Fascism – Page 13 – immigrationcourtside.com

LATEST FROM “SIR JEFFREY” 🛡⚔️ — “Determining Political Opinion: Problems and Solutions — Jeffrey S. Chase | Opinions/Analysis on Immigration Law”

https://www.jeffreyschase.com/blog/2021/3/7/determining-political-opinion-problems-and-solutions

JEFFREY S. CHASE | OPINIONS/ANALYSIS ON IMMIGRATION LAW

Blog Archive Press and Interviews Calendar Contact

Determining Political Opinion: Problems and Solutions

Regarding political opinion, the refugee law scholar Atle Grahl-Madsen famously explained that refugee protection “is designed to suit the situation of common [people], not only that of philosophers…The instinctive or spontaneous reaction to usurpation or oppression is [as] equally valid” as the “educated, cultivated, reflected opinion.”1 A recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit provides an opportunity to reflect on this premise.

In Zelaya-Moreno v. Wilkinson, a young man was targeted for recruitment by MS-13. On two occasions, Zelaya directly announced to the gang’s members his reason for refusing to join: because gangs were bad for his hometown and country. Both times, the gang members responded by beating him, fracturing his arm the second time. They also threatened to kill him if he continued to refuse to join. The questions raised are whether Zelaya’s instinctive, simply-worded response expressed a political opinion, and if so, did that opinion form part of the reason for the beatings and threat?

The Immigration Judge recognized Zelaya’s statement to the gang to be a political opinion for asylum purposes. However, the IJ wasn’t persuaded from the record that Zelaya’s opinion was why the gang beat him. As expressed by the IJ, the beatings were caused by “Zelaya’s refusal to join the gang, irrespective of the reasons.” It doesn’t seem that the IJ considered whether the gang members imputed a political opinion to the act of refusal per se.

On appeal, the BIA took a far more extreme position, stating that because gangs are not political organizations and their activities are not political in nature, “expressing an opinion against their group is not expressing a political opinion.” This happens to be a position that EOIR and DHS (in defiance of much circuit case law and expert opinion to the contrary) later sought to codify in regulations that fortunately remain enjoined at present.

The Second Circuit in Zelaya-Moreno rejected the Board’s narrow view of political opinion. In fact, the court only last year, in its decision in Hernandez-Chacon v. Barr, recognized the act of resisting rape by members of the very same gang in El Salvador as the expression of a feminist, anti-patriarchy political opinion. Significantly, the victim in that case hadn’t stated any opinion to the gang members; it was only years later in front of the immigration judge that she gave her reason for resisting as “because I have every right to.”

As it has done in other decisions, the Second Circuit emphasized the need for a “complex and contextual factual inquiry” in political opinion determinations. It conducted a survey of cases in which political opinion was found, and of others in which it wasn’t. Unfortunately, the majority upheld the decision that Zelaya had not expressed a political opinion to the MS-13 members, stating that “[s]o far as the record shows, his objection to them is not rooted in any sort of disagreement with the policies they seek to impose nor any ideology they espouse.”

“So far as the record shows” is critical. I haven’t seen the record in this case, but I believe it might serve to demonstrate that while Grahl-Madsen correctly assigned equal validity to the opinions of the commoner and the intellectual, in practice, claims brought by members of the former group often require assistance from the latter in persuading adjudicators of the political nature of their words or actions.

For example, in Hernandez-Chacon, context for the petitioner’s resistance was provided by the affidavit of a lawyer and human rights expert who was able to articulate the patriarchal gender bias in Salvadoran society from which a political opinion could be gleaned from the asylum-seeker’s act of resistance alone. In another decision cited by the court, Alvarez-Lagos v. Barr, the Fourth Circuit was able to rely on the explanation of two experts on Central American gangs that the petitioner’s refusal to comply with extortion demands would be viewed by the gang as “political opposition” and “a form of political disobedience.”

In Zelaya-Moreno, the dissenting judge (in an opinion worth reading) was able to draw a political inference from the facts alone. It seemed that the two judges in the majority required more. But in finding the statements or actions of an applicant alone to be insufficient, is our present system of refugee protection genuinely designed to suit the situation of common people as well as philosophers?

In the view of the dissenting judge, yes. In that judge’s words, Zelaya “sought refuge here after standing up to MS members, refusing their demands that he join them, and informing them that he did not support them and considered them a blight on his native El Salvador. Our asylum laws protect individuals like Zelaya-Moreno who face persecution for such politically courageous stands.”

But in the view of the majority, Zelaya had expressed nothing “more than the generalized statement ‘gangs are bad.’ Thus, we cannot conclude that Zelaya holds a political opinion within the meaning of the statute, and therefore that the BIA erred in concluding that he was not eligible for asylum on this ground.” Would additional documentation providing the complex, contextual analysis the court mentioned earlier in its decision have delivered the two judges in the majority to the place already reached by their dissenting colleague?

The United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees is a good reference source on such issues. In its Guidance Note on Refugee Claims Relating to Victims of Organized Crimes, UNHCR stated at para. 45 that in its view, “political opinion needs to be understood in a broad sense to encompass “any opinion on any matter in which the machinery of State, government, society, or policy may be engaged.” It continued at para. 47 that powerful gangs such as MS-13 may exercise de facto power in certain areas, and their activities and those of certain State agents may be closely intertwined. At para. 50, UNHCR stated that “rejecting a recruitment attempt may convey anti-gang sentiments as clearly as an opinion expressed in a more traditional political manner by, for instance, vocalizing criticism of gangs in public meetings or campaigns.” And at para. 51, UNHCR added that “[p]olitical opinion can also be imputed to the applicant by the gang without the applicant taking any action or making a particular statement him/herself. A refusal to give in to the demands of a gang is viewed by gangs as an act of betrayal, and gangs typically impute anti-gang sentiment to the victim whether or not s/he voices actual gang opposition.”

Had this document been included in the record, would it have been enough to persuade the majority that the BIA had erred in rejecting Zelaya’s claim that he was targeted on account of his political opinion? If so, how many pro se asylum applicants would understand the need to supplement their claims to provide this context, or know what type of document would be sufficient, or how to find it?

The Seventh Circuit had foreseen this problem 15 years ago. In a 2006 decision, Banks v. Gonzales, the court opined that Immigration Court needs its own country experts, who would operate much as vocational experts do in disability hearings before the Social Security Administration’s judges. In my opinion, an alternative approach would be for EOIR to follow the example of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, which maintains National Documentation Packages that are referenced in all cases by adjudicators of refugee claims.

During my time in government, I oversaw the creation of country condition pages on EOIR’s Virtual Law Library, which were built, and continue to be updated, by EOIR’s Law Library staff. However, EOIR did not see fit to make its contents part of the records of hearing in asylum cases. It is for this reason that UNHCR’s Eligibility Guidelines For Assessing International Protection Needs of Asylum Seekers in El Salvador, which contains much of the same language as the Guidance Note quoted above, and which expresses the specific conclusion that “persons perceived by a gang as contravening its rules or resisting its authority may be in need of international refugee protection on the grounds of their (imputed) political opinion,”2 is found on EOIR’s own website on the country page for “El Salvador,” yet wasn’t even considered in Zelaya-Moreno.

Considering the growing number of pro se applicants, the lack of legal resources available to those held in remote detention facilities, and the short time frame to prepare for hearings in certain categories of cases, I can’t see why the EOIR country pages should not be made part of the hearing record here as in Canada. It’s possible that such a policy would have led to a different result in Zelaya.

Furthermore, the BIA hears plenty of cases involving expert opinions supporting the conclusion that those resisting gangs such as MS-13 were harmed on account of their political opinion. Issuing precedent opinions recognizing the context that politicizes statements and actions such as Zelaya’s would result in much greater efficiency, consistency, and fairness in Immigration Court and Asylum Office adjudications.

Realistically, I harbor no illusions that the recent change in administration will bring about such enlightened changes to asylum adjudication anytime soon. But we must still continue to argue for such change. As the dissenting opinion in Zelaya stated in its conclusion: “[w]hile it may be too late for Zelaya-Moreno, the BIA and the Department of Justice can right this wrong for future asylum seekers. I urge them to reconsider their approach to anti-gang political opinion cases to ensure those who stand up to fearsome dangers are welcomed into this country rather than forced back to face torture and death.” As noted above, it wouldn’t take much effort on EOIR’s part to accomplish this.

Notes:

Atle Grahl-Madsen, The Status of Refugees in International Law, 228, 251 (1966) (quoted in Deborah E. Anker, The Law of Asylum in the United States (2020 Ed.) § 5:17, fn. 3.

UNHCR Eligibility Guidelines For Assessing International Protection Needs of Asylum Seekers in El Salvador at 29-30.

Copyright 2021 Jeffrey S. Chase. All rights reserved.

Reprinted with permission.

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

Truly wonderful, Jeffrey! One of your “best ever,” in my view! (And, they are all great, so that’s saying something.)

Imagine what could be achieved at the BIA with real judges, experts in asylum law, thoughtful, practical analysis, intellectual leadership, and inspiration to a fairer future, rather than the current Clown Show 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ inventing bogus ways to ”get to no!”

As Jeffrey demonstrates, we could choose to protect rather than to reject. There has always been a tendency to do the latter at the DOJ; but, under White Nationalist nativist Jeff Sessions and his successors it has gone “hog wild” — rejection has been falsely portrayed as a “duty” rather than an extremely poor choice and an abdication of moral and legal responsibility!

Today’s BIA is basically incapable of problem solving. Time and again their strained, stilted anti-immigrant, anti-due-process, pro-worst-practices interpretations not only spell doom for those coming before them, but also promote inefficiency and backlogs in an already overwhelmed system. They also send messages of disdain and disrespect for the rights and humanity of people of color that redounds throughout our struggling U.S. Legal System.

I’ll keep saying it: Whatever positive message Judge Garland and his team at DOJ intend to send about racial justice will be fatally undermined as long as “Dred Scottification” and disdain for the due process rights of migrants is the “order of the day” at the one Federal Court System the DOJ runs: The U.S. Immigration Court! As long as EOIR is a “bad joke” the rest of Judge Garland’s reforms will fall flat!

The right judges 🧑🏽‍⚖️ at the BIA could turn this thing around! Remains to be seen if it will happen. But, it’s not rocket science. It just requires putting the right folks in charge, in place, and giving them the support and independence to engage in “creative problem solving.”

Judge Garland should be confirmed next week. And the confirmation hearings for Lisa Monaco (DAG) and Vanita Gupta (AAG) have been scheduled.

Some additional points:

The dissenter in the Second Circuit’s decision in Zelaya-Moreno v. Wilkinson is Judge Rosemary Pooler. Judge Pooler has had a long and distinguished career. Perhaps she would like to cap it off by becoming Chair of the BIA and leading by example;
Shows the importance of experts, which is probably why the BIA has gone out of its way to demean them and encourage IJs to ignore their evidence;
Jeffrey’s analysis supports my “Better BIA for a Better America” 🇺🇸program;
As Justice Sotomayor says: “It is not justice.” That’s my view on today’s EOIR!

Due Process Forever! ⚖️🗽

PWS

03-07-21

⚖️ABOVE THE LAW: Trump Treated Ethics, Legal Norms, & Human Values Like A Joke — The GOP Supremes Laughed With Him, As They Insured His Lack Of Accountability & Actively Undermined Those With The Courage To Stand Up To Tyranny!🤮

Jacqueline Thomsen reports for the National Law Journal:

. . . .

Even with an emoluments lawsuit filed against Trump on his first day in office, four years later nothing came of it. After he left office, the lawsuits were declared moot by the U.S. Supreme Court and dismissed.

The struggle to legally hold Trump to account over the alleged emoluments violations were emblematic of the rest of the lawsuits he faced during his presidency, whether they targeted him individually or his administration.

When lower courts ruled against Trump officials—as they did in suits over border wall construction—his administration would go to the U.S. Supreme Court to get an emergency order that allowed them to continue the challenged action. More often than not, Trump got a ruling in his favor.

“Trump could count on them for anything,” Norm Ornstein, a conservative resident scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, said of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

“And certainly that’s the case with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett,” he added, referring to the three justices Trump appointed to the court.

And the novel legal questions surrounding lawsuits against a sitting president were enough to significantly delay several other challenges against him. House cases dragged out as courts determined whether lawmakers had the ability to sue to enforce subpoenas against the administration, a legal issue that forced similar suits to halt for months.

Despite two impeachments, hundreds of lawsuits against his administration and other litigation targeting him and his businesses, Trump left office relatively legally unscathed. Armed with a litigious past and a grip on his political party, he successfully managed to use the country’s institutions to minimize the blowback and get his way.

. . . .

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

Those with NLJ access (everyone used to get 3 free articles/mo; now it’s down to one) can read the rest of Jacqueline’s article at the link. She’s a great writer. Too bad so much of her work is “hidden behind the wall.”

Lack of accountability for scofflaw behavior, abuse of power, and corruption are hallmarks of third-world dictatorships and authoritarian regimes throughout history.

The Supremes’ enabling started with the Travel Ban cases and continued to the Capitol insurrection, which “the complicit ones” were able to watch unfold from their marble palace across the street.

So, the Supremes, the institution whose most important job is to protect American democracy, democratic institutions, due process, and individual rights when the other two branches fail, wasn’t up to the job! Despite the Supremes’ best efforts to undermine democratic governance, and their active furthering of the GOP’s race-driven voter suppression agenda, 81 million voters bailed us out this time around. But, it’s highly unlikely that American democracy could survive another “Trump-type” authoritarian regime. Don’t expect any help from the Supremes as currently comprised.

⚖️🧑🏽‍⚖️Better judges for a better America!🇺🇸🗽

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

03-04-21

EUGENE ROBINSON @ WASHPOST: The GOP Is The Party Of Jim Crow ☠️ — The Rest Of Us Who Believe In Democracy Had Better Join The Fight To Preserve The Voting Rights Of Citizens Of Color!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-republican-party-is-making-jim-crow-segregationists-proud/2021/03/01/80036fce-7ac7-11eb-b3d1-9e5aa3d5220c_story.html

Opinion by Eugene Robinson

March 1 at 5:18 PM ET

The Republican Party’s biggest problem is that too many people of color are exercising their right to vote. The party’s solution is a massive push for voter suppression that would make old-time Jim Crow segregationists proud.

The Conservative Political Action Conference circus last week in Orlando showed how bankrupt the GOP is — at least when it comes to ideas, principles and integrity. Some might argue that the party, in buying into the lie that last year’s election was somehow stolen, is simply delusional. I disagree. I think Republican leaders know exactly what they’re doing.

The GOP may have lost the White House and the Senate, but it remains strong in most state capitols. So far this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, Republicans in 33 states “have introduced, prefiled, or carried over 165 bills to restrict voting access.” The thrust of virtually all these measures is to make it more difficult for African Americans and other minorities to vote.

These efforts at disenfranchisement are more numerous, and more discriminatory, in several of the swing states President Biden carried narrowly: Arizona, Pennsylvania and Georgia. That should come as no surprise. GOP officials who had the temerity to follow the law and count the November vote honestly, such as Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, have been all but excommunicated by their state Republican Party organizations.

In Georgia — where not only did Donald Trump lose to Biden by 11,779 votes, but also two incumbent GOP senators were defeated by Democratic challengers — Republicans are using their control of the statehouse to try to eliminate all early voting on Sundays. That would put an end to “Souls to the Polls,” a popular Sunday get-out-the-vote initiative in which Black churches help parishioners get to polling places and cast their ballots.

. . . .

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

Read Eugene’s full op-ed at the link.

After a Presidential election that they lost by a substantial majority of votes, the GOP has decided that the solution isn’t to improve on their party’s unpopular messages of shame, blame, intolerance, ignorance, and White privilege. Nor have they chosen to abandon their corrupt and divisive leader. No, the answer, according to the GOP, is to reduce the size of the electorate to keep the will of the majority from prevailing.

There is not a whit of evidence about widespread voter fraud or any credible reason to believe that the results don’t represent the will of the majority of American voters. Nevertheless, the GOP has introduced slews of bills at the state level to make it more difficult for African Americans, Latinos, and other minorities to vote. Just like the White southern aristocracy after the Civil War, the modern GOP fears that true democratic majority rule will deprive them of their minority power and privilege.

James “Jim” Crow
Symbol of American Racism

Well, you’ve heard it all before on Courtside. The Voting Rights Act is the cornerstone of modern American democracy. The forces of anti-democracy, including the GOP and their Supremes’ majority, intend to undo it in the name of White Supremacy.

The overt suppression of African-American voting rights that ended Reconstruction ushered in more than four decades of gross violations of the 13th 14th, and 15th Amendments. We should remember that the White-dominated Federal Government and the Federal Courts basically took a cowardly pass on the rights of our African American fellow citizens for generations.

Eric Lutz summed it up in his recent article on Vanity Fair:

Biden is reluctant to end that filibuster. But at a certain point, failing to do so means failing to reckon with the the severity of the threat to democracy—and the particular peril the GOP’s attacks pose to the rights of Black Americans and other minorities. “The argument that preserving the filibuster is necessary because it’s an important tool in our Democracy falls apart when it’s clearer with every passing day that we won’t have a Democracy without Congress passing voting rights legislation,” the former Obama aide David Plouffe remarked Monday. Republicans are mounting a concerted, relentless attack on democracy. To defend against it, Democrats’ response must be proportional. And that means confronting the reality that Trump leaving office didn’t extinguish his Big Lie, but made it more powerful.

https://apple.news/Aawbmzi5JRkGSdLedjZN23Q

It’s essential that the majority of us unite against the attempt of the corrupt GOP to restore the horrors of White Supremacy and Jim Crow. And, make no mistake — the attack on asylum seekers and migrants of color is an integral part of the White Nationalist program to kneecap American democracy. Under Trump, that effort culminated in the Capitol insurrection.

As the death of civil rights icon Vernon Jordon this week reminds us, those of us who believe in democracy must unite to fight the right and protect the right of all Americans to vote and the rights of immigrants to be treated as “persons” under the law.

