TAL KOPAN @ SF CHRON: 🏴‍☠️ Billy The Bigot’s DOJ Goes Full Racist, Cans Immigration Courts’ Diversity Training!

 

Tal Kopan
Tal Kopan
Washington Reporter, SF Chronicle
Honorable Mimi Tsankov
Honorable Mimi Tsankov
U.S. Immigration Judge
Eastern Region Vice President
National Association of Immigration Judges (“NAIJ”)

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Justice-Department-cancels-diversity-training-15635203.php

Justice Department cancels diversity training, including for immigration judges

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Justice Department has suspended all diversity and inclusion training and events for its employees, according to a memo obtained by The Chronicle, which would include judges in San Francisco and elsewhere hearing cases of immigrants seeking to avoid deportation.

The memo, dated Oct. 8, is in response to an executive order issued by President Trump last month that labeled racial bias training as “offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating.” It was issued by Lee Lofthus, the assistant attorney general for administration.

“To ensure compliance with requirements specific to Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) training for employees, DOJ Components are instructed to suspend all D&I related training, programs, activities, and events that employees are required or permitted to attend while on Government-paid time,” Lofthus wrote.

Any new diversity training must be approved by the federal Office of Personnel Management, Lofthus said. He offered no timeline for resuming training.

The suspension applies to all divisions of the Justice Department, but could be of particular importance to the immigration courts.

Unlike the independent federal judiciary, immigration judges who hear the cases of asylum seekers and others trying to stay in the U.S. are employees of the Justice Department, hired by the attorney general.

Those cases often include some of the most sensitive stories of trauma from around the world, including many from women who say they have been raped, trafficked or abused in countries that frequently do not punish men who commit such acts. Asylum seekers also include people who say they have been persecuted because of their religious beliefs and LGBTQ individuals from countries where such identities are criminalized.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, who chairs the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, said the Justice Department, like other workplaces, “should always aim for more diversity, not less.”

“The suspension of this training will also apply to our nation‘s immigration courts and could lead to less inclusive and fair-minded judges,” Lofgren said in a statement to The Chronicle. “This is yet another reason why the immigration court system should be an independent body, separate from DOJ and free from the political whims of the Executive branch.”

The union that represents immigration judges noted that they interact with a diverse group of people in court, which it said makes such training important.

“The National Association of Immigration Judges values diversity and inclusion in the workplace as it ensures that the Immigration Judges can meet the needs of the diverse group of stakeholders with whom we interface.” Mimi Tsankov, the chair of the group’s committee on gender equity and a judge in New York, said in a statement. “Immigration Court workplace training on diversity and inclusion reflects a commitment to its importance and ensures a judicial bench ready to respond to the needs that our cases demand.”

President Trump’s attorneys general have paid particular attention to the immigration courts as part of their efforts to restrict immigration to the United States, by implementing policies that have reduced judges’ discretion and made it harder for immigrants to claim asylum.

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

Those with access should go to the above link for the full article. It also gives Tal a boost from the “hits.”

Glaring, intentional lack of diversity on the bench along with racial, gender, religious, and ethnic insensitivity have become an endemic problem at EOIR. But, given a regime and a DOJ that pride themselves on racism, misogyny, xenophobia, along with disdain for professionalism, expertise, ethics, humanity, and the Constitution, that’s not surprising.

Representative Lofgren and the NAIJ’s Judge Tsankov are absolutely correct. It’s time to put an end to the disgraceful abomination at EOIR and create a real, independent court system dedicated to due process, fundamental fairness, and promoting human dignity!

Due Process Forever! Today’s Dysfunctional & Unfair EOIR, Never!

PWS

10-11-20

NDPA NEWS: Liz Jordan @ Immigration Detention Accountability Project (IDAP), Denver, With USDC Victory On DHS’s Deadly ☠️🤮⚰️ COVID Practices!

Elizabeth Jordan ESQUIRE
Elizabeth Jordan Esquire
Director, Immigration Detention Accountability Project (IDAP)

 

Hi everyone,

 

I am pleased to report that we, along with co-counsel SPLC, DRA, Orrick, and Willkie, just got the attached order on our motion to enforce our Fraihat COVID preliminary injunction. We are working on developing guidance for detained folks, their families, advocates and allies. We encourage you to read it through if you’re interested because there are a lot of gems in there, but did want to flag these four big takeaways ASAP:

 

  1. Defendants shall mandate more widespread and regular testing of medically vulnerable people, consistent with CDC guidelines and above the level provided by the BOP and state prisons.
  2. Defendants shall mandate that medical isolation and quarantine are distinct from solitary, segregated, or punitive housing, that extended lockdowns as a means of COVID-19 prevention are not allowed, and that access to diversion and to telephones must be maintained to the fullest extent possible.
  3. Defendant shall provide more protective, and more concrete, transfer protocols to protect medically vulnerable people, including a suspension of transfers with a narrow and well defined list of exceptions consistent with CDC guidance.
  4. On custody redeterminations, blanket or cursory release denials are prohibited. Only in rare cases should a medically vulnerable detained individual who is not subject to mandatory detention remain detained, and any exceptions must be supported by specific justifications. With respect to people who are subject to mandatory detention, defendants must perform an individualized assessment, and should only continue to be detained after consideration of the risk of severe illness or death, with due regard to the public health emergency.

Many thanks to the many of you on these various lists for your reporting of on-the-ground conditions and results of release requests for class members, for evidence you provided in support of this motion, and for your thought partnership and tireless advocacy on these issues. Free them all!

 

Thanks

Liz.

 

Elizabeth Jordan*

(she/her/ella)

Director, Immigration Detention Accountability Project (IDAP)

Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center (CREEC)NDP

Here’s Judge Jesus Bernal’s  Order in Fraihat, et al. v. ICE:

2020-10-08 [240] Order Granting MTE in part

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

Congrats, Liz, and thanks for all you do for American justice!

This sentence from Judge Bernal’s order says it all about the Trump ICE kakistocracy:`

Defendants have established a pattern of noncompliance or exceedingly slow compliance that calls for more active Court monitoring than has heretofore been the case.

What if we had an independent U.S. Immigration Court with judges who had demonstrated due process and human rights expertise? Such a court could require ICE to comply with the law, take appropriate corrective action against contemptuous non-compliance, and relieve US District Judges from the responsibility to supervise ICE.

Kakistocracy is neither ethical nor efficient! Vote the kakistocracy out this Fall!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-09-20

 

 

 

ROUND TABLE STAR 🌟 HON. SUE ROY REPORTS ON AILA LITIGATION ABOUT NEW JERSEY IMMIGRATION COURTS⚖️!

Hon. Susan G. Roy
Hon. Susan G. Roy
Law Office of Susan G. Roy, LLC
Princeton Junction, NJ
Member, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges

ROUND TABLE STAR 🌟 HON. SUE ROY REPORTS ON NJ AILA LITIGATION ABOUT IMMIGRATION COURTS⚖️!

By Hon. Sue Roy

Former U.S. Immigration Judge

Exclusive to Courtside

Oct. 8, 2020

As Paul had written about in August, the New Jersey chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA-NJ) filed a complaint against the Department of Justice/Executive Office for Immigration Review (DOJ/EOIR) over the arbitrary re-opening of the Newark Immigration Court for in-person hearings on July 13, 2020, without proper COVID-19 safety procedures and protocols in place.

 

This is despite the fact that in March, numerous individuals contracted COVID-19 because the Court did not timely close at the outset of the pandemic. To date, a well-respected immigration attorney who was present in the building during that time passed away from COVID-19 complications. Three additional people who worked in the building have also passed away from COVID-19, and many individuals became quite ill due to the exposure; some of whom have permanent health complications as a result.

 

As of now, most courts in NJ remain closed; courts at the municipal, country, state, and federal level have successfully utilized either telephonic or televideo technology to ensure that cases move forward. In fact, the NJ District Court is literally next door to the Newark Immigration Court; it remains closed, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which is located in the same building as the Newark Immigration Court, remains closed as well.

 

Before filing the lawsuit, AILA-NJ asked EOIR to provide them with information regarding what safeguards were going to be implemented at the time of reopening, but EOIR declined to respond.

It should be noted that the National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ) has been seeking the same information from EOIR, and EOIR has refused to release information to NAIJ as well.

 

Accordingly, AILA-NJ, through the pro bono representation of Gibbons, P.C., filed a complaint and an injunction request in the NJ District Court. DOJ, represented by the U.S. Attorney’s Office, advised the Court that it was not their responsibility to ensure the safety of individuals utilizing the Court; it was the parties’ responsibility to follow proper COVID-19 safety protocols. While Judge Vasquez did not grant the injunction, he was extremely critical of DOJ’s position, calling it “shocking” and “disheartening.” He noted that it was impossible for him to determine if EOIR had acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner in reopening the Newark Immigration Court without being advised as to what went into the decision-making process.

 

Two and ½ weeks ago, DOJ asked for a 2-week extension to file their responses to Judge Vasquez’s requests for information regarding EOIR’s safety plans, any policy discussions/memoranda from the various agencies who were allegedly involved in the decision to reopen Newark Immigration Court in July. DOJ also indicated that, despite previously stating that televideo proceedings were not possible, they were looking into setting them up at Newark.  AILA-NJ agreed to the continuance request.

 

The Newark Immigration Court has held a few televideo hearings over the past two weeks. Attorneys are required to have their clients present with them in their offices when appearing before the Court. One attorney who was forced to do this tested positive for COVD-19 two days later and is now in quarantine.

 

Instead of then complying with Judge’s Vasquez’s order, last Thursday, DOJ filed a letter brief asking the Judge to dismiss the lawsuit as moot. AILA-NJ offered to settle the matter through the use of a consent order; DOJ refused. Therefore, AILA-NJ has opposed the request to dismiss the lawsuit, noting the continuing safety issues, the lack of any uniform procedures for the video hearings, the fact that televideo hearings are subject to individual judges’ discretion, and other concerns.

 

There is a telephonic conference now scheduled before Judge Vasquez for Thursday, October 8, at 11:30 am.

 

As of now, televideo hearings are only being offered at Newark Immigration Court, (not nationwide) and only to AILA-NJ attorney members who request it. Non-AILA-NJ attorneys are not being offered this option, and neither are pro se litigants, who are required to appear in person for master calendar and individual hearings. Court staff, interpreters, and immigration judges are required to be physically present for hearings, thus risking exposure to COVID-19, which is currently on the rise again in New Jersey generally, and in Newark in particular.

 

We have always suspected that EOIR had no safety plans or protocols in place before it decided to arbitrarily reopen the Newark Immigration Court. This view is shared by the NAIJ. The fact that EOIR reversed course and set up televideo hearings in Newark in less than 2 weeks and are now seeking to not release any information demonstrates just how disingenuous and unscrupulous DOJ has become.

 

NAIJ, the New Jersey State Bar Association, the Hispanic Bar Association, and the Round Table of Former Immigration Judges, among others, have all issued statements in support of the AILA-NJ litigation.

Hon. Susan B. Roy is a member of the Round Table of Former Immigration Judges and the principal of Law Office of Susan G. Roy, LLC in Princeton Junction, New Jersey.

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

Thanks, Sue, for all you do for due process!

Here are links to my previous reports on the litigation:

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2020/09/05/22729/

🏴‍☠️☠️🤮👎KAKISTOCRACY WATCH: NJ AILA Sues EOIR’s Malicious Incompetents To Stop Deadly ☠️☠️☠️🤮 In-Person Hearings

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10–08-20

 

 

 

 

😎HERE’S SOME GOOD NEWS👍: My Friend & NDPA Superhero 🦸‍♀️ Professor Michele Pistone @ Villanova Law Recognized By The Chronicle Of Higher Education For Her Innovative VIISTA Program That Trains Non-Attorneys To Provide Great Pro Bono Representation To Migrants In Immigration Court!

The Chronicle of Higher Education featured VIISTA.  Here is the story:

 

Article Link: https://www.chronicle.com/article/most-asylum-seekers-have-no-legal-counsel-this-villanova-program-trains-non-lawyers-to-step-in

 

The Chronicle of Higher Education (Oct. 6, 2020)

 

Most Asylum Seekers Have No Legal Counsel. This Villanova Program Trains Non-Lawyers to Step In.

 

By Katherine Mangan

 

pastedGraphic.png

Michele Pistone, a law professor at Villanova University, stands in front of Pennsylvania’s

York County Prison, one of the largest immigration detention centers in her region. Pistone

has created a college course in which laypeople can learn to advocate for immigrants.

 

The contrast, for a young lawyer in a high-powered New York firm, couldn’t have been clearer. In 1991, Michele R. Pistone was part of a team of lawyers helping Donald J. Trump restructure his massive debts as his Atlantic City casinos hemorrhaged money. Pistone, who was 25 at the time, recalls walking into her client’s office with closing documents and being greeted by an entire floor-to-ceiling wall of framed magazine covers with his photo.

 

Fast-forward a few months to the pro bono assignment that would change the course of her career and inspire her to start a program at Villanova University aimed at expanding legal assistance to immigrants and asylum seekers.

 

Volunteering for a group now called Human Rights First, she represented a father and son who had fled Somalia during a bloody civil war. The father, a minister whose life had been threatened during the uprising, had been charged with alien smuggling since his son did not have a visa. If forced to return to his country, the elderly man faced the possibility he could be killed.

 

About six years after she won their case, the son, who had just earned U.S. citizenship, and his father gave her a colorful straw bag as a thank you. It is a constant reminder, she said, of the power and privilege she has as a lawyer. “It was so amazing to be in a position to save someone’s life.”

 

Pistone, who led lobbying efforts in the mid-90s in Washington, D.C., to protect asylum seekers, estimates that she has helped free more than 100 clients from detention, including former child soldiers, women who fled gender-based violence, and children who fled gang violence.

 

As a professor of law at Villanova, her focus now is on making sure that more refugees and asylum seekers, six out of 10 of whom confront the immigration system alone, get that help.

 

After a successful pilot that ended in May, she started a program this fall to certify students to become legal advocates for migrants and refugees. “Villanova Interdisciplinary Immigration Studies Training for Advocates,” offered through the university’s College of Professional Studies, is described as the first university-based, fully online program to train immigrant advocates. That format, planned before the pandemic forced most courses online, allows easier access for working professionals, including those in rural areas, and keeps costs low.

 

Graduates can apply to become Department of Justice “accredited representatives,” non-lawyers who are authorized to provide inexpensive legal representation to migrant and refugee families. Accredited representatives, who must work or volunteer for a recognized group like a nonprofit or faith-based organization, can sign legal documents, accompany clients to interviews, and perform other duties a lawyer would handle in court.

 

In the United States, where deportation cases are civil proceedings, immigrants are not entitled to court-appointed lawyers the way they are in criminal proceedings.

 

Access to legal representation makes a huge difference, according to the Vera Institute of Justice. The nonprofit research and policy group found that immigrants are 12 times more likely to get available relief when they have an advocate.

 

“Tens of thousands of people each year go unrepresented, including asylum seekers, longtime legal residents, immigrant parents or spouses of U.S. citizens, and even children,” the Vera Institute notes. “They are left to defend themselves in an adversarial and notoriously complex system against the United States government, which is always represented by counsel.”

 

The Committee for Immigration Reform Implementation estimated in 2014 that at least one million of the unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. were eligible for legal relief and would be permitted to live in the U.S. if they had access to legal representation.

 

Few people facing the threat of deportation can afford to hire lawyers, and nationwide, there are only about 300 fully accredited representatives authorized to counsel clients in court, Pistone said. That’s where VIISTA hopes to make a difference.

 

The program is divided into three 14-week modules. The certificates students earn after completing each module authorize them to take on increasing levels of responsibility for representing immigrants. The first module, which prepares students to interview and be sensitive to the needs of immigrants, addresses why people migrate, the structure of government immigration systems, and cultural differences. The second and third focus on immigration law and train people to become partially or fully accredited representatives. Students can complete one, two, or three modules.

 

Among the students who completed all three modules in the pilot this spring is Eileen Doherty-Sil, an adjunct associate professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania who teaches about forced migration. It’s one thing, Doherty-Sil said, to teach about the United Nations Convention Against Torture, and quite another to represent a client who could face torture if returned to his home country.

 

The insights she gained in the program will enrich her teaching, she said. “Michele’s program gave us a really clear-eyed idea of what it looks like for someone to face a judge and say, ‘Please don’t send me back.’”

 

Without someone to advise him, an asylum seeker who fears he could be tortured or killed if he’s returned might instead say in court that his goal is to get a good job and be a good citizen. “They can’t possibly know that that’s the wrong thing to say,” Doherty-Sil said. Asylum is for refugees fleeing persecution, not for someone seeking a better life.

 

Pistone likens the development of specialized legal representatives to the growth of nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the medical field. (The role is different from paralegals, who are trained to support lawyers within their offices but aren’t authorized to appear in court.)

 

The problem of representation became more acute as mounting tuition and shrinking job opportunities caused the number of law-school applications to tumble beginning in 2008-9. But even when people complained about a glut of lawyers, there never seemed to be enough people willing, or financially able, to represent the poorest clients.

 

“A lot of people in the legal academy think the solution to access to justice is lawyers, yet we’ve been trying for so long using lawyers,” Pistone said. The system, she said, is clearly broken. “It’s up to those of us in the system to come up with a viable, scalable solution.”

 

All three modules of the VIISTA program can be completed in 10 months, for a cost of under $4,000.

 

Pistone’s students have included teachers, social workers, and others who want to play a more active role in helping immigrants.

 

“I want to train 1,000 people a year,” Pistone said. “And if they each represented one client a month, that’s 12,000 families that are getting an advocate in immigration court.”

Michele

Michele R. Pistone

Professor of Law

Villanova University, Charles Widger School of Law

Director, Clinic for Asylum, Refugee & Emigrant Services (CARES)

Founder, VIISTA Villanova Interdisciplinary Immigration Studies Training for Advocates

Co-Managing Editor,Journal on Migration and Human Security

Adjunct Fellow, Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation

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

Many well-deserved congrats,  Michele, my friend!

As I previously mentioned, I am delighted to have had a small role in helping Michele get VIISTA off the ground.

To once again state the obvious: American Government and our Federal Judiciary need more “scholar problem-solvers” like Michele.

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-07-20

🏴‍☠️☠️🤮⚰️👎CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, “PERPS” ON THE LOOSE! — DOJ Internal Report Shows How “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions, Rosenstein, Hamilton Conspired To Separate Migrant Kids In Violation Of 5th Amendment — When Will These Criminals Be Charged & Prosecuted Under 18 USC 242? — NY Times Reports!

Sessions in a cage
Jeff Sessions’ Cage by J.D. Crowe, Alabama Media Group/AL.com
Republished under license

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/us/politics/family-separation-border-immigration-jeff-sessions-rod-rosenstein.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20201007&instance_id=22889&nl=the-morning&regi_id=119096355&section_index=2&section_name=the_latest_news&segment_id=40077&te=1&user_id=70724c8ee3c2ebb50a6ef32ab050a46b

‘We Need to Take Away Children,’ No Matter How Young, Justice Dept. Officials Said

Top department officials were “a driving force” behind President Trump’s child separation policy, a draft investigation report said.

pastedGraphic.pngpastedGraphic_1.pngpastedGraphic_2.png

By Michael D. Shear, Katie Benner and Michael S. Schmidt

  • Oct. 6, 2020
    • 505

WASHINGTON — The five U.S. attorneys along the border with Mexico, including three appointed by President Trump, recoiled in May 2018 against an order to prosecute all undocumented immigrants even if it meant separating children from their parents. They told top Justice Department officials they were “deeply concerned” about the children’s welfare.

But the attorney general at the time, Jeff Sessions, made it clear what Mr. Trump wanted on a conference call later that afternoon, according to a two-year inquiry by the Justice Department’s inspector general into Mr. Trump’s “zero tolerance” family separation policy.

“We need to take away children,” Mr. Sessions told the prosecutors, according to participants’ notes. One added in shorthand: “If care about kids, don’t bring them in. Won’t give amnesty to people with kids.”

Rod J. Rosenstein, then the deputy attorney general, went even further in a second call about a week later, telling the five prosecutors that it did not matter how young the children were. He said that government lawyers should not have refused to prosecute two cases simply because the children were barely more than infants.

“Those two cases should not have been declined,” John Bash, the departing U.S. attorney in western Texas, wrote to his staff immediately after the call. Mr. Bash had declined the cases, but Mr. Rosenstein “instructed that, per the A.G.’s policy, we should NOT be categorically declining immigration prosecutions of adults in family units because of the age of a child.”

The Justice Department’s top officials were “a driving force” behind the policy that spurred the separation of thousands of families, many of them fleeing violence in Central America and seeking asylum in the United States, before Mr. Trump abandoned it amid global outrage, according to a draft report of the results of the investigation by Michael E. Horowitz, the department’s inspector general.

The separation of migrant children from their parents, sometimes for months, was at the heart of the Trump administration’s assault on immigration. But the fierce backlash when the administration struggled to reunite the children turned it into one of the biggest policy debacles of the president’s term.

Though Mr. Sessions sought to distance himself from the policy, allowing Mr. Trump and Homeland Security Department officials to largely be blamed, he and other top law enforcement officials understood that “zero tolerance” meant that migrant families would be separated and wanted that to happen because they believed it would deter future illegal immigration, Mr. Horowitz wrote.

The draft report, citing more than 45 interviews with key officials, emails and other documents, provides the most complete look at the discussions inside the Justice Department as the family separation policy was developed, pushed and ultimately carried out with little concern for children.

This article is based on a review of the 86-page draft report and interviews with three government officials who read it in recent months and described its conclusions and many of the details in it. The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to discuss it publicly, cautioned that the final report could change.

Before publishing the findings of its investigations, the inspector general’s office typically provides draft copies to Justice Department leaders and others mentioned in the reports to ensure that they are accurate.

Mr. Horowitz had been preparing to release his report since late summer, according to a person familiar with the investigation, though the process allowing for responses from current and former department officials whose conduct is under scrutiny is likely to delay its release until after the presidential election.

Mr. Sessions refused to be interviewed, the report noted. Mr. Rosenstein, who is now a lawyer in private practice, defended himself in his interview with investigators in response to questioning about his role, according to two of the officials. Mr. Rosenstein’s former office submitted a 64-page response to the report.

“If any United States attorney ever charged a defendant they did not personally believe warranted prosecution, they violated their oath of office,” Mr. Rosenstein said in a statement. “I never ordered anyone to prosecute a case.”

. . . .

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

Read the complete article at the link.

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw concluded that intentional separation of families was unconstitutional — a clear violation of Fifth Amendment due process. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/us/politics/family-separations-congress-states.html

The Government did not seriously question the correctness of this finding! 

Intentionally violating Constitutional rights (not to mention lying and attempting to cover it up) is clearly a violation of 18 USC 242.

Here’s the text of that section from the DOJ’s own website:

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

Sure looks like an”open and shut” case for prosecution.

The irony: Families and their kids have been traumatized for life, perhaps even killed or disabled by the actions of these criminal conspirators; however, the “perps” remain at large.

Hamilton is on the public dole continuing to wreak-havoc on the Constitution, the rule of law, the Immigration Courts, and human decency at the corrupt Barr DOJ; Rosenstein works for a “fat cat” law firm hauling down a six figure salary while he avoids justice and accountability for his misdeeds; “Gonzo” had the absolute audacity to try to reinsert himself onto the public dole by running for the Senate from Alabama (thankfully, unsuccessfully, even though he previously held the seat for years and misused it as a public forum to spread his racist ideas, xenophobic venom, lies, false narratives, and unrelenting cruelty).

Where’s the “justice” in a system that punishes victims while letting “perps” prosper and go free?

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-07-20

MARCIA BROWN @ NEW REPUBLIC — There Can Be No Due Process Without An Independent Immigration Court Staffed By Qualified Judges!

Marcia Brown
Marcia Brown
Writing Fellow
American Prospect
Photo source: American Prospect

https://newrepublic.com/article/159530/best-way-protect-immigrants-whims-politics

. . . .

Paul Schmidt, who served as a board member and board chair of the Board of Immigration Appeals under the [Clinton] administration, said that Trump is not the first to manipulate the courts. In 2003, President George Bush’s Attorney General John Ashcroft removed board members whose views did not match the administration’s ideas for immigration. “You can track the downward trajectory of the immigration courts from Ashcroft,” he said. “We call it the purge. If you’re not with the program, your job could be on the line.… Ashcroft rejiggered the system so there’s no dissent.”

Schmidt said he “got bounced” because of his views, which makes him skeptical of the courts ever being independent in the current system. “How can you be a little bit independent?” he said. “It’s like being a little bit pregnant. You either are, or you aren’t.”

. . . .

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

Read the full article at the link.

Congrats to Marcia for recognizing that while the seeds of the current Immigration Court disaster originated in the Bush II Administration, they also grew steadily because of the Obama Administration’s mismanagement and misuse of the Immigration Courts.

Given a rare chance to create a truly progressive, due-process-oriented judiciary, without any interference from Mitch McConnell and the GOP, the Obama group chose another path. They promoted “Aimless Docket Reshuffling” at EOIR to meet improper political policy objectives. At the same time, they almost totally “shut out” the human rights, clinical, and immigration bars by appointing over 90% of Immigration Judges from Government backgrounds, overwhelmingly DHS prosecutors. 

Notwithstanding a process that did not require Senate Confirmation, the Obama Administration politicos took a mind boggling average of two years to fill Immigration Court judicial vacancies! They also left an unconscionable number of unfilled positions on the table for White Nationalist AG Jeff Sessions to fill!

Sure, it’s not “malicious incompetence” like the Trump regime. But, for asylum applicants and other migrants whose lives and due process rights are now going down the drain at an unprecedented accelerated rate, the difference might be negligible.

Dead is dead! Tortured is tortured! Missed opportunities to save lives are lives lost!

First, and foremost, Biden/Harris need to get elected. But, then they must escape the shadow of Obama’s immigration failures and do better for the many vulnerable and deserving folks whose lives are on the line.

Shouldn’t be that hard! The progressive legal talent is out there for a better Federal Judiciary from the Immigration Courts to the Supremes.

It just requires an Administration that takes due process, human rights, human dignity, and equal justice for all seriously and recognizes that in the end, “it all runs through immigration and asylum!” The failure to establish a sound, independent, institutionalized due process and equal justice foundation at the U.S. Immigration Courts, the “retail level” of our courts, now threatens to infect and topple the entire U.S. justice system! We need to end “Dred Scottification” before it eradicates all of our individual rights.

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-06-20

U.S. JUDGE 👨‍⚖️ 🇺🇸⚖️ THWARTS ICE 🏴‍☠️ EFFORT TO REMOVE INDONESIAN ASYLUM APPLICANT – “Siahaan’s attorneys, Elsy Ramos Velasquez and Patrick Taurel, had argued the arrest was made under false pretenses, without a warrant and in violation of ICE’s policy that typically prohibits agents from making arrests on church property.”

Meagan Flynn
Meagan Flynn
Morning Mix Reporter
WashPost
Photo From Twitter

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/siahaan-immigration-deportation/2020/10/03/ec7f2380-04c2-11eb-897d-3a6201d6643f_story.html

 

By

Meagan Flynn

Oct. 3, 2020 at 3:50 p.m. EDT

A federal judge in Maryland has granted an undocumented Indonesian immigrant temporary reprieve from deportation, ruling Friday evening that immigration authorities cannot remove him from the country until he has a chance to pursue religious asylum.

Binsar Siahaan, a 52-year-old father to two U.S. citizens, attracted considerable support from faith-based activists nationwide after he was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement last month at his home on the grounds of Glenmont United Methodist Church in Silver Spring, Md. He and his wife, also an undocumented Indonesian immigrant, work there as church caretakers.

ICE arrested an undocumented immigrant on church grounds. They lied to coax him out, family and attorney say.

Siahaan’s attorneys, Elsy Ramos Velasquez and Patrick Taurel, had argued the arrest was made under false pretenses, without a warrant and in violation of ICE’s policy that typically prohibits agents from making arrests on church property. They also argued that Siahaan, who is Christian, should not be deported to majority-Muslim Indonesia until he has a chance to fully pursue religious asylum.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm agreed, granting Siahaan a preliminary injunction that blocks ICE from removing him from the country until the Board of Immigration Appeals, or a higher federal court, makes a ruling on his pending appeal. Siahaan is being held at a detention center in Georgia, where he was transferred from Baltimore to await deportation. Grimm also ordered ICE to bring him back to Baltimore, where he will remain in custody closer to his family.

“When the ruling came down, we were really relieved,” said the Rev. Kara Scroggins, pastor at Glenmont United Methodist. “We’re glad that he’s closer to home at the detention facility in Baltimore, but we’re going to keep fighting until he’s home with his family.”

ICE could not immediately be reached for comment Saturday but previously said Siahaan was arrested “after he received full due process in the nation’s immigration courts.”

 

. . . .

 

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

Read the full article at the link.

 

Hats off to the litigation team and to U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm! By ordering ICE to return Siahaan to Maryland, rather than detaining him in Georgia, generally known as one of the worst places in the “New American Gulag,” Judge Grimm took the kind of effective action necessary to stop the abusive actions of ICE and to guarantee real due process!

 

In a functioning system with an independent U.S. Immigration Court comprised of Judges with expertise in asylum and human rights laws and a commitment to due process and the rule of law, Immigration Judges could take the actions necessary to protect fundamental rights and hold ICE accountable without constant resort to the U.S. District Courts. A “captive” Immigration Court, where Immigration Judges are subservient to Billy the Bigot Barr and pressured to act as “ICE enforcement in robes” ill-serves the national interest! It’s also highly inefficient and wasteful of public resources!

 

Thanks to my good friend Deb Sanders for bringing this incident to my attention!

 

Due Process Forever!

 

 

PWS

10-05-20

⚖️HON. SHIRA SCHEINDLIN👩🏻‍⚖️ @ THE GUARDIAN: Barrett Nomination Part & Parcel Of GOP Destruction Of American Democracy! 🏴‍☠️ – The Continued Erosion Of The Supremes & The Federal Judiciary Is Destroying Our Nation!👎

Hon. Shira Scheindlin
Hon. Shira A. Scheindlin
Retired US District Judge
Photo: Joel Spector ©2013
Creative Commons License

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/sep/29/supreme-court-conservatives-trump-amy-coney-barrett?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

. . . .

 

This is no longer the case. Public confidence and public perception that the courts are non-partisan has eroded. The Republican boycott of Garland, together with Trump’s unprecedented nomination of Barrett and her likely confirmation, will seal the Republican theft of two supreme court seats, at least in the eyes of more than half the electorate, and will ensure conservative control of the court for decades to come.

If Barrett’s record is any indication, the court will soon turn its back on its most treasured precedents and turn America into a more regressive country. Before joining the bench just three years ago, she served as a law clerk to Scalia, whose judicial philosophy she has fully embraced. She has also been a longtime member of the rightwing Federalist Society.

 

Public confidence and public perception that the courts are non-partisan has eroded

Her short judicial record, together with her scholarly writings, reveal that she is a rock-solid conservative jurist. Like Scalia, she defines herself as an originalist and textualist, which means that the constitution must be viewed as of the time it was written. From that perspective, there is nothing in the constitution that would explicitly support abortion rights, gay marriage, mandatory school desegregation, or the right to suppress evidence that is illegally seized. By contrast, in one of her most famous opinions, United States v Virginia (1996), Ginsburg wrote that “a prime part of the history of our constitution … is the story of the extension of constitutional rights and protections to people once ignored or excluded.”

In a 2013 article, Barrett repeatedly expressed the view that the supreme court had created, through judicial fiat, a framework of abortion on demand that ignited a national controversy. In an opinion she joined with another judge, she expressed doubt that a law preventing parents from terminating a pregnancy because they did not want a child of a particular sex or one with a disability could be unconstitutional. These writings surely indicate that Barrett will do whatever she can to limit or eliminate abortion rights.

Barrett has also expressed dissatisfaction with the Affordable Care Act and support for a broad interpretation of the second amendment. She has writtenthat Chief Justice John Roberts “pushed the Affordable Care Act beyond its plausible meaning”. She also quoted Scalia, when he wrote that “the statute known as Obamacare should be renamed ‘Scotuscare’” in “honor of the court’s willingness to ‘rewrite’ the statute in order to keep it afloat”. There is little doubt that Barrett would be inclined to find the Affordable Care Act unconstitutional and thereby deprive millions of Americans of affordable healthcare coverage. Similarly, she wrote a dissenting opinion questioning the constitutionality of a statute that prohibited ex-felons from purchasing guns. Thus, she has demonstrated her fealty to the NRA position that the more guns the better – inevitably leading to more Americans dying from gun violence.

When addressing the legal doctrine known as stare decisis, meaning respect for precedent, Barrett wrote that she “tend[ed] to agree with those who say that a justice’s duty is to the constitution and that it is thus more legitimate for her to enforce her best understanding of the constitution rather than a precedent she thinks is clearly in conflict with it”. In other words, she would overturn landmark decisions such as Brown v Board of Education or Roe v Wade if those decisions did not reflect her best understanding of the constitution.

Amy Coney Barrett: what will she mean for women’s rights?

 

Read more

Stunningly, in an interview in 2016, when asked whether Congress should confirm Obama’s nominee during an election year, Barrett responded that confirmation should wait until after the election because an immediate replacement would “dramatically flip the balance of power”. Given that answer, she should decline the nomination, as her confirmation would even more dramatically flip the balance of the court, entrenching a 6-3 conservative majority.

Confirming this nominee before the outcome of the national elections – which will determine both the identity of the next president and the composition of a new Senate – is unprecedented, inexcusable and a threat to many rights that the majority of Americans have embraced. This is a tragedy about to happen.

  • Shira A Scheindlin served as a United States district judge for the southern district of New York for 22 years. She is the co-chair of the board of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and a board member of the American Constitution Society

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

Read the rest of Judge Scheindlin’s article at the link.

 

As I have been saying “Better Judges For A Better America!”  It starts with electing a President who will nominate them and a Senate that will confirm them. That requires “regime change” and defeat of the GOP Anti-Democracy Party at all levels.

 

Dems need to stop sputtering about Barrett, whom they don’t appear able to stop anyway, and get out the vote to insure that she will be the last GOP far right shill on Supremes for many years! Rebuilding and improving American democracy starts NOW, with THIS ELECTION.  As Willie Nelson says: “Vote ‘Em Out, Vote ‘Em Out!”

 

BTW, “Moscow Mitch” and his GOP toadies have plenty of time to race through the Barrett confirmation during an election, but no time to help Americans thrown out of work or losing their health insurance because of the pandemic!🤮⚰️

 

PWS

 

10-01-20

 

BILLY APPOINTS MALPHRUS AS ADDITIONAL DEPUTY CHIEF APPELLATE IMMIGRATION JUDGE (“VICE CHAIR”) @ BIA! — Hard Line, Restrictionist, Anti-Asylum, Anti-Due-Process Jurisprudence Rewarded!🏴‍☠️☠️⚰️

Billy Barr Consigliere
Bill Barr Consigliere
Artist: Pat Bagley
Salt Lake Tribune
Reproduced under license
EYORE
“Eyore In Distress”
Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”

From the EOIR website: 

Garry Malphrus

Deputy Chief Appellate Immigration Judge

Attorney General William P. Barr appointed Garry Malphrus as a deputy chief appellate immigration judge in September 2020. Judge Malphrus earned a Bachelor of Arts in 1989 from the University of South Carolina and a Juris Doctor in 1993 from the University of South Carolina. From August 2008 to September 2020, he served on the Board of Immigration Appeals, Executive Office for Immigration Review, including as acting board chairman from October 2019 to May 2020. From 2005 to 2008, he served as an immigration judge at the Arlington Immigration Court. From 2001 to 2005, he served as associate director of the White House Domestic Policy Council. From 1997 to 2001, he worked for the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which included serving as chief counsel and staff director on the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight and the Subcommittee on the Constitution. From 1995 to 1997, Garry served as a law clerk for the Honorable Dennis W. Shedd, U.S. District Judge for the District of South Carolina. From 1994 to 1995, he was a law clerk for the Honorable William W. Wilkins of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. From 1993 to 1994, he was a law clerk for the Honorable Larry R. Patterson, Circuit Judge for South Carolina. Judge Malphrus is a member of the South Carolina Bar.

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

No surprise here, folks, as Courtside had predicted this back in May: 

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2020/05/22/%f0%9f%91%82%f0%9f%8f%bb%f0%9f%91%80%f0%9f%a4%abeoir-rumor-mill-doj-honcho-x-oiler-david-h-wetmore-reportedly-will-be-tapped-as-new-bia-chair/

This appears to be the “penultimate step” in the ongoing process of “benching” the long-time “holdover” Vice Chair Chuck Adkins-Blanch. First, he was “passed over” when Judge Malphrus became the BIA’s Acting Chair following the hasty departure of former Chair David Neal. Now, Malphrus basically has been “layered in” to be the “real Deputy,” who will faithfully continue to carry out Billy’s nativist political agenda, presumably until Adkins-Blanch reaches retirement and finally pulls the plug.

Needless to say, Judge Adkins-Blanch’s name has been conspicuously absent from the BIA’s most recent barrage of anti-immigrant, anti-asylum “precedents.” That is, of course, the “precedents” that Billy lets the BIA write as opposed to the ones that he and his fellow political hacks at “Main DOJ” issue as “AG precedents.”

More and more, the AG, whom nobody except, perhaps, a few intentionally tone-deaf Circuit Court of Appeals Judges, would mistake for an “expert” in immigration law, has taken over the BIA’s precedent setting function. That leaves the BIA basically to do the “mop-up work” of maximizing the impact of Billy’s anti-immigrant policies and insuring that just and fair results below favoring immigrants are reversed upon demand of  “EOIR’s masters” at DHS Enforcement.

Talk about the need for an Article I Court with a new cast of characters selected on a merit basis for their demonstrated immigration expertise, and established commitment to due process, fundamental fairness, equal justice, human rights, and practical applied scholarship!  That so many Article III judges continue to “go along to get along” with this vile legal charade says some pretty sad things about the overall state of justice and the judiciary in  America!

An Article I Court requires judicial leadership that replaces “built to fail ‘Vatican Style’ (or “Legacy INS Style”) hierarchical bureaucracy” with professional court administration and a much “leaner and flatter” judicial structure. A judicial structure where most resources are devoted to actually fairly and efficiently deciding cases, establishing “best practices,” and leading by example. That would eliminate  the “Mickey Mouse” demeaning “control freak supervision (“suppression”)” of supposedly senior level “judges” who, if properly selected, would need effective support, but little to no “supervision” in the normal bureaucratic sense of the term. 

In the meantime, expect the backlog to grow unabated and the Article IIIs to continue to reverse and return an essentially random selection of the BIA’s reliably “one-sided” jurisprudence for “redos!” That will further increase the backlog without effectively addressing the fundamental problem of an unconstitutional system with a clearly established anti-immigrant political bias!

Just more signs of an American  justice system now in the throes of institutional failure!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-29-20

LINKEDIN SAVES LIVES: NDPA Superstar Michelle Mendez Of CLINIC With Some Good News On How Litigation Success Has Saved Lives In The Face Of Regime’s Scurrilous White Nationalist Attack On Asylum Laws! — These Are The True Brilliant Minds & Courageous Heroes Of Our Legal System, Carrying On RBG’s Legacy Of Fighting Tirelessly For Equal Justice!

 

Michelle Mendez
Michelle Mendez
Defending Vulnerable Populations Director
Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. (“CLINIC”)
Aimee Mayer Salins
Aimee Mayer Salins
Staff Attorney
Defending Vulnerable Populations
CLINIC
Source: Linkedin

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

Sorry for the small print. But, well worth the read.

Compare the courage and fidelity to due process, fundamental fairness, equal justice for all, and defense of human dignity demonstrated by brilliant lawyers like Michelle Mendez, Aimee Mayer Salins (former BIA JLC), and the terrific CAIR litigators with the warped right wing, anti-constitutional, anti-humanity jurisprudence of Trump’s Supreme Court choice, Judge Amy Coney Barrett:

Faced with two plausible readings of a law, fact, or precedent, Barrett always seems to choose the harsher, stingier interpretation. Can job applicants sue employers whose policies have a disproportionately deleterious impact on older people? Barrett said no. Should courts halt the deportation of an immigrant who faced torture at home? Barrett said no. Should they protect refugees denied asylum on the basis of xenophobic prejudice? Barrett said no. Should they shield prisoners from unjustified violence by correctional officers? Barrett said no. Should minors be allowed to terminate a pregnancy without telling their parents if a judge has found that they’re mature enough to make the decision? Barrett said no. Should women be permitted to obtain an abortion upon discovering a severe fetal abnormality? Barrett said no.

There is no question that, if confirmed, Barrett would cast the fifth vote to either hollow out Roe v. Wade or overturn it altogether. Similarly, there is no doubt that Barrett would dramatically expand the Second Amendment, invalidating gun control measures around the country. It’s quite possible, perhaps even likely, that within a year of her confirmation, Americans will be forbidden from terminating a pregnancy in 21 states—but permitted to purchase assault weapons and carry firearms in public in every state.

https://immigrationcourtside.com/2020/09/21/insult-to-injury🤮☠%EF%B8%8F👎🏻-trump-to-tap-unqualified-cruel-righty-zealot-to-replace-rbg-one-leading-candidate-the-anti-rbg/

In other words, guns yes; human rights and human dignity, no! Some lawyers spend their lives saving lives and advancing humanity; others spend them pursuing and spreading anti-humanitarian, right wing dogmas. Why are commitments to cruelty, inhumanity, and a fundamentally unjust society things to “tout” in a judicial candidate? You need to look inside the deep perversity of the GOP minority who control our nation and are running it into the ground to get the answer.

There are thousands of progressive lawyers, many of them women and minorities, committed to standing up for equal justice for all who are better qualified than Judge Barrett. There is something wrong with a system that elevates the wrong people to the judiciary and other high offices.

It’s time to establish meritocracy and save our democracy. Vote to throw the GOP out of office and end the selection of far-right judges whose reactionary views and lack of empathy for the most vulnerable in society are far outside both the reality of our diverse nation and our future as a vibrant, progressive democracy that will promote equal justice and human rights at home and abroad!

Keep the future Judge Barretts where they belong — on the sidelines and in the margins of our legal system, while those with a better view of the Constitution, the rule of law, and human progress take their rightful places in positions of power and progressive influence in all there branches of our Government.

Judge Barrett parrots great admiration for RBG while aiming to trash her legacy of fairness and equality with a far-right, exclusive, intolerant agenda. In the future, we need Federal Judges who will constantly confront Judge Barrett, her soon-to-be-fellow GOP Supremes, and other righty judges bent on taking us back to the darkest corners of our past.  Make them face the truly courageous and enlightened legacy of RBG and others like her. Force the “Barretts of the world” to reckon with their own smugly disingenuous jurisprudence and their lack of commmitment to humanity and true equality before the law for all persons in the U.S.! Constantly confront complicit courts for change!

Better judges for a better, fairer America!

This Fall, vote like your life and the future of humanity depend on it! Because they do!

 

PWS

09-27-20

WE ALWAYS KNEW THE GOP SENATE 🤮 WAS A HAVEN FOR SLEAZE-BALLS — So Why Be Surprised When They Act The Part? — The Solution Is Simple — Vote ‘Em Out!  — Start Rebuilding Our Democratic Republic Before It’s Too Late!

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1933-2020
Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States, Photographer: Steve Petteway
Public Realm
Karen Tumulty
Karen Tumulty
Political Columnist
Photo: Rick Reinhard via Inter-American Dialogue
Creative Commons License

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/20/senate-republicans-are-showing-us-why-they-should-lose-their-majority/

Karen Tumulty in WashPost:

. . . .

In fact, McConnell’s actions are totally in keeping with the opportunism with which he has led the Senate. Given a chance, he will always abuse his power. Branding McConnell a hypocrite misses the point. Hypocrisy — coupled with an utter lack of shame — is not a character fault in his eyes. It is a management style, a means to an end.

[Obituary: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Supreme Court justice and legal pioneer for gender equality, dies at 87]

And would we have expected anything different from Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), the shape-shifting chairman of the Judiciary Committee?

Back in the days when he pretended to care about something more than sucking up to power, Graham used to say Republicans would have to live with what they had done to Obama’s 2016 nominee, Merrick Garland. In October 2018, shortly before taking the gavel of the committee that will consider Trump’s nomination, Graham promised: “If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait till the next election.”

Now — surprise! — Graham has promised, via Twitter: “I will support President @realDonaldTrump in any effort to move forward regarding the recent vacancy created by the passing of Justice Ginsburg.” His rationale, if you can dignify it by calling it that, is that Democrats did things that offended him. So it’s payback time.

Oh, and let’s consider the sanctimonious and pseudointellectual Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), whom Trump has said he would consider for future openings on the court. When running for president in early 2016, he loftily declared to NBC’s Chuck Todd: “It has been 80 years since a Supreme Court vacancy was nominated and confirmed in an election year. There is a long tradition that you don’t do this in an election year. And what this means, Chuck, is we ought to make the 2016 election a referendum on the Supreme Court.”

What Cruz said wasn’t true, as is so often the case. There had indeed been instances of presidential nominees being confirmed during election years. In February 1988, a Democratic-led Senate voted 97-0 to put Ronald Reagan’s pick, Anthony M. Kennedy, on the court.

But this was only the beginning for Cruz. When it still appeared that Hillary Clinton would win in 2016, he also suggested that the court could get along just fine with only eight members indefinitely. Now — surprise! — Cruz is warning that having an even number of justices constitutes a “grave danger.”

. . . .

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

Read Karen’s complete op-ed at the link at the link.

As political sage Willie Nelson would say: “Vote ‘Em Out, Vote ‘Em Out!”

The best, perhaps only, way to honor RGB’s legacy and life work is to remove from office the party of inhumanity, inequality, and unbridled corruption who would spit and stomp on her legacy, NOW! Think about the “cultists” running around in “Fill Her Seat” shirts! Do you want these “princes and princesses of darkness, ignorance, bias, racism, and institutionalized inequality” to be running YOUR nation and determining the future of YOUR children and grandchildren? Pull out all the stops, open your wallets, and tell all your family, friends, and neighbors to register and vote for Joe and Kamala. It’s clearly “the last stand” for American democracy and human decency as we envision it (but also a great opportunity to make America better by voting for Biden/Harris)!

PWS

09-22-20

WHAT TOOK THEM SO LONG ⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️— “Courtside” Has Been “Outing” The Outrageous  Scofflaw Conduct Of The Trump Regime Almost From Its Inception — Finally, It’s Dawning On The WashPost & Other “Mainstream” Media That We Have A Rogue Regime & An Anti-Democracy Party Seeking To Dismantle Our Republic & Replace It With A White Nationalist Kakistocracy!

Trump Clown
U Donald J. Trump
Famous American Clown
(Officially titled “Ass Clown”)
Artist: Scott Scheidly
Orlando, FL
Reproduced by permission

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/18/trump-law-checks-balances/

From the WashPost Editorial Board:

President Trump promised in 2016 that he would protect the Constitution’s “Article I, Article II, Article XII.” (There is no Article XII.) Instead, he has shown how fragile the constitutional order can be when a president does not respect the rule of law. He has not grown into the office; instead, he has learned how to more effectively abuse its powers. The damage of a second term might be irreparable.

Our Democracy in Peril

Part seven of a series of editorials on the damage President Trump has caused — and the danger he would pose in a second term.

A president’s core responsibility is to use the awesome power of his office fairly and with neutrality. Mr. Trump has shown that he has a different understanding: The law is a weapon with which to reward loyalists, punish enemies and frighten everyone else to fall in line.

His distortion of the criminal justice system began within months of his inauguration. When FBI Director James B. Comey tried to explain the proper relationship between the president and the FBI, Mr. Trump demanded loyalty and asked the FBI director to go easy on his former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Mr. Comey declined to promise the former or do the latter, and the president fired him.

The tumult that Mr. Comey’s dismissal elicited might have taught a lesson to a more sensible person: There is substance and expectation behind the presidential oath’s pledge to faithfully execute the laws. Mr. Trump did not learn that lesson. His pick for attorney general, Jeff Sessions, properly recused himself from the federal investigation into Russia’s attack on the 2016 U.S. presidential election — and any coordination with the Trump campaign — leading to the appointment of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. So Mr. Trump viciously attacked Mr. Sessions, and then fired him, too.

In part because the president’s staff more effectively restrained him back then, the special counsel was allowed to complete his investigation relatively unhindered. But Mr. Trump had no patience for standard Justice Department procedure — recusal when conflicts of interests may exist, special care to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. He reportedly complained that he needed a “Roy Cohn” at the Justice Department — that is, an aggressive protector of his personal interests. So, after firing Mr. Sessions, he hired an attorney general with no apparent concern about the appearance or reality of impropriety, William P. Barr.

Whether out of ideological fervor or fear of Mr. Trump’s wrath, Mr. Barr has aided the president’s friends, hurt his enemies and vociferously attacked anyone who has found these actions untoward. Mr. Barr sicced handpicked prosecutors on the Russia probe, despite independent investigations concluding it was warranted. Then Mr. Barr intervened to lessen the charging recommendation for Trump friend and convicted felon Roger Stone. Mr. Barr also ordered charges against Mr. Flynn, the admitted felon whom Mr. Trump had asked Mr. Comey to help, to be dropped. Yet another Justice Department official, FBI General Counsel Dana Boente, was fired after he opposed cooperating with the plot to clear Mr. Flynn.

Mr. Trump waited until after Senate Republicans voted to dismiss articles of impeachment in February to do more of his own dirty work. His White House already had issued illegal orders to prevent current or former executive branch officers from turning over documents or giving testimony to Congress, betting correctly that lawmakers would not be able to litigate the issue in time for the information they sought to matter. Free of the threat of removal, he committed revenge firings of impeachment witnesses who had only done their jobs and followed the law, including patriots such as Army Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman — and, for good measure, Mr. Vindman’s brother, who had nothing to do with impeachment.

Mr. Trump fired intelligence community inspector general Michael Atkinson for forwarding to Congress a whistleblower complaint that had implicated the president in his scheme to use public funds to extract political help from a foreign government. The message was clear: The lawful performance of one’s duties is secondary to protecting the president.

Mr. Trump commuted Mr. Stone’s sentence so that his friend would not have to serve one day, mocking the notion of equal justice before the law. He fired the inspector general tapped to monitor the administration’s coronavirus response programs, for reasons that are unclear, beyond his aversion to authentic oversight. The White House has inquisitors dedicated to rooting out federal staff who are insufficiently loyal to Mr. Trump, and they appear to be planning a broader purge after the November election.

Because the courts move slowly, the president discovered that he can sustain even the most egregious stonewalling and violations for years. The remaining checks would be Congress, but Republicans have almost uniformly chosen subservience to Mr. ‘Trump over fealty to the Constitution, and the executive branch, but Mr. Trump has sought to fire or cow anyone who would stand in the way of his lawlessness.

Last month brought two bright warning signs that the president feels ever-less inhibited. The Government Accountability Office found that Chad Wolf’s appointment as acting director of the Department of Homeland Security is illegal, yet Mr. Wolf is still there, overseeing a department that assisted in Mr. Trump’s alarming overreaction to protesters in Portland, Ore. Mr. Trump then used the White House for his Republican National Convention acceptance speech, which almost certainly resulted in violations of a law that prohibits federal resources from being used for political purposes. The New York Times reported that Mr. Trump “relished the fact that no one could do anything to stop him.”

Americans have long been taught that the U.S. political system has effective checks and balances. But in the past years, a frightening truth has emerged. Much of that balance has depended on the good character of the president, and there are surprisingly few ways to check a malign president from abusing the enormous powers of his office. Mr. Trump is committed to using those powers for his own personal ends, and he has slowly but surely chipped away at any limitations. How many would remain after four more years?

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

One reason it’s taken some folks so long to raise the alarm is because they lack understanding of our immigration and human rights laws and their foundational relationship to our democracy. Those of us who do, sounded the alarm early on! 

The lack of progressive immigration and human rights expertise and influence across all three branches of our Government and in much of the media has been a major factor in the rapid deterioration of our democracy. The progressive talent is out there in abundance; it’s just in the wrong place, outside of the power structure.

While I agree with the Post’s “bottom line,” I disagree somewhat with the analysis of why our Judicial System has failed so miserably when we most needed it. It’s not just an institutional weakness of “slowness;” it’s a defect in the qualifications, ideology, and character of too many GOP-appointed Federal Judges including the majority of our Supremes.

Yes, the wheels of justice can grind slowly. But, there is no institutional bar to integrity, creative emergency responses, or putting ideology aside to “do the right thing” for the rule of law and for human decency and human dignity. It’s happened before; but not this time around, with our nation in peril.

We saw an early example of the lack of legal and moral leadership on our highest Court with the invidious and blatantly unconstitutional and outright fraudulent “Muslim Ban.” 

The lower Federal Courts reacted immediately with proper urgency to “just say no” to this invidious, unconstitutional, dishonest political gimmick. Because their answer clearly was correct, the Supremes had only to reinforce that message to the regime — that Trump would be required to operate within the law and to conduct himself with professionalism, honesty, and the same modicum of human decency exhibited by all other Presidents. This should have been “a piece of cake” and a golden moment for the Court to assert its independence and reinforce human decency regardless of ideology.

Rather than upholding and reinforcing this courageous and timely conduct by their subordinate jurists, the Supremes improperly and incorrectly undermined them. Then, after unnecessary delay, they let the Trump bigot/scofflaws/liars off the hook. The rout of honesty, human dignity, and our Constitution was on!

Since then, the Roberts Court has engaged in a “pattern or practice” of improper intervention to disable timely actions by the lower courts and thereby aid the White Nationalist regime’s illegal, racism-driven actions and unethical legal tactics. Nowhere has that been worse than in the gross and deadly erosion of immigrants’ rights and human rights. Real human beings continue to suffer grotesque degradations and die because some Justices wouldn’t do their jobs! 

Roberts & Co. should spend some time suffering with their fellow humans in the squalid camps in Mexico they helped create; in dangerous and disgusting DHS detention that falls below standards we would inflict on convicted felons; in “baby jails;” on flights returning refugees to danger after not even taking the time to fairly listen and evaluate their claims; in “safe” third countries that are actually functionally war zones without functioning legal systems, let alone asylum systems, where corrupt regimes have neither the interest nor the ability to protect those being persecuted; or in our “Modern Star Chambers” known as “Immigration Courts” where maliciously incompetent management and a systemic contempt for due process actually threatens the lives of not only migrants, but also lawyers on both sides, the “judges,” and “court” staff. 

Too many “righty judges” exist outside the reality of the daily human misery inflicted on others by their intransigence and warped anti-humanity ideology! Even some so-called  “liberal” judges too often live in an “intellectual bubble” far removed from the unending ugliness and human despair daily unfolding at the “retail level of our justice system” — known as Immigration “Courts” that these days are nothing remotely resembling actual “courts.”

Those rights of the most vulnerable among us being ground into mush are all of our rights to equal justice and fundamental fairness under law. The failure to stand up for equal justice under law and social justice for all is currently ripping our nation apart and fueling a resurgence of Jim Crow racism.

Life tenure insures that our judiciary will only change over time. But, more anti-democracy, right wing jurists on our Federal Bench will exponentially decrease our chances of saving our republic. And, we can be sure that the Trump/Mitch pick to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg will push American Justice to the precipice.

We need fundamental changes in what type of persons with what type of values control and comprise all three Branches of our Government. We  must start now, before it is too late. No system will stand up to the actions of individuals who don’t believe in its fundamental Constitutional guarantees of due process, fundamental fairness, and equal justice for all persons under law! 

It’s also long past time for future Democratic Administrations aggressively to embrace and elevate the pool of tremendous legal expertise, administrative talent, moral and intellectual courage, and proven problem solving ability now out there in the private, academic, and NGO human rights and immigrants’ rights community! 

These are the “anti-Stephen-Millers,” “anti Billy-the-Bigots,” and “anti-Wolfmans,” who would strive to make our Constitutional promises finally come alive for all Americans, insure equality for all before the law, and make our nation a better place for everyone, not just the privileged and powerful. Government utilizing the skills of smart, practical, humane problem solvers would also be much more efficient in spending our tax dollars than the current Government of bigots and incompetents driven by extreme bias, an exclusive vision, and highly counterproductive ideologies!

This Fall, vote like your life and the future of our Constitutional republic depend on it. Because they most certainly do!

PWS

09-19-20

⚰️☠️🏴‍☠️KILLERS ON THE LOOSE, ON YOUR PAYROLL! — Whistleblower Report Shows How  Corrupt Regime “War Criminals” Have Intentionally Falsified Information To Cover Up Deadly Conditions In Northern Triangle, Thereby Potentially Condemning Refugees To Death Without Due Process — Too Many Article III Judges Have Disingenuously Used “Standards Of Review” & Other Dishonest “Legal Gimmicks” To Hide Their Own Failures To Critically Examine Bogus Asylum Denials & Overtly Racist Restrictionist Policies Flowing From The Twisted Mind Of Neo-Nazi Stephen Miller!

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

https://www.justsecurity.org/72451/whistleblower-dhs-suppressed-reports-on-central-america-and-inflated-risk-of-terrorist-border-crossers/

Susan Gzesh in Just Security:

. . . .

U.S. law and the United Nations Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees also require the United States to accept political asylum claims presented at the U.S. border and to not return applicants to a place where their “life or freedom would be threatened.” These conditions were, of course, not met with respect to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. The Trump administration later ceased referring to the agreements with these Central American countries as “Safe Third Country” agreements and used the term “Asylum Cooperation Agreements,” perhaps in a cynical attempt to avoid U.S. law and regulations.

What Murphy’s Complaint Reveals

According to his whistleblower complaint (footnote 1 at pages 9-10) and earlier anonymous reports he filed with the DHS Office of Inspector General, career DHS intelligence official Brian Murphy presented intelligence reports to political appointees in DHS which found “high levels of corruption, violence, and poor economic conditions” in all three countries. It was no surprise that Murphy’s complaint recounts that in December 2019, as the Trump administration was sending the first asylum seekers to Central America, then Acting Assistant Secretary of DHS Ken Cuccinelli ordered Murphy to change those reports.

According to Murphy, Cuccinelli not only claimed the reports must be false, but also attributed them to forces within the intelligence community hostile to the President. He accused “unknown ‘deep state intelligence analysts’ of compiling intelligence information to undermine President Donald J. Trump’s policy objectives with respect to asylum.” According to Murphy, Cuccinelli further ordered him to identify those “who compiled the intelligence reports and to either fire or reassign them immediately” (see page 9 of Murphy’s complaint).

With respect to the policy rationale to support spending millions of dollars on a border wall,  Murphy’s complaint recounts how he was asked to reinterpret and rewrite intelligence reports about Known or Suspected Terrorists (KSTs) attempting to enter the United States from Mexico to fit the White House’s policy arguments about the need for a wall. In several meetings during 2018 and 2019, Murphy delivered intelligence to then DHS-Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and other officials that the actual number of individually-documented KSTs was very tiny. Despite Murphy’s briefings, Nielsen and other officials in DHS issued documents and gave congressional briefings in which they greatly exaggerated the numbers, inflating a figure of 3 KSTs to over 3,000. (Murphy’s attorney has provided an amended complaint to correct an error in the original version of these events.) At one meeting in December 2019, after Murphy contradicted his superiors regarding the number of KSTs crossing into the United States, he was removed from the meeting by now interim DHS Secretary Chad Wolf (as noted in his amended complaint at pages 5-8).

Brian Murphy’s Whistleblower complaint confirms what the public has seen so often: White House officials and political appointees in federal agencies willing to hide carefully investigated and proven facts in order to substitute lies more in keeping with White House policy goals.

DHS Secretary-designate Chad Wolf is supposed to testify before a House panel later this week.  Let’s hope he gives truthful answers to all the questions raised in Brian Murphy’s complaint.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of Susan’s article at the link.

Hey, 3 known “suspected” terrorists vs 3,000! What’s the big deal? They both contain the number “3.”

This is the type of demonstrable nonsense that the Supremes’ majority disingenuously accepts in letting the regime declare bogus “immigration emergencies” and stomp all over the legal and constitutional rights of asylum seekers! Real people die, get tortured, and have their lives destroyed because elitist judges have removed themselves from humanity and kowtow to a scofflaw, corrupt, immoral Executive. This is what a failing democracy and a complicit judiciary look like.

I appreciate Susan’s optimistic hope in the last paragraph. But, the chance “Wolfman,” an “illegal,” will tell Congress the truth under oath is zero. 

All three branches of our failing Government have conspired to insure that his lies and illegal actions will have no meaningful consequences for him or any of his co-conspirators. Only the health, safety, and lives of his, Trump’s, Miller’s, Barr’s, Session’s, and “Cooch’s” victims are on the line.

In the meantime, refugees entitled to protection under U.S. and international law continue to be returned to dangerous and deadly conditions in the Northern Triangle without due process or indeed any process whatsoever. Indeed, with the help of disingenuous Federal Courts, the regime has effectively repealed U.S. protection laws without enacting a single piece of legislation!

One of many unfortunate “practical consequences” of the Article IIIs overall lack of critical review: In addition to having to fight the unethical and often frivolous litigation “strategies and gimmicks” of the regime and the DOJ, advocates, often serving pro bono or low bono, now bear the burden of preparing their own “Country Reports” to rebut the falsified, misleading, and highly politicized versions of country conditions presented in DOS “Country Reports.” 

The latter used to be considered the “international gold standard” for determining country conditions in asylum and refugee adjudications (although true expert judges and adjudicators still viewed them critically). Now, they are little more than “political propaganda screeds” for a corrupt, White Nationalist, bigoted regime. 

But, most Article IIIs have been intentionally or negligently “asleep at the switch,” still disingenuously “deferring” to these deeply defective and intentionally misleading, sometimes fictionalized, accounts. For example, almost any legitimate asylum expert would say that Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions’s largely fictionalized account of conditions for women in El Salvador, presented in Matter of A-B-, 27 I&N Dec. 316 (AG 2018), bears little resemble to reality.

Of course, the political branches have authority to set policy — but only within Constitutional and legal limits. Clearly, that authority to direct the activities of civil servants does not include authority to ignore facts and create false narratives in support of overtly racist, religiously bigoted, or improperly politically punitive agendas. Any Federal Judge who looks the other way when such overtly invidious objectives and motives are at work is derelict in his or her duty.

Our democracy is in deep trouble. And, to get it fully functioning and finally achieve the promise of equal justice under law, we eventually will need a better qualified Article III Judiciary.

The sooner that process starts, the better. It will take years or even generations to reform the life-tenured judiciary and get better qualified women and men on the bench. Judges who actually reflect the diversity of America and are unswervingly committed to equal justice for all under our laws.

We need Federal Judges, at all levels from the Supremes to the Immigration Courts, who actually know and understand asylum and human rights laws and their human dimension. Judges who have the courage and integrity to stand up for the rights of all persons for due process, fundamental fairness, and to be treated with human dignity, free of the overt racist bias demonstrated by Trump, Miller, and others.

In the end, the rights of foreign nationals to be treated as “persons” under our law are all of our rights! The dehumanization and “Dred Scottification” of asylum seekers by the regime and the Federal Courts diminishes each of us, including those complicit “go along to get along” judges who fail to see their own humanity in the faces and lives of those they oppress and fail to protect.

For now, they are largely getting away with it. But, eventually, somewhere down the line, there will be a “judgement of history” for their inhumanity and dereliction of duty. Of that, I am certain!

 Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-17-20

DESTROYING DEMOCRACY: BILLY THE BIGOT GOES TO WAR WITH DOJ — Rips Career Prosecutors — Advocates Politicization Of Justice In America!🏴‍☠️

Billy Barr Consigliere Artist: Par Begley Salt Lake Tribune Reproduced under license, Large
Bill Barr Consigliere
Artist: Pat Bagley
Salt Lake Tribune
Reproduced under license

https://apple.news/ABgTGgYnLQRq-WHQT_ZVQ8g

BY DEVLIN BARRETT AND MATT ZAPOTOSKY report for WashPost:

Attorney General William P. Barr delivered a scathing critique of his own Justice Department Wednesday night, insisting on his absolute authority to overrule career staff, whom he said too often injected themselves into politics and went “headhunting” for high profile targets.

Speaking at an event hosted by Hillsdale College, a school with deep ties to conservative politics, Barr directly addressed the criticism that has been building for months inside the department toward his heavy hand in politically sensitive cases, particularly those involving associates of President Trump.

“What exactly am I interfering with?” he asked. “Under the law, all prosecutorial power is invested in the attorney general.”

Barr’s comments were remarkable, in that the head of the Justice Department catalogued all of the ways in which he thought his agency had gone astray over the years, and in its current formulation harms the body politic. Barr has drawn considerable criticism for intervening in criminal cases in ways that help benefit the president’s friends.

Barr said it was he, not career officials, who have the ultimate authority to decide how cases should be handled, and derided less-experienced, less-senior bureaucrats who current and former prosecutors have long insisted should be left to handle their cases free from interference from political appointees.

Barr said that argument, in essence, means “the will of the most junior member of the organization” would make decisions, but he insisted he would not “blindly” defer to “whatever those subordinates want to do.”

“Letting the most junior members set the agenda might be a good philosophy for a Montessori preschool, but it is no way to run a federal agency,” Barr said.

The attorney general, the nation’s top law enforcement official, spent much of the speech eviscerating the idea of the Justice Department as a place where nonpolitical career prosecutors should be left to decide how sensitive cases are resolved.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of the article at the link.

I’m sure this does wonders for morale at the DOJ! But, demoralizing all the career lawyers and pushing them out the door appears to be part of the program. After all, the regime initially tried to “buy out” the holdover members of the BIA. Morale at the Immigration “Courts” is already at an all-time low!

Career civil servants at the DOJ and elsewhere actually work for the people of the U.S., not personally for Billy, other political appointees, or the President. Government employees take an oath to uphold the Constitution, not of loyalty to the President, the AG, or any other political official. 

Billy clearly has been running the Immigration “Courts” as a politically weaponized part of the regime’s White Nationalist, authoritarian, race-driven immigration enforcement agenda. Funny how long it has taken the overall legal community to see that Barr basically considers the entire legal system, including the Article III Courts, as just as subservient as the Immigration “Courts.” And, to date, the Supremes have done little to discourage that view.

As former Deputy AG Don Ayer pointed out in his recent Amicus podcast, featured here on Courtside, Billy is not serving the people of the U.S., for whom he has nothing but contempt unless they happen to share his bigoted right wing views. https://immigrationcourtside.com/2020/09/13/america-on-red-alert%f0%9f%86%98%f0%9f%8f%b4%e2%80%8d%e2%98%a0%ef%b8%8f%f0%9f%a4%ae%e2%98%a0%ef%b8%8f-theocrat-autocrat-liar-race-baiter-anti-democracy-activist-billy-the-bigot-barr-conspires-wit/

He is carrying out a personal agenda of replacing representative democracy with an authoritarian state where everybody and everything is subservient to an all-powerful totally unconstitutional “Unitary Executive” (actually a bogus right-wing “invented concept” with no actual legitimate basis in American political history, as cogently “debunked” by Ayer in his podcast). That certainly makes him one of the two most dangerous men in America!

Billy did say one thing I agree with. Politicos, particularly hacks like Billy and Trump, can be held accountable at the ballot box. Indeed, given the feckless performance of the GOP Senate and the overall failure of the Federal Courts to stand up to tyranny, that appears to be the very last hope for our democracy.

Had enough of the Liar in Chief, Billy the Bigot, Moscow Mitch, & Co? Vote the GOP out of every public office at every level this Fall, while there is still a chance to save our democracy!

This Fall, vote like your life and the continued existence of American democracy depend on it! Because they do!

PWS

09-17-20

THE GIBSON REPORT — 09-15-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

THE GIBSON REPORT — 09-15-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

Elizabeth Gibson
Elizabeth Gibson
Attorney, NY Legal Assistance Group
Publisher of “The Gibson Report”

COVID-19

Note: Policies are rapidly changing, so please verify the latest information on the relevant government websites and with colleagues on listservs as best you can.

 

New

 

Closures

 

Guidance:

 

TOP NEWS

 

Panel Tosses Nationwide Freeze on Trump’s Public Charge Rule

Bloomberg: A nationwide injunction blocking a Trump administration rule that denies legal status to immigrants receiving public assistance was stayed by a Second Circuit panel. The Southern District of New York…likely lacked jurisdiction to enter the injunction while the appeal of its previously-issued injunction was pending, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said Sept. 11.

 

USCIS Wants Sponsors To Repay Gov’t For Benefits

Law360: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on Thursday announced an initiative to hold immigrant sponsors legally responsible for reimbursing the government for benefits used by their immigrant sponsees.

 

US seeks sweeping DNA collection of immigrants, sponsors

AlJazeera: Its proposal also vastly expands the biological information that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) collects beyond genetic material to include eye scans, voiceprints, and palm prints, the department’s US Citizenship and Immigration Services said in a notice published in the Federal Register.

 

After a Pandemic Pause, ICE Resumes Deportation Arrests

NYT: Since mid-July, immigration agents have taken more than 2,000 people into custody from their homes, workplaces and other sites, including a post office, often after staking them out for days.

 

The Life and Death of Administrative Closure

TRAC: TRAC’s detailed analysis of the court records on administrative closure yields four key findings. First, administrative closure has been routinely used by Immigration Judges to manage their growing caseloads as well as manage the unresolved overlapping of jurisdictions between the EOIR and other immigration agencies. Second, TRAC finds that far from contributing to the backlog, administrative closure has helped reduce the backlog. Third, data from the Immigration Courts show that immigrants who obtain administrative closure are likely to have followed legal requirements and obtain lawful status. Fourth, the EOIR significantly misrepresented the data it used to justify this rule.

 

Immigration to New York City Declines, Amplifying Economic Concerns

WSJ: Immigration to New York City dropped 45% between 2016 and 2019, with about 34,000 immigrants moving to the city last year compared with 62,000 in 2016, according to an analysis of U.S. Census Bureau population estimates by William Frey, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. City officials and immigration advocates say tighter federal immigration policies and delays in processing visa applications during the pandemic ave reduced the flow of transplants.

 

US revokes visas for 1,000 Chinese students deemed security risk

BBC: The move follows a proclamation by President Donald Trump in May aimed at Chinese nationals suspected of having ties to the military. He said some had stolen data and intellectual property. China has accused the US of racial discrimination. Nearly 370,000 students from China enrolled at US universities in 2018-19.

 

Americans are renouncing U.S. citizenship in record numbers – but maybe not for the reasons you think

The Conversation: In surveys and testimonials, these people say they’re dropping their U.S. citizenship because American anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism regulations make it too onerous and expensive to keep.

 

DHS Whistleblower Complaint Includes Surprising Insights on Immigration Policy

ImmProf: Mr. Murphy believes former DHS head Kirtjen Nielsen presented Congress with “knowing and deliberate submission of false material information” about the number of [known or suspected terrorists] crossing the southern border.

 

Immigration agency cuts of 800 Kansas City jobs expected to trigger backlogs, delays nationwide

Kansas Reflector: Members of Congress from the Kansas City region scored a victory last month when a federal immigration agency backed off plans that would have led to thousands of layoffs of government employees in the metro area. But their relief was short lived, as the agency now intends to furlough 800 of its local private contractors instead — a move expected to set off immigration backlogs and processing delays throughout the nation.

 

Trump administration considers postponing refugee admissions, U.S. official says

Reuters: The refugee cap was cut to 18,000 this year, the lowest level since the modern-day program began in 1980. So far, roughly half that many refugees have been let in as increased vetting and the coronavirus pandemic have slowed arrivals.

 

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

 

Federal court blocks Trump plan to exclude undocumented immigrants from census count used to allocate seats in Congress

CNN: The court ruled Thursday that the President’s July order violates the federal laws that set out how congressional seats are apportioned, and granted a permanent injunction blocking the rule. The court did not decide if the President’s memorandum violates the Constitution.

 

Md. Judge Finds Wolf Likely Appointed Illegally At DHS

Law 360: A Maryland federal judge held Friday that acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf was likely illegally appointed, and temporarily barred the Trump administration from enforcing new asylum restrictions on members of the advocacy organizations that challenged them.

 

District Court Issues Consent Order and Final Statement in Class Action Challenging Delay in Issuance of EADs

On 8/21/20, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Eastern Division) entered a Consent Order and Final Statement in the class action lawsuit challenging delays in issuance of EADs by USCIS following approval of Form I-765 applications. (Subramanya v. USCIS, 8/21/20) AILA Doc. No. 20080438

 

Immigrants detained at Buffalo Federal Detention Center in Batavia sue contractor over $1-a-day work program

Batavian: The Worker Justice Center of New York (WJCNY) has filed suit in New York’s Supreme Court against the private, for-profit company, Akima Global Services (AGS), for its exploitation of detained immigrants at the Buffalo Federal Detention Center in Batavia.

 

CA1 Vacates Preliminary Injunction Against ICE Courthouse Arrests in Massachusetts

The court held that the district court abused its discretion in finding plaintiffs were likely to succeed in showing that the INA implicitly incorporates a common law privilege against civil arrests for individuals attending court on official business. (Ryan, et al. v. ICE, et al., 9/1/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090831

 

CA1 Upholds BIA’s Denial of Motion to Reconsider Where Petitioner’s VAWA Self-Petition Was Pending

Where the petitioner had premised his motion to reopen on a pending Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petition, the court upheld the denial of his motion to reconsider, holding that the BIA did not err by finding he had failed to make a prima facie case. (Franjul-Soto v. Barr, 8/24/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090331

 

CA1 Finds Petitioner’s Conviction in Massachusetts for Drug Possession with Intent to Distribute Was an Aggravated Felony

The court held that the petitioner’s Massachusetts’ drug conviction for possession with the intent to distribute amounted to “illicit trafficking in a controlled substance” and was thus an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(B). (Soto-Vittini v. Barr, 8/24/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090330

 

CA2 Stays Nationwide Injunction on DHS Public Charge Rule

The court stayed the district court’s July 29, 2020, preliminary injunction in the DHS public charge rule, thus allowing USCIS to require the Form I-944 in all jurisdictions. (State of New York, et al., v. DHS, et al., 9/11/20) AILA Doc. No. 20091190

 

CA3 Upholds Asylum Denial After Finding Syrian Militia Is a Tier III Terrorist Organization Under INA §212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(III)

The court upheld the denial of asylum to the petitioner, who fled involuntary military service in a government-controlled militia in Syria, finding that the militia was not beyond the scope of the Tier III provision under INA §212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(III). (A.A. v. Att’y Gen., 9/2/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090834

 

CA3 Holds That “Substantial Evidence” Standard of Review Applies to an IJ’s Reasonable Fear Determinations

After holding that the substantial evidence standard applies to an IJ’s reasonable fear determinations, the court found that substantial evidence supported the IJ’s conclusion that the Mexican petitioner did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture. (Romero v. Att’y Gen., 8/25/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090333

 

CA3 Says It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Discretionary Denial of Petitioner’s Motion for Certification of Late-Filed Appeal

Concluding that the “settled course exception” did not apply in the context of the case, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary decision to decline to self-certify the petitioner’s late-filed appeal. (Abdulla v. Att’y Gen., 8/20/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090332

 

CA4 Finds Petitioner Failed to Establish That Salvadoran Government Was Unable or Unwilling to Control MS-13

Finding that the record did not compel the conclusion that the Salvadoran government was unwilling or unable to control the MS-13 gang, the court upheld the IJ and BIA’s conclusion that the petitioner did not qualify as a refugee under INA §101(a)(42)(A). (Portillo-Flores v. Barr, 9/2/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090835

 

CA5 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Where BIA Found Petitioner Had Failed to Pursue His Rights Diligently

The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in finding that the Mexican petitioner’s motion to reopen, which was filed seven years after the entry of his removal order, was untimely and not entitled to equitable tolling. (Flores-Moreno v. Barr, 8/24/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090334

 

CA8 Finds District Court Correctly Dismissed Petitioners’ Request for Nunc Pro Tunc Adjustment of Status

The court held that the district court properly dismissed the petitioners’ request for nunc pro tunc adjustment of status, because they had failed to adjust their status to lawful permanent residents, and thus could not meet the requirements for naturalization. (Al-Saadoon v. Barr, 8/28/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090336

 

CA8 Affirms Denial of EAJA Attorney’s Fees Where Government’s Position Was Substantially Justified

The court held that the district court did not err in concluding that the government’s litigation position was substantially justified, and thus affirmed the district court’s order denying the petitioner’s attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). (Garcia v. Barr, 8/20/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090335

 

CA9 Finds Domestic Violence Waiver Under Special Rule Cancellation of Removal Did Not Cover Petitioner’s Drug Conviction

The court held that the domestic violence waiver established under INA §237(a)(7), and made applicable to cancellation of removal by INA §240A(b)(5), is limited to crimes of domestic violence and stalking, and thus did not cover petitioner’s drug conviction. (Jaimes-Cardenas v. Barr, 9/1/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090836

 

CA9 Reverses IJ’s and BIA’s Adverse Credibility Determination as to Asylum-Seeking Member of Minority Somali Clan

The court held that substantial evidence did not support the IJ’s and BIA’s adverse credibility determination, finding that, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the evidence compelled the conclusion that the Somali petitioner’s testimony was credible. (Iman v. Barr, 8/25/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090339

 

CA9 Defers to BIA’s Interpretation of Perjury and Holds That Conviction for Perjury in California Is an Aggravated Felony

Deferring to the BIA’s interpretation of “perjury” as used in the aggravated felony definition of INA §101(a)(43)(S), the court held that perjury under section 118(a) of the California Penal Code is an aggravated felony. (Yim v. Barr, 8/25/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090338

 

CA9 Says Petitioner Seeking to Reopen Proceedings Was Not Required to Attach a New Application for Relief

The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in finding that a noncitizen who seeks to reopen an earlier application for relief, and attaches that application to the motion, has failed to attach the “appropriate application for relief” under 8 CFR §1003.2(c)(1). (Aliyev v. Barr, 8/24/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090337

 

CA11 Finds BIA Erred in Retroactively Applying Stop-Time Rule to Pre-IIRAIRA Conviction of Petitioner Seeking Cancellation

The court held that because the petitioner had pled guilty before the stop-time rule was enacted via the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), applying the stop-time rule retroactively to his conviction was impermissible. (Rendon v. Att’y Gen., 8/26/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090340

 

Matter of R-C-R, 28 I&N Dec. 74 (BIA 2020)

(1) After an Immigration Judge has set a firm deadline for filing an application for relief, the respondent’s opportunity to file the application may be deemed waived, prior to a scheduled hearing, if the deadline passes without submission of the application and no good cause for noncompliance has been shown.

(2) The respondent failed to meet his burden of establishing that he was deprived of a full and fair hearing where he has not shown that conducting the hearing by video conference interfered with his communication with the Immigration Judge or otherwise prejudiced him as a result of technical problems with the video equipment.

 

District Court Grants Preliminary Injunction After Finding It Has Jurisdiction to Review USCIS’s Revocation of I-140 Petition

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that it has jurisdiction to review USCIS’s revocation of the plaintiff’s I-140 petition, and granted the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction. (6901 Coral Way Management, LLC, et al., v. Cucinelli, et al., 9/10/20) AILA Doc. No. 20091135

 

USCIS Launches SAVE Initiative to Collect Information on Sponsor Deeming and Agency Reimbursement

USCIS launched a new SAVE initiative asking agencies that administer federal means-tested benefits to share how they use sponsorship information in sponsor assessment and agency reimbursement processes, with the goal of helping agencies make eligibility determinations and hold sponsors accountable. AILA Doc. No. 20091032

 

DHS Proposed Rule on Use and Collection of Biometrics

DHS proposed rule on the use and collection of biometrics in the enforcement and administration of immigration laws. Comments on the rule are due on 10/13/20, with comments on associated proposed form revisions due 11/10/20. (85 FR 56338, 9/11/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090494

 

CDC Rule Finalizing Interim Final Rule on Foreign Quarantine

CDC rule finalizing the interim final rule published at 85 FR 16559, which provided a procedure for the CDC to suspend the introduction of persons into the United States from designated foreign countries or places for public health purposes. (85 FR 56424, 9/11/20) AILA Doc. No. 20090833

 

DHS Publishes Privacy Impact Assessment on Immigration-Related Information Sharing with U.S. Census Bureau

DHS released a PIA examining the privacy impact of immigration-related information sharing between DHS and the Census Bureau. DHS is providing administrative records to the Bureau to assist in determining the number of citizens, LPRs, and unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. during the 2020 census. AILA Doc. No. 19122704

 

RESOURCES

 

 

EVENTS

 

Note: Check with organizers regarding cancellations/changes

 

ImmProf

 

Monday, September 14, 2020

Sunday, September 13, 2020

Saturday, September 12, 2020

Friday, September 11, 2020

Thursday, September 10, 2020

Wednesday, September 9, 2020

Tuesday, September 8, 2020

Monday, September 7, 2020

 

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

So much outrageous conduct by the regime. So little effective “pushback” from the other two branches who largely continue to treat the dissolution of democracy as “just another day at the office.”

With so much “bad stuff” to choose from, here’s my personal “favorite of the week:”

DHS Whistleblower Complaint Includes Surprising Insights on Immigration Policy

ImmProf: Mr. Murphy believes former DHS head Kirtjen Nielsen presented Congress with “knowing and deliberate submission of false material information” about the number of [known or suspected terrorists] crossing the southern border.

Cabinet Secretary lies to Congress. Regime uses lies to proclaim a bogus “national security emergency” at the Southern Border. Some Federal Courts, including the Supremes, accept the pretexts for furthering the Trump/Miller racist, White Nationalist anti-asylum-seekers of color agenda. 

Nothing happens to the liars. Congress and the Federal Courts “normalize” lying as a “standard Executive practice,” defer to it, and allow regime to impose potential death sentences without due process. Victims are just a bunch of largely non-White vulnerable humans that righty Federal Judges don’t believe are human or “persons” under our law.

As one of my esteemed, now retired, Arlington colleagues used to say: “The system is broken.” 

But, disturbingly, this time it’s not just the Immigration Court system we’re talking about. It’s the whole justice system, the checks and balances, and the separation of powers set up by our Constitution. Lack of accountability for gross misconduct by public officials is the sign of a failing state.

I almost feel sorry for T. Dick Nixon. If he were in office today, the Watergate burglary, conspiracy, and cover-up would have been dismissed by the GOP politicos as “fake news.” And, today’s righty judges on the Supremes and the appellate courts would simply have looked they other way and made up legal gobbledygook and gibberish to cover for their supreme ruler.

Remember, part of Nixon’s downfall was the “missing 18 minutes” of the tapes. There’s nothing missing about the “Trump tapes.”

He’s recorded committing “criminal negligence” in office, lying about it, and endangering the lives and health of tens of thousands of Americans. Then, he and his stooges get up before the public and lie some more about what happened. Then, to prove he really doesn’t give a damn about the American people, he follows up by holding a rally that fails to comply with, and in fact mocks and disparages, his own Administration’s best health advice.

Nixon was a liar. But, I guess not a shameless enough one. And, he didn’t kill as many Americans.

Fortunately for Trump, the dead can’t vote. But, their families, friends, and colleagues can! How many more must die unnecessarily before we finally “throw the bum out” (with apologies to honest bums everywhere) and get a real President into office?’

PWS

09-15-20