Reuters – immigrationcourtside.com

🤮 AMERICAN ASYLUM POLICY: GOP POLITICOS PANDER, ADMINISTRATION BUILDS WALLS, DEMS PREPARE TO THROW ASYLUM SEEKERS UNDER THE BUS (AGAIN) — What Happens To Those Waiting To Use “CBP One” At The Border? — They Get Raped & Extorted! — “It’s the saddest, most horrible thing that can happen to a person!”

""Rape of the Sabine Women" — “Rape of the Sabine Women”
Peter Paul Rubens
Circa 1635
Public Domain

From Reuters:

https://www.voanews.com/a/migrants-being-raped-at-mexico-border-as-they-await-entry-to-us-/7291239.html

REYNOSA, MEXICO —

When Carolina’s captors arrived at dawn to pull her out of the stash house in the Mexican border city of Reynosa in late May, she thought they were going to force her to call her family in Venezuela again to beg them to pay $2,000 ransom.

Instead, one of the men shoved her onto a broken-down bus parked outside and raped her, she told Reuters. “It’s the saddest, most horrible thing that can happen to a person,” Carolina said.

A migrant advocate who assisted Carolina after the kidnapping, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity due to security concerns, confirmed all the details of her account.

The attack came amid an increase in sexual violence against migrants in the border cities of Reynosa and Matamoros, both major transit routes for immigrants seeking to enter the U.S., according to data from the Mexican government and humanitarian groups, as well as interviews with eight sexual assault survivors and more than a dozen local aid workers.

“The inhumane way smugglers abuse, extort, and perpetrate violence against migrants for profit is criminal and morally reprehensible,” U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson Luis Miranda said in response to questions about the rise in reported rapes.

Criminal investigations into the rape of foreign nationals, excluding Americans, were the highest on record in the two cities this year, according to state data from 2014 to 2023 obtained by Reuters through freedom of information requests.

The U.S. State Department considers Tamaulipas, where the two cities are located, to be the most dangerous state along the U.S.-Mexico border.

. . . .

A Venezuelan migrant said he was kidnapped in May in Reynosa by a cartel while traveling to the border for his confirmed CBP One appointment. He couldn’t raise the full $800 ransom, so he was forced to work for two months to pay off the remaining $200, he said.

Two other migrants who said they were held at the house during the same time period confirmed the man was forced to work against his will, and that they heard female migrants being raped.

On the nights the Venezuelan man was tasked with standing guard over the other migrants, he said he watched the cartel members ask the man in charge of the house for permission to rape the women of their choosing.

He said the answer was always the same: “Take her.”

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

Read the full article at the link.

Walls, detention, eliminating the right to asylum aren’t going to solve this. But, solving it doesn’t seem to be the objective. Blaming the victims is a lot easier than treating them as human beings.

As my friend Debi Sanders (who alerted me to this report) said: “Terrifying!” Yup! 🤯🏴‍☠️

How disingenuous is the Biden Administration’s latest attempt to “get tough” at the border with more proven to fail deterrence? Well, just this week, DHS announced plans to deport more individuals to Venezuela. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-restarting-direct-deportations-venezuela-senior-official-2023-10-05/

Yet, just a few days earlier, in deciding to extend TPS to nearly a half million Venezuelans in the US, that same DHS found:

Overview

Venezuela continues to face a severe humanitarian emergency due to a political and economic crisis, as well as human rights violations and abuses and high levels of crime and violence, that impacts access to food, medicine, healthcare, water, electricity, and fuel, and has led to high levels of poverty. Additionally, Venezuela has recently experienced heavy rainfall in the spring and summer of 2023 which triggered flooding and landslides. Given the current conditions in Venezuela, these issues contribute to the country’s existing challenges.

Venezuela is experiencing “an unprecedented political, economic, and humanitarian crisis.” ^[5]“Venezuela is suffering one of the worst humanitarian crises in the history of the Western Hemisphere,” which has been characterized by “[h]igh levels of poverty, food insecurity, malnutrition, and infant mortality, together with frequent electricity outages and the collapse of health infrastructure.” ^[6]Though there were some positive developments in Venezuela in 2022 “as the economy stabilized and showed signs of economic growth,” the effects of these changes were not felt across the Venezuelan population and did not offset the impact of the large-scale economic contraction which resulted in significant humanitarian challenges that continue today and will take time to address.^[7]

Political Repression and Human Rights

The Maduro regime has closed off channels for political dissent, restricting enjoyment of civil liberties and “prosecuting perceived opponents without regard for due process.” ^[8]The UN Human Rights Council’s Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (IIFFM) found in its September 2022 report, “Venezuela’s military and civilian intelligence agencies function as well-coordinated and effective structures in the implementation of a plan” to “repress dissent.” ^[9]

Crime and Insecurity

Venezuela has one of the highest rates of violent deaths in the world.^[10]Additionally, “Venezuelans face physical insecurity and violence from several sources, including irregular armed groups, security forces, and organized gangs.” ^[11]Corruption in Venezuela exacerbates insecurity. InSight Crime has reported that “criminal groups and corrupt state actors together form a hybrid state that combines governance with criminality, and where illegal armed groups act at the service of the state, while criminal networks form within it.” ^[12]Human trafficking remains a serious concern. Traffickers exploit and subject Venezuelans, including those fleeing the country, to egregious forms of exploitation, including sex trafficking and forced labor.^[13]Members of non-state armed groups that operate in the country with impunity, subject Venezuelans to forced labor and forced criminality, and recruit or use child soldiers.^[14]

Economic Collapse

Since 2014, Venezuela has suffered from an “economic recession marked by hyperinflation, shortages of basic goods and a collapse in public services such as electricity and water.” ^[15]Recently, Venezuela’s economy has shown some signs of recovery; however, it is still in a precarious condition.^[16]In a report covering the period from May 2022 through April 2023, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) noted that while economic growth which occurred in 2022 “would bring hope for improved economic prospects, persistent challenges and other factors continued to negatively affect essential public services, transport, education, and health.” ^[17]

In its annual report covering 2022, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) noted “the high rates of poverty and inequality in the country, in which there are estimates that more than 90% of the population lives in poverty.” ^[18]The same report stated that “as of March 2022, HumVenezuela estimated that 94.5% of the population would not have sufficient income to cover items such as food, housing, health, education, transportation and clothing.” ^[19]

Health Crisis

Various sources have referred to severe problems with health systems in Venezuela, including the IACHR, Human Rights Watch, and the Congressional Research Service (CRS).^[20]Per The Associated Press, Venezuela’s “health care system crumbled long before” the start of the COVID–19 pandemic.^[21]Likewise, in its 2022 annual report, the IACHR acknowledged that while the COVID–19 pandemic “has had significant impacts on the health sector and the population, the serious affectations of the system preceded the health emergency.” ^[22]Elaborating on this topic, the IACHR identified “shortages of medicines, supplies, materials and medical treatment” as of 2018, and that the “situation has been worsening since 2014, and it is important to highlight that the health system has reportedly collapsed due to its persistent precariousness, which would have been exacerbated by the pandemic.” ^[23]

According to OHCHR, health centers in Venezuela “report structural underfunding and understaffing resulting in for example, regular blackouts and water shortages.” ^[24]In its report on the humanitarian situation in Venezuela in 2022, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) noted that “[h]ealth services continue to be affected by insufficient water and sanitation conditions and the lack of electricity supply in facilities.” ^[25]Similarly, Human Rights Watch stated in its annual report covering 2022 that “[p]ower and water outages at healthcare centers—and emigration of healthcare workers—were further weakening operational capacity.” ^[26]Furthermore, the IACHR has reported that “98% of the hospitals in the country lack medicines, electrical plants and water, as well as failures in laboratories, reagents and wards. As a result, it is estimated that only between 3 and 10% of the hospitals have medical and surgical material to solve medical circumstances.” ^[27]

Food Insecurity

In a humanitarian response plan published in 2023, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) identified food insecurity as “the most pressing challenge for the population.” ^[28]Human Rights Watch stated in its annual report covering 2022 that HumVenezuela reported in March 2022 that “most Venezuelans face difficulties in accessing food, with 10.9 million undernourished or chronically hungry. Some 4.3 million are deprived of food, sometimes going days without eating.” ^[29]Moreover, the IACHR noted in its 2022 annual report that “32% of children live in a situation of chronic malnutrition.” ^[30]

Heavy Rains and Flooding

Since May 26, 2023, as hurricane season began, Venezuela has experienced heavy rains which resulted in flooding that affected several areas of the country.^[31]According to ACAPS, “Between June and July there have been 19 tropical waves, that have brought heavy rains, floods and landslides across the country.” ^[32]As of July 11, 2023, the meteorological situation in Venezuela indicated “that rainfall and resulting damages are expected to be more severe than previous years.” ^[33]Reports of the damage caused by the heavy rains include 5,100 people affected with damage to houses and blockages in the drainage system in the state of Portuguesa.^[34]In another area—Delta Amacuro state—around 7,500 people are affected by the 2023 floods.^[35]

In summary, extraordinary and temporary conditions continue to prevent Venezuelan nationals from returning in safety due to a severe humanitarian emergency which has resulted in food insecurity and the inability to access adequate medicine, healthcare, water, electricity, and fuel. Additionally, human rights violations and abuses, high levels of poverty, high levels of crime and violence, and heavy rains and flooding prevent Venezuelan nationals from returning in safety and permitting Venezuelan noncitizens to remain in the United States temporarily would not be contrary to the interests of the United States.

Based on this review and after consultation with appropriate U.S. Government agencies, the Secretary has determined that:

• The conditions supporting Venezuela’s designation for TPS continue to be met. See INA sec. 244(b)(3)(A) and (C), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(3)(A) and (C).

• There continues to be extraordinary and temporary conditions in Venezuela that prevent Venezuelan nationals (or individuals having no nationality who last habitually resided in Venezuela) from returning to Venezuela in safety, and it is not contrary to the national interest of the United States to permit Venezuelan TPS beneficiaries to remain in the United States temporarily. See INA sec. 244(b)(1)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(1)(C).

• The existing designation of Venezuela for TPS (Venezuela 2021) should be extended for an 18-month period, beginning on March 11, 2024 and ending on September 10, 2025. See INA sec. 244(b)(3)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(3)(C).

• Due to the conditions described above, Venezuela should be redesignated for TPS beginning on October 3, 2023, and ending on April 2, 2025. See INA sec. 244(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2).

For the redesignation, the Secretary has determined that TPS applicants must demonstrate that they have continuously resided in the United States since July 31, 2023.

Initial TPS applicants under the redesignation must demonstrate that they have been continuously physically present in the United States since October 3, 2023, the effective date of the redesignation of Venezuela for TPS.

There are approximately 243,000 current Venezuela TPS beneficiaries who are eligible to re-register for TPS under the extension.

It is estimated that approximately 472,000 additional individuals may be eligible for TPS under the redesignation of Venezuela. This population includes Venezuelan nationals in the United States in nonimmigrant status or without immigration status.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-10-03/pdf/2023-21865.pdf

Does this sound like a country that will “ensure orderly, safe and legal repatriation?” Duh!

As for the DHS attempt to “blame the victims” for not taking advantage of legal opportunities, the legal right to apply for asylum in the U.S. attaches at the border to ANYONE “who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status.” INA, section 208.

With huge backlogs at both the Asylum Office and EOIR, and some problematic adjudicators, judges, administrators, and poor precedents, just how could hundreds of thousands of legal removals take place without huge systemic changes that to date the Administration has failed to make at either DHS or EOIR? Sounds like a prescription for massive legal and human rights violations!☠️

Yes, we’re going to hear chants of “we can’t take them all” from all sides. But, the truth that few acknowledge is that we haven’t and won’t be “taking them all” — not by a long shot! Of the more than 7 million who have fled the Maduro regime in Venezuela, only approximately 10% (about 750,000) have come to the U.S.! https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66875264. The vast, vast majority — approximately 90% — have taken refuge elsewhere in Latin American, in poorer countries far less able than the U.S. to absorb them! But, hey, when does truth and reality ever enter into the U.S. political debate on immigration?

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-05-23

💡A Good Idea On Enhancing Refugee Processing, But Administration Doesn’t Seem That Serious About “Leveraging” It To Really Help!

From Asylum Access & Reuters:

#US is looking to open a resettlement pathway to #refugees in #Mexico who arrived before June 6, 2023.

“The plan under discussion would allow qualifying migrants approved for refugee status to enter via the U.S. refugee resettlement program, which is only available to applicants abroad (…) refugees receive immediate work authorization and government benefits such as housing and employment assistance”

Read more below from Reuters

https://lnkd.in/gDQwYerd

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

This is a fine idea, albeit one that many experts recommended that the Biden Administration implement in a robust way upon taking office in January 2021.

If properly and generously carried out, it could 1) stop the “endless wait” for refugees stuck in Mexico; 2) relieve border pressure; 3) avoid the backlogs at EOIR and the Asylum Office; 4) admit individuals as refugees with immediate work authorization and a clear part to green cards and citizenship; 5) pave the way for more robust refugee processing elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere; 6) avoid the political stunts of GOP nativist governors; and 7) be much harder for restrictionists to challenge in court.

Past programs similar to this in the Western Hemisphere (with the exceptions of Cubans in the 1960s) have largely failed because they have been too 1) limited, 2) slow, and 3) bureaucratized.

From the Reuters article, it appears to me that the Administration is ready to repeat all three of the foregoing mistakes, assuming the program even gets off the ground at all.

It’s definitely a good idea with promise. But realizing that promise depends on the details of implementation. In this case, they don’t sound promising. Stay tuned!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-13-23

🤯 🤯🤯 COURTSIDE TRIPLE HEADER! — 1) “Why Is It A Continuing Battle To Get The Biden Administration To Follow Asylum Law, As Promised,” Asks Hon. “Sir Jeffrey” Chase? — “If you’re wondering how the new system is working out, according to one report, it has resulted in asylum seekers on the Mexican side of the Laredo port of entry being robbed, kidnapped, and held for ransom.” — 2) Commentary From The Great Lenni Benson: “Confusion Abounds!” — 3) PLUS BONUS BORDER COVERAGE FROM MICA ROSENBERG @ REUTERS: Biden’s Regs Are A Humanitarian, Legal, & Moral Catastrophe Despite BS “Success” Claims From Disingenuous USG Officials! ☠️

Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase
Jeffrey S. Chase Blog
Coordinator & Chief Spokesperson, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges

https://www.jeffreyschase.com/blog/2023/7/5/bidens-asylum-bar

Biden’s Asylum Bar

I’m sure many of you remember a childhood game called “Mother, May I?” An authority figure would say, “Jeff, take two giant steps forward!” But before doing so, the player would have to ask “Mother, may I?” Those two giant steps could only be taken if the response was “Yes, you may.” Otherwise, if the player took the steps, they were out.

If we were to take this game, direct the request and reply through an app called CBPOne, and make the stakes life or death, the result would be something very similar to the Biden Administration’s latest regulations governing asylum at the southern border.

The new rules are at odds with U.S. law. Congress has already authorized asylum seekers to take the necessary steps up to the border. The very first sentence of 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (the U.S. asylum statute) says that any noncitizen “whether or not at a designated port of arrival” and irrespective of their immigration status may apply for asylum.

And yet, not Congress but two Executive Branch agencies have now added a “Mother, May I?” type obstacle for those seeking to do what the law has long permitted. Under the new rules, the asylum seeker must first ask through a glitchy government phone app for specific permission (in the form of an appointment) before striding up to the border. Otherwise, the asylum seeker is simply not eligible for asylum, no matter how serious the danger they face if removed to their country.

How can Executive Branch agencies issue regulations that so directly contradict the statute those agencies are charged with enforcing? That question is the basis of a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, the National Immigrant Justice Center, and the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies in U.S. District Court.1

Our Round Table of Former Immigration Judges filed an amicus brief in support of petitioners’ arguments. We are in good company, as the USCIS asylum officers’ union filed a persuasive amicus brief as well.2 This means that groups representing the views of the only government officials authorized to decide asylum claims in this country (i.e. immigration judges and asylum officers) are united in opposing the new rule.

In our Round Table brief, we specifically take issue with the government’s false labeling of the new bar as merely a “rebuttable presumption” of asylum ineligibility.

Real rebuttable presumptions have long existed in our asylum regulations. For example, there is a rebuttable presumption that someone who has been persecuted in the past for reasons that give rise to an asylum claim may be persecuted again, unless major changes have since taken place in their country. There is also a presumption that one whose persecutor is the government of their country can’t find safety by simply relocating within that same country.

As you’ve probably noticed, there is a logic that flows in each of those examples from the known facts to the presumption. It is logical to assume that someone who was harmed before might be harmed again if conditions remain the same. The government may rebut the presumption by showing a fundamental change of the type that would put those fears to rest. There is a similar logic in concluding that a government’s reach extends throughout the country it governs. Again, the government may rebut that presumption through evidence establishing an exception to this general rule. In both of these examples, the fact established increases the likelihood of the fact presumed.

Now let’s return to the new rule. Say that a person faces brutal persecution on account of their political opinion if returned to their country. How does the fact that they couldn’t or didn’t get an appointment through a phone app in any way create a presumption that they are not in need of humanitarian protection? There can’t be a presumption if the fact established (i.e. that the person didn’t obtain an appointment through the app) is completely unrelated to the fact presumed (i.e. the person is not in need of asylum).

I believe it matters greatly whether the rule is considered a bar or a presumption. It is Congress that decides who may apply for asylum in this country. Thus, a regulation that admittedly creates a new bar to asylum (particularly where that bar is in direct contradiction to Congressional intent) is likely to be rejected as ultra vires by the courts. And in fact, a very similar bar to this one published by the Trump Administration was enjoined for just that reason.3 Agencies cannot usurp Congress’s role by legislating in the guise of rulemaking.

By attempting to disguise the new bar as merely a “rebuttable presumption,” the agencies seek to increase the odds of the ban passing muster this time. That is exactly the Department of Justice’s argument in its response brief: that its new rule is completely different from the prior administration’s “bar,” because according to DOJ, the new rule “does not treat manner of entry as dispositive, but instead creates a rebuttable presumption that can be overcome…”4

So the “Mother, may I?” regs clearly overstep the agencies’ legal authority. But do they create an equal barrier for all asylum seekers? The answer is no. As stated, the rules require one intending to apply for asylum to first obtain an appointment. Of course, there are more asylum seekers than there are available appointments. As mentioned, the government app through which one tries to secure an appointment, CBPOne, is full of glitches. As Prof. Austin Kocher recently noted, those glitches have impacted who gets those appointments:

the initial release of CBP One was accompanied by a variety of tech failures that did not necessarily undermine CBP’s ability to fill up its appointments calendar for asylum seekers but did create barriers to entry for migrants who were less tech savvy, could not access high-speed Internet, were part of larger families, or, either directly or indirectly, migrants who were darker-skinned or Black.5

That last point refers to the app’s problems with facial recognition that have caused it to reject applicants who are not white.6 As a result of these and other reported scheduling inequities, Sen. Edward Markey wrote to DHS back in February urging the agency to cease use of the app, due to its inaccessibility to many intending applicants, adding that “we cannot allow it to create a tiered system that treats asylum seekers differently based on their economic status — including the ability to pay for travel — language, nationality, or race.”.7

Instead of “ditching the app” as the Senator requested, the agencies instead added an exception to the bar if the noncitizen “demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that it was not possible to access or use the DHS scheduling system due to language barrier, illiteracy, significant technical failure, or other ongoing and serious obstacle.”8

However, there is a big catch. Pursuant to the rule, this exception is only available to those without an appointment who make their claim at an actual port of entry. But observers at points of entry along the southern border report that “practices by U.S. and Mexican authorities restricted asylum seekers without CBP One appointments from physically reaching U.S. ports of entry to make protection requests.”9 So the exception written into the regs is not available in reality, as one seeking to claim it is restricted from reaching the port of entry where it must be claimed, and is barred from claiming the exception if they cross the border elsewhere.

If you’re wondering how the new system is working out, according to one report, it has resulted in asylum seekers on the Mexican side of the Laredo port of entry being robbed, kidnapped, and held for ransom.10 Another article described how some of those “lucky” enough to have obtained CBPOne appointments at Laredo claimed “that Mexican officials in Nuevo Laredo, across the border from Laredo, Texas, had threatened to hold them and make them miss their scheduled asylum appointments unless they paid them.”11 As a result, CBPOne appointments were temporarily suspended for the Laredo port of entry.

One excluded from asylum under these rules may still seek two types of lesser protections called withholding of removal.12 Oddly, under U.S. law, these alternative protections are much more difficult than asylum to qualify for, yet provide far fewer benefits. Asylum is an actual legal status which extends to the spouse and minor children of the asylee, allows for travel abroad, and puts recipients on a path to permanent residence and then citizenship in this country. By contrast, withholding of removal arises when an individual is ordered deported, and only blocks their deportation to a country in which persecution or torture is likely to occur, but otherwise leaves the recipient in limbo. The protection provides no path to family reunification or permanent status, and no right to travel abroad to visit the family members from whom the recipient is left indefinitely separated.

Nevertheless, withholding of removal does save lives. But not satisfied with simply barring asylum, the new regulations also make these lesser forms of protection far more difficult to access. This is because one must first pass something called a “credible fear interview” in order to even have the right to apply for withholding of removal in this country. As those interviews are conducted within days of the asylum-seeker’s arrival, in custody, often before the applicant has had the opportunity to obtain legal counsel or evidence, and possibly while suffering from the effects of persecution, the credible fear standard was intentionally designed to be a low one. The idea is to allow people who might genuinely be at risk the opportunity to fully develop their cases in a full removal proceeding, while only quickly removing those lacking legitimate claims.

But the new regulations raise the burden of proof by requiring the applicant at this very early stage to demonstrate a “reasonable fear” of persecution, which USCIS describes as the exact same standard required for a grant of asylum – i.e. “well-founded fear.13 Again, the lower credible fear standard being replaced was created solely because it isn’t reasonable to expect someone to prove more under the conditions faced by such recent arrivals. This intended safeguard has thus been completely undermined, as one who might only be a day or two in the country must now present a full-blown asylum claim just to earn the chance to have a hearing.

The new process requires non-lawyers to satisfy a complex legal standard they won’t understand, often without the time to seek legal advice or compile the evidence necessary to meet the heightened burden. I have no doubt that the process will result in genuine refugees being denied protection. And once again, the entire reason for placing applicants at such heightened risk is their not having obtained an appointment on a problematic phone app.

Why does the Biden Administration believe all this is necessary? In a recent column, Jamelle Bouie addressed the vows of some Republican presidential candidates to eliminate the constitutional right to birthright citizenship through executive order.14 In addition to presenting a compelling argument as to why this cannot legally be done, Bouie included in his column a wonderful quote from Frederick Douglass: “The outspread wings of the American Eagle are broad enough to shelter all who are likely to come.”

In case the Biden Administration is wondering if it can champion that same sentiment today, in lieu of its convoluted attempt to ban protection to those deserving of it under our laws, the answer is: “Yes, you may.”

(Much thanks to attorneys Ashley Vinson Crawford and Steven Schulman of the law firm of Akin Gump for representing the group of former Immigration Judges and BIA Members on our amicus brief in East Bay Sanctuary.)

Copyright 2023, Jeffrey S. Chase. All rights reserved.

Notes:

East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Biden, No. 18-cv-06810-JST, N.D. Cal. (Filed May 11, 2023).

See Britain Eakin, “Asylum Officers, Ex-Judges Back Suit on Biden Asylum Rule,” Law360, June 8, 2023.

East Bay Sanctuary v. Barr, 964 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2020) (holding that the Trump Administration’s asylum bar was inconsistent with our asylum laws).

Defendants’ Reply Brief, East Bay Sanctuary v. Biden, (June 30, 2023) at 8.

Austin Kocher, “Glitches in the Digitization of Asylum: How CBP One Turns Migrants’ Smartphones into Mobile Borders,” mdpi.com, June 20, 2023, https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/13/6/149, section 4.

Melissa del Bosque, “Facial Recognition Bias Frustrates Black Asylum Applicants to US,” The Guardian, Feb. 8, 2023,

“Senator Markey Calls on DHS to Ditch Mobile App Riddled With Glitches, Privacy Problems, For Asylum Seekers,” https://www.markey.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-markey-calls-on-dhs-to-ditch-mobile-app-riddled-with-glitches-privacy-problems-for-asylum-seekers.

8 C.F.R. § 1208.33(a)(2)(ii)(B).

International Rescue Committee, “Limits on Access to Asylum After Title 42: One Month of Monitoring U.S.-Mexico Border Ports of Entry” (June 2023), https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/Limits%20on%20Access%20to%20Asylum%20After%20Title%2042_1.pdf.

Sandra Sanchez, “Kidnappings, Extortion End CBP Asylum Interviews at Laredo-Nuevo Laredo Border Crossing,” Border Report, June 14, 2023, https://www.borderreport.com/immigration/border-crime/kidnappings-extortion-end-cbp-asylum-interviews-at-laredo-nuevo-laredo-border-crossing/?ipid=promo-link-block1.

Valerie Gonzalez and Julie Watson, “U.S. Halts Online Asylum Appointments at Texas Crossing After Extortion Warnings,” A.P., June 12, 2023, https://apnews.com/article/mexico-border-cbp-one-laredo-bfccf8c3f52d9cec2563b40da905a391.

One form of withholding covers persecution for specified reasons; the other applies to torture.

See Asylum Officer Basic Training Course Lesson Plan, “Reasonable Fear and Torture Determinations,” (USCIS, RAIO, 2017) at 11 (“The ‘reasonable possibility’ standard is the same standard required to establish eligibility for asylum (the ‘well- founded fear’ standard).”)

Jamelle Bouie, “Opinion: What Frederick Douglass Knew That Trump and DeSantis Don’t,” NYT, June 30, 2023.

JULY 5, 2023

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

It’s an existential problem for our nation when a Dem Administration claims as “success:” failure to recognize the rights of asylum seekers, intentionally evading asylum law, and endangering the lives of asylum seekers!

Lest anyone think the confusion, unfairness, and disorder caused by the Biden/Harris failure to implement competent, professional, expert leadership on human rights is “overhyped,” here’s an “in person” report from Professor Lenni Benson of NY Law School, founder of Safe Passage Project, and a widely reknowned “practical expert” on asylum and human rights.

Professor Lenni B. Benson — Professor Lenni B.Benson
Distinguished Chair of Immigration and Human Rights Law
New York Law School
Founder, Safe Passage Project
PHOTO: NYLS website

Sharing an excellent Blog post by retired IJ Jeff Chase on why the CBP One app may be endangering asylum applicants. See below.

Related to the CBP One app was a hearing I observed last Friday, June 30, 2023 in NY City.

A self-represented individual was asked by the IJ “were you admitted or inspected” by the government, the Respondent through a Mandarin interpreter said “Yes, through the CBP app.” The IJ paused. The OPLA attorney was visible on Webex. She was silent.

The IJ said “I will note your statement for the record, I find you removable as charged for not having been inspected or admitted.” [The Respondent had declined an opportunity to find an attorney.]

I am sure CBP will argue that entry under the app is not an inspection or admission and I haven’t looked carefully at the regulations but the issue is there to perhaps be litigated.

The other interesting twist in this particular case was that the government then told the Judge that she could see the Respondent had already completed biometrics and submitted an asylum application, but no application was in either her file nor the Court’s.

The IJ asked, do you have a copy?

The respondent: “On my phone.”

The IJ set a call-up date hearing to have the respondent print out the application and file it with the court in person.

I didn’t get a chance to speak to the Respondent, but I wondered if he had perhaps thought his interview with CBP was his asylum application or if he had filed affirmatively with USCIS.

Just sharing with this community.

Confusion abounds.

“Confusion abounds!” 🤯Why, rather than clarifying and applying the law, would the Administration intentionally create confusion and a host of unnecessary “litigatable issues?”

Why would they create delay by supposedly having applications for asylum “filed” but unavailable electronically to either ICE or EOIR?

Why didn’t the Administration recruit and hire real “practical experts” like Lenni Benson and her colleagues to straighten out the asylum system at the border, restore the rule of law, and reform and repopulate the critically important, currently dysfunctional, Immigration Courts and the BIA with well-qualified progressive judges, merit-selected experts in human rights and practical problem solving?

Pleased to join my friend “Sir Jeffrey” in giving a big “shout out” to our Round Table colleagues and superstar NDPA attorneys Steve Schulman, Ashley Vinson Crawford, and their pro bono team at Akin Gump for representing us on the amicus brief in East Bay Sanctuary!

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

Anybody naive enough to believe the “party line” from Administration wonks about “success at the border” should heed this “hot off the presses” report from Mica Rosenberg @ Reuters. It confirms the legal and humanitarian disaster at the border resulting from two plus years of mismanagement of asylum by Mayorkas, Garland, and the rest of the Biden immigration politicos who have failed to undo the humanitarian and legal mess left behind by White Nationalist Stephen Miller and the rest of the Trumpist scofflaws!

Mica Rosenberg
National Immigration Reporter, Reuters

Mica writes:

We examined the impact of the Biden administration’s new asylum regulation at the U.S.-Mexico border after it replaced the COVID-era Title 42 expulsion policy on May 11.

U.S. officials have said the regulation and other Biden immigration policies, that have opened new legal pathways to the US, have dramatically reduced the number of illegal border crossings.

But in the first month of the new policy, Reuters interviews with more than 50 migrants, U.S. and Mexican officials, a review of court records and previously unreported data found:

More than 100,000 migrants waiting in northern Mexico, many trying to snag an appointment on an oversubscribed government run smartphone app; a sharp drop in people passing their initial asylum screenings; more people in detention and tens of thousands of deportations.

My colleagues visited the mile-long migrant camp in Matamoros, across the river from Brownsville, Texas, where conditions are deteriorating, including cases of sexual assault in the camp, and we also spoke to a father who crossed the border but was speedily deported while his family was allowed into the US.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-immigration-asylum-border/

Please read and share and keep in touch.

The report at the above link has many photos illustrating both the cruel stupidity of the Biden program and the amazing resilience of those still hoping, against the odds, to have their legal rights respected and protected by the USG.

Thanks, Mica, for “telling it like it is” and penetrating the “bureaucratic smokescreen” thrown up by the Administration to cover its misdeeds and human rights abuses!🤮

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-06-23

⚖️ NDPA STALWART MICHAEL MEHR BEATS DOWN MATTER OF CORDERO-GARCIA (Obstruction of Justice) IN 9TH — Dissenting Trump Judge VanDyke Goes Ballistic — Accuses Colleagues Of “Playing Dirty” By Occasionally Ruling In Favor Of Individuals In Immigration Cases!

Here’s a report from Nate Raymond @ Reuters:

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-appointed-judge-says-9th-circuit-playing-dirty-prevent-deportations-2022-08-15/

(Reuters) – A conservative judge appointed by former President Donald Trump on Monday accused his colleagues on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals of playing “dirty” in a “trainwreck” of rulings to prevent immigrants from being deported.

U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke’s criticism came in a dissent to a 2-1 decision holding a Mexican native’s California conviction for dissuading a witness from reporting a crime was not a deportable offense under federal immigration law.

VanDyke, who has become known for a string of dissents since joining the liberal-leaning court in 2020, noted he had not been shy in criticizing the San Francisco-based court’s “abysmal and indefensible immigration precedents.”

He said the 9th Circuit for more than a decade has been “doing everything in our power (and much not) to upset” the Board of Immigration Appeals’ “reasonable” interpretation of what constitutes an offense related to obstruction of justice.

The BIA in this case had concluded Fernando Cordero-Garcia committed such an offense after he was convicted in California of sexual battery without restraint, sexual exploitation by a psychotherapist and dissuading a witness from reporting a crime.

“My colleagues in the majority should be embarrassed,” VanDyke wrote. “Perhaps not for their wrong decision today–to err is human, after all, even for those in robes. But they should be troubled by our court’s jaw-dropping, always-increasing, epic collection of immigration gaffes.”Cordero-Garcia’s lawyer, Michael Mehr, declined to comment.

Cordero-Garcia, who entered the country in 1965 as a lawful permanent resident, was a psychologist for the County of Santa Barbara Alcohol, Drug and Mental Health Services department who prosecutors said sexually assaulted patients, the ruling said.

Two appointees of Democratic presidents — U.S. District Judge Barry Moskowitz, a visiting judge on the court, and U.S. Circuit Judge Andrew Hurwitz — ruled for Cordero-Garcia in overturning the BIA’s decision on the obstruction offense.

Moskowitz, writing for the majority, said he was not writing on a “clean slate,” as the 9th Circuit in 2020 ruled an “obstruction of justice” offense must be connected to ongoing or pending criminal proceedings.

The California law Cordero-Garcia was convicted under, by contrast, does not require any connection to an ongoing or pending proceeding or investigation, making it “not an appropriate comparator” to obstruction under federal law.

VanDyke, though, said the 9th Circuit’s approach had created a “lopsided circuit-split,” with the majority acknowledging its ruling ran counter to decisions by the 1st and 4th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals.

The case is Cordero-Garcia v. Garland, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 19-72779.

For Cordero-Garcia: Michael Mehr of Mehr & Soto

For the United States: Rebecca Hoffberg Phillips of the U.S. Department of Justice

Read more:

Trump-appointed judge blasts 9th Circuit’s ’embarrassing’ immigration rulings

In barbed dissents, Trump appointees call

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

Here’s a link to Matter of Garcia-Cordero, 27 I&N Dec. 652 (BIA 2019) which was reversed by the 9th Circuit:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwip-puUns75AhUlk4kEHaQXAisQFnoECAMQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.gov%2Feoir%2Fpage%2Ffile%2F1210991%2Fdownload&usg=AOvVaw2IVnTOUmhzqK0ppatf4rr7

While VanDyke has been eager to rip into his colleagues for critically reviewing BIA rulings, rather than just “rubber stamp deferring,” he is no stranger to controversy. He received the coveted “not qualified to serve” rating from the ABA and has been characterized as an “unqualified hack” by Joe Patrice over at abovethelaw.com. https://abovethelaw.com/2021/12/ninth-circuit-judge-has-had-it-with-trump-judges-insulting-dissents/.

Interestingly, a chunk of the dissent is dedicated to showing that Mr. Cordero-Garcia is a louse. However, that doesn’t seem to have much to do with the legal application of the “categorical test” to his crime in the immigration context. For all its difficulties, Congress was well aware that courts had historically applied the “categorical test” as opposed to the “sounds like a bad guy” approach when they enacted the statutory language in question.

Curiously, VanDyke castigates his majority colleagues for “result oriented” decision making. But it seems highly unlikely that either District Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz, who wrote the opinion, or Circuit Judge Andrew Hurwitz would have chosen Mr. Cordero-Garcia’s situation as one to “throw out a lifeline.”

What’s more likely is that they fairly applied controlling Circuit precedent notwithstanding the highly unsympathetic individual involved. By contrast, critics have characterized VanDyke as an ideologue — driven by a far-right agenda — whose main focus on the bench has been “writing vitriolic Town Hall editorials to publish in F.4th.” Id.

From a due process standpoint, one of the most severe problems undermining our entire justice system today is the disturbingly poor performance of the BIA which often functions as a “rubber stamp” on incorrect anti-immigrant decisions by Immigration Judges, many of them appointed during the Trump Administration with questionable credentials, at best. That’s when the BIA isn’t busy serving as a “shill” for DHS Enforcement — often bending the law or going out of their way to sustain ICE appeals from correct decisions below that grant relief or benefit individuals. BIA precedents favorable to asylum seekers and other migrants are few and far between — despite an obvious lack of immigration and human rights expertise among many Trump appointees to the immigration bench.

The problem is compounded when reviewing Circuit Courts ignore the glaring Constitutional conflict of having a “court” that is “owned” by an enforcement agency (and was blatantly “weaponized” against migrants by Sessions and Barr) and the poor quality decision making, lack of scholarship, and overt bias that plagues EOIR. “Rubber stamp deference” to BIA decisions that do not deserve it is a systemic problem for the Article IIIs, actively encouraged by the Supremes judge-created Chevron and Brand X doctrines of undue deference. From this perspective, VanDyke and many (not all) of his Trump colleagues are a big part of the problem — not the solution!

Michael K. Mehr ESQ!
Senior Partner
Mehr & Soto LLP
Santa Cruz, CA
PHOTO: Website

Many congrats to Michael Mehr for vigorously and successfully litigating this complex issue in the 9th Circuit. It’s telling to compare the “quiet competence” of dedicated, expert advocates like Mehr with the “bombastic grandstanding” of VanDyke and others in the xenophobic right. Mehr and others in the NDPA have honed their their advocacy and scholarship skills by decades of giving a “voice” to those who otherwise are seldom “heard” by the powers that be.

Undoubtedly, given the circuit split, this eventually will end up at the Supremes. There, VanDyke’s fellow Trump appointees could well agree with him. But, that might be more reflective of problems with the composition of today’s Supremes than with the law. Stay tuned!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

08-17-22

MICA ROSENBERG @ REUTERS: “NEW Reuters project on the rising numbers of deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border” — Death Is Just “Collateral Damage” From Bad Border & Immigration Policies! — As The Desert Gets Hotter, Expect The Human Toll To Rise! ☠️⚰️

Hi there again,

I also wanted to share a multi media project we published yesterday about the rising number of deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-immigration-border-deaths/

Through our reporting, we exclusively learned that U.S. Customs and Border Protection quietly changed last year how they count deaths on the border to only include deaths in custody, during arrests or when agents were nearby and there were 151 such “CBP-related” deaths in the 2021 fiscal year.

We are still reporting on this and other issues of course, so please keep in touch with tips and story ideas!

All the best,

Mica

………………………………………………….

Mica Rosenberg

Reuters News

National Immigration Reporter

www.reuters.com

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

Thanks, Mica. “Tune in” to the full “multimedia report” referenced by Mica at the above link to Reuters.

No amount of statistical hocus-pocus or nativist BS can hide the stain of these deadly, yet ultimately ineffective, border enforcement policies. It’s important that the names and actions of the politicos, bureaucrats, and bad judges who promote and encourage deadly violations of human rights, and their media apologists, be preserved and documented for history!

As we can see, there are, and will continue to be, concerted efforts to “cover up,” deny, and misrepresent the deadly effects of bad border policies! “Dehumanization of the other,” actively promoted by Trumpists and other White Nationalist GOP pols and their hand picked Federal Judges is a crucial first step!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-27-22

☹️👎 EXECUTIVE BRANCH “JUDGES” ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROBLEMATIC: EOIR Might Be The Worst, But By No Means The Only Agency Where Quasi-Judicial Independence Is Compromised By Politicos & Their Subservient “Managers!” — Reuters Reports!

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-watchdog-says-pressure-patent-officials-affected-agency-rulings-2022-07-21/

U.S. watchdog says pressure from patent officials affected agency rulings

Blake Brittain July 21, 20224:11 PM EDTLast Updated a day ago

(Reuters) – U.S. Patent and Trademark Office administrators improperly influenced decisions by the office’s patent-eligibility tribunal for years, the U.S. Government Accountability Office said in a preliminary report released Thursday.

The report said two-thirds of judges on the PTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board felt pressure from higher-ups at the office to change aspects of their decisions, and that three-quarters of them believed the oversight affected their independence.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

While the report said management “rarely” influenced decisions on whether to cancel a patent, it said it did affect judges’ rulings on questions like whether to review a patent.

A PTO spokesperson said the report “reflects GAO’s preliminary observations on past practices,” and that current director Kathi Vidal has “prioritized providing clear guidance to the PTAB regarding the director review process” since taking office in April.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

The U.S. Supreme Court decided last year that the PTO director should be able to review board decisions.

The PTAB allows parties to challenge the validity of patents based on preexisting inventions in “inter partes review” proceedings.

A committee of volunteer judges began peer reviewing decisions in such cases for style and policy consistency and flagging them for potential management review in 2013, the report said. PTAB management began informally pre-reviewing board decisions on important issues and offering suggestions in 2017, and management review became official PTO policy in 2019.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Some PTAB judges said their decisions had been affected by fears of negative career consequences for going against the suggestions. One judge said in the report that the review policy’s “very existence creates a preemptive chilling effect,” and that management’s wishes were “at least a factor in all panel deliberations” and “sometimes the dominant factor.”

The report said the internal review policies were not made public until May.

Republican Congressman Darrell Issa of California said during a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee hearing Thursday that the report of officials influencing PTAB decisions “behind closed doors” was “disturbing.”

Andrei Iancu was appointed PTO director by former President Donald Trump and took charge of the office in 2018. Iancu, now a partner at Irell & Manella, had no comment on the report.

Issa, the subcommittee’s ranking member, and its chairman, Democratic Congressman Hank Johnson of Georgia, called on the GAO last year to investigate the PTO director’s potential influence on PTAB cases.

(NOTE: This story has been updated with comment from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.)

Read more:

U.S. Supreme Court reins in power of patent tribunal judges

U.S. Senators Leahy, Tillis introduce bill to revamp patent review board

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Thomson Reuters

Blake Brittain reports on intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. Reach him at blake.brittain@thomsonreuters.com

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

While it might once have seemed like a great idea, after more than a half-century the so-called “Administrative Judiciary” has proved to be a failure. It often delivers watered-down, sloppy, political, expedient, or “agency friendly” decisions with the “window dressing” of due process and real judicial proceedings.

Moreover, contrary to the original purpose, in most cases it is neither truly “expert” not “efficient.” Indeed, the Immigration Courts have built “one of the largest backlogs known to man!” That just leads to more misguided “gimmicks” and pressure to “speed up the quasi-judicial assembly line!” Individual lives and rights are the “big losers.”

To make matters worse, under the “Chevron doctrine” and its “off the wall” progeny “Brand X,” the Article IIIs “cop out” by giving “undue deference” to this deficient product.

It’s time for all Federal Judicial tribunals to be organized under Article III or Article I of the Constitution and for the legal profession and law schools to take a long, critical look at the poor job we now are doing of educating and preparing judges. We need to train and motivate the “best, brightest, and fairest” to think critically, humanely, and practically. Then, encourage them to become judges — out of a sense of public service, furthering the common good, promoting equal justice for all, and a commitment to vindicating individual rights, not some “ideological litmus test” as has a become the recent practice.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-22-22

ICRC: “Migration is not going to stop. If you try to prevent it or strictly regulate it, people start to pile up at the borders, which is happening in Mexico and other countries.”

Reuters reports:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/24/migration-violence-mexico-central-america?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Waves of migration through Mexico and Central America, and people who go missing, will increase in 2022 due to high levels of violence in the region, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said.

Battle-scarred ghost town bears mute witness to Mexico’s drug wars

“In many countries, violence is wreaking more and more havoc, and that’s why there are more and more migrants,” ICRC representative Jordi Raich told Reuters in an interview Wednesday. “And it’s not a situation that is going to improve or slow down, not even in the years to come.“

Immigration authorities in Mexico detained 307,679 migrants in 2021, a 68% increase compared with 182,940 detentions in 2019, according to government data.

Shelters in Mexico were completely overwhelmed last year, filled with frustrated migrants unable to continue their journey to the United States, Raich said.

Many migrants get “stuck” along Mexico’s southern or northern borders, Raich said, where they face “enormous economic constraints” and are able to find only basic services.

The administration of Joe Biden has faced record numbers of migrants arriving at the southern border and has implored Mexico and Central American countries to do more to stem the wave.

Disappearances in the region have not slowed either, the Red Cross said in a report released Thursday. Mexico recently surpassed 100,000 people reported missing in the country.

In El Salvador, 488 missing person cases remain unsolved, and in Guatemala, the number of missing women rose to six a day, the Red Cross report said.

Raich said it will be difficult to respond to the root causes of migration immediately. A joint effort among countries like El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras is necessary, he added.

“Migration is not going to stop,” Raich said. “If you try to prevent it or strictly regulate it, people start to pile up at the borders, which is happening in Mexico and other countries.”

Meanwhile, the Biden administration on Thursday rolled out a sweeping new regulation that aims to speed up asylum processing and deportations at the US-Mexico border, amid a record number of migrants seeking to enter the US.

The announcement of the new rule came as US officials are debating whether to end a separate Covid-era policy that has blocked most asylum claims at the border. The asylum overhaul could provide a faster way to process border crossers if the Covid order is ended.

. . . .

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

Read the full article at the link.

Cruelty, walls, detention, family separation, border militarization, expedited hearings — they aren’t going to stop human migration. We will be able to increase border deaths, expand the scope of “black market migration,” increase our “underground population,” and enrich human smugglers. Good policy?

Meanwhile, it’s obvious that the “disingenuous internal debate” on Title 42 has nothing whatsoever to do with public health and everything to do with whether continued illegal and immoral suspension of asylum protections at the border will prove politically advantageous to the Biden Administration. It won’t! It might, however, cost Dems support among progressives.

How dishonest and unethical is the Biden Administration’s discussion of violating the law? (Do we actually have an Attorney General?) According to the WashPost, scofflaw Biden Administration officials actually are considering lifting Title 42 for families, but not for single males! https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/03/24/border-biden-migrants-influx-pandemic/

There is, of course, no known medical evidence that “single males” present a greater COVID threat than families! Indeed, there is no known medical evidence to suggest that any potential asylum applicant is a threat to the health and safety of the US.

The whole thing is a deadly farce! Why aren’t Hill Dems calling for oversight of Garland’s sitting by and watching while the law and ethics are pulverized around him? Or worse yet, what about his Department’s defense of abrogation of our laws? Believe it or not, we actually have asylum and protection laws on the books, duly enacted by Congress, although you’d never know it from Garland’s feckless performance!

Meanwhile, WashPost and other so-called “mainstream media” continue to hype stories about increased border pressure. So, continuing to violate asylum law is a viable alternative “strategy?” Give me a break! How is violating the law going to stop folks from fleeing deadly conditions in their home countries? It won’t, as the ICRC points out above!

What it will do, as also pointed out above, is kill more asylum seekers, subject them to rape, torture and other harm, enrich smugglers, and increase the extralegal population in the U.S.!

Blaine Bookey
Legal Director
Center for Gender & Refugee Studies @ Hastings Law
Photo: CGRS website

It also will increase those waiting in vain at the Southern Border for the reopening of a legal asylum system that has abandoned them! In the words of one expert:

“The conditions are squalid,” said Blaine Bookey, the legal director of the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at University of California, Hastings College of the Law, who led a team interviewing dozens of families waiting in Tijuana for the federal government to lift Title 42. “There is real lack of access to sanitation, medical care, adequate food, all of the real basic fundamental necessities.”

. . . .

“There have been some exceptions made for Ukrainians, which we’re happy to see, but the policy should be ended for everyone,” Bookey said. “There was never a public health justification, and there certainly isn’t now.” (WashPost, supra).

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) babbles nativist nonsense:

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) said at a committee hearing last week that the influx has “completely derailed” efforts to discuss improving legal immigration to the United States, which he said states such as Texas need to staff hospitals and fill jobs. Border states such as Texas and Arizona are bracing for higher numbers of unauthorized immigrants in coming weeks, he said.

“Rather than deter would-be migrants with weak asylum claims from taking the dangerous journey to the southwest border, the administration has rolled out the welcome mat and created new incentives to illegally immigrate to the United States,” he said at the March 15 hearing before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship and border safety.

To my knowledge, neither Cornyn nor any of his other GOP nativist buddies have ever adjudicated an asylum application. Nor have they represented asylum seekers before the Asylum Office or in our broken Immigration Courts. So, how would that have any idea whether certain asylum claims are “weak” or not? They wouldn‘t!

Moreover, we haven’t had a functioning asylum system at our Southern Border for years. So, how would anyone know how many of the claims are “weak?” They wouldn’t?

Remarkably, apparently unknown to Cornyn and his scofflaw buddies, we actually have laws to deal with his concerns. When the legal system is “open for business” — which it isn’t now — those claiming asylum at the border are subject to “summary exclusion” by DHS officers. Their claims are then expeditiously reviewed by Asylum Officers for a “credible fear” of asylum. Those who don’t establish credible fear, subject only to cursory review by an Immigration Judge, can be immediately removed by DHS.

Historically, when the system was at least nominally functional, those “passing” credible fear have been turned over to the now dysfunctional Immigration Courts. Under Trump, these “parodies of courts” were “weaponized” into “asylum killing grounds.”

Sessions and Barr packed their non-independent “captive courts” with “judges” perceived to be “enforcement oriented” and “anti-asylum” — willing to skew the law and facts as necessary to deny and deport. This mess is “led” by an appellate body, the BIA, which contains some of the most notorious members of the “Asylum Deniers’ Club” — folks who got their appellate jobs under Barr specifically because as Immigraton Judges they denied almost every asylum case that came before them! In other words, even when there was some semblance of a legal asylum system, it was redesigned under Trump to be systemically unfair to asylum seekers, particularly women and applicants of color. For sure, racism and misogyny played into this unseemly scenario.

Remarkably, Garland has chosen to maintain this dysfunctional, biased, and broken system largely in the form it existed and with almost all of the same unqualified or questionably qualified “judges” he inherited from Session and Barr!

While the Administration has announced “new interim regulations” that would allow Asylum Officers to grant meritorious cases without going before Immigration Courts, the system still depends on “guidance,” supervision, and de novo review by the broken, biased, and dysfunctional Immigration Courts running amok under Garland. https://immigrationcourtside.com/2022/03/24/🏴☠%EF%B8%8Fno-surprise-boston-asylum-office-screws-🔩-maine-refugees-☠%EF%B8%8F-part-of-a-serious-national-anti-asylum-bias-largely/

Our broken asylum system can’t and won’t be fixed without dealing head-on with the overarching problem — systemic anti-asylum bias, poor quality decision-making, grotesque inconsistencies, and beyond incompetent administration of our Immigraton Courts by the DOJ!

Remarkably, Garland’s proposed solution is yet another “designed to fail” gimmick — expedite cases in his broken and biased, anti-asylum system! So the solution to a defective court system, infected with anti-asylum bias and poorly qualified judges turning out defective decisions is to make it “go faster!” The new regulations also fail to deal with the huge due process issue of lack of competent representation in the asylum system, particularly the Immigration Courts. Come on man!

We don’t need over 500 pages of new regulations and sophomoric, alternate universe “time limits” for an agency that can’t even find its files! What we need is for Garland to do the job he was hired to do more than a year ago! That’s “clean house” at the Immigration Courts, bring in competent, fair judges who have experience in Immigration Court and are legitimate, well-recognized asylum experts — starting with a new BIA (save for their one qualified Appellate Immigration Judge Andrea Saenz, a Garland appointee).

Get expert judges, intellectual leaders, and competent judicial administrators into the broken Immigration Court system to provide coherent, practical asylum legal guidance and work with advocates, the Asylum Office, and DHS to get a functional and fair legal asylum system in place and operating smoothly and efficiently at the border. It should already be in place by now. That it isn’t, is entirely “on Garland!”

Then, with experts who actually are committed to fairly and impartially applying asylum law in place, we’ll see, for the first time, how many of the asylum claims are valid and how many aren’t! And, while we’re at it, we might find that many of the “legal” immigrants Texas and the rest of America needs are right there at our borders — just waiting for our legal system to do justice and admit them. Asylum seekers are seeking legal immigration! It the USG that’s acting “illegally” here!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

03-26-22

REUTERS: MICA ROSENBERG & TEAM REPORT ON UNACCOMPANIED CHILDREN, FAMILY REUNIFICATION!

Hi there all,

I wanted to share with you our latest Reuters investigation about unaccompanied minors released to the town of Enterprise, Alabama where the chicken industry is booming and we profiled a teen who easily found work after she was released from federal custody. We detail how last summer U.S. Department of Health and Human Services temporarily halted releases from shelters to the town, as several federal agencies probed whether migrants were at risk. While no child trafficking has been found, labor exploitation of migrants there is being investigated.

Read more, and share, here: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-immigration-alabama/

This follows our coverage of the reunification of one migrant family separated in 2017 at the U.S.-Mexico border under Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy who was reunited in January. We have been in touch with the family since 2020.

Here is the story with a graphic that shows the scale of the work of the Biden administration’s reunification task force:

https://widerimage.reuters.com/story/split-up-at-the-us-mexico-border-family-finally-reunites

and here is the story with additional photographs of this family’s long and painful journey:

https://graphics.reuters.com/USA-IMMIGRATION/REUNIFICATION/byprjxlnzpe/index.html

We also were able to report on another heartwarming reunion, after a family lost their baby in the chaos of the evacuation of Afghanistan. Our story published last November helped lead to tips that located the baby in Kabul so he could be reunited with relatives there and hopefully soon taken to the United States to join his parents who have resettled in Michigan:

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/exclusive-baby-lost-chaos-afghanistan-airlift-found-returned-family-after-long-2022-01-08/

We are continuing coverage of all these important issues so please keep in touch with tips and story ideas!

All the best,

Mica

………………………………………………….

Mica Rosenberg

Reuters News

National Immigration Reporter

www.reuters.com

3 Times Square, 18th Floor

New York, NY 10036

Cell/signal/whatsapp/telegram: +1 (646) 897-4851

Teams: +1 (332) 219-1353

email: mica.rosenberg@thomsonreuters.com

www.linkedin.com/in/micarosenberg/

***********

Thanks, Mica, for giving us an in-depth look at the “human side” of these issues!

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-07-22

⚖️JUSTICE ALITO GRANTS BRIEF STAY TO ALLOW FULL COURT TO VOTE ON MPP REINSTATEMENT!

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-faces-deadline-reinstate-remain-mexico-border-program-2021-08-20/

WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) – A U.S. Supreme Court justice on Friday temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that would require Democratic President Joe Biden to reinstate a contentious immigration policy implemented by his Republican predecessor, Donald Trump.

The brief order by conservative Justice Samuel Alito puts the litigation on hold while the high court considers how to handle the Biden administration’s request seeking to impose a longer-term block on the judge’s ruling that would require the government to revive the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program.

. . . .

******************
Read the complete report at the link.

Doesn’t mean the Court will grant the Gov’s application for stay pending appeal. It’s just that Justice Alito sees enough of an issue that he wants his colleague to have a chance to weigh in.

DPF

PWS

08-21-21

🤮BIDEN/GARLAND APPEAR HEADED FOR “VICTORY” @ SUPREMES OVER LONG-TIME RESIDENTS SEEKING GREEN CARDS — Progressives, Immigration Advocates, Dems Rebuffed As Biden Administration Goes “Full Stephen Miller” On Couple With Two Decades’ Residence, USC Child! — Only Justice Sotomayor Speaks Up For “Better” Interpretation Of Statute, Immigrants Rights, Common Sense In The Law!

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/us-supreme-court-doubts-green-cards-some-protected-migrants-2021-04-19/

Andrew Chung reports for Reuters:

U.S. Supreme Court justices on Monday appeared reluctant to let people who have been allowed to stay in the United States on humanitarian grounds apply to become permanent residents if they entered the country illegally.

The justices heard arguments in an appeal by a married couple from El Salvador who were granted so-called Temporary Protected Status of a lower court ruling that barred their applications for permanent residency, also known as a green card, because of their unlawful entry.

The case could affect thousands of immigrants, many of whom have lived in the United States for years. President Joe Biden’s administration opposes the immigrants in the case. The dispute puts Biden, who has sought to reverse many of his Republican predecessor Donald Trump’s hardline immigration policies, at odds with immigration advocacy groups and some of his fellow Democrats. read more

A federal law called the Immigration and Nationality Act generally requires that people seeking to become permanent residents have been “inspected and admitted” into the United States. At issue in the case is whether a grant of Temporary Protected Status, which gives the recipient “lawful status,” satisfies those requirements.

. . . .

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Justice Department lawyer Michael Huston, “If you’re asking us to find the better reading of the statute, we should go by its terms: Those people have been admitted.”

. . . .

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

Read the full article at the link.

Garland helps Biden deliver “tough noogies, go pound sand, your lives don’t matter” message to immigrants like Jose and Sonia and their supporters who might have had the illusion that better times were on the horizon with Biden’s election! Progressives find that when push comes to shove, Biden & Garland can be just as cruel, dumb, and counterproductive as Trump & Miller!

Any hope that advocates might have had of help, sympathy, or understanding for their green-card-qualified clients with decades of residence and citizen family members goes down the tubes early in Dem Administration. Biden-Harris humane rhetoric and promises prove just another illusion for progressives in Administration’s first High Court test!

But for Justice Sotomayor, the thinness of the Justices’ understanding of both immigration law and the human issues involved was alarming, yet basically predictable. What do a bunch of highly privileged, above the fray, judges who have never personally dealt with the stupidity, arbitrariness, and trauma of our immigration system, and never represented clients in Immigration Court, care about shutting hard working American residents, people of color, like Jose and Sonia, out of our system and disenfranchising them for no particular reason. The worst, most racially discriminatory “interpretations” are “available” to those judges, so why not use them? For them, it’s a wooden academic exercise played out with human lives that don’t matter because they are “the other.” Except for Sotomayor, going for the best, most practical, humane interpretation evidently never crossed the minds of these Justices.

As Justice Sotomayor correctly said: “If you’re asking us to find the better reading of the statute, we should go by its terms: Those people have been admitted.”

It’s not rocket science. Just common sense, humanity, and a clear understanding of the effect of legal interpretations on human lives. At the Supreme Court level, most decisions represent a “choice” rather than a “mandate.” That’s where having Justices who neither care to understand nor have to live with the consequences of their decisions really hurts people of color, immigrants, asylum seekers, and others not in the “power structure!” Better judges for a better America!

Meanwhile, advocates and progressives should never underestimate the ability of Dem Administrations to screw up immigration policy.

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

04-20-21

🏴‍☠️INSIDE A FAILED AND UNJUST SYSTEM: Reuters Report Explains How The Trump Administration Destroyed Due Process, Fundamental Fairness, & Humanity In The U.S. Immigration Courts!

Four Horsemen — BIA Asylum Panel In Action
Albrecht Dürer, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-trump-court-special-r/special-report-how-trump-administration-left-indelible-mark-on-u-s-immigration-courts-idUSKBN2B0179

Reade Levinson, Kristina Cooke, & Mica Rosenberg report for Reuters:

(Reuters) – On a rainy September day in 2018, Jeff Sessions, then U.S. attorney general, addressed one of the largest classes of newly hired immigration judges in American history.

“The vast majority of asylum claims are not valid,” he said during a swearing-in ceremony in Falls Church, Virginia, according to his prepared remarks. If judges do their job, he said, “the number of illegal aliens and the number of baseless claims will fall.”

It was a clear message to the incoming class: Most of the immigrants who appear in court do not deserve to remain in the United States.

As U.S. President Joe Biden works to undo many of the restrictive immigration policies enacted by former President Donald Trump, he will confront one of his predecessor’s indelible legacies: the legion of immigration judges Trump’s administration hired.

The administration filled two-thirds of the immigration courts’ 520 lifetime positions with judges who, as a whole, have disproportionately ordered deportation, according to a Reuters analysis of more than 800,000 immigration cases decided over the past 20 years.

Judges hired under Trump ordered immigrants deported in 69% of cases, compared to 58% for judges hired as far back as the administration of President Ronald Reagan. Because hundreds of thousands of immigrants have cases before the court each year, that 11 percentage-point difference translates to tens of thousands more people ordered deported each year. Appeals are rarely successful.

Biden has promised to dramatically expand the courts by doubling the number of immigration judges and other staff. That’s a worthwhile effort, said Stephen Legomsky, a former chief counsel of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services who is now a professor emeritus at Washington University School of Law in St. Louis. “But the challenge is going to be tremendous.”

Although there are no statutory limits on the number of judges who can be hired, expanding the court would be costly and could take years, immigration law experts said.

“The fact that these (Trump-era) judges are already in place inhibits him a great deal,” Legomsky said of Biden.

Stephen Miller, the key architect of Trump’s immigration agenda, told Reuters that the administration had aimed to hire more immigration judges as part of an effort to “create more integrity in the asylum process” and quickly resolve what he termed meritless claims to cut down on a massive backlog.

“Most of the people that are coming unlawfully between ports of entry on the southwest border are not eligible for any recognized form of asylum,” Miller said in an interview. “There should be a very high rejection rate.”

Under U.S. law, immigrants are eligible for asylum only if they can prove they were being persecuted in their home countries on the basis of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or their political opinions. Miller said many migrants arriving at the border are coming for economic reasons and present fraudulent asylum claims.

Sessions, who as attorney general had the final say in hiring immigration judges, told Reuters that “the problem is not with the Trump judges. The problem was with some of the other judges that seemed to not be able to manage their dockets, or, in many cases, rendered rulings that were not consistent with the law.

The Trump administration’s successors to Sessions, who was forced out in 2018, did not respond to requests for comment.

. . . .

“There has been a significant lack of basic understanding of immigration law and policy with many – not all – but many of the new hires under the Trump administration,” said Susan Roy, an attorney and former immigration judge appointed during the administration of President George W. Bush who has represented immigrants before some new judges.

Reuters spoke with eight other former immigration judges, five of whom served under Trump, who generally echoed her view. Sitting immigration judges are not permitted to speak to the media.

Even for judges with immigration backgrounds, the type of experience they have has been controversial. In 2017, a report commissioned by the Justice Department found a lack of diversity of experience among judges hired, due to an excess of former prosecutors here from Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of the report at the link.

Hon. Sue Roy is a distinguished member of our Round Table of Former Immigration Judges 🛡⚔️ now in private practice representing asylum seekers and other migrants in Immigration Court.

Hon. Charles Honeyman, quoted elsewhere in the article, is also a member of the Round Table who actually was removed from a case for failing to carry out what he believed to be improper instructions from his “supervisors” who were implementing Sessions’s anti-immigrant policies.

Stephen Legomsky is a former USCIS Senior Executive and esteemed retired Professor who generally is acknowledged as one of American’s leading scholar-experts on immigration and human rights.

Judge Dana Leigh Marks, quoted elsewhere in the article, is a former President of the National Association of Immigration Judges who also successfully argued the landmark Supreme Court case INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, which established the generous well-founded fear standard for asylum.

Sessions and Miller are notorious White Nationalist xenophobes who have neither represented asylum seekers nor been Immigration Judges. Their efforts to eradicate international norms and legal protections for vulnerable asylum seekers, and their particular bias against female asylum seekers, have been widely criticized and panned by human rights experts throughout the world, as well as enjoined or overruled by some U.S. Courts. They were architects of the widely condemned child separation policy and the New American Gulag (“NAG”).

EOIR is the failed DOJ agency that houses the dysfunctional Immigration Courts.

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

03-08-21

🏴‍☠️☠️🤮⚰️INSIDE ICE’S NEW AMERICAN GULAG (“NAG”) WITH MICA ROSENBERG @ REUTERS! – As COVID Rages, “Civil” Detainees Jailed By ICE In Deadly Conditions For Longer Periods!

In our most recent story on ICE detention and the coronavirus, we looked at ICE data going back to 2010 and found immigrants are being held now for longer on average than at any time in a decade in the middle of a pandemic, which has now infected more than 6,400 detainees nationwide. We spoke to 20 detainees from Africa and Latin America who have been detained for more than six months. Some were asylum seekers held for long periods as they seek relief in immigration court, others were DACA recipients who have served criminal sentences but are still fighting their deportation orders.

Detainees are locked up for much longer, even as the overall detention population dropped dramatically this year. Part of the reason for that decline: around 150,000 expulsions at the US-Mexico border under new health rules put in place by the Trump administration in March.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-detention-insight/amid-pandemic-sharply-increased-u-s-detention-times-put-migrants-at-risk-idUSKBN26U15Y

This follows on our earlier reporting about how ICE transfers of detainees have exacerbated the spread of the virus in some cases and how detainees have died of COVID-19. As well as how the families of detainees are being affected because of their frontline work.

Thanks again to everyone who has helped me report these stories and please do keep in touch with future tips. Beyond detention, we are also following the swift pace of immigration policy changes across the board.

All the best,

Mica

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

Thanks Mica and crew for continuing to expose these outrageous violations our Constitution, our international obligations, morality, common sense, and our obligations to our fellow humans by the Trump regime’s white nationalist kakistocracy!

Vote ‘em out, vote ‘em out, on every level! Return our nation to the rule of law, common sense, competency, and simple human decency.

PWS

10-11-20

🏴‍☠️☠️👎🏻🤮CONSTITUTION IN RUINS: Egged On By Feckless Supremes, Trump Rolls Out Another Racist Attack On Our Constitution & Our Nation By Declaring Undocumented Residents “Non-Persons!” — The “Dred Scottification” Of People Of Color By Trump & His Supremes Continues To Bear Ugly Fruit!

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-executive-order-immigrants-redistricting_n_5f1709e0c5b615860bb7f415

The Constitution says the congressional apportionment should be based on the “whole number of persons” in each state. But the president wants to change that.

Reuters, By Alexandra Alper & Nick Brown

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump on Tuesday signed a memorandum that would prevent migrants who are in the United States illegally from being counted when U.S. congressional voting districts are redrawn in the next round of redistricting.

U.S. Census experts and lawyers say the action is legally dubious. In theory, it would benefit Trump’s Republican Party by eliminating the largely non-white population of migrants in the U.S. illegally, creating voting districts that skew more Caucasian.

. . . .

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

Read the full article at the link.

The Supremes allowed Trump to rewrite the immigration and refugee laws without benefit of legislation.

They allowed him to abrogate the due process clause of our Constitution for persons of color who had the bad fortune to be asylum seekers or immigrants.

They allowed the GOP to revise the Constitution and abrogate the Voting Rights Act to make it more difficult for minorities to vote and to insure that their votes counted for less than their White counterparts.

Now, empowered by Supreme complicity, Trump is going for yet another “do it yourself” Constitutional rewrite.

We have only ourselves to blame for allowing unqualified Justices like the “JR Five” to gain control of our highest Court — what was supposed to be our “final bastion” against Executive tyranny, but has instead become an enabler of “Dred Scottification” — that is “de-humanization” of large segments of our population — disproportionately people of color. Another term used for the Supremes’ majority’s defective performance in the face of Trump’s lawlessness is “Constitutional Castration” (assuming, arguendo, that the Constitution is “male”). Either way, it’s an ugly process.

It’s worth noting that enslaved Africans Americans, those originally subjected to “Dred Scottification,” and still feeling the adverse effects of the Supremes “renewal” of the concept, were counted for “3/5 of a person” under the original Constitution. Undocumented individuals, according to Trump, count for zero, even though they have consistently been counted in the past.

Of course the difference is that the original “3/5 rule” was designed to benefit the racists of the post-colonial South. The “new zero rule” is intended to benefit GOP racists of today.

The “Census case” actually went to the Supremes once. It’s the one where Wilbur Ross perjured himself. Rather than earning disbarment for the DOJ Attorneys who brought that mess before the Court and sanctions against the Administration, Trump got only a mild rebuke from Roberts. Heck, some Justices actually voted in favor of the regime’s racist inspired fraud!

In the process of soft-peddling the Administration’s gross misconduct and intellectual dishonesty, the Supremes’ majority also engaged in a largely fictional “historical analysis” deemed by commentators from the Brennan Center to be “preposterous.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/citizenship-questions-are-not-historically-normal/593014/

That’s strong language. But, actually, it comes to mind frequently with respect to the Roberts’ Court’s various attempts to defeat equal justice and diminish the humanity of non-white -populations under our laws.

This latest Trump memo makes it crystal clear that the original subterfuge for the “citizenship question” — that it was necessary to enforce civil rights laws — utterly laughable — was a complete fraud on the Court. But, don’t expect that exercise of bad faith (“death” to any private party before the Supremes) to make any difference to Trumpian Justices who long ago sold out nation and our Constitution along with their own humanity and integrity.

This latest systemic failure by all three branches could well leave future Congressional apportionments and elections in chaos.

A better America for all requires better, more intellectually honest and morally courageous Justices who stand for the Constitution and against racism in all forms, be it promoted by the Executive, Congress, or their fellow judges. Unhappily, we’re a long way from there right now!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

07-21-20

SCOFFLAW NATION: Regime Uses Coronavirus Chaos To Ramp Up Attacks On Migrant Kids!

Trump Abuses Children — Trump & Children Cartoon
Joel Pett
Tribune Content Agency

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/us-deport-migrant-children-coronavirus-bill_n_5e8d8e46c5b6e1d10a6c30dc

Reuters reports:

Nearly 400 migrant children intercepted at the U.S.-Mexico border have been deported in the past two weeks under new border restrictions.

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) ― U.S. immigration officials have rapidly deported nearly 400 migrant children intercepted at the U.S.-Mexico border in the past two weeks under new rules billed as seeking to limit the spread of the novel coronavirus in the United States, according to government data seen by Reuters.

President Donald Trump’s administration implemented new border rules on March 21 that scrapped decades-long practices under laws meant to protect children from human trafficking and offer them a chance to seek asylum in a U.S. immigration court. Under the new rules, U.S. officials can quickly remove people without standard immigration proceedings.

Overall, U.S. border officials have expelled nearly 7,000 migrants to Mexico since the new procedures took effect, according to the data and a Mexican government official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Of those, 377 were minors, the data showed.

The overall number of 7,000 was first published by ProPublica, but the figure for children deported has not previously been reported.

Around 120 of the minors, who arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border without a parent or legal guardian, were quickly sent on planes back to Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, according to data from March 27 to April 2. It was not clear whether the remainder of the children intercepted at the border were pushed back to Mexico or returned to their home countries during the preceding week.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) declined to comment. The agency in the past has said that all people caught crossing illegally, including minors, could be subjected to the new restrictions, which aim to cut the time migrants arrested at the border are held in U.S. custody.

Before the pandemic of COVID-19, the potentially lethal respiratory disease caused by the novel coronavirus, unaccompanied minors caught at the border were placed in shelters run by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Children traveling with adults other than parents or legal guardians would also be classified as “unaccompanied” and put into HHS care, even if the adults they were traveling with were family members. Under the new rules, however, they are now called “single minors” and can be sent back to Mexico, according to a CBP official.

. . . .

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

Read the full story at the link.

Basically, Trump has repealed U.S. asylum and protection laws by unilateral action, with almost no “pushback” from Congress or the courts.

PWS

04-08-17

MICA ROSENBERG @ REUTERS: Migrants In Trump’s New American Gulag Risk Dying Distant From Hospitals — U.S. Judges Dither As Human Rights Abuses Mount & U.S. Justice System Crumbles Under COVID 19 & Trump’s Continuing Human Rights Abuses! ☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️🆘🆘🆘🆘🆘

Mica writes:

I wanted to share our latest reporting, which found about a third of the 43,000 immigrants in detention as of March 2 were housed at facilities that have only one hospital – or none – with intensive-care beds within 25 miles, according to an analysis of data from the American Hospital Directory and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The seven sites with no such hospitals nearby held a total of about 5,000 detainees, according to the analysis, which examined centers that averaged 100 or more detainees. (ICE has said there are fewer detainees being held currently – around 35,600 – but did not provide a facility-by-facility breakdown of their whereabouts)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-detention-insi-idUSKBN21L1E4

We focused on Louisiana where the number of immigrant detainees has quadrupled under Trump to nearly 7,000 as of March 2 data. Many of the detention centers in the state are in tiny, rural towns. The Catahoula Correctional Center for example houses more than 500 detainees. It is just outside of Harrisonburg, LA, population 330.

Nurses, doctors and hospital administrators at the small hospitals closest to the detention centers – and even at larger facilities farther away – said they would be overwhelmed if there is an outbreak inside one of the facilities.

Public health experts said an outbreak in a population of 1,500 detainees could require between 150 and 175 intensive-care admissions.

We previously have reported on how lawyers are seeking parole for vulnerable immigrant detainees and how the city of Matamoros in Mexico, where thousands of migrants are stuck in limbo in tent camps, is unprepared for an outbreak.

Please read and share and contact me with additional tips for us to follow!

………………………………………………….

Mica Rosenberg

Reuters News

National Immigration Reporter

www.reuters.com

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

The whole idea of locating immigration prisons “in the middle of nowhere” intentionally to hamper representation, coerce, punish, and deter detainees from asserting legal rights, and limit accountability and public oversight has been a grotesque denial of due process from the “git go.” Congress and the Article III Courts should have intervened long ago to put a stop to this nonsense before it became life-threatening on an even larger scale.

Even more preposterous is that the DOJ and EOIR have located so-called “courts” (that aren’t really courts in any sense of the term, and which no longer provide any semblance of due process and fundamental fairness) within the Gulag. It’s more like the Spanish Inquisition than it is 21st Century American Justice. Except the tragedy is that this is what passes for justice in 21st Century America! What has happened to our country and our souls? Sadly, it’s actually possible that those appearing before the Spanish Inquisition were treated better than we treat asylum seekers under the Trump regime.

Even worse, the “perpetrators” of this disgraceful mockery of the law and human dignity have to date gotten away Scot-Free. Our justice system at all levels has failed migrants seeking fair and humane treatment under our laws. (Apparently, threatening the lives, rights, and safety of non-criminal so-called “civil detainees” isn’t a problem for either Congress or the Article IIIs. We already know that Trump considers our Constitution to be a joke, and that he therefore runs over it with regularity, contempt, and impunity, while Roberts and his Supremes’ majority express disinterest in holding the Trump regime accountable for even the most boldly egregious abuses. No wonder his open contempt for the Article IIIs has only grown over the past three years.)

Thanks, Mica, for your courageous reporting and continuing to tell the story of those whose lives are being endangered by a “maliciously incompetent” White Nationalist regime and feckless Federal Courts, many of whom have forgotten the meaning of their oaths of office and their obligations to their fellow human beings.

Read all of Mica’s stories in their entirety at the above links. Or, better yet, contact Mica directly@Reuters with your own “horror stories” from inside Trump’s judicially-enabled New American Gulag.

Due Process Forever! The Trump Regime & The Complicit Congress & Federal Courts That Enable Its Abuses, Never!

Vote Like Your Life Depends On It This November! Because, It Does!

PWS

04-04-20

From Reuters:

Overview

Political Repression and Human Rights

Crime and Insecurity

Economic Collapse

Health Crisis

Food Insecurity

Heavy Rains and Flooding

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

From Asylum Access & Reuters:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Mica writes:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here’s a report from Nate Raymond @ Reuters:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Reuters reports:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Related posts:

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Vote ‘em out, vote ‘em out, on every level! Return our nation to the rule of law, common sense, competency, and simple human decency.

Related posts:

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Related posts:

Due Process Forever! The Trump Regime & The Complicit Congress & Federal Courts That Enable Its Abuses, Never!

Vote Like Your Life Depends On It This November! Because, It Does!

PWS

Related posts: