuck with effectively placing the U.S. Immigration Courts in “judicial receivership” until some future Congress addresses the situation in a way that insures Constitutional Due Process of law for all.

A very bad day for the U.S. Justice System and for all who care about upholding Due Process under our Constitution.

 

PWS

01-19-20

EOIR/IMMIGRATION COURTS: AG SESSIONS ANNOUNCES APPOINTMENT OF HON. JAMES McHENRY AS PERMANENT DIRECTOR OF EOIR!

SHARE

 

“JUSTICE NEWS

Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Attorney General Sessions Announces Appointment of James McHenry As Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review

Attorney General Jeff Sessions today announced the appointment of James McHenry as the permanent Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) at the Department of Justice. McHenry has served as the Acting Director of EOIR since May 30, 2017.

 

“I am pleased to announce the appointment of James as the permanent Director of EOIR. Since his appointment as Acting Director last May, James has led EOIR in restoring its commitment to the timely and efficient adjudication of immigration cases, and in identifying additional common-sense improvements to the immigration court system,” said Attorney General Sessions. “James is an exceptionally talented and capable leader, and I am confident that he will continue to ensure that EOIR and its components will adjudicate cases in a manner that serves the national interest.”

 

“Under Attorney General Sessions’ leadership, EOIR has implemented a series of sensible reforms that aim to reduce the pending caseload by realigning the agency towards completing cases, increasing both productivity and capacity, and changing policies that lead to inefficiencies and waste,” said EOIR Director McHenry. “I look forward to building on the success of last year and further realizing our goal of cutting the pending caseload in half by 2020.”

 

EOIR was created on Jan. 9, 1983, through an internal department reorganization which combined the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) with the immigration judge function previously performed by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) (now part of the Department of Homeland Security). The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) was added in 1987.

 

EOIR is headed by a director who is responsible for the supervision of the Chairman of BIA, the Chief Immigration Judge, the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer and all agency personnel. EOIR has more than 2,100 employees in its 59 immigration courts nationwide, at the BIA, at OCAHO, and at EOIR headquarters in Falls Church, Virginia.

 

Director McHenry has previously served in the Executive Office for Immigration Review; he first joined the agency in 2003 through the Attorney General’s Honors Program and returned to the agency in 2016, when he was appointed as an administrative law judge (ALJ) for EOIR OCAHO.

 

Last year, McHenry served as a Deputy Associate Attorney General working on a variety of immigration-related litigation matters and overseeing multiple components reporting to the Office of the Associate Attorney General. From 2014 to 2016, he served as an ALJ for the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review in the Social Security Administration. Prior to that, he worked for the Office of the Principal Legal Advisor (OPLA), Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security as an Assistant Chief Counsel and, later, as a Senior Attorney where he served as a lead attorney for national security, denaturalization, gang cases, anti-human trafficking operations, and worksite enforcement matters. He also served a detail as a Special Assistant United States Attorney for the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Georgia.

 

Director McHenry earned a Bachelor of Science from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, a Master of Arts in political science from the Vanderbilt University Graduate School, and a Juris Doctor from the Vanderbilt University Law School.”

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

PWS

01-19-20

ANOTHER DUE PROCESS ASYLUM VICTORY FOR THE GW IMMIGRATION CLINIC AT THE ARLINGTON IMMIGRATION COURT!

Professor Benitez reports:

“Friends,

Please join me in congratulating Immigration Clinic student-attorney Solangel González, who this afternoon won a grant of asylum for her clients, N-R and her two minor children, from El Salvador.  The ICE trial attorney waived appeal so the decision is final.  The immigration judge (IJ), Quynh Vu Bain, commenced today’s proceeding in the above manner.

N-R was threatened by the MS gang in her country because of her familial relationship with her uncle, who was murdered by the gang.  After her uncle’s body was discovered, N-R called the police.  While discussing the murder with a police officer a gang member walked by and saw the discussion.  During the discussion, however, the police officer told N-R that it was best if she dropped the matter because, if they found out she filed a complaint, the gang could kill her kids.  N-R later was told by a gang associate that she and her kids would be killed if she pursued the complaint.  Out of caution, N-R moved with her children to another part of El Salvador, but the gang continued to look for her.  Finally, N-R and her children fled to the USA.  N-R testified that the gang members continue to look for her.

Congratulations also to Alyssa Currier, Karoline Núñez, Chen Liang, and Jonathan Bialosky, who previously worked on this case.

NOTE:  While waiting in the lobby for her case to be called, Solangel escorted a respondent, who didn’t know where to go and who didn’t know who her lawyer was, to her assigned court room, thus avoiding a potential in absentia removal order.

**************************************************
Alberto Manuel Benitez
Professor of Clinical Law
Director, Immigration Clinic
The George Washington University Law School
650 20th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052
(202) 994-7463
(202) 994-4946 fax
abenitez@law.gwu.edu
THE WORLD IS YOURS…”
***************************************
Congrats to all involved! It also illustrates one of the points that I repeatedly make. With good representation, adequate time to prepare, a good judge who knows asylum law and takes individuals’ rights seriously, and a conscientious Assistant Chief Counsel representing the DHS, many of the Central American asylum claims are very “winnable” under the law. That’s why detaining individuals in poor conditions in locations where competent pro bono counsel is not readily available and cases are being “raced through” to minimize detention expenses and maximize removal statistics is so unfair and such an obvious violation of due process.
Also, this is the Judge Quynh Vu Bain that I remember as a former colleague at the Arlington Immigration Court: fair, scholarly, hard-working, kind, and Due Process oriented. My Georgetown Law student observers remarked on how welcoming she was and how she went out of-her way to make sure that everyone in the courtroom understood what was happening and why.
Despite Sessions’s disdain for individual rights of migrants (particularly vulnerable asylum seekers) and Due Process, and his fanatic emphasis on using the U.S. Immigration Courts as mere tools of DHS enforcement, there are many U.S. immigration Judges out there working conscientiously every day to provide fairness and Due Process to vulnerable migrants while laboring under some of the highest stress levels and worst working conditions faced by any judges in America!
America needs an independent Article I United States Immigration Court dedicated to guaranteeing “fairness and due process for all” now!
DUE PROCESS FOREVER!
PWS
01-19-18

U.S. IMMIGRATION JUDGE RODGER P. HARRIS REPORTEDLY STANDS TALL FOR DUE PROCESS AS NEW COURT SUIT ALLEGES THAT HIS COLLEAGUES ON THE IMMIGRATION BENCH IN CHARLOTTE, N.C. ARE SCOFFLAWS WHO FAIL TO HOLD LEGALLY REQUIRED BOND HEARINGS!

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/immigration-law-blog/archive/2018/01/18/lawsuit-challenges-immigration-judges-who-refuse-to-hold-bond-hearings-palacios-v-sessions.aspx?Redirected=true

From LexisNexis Immigration Community online:

“Lawsuit Challenges Immigration Judges Who Refuse to Hold Bond Hearings: Palacios v. Sessions

AIC, Jan. 17, 2018

“The government cannot lock people up without giving them access to prompt bond hearings and an opportunity to show that they should be released for the months or years that it takes to adjudicate their removal cases. This lawsuit challenges the actions of immigration judges in Charlotte, North Carolina who have done just that: refused to conduct bond hearings for people who properly file bond motions with the Charlotte Immigration Court.  The case was filed as a class action in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina by the American Immigration Council, the CAIR Coalition, and Cauley Forsythe Law Group.”

Complaint

Brief in Support of Motion for Class Certification”

****************************************
Go on over to LexisNexis Immigration Community at the link for the complete story.
Check out paragraph 6 of the Complaint which contrasts the conduct of Judge Harris, who holds bond hearing in accordance with the law and established procedures, and the alleged conduct of his judicial colleagues in Charlotte.
Not surprising to me! Judge Harris was my colleague for years at the U.S. Immigration Court in Arlington Virginia where he had a reputation for scrupulously following the law and providing full due process to all who came before him. Just like a U.S. Immigration Judge is supposed to do.
On the other hand, prior to Judge Harris’s arrival, the Charlotte Immigration Court had a reputation among the private bar, commentators, and the press as a place where due process was often given short shrift, particularly in asylum cases.
Of course, these are merely allegations at this time. We’ll see what happens as the case progresses in Federal District Court.
While Sessions, McHenry, and the “Falls Church Crew” are screwing around with imaginary “goals and timetables’ — untethered to reality in a system with a 660,000 backlog and no real plan for resolving it — these are the real due process problems that are festering in the U.S. Immigration Courts and denying individuals their legal right to due process on a regular basis. Where’s the concern from “on high” with a court system that’s failing in its mission to provide due process to individuals under our Constitution? Obviously, the problem starts with a “Scofflaw Attorney General” who cares more about expediting removals and a White Nationalist immigration enforcement agenda than he does about the Constitution, Due Process, and the integrity of the U.S. Immigration Court system.
We need an independent Article I U.S. Immigration Court now!
PWS
01-18-18

 

THE BO-GLO: FEDERAL JUDGE IN BOSTON STRONGLY REBUKES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S “GONZO” ENFORCEMENT — COMPARES CHRISTIANS BEING FORCED OUT “to Jews fleeing the Third Reich in a boat!”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/01/17/judge-compares-christians-facing-deportation-trump-administration-jews-fleeing-nazis/klnay5JG42au9fadumgIcL/story.html?s_campaign=8315

Michael Levinson reports for the Boston Globe:

“A federal judge on Wednesday likened a group of Indonesian Christians facing possible deportation by the Trump administration to Jewish refugees trying to escape the Nazis.

Judge Patti B. Saris compared the plight of the Indonesians, who are in the country illegally, to Jews fleeing the Third Reich in a boat — an apparent reference to the infamous case of the St. Louis, an ocean liner that left Germany with 937 passengers, most of them Jews, and was turned away by the US government in 1939. Hundreds of the Jews were later killed during the Holocaust.

The Indonesians argue they will be tortured or killed because of their religion if forced to return to their Muslim-majority homeland. The Trump administration insists they have not proven they would be harmed if they returned to Indonesia.

“We’re not going to be that country,” Saris said Wednesday at a hearing in US District Court in Boston. “We don’t want to put them on the ship unless someone” can review their contention that deportation back to Indonesia is “a really bad situation for them.”

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

Read the complete story at the link. Thanks to my good friend Kevin Roche from Boothbay Harbor (summer) and Boston (winter) for sending this my way.

More wasteful litigation, more abuse of authority, more cruel, unnecessary, and unproductive “Gonzo” enforcement from the Trump Administration! They seem determined to repeat all of the worst mistakes of American history. But, then again, the Trumpsters pride themselves on ignorance of history, disregard of facts, and anti-intellectualism. So, why should we be surprised that they act more like “third-world thugs” than representatives of an enlightened Western Democracy?

All of this supports my observation that DHS doesn’t have enough real law enforcement functions to keep its current workforce busy. They clearly don’t need any additional agents. Just different leadership and smarter, more humane and sensible policies.

PWS

01-18-18

 

 

 

 

NO SURPRISES HERE – “GONZO” IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IS BAD LAW ENFORCEMENT!

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/how-trumps-immigration-policies-are-backfiring.html

Isaac Chotiner reports for Slate

“A week after President Trump declared his preference for immigrants from places like Norway over various “shithole” countries (that just happen to be majority nonwhite), Congress and the White House are negotiating over keeping the government funded, with immigration as a key issue. Most Democrats only want to do avoid a shutdown if the Dreamers are given legal protections that Trump has sought to remove. In return for offering them protections, Trump wants funding for things like a border wall. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has continued its heightened pace of immigration raids and deportations, and recently declared that it would remove protections from Salvadoran immigrants who had settled in the country.

To discuss the state of play on Capitol Hill, and Trump’s approach to immigration more broadly, I spoke by phone with Jonathan Blitzer, a staff writer at the New Yorker who covers immigration issues. (Earlier this month, he wrote about the presence of the MS-13 gang on Long Island.) During the course of our conversation, which has been edited and condensed for clarity, we discussed how much racism has influenced Trump’s immigration policies, whether tough-on-immigration stances can be counterproductive to halting crime, and if Democrats should compromise on a border wall if it means protecting the Dreamers.

. . . .

Essentially in the past, in the last two years of the Obama presidency, DHS created a set of priorities, basically saying to ICE: Look, there’s a huge undocumented immigrant population in the United States. 12 million people. You can’t go after everyone. If you guys are going to be a serious police force and if people aren’t going to live in fear of completely random acts of arrest and deportations, you have to prioritize people with criminal records. You have to prioritize people who could be viewed as constituting a public safety threat. The new administration immediately canceled those priorities, which pretty much means there are actually no guidelines for how ICE now goes about its business.

In one sense, that suits the MO of the administration, which is almost total randomness. There really isn’t a kind of thoroughgoing vision of what immigration enforcement looks like. In fact, if you think thematically, the administration is doing things that in some ways undermine the president’s very public statements about how concerned he is with the growing undocumented population in the U.S.

How so?

Just talking about the Salvadoran population, you’re talking about 200,000 people. Those people aren’t just going to leave after two decades here because the administration has now removed this legal protection for them. You are going to see the undocumented community grow in the United States under the Trump administration.

What’s more, arrests are up, right? So the statistics I’ve seen are that ICE arrests have gone up by something like 40 percent, and a significant number of those are people who did not have criminal records. There’s an enormous backlog in immigration courts, a backlog of over 600,000 cases, which means that you actually can’t process all the people who are being arrested. In fact, if you were thinking about this all rationally, [the arrests] would be counterproductive.

One thing your colleague Sarah Stillman mentions in her piece in last week’s issue of the New Yorker is that immigrants are not reporting crime. The drops in major cities are staggering. In Arlington, Virginia, for example, according to Stillman, “domestic-assault reports in one Hispanic neighborhood dropped more than eighty-five per cent in the first eight months after Trump’s Inauguration, compared with the same period the previous year. Reports of rape and sexual assault fell seventy-five per cent.” You would think that as an administration that talks about being tough on crime that this would be a huge problem, but it isn’t to them.

One hundred percent agreed. It’s counterproductive in almost every sense. You don’t even need to go to the bleeding-heart liberals for confirmation of this. You talk to police, you talk to sheriffs, and a lot of them are actually quite concerned about what this means for public safety and how they do their police work. Victims aren’t coming forward.

In some of the work that I’ve done on Long Island, MS-13 has been basically an obsession with this administration, and in every instance, the way the administration has gone about trying to combat the gang problem has backfired and has resulted in communities being a lot less safe than they otherwise would have been.

What specifically?

What’s happening on Long Island—and I think it’s fair to say this is happening elsewhere where MS-13’s been active—what ICE and local law enforcement have started to do is they’ve been so indiscriminate in who they’re arresting for suspected gang associations that they’re actually arresting a lot of people who are the victims of gang crime. I mean, you look at some of these communities, the victims and the perpetrators live side-by-side in these tiny hamlets. They go to the same schools. They work the same jobs. The idea of arresting anyone who has this kind of peripheral association with the gang is nonsensical.

There’s some racial profiling going on on Long Island, and this is exactly the stuff that you’re describing, the fears that people have. I mean you have victims of crimes who are scared to come forward because when they talk to the police, they know police are talking to ICE and the next thing they know, they’ll either end up in detention or family members will end up in detention.

What would be a more proper approach to MS-13? It seems like a tough issue for Democrats.

The proper approach from a law enforcement and community-building standpoint is to invest more money in after school programs. It sounds like sort of milquetoast policy, but you talk to experts on this, you talk to former gang members and community organizers and all of them, all of them are aligned in stressing the importance of just basically providing some sense of community for kids who live in these immigrant communities who often have come fleeing gang violence in Central America who have essentially nowhere else to turn. They go to schools. They don’t speak the language. There aren’t after school programs. They don’t have counseling. Some of them have undergone intense trauma. They’re easy marks for a gang that recruits people who feel isolated and socially marginalized. Oftentimes what happens is they join up on the U.S. side and not on the Central American side, precisely because they feel exposed here.

But that’s not an easy sell. I think Democrats are in a tough spot on that and I think that’s one of the reasons why the Republicans have really tried to link MS-13 to this kind of nationwide attack on sanctuary cities. It’s all playing on these fears and rhetorically, I think for the most part has been pretty successful for Republicans.

If you put aside for a minute America’s role in helping immiserate El Salvador, going back many years to our support for very bad people during their civil war, what would you tell American citizens about taking in immigrants who might be likely to end up in gangs like this?

I don’t think they are so likely to end up in gangs. I think that’s one of the first things that the administration trades on: playing up the idea that all of these kids who arrive here are somehow threats. A tiny, tiny minority of unaccompanied kids who show up in the U.S. end up joining these gangs. The vast majority, the overwhelming majority of them have no gang affiliation, want nothing to do with the gangs, and if given the opportunity here, thrive.

The argument for why we should be more open to them is the same argument that I would make about U.S. refugee policies generally. It is a mark of American moral and political leadership. It actually affects our policies and our foreign policy weight in these regions. The United States has supported all kinds of horrifying political regimes in Central America, but even leaving that political history aside, the gang problem in Central America is the direct outgrowth of U.S. deportation policy. It’s a literal shift. It’s not even a manner of speaking.

Mass deportation creates instability. It’s just going to continue to create a refugee crisis. I mean this crisis is just the continuation of a decades-long trend. We sometimes look the other way, which sometimes is contributing directly to the violence in these regions and then people basically having no other move than to try to move north.

. . . .”

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

Read the complete interview at the link.

As I have been saying, Trump, Sessions, Miller, Homan, & Co. have little or no interest in effective law enforcement. Anything but!

Indeed, as this article points out, and as I have said in the past, truly effective, legitimate law enforcement would involve securing the trust of the Hispanic communities and separating real law enforcement targets — serious criminals and terrorists — from the vast, vast bulk of the undocumented population who are residing peacefully and productively in the U.S. In addition to exercising “PD” for the latter, effective law enforcement would involve putting forth a “no strings attached” proposal to give these folks legal status and work authorization in the U.S., preferably with, but even without, a “path to citizenship.”

No, with the Trumpsters, it’s all about White Nationalism, racism, and the quest to create a false link between Hispanics, crime, and loss of American jobs (conveniently forgetting that we’re now basically at “full employment” in the U.S. and that without undocumented workers our economy would likely be contracting rather than continuing to expand). As a result, ICE is becoming a “bad joke” in the legitimate law enforcement community and an anathema to people almost everywhere. In a democracy (which Trump, Sessions, et al don’t really want) law enforcement can’t operate effectively without a certain amount of mutual trust and respect from the community.

PWS

01-18-18

MORE NONSENSE FROM EOIR: NEW “PRIORITIES & TIMETABLES” WON’T HELP RESOLVE 660,00 CASE BACKLOG, BUT WILL MINDLESSLY INCREASE STRESS, CAUSE MORE “ADR,” & IMPEDE DUE PROCESS!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/17/doj-issues-new-immigration-court-policies-addressing-obama-era-caseload-backup.html

Brooke Singman reports for Fox News:

“The Justice Department issued new measures on Wednesday that will prioritize certain immigration cases in an effort to streamline a system that nearly tripled the caseload of judges during the Obama administration.

A memo listing guidelines for all new cases filed and an order that all immigration court cases that are reopened must establish case priorities was sent by John [sic] McHenry, the director of the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, to the Office of Chief Immigration Judge, all immigration judges, all court administrators and all immigration court staff.

“In 2010, immigration court benchmarks for non-detained cases were abruptly abandoned, and since that time — perhaps non-coincidentally — the caseload has tripled,” Justice Department spokesman Devin O’Malley said in a statement to Fox News, noting that the reintroduction of court-based goals and benchmarks would “assist in properly managing cases, increase productivity, and reduce the pending caseload.”

“Some policies implemented in the immigration court system in recent years have contributed to a three-fold increase of the courts’ pending caseload,” O’Malley said to Fox News, noting that certain “prioritization practices” made the caseload “worse” by continuing cases that could be resolved more quickly in favor of cases that often took longer to complete.

It was “the immigration court equivalent of fiddling while Rome burned,” O’Malley said.

“Some policies implemented in the immigration court system in recent years have contributed to a three-fold increase of the courts’ pending caseload.”

– Devin O’Malley, DOJ spokesman

McHenry’s memo is part of a larger push led by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who issued a broader memo late last year outlining principles to ensure that the “adjudication of immigration court cases serves the national interest,” and gave McHenry the “authority” to set time frames for the resolution of cases, and to evaluate the performance of immigration judges and “take corrective action where needed.”

Currently, less than 10 percent of immigration cases pending meet the definition of “priority,” according to McHenry, leading him to address “confusion” and “clarify” the department’s priorities. That statistic, however, conveys a “potentially mistaken impression” of the importance of completing the other 600,000-plus pending cases that do not bear a “priority” designation, according to McHenry.

“All cases involving individuals in detention or custody, regardless of the custodian, are priorities for completion,” McHenry wrote, but noted that “the designation of a case as a priority is not intended to mandate a specific outcome in any particular case.”

Other measures McHenry ordered were new benchmarks for courts, and for immigration judges.

The new measures require that 85 percent of all non-status detained removal cases be completed within 60 days of filing; 85 percent of all non-status non-detained removal cases be completed within 1 year of filing; and 85 percent of all motions adjudicated within 14 days of the request.

McHenry also required 90 percent of custody redeterminations to be completed within 14 days of the request, and 95 percent of all hearings to be completed on their initial scheduled hearing date.

Another new rule requires 100 percent of “all credible fear reviews” to be completed within seven days.

Fox News’ Jake Gibson contributed to this report.”

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

Thanks to Dan Kowalski over at LexisNexis for sending this item my way.

Inane memos like this, issued without consultation and meaningful input from either the U.S. Immigration Judges who actually decide the cases or the attorneys who litigate in immigration Court, are basically “DOA.” Significantly, both the BIA and the Federal Courts have made it clear that compliance with bureaucratic “timeframes” can’t overrule the legal requirements of Due Process in an individual case. Even assuming that Sessions can “co-opt” the BIA, the Federal Courts will be sending back cases in which it appears that the Immigration Judge has elevated the desire to meet timeframes over the requirements of fundamental fairness and Due Process.

But, quite contrary to Acting Director James (not “John” as the article states) McHenry’s bogus claim that the memo does not suggest any particular outcome, the memo clearly suggests that U.S. Immigration Judges should cut corners and deny Due Process to meet these artificial guidelines or risk having their performance judged “deficient.” For example, most detained cases with asylum applications that go to an “Individual Merits” hearing are going to take more than 60 days for the Respondent to locate a pro bono attorney and for that attorney to complete the application and prepare for what often can be a very complex and hotly contested hearing.  It’s an open invitation, if not an actual directive, to engage in sloppy, unprofessional judging.

Moreover, the tone of the memo insultingly suggests that the problem is that  in the absence of this type of sophomoric “guidance from above” U.S. Immigration Judges haven’t been working very hard or effectively to complete cases. Therefore, “cracking the administrative whip” — by folks that by and large are not and never have actually been sitting U.S. immigration Judges — will somehow motivate them to “peddle faster.” What a crock! Almost any executive or manager worth his or her salt knows that this type of “scare tactic” applied to a senior professional workforce accomplishes nothing besides ratcheting up already astronomically high stress levels and unnecessarily diminishing already low morale.

This memorandum is, however, yet another key exhibit on how and why the current U.S. Immigration Court is being incompetently administered by the DOJ and their “gofors” over at EOIR Headquarters in Falls Church. With the likes of Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions in charge of the U.S. Immigration Courts, things are only going to get worse. American needs an independent Article I U.S. Immigration Court now! 

PWS

01-18-18

 

 

 

THE HILL: NOLAN UNIMPRESSED BY “GANG OF SIX’S” DREAMER COMPROMISE EFFORT!

http://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/369403-gang-of-six-daca-bill-is-an-exploitative-political-statement

 

Family Pictures

Nolan writes:

“. . . .

Yet no matter how Flake describes the proposal, it is not a good faith attempt to find common ground with either the majority of congressional Republicans or the president.

Five of the six senators in the Gang of Six were also in 2013’s the Gang of Eight, which showed the same disregard for majority Republican positions when they moved the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013, S. 744, through the Senate.

S. 744 was bipartisan too, but it was opposed by 70 percent of the Senate Republicans. Among other things, it would have established a large legalization program without assurance that the aliens being legalized would not be replaced in 10 years by a new group of undocumented aliens.

This has been the sine qua non for Republican cooperation with a legalization program since the failed implementation of the enforcement provisions in the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, (IRCA), which legalized 2.7 million aliens.

One of IRCA’s major objectives was to wipe the slate clean and start over with an effective enforcement program. But IRCA’s enforcement measures were not implemented, and by October 1996, the undocumented alien population had almost doubled.

. . . .

Trump wants a physical wall. Virtual walls rely primarily on surveillance technology, which just notifies the border patrol when aliens are making an illegal crossing. They will be in the United States before they can be apprehended, and Trump’s enforcement program suffers already from an immigration court backlog crisis.

A physical wall makes illegal crossings more difficult. While some grown men can climb over a large wall, children can’t, and the dangers involved in climbing over such a wall should deter parents from bringing their children here illegally.

If the Democrats really want to help the DACA participants, they will let Trump have his wall.”

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

I probably see it more the way the Washington Post did in yesterday’s lead editorial. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ignore-the-president-vote-on-the-daca-deal/2018/01/16/55f38288-fb03-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html

There apparently are enough Democratic and GOP votes to pass the “Gang of Six” compromise. Why be held hostage by GOP legislators who, while perhaps they are a majority of the GOP, are a minority of the total legislature and actually represent a minority position among Americans? Some days Trump says he’ll sign anything Congress passes; other days he doesn’t. So, give him the bill and see what happens. Seems unlikely that he will veto his own budget.

On the other hand, at this point, I’d be willing to give Trump his Wall (but not an end to “chain migration” or permanent cuts in permanent immigration) if that’s what it takes to save the Dreamers. Unlike Nolan, however, my experience tells me that “The Wall” will ultimately be an expensive failure. Whatever the technical difficulties with past “Virtual Walls” might have been, I have to believe that technology, which tends to improve over time, not physical barriers are the wave of the future.

And the real solution to individuals coming here without documents is a more robust and realistic legal immigration program that meets market demands for additional labor and also satisfies our humanitarian obligations. 

Most of the current adult so-called “undocumented” residents of the U.S. are gainfully employed in ways that actually help and support the U.S. They are a huge net “plus.” So, why would we want to go to great lengths in a futile attempt to keep folks like them from coming in to help us in the future? Doesn’t make any sense! That’s why we’re in the current situation — unrealistic laws.

The real solution is more legal immigration which would insure that those coming get properly screened and don’t have to use the services of smugglers. Then, immigration enforcement could concentrate on those seeking to come outside the system.

Leaving aside refugees, why would folks come if the job market actually gets to the point where it is saturated and can no longer expand? For the most part, they wouldn’t. But, of course, that wouldn’t satisfy the GOP White Nationalist restrictionists who are operating from a racial rather than a realistic perspective.

PWS

01-18-18

 

MORE DEADLY MISTAKES: 6TH CIR. FINDS BIA’S ERROR-RIDDLED DECISION WRONGLY SENT WOMAN BACK TO FACE CARTEL THREATS IN MEXICO – TRUJILLO DIAZ V. SESSIONS!

18a0012p-06-6thGangs

Trujillo Diaz v. Sessions, 6th Cir., 01-17-18, published

PANEL: MERRITT, MOORE, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.

OPINION  BY: Judge Bush.

SUMMARY (FROM OPINION):

“In this immigration case, Maribel Trujillo Diaz petitions for review of an order denying her motion to reopen removal proceedings. The United States Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) ruled that Trujillo Diaz failed to establish a prima facie case of eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA” or “Act”) because she failed to show that she would be singled out individually for persecution based on her family membership. The BIA reiterated this finding in ruling that Trujillo Diaz failed to establish a prima facie case of eligibility for protection under the Convention Against Torture. Because the BIA failed to credit the facts stated in Trujillo Diaz’s declarations, and this error undermined its conclusion as to the sufficiency of Trujillo Diaz’s prima facie evidence, we hold that the BIA abused its discretion. We further hold that the BIA abused its discretion in summarily rejecting Trujillo Diaz’s argument that she could not safely relocate internally in Mexico for purposes of showing a prima facie case of eligibility for relief under the Convention Against Torture. Thus, we vacate the order of the BIA and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

KEY QUOTATION:

“The BIA’s abuse of discretion in failing to credit Trujillo Diaz’s father’s affidavit undermined its conclusion that Trujillo Diaz had not made a prima facie showing of eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal under the INA. This conclusion also affected the BIA’s analysis of whether Trujillo Diaz made a prima facie showing of eligibility for protection under the Convention Against Torture. Further, the BIA abused its discretion in summarily rejecting Trujillo Diaz’s argument that she could not safely relocate internally in Mexico for purposes of showing prima facie eligibility under the Convention Against Torture. Accordingly, we GRANT the petition and REMAND to the BIA for reconsideration consistent with this opinion.”

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

Following the denial of her original claim for asylum, Trujillo Diaz was allowed by the Obama Administration as an exercise of prosecutorial discretion to remain in the United States with work authorization and faithfully checked in with the DHS. However, the Trump Administration arbitrarily targeted her for removal. Although many in the community, including the Catholic Church, protested, the Administration nevertheless removed Trujillo Diaz to Mexico while this motion was pending.

Our tax dollars are being squandered for this type of useless, immoral, and in this case ultimately wrongful removal. At no time has Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions shown any concern whatsoever for the significant  number of mistaken asylum denials and improper deportations taking place as a result of poor quality decision-making taking place in the over-stressed and overwhelmed U.S. Immigration Courts operating under his administration. Nor has he shown any appreciation for the obvious fact that rather than more speed in deporting individuals, this court system is badly in need of better representation for asylum seekers, more careful decision-making that complies with the law, and measures to insure Due Process as required by the U.S. Constitution. 

Sessions’s anti-due-process administration of the U.S. Immigration Courts is a national disgrace! We need an independent United States Immigration Court dedicated to insuring Due Process and protecting vulnerable individuals from wrongful removals like this! Now! 

PWS

01-18-18

 

DANA MILBANK @ WASHPOST: KIRSTJEN NIELSEN IS A BUREAUCRATIC SUPER SYCOPHANT! – Duh! Why Do You Think She Got The Job?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/this-way-madness-lies/2018/01/16/0b627fe2-fb0a-11e7-a46b-a3614530bd87_story.html

Milbank writes:

“This way madness lies.

I knew that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, when she appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, would deny that Trump said what the whole world knows he said: that he wants immigrants from Norway rather than from “shithole” countries in Africa.

What I was not expecting was that Nielsen would raise a question about whether Norwegians are mostly white.

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) displayed a poster from the dais proclaiming, in big letters, “Trump: Why allow immigrants from ‘Shithole Countries’?” An aide held the poster aloft right behind Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who, along with Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), was at the infamous meeting with Trump and told others about his racist language.

Nielsen, who was also in that meeting, was now under oath, and she wiggled every which way to excuse Trump without perjuring herself: “I did not hear that word used. . . . I don’t dispute that the president was using tough language.”

Leahy moved on to Trump’s wish for more Norwegian immigrants. “Norway is a predominantly white country, isn’t it?” he asked, rhetorically.