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

03-03-21

⚖️🗽🇺🇸JUDGE GARLAND ACKNOWLEDGES REFUGEE HERITAGE — Does He Recognize That As He Testifies, Many Of His “Soon-To-Be Judges” @ EOIR Are Intentionally Screwing Vulnerable Asylum Seekers, Harassing Their Pro Bono Attorneys, Carrying Out Miller’s White Nationalist Agenda, & Otherwise Mocking Due Process, Fundamental Fairness, & Equal Justice For Persons Of Color?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/02/22/merrick-garland-finally-speaks-his-words-were-worth-wait/

Robin Givhan writes @ WashPost:

. . . .

For the Republicans, justice is not something that “rolls down like waters,” it’s something that comes down like a hammer.

This was a failure that Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) aimed to make clear when he asked Garland whether he was familiar with a biblical reference to justice that advises to “act justly and to love mercy.” Much of Booker’s questioning centered around racism within the criminal justice system — the disproportionate arrests of minorities, lousy legal representation for the poor, sentencing imbalances and the issue that caused Kennedy such befuddlement, implicit bias.

Garland acknowledged these issues, the flaws in the system, the need to change. And then he told in public, the story he’d told Booker in private about why he wanted to leave a lifetime appointment on the federal bench to do this job. It’s the most reasonable question, but one that so often is never asked: Why do you want to do this?

Garland acknowledged these issues, the flaws in the system, the need to change. And then he told in public, the story he’d told Booker in private about why he wanted to leave a lifetime appointment on the federal bench to do this job. It’s the most reasonable question, but one that so often is never asked: Why do you want to do this?

“I come from a family where my grandparents fled antisemitism and persecution,” Garland said. And then he stopped. He sat in silence for more than a few beats. And when he resumed, his voice cracked. “The country took us in and protected us. And I feel an obligation to the country, to pay back.”

“This is the highest, best use of my one set of skills,” Garland said. “And so I want very much to be the kind of attorney general you’re saying I could be.”

And that would be one focused on protecting the rights of the greatest and the least — and even the worst. Punishment is part of the job. But it’s not the definition of justice.

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

Read Robin’s complete article at the link. She can write! So delighted the Post got her off the “fashion beat” where her talents were being squandered, and got her onto more serious stuff!

Judge Garland’s awareness and humility are refreshing. But, unless he takes immediate action to redo EOIR and the rest of the DOJ’s immigration kakistocracy, it won’t mean much.

Judge, it could have been YOUR family forced to suffer kidnapping, extortion, murder threats, family separation, and other overtly cruel and inhuman treatment in squalid camps in Mexico, waiting for “hearings” that would never come before “judges” known for denying almost 100% of claims regardless of merit! YOUR family’s plea for refugee could have been rejected by some nativist bureaucrat or “hand-selected by the prosecutor” “Deportation Judge” for specious, biased reasons!

YOUR family was welcomed! But what if the only thought had been how to “best deter” “you and others like you” from coming?

Maybe because you and yours are White and hail from Eastern Europe, the “rule of law” has a different meaning and impact than it would if you were Brown, Black, or some other “non-White” skin color and had the misfortune to be from a “shithole” country where we have no concern for what happens to humanity? Or, worse yet, what if your family’s claim had been based on your Grandmother’s gender status? You would really be out of luck under today’s overtly misogynist approach to refugee law flowing out of EOIR!

Then, where would you and your nice family be today? Would you even be? THOSE are the questions you should be asking yourself!

Unfortunately, it’s easy to see that folks like Cotton, Hawley, Cruz, and Kennedy will be deeply offended if you attack their White Nationalist privilege, views, and agendas in any meaningful way.

And, if you actually make progress in holding the Capitol insurrectionists accountable, you’ll have to deal with the unapologetic, disingenuous, anti-democracy, insurrectionist actions of folks like Hawley and Cruz. That won’t be too “bipartisanly popular” with a GOP gang that just overwhelmingly worked and voted to ignore the evidence and “acquit” the “Chief Insurrectionist.” Who, by the way, was a main purveyor of the institutionalized racism that infects EOIR and the rest of the DOJ. It’s no real secret that “America’s anti-democracy party” aids, abets, encourages, and exonerates White Supremacists and domestic terrorists.

In the GOP world, “mercy” and “due process” are reserved for White guys like Trump, Flynn, Stone, White Supremacists, and “Q-Anoners.” Folks of color and migrants exist largely below the floor level of the GOP’s definition of “person” or “human.” For them, justice is a “hammer” to beat them into submission and punish them for asserting their rights.

So, restoring the rule of law at the DOJ is going to be a tough job — you need to clean house and get the right folks (mostly from outside Government) in to help you. And, you must examine carefully the roles of many career civil servants who chose to be part of the problems outlined by Chairman Durbin in his opening remarks.

You’re also going to have to “tune out” the criticism, harassment, and unhelpful “input” you’re likely to get from GOP legislators in both Houses who are firmly committed to the former regime’s White Nationalist agenda of “Dred Scottification,” disenfranchisement, nativism, and preventing equal justice for persons of color, of any status!

Think about all the reasons why you and your family are grateful for the treatment you received from our country. Then, think of the ways you could make those things a reality for all persons seeking refuge or just treatment, regardless of skin color, creed, or status. That’s the way you can “give back” at today’s DOJ! That’s the way you can be remembered as the “father of the diverse, representative, independent, due-process exemplifying 21st Century Immigration Judiciary!” 🧑🏽‍⚖️👩‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-23-21

⚖️🗽A FAIR ASYLUM SYSTEM THAT TREATS HUMANS WITH “EMPATHY, DIGNITY, & RESPECT” – It’s What Our Constitution, Laws, & Values Require – Every Day, As A Nation, We Violate These Basic Principles – When Will It Change? – A New Human Right First (“HRF”) “Video Short,” Narrated By Clara Long, Shows The Unnecessary Human Misery We Cause That Can Never Be Undone!

Clara Long
Associate Director
US Program
Human Rights First
PHOTO: HRF website

Here’s the video:

https://youtu.be/USIKjkzTS7U

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

It’s not “rocket science.” Actually, just carrying out our current legal and moral obligations. It’s well within our capabilities, particularly with the right people in charge. Why wasn’t a plan to get this done “front and center” in Judge Garland’s testimony today?

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever! Human misery doesn‘t stop for “study.” Not all damage and harm is reversible! What if it were YOU and YOUR family?

PWS

02-22-21

☠️⚰️MORE LIFE-THREATENING ERRORS — BIA’s (Absurd) Anti-Asylum Slant On Mexican Asylum Case Blown Away By 9th Cir. — “As we read its decision, the BIA recognized that property ownership was a cause—and moreover, the real reason—Garcia was targeted, but it still found that she was not targeted “on account of” property ownership.” — Naranjo Garcia v. Wilkinson

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

Dan Kowalski reports from LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/LegalNewsRoom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca9-on-mexico-cartels-social-group-nexus-naranjo-garcia-v-wilkinson

CA9 on Mexico, Cartels, Social Group, Nexus: Naranjo Garcia v. Wilkinson

Naranjo Garcia v. Wilkinson

“Alicia Naranjo Garcia (“Garcia”) is a native and citizen of Mexico. Garcia petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The Knights Templar, a local drug cartel, murdered Garcia’s husband, twice threatened her life, and forcibly took her property in retaliation for helping her son escape recruitment by fleeing to the United States. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we grant the petition in part and remand. … [W]e conclude that the BIA erred in its nexus analysis for both Garcia’s asylum claim and her withholding of removal claim. We remand with instructions for the BIA to reconsider Garcia’s asylum claim, and for the BIA to consider whether Garcia is eligible for withholding of removal under the proper “a reason” standard. We deny the petition as it relates to Garcia’s claim for relief under CAT.”

[Hats off to Sarah A. Nelson (argued), Certified Law Student; Thomas V. Burch and Anna W. Howard, Supervising Attorneys; University of Georgia School of Law, Athens, Georgia!]

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

This insanely nonsensical gibberish put forth by the BIA — and defended by OIL — is an insult to the entire American justice system! Obviously, EOIR and their DOJ “handlers” unethically assume that Article III Circuit Judges will just “take a dive” and defer to illegal and illogical removal orders. Because, after all, it’s only foreign nationals (mostly people of color) whose lives are at stake! Not “real human beings.” That’s exactly what “institutionalized racism” and “Dred Scottification” look like. Nothing worth breaking a sweat about in the “21st Century Jim Crow America!”

The BIA’s anti-asylum bias and massively incompetent adjudication — on life or death matters — continues to be exposed. There likely are many, many other legitimate asylum cases that are wrongfully rejected by the EOIR “denial factory.” That’s one of many reasons why the EOIR/DHS (intentionally) “cooked stats” on the bona fides of asylum seekers arriving at our Southern Border can never be trusted!

Not everyone is fortunate enough to have competent representation and get meaningful review by a Circuit panel not on “autopilot.” This is a corrupt and broken system, the continued existence of which in its current form is a repudiation of our Constitution, the rule of law, and human decency!

The Biden Administration can, and must, put an end to this ongoing national disgrace! “Any reason to deny” is not justice!