“I actually do not know that, sir,” Nielsen replied. “But I imagine that is the case.”

Kirstjen Nielsen doesn’t know Norwegians are white?

Just as Nielsen “imagines” Norwegians are white, I imagine that she, in her denial of the obvious and defense of the indefensible, is the latest Trump sycophant to trash her reputation. She joins the two Republican senators, David Perdue (Ga.) and Tom Cotton (Ark.), who were in the room for the “shithole” moment but not only denied that it was said (Trump’s use of the vulgar word was widely confirmed, even by Fox News, and not denied by the White House until Trump tweeted a partial denial the next day) but also disparaged the integrity of Durbin for being truthful.

It’s clear they, like Nielsen, do this so they don’t get crosswise with the volatile president — but in the process shred their own integrity.

Now the federal government is hurtling toward a shutdown, entirely because of the president’s whim. Democrats and Republicans presented him last week with exactly the bipartisan deal he said he would sign — protecting the immigrant “dreamers” while also providing funding for his border security “wall” — but Trump unexpectedly exploded with his racist attack and vulgar word.”

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

Read the rest of Milbank’s op-ed at the above link.

Obviously, Neilsen got the job of DHS Secretary because she was perceived by the Trumpsters to be a lightweight sycophant who wouldn’t “rock the boat.” After all, a truly independent individual at the head of DHS might stand up to the wasteful and immoral “Gonzo” enforcement program being pursued by Trump, Miller, Sessions, Kelly, Homan, and the rest of the Administration’s “White Nationalist Cabal.”

How dumb and complicit is Nielsen? Well, she’s been “reassuring” the “Dreamer community” that even if the budget deal falls through they won’t be an “enforcement priority!” She ignores, of course, the fact that without DACA or legislation, the Dreamers will lose their hard-earned legal work authorizations and, in many cases, their ability to pursue higher education.

In plain terms, they will be “forced underground” where they will be subject to employer abuse, won’t be able to pay taxes, won’t be able to realize their full potential, and, naturally, will be unable to report or act as witnesses to crimes because of fear of removal. Plus, Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions and Tom Homan have assured Dreamers that if they happen to get caught up in any of ICE’s “dragnet” operations, their “nonpriority” status won’t save them from deportation. Also, once “underground” and no longer required to apply to the DHS for renewals, those few “Dreamers” who do go “off the tracks” will not have their records periodically reviewed by the Government. We won’t even have a real idea of how many actually are in the U.S. any more. So, how is this sane government?

The Obama Administration correctly determined that removal of the Dreamers was not an enforcement priority and not in the national interest. In other words, they that they should receive “prosecutorial discretion,” or “PD” pending an appropriate legislative resolution which was not immediately available.

Rather than leaving it to a myriad of local enforcement officials to arbitrarily exercise PD, the Obama Administration established a program where Dreamers were carefully reviewed by professional DHS adjudicators who consistently applied written, transparent criteria. If qualified, Dreamers were given legal authorization to work and documentation that, for the most part, allowed them to pursue higher education, get drivers licenses, etc. What a reasonable and rational way to exercise “prosecutorial discretion” or “PD.” Indeed, a model program.

A real DHS secretary might have stood up to bullies Trump, Kelly, Miller, and Sessions by arguing that the DACA program should be reinstated. The opportunity certainly presented itself. The Administration could simply drop its opposition to the order of the U.S. District Judge Alsup blocking the rescission of DACA. That also would offer the Administration “legal cover” if any of the restrictionist GOP state AGs challenge DACA. They would have to deal with a highly skeptical Judge Alsup.

A real DHS Secretary might also not have had “bogus amnesia” and have reported accurately under oath what the President really said. A real DHS Secretary might also have “Just Said No” to the cruel and irrational termination of Salvadoran TPS. Yeah, the President could fire her for either of those things. But, no Cabinet Secretary job is forever anyway. If you’re going to go down, having it be for courageously telling truth to power, when power is being abused, isn’t the worst way to go out.

Instead, Neilsen will go down as just another bureaucratic sycophant who “went along to get along” no matter what the cost to her country and to her own integrity.

PWS

01-17-18

 

GONZO’S WORLD: HIS HIGHLY DISINGENUOUS “TRIBUTE” TO DR. KING WHILE ACTIVELY UNDERMINING MLK’S VISION OF RACIAL EQUALITY IN AMERICA OUTRAGES CIVIL RIGHTS ADVOCATES! — Hollow Words From An Empty Man!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-in-remarks-criticized-as-beyond-ironic-praises-martin-luther-king-jr/2018/01/16/cb3a8bd8-fae3-11e7-a46b-a3614530bd87_story.html

 

Sari Horwitz reports for the Washington Post:

“All he had were his words and the power of truth,” Sessions said. “ . . . His message, his life and his death changed hearts and minds. Those changed souls then changed the laws of this land.”

But civil rights leaders criticized Sessions’s remarks, made at a time, they said, when the Justice Department is rolling back efforts to promote civil and voting rights.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions called Tuesday for Justice Department employees to “remember, celebrate and act” in commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)

“It is beyond ironic for Jeff Sessions to celebrate the architecture of civil rights protections inspired by Dr. King and other leaders as he works to tear down these very protections,” said Vanita Gupta, the head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division under President Barack Obama and now president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

“Make no mistake,” Gupta said. “If Dr. King were alive today, he would be protesting outside of Jeff Sessions’s office.”

Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said that in the past year, the Justice Department under Sessions has taken action to “obstruct and reverse civil rights enforcement.”

She and others point to a new policy that calls for federal prosecutors to pursue the most serious charges even if that might mean minority defendants face stiff, mandatory-minimum penalties. Sessions has defended President Trump’s travel ban and threatened to take away funding from cities with policies he considers too lenient toward undocumented immigrants. The department’s new guidance and stances on voting rights and LGBT issues also might disenfranchise minorities and poor people, civil rights advocates say.

Justice officials say that Sessions’s actions reflect an aggressive, by-the-book interpretation of federal law and that his policies are geared toward fighting violent crime and drug trafficking.”

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

Read the complete article at the above link.

Absurd and insulting! Actions speak louder than words, Gonzo! Every day that you spend in office mocks our Constitution, the rule of law, human decency, and the legacy of MLK and others who fought for racial and social equality and social justice under the law.

I have no doubt that if Dr. King were alive today, he and his followers would be on your and Trump’s  “hit list.” Indeed, peacefully but forcefully standing up to and shaming tone-deaf, White Nationalist, racially challenged politicos like you, who lived in the past and inhibited America’s future with their racism, was one of the defining marks of MLK’s life!

How do things like increasing civil immigration detention, building the “New American Gulag,” stripping unaccompanied children of their rights to an Immigration Court hearing, mindlessly attacking so-called “sanctuary cities,” mocking hard-working pro bono immigration attorneys and their efforts, reducing the number of refugees, excluding Muslims, building a wall, stripping protections from Dreamers, reducing legal immigration, favoring White immigrants, and spreading false narratives about Latino migrants and crime “honor” the legacy of Dr. King?

Indeed, the “Sanctuary Cities Movement” appears to have a direct historical connection to King’s non-violent civil disobedience aimed at the enforcement of “Jim Crow” laws. Much as today, those on the “wrong side of history” wrapped themselves in hypocritical bogus “rule of law” arguments as they mocked and violated the civil rights of African Americans. 

At some point, America needs and deserves a real Attorney General, one who recognizes and fights for the rights of everyone in America, including minorities, the poor, the most vulnerable, and the so-called undocumented population, who, contrary to your actions and rhetoric, are entitled to full Due Process of law under our Constitution. Imagine how a real Attorney General, one like say Vanita Gupta, might act. Now that would truly honor Dr. King’s memory.

PWS

01-17-18

 

TRUMP GOP INTENTIONALLY TORTURES DREAMERS – MESSING WITH AMERICA’S FUTURE FOR NO GOOD REASON!

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/why-the-trump-administrations-daca-policy-is-indefensible.html

Eric Levitz writes for NY Maggie:

“There are a lot more undocumented immigrants in the United States than our government can possibly deport (without increasing the size and scope of immigration enforcement beyond even the Trump administration’s wildest dreams). At present, U.S. immigration courts are so severely backlogged, deportations actually went down during Trump’s first year in office, even as the number of immigration arrests dramatically increased.

This context requires the White House to set priorities for enforcing immigration law. Until Congress increases the relevant resources, the Executive branch cannot significantly increase deportations with its policy changes — it can only change the composition of the deportee population. The Obama administration decided that it made little sense to use the government’s limited resources on expelling Dreamers (law-abiding, gainfully-employed undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children). And on Tuesday, Trump’s Department of Homeland Security reached the same conclusion.

“It’s not going to be a priority of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prioritize their removal. I’ve said that before. That’s not the policy of DHS,” DHS head Kirstjen Nielsen told CBS This Morning. “If you are a DACA that’s compliant with your registration, meaning you haven’t committed a crime, you, in fact, are registered, you’re not priority of enforcement for ICE should the program end.”

This statement is not surprising. It would be bizarre if Homeland Security did prioritize deporting a category of immigrants that is, by definition, compliant with all (non-immigration) laws, and making productive contributions to society. And the significance of Nielson’s remarks are unclear. There is a big difference between deprioritizing Dreamers, and instructing immigration enforcement agents to leave them alone. Many Dreamers shared their personal information and immigration status with the government when applying for protection from deportation under the Obama administration. If ICE isn’t explicitly prohibited from using that data to make quick-and-easy arrests of undocumented individuals, some agents could take that initiative.

Regardless, Nielsen’s statement betrays the fundamental incoherence of the Trump administration’s policy on Dreamers. Like its predecessor, the Trump White House (officially) believes that Dreamers should not be prioritized for deportation; unlike the Obama administration, it does not believe that the Executive branch should make it easier for Dreamers to contribute to the legitimate economy while they’re here.

Trump has never actually made a policy argument for this position. When the administration ended Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program — which had provided Dreamers with formal protection from deportation and renewable work permits — it claimed to do so on legal grounds: Whatever the merits of the policy, it was simply unconstitutional for the Executive branch to implement such a program without congressional approval.

The problem with that argument, as a federal judge recently noticed, is that “deferred action has been blessed by both the the Supreme Court and Congress as a means to exercise enforcement discretion” and embraced by presidents of both parties for decades. Further, the specific features of DACA, such as work permits, are explicitly allowedunder current law. (Notably, in other contexts, the Trump administration has shown little reluctance to assert the Executive branch’s immense discretion over immigration policy.)

The Trump administration says it does not want to deport Dreamers. A large body of law — and now, a federal court ruling — says that it has the power to unilaterally give Dreamers formal protection from deportation. And yet, Trump refuses to exercise that authority. Thus, his ostensible position is that Dreamers should be allowed to stay in the U.S. — but should be kept in a perpetual state of anxiety, and prevented from securing legal employment — until Congress agrees to pass a long-list of controversial reforms to the immigration system.

In this light, Trump’s DACA policy is not (as Jeff Sessions once suggested) an act of deference to the limits of executive authority. Rather, it is a gross abuse of that discretion: The administration revoked the legal status of 700,000 people, not because it thinks this is defensible as a policy, but solely as a means of coercing Congress into passing legislation that it otherwise would not.”

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

The Trumpsters are holding the Dreamers “hostage” for a White Nationalist, restrictionist, racist immigration agenda that would be bad for American in every imaginable way.

Levitz also “gets” two things that others sometimes miss: 1) that Trump is actually “over a barrel” because he can’t really remove the Dreamers — just drive them underground and make their lives miserable and less productive (and deprive us of tax revenues) by taking away their work authorization; and 2) the legal underpinnings for DACA are much stronger than Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions would ever admit.

The GOP White Nationalists have created a fake “immigration crisis” that any other Administration with an ounce of human decency, good lawyering, and common sense could and would have avoided. And, all of this is a colossal waste of taxpayer money! “Throw the bums out” at the ballot box!

PWS

01-17-18

DEPORTING THE INNOCENT – DESTROYING AMERICAN FAMILIES & COMMUNITIES – A TRUMP/SESSIONS/DHS SPECIALTY!

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/deport-man-30-years_us_5a5dc32fe4b04f3c55a56e47

Willa Frej reports for the Huffington Post:

“Jorge Garcia, 39, bid his family farewell Monday under the watchful gaze of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, who required him to return to his native Mexico after living in the Detroit area for 30 years.

Emotional video of Garcia hugging his wife and two children at Detroit’s Metro Airport captured the emotional trauma that deportations can cause for families. Though members of Garcia’s family all are U.S. citizens, he was technically living in the country illegally.

NIRAJ WARIKOO/DETROIT FREE PRESS/USA TODAY SPORTS IMAGES
Jorge Garcia, 39, of Lincoln Park, Michigcan, hugs his wife, Cindy Garcia, and their two children Jan. 15, 2018, at Detroit Metro Airport moments before being forced to board a flight to Mexico to be deported.

“Yes, he was brought here at 10 years old and yes, he entered the country illegally, but he has no criminal record and his case needs to be looked at individually because he deserves to be here in a country that he’s known ― not Mexico,” his wife, Cindy Garcia, told CNN.

During President Barack Obama’s administration, Garcia received temporary extensions allowing him to avert a deportation order from 2009, according to the Detroit Free Press. ICE renewed the order in November and told Garcia he needed to exit the country by Jan. 15.

President Donald Trump’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants includes widescale raids, arrests and deportations. From the time Trump took office until the end of September, ICE removals that resulted from an arrests increased by 37 percent over the previous year, the Department of Homeland Security said. Meanwhile, the number of people apprehended attempting to cross the U.S. southern border dropped to a historical low in fiscal 2017.

Garcia expressed sadness and apprehension about returning to a country he barely remembers.

“I got to leave my family behind, knowing that they’re probably going to have a hard time adjusting, me not being there for them for who knows how long,” he said in an interview with the Detroit Free Press the night before his deportation.  “It’s just hard. It’s going to be kind of hard for me to adjust, too.”

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

Senseless as it is cruel, stupid, and wasteful. As I’ve pointed out before, if this is how DHS is “setting priorities,” using law enforcement resources, and wasting taxpayer money, they clearly do not need any more agents.

PWS

1-16-18

DEPORTATION TO DEATH — HOW AMERICA FAILS TO LIVE UP TO ITS HUMANITARIAN OBLIGATIONS!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/01/15/lgbt-el-salvador/

Josefina Salomon reports from Mexico fro the Washington Post:

“MEXICO CITY — Cristel woke up on the freezing floor of a tiny room in a detention center in San Diego. She was alone, dirty, hungry and exhausted. It was April. Eight days earlier, she had been arrested on the American side of the border crossing at Tijuana, where she planned to claim asylum. She had been in solitary confinement since then. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers had given her no reason for her detention.

Five years on the run had left her drained. From the floor of that San Diego cell, it seemed like she was out of options. She could not bear the thought of being forced by ICE to return to El Salvador. That would be a death sentence.

Death threats from violent gangs had chased Cristel from her native El Salvador, through Guatemala and Mexico, up to the U.S. border. They kept her awake at night, echoing in the back of her head. In El Salvador and on her journey north, she had been bullied, threatened, robbed, beaten and raped. At one point, she had turned to sex work. She had been kidnapped and abused. She had escaped, but she still didn’t feel safe.

Cristel is not her real name. She is 25 and grew up in San Salvador. As a transgender woman, she has faced discrimination and violence nearly her entire life. My colleagues and I met Cristel half a dozen times over the last 18 months, first in San Salvador, and later at different points along her journey, as she moved toward what she hoped was salvation in the U.S.

Over time, Cristel lost weight and dark circles appeared under her eyes as fear, exhaustion and frustration took hold. Sometimes while we were talking, there would be seemingly unstoppable bursts of tears. Weeks might go by before we heard from her. Had she been hurt, or worse? The question, “What is going to happen to me?”, which she asked at every one of our meetings, became more and more urgent.\

. . . .

Starting in the 1990s, the U.S. was one of the first countries to begin admitting asylum seekers and refugees who were persecuted on the basis of their sexual orientation. While the Trump administration has not sought to change U.S. asylum law, it has made it clear that it aims to decrease the overall number of refugees admitted into the country and to raise the threshold for asylum seekers’ “credible fear” of persecution as a basis for their asylum.

According to figures from the U.S. Department of Justice, the number of asylum claims by people from El Salvador has been increasing dramatically in the past few years. There were nearly 18,000 claims in 2016 alone. While the number of people who have secured asylum in the U.S. increased in that period, so did the number of claims that were denied, abandoned or withdrawn. Many prospective asylum seekers and analysts have said this is because of the arduous process and the harsh detention conditions asylum seekers are forced to endure. The most vulnerable, like Cristel, often have few options but return to the danger they were desperately trying to escape in the first place.

In San Diego, after first being confined to solitary, Cristel was transferred to a cell that she shared with eight men. She was kept there for a month and a half. At her hearing, when it eventually came, she was appointed a pro bono lawyer, but her claim for asylum was denied. She was transferred to another detention center in Arizona, where she was handcuffed, put on a plane and sent back to a nightmare.

. . . .

She had gone back to live at her mother’s house, but the gang found her anyway. The extortion had resumed. Every time she is late with her payments, even by a day or two, gang members beat her. “I’m exhausted of being forced to pay to live. I want to leave but there’s nowhere to go.”

Sobbing, she said, “They are going to kill me.”

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

Read the complete story at the link.

This is what “Trumpism” and “GOP restrictionism” are really about — turning our backs on those in the most need of protection.

One of the most disturbing things about this story is that, as noted by Solomon, the U.S. actually has been fairly routinely granting gender-based cases like this since at least the mid-1990s. See, e.g., Matter of Tobaso-Alfonso,20 I&N Dec. 819 (BIA 1990). In many U.S. Immigration Courts cases like this would routinely be granted, often with the DHS’s concurrence.

So, “Cristel” was unlucky.  She got the got the wrong Court, the wrong Judge, the wrong time, and perhaps the wrong pro bono attorney — and it’s likely to cost her life! That’s not justice, and that’s not a properly functioning U.S. Immigration Court that “guarantees fairness and due process to all.” Instead, the “captive” U.S. Immigration Court is turning into a “whistle-stop on the Trump/Sessions Deportation Railroad!” That’s something of which every true American should be ashamed. We need an independent, Due Process focused U.S. Immigration Court now!

PWS

01-16-18

THE GIBSON REPORT — 01-16-18

THE GIBSON REPORT—01

HEADLINES:

“TOP UPDATES

 

DACA Renewals Open Again after Judge Enjoins Recession

USCIS: Due to a federal court order, USCIS has resumed accepting requests to renew a grant of deferred action under DACA.  Until further notice, and unless otherwise provided in this guidance, the DACA policy will be operated on the terms in place before it was rescinded on Sept. 5, 2017. (Here’s a good rundown on social media.)

 

TPS

  • El Salvador – The Secretary of Homeland Security announced her determination that termination of the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for El Salvador was required pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act. To allow for an orderly transition, she has determined to delay the termination for 18 months. The designation will terminate on Sept. 9, 2019.
  • Haiti – Current TPS is valid through January 22, 2018 next week. On November 20, 2017, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke announced her decision to terminate the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for Haiti with a delayed effective date of 18 months to allow for an orderly transition before the designation terminates on July 22, 2019. However, USCIS has not yet published additional information on re-registration or EAD renewal.

o   REMINDER: termination of TPS is explicitly listed in regs as an exception to the one-year asylum filing deadline. 8 CFR 1208.4(a)(5)(iv)

  • Syria – TPS is set to expire for Syria on March 31, 2018. Find updates on advocacy efforts here.

 

SCOTUS Grants Cert on Stop-Time Rule Case

SCOTUSblog: Whether, to trigger the stop-time rule by serving a “notice to appear,” the government must “specify” the items listed in the definition of a “notice to appear,” including “[t]he time and place at which the proceedings will be held.”

 

New York Immigrant Activist [Ravi Ragbir] Detained by ICE [and held] in Miami Might Be Deported Today

 

Justice Department Announces Court Order Revoking Naturalized Citizenship, Citing Fingerprint Issue

Rewire: Baljinder Singh, also known as Davinder Singh, is the first casualty of “Operation Janus,” a joint operation by the DOJ and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). It appears that because USCIS failed to use fingerprint records effectively, those who have been granted citizenship without proper fingerprint records, meaning before fingerprints were digitized, may now be subject to having their citizenship revoked.

 

Immigration Court Backlog Tops 650,000

ImmProf: According to the latest case-by-case court records, the backlog at the end of November 2017 had reached 658,728, up from 629,051 at the end of September 2017. California leads the country with the largest Immigration Court backlog of 123,217 cases. Texas is second with 103,384 pending cases as of the end of November 2017, followed by New York with 89,489 cases.

 

World Migration Report 2018

IOM: Current estimates are that there are 244 million international migrants globally (or 3.3% of the world’s population).

 

Every immigration proposal in one chart

ImmProf: This chart looks at what is and isn’t in various legislative proposals.

 

Trump is Quietly Swamping Visa Applicants in Extra Paperwork

Quartz: From last January to November, the office issued around 40% more RFEs than in all of 2016, and 65% more than in all of 2015, USCIS data shows.

 

Unpublished BIA Decisions

·         BIA Finds Aggravated Child Abuse Not Sexual Abuse of a Minor

·         BIA Finds Altering Vehicle Document Is Not a CIMT

·         BIA Upholds Bond for Respondent with Two DUI Convictions

·         BIA Holds Iowa Theft Not an Aggravated Felony

·         IJ finds Haitian not firmly resettled in Brazil on remand (attached)

 

ACTIONS

o   ACTION ALERT: #SaveTPS for Syria!

o   Take Action: Protect TPS Holders

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

 

ImmProf

 

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Monday, January 15, 2018

Sunday, January 14, 2018

Saturday, January 13, 2018

Friday, January 12, 2018

Thursday, January 11, 2018

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Tuesday, January 9, 2018

Monday, January 8, 2018

 

AILA NEWS UPDATE

 

http://www.aila.org/advo-media/news/clips

 

Daily Immigration News Clips – January 12, 2018

Aggregated local and national media coverage of major immigration law news stories being discussed throughout the U.S. on January 12, 2018

National

Quartz Trump is quietly swamping visa applicants in extra paperwork
By Ana Campoy

New York Times These Claims About ‘Chain Migration’ Are Not Accurate
By Linda Qiu

HuffPost U.S. Warns Tourists Against Mexico Travel While Feds Threaten To Send Immigrants Back
By Willa Frej

CBS News Trump says visa lottery rewards the “worst” immigrants. That’s inaccurate
By Jacqueline Alemany

Reuters U.N. rights office decries Trump’s reported remarks as ‘racist’
By Stephanie Nebehay

Reuters Trump questions taking immigrants from ‘shithole countries’: sources

New York Times From Norway to Haiti, Trump’s Comments Stir Fresh Outrage
By Henrik Pryser Libell and Catherine Porter

New York Times Trump Alarms Lawmakers With Disparaging Words for Haiti and Africa
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, and Thomas Kaplan

The Washington Post Trump attacks protections for immigrants from ‘shithole’ countries in Oval Office meeting
By Josh Dawsey

The Hill Vicente Fox: Trump’s ‘mouth is the foulest s—hole in the world’
By John Bowden

The Hill Blumenthal: Trump’s ‘s—hole’ comment is ‘racism masquerading poorly as immigration policy’
By John Bowden

Roll Call White House Won’t Deny Trump’s Slur About Haiti, African Nations
By John T. Bennett

AP Congress Is Looking For an Elusive Compromise on Immigration after President Trump’s Meeting
By Andrew Taylor and Alan Fram

Reuters Six senators say they have reached immigration deal

Reuters Bipartisan Senate immigration plan draws quick opposition

Reuters White House says immigration deal has not been reached

The Washington Post The president gives another gift to lawyers challenging his immigration orders
By Derek Hawkins

The Washington Post Trump to fight federal injunction protecting ‘dreamers’ from deportation
By Maria Sacchetti, Patricia Sullivan, and Ed O’Keefe

The Washington Post Immigration talks flounder after White House rejects deal and Trump insults foreign countries
By Ed O’Keefe, Erica Werner, and Josh Dawsey

Politico Trump rebuffs Dreamers deal reached by senators
By Seung Min Kim

CNN Trump rejects bipartisan immigration proposal at White House meeting
By Tal Kopan and Lauren Fox

The Hill Pelosi, Dems accuse GOP of moving goal posts on DACA deal
By Mike Lillis

The Hill WH: No deal yet on DACA
By Jordan Fabian

The Hill Trump hits the brakes on Senate immigration deal
By Jordain Carney

NPR ‘Deport Them’: Arpaio Departs From Trump On DACA Recipients
By Anita Kelly and Domenico Montanaro

ABC News The Note: Trump and GOP fenced in by wall, immigration
By Rick Klein

KAZU Website Puts A Face On DACA’s DREAMers
By Krista Alamanzan

AP Honduras next in line for US decision on protected migrants

Reuters Forcing Salvadorans out of U.S. carries twin risks: Red Cross
By Sophie Hares

Vox Thousands of Salvadoran TPS workers clean federal offices. Now their livelihoods are on the line.
By Alexia Fernandez

AP US Resisting Feb. 2 Deadline For Bond Hearings For Iraqis

AP Immigrant stripped of citizenship under federal initiative

AP News of activist’s detention leads to NYC supporter arrests

Wall Street Journal Immigrants Connected to Sanctuary Movement Arrested
By Ian Lovett and Alicia A. Caldwell

Wall Street Journal Immigration Officials Swarm 7-Elevens, Issue Warning to U.S. Businesses
By Alicia A. Caldwell

The Washington Post Another pregnant immigrant teen asks judge to allow access to abortion
By Ann E. Marimow

The Intercept Private Prison Continues to Send ICE Detainees to Solitary Confinement for Refusing Voluntary Labor
By Spencer Woodman

All Africa Somalia: ICE Abused Somalis for 2 Days On a Plane and Now Wants to Send Them Into Harm’s Way
By Amrit Cheng

Reuters Mexico will never pay for Trump wall: Mexican economy minister

Reuters New York charges 17 with numerous crimes, ties to Salvadoran drug gang
By Peter Szekely

New York Daily News Disgraced ex-sheriff Joe Arpaio shares anti-immigration stance: ‘Deport them’
By Denis Slattery

The Week Trevor Noah peeks behind the curtains of Trump’s immigration show
By Peter Weber

MSNBC Rachel Maddow Quoting Frank Sharry (Part 1)

MSNBC Rachel Maddow Quoting Frank Sharry (Part 2)

Bustle What The New DACA Ruling Means For Dreamers & Other Undocumented People
By Madhuri Sathish

Politico Magazine (Opinion) Buy Off Trump With the Wall
By Rich Lowry

New York Times (Op-Ed) John Kasich and Jeb Bush Jr.: A Bad Idea on Immigration
By Governors John Kasich and Jeb Bush Jr.

The Washington Post (Op-Ed) It’s on Republicans to stop a shutdown
By Senator Bernie Sanders

The Hill (Op-Ed) We must take back DACA debate from political predators
By Derek Monson

Local

Seattle Times Washington state regularly gives drivers’ info to immigration authorities; Inslee orders temporary halt
By Nina Shapiro

The National 6,900 Syrians in US face risk of deportation if Trump ends protection
By Joyce Karam

Southampton Patch Advocacy Groups Blast Proposed End Of Protection For Salvadorans
By Lisa Finn

Charlotte Observer Man gets prison, then deportation for stealing data to make IDs for the undocumented
By Joe Marusak

Wall Street Journal N.Y. City Councilmen Arrested as Immigrant Rights Leader Is Detained
By Zolan Kanno-Youngs and Mara Gay

New York Times Council Speaker Calls Police Response ‘Out of Control’
By Wiliam Neuman and Liz Robbins

Cleveland.com Immigration forum to give context to national, regional sanctuary city discussions
By Emily Bamforth

Texas Tribune (Texas) Texas Lt. Gov. Patrick wants AG Paxton to look into San Antonio immigrant smuggling case
By Julian Aguilar

Longview News-Journal (Texas) Petitions urge Gohmert to back DREAM Act
By Glenn Evans

KING5 (Washington) DACA ruling ‘shouldn’t let Congress off hook,’ WA Dreamer says
By Natalie Brand

Miami Herald (Editorial) Stop punishing TPS recipients

San Antonio Express-News (Editorial) Let these Salvadorans stay

Modesto Bee (Editorial) Denham can help Dreamers, if he wants to

Baltimore Sun (Op-Ed) It’s not too late for Congress to pass a DREAM act
By Karen Gonzalez

 

Daily Immigration News Clips – January 11, 2018

Aggregated local and national media coverage of major immigration law news stories being discussed throughout the U.S. on January 11, 2018

National

New York Times Head-Spinning Days for Young Immigrants as Lawmakers and Judges Debate Their Fate
By Vivian Lee, Caitlyn Dickerson, Sheryl Gay Stolberg

CNN DACA negotiations full steam ahead despite ruling, sources say
By Tal Kopan

The Hill Left fears Democrats will give too much on immigration
By Alexander Bolton and Mike Lillis

The Atlantic What Will the Dreamers Do Now?
By Priscilla Alvarez

The Republic What to know about a federal judge’s order blocking Trump’s decision to end DACA
By Daniel Gonzalez

Reuters U.S. immigration operation targets 7-Eleven stores in 17 states
By Bernie Woodall

The Washington Post Immigration agents target 7-Eleven stores in nationwide sweep
By Nick Miroff

CNN Money ICE immigration officers swoop in on 7-Elevens nationwide
By Julia Horowitz

The Hill Feds raid 7-Eleven stores in immigration bust
By Brett Samuels

Fortune 7-Eleven Stores Targeted In Nationwide Immigration Sweep
By Natasha Bash

AP Trump criticizes federal judge blocking him on immigration
By Alan Fram and Ken Thomas

Reuters How an obscure SCOTUS employment ruling put the brakes on DACA rollback
By Allison Frankel

Reuters Trump blasts DACA ruling, calls U.S. court system ‘broken and unfair’
By Richard Cowan and Mica Rosenberg

New York Times Donald Trump Is Optimistic a Deal Can Be Reached on ‘Dreamers’
By Laura Meckler and Kristina Peterson

New York Times House Republicans’ Hard-Line Immigration Stand Clashes With Trump Overture
By Thomas Kaplan and Sheryl Gay Stolberg

Wall Street Journal Trump Attacks ‘Broken’ Court After Ruling Blocking End to ‘Dreamers’ Program
By Louise Radnofsky and Alicia A. Caldwell

Wall Street Journal Trump’s DACA Overture Worries Immigration Hawks
By Laura Meckler

Wall Street Journal Top Senators Say Judge’s Ruling Won’t Stall Talks on ‘Dreamers’
By Louise Radnofsky and Alicia A. Caldwell

The Washington Post DACA injunction: What a federal judge’s ruling means for ‘dreamers’
By Maria Sacchetti

Politico DACA reinstatement throws lawmakers for a loop
By Seung Min Kim

Politico Democratic leaders face internal mutiny over Dreamers deal
By Heather Caygle and Seung Min Kim

CNN Here are the key players in Congress on immigration
By Ashley Killough and Tal Kopan

CNN Shutdown/DACA state of play: a ‘mess’ with a major twist
By Phil Mattingly

CNN Trump, Republicans face immigration reckoning
By Stephen Collinson and Lauren Fox

CNN What kind of border wall does Trump want? It depends on who’s asking.
By Gergory Kreig

The Hill Ann Coulter torches Trump for immigration meeting
By Max Greenwood

The Hill Bipartisan Senate group ‘close’ on DACA deal
By Jordain Carney

The Hill Trump says DACA ruling reflects ‘broken’ court system
By Jordan Fabian

The Hill Warren: Glad we ‘are moving forward on getting a clean DREAM Act’
By Julia Manchester

The Hill House GOP presses harder-line Goodlatte immigration bill
By Scott Wong and Melanie Zanona

Roll Call Spending, Immigration Talks Entangled
By Lindsey McPherson

McClatchy DC Bureau GOP negotiators say Trump aide Stephen Miller is standing in the way of an immigration deal
By Anita Kumar

Buzzfeed News The Fate Of DACA Recipients May Come Down To Finding A Definition Of “Wall” That Both Parties Can Live With
By Paul McLeod

Fox News Insider Malkin: There Will Be ‘Hell to Pay’ for Trump, GOP If They Cave on Amnesty

NPR Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar On Immigration Policy

CNBC More than 100 CEOs pressure Congress to pass immigration bill by Jan. 19
By Ylan Mui

CNBC Trump DACA compromise would crush Trump’s chances in 2020
By Jake Novak

Bloomberg Politics Trump’s Willingness to Deal on Immigration Adds Urgency to Talks
By Laura Litvan

Vox How the 9th Circuit became conservatives’ least favorite court
By Dylan Matthews

Politifact Julián Castro says nearly all DACA recipients employed, in school or serving in military
By Jasper Scherer

Bustle What The New DACA Ruling Means For Dreamers & Other Undocumented People
By Madhuri Sathish

CBN News As Judge Blocks Trump’s DACA Move, Pressures Mount for Lawmakers to Reach a Deal
By Abigail Robertson

Morning Consult Republicans Want DACA Fix Tied to Border Wall, Bucking Broader Voter Trend
By Eli Yokley

The Intercept DREAMERS WIN IN COURT, BUT UNTIL CONGRESS ACTS, THEIR FUTURES ARE AS UNCERTAIN AS EVER
By Aida Chavez

Reuters Canada telling Salvadorans facing U.S. exit that haven isn’t guaranteed
By Anna Mehler Paperny

Reuters Salvadorans say going home not an option after U.S. axes protection
By Joseph Ax and Mica Rosenberg

The Washington Post Trump wants to remove these immigrants. An ugly bit of history tells us what it could do to the economy
By Andrew Van Dam

The Washington Post Canada to Salvadorans leaving US: Don’t come here
By Alan Freeman

Khaleej Times Stripped of citizenship, Indian faces deportation from US

The Guardian UCSD Student Detained After Accidentally Crossing Border
By Amalia Huerta Cornejo

The Washington Post From Apple to Koch, big businesses say Trump is wrong on immigration
By Heather Long

CNN Trump admin grapples with rise in border crossing numbers it once touted
By Tal Kopan

CNN San Antonio top cop under fire after releasing immigrants to charity
By Eliott C. McLaughlin and AnneClaire Stapleton

Vox The complicated calculus as Democrats debate whether to shut down the government
By Ella Nilsen

Pacific Standard PERCEIVED THREAT DRIVES ANTI-IMMIGRANT BIAS
By Tom Jacobs

New York Times (Editorial) Don’t Deport the Salvadorans

The Washington Post (Editorial) Take a deal for the dreamers. Build the wall.

HuffPost (Opinion) A Blueprint For A National Legal Defense Fund
By Tahmina Watson

New York Magazine (Opinion) Trump Ending DACA Was Never About the Law. A Federal Judge Noticed.
By Cristian Farias

New York Magazine (Opinion) Guess Which Line Was Missing From the Transcript of Trump’s Immigration Meeting
By Margaret Hartmann

Yahoo News (Opinion) How Obama left immigrants vulnerable to Trump
By Rick Newman

New York Times (Op-Ed) President Trump Is Breaking Up My Family
By Rodman Serrano

The Washington Post (Op-Ed) Dana Milbank: ‘Dreamers’ need to get out of their own way
By Dana Milbank

The Hill (Op-Ed) Amnesty will be a poisonous prospect for politicians who support it
By Matt O’Brien

Bloomberg View (Opinion) Democrats, Give Trump a Wall!
By Francis Wilkinson

Irish Central (Opinion) President Donald Trump would have turned away the Famine Irish just like the Salvadorans
By Cahir O’Doherty

WHYY (Opinion) The camera doesn’t lie: On immigration, Trump is rudderless
By Dick Polman

Local

CBS Chicago Five Chicago Area 7-Eleven Stores Part Of National Immigration Investigation

Chicago Tribune Chicago ‘Dreamers’ study, save and plan for the worst while Congress debates immigration relief
By Nereida Moreno

Inland Empire Community News Recent DACA decision gives immigrant groups ‘greater momentum’ for Dream Act
By Anthony Victoria

Sacramento Bee California wins major victory for Dreamers, but is it temporary?
By Anita Chabria

Tyler Morning Telegraph DREAM Act petition with 6,000 signatures delivered to Louie Gohmert’s office
By Erin Mansfield

NorthJersey.com NJ ‘Dreamers’ cautiously optimistic after judge blocks Trump’s decision on DACA
By Monsy Alvarado

AP (New York) NY state offers help to Salvadorans facing deportation

AP (Washington) Spokane decides to outlaw immigrant detention by police

PennLive (Pennsylvania) Man faces deportation after secretly filming women, girls in Pa. pizza shop bathroom
By John Luciew

NY1 (New York) STATE RAMPS UP EFFORTS TO HELP SALVADORAN IMMIGRANTS AT RISK OF DEPORTATION

 

Daily Immigration News Clips – January 10, 2018

Aggregated local and national media coverage of major immigration law news stories being discussed throughout the U.S. on January 10, 2018

National

AP ICE conducts sweeps of 100 7-Eleven stores, targeting employers in immigration probe

CNN Democrats seek to avoid DACA’s isolation in budget negotiations
By Tal Kopan

Time Congress May Be Moving Closer to a Compromise on Dreamers
By Maya Rhodan

Los Angeles Times Federal judge in San Francisco temporarily blocks Trump’s decision to end DACA program
By Joel Rubin, Jazmine Ulloa, and Lisa Mascaro

Reuters U.S. judge blocks Trump move to end DACA program for immigrants
By Dan Levine and Yeganeh Torbati

Wall Street Journal Judge Blocks Trump Plan to End ‘Dreamers’ Program
By Alicia A. Caldwell

The Washington Post Federal judge says DACA can’t end while lawsuit is pending
By Maria Sacchetti

Politico Judge blocks Trump wind-down of Dreamers program
By Josh Gerstein

AP Trump suggests 2-phase immigration deal for ‘Dreamers’
By Ken Thomas and Alan Fram

Reuters White House: Lawmakers agreed immigration bill to focus on four areas

New York Times A Brief Anatomy of Trump’s Immigration Meeting With Lawmakers
By Michael D. Shear

New York Times Trump Appears to Endorse Path to Citizenship for Millions of Immigrants
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis

New York Times Trump’s Negotiation on Immigration, Unfolding on Camera
By Peter Baker

Wall Street Journal Donald Trump Is Optimistic a Deal Can Be Reached on ‘Dreamers’
By Laura Meckler and Kristina Peterson

The Washington Post Trump offers to ‘take all the heat’ on immigration, but also appears to contradict himself
By Ed O’Keefe and David Nakamura

Politico Trump puts immigration meeting on display amid questions about his mental state
By Louis Nelson

Politico Dreamer talks still jumbled after Trump’s freewheeling summit
By Seung Min Kim, Heather Caygle, Ted Hesson, and Rachel Bade

Roll Call Goodlatte to Roll Out Immigration Bill Soon, Trump Says
By John T. Bennett

Roll Call Ample Confusion After White House Immigration Meeting
By John T. Bennett

CNN House conservatives prep own DACA bill
By Tal Kopan

CNN Trump holds meeting with bipartisan lawmakers over immigration
By Dana Bash, Daniella Diaz, and Tal Kopan

CNN Trump contradicts self repeatedly in immigration meeting
By Tal Kopan

CNN After White House meeting, negotiations on DACA continue on the Hill
By Lauren Fox, Deirdre Walsh, and Jim Acosta

The Hill Graham: Meeting with Trump ‘most fascinating’ in 20 years of politics
By Max Greenwood

The Hill Trump, lawmakers agree to parameters of potential immigration deal
By Alexander Bolton and Jordain Carney

The Hill McConnell: No DACA fix in spending bill
By Jordain Carney

USA Today In extraordinary public negotiation with Congress, Trump promises to sign DACA bill
By Gregory Korte, Deidre Shesgreen, and Eliza Collins

Vox Republicans are misleading everyone – including themselves – about how long they have to fix DACA
By Dara Lind

Newsweek THIS IS HOW DEMOCRATS CAN STILL SAVE IMMIGRANTS FROM TRUMP
By Nicole Rodriguez

Raw Story Colbert blasts Trump’s immigration ‘bill of love’: ‘If you love someone, kick them out of the country’
By Noo Al-Sibai

New York Times ‘Trump Effect’ Wears Off as Migrants Resume Their Northward Push
By Caitlyn Dickerson

Reuters Salvadorans say going home not an option after U.S. axes protection
By Joseph Ax and Mica Rosenberg

New York Times El Salvador Again Feels the Hand of Washington Shaping Its Fate
By Gene Palumbo and Azam Ahmed

New York Times Listen to ‘The Daily’: U.S. Ends Protections for Salvadorans
By Michael Barbaro

Reuters Ex-Arizona sheriff Arpaio says he will run for Senate

Wall Street Journal Joe Arpaio Will Run for Arizona U.S. Senate Seat
By Janet Hook

Politico Arpaio running for Senate in Arizona
By Kevin Robillard

CNN Joe Arpaio, controversial sheriff pardoned by Trump, enters Arizona Senate race
By Eric Bradner

CNN Immigration, Trump and you: 5 things happening now, and why they matter
By Catherine E. Shoichet

Rewire Justice Department Revokes Naturalized Citizenship, Citing Fingerprint Issue
By Tina Vasquez

New York Times (Editorial) Joe Arpaio’s Latest Offense – Running for Senate

Wall Street Journal (Editorial) Progress on Immigration

HuffPost (Opinion) Make the Workforce American Again
By Michael Wildes

New York Times (Opinion) Save the Salvadorans
By David Leonhardt

The Washington Post (Opinion) Will Democrats stop Trump’s cruel use of immigrants as pawns?
By Jennifer Rubin

HuffPost (Opinion) The Heartless End of TPS for Salvadorans
By Julio Lainez

Wall Street Journal (Op-Ed) The House Chairmen’s Plan for Immigration Reform
By Representatives Bob Goodlatte, Michael McCaul, Raul Labrador, and Martha McSally

CNN (Op-Ed) Trump administration’s new immigration decision is shortsighted and cruel
By Raul A. Reyes

The Hill (Op-Ed) Congress dithers on DACA, but why?
By Gordon Peterson

Local

The Monitor Democrats face tough challenge in selling Trump’s promised wall

Tampa Bay Times Immigration is a big deal in Florida, so why is the state MIA in meeting with Trump?
By Alex Leary

Cincinnati.com (Ohio) Despite social media outcry, caretaker of paraplegic boy to be deported
By Mark Curnutte

 

Daily Immigration News Clips – January 9, 2018

Aggregated local and national media coverage of major immigration law news stories being discussed throughout the U.S. on January 9, 2018

National

McClatchy Under pressure, Trump team backs off proposal to cull foreign tech workforce
By Franco Ordonez

The Atlantic The Battle Over DACA Reaches a Fever Pitch
By Russell Berman

The Republic How Trump’s wall pledge is complicating a DACA bill for ‘dreamers’
By Dan Nowicki and Deniel Gonzalez

Star-Telegram Immigration advocates: DACA deal likely to give Trump his wall
By Andrea Drusch

Reuters Top Democrats send mixed signals on Dreamers, budget deal
By Susan Cornwell

CNN ‘It’s a mess’: DACA negotiations hit a snag ahead of White House meeting
By Lauren Fox, Phil Mattingly, and Tal Kopan

CNN John Kelly leading White House’s immigration effort in congressional negotiations
By Keving Liptak, Jeff Zeleny, Phil Mattingly, and Dana Bash

CNN Exclusive: Pair of lawmakers unveil bipartisan DACA plan
By Tal Kopan

CNN Republicans can’t avoid Trump’s wall promises in DACA talks
By Lauren Fox

The Hill Texas rep: Most Dems will vote against DACA fix that includes wall funding
By Brett Samuels

USA Today In reversal, anti-immigration groups are open to deal to let 800,000 DREAMers stay
By Alan Gomez

AP Pelosi is optimistic about agreement on budget, immigration
By Andrew Taylor

Center for Public Integrity Trump administration to end temporary protected status for immigrants from El Salvador
By Susan Ferriss

The Guardian US says 200,000 people from El Salvador must leave within 18 months
By Amanda Holpuch

CBS News DHS to end protections for some 260K Salvadoran immigrants
By Geneva Sands

AP US ends protections for Salvadoran immigrants, sparking fear
By Luis Alonso Lugo and Elliot Spagat

Reuters U.S. moves toward expelling 200,000 Salvadorans
By Yeganeh Torbati

New York Times Trump Administration Says That Nearly 200,000 Salvadorans Must Leave
By Miriam Jordan

Wall Street Journal U.S. to End Protections for Some Salvadoran Immigrants
By Alicia A. Caldwell and Laura Meckler

Politico Trump to end protected status for Salvadorans
By Ted Hesson, Seung Min Kim, and Heather Caygle

Roll Call Protected Immigration Status for Salvadorans to End in 2019
By Camila Dechaus

Washington Post ‘We will lose practically everything’: Salvadorans devastated by TPS decision
By Maria Sacchetti

AP Advocates want #MeToo debate to include immigrant detention
By Nomaan Merchant

New York Times To Pay for Wall, Trump Would Cut Proven Border Security Measures
By Ron Nixon

New York Times From Offices to Disney World, Employers Brace for the Loss of an Immigrant Work Force
By Vivian Yee, Liz Robbins, and Caitlyn Dickerson

CNN The political stakes of the immigration fight
By Stephen Collinson

The Hill Refugee admissions down for first part of fiscal 2018: report
By Rebecca Savransky

Fox News (Opinion) Trump’s crackdown on legal immigration is hurting America
By Anastasia Tonello

The Washington Post (Opinion) Trump heaps more misery on vulnerable immigrants
By Ishann Tharoor

The Hill (Opinion) Immigration reform: An Army recruitment opportunity
By Eric Fanning

New Yorker (Opinion) When Deportation Is a Death Sentence
By Sarah Stillman

CNN (Op-Ed) Trump’s Mexico wall would be a gift to the drug cartels
By Alice Driver

New York Times (Op-Ed) A Counterproductive Approach to a Broken Immigration System
By Ben Shifter and Michael Raderstorf

Splinter (Op-Ed) I’m Everything This Administration Hates
By Jorge Rivas

The Hill (Op-Ed) An apology to my sons’ Salvadorian caretaker
By Ezra Rosser

Local

Times-Picayune After El Salvador loses special protections from deportation, local Hondurans fear they’re next
By Maria Clark

Trib Live (Pennsylvania) Trump’s decision that would deport Salvadorans makes little sense, Pittsburgh-area immigration experts say
By Bob Bauder

Salt Lake Tribune (Utah) Fearful of deportation, unauthorized immigrants in Salt Lake City are not reporting crime, police chief says
By Christopher Smart

Texas Tribune (Texas) How a South Texas bureaucrat became a multimillionaire amid the rush to build a border fence
By Kiah Collier and Julian Aguilar

Sacramento Bee (Editorial) Trump targets Salvadoran immigrants. Here’s what Congress must do

 

Daily Immigration News Clips – January 8, 2018

Aggregated local and national media coverage of major immigration law news stories being discussed throughout the U.S. on January 8, 2018

National

New York Times Trump Administration Says That Nearly 200,000 Salvadorans Must Leave
By Miriam Jordan

Washington Post 200,000 Salvadorans may be forced to leave the U.S. as Trump ends immigration protection
By Nick Miroff

New York Times At Least 1,900 Immigrants Were Rejected Because of Mail Problems
By Liz Robbins

New York Times Judge Faults U.S. for Holding Immigrant Defendants Freed on Bail
By Alan Feuer

Wall Street Journal SEC Looks Into Kushner Cos. Over Use of EB-5 Program for Immigrant Investors
By Erica Orden

Wall Street Journal Border Agents’ Searches of Travelers’ Phones Skyrocketed, Agency Says
By Alicia A. Caldwell and Laura Meckler

AP The Latest: Trump sees possible deal on young immigrants

Reuters Senator Durbin blasts Trump for ‘anti-immigrant’ moves in ‘Dreamer’ talks

Reuters Democrats, Republicans trade barbs in tense immigration talks
By Richard Cowan

New York Times White House Immigration Demands Imperil Bipartisan Talks
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Michael Tackett

Politico Playbook Democrats squeezed on DACA

The Washington Post In next round of budget talks, ‘dreamers’ are set to dominate
By Ed O’Keefe, Mike DeBonis, and Erica Werner

HuffPost Dreamers To California Republicans: Help Us, Please
By Susan Ferriss

ABC News ‘This Week’ Transcript 1-7-18: Nikki Haley, Sen. Tom Cotton and Sen. Bernie Sanders

KPCC DACA job permits will begin expiring soon for young immigrants
By Leslie Berestein Rojas

Atlanta Journal-Constitution Nuestra Comunidad: Blind karate teacher faces possible deportment
By Carlos Moreno

AP Court date for immigrant restaurant manager not until 2021

Reuters Illegal immigrant acquitted in California death gets prison on gun charge
By Alex Dobuzinskis

Reuters Trump meets Republican leaders to set strategy for 2018
By Jeff Mason and Richard Cowan

Reuters Trump, meeting with Republican leaders, says welfare reform may have to wait
By James Oliphant

Wall Street Journal Trump Administration Seeks $18 Billion Over Decade to Expand Border Wall
By Laura Meckler

Wall Street Journal Refugee Admissions to U.S. Off to Slow Start in Fiscal Year 2018
By Laura Meckler

The Washington Post Immigrant sentenced in Kate Steinle shooting as Steinle family prepares for next fight
By Abigail Hauslohner and Maria Sacchetti

The Hill Sessions challenges administrative loophole in immigration court cases
By John Bowden

The Hill 5 Dem senators ask administration not to include citizenship question on census
By Julia Manchester

Newsweek Trump’s Anti-Immigration Rhetoric, Policies Killing Tourism to the U.S. Industry Analysts Say
By Nicole Rodriguez

Times Now H-1B rules: US lawmakers oppose Trump’s proposed changes, raise concern over deportation of 7.5 lakh Indians

New York Times (Letters to the Editor) The Immigrants Who Deliver Healthcare

The Hill (Opinion) Democrats Out of Order on DREAM Act
By Nolan Rappaport

New York Times (Opinion) Let’s Try to Get Past Trump
By Gail Collins

National Review (Opinion) DACA, DACA, Bo-Baca . . .
By Mark Krikorian

Local

Public News Service FL House Speaker “Using Trump’s Playbook” to Ban Sanctuary Cities
By Trimmel Gomes

New York Times (California) In Clash Between California and Trump, It’s One America Versus Another
By Tim Arango

Miami Herald (Florida) A year after obeying Trump on immigration, Miami-Dade still waiting for a windfall
By Douglas Hinks

The Intercept (Texas) Texas Police Chief Hands Over Undocumented Smuggling Victims to Local Organizations, Shunning ICE
By Ryan Devereaux

NBC San Diego Lawyer Fights for Student Facing Deportation After Being Detained in San Diego
By Mackenzie Maynard

CBS Sacramento (California) Immigration Attorneys Warn Against Using Marijuana As Feds Change Stance
By Carlos Correa

Vindy Community helps earn deportation delay for Adi
By Graig Graziosi

Cincinnati.com (Ohio) Appeal denied: ICE to move forward with deportation of paraplegic boy’s caregiver
By Mark Curnutte

Vindicator (Editorial) Area businessman a victim of US immigration system

The Monitor (Op-Ed) COMMENTARY: Far-right sentiment hurting businesses in RGV
By Samuel David Garcia

Lowell Sun (Op-Ed) Safe Communities Act sets clear line on immigration enforcement 
By Dina Samfield

Lancaster Online (LTE) Looking for more from Smucker
By Agustina Drot de Gourville

Boston Herald Atkins: Clock ticking on DACA deal
By Kimberly Atkins”

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

PWS

01-16-18