Wonder how the Georgia Law Clinic got involved in this 9th Circuit case? I have the answer, thanks to my friend Michelle Mendez, Director, Defending Vulnerable Populations @ CLINIC:

Thanks so much to CLINIC’s BIA Pro Bono Project for identifying and placing this case with the wonderful team at at University of Georgia School of Law!

The NDPA is everywhere! And, we’ll continue to be there until due process for all is achieved, regardless of the Administration!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-19-21

PROPHET 🔮 IN HIS OWN TIME: IN 2015, PROFESSOR GEOFFREY HOFFMAN CALLED FOR BETTER IMMIGRATION JUDGES 🧑🏽‍⚖️👩‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️⚖️ — The Situation Is 10X Worse Now! — Judge Garland Must Act To End This National Disgrace That Otherwise Will Quickly Become A Blot On The Biden Record! — “[L]et’s draw from the ranks of those with proven compassion, like the YMCA directors, legal aid attorneys, and people who will never belittle a child, never lose themselves in the power and prestige, and be resilient and persevere in one of the hardest jobs imaginable.”

From LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/newsheadlines/posts/geoffrey-hoffman-eoir-needs-better-immigration-judges

Geoffrey Hoffman: EOIR Needs Better Immigration Judges

Prof. Geoffrey Hoffman, Nov. 24, 2015 – “It is important, I think, to note the import but also the paradox behind the BIA’s latest precedent decision, Matter of Y-S-L-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 688 (BIA 2015) that admonishes IJ’s not to bully minors. In the decision, the Board discusses conduct by an Immigration Judge that can be construed as “bullying or hostile” behavior and says it is “never appropriate,” particularly in cases involving “minor respondents,” concluding such behavior may result in remand to a different Immigration Judge. I am glad that the Board is finally taking to task this kind of egregious IJ behavior. On the one hand, we should applaud the Board for pointing out this behavior and finally holding it up to the light of day in an important new precedent decision. On the other hand, it is a sad commentary on the behavior of some judges that the appellate body of the EOIR has to even say this publicly. Of course judges should not behave this way, and the fact that recusal is mandated by the BIA in such situations is something to congratulate the Board for now getting behind. But, one wonders whether this response is at all sufficient. Whether, as an IJ, I can now say, “Well, the worst that will happen is that I will have the case taken away from me on remand, and therefore I do not have to deal with this mess anymore.” It doesn’t seem like much of a deterrent.

In a case which I handled on appeal, the IJ denied the respondent’s attorney the opportunity to call a psychologist to testify about the respondent’s mental condition and disease (bipolar disorder), a fact which went directly to the particular social group and seemed particularly relevant to me. When the attorney respectfully requested permission to put on the expert witness, and specially whether the witness could testify about any medications the respondent had taken or was taking the IJ in response asked the attorney whether she was on any medications. Was she on any medications? I read and re-read that line again and again as I prepared the appeal thinking perhaps I had missed the joke. But this wasn’t a joke. It was simply intemperate behavior by an IJ. Thankfully, the BIA correctly and compassionately remanded the case but based on the bipolar condition, recognizing that it could form a valid PSG. No mention was made of the issue of judicial impropriety I had raised in the brief. In other appeals I have done before the Board, I have noticed that when raising issues with the Board about IJ’s missing evidence or even misconstruing the factual background, the Board does not seem to deal with these issues head-on but instead bases their decisions on some other ground, preferring to adjudicate the appeal on a legal ground rather than on the basis of judicial misconduct or judicial mistake. And there is nothing surprising here, with the Board insulating IJ’s from admonishment and not highlighting their misunderstandings of the record, but there is I think a cost which has been underreported or perhaps not even appreciated. The cost is that IJs become used to behaving in a way that can be described as intemperate at best and demeaning or demoralizing and abusive, at worst.

This said, I do have a lot of sympathy for many IJs, having worked very hard myself for a federal judge for two years after law school, and seeing and appreciating the incredible stress and responsibilities of being a judge. The IJs, it should be mentioned, have it worse: they have to juggle a case load of hundreds and hundreds of cases, while at the same time maintaining compassion and composure at all times, and at the same time providing a clear, cogent and correct legal analysis in all cases and contexts. However, and this needs to be said, I think some IJs should not be IJs and should not have been selected to be IJs. If we want to make the immigration court system work we need to do a better job in vetting these judges, choosing based on temperament and suitability to deal with the rigors of handling all these cases with compassion and professionalism.

This is the time now (at this very moment) to make this statement as loudly and boldly as possible, since EOIR right now is advertising for 50+ new judgeships across the country. Since we have approximately 250+ judges, this represents an approximate 20 percent increase. I implore EOIR to make these decisions with due regard to how the judges might act in future, not just whether they have experience deporting people, working for the government in other capacities, or experiences such as being in the military. While those are factors, let’s draw from the ranks of those with proven compassion, like the YMCA directors, legal aid attorneys, and people who will never belittle a child, never lose themselves in the power and prestige, and be resilient and persevere in one of the hardest jobs imaginable.”

Geoffrey A. Hoffman

Director-University of Houston Law Center Immigration Clinic

Clinical Associate Professor

4604 Calhoun Road

TU-II, Room 56

Houston, TX 77204-6060

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

Unfortunately, the Obama Administration ignored Geoffrey’s plea. Instead of creating a well-qualified, independent, progressive judiciary that could achieve the “EOIR Vision” of: “Through teamwork and innovation becoming the world’s best tribunals, guaranteeing fairness and due process for all,” the Obama Administration handed out immigration judgeships like they were service awards for DHS prosecutors, DOJ attorneys, and other government lawyers.

The Obama selections appeared designed primarily to avoid appointing anyone who might have the background, backbone, and courage to “rock the boat” and stand up for immigrants’ rights even when it meant rejecting ill-advised and legally questionable Administration enforcement policies and procedures. In other words, truly independent judging and thinking was discouraged in favor of a “go along to get along” atmosphere mischaracterized as “collegiality.”

Sure, collegiality has its benefits. But, in the end, independent judging is about justice for the individuals coming before the courts, not about institutional survival, job preservation, making friends, achieving bureaucratic performance goals, or pleasing political “handlers” who don’t want to read about their “subordinates” in the “funny papers.” When I was ousted from the BIA as part of the so-called “Ashcroft purge,” I noticed that those those judges who were “collegial” but outspoken about immigrants’ legal rights got punished right along with those who were perceived as “less collegial” in standing up for the same rights.

Moreover, the Obama folks designed an unwieldy and astoundingly inefficient “Rube Goldberg selection system” that took more than two years to fill an average IJ vacancy — much longer than the Senate confirmation process! This was at a time when backlogs were building and the NAIJ and the “line IJs” were begging “EOIR management” for help. “Management” could have achieved comparable results simply by throwing darts at a board containing the names of government attorneys. And, it would have cut the red tape.

Inept as the Obama Administration might have been, the Trump kakistocracy of course proved to be our worst nightmare. They “weaponized” the EOIR immigration judiciary into a tool of White Nationalist nativist enforcement, racial injustice, and misogyny. Here are some of the things Sessions and Barr did at the behest of Stephen Miller:

“Packed” the BIA with judges known as “asylum deniers” — some with denial rates in excess of 90%;
Appointed IJs from the Atlanta Immigration Court, which had generated Matter of Y-S-L-C-, to the BIA in an overt attempt to replicate the “Asylum Free Zone” as Atlanta was known throughout the private bar;
“Rewarded” with BIA appointments several judges who had complaints lodged against them for their rude and unprofessional in-court behavior, open hostility to asylum seekers (particularly women), and unprofessional treatment of private attorneys;
Issued bogus EOIR and BIA precedents, some on their “own motion,” that were almost 100% against respondents and in favor of DHS Enforcement while undoing long-standing rules that had promoted fairness to asylum seekers and sound docket management;
Appointed almost all government/prosecutorial background Immigration Judges, many without immigration qualifications, others associated with anti-immigrant or anti-gay groups;
“Decertified” the National Association of Immigration Judges (“NAIJ”) as punishment for speaking out against gross mismanagement at EOIR and DOJ;
Imposed due-process-denying unprofessional “production quotas” on IJs intended to increase deportation rates;
Deprived IJs of effective management control over their dockets, while engaging in endless “Aimless Docket Reshuffling;”
Unethically exhorted IJs to treat the DHS as their “partners” in enforcing immigration laws;
Gave the Director — essentially a political appointee disguised as a career executive — authority to interfere with BIA decision making in certain cases;
Basically reduced Immigration Judges to the status of “deportation clerks” while falsely claiming that they were “management officials” to “bust” the union;
“Dumbed down” immigration judge training;
Artificially “jacked up” the Immigration Court backlog to an astounding 1.3 million cases — even with twice the number of IJs on the bench.

As one of my esteemed Round Table colleagues said, “since [Geoffrey’s article] was written, record numbers of good IJs resigned over the past 4 years, many good candidates wouldn’t apply (or if they did, likely weren’t chosen) over the past 4 years, and then just the general drop in quality that comes with that degree of expansion [in the absence of competent planning].”

The lack of compassion, glaring disregard for the protective purposes of refugee law, and absence of human understanding as to what it means to be a refugee seeking salvation simply screams out from the last four years of perverse AG and BIA precedents as well as from some of the elementary mistakes made by EOIR judges at all levels in the numerous cases reversed by Courts of Appeals over the past four years.

And, this is just the “tip of the iceberg.” Many seeking protection are denied any hearings at all, railroaded out without understanding what’s happening, or simply give up without appealing wrong decisions and denials of due process — worn down by the abusive and unnecessary detention that EOIR helps promote and the intentionally “user unfriendly” procedures developed to discourage individuals from asserting their legal and human rights.

While the broken and reeling Department of Justice presents many challenges, I predict that Judge Garland’s tenure will be remembered largely by how he deals, or doesn’t deal, with the total disaster in the U.S. Immigration Courts. The Trump regime’s attack on democracy and people of color began with immigration, and the effort to dehumanize and degrade migrants continued until the final day.

Will Judge Garland leave behind a reformed, progressive, due-process-oriented system that is a model judiciary? One that finally fulfills the vision of — “Through Teamwork and innovation action becoming the world’s best tribunals, guaranteeing fairness and due process for all?” A court that can easily transition out of the DOJ intro an independent Article I Judiciary? Or will he leave behind another disgraceful mess and the dead bodies, broken dreams, and visible betrayals of American values to prove it?

Only time will tell! But, the NDPA will be watching. And, there isn’t much patience out here for more of the “EOIR Clown Show!”🤡🦹🏿‍♂️

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever! Better judges 🧑🏽‍⚖️👩‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️ for a better America. And that starts (but doesn’t end) with the U.S. Immigration Courts!

PWS

02-14-21

BESS LEVIN @ VANITY FAIR: Trump’s “Defense” Was An Astounding Mixture Of Lies, False Narratives, Conspiracy Theories, Nonsense, Gibberish, & Non-Sequiturs (Citing Madonna and Johnny Depp, Among Other Irrelevancies) — Of Course, Corrupt GOP Legislators Loved It!

Quick: You’re a lawyer and your client is on trial for inciting a violent insurrection. The problem is, he’s guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Literally, there is no question whatsoever that he did what he’s been accused of—none! Whatsoever! And everyone knows it! To wonder if he’s guilty is to look at O.J. Simpson and think, “Well, the glove doesn’t fit, so who knows?” Nevertheless, you’ve been hired to defend him—after basically everyone else in your profession refused—and defend him you will! But how? If you’re Donald Trump’s attorneys, the answer is clearly: Lie, lie, play some Madonna clips, and lie some more.

There were far, far too many lies told over the course of Bruce Castor Jr., David Schoen, and Michael van der Veen’s presentation to catalog them all. In fact, it would be easier to simply point out the rare moments in which they did tell the truth. But, just for posterity’s sake, here were some of the biggest whoppers the defense team told as it claimed that Trump wasn’t responsible for the rally that took place at the Capitol on January 6:

Trump never intended for “the joint session [of Congress] be prevented from conducting its business”: This is obviously completely false and the reason we know that is because Trump repeatedly tried to get Mike Pence to stop Congress from doing just that, reportedly telling the V.P., “You can either go down in history as a patriot, or you can go down in history as a pussy.”

The rioters were mostly antifa, and one of the first people arrested was a member of the left-wing group: This, like virtually all of Trump’s lawyers’ claims are not true. The first person arrested was John E. Sullivan, who has denied being a member of antifa, and the FBI has said there is zero evidence that the supporters’ movements participated in the riot, no matter what Trump’s most shameless loyalists say. (Rep. Matt Gaetz, for instance, falsely claimed, “They were masquerading as Trump supporters and, in fact, were members of the violent terrorist group antifa.”)

A prior protest in front of the White House was just as bad: Referring to the June protest in front of the White House, van der Veen claimed “violent rioters” attacked officers and “at one point, pierced a security wall, culminating in the clearing of Lafayette Square.” (1) There was no breach; (2) five people didn’t die (3) the people who were hurt were the protesters tear-gassed so that Trump could do a photo shoot with a bible outside a church (an event that, surprisingly, did not result in him bursting into flames).

Trump hates violence and only ever preaches “law and order”: If you forget the innumerable times he’s advocated for violence, including when he claimed the violent insurrection that took place at the Capitol was justified, sure, the guy is a total peace-loving pacifist.

“The reality is Mr. Trump not in any way shape or form instructing these people to fight or use physical violence. What he was instructing them to do was to challenge their opponents in primary elections, to push for sweeping election reforms, to hold Big Tech responsible—all customary and legal ways to petition your government for redress of grievances which of course is also protected Constitutional speech.” Right, right, sure, sure. Trump totally wasn’t encouraging his supporters to air their grievances via violence, he just wanted them to push for election reforms. He just wanted them to form political action committees, you see! Run for office! Fight ideological differences at the ballot box! It’s actually extremely impressive van der Ween was able to get through this whole thing without bursting into laughter, and for that he should win some kind of award (and then lose his license to practice law).

“There was no insurrection”: There was! We all saw it! If you missed it, just google “Capitol riot” or “Capitol attack” or “Trump insurrection.”

In addition to the many lies told by Trump’s defense, his legal team also proffered a series of arguments for why he couldn’t possibly be found guilty that sound like something a bunch of stoned college kids came up with shortly before a mock trial they forgot to prepare for, which is actually an insult to stoned college kids unprepared for mock trials. Specifically, we’re talking about the series of clips the defense presented showing various Democrats using the word “fight,“ which they claim means Trump can’t also be held responsible for telling his supporters to “fight,“ because other people have said “fight” before and they weren’t found guilty of inciting insurrections. (Naturally, they left out the part about how, for instance, when Elizabeth Warren told supporters to “fight” they didn’t proceed to storm the Capitol and try to burn down democracy):

Or that, when Chuck Schumer said “fight” he was talking about fighting COVID-19. Yes, this a real thing that actually happened:

And yes, there was also this:

Of course, the bald-faced lies and complete lack of convincing arguments will clearly do little to sway the majority of Republicans, who have already decided how they’re going to vote, which we know because they‘ve already said as much and also because during the question-and-answer portion of the day, a typical question posed of the attorneys went something like, “Can you tell us how it’s possible that President Trump has not been named People’s Sexiest Man Alive yet? Is it because the media is in the can for liberals? Because we can’t think of another explanation!”

Anyway, Madonna, eh? Someone better impeach that menace, ASAP!

Just in case there was any question re: whether or not Trump loved the insurrection he personally set into motion…

CNN reports that the ex-president insisted the rioters were patriots in a call with House leader Kevin McCarthy:

In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the Capitol was under attack, then President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did. “Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are,” Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy.

McCarthy insisted that the rioters were Trump’s supporters and begged Trump to call them off. Trump’s comment set off what Republican lawmakers familiar with the call described as a shouting match between the two men. A furious McCarthy told the president the rioters were breaking into his office through the windows, and asked Trump, “Who the f–k do you think you are talking to?” according to a Republican lawmaker familiar with the call.

“I think it speaks to the former president’s mindset,” Rep. Anthony Gonzalez, an Ohio Republican who voted to impeach Trump last month, told CNN. “He was not sorry to see his unyieldingly loyal vice president or the Congress under attack by the mob he inspired. In fact, it seems he was happy about it or at the least enjoyed the scenes that were horrifying to most Americans across the country.”

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

You can read the rest of the Levin Report here:

https://mailchi.mp/ff0581d54d6b/levin-report-trumps-heart-bursting-with-sympathy-for-his-buddy-bob-kraft-2922686?e=adce5e3390

In reality, as others have observed, the “defense team” could have read old copies of the Congressional Record or all the baseball scores from the 2019 season from the podium and it wouldn’t have made any difference to corrupt GOP Sens who had already decided to acquit notwithstanding the overwhelming evidence of guilt.

The indifference and boredom with the suffering of others and the clear misdeeds of Trump exhibited by scumbags like Cruz (who actually helped prepare the inept “defense”), Hawley, Cotton, et al, was pretty telling. Obviously, they wouldn’t have cared a fig if Trump’s rioters had done in Pence, Romney, or any other of their “colleagues.”

It’s all about the next election and destroying American democracy.

My favorite part is when the Trump defense Team kept whining about the rights of 74 million who voted for the The Big Clown. It’s like their attempt to disenfranchise and diss the 81+ million of us who didn’t vote for Putin’s Puppet are irrelevant? But, that’s always been the way the “modern GOP” has “governed.”

Right now, the GOP is hard at work at the state level trying to disenfranchise as many Black and Brown voters as possible in advance of the 2022 elections.

Remember all the great “bipartisanship” and concern with the legislative process on the tax giveaway (nobody actually read it, clearly not Trump) or the unsuccessful attempt to “do in” Obamacare. Lots of great “bipartisanship” on display with the Coney Barrett confirmation and the confirmation of a steady stream of Federalist Society judges.

The current GOP is an ongoing threat to the national security and well-being of our nation.

PWS

02-13-21

CELEBRATING BLACK HISTORY MONTH @ DHS: ICE DEPORTS BLACKS TO DANGER & POTENTIAL DEATH, MANY WITH NO DUE PROCESS!🏴‍☠️ — Legislators Call On Biden Administration To End Racist Enforcement Policies!

Colfax

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/black-immigrants-deportations-biden/2021/02/12/5f395932-6d54-11eb-ba56-d7e2c8defa31_story.html

Arelis R. Hernandez
Southern Border Reporter
Washington Post, Photo: WashPost

By Maria Sacchetti and Arelis R. Hernández in WashPost:

Prominent Black lawmakers are urging the Biden administration to stop expelling migrants to nations such as Haiti that are engulfed in political turmoil, fearing that they could be harmed or killed.

Hundreds of immigrants have been swept out of the United States in recent days, a blow to groups that had been counting on President Biden and Vice President Harris, the daughter of immigrants and the first Black vice president, to halt deportations and overturn the Trump administration’s hard-line immigration policies.

Biden attempted to pause most deportations on Jan. 20, but a federal judge temporarily blocked the move. Immigration officials say the recent removals match Biden’s new enforcement priorities — such as people who recently crossed the border or who were convicted of serious crimes — but advocates say immigrants are being sent to nations where they could face danger.

“The community should not still be in panic across this nation when we have an administration that is willing to do the work of stopping these deportations,” Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said Friday in a call with reporters. “They have the authority to say no more flights will leave the United States.”

Migrants who cross the border are still being removed under a Trump administration order that allowed the expulsion of recently arrived people under Title 42, Section 265, of the public health law that aims to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. Advocates for immigrants tracking the flights say Immigration and Customs Enforcement has expelled approximately 900 Haitians, including dozens of children, in the past two weeks.

Advocates for immigrants say the situation is urgent, as Haiti and nations in Africa are facing varying threats. Haiti, the Western Hemisphere’s poorest country, has seen its democracy plunge into a constitutional crisis with allegations of a coup attempt and conflicting claims to the presidency.

. . . .

ICE deported New York resident Paul Pierrilus to Haiti on Feb. 2, even though he has never been to that country and has lived 35 of his 40 years in the United States.

He had fought deportation since 2004 after a drug conviction. His parents are of Haitian descent, but they are U.S. citizens and Pierrilus was born on the Caribbean island of St. Martin.

Haiti had never recognized him as a citizen, he said, but an immigration judge ordered him deported more than 16 years ago and he lost his appeals.

In an interview, Pierrilus described how he had to be dragged off the airplane. He wore the parka he used to wear in New York into the tropical 85-degree air. He said he is stunned and defeated.

“I’m not a Haitian citizen! I’m not a Haitian citizen!” Pierrilus recalled yelling as local officials pushed him onto a bus. “I felt helpless because it’s a situation out of my control. It’s a situation I can’t do anything about. No one is hearing what I’m saying.”

. . . .

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

Read the complete article at the link.

The Pierrilus story is particularly indicative of ICE’s attitude toward people of color: If he’s black send him to Haiti, ask questions later!

Courtside was “on top” of Ed Pilkington’s recent Guardian article on deporting babies and children to total disorder and danger in Haiti.

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2021/02/08/%f0%9f%96%95ice-continues-to-give-biden-administration-humanity-the-big-middle-finger-racism-also-on-display-as-haitian-kids-babies-deported-to-burning-house/

Remember, creating an atmosphere of fear and terror in ethnic communities throughout the United States was a key priority of the Trump White Nationalist kakistocracy — with a some help from the Supremes’ majority. It has been very successful. In fact, as noted by Vice President Harris, hate crimes directed against Asian Americans are up astronomically.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjxhrifm-fuAhU4MVkFHTW0BywQ0PADegQIGRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2021%2F02%2F12%2Fvp-harris-responds-to-surge-in-violent-attacks-against-asian-americans.html&usg=AOvVaw2FZQYF9caSSckRsqU9fO58

But, of course, there aren’t any Asian American Justices, are there? So, out of sight out of mind for perhaps Ameria’s “least representative” court (with the possible exception of the EOIR “courts”).

I’ve consistently been making several points that others are finally starting to pick up on and that will be essential for Biden Administration policy makers to keep in mind:

The issues of racial justice and immigrant justice are deeply intertwined — one can’t be solved without addressing the other;
Dehumanization of “the other” (Black, Latino, Asian-American, women, immigrants, asylum seekers, etc.) — “Dred Scottification” — has been promoted over the past four years and essentially endorsed and furthered by a tone-deaf Supremes’ majority;
Racist attitudes and misogyny are deeply ingrained in the current DHS and EOIR (now operating as an adjunct of DHS Enforcement) enforcement mechanisms and in some of the personnel carrying out enforcement policies, including some EOIR judges;
An aura of impunity and unaccountability infects both DHS and DOJ;
Racial justice and equal justice under law will not be achieved without significant personnel and attitude changes at the “retail level” of both DHS and EOIR.

Finally, complaining is a start. But, it won’t result in the necessary systemic changes.

The only way that African-American, Hispanic-American, Asian-American, and female lawmakers are going to get durable change is by prevailing on their colleagues to recognize the humanity of all persons in the United States and to make the necessary statutory changes in the immigration laws, beginning, but not ending, with an independent Article I Immigration Court.

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-13-21

🏴‍☠️HONDURAS IS A HOTBED OF MISOGYNY, CORRUPTION, & ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS ☠️ COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD — The Trump Regime Fraudulently Designated As A “Safe Third Country” — Persecuted Women Still Struggle To Get Protection In EOIR’s Broken & Biased System!🦹🏿‍♂️

Trump Dumping Asylum Seekers in Hondiras — Dumping Asylum Seekers in Honduras
Artist: Monte Wolverton
Reproduced under license

Woman Tortured — “She struggled madly in the torturing Ray”
Amazing StoriesArtist Unknown, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/12/honduras-femicide-keyla-martinez-women-violence?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Nina Lakhani reports for The Guardian:

Keyla Martínez screamed for help from inside the police cell, but no one came to save her.

Martínez, a 26-year-old trainee nurse from La Esperanza, western Honduras, died in police custody last weekend after being detained for breaching a coronavirus curfew.

Police officers initially claimed Martínez had killed herself. But a preliminary autopsy found she had died from “mechanical asphyxiation” and prosecutors announced they were investigating her death as a murder.

How Honduras became one of the most dangerous countries to defend natural resources

She was the latest victim in a relentless wave of misogynistic killings and state-sponsored violence in Honduras – one of the most dangerous and corrupt countries in the Americas. Twenty-nine women have been killed so far this year in Honduras, which has a population of about 9 million – only slightly more than New York City.

Advertisement

Upgrade to Premium and enjoy the app ad-free.

Upgrade to Premium

This week, security forces have teargassed protesters demanding truth and justice for the young nurse. Human rights groups are also demanding accountability amid the alarming escalation of deadly violence against women. At least six women have been killed since Martínez died.

“This killing has all the hallmarks of an extrajudicial execution and must be investigated as such,” said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas director at Amnesty International.

“Grave human rights violations such as the killing of Keyla Martínez do not happen in a vacuum. They are the product of rampant impunity and the lack of political will to address the human rights crisis in Honduras. This dire context has produced a relentless and widespread stream of abuses by state security forces.”

Honduras is one of the most dangerous countries in the world to be a woman or girl. It is a deeply machista society where conservative church leaders exert a powerful influence over the personal and political spheres – including women’s access to reproductive healthcare and protection from violence.

Last month, congress voted to amend the constitution to make it virtually impossible to overturn the country’s abortion laws – which are already some of the strictest in Latin America.

In 2009, a coup orchestrated by a network of military, economic, political and religious elites, ushered in an authoritarian government, which remains in power despite multiple allegations of corruption, extrajudicial killings, electoral fraud and ties to international drug trafficking networks.

Advertisement

Upgrade to Premium and enjoy the app ad-free.

Upgrade to Premium

Since then emigration has risen dramatically, as hundreds of thousands of men, women and children have fled north looking for safety and jobs. A culture of impunity has also meant that violence against women has only worsened.

In the decade before the coup, 222 women were murdered annually, according to analysis by the Centre for Women’s Studies – Honduras (CEM-H). In the past five years, 381 have been killed on average annually. Ninety-six per cent of the murders remain unsolved.

Honduras lawmakers seek to lock in ban on abortion for ever

“The militarization of the country since the coup has increased the threat to women’s lives, there are guns everywhere and we know the police have links to criminal gangs,” said Suyapa Martínez (no relation to Keyla Martínez) from CEM-H, a feminist organisation based in Tegucigalpa.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of the article at the link.

Refugee women continue to flee Honduras, even though the Trump regime misogynist nativists have skewed asylum law to make it more difficult for them to gain legal protection.

The Biden Administration has directed consideration of gender-based asylum regulations. It’s hardly a new idea — former AG the late Janet Reno ordered development of regulations regularizing the granting of “gender-based” asylum claims two decades ago.

Those efforts were basically sabotaged by DOJ bureaucrats and litigators more interested in narrowing asylum eligibility and making denials easier to defend than they were in protecting women — one of the world’s most persecuted groups by any reasonable accounting.

After years of screwing around, including eight years of inaction during the Obama Administration, super-misogynist and anti-asylum racist Stephen Miller arrived. He perversely came up with absurdly illegal regulations that incredibly purported to bar gender-based asylum claims! Those illegal (not to mention immoral) regulations have been enjoined. Nevertheless, the anti-asylum, anti-woman, anti-Latino attitudes and “judicial” decision-making at EOIR and DHS remain deeply ingrained!

The lesson: Changing policies in the bureaucracy requires something in addition to high level support. It requires bureaucrats who actually believe in the change and are committed to making it happen! That’s why dismantling the Trump immigration kakistocracy and getting better qualified individuals at all levels is so important.

Moreover, for lasting “Miller proof” change: Get it into legislation!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-13-21

🎇🧨💣BLOCKBUSTER NEW REPORT MAKES COMPELLING CASE FOR IMMEDIATE END TO EOIR CLOWN SHOW! 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ — Lays Out Blueprint For Restoring Due Process, Enhancing Justice In America’s Most Dysfunctional, Unfair, and Abusive “Courts!”

EYORE — “Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”

Star Chamber Justice — “Justice”
Star Chamber
Style

New from Kate Voigt @ AILA:

https://www.aila.org/advo-media/aila-policy-briefs/policy-brief-why-president-biden-needs-to-make

Policy Brief: Why President Biden Needs to Make Immediate Changes to Rehabilitate the Immigration Courts

AILA Doc. No. 21021232 | Dated February 12, 2021 | File Size: 864 K

DOWNLOAD THE DOCUMENT

In just four years, President Trump implemented radical changes that fundamentally compromised the integrity of the immigration courts. This policy brief explains the most critical and urgent changes President Biden should make to the immigration court system to ensure fairness and impartiality.

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

Download the complete policy brief at the link.

Thanks, Kate!

Great report!

I hope you have arranged to have a copy of this delivered to Judge Garland, Vanita Gupta, and Lisa Monaco. As you know better than anyone, every day the current BIA remains empowered to grossly distort and intentionally misapply the law and dish out injustice is another day of outrageous abuse for migrants and psychological harm inflicted on their representatives.

It is also essential that the folks in MPP and others applying at our borders are represented and judged according to a properly fair and generous interpretation of our asylum laws (as you point out, no more “99% denial club” assigned to Central American cases). Along with bogus “no show” rates, artificially inflated asylum denial rates have been used as key parts of the false narrative to smear and dehumanize asylum applicants at our Southern Border.

🇺🇸⚖️🗽🧑🏽‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️👩‍⚖️Due Process Forever!

Thanks again for all you and your colleagues do, and best wishes,

PWS

02-12-21

👍🏼🗽⚖️🙂🇺🇸BREAKING: IN A STUNNING REVERSAL, BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WILL BEGIN DISMANTLING “REMAIN IN MEXICO” PROGRAM BY SCREENING & ADMITTING THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN AWAITING ASYLUM HEARINGS! — Processing To Begin On Feb. 19!

Elliott Spagat — Elliot Spagat
Reporter
Associated Press

https://madison.com/news/national/tens-of-thousands-of-asylum-seekers-waiting-in-mexico-to-be-allowed-in-us/article_088fd344-7315-55f4-9ade-ceb555035a79.html?utm_source=BadgerBeat&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=Breaking%20News

By ELLIOT SPAGAT Associated Press

SAN DIEGO (AP) — The Biden administration on Friday announced plans for tens of thousands of asylum-seekers waiting in Mexico for their next immigration court hearings to be allowed into the United States while their cases proceed.

The first of an estimated 25,000 asylum-seekers in Mexico with active cases will be allowed in the United States on Feb. 19, authorities said. They plan to start slowly with two border crossings each processing up to 300 people a day and a third crossing taking fewer. Administration officials declined to name them out of fear they may encourage a rush of people to those locations.

See photos from Mexico as the US immigration debate continues in a gallery at the end of this story

The move is a major step toward dismantling one of former President Donald Trump’s most consequential policies to deter asylum-seekers from coming to the U.S. About 70,000 asylum-seekers were enrolled in “Remain in Mexico,” officially called “Migrant Protection Protocols,” since it was introduced in January 2019.

On Biden’s first day in office, the Homeland Security Department suspended the policy for new arrivals. Since then, some asylum-seekers picked up at the border have been released in the U.S. with notices to appear in court.

. . . .

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

Read the complete article and view the photo gallery of the “human side” of “Remain in Mexico” (a/k/a “Let ‘Em Die In Mexico”) at the link.

Earlier this week, Press Secretary Jen Psaki appeared to say it would take weeks if not months for the Administration to develop a plan to dismantle “Remain in Mexico.”

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2021/02/11/%f0%9f%98%a2different-tone-but-the-same-old-song-bottom-line-biden-administration-will-continue-stephen-millers-bogus-border-closing-policy-refugees-told-that-u-s/

These are all individuals who have been previously screened and found to have a “credible fear” of persecution by a USCIS Asylum Officer. Many have been waiting for hearings for more than one year and have had their hearings postponed by EOIR time after time.

Additionally, many of the Immigration Judges assigned to the “Remain in Mexico” Program have notoriously high asylum denial rates, some approaching 100% denials.

I sure hope that the Pro Bono Bar is working with USCIS and EOIR to insure that all of these individuals are represented. As we know, that’s the key not only to insuring court appearances, but also to increasing the chances for success on the asylum application.

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2021/01/29/⚖%EF%B8%8F🗽outing-the-big-nativist-lie-eoir-dhs-claim-that-migrants-dont-show-up-for-hearings-refuted-by-usgs-own-data-professor-ingrid-eagly-steven-s/

Vigorous representation of asylum seekers will also be the key to dismantling the aggressive anti-asylum, anti-due-process “jurisprudence” that the defeated regime attempted to implement at a “weaponized” EOIR. Where necessary, these cases must be litigated to the Courts of Appeals and used as examples of the pressing need for reform of the broken, unfair, and dysfunctional U.S. Immigration Courts.

For now, it remains unclear what will happen to newly arriving asylum applicants. Will they receive the “credible fear” screening to which they are legally entitled? (It appears that some families applying for asylum have been screened and released to await hearings in the U.S.) Or, will they be arbitrarily returned to harm’s way with no process at all, pursuant to Stephen Miller’s bogus “CDC border closing order” that has yet to be repealed?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/02/11/asylum-seekers-stuck-mexico-are-frustrated-angry-over-family-releases/

Progress! But still lots of confusion at the border as a result of the defeated regime’s extralegal shenanigans!

Still, dismantling the mess Miller left behind shouldn’t be rocket science. Just common sense and using the existing legal tools to solve human problems, rather than intentionally aggravating them. But, it will take different folks (experts) in charge to make it happen!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-12-21

😢DIFFERENT TONE, BUT THE SAME OLD SONG — BOTTOM LINE: BIDEN ADMINISTRATION WILL CONTINUE STEPHEN MILLER’S BOGUS BORDER CLOSING POLICY — Refugees Told That U.S. Will Continue To Violate Asylum Laws, Due Process “Until Further Notice” ☠️

Death On The Rio Grande — Supremes Sign Death Warrants For Vulnerable Refugees, Trash Refugee Act of 1980

Remain in Mexico — A girl peers out from an encampment at the U.S.-Mexico border where she and several hundred people waited to present themselves to U.S. immigration to seek asylum. / Photo by David Maung

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/adolfoflores/biden-turning-away-immigrants-border-policy

by Adolfo Flores and Hamed Aleaziz in BuzzFeed News:

After days of confusion about changes along the southern border, the Biden administration on Wednesday said immigrants should not try to enter the US because most will still be turned away under a Trump-era policy that has recently come under legal scrutiny.

. . . .

Confusion about who was being allowed into the US in recent days forced the administration to issue a stronger warning. Last week, reports of some families being allowed into the US after being apprehended at the border resulted in speculation that immigrants would no longer be immediately expelled and instead be allowed to fight their immigration cases from within the United States. In the Rio Grande Valley in South Texas, immigration advocates have reported seeing about 100 people a day released by Customs and Border Protection. In other parts of Texas, shelters have also seen increasing numbers of immigrant families, but it is not clear why.

Attorneys and advocates who work with immigrants along the border have been bombarded with phone calls and texts about whether they should try their luck at getting into the US. Erika Pinheiro, policy and litigation director with the immigrant advocacy group Al Otro Lado, said it was “incredibly disappointing” that the Biden administration has continued to expel immigrants under the CDC order.

“We know now that the CDC order prohibiting asylum processing at the border did not arise from public health concerns but rather was part of Stephen Miller’s efforts to dismantle the US asylum system and was implemented despite opposition from CDC leadership,” Pinheiro said, referring to one of Trump’s former senior advisers. “US expulsions of asylum-seekers, including infants, constitute plain violations of domestic and international laws meant to protect vulnerable refugees. CBP absolutely has the resources to process asylum-seekers in a safe and humane way.”

The turnbacks, known as expulsions, are legally different from deportations, which would mean an immigrant had actually undergone the immigration process and found to not be legally allowed to stay in the US. Critics say the government is using the public health orders as an excuse to turn back immigrants at the border.

. . . .

“While we recognize that the Biden administration has been saddled with a lot of bad policy and structural problems, it cannot continue the Trump administration practice of turning away people in danger based on illegal policies, such as the notorious and pretextual Title 42 policy,” said Lee Gelernt, an attorney with the ACLU.

. . . .

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

Read the full article at the link.

“Go suffer and die somewhere else, out of our sight,” might not be the best message for an Administration trying to re-establish its human rights and humanitarian leadership and credentials. Ever hear of the “St. Louis Incident?” It’s always easy to find a way to “just say no” to refugees — and the consequences are seldom pretty.

Those who won’t learn from history are destined to repeat it. Refugee and forced migration situations happen in the “here and now;” they can’t be “back burnered” — no matter how much policy officials might wish otherwise. In a forced migration situation, “doing nothing” is an action that produces consequences for both the forced migrant and those who ignore their plight.

There are many daily potentially deadly and dehumanizing consequences of continuing to ignore asylum laws and Constitutional due process for asylum seekers at our Southern Border.

One predictable one: Instead of turning themselves in at the border or to the Border Patrol shortly after entry, as had been happening until Miller & co. intervened, those seeking refuge apparently have gotten the message that our legal system is and remains a sham for them. Consequently, increasingly they are simply evading the Border Patrol and disappearing into the interior with no screening whatsoever — health, legal, or background. Also, by intentionally driving people out of the legal system, the Administration is totally blowing a chance to harness and build upon one of the most powerful known facts — represented individuals with asylum hearings scheduled show up for their hearings!

⚖️🗽OUTING THE BIG NATIVIST LIE: EOIR/DHS CLAIM THAT MIGRANTS DON’T SHOW UP FOR HEARINGS REFUTED BY USG’S OWN DATA — Professor Ingrid Eagly & Steven Schafer Analyzed Millions Of Records To Show How False Narratives Drive Draconian Policies — Eagley, Shafer, Reichlin-Melnick, Schmidt Set Record Straight @ Press Conference!

According to an article in today’s Washington Post, the estimated number of so-called “get always” — actually human beings seeking refuge — hit 1,000 on Sunday.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/immigration/border-arrests-increased-in-january/2021/02/10/8604f714-6bc0-11eb-9f80-3d7646ce1bc0_story.html

Sure, there are many aspects of this problem. But, it has been “out there” for nearly a year!

Sure seems to me that with the right experts in charge, including folks like Lee Gelernt and Erika Pinhero, this issue could and should have been addressed more constructively and with much more urgency by the Biden Administration by now. Why not harness the expertise and proven problem solving abilities of folks like Lee, Erika, and many other members of the New Due Process Army rather than fighting with and resisting them?

Instead, it looks like time and resources will continue to be wasted on forcing policy changes through litigation. Meanwhile, vulnerable asylum seekers and their families will continue to suffer as illustrated by this recent article from HuffPost about the human consequences for those caught up in the Government’s scofflaw border policies.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/biden-trump-migrant-asylum-seekers_n_60219e61c5b6c56a89a39a32

NOTE TO PRESIDENTIAL PRESS SECRETARY JEN PSAKI: Sorry, Jen, but those fleeing for their lives don’t generally respond well to “don’t come right now, we don’t want you” messages, particularly from folks who have never been in that situation themselves. It’s actually pretty insulting to think that folks fleeing to the U.S. 1) aren’t smart enough to know the dangers involved; 2) don’t realize that the the U.S. Government doesn’t want them; and/or 3) have choices about their travel as Jen and her buddies might have when planning a summer vacation.

As one of my esteemed colleagues once told me: “Desperate people do desperate things.” What about people who keep repeating the same policy mistakes over and over while expecting different results and failing to grasp either the absolute urgency or the human side of forced migration issues? It’s sort of like going to the emergency room with a burst appendix and being told, “Why don’t you just sit in the waiting room until we doctors figure out what to do? Get back to you later!”

Somewhere out there, Stephen Miller must be gloating about how he totally outsmarted and outflanked the Biden Team!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever! Oh, when will they ever learn, when will they learn?

PWS

02-11-21

UPDATE: THE CONTINUING REAL TRAUMA CAUSED BY THE “REMAIN IN MEXICO PROGRAM” (A/K/A “LET ‘EM DIE IN MEXICO”) WHILE THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION “STUDIES” THEIR NEXT MOVE:

Emily Green writes in Vice, as reposted in ImmigrationProf Blog:

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2021/02/the-trauma-of-being-stuck-at-the-us-mexico-border.html

PWS

02-11-21

THE “LUCAS LIST” — No, It’s Not Another “Star Trek” 🚀 🌌Prequel! — But, It Could Be The Key To Saving Our Universe!🌎

Darth Vader — Trump Era Immigration Kakistocrat
Photo: Bennie Thomas, Creative Commons License

Professor Lucas Guttentag has tracked “every known Trump-era immigration policy from January 2017 through the end of the administration.” There are over 1,000! This “easy to use” tool should be a great resource for policy makers, litigators, legislators, journalists, students, historians and teachers looking to grasp and dismantle Trump’s anti-American, anti-humanity immigration initiatives!

Needless to say, there is a whole section for the EOIR Clown Show/Kakistocracy 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ containing 173 separate entries!

https://immpolicytracking.org/policies/department/department-of-justice/executive-office-for-immigration-review

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-10-21

⚒PULVERIZED AGAIN: 4TH CIR. JACKHAMMERS BIA’S LATEST ANTI-ASYLUM, MISOGYNIST 🏴‍☠️ CRUSADE TARGETING REFUGEE WOMEN FROM GUATEMALA — “Excessively narrow view of nexus” — “Record conclusively establishes that the Guatemalan government was unable or unwilling to control Diaz de Gomez’s persecutors!”

Dan Kowalski reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca4-on-guatemala-nexus-argueta-diaz-de-gomez-v-wilkinson

CA4 on Guatemala, Nexus: Argueta Diaz de Gomez v. Wilkinson

Argueta Diaz de Gomez v. Wilkinson

“Diaz de Gomez claims that she received repeated death threats from a gang in Guatemala after she and her family witnessed a mass killing by gang members and refused to acquiesce to the gang’s extortion and other demands. … [W]e reject the Board’s “excessively narrow” view of the nexus requirement, and conclude that Diaz de Gomez established that her familial ties were one central reason for her persecution. … We also hold that the record conclusively establishes that the Guatemalan government was unable or unwilling to control Diaz de Gomez’s persecutors. We therefore grant the petition for review and remand for the Board to reconsider Diaz de Gomez’s claims in light of our holdings.”

[Hats off to Pamela P. Keenan!]

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

So, let’s compare the 4th Circuit’s view with the most recent abomination and intentional misconstruction of the “unable or unwilling to control” doctrine by totally unqualified political hack Jeffrey Rosen, then impersonating the “Acting Attorney General” and issuing clearly unconstitutional “precedents” to implement the defeated regime’s racially biased, misogynistic, anti-asylum agenda.

https://immigrationcourtside.com/category/asylum/failure-of-state-protection/

Absurdly, up until the Biden Administration suspended it this week, Guatemala, of all places, was fraudulently determined by the Trump immigration kakistocracy to be a “safe third country” for asylum seekers. https://www.state.gov/suspending-and-terminating-the-asylum-cooperative-agreements-with-the-governments-el-salvador-guatemala-and-honduras/

Talk about “crimes against humanity!” ☠️🏴‍☠️ Certainly, every current civil servant who supported and advanced this bogus designation should be held accountable.

Kakistocracy Kills: Obviously, with better qualified judges, competent representation, and a fair system operated in accordance with due process and a proper interpretation of asylum laws, many of those now being arbitrarily, capriciously, and unlawfully turned back at our borders would be entitled to our legal protection. This is life or death, not a problem that can “wait till tomorrow” to be addressed! Every day that the patently inadequate “judges” currently on the BIA remain in their positions means more injustice, trauma, and even death for legitimate asylum seekers!

The BIA Clown Show 🤡🦹🏿‍♂️ has got to go!

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-10-21

Due Process Forever! ⚖️🗽

Related posts:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Here’s the video:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever! Human misery doesn‘t stop for “study.” Not all damage and harm is reversible! What if it were YOU and YOUR family?

Related posts:

CA9 on Mexico, Cartels, Social Group, Nexus: Naranjo Garcia v. Wilkinson

The NDPA is everywhere! And, we’ll continue to be there until due process for all is achieved, regardless of the Administration!

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Geoffrey Hoffman: EOIR Needs Better Immigration Judges

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever! Better judges 🧑🏽‍⚖️👩‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️ for a better America. And that starts (but doesn’t end) with the U.S. Immigration Courts!

Related posts:

Related posts:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Policy Brief: Why President Biden Needs to Make Immediate Changes to Rehabilitate the Immigration Courts

🇺🇸⚖️🗽🧑🏽‍⚖️👨🏻‍⚖️👩‍⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever! Oh, when will they ever learn, when will they learn?

UPDATE: THE CONTINUING REAL TRAUMA CAUSED BY THE “REMAIN IN MEXICO PROGRAM” (A/K/A “LET ‘EM DIE IN MEXICO”) WHILE THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION “STUDIES” THEIR NEXT MOVE:

Related posts:

🇺🇸🗽⚖️Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process Forever!

Related posts: