Executive Order – Page 76 – immigrationcourtside.com

CRUEL, INHUMANE, INEFFECTIVE, WASTEFUL: New Report From CMS, KBI, & CBE Shows How Trump’s Racist Immigration Enforcement Policies Are Destroying & Dividing America, Not Protecting Us!

FINAL-Communities-in-Crisis-Report-ver-5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

A report of the , Center forMigration Studies, and Office of Justice and Ecology

Section 1: Introduction

A woman and her child waiting at the port of entry in Nogales, Sonora to be processed into the US asylum system. Photo: Greg Constantine.

KBI, CMS, and OJE Report November 2018Communities in Crisis: Interior Removals and

Their Human Consequences

“My oldest son asks, ‘Where are my rights as a US citizen? Where is my right to live with my family and have a home?’”

— Mother of three US citizen children and wife of detained immigrant

“My husband called and said that he had a normal check-in like every year. He went like always, but this time they arrested him. I asked why if everything was going well. He had a clean record. He is a good father. He is working to help our kids get ahead. We have two children who are citizens and we are fighting for them, so that they are good people and professionals. I didn’t see any reason for him to get arrested.”

— Woman whose husband was deported

“In my preaching, I guide and insist that it is important to be aware of our rights, to not have fear, and to know that we all are God’s children and need a piece of land in this planet. I try to remind them that they are immigrants but also human beings before anything else and that all human beings have rights.”

— Priest

Executive Summary

In late 2017, the Kino Border Initiative (KBI), the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS), and the Office of Justice and Ecology (OJE) of the Jesuit Conference of Canada and the United States initiated a study to examine the characteristics of deportees and the effects of deportation, and to place them in a broader policy context (Attachment A).1

The CRISIS Study (Catholic Removal Impact Survey in Society) included both quantitative and qualitative elements. During the first five months of 2018, KBI staff surveyed 133 deportees from the United States at its migrant shelter in Nogales, Sonora. Survey respondents were all Mexican nationals, all but one were men, and each had been living for a period of time in the United

1 KBI, which operates in Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Sonora, seeks “to promote US/Mexico border and immigration policies that affirm the dignity of the human person and a spirit of binational solidarity.” KBI provides humanitarian assistance and accompaniment to migrants; social and pastoral education with communities on both sides of the border; and research and advocacy. CMS is a think tank and an educational institute devoted to the study of international migration, to the promotion of understanding between immigrants and receiving communities, and to public policies that safeguard the dignity and rights of migrants, refugees, and newcomers. CMS is a member of the Scalabrini International Migration Network (SIMN), a global network of migrant shelters, service centers, and other institutions, and the Scalabrini Migration Study Centers. OJE of the Jesuit Conference of Canada and United States seeks to foster reconciliation on issues such as refugee protection, immigration, and economic, criminal, juvenile, and environmental justice.

2

KBI, CMS, and OJE Report November 2018

States.2 They had resided in 16 US states, the majority in Arizona, followed by Nevada, California, and Utah. The survey sought information on their US lives, the removal and detention process, and the impact of removal on them and their families (Attachment B).

The study also included one interview with a deportee (via Skype) and 20 interviews with the family members of deportees and other persons affected by deportation in Catholic parishes in Florida, Michigan, and Minnesota. The parishes — which the report will not identify in order to ensure the interviewees’ anonymity — were chosen based on their geographic, demographic, and sociopolitical diversity, their connections to the agencies conducting the study, and their ability to facilitate access to deportees, their families, and others impacted by deportation.

The interviews explored: (1) the impact of removals on deportees, their families, and other community members; (2) the deportation process; and (3) the relationship between deportees and their families (Attachment C). They provided an intimate, often raw look at the human consequences of deportation.

Long Tenure, Homeownership, Legal Status, and Community Engagement

By and large, survey respondents had built their lives, made their homes, and established long and deep ties in the United States.

On average, they had lived in the United States for 19.9 years.

More than half (56 percent) first entered the country as minors (below age 18), and 21 percent below age 10.

Thirty-eight percent reported having legal status in the United States, including 14.3 percent who were lawful permanent residents (LPRs).

Twenty-six percent had been US homeowners.

Fifty-two percent had participated in church activities, 34.1 percent regularly attended church services, and 9 percent had participated in community organizations.Family and Economic Ties and the Consequences of DeportationSurvey respondents had established strong family and economic ties in the United States. Deportation mostly severed these ties, and divided, devastated, and impoverished the affected families.

Seventy-eight percent of survey respondents had US citizen children.3

The average age of respondents’ children living in the United States was 14.9 and 33 percent were 10 years old or less.

Forty-two percent had US citizen spouses or partners.4

Ninety-six percent had been employed in the United States.2 The report uses the phrase “interior removals” to refer to the deportation of persons who have been living in the United States for a period of time.
3 Respondents were asked to list the age, residency, and citizenship status of up to five children.
4 This figure refers to respondents with spouses or domestic partners.

Communities in Crisis: Interior Removals and Their Human Consequences

On average, they had worked nearly 10 years in the same job and earned roughly $2,800 per month.

Respondents had an average of $142 in their possession at the time of their deportation.5

Deportees reported that they needed employment (78.2 percent), financial (68.4 percent), housing (56.4 percent), emotional (56.4 percent), and social integration (54.9 percent) assistance.

Most survey respondents reported that their spouse or partner in the United States did not have enough money to support their children (74 percent) or to live on (63 percent).

Respondents identified a range of close family members who depended on them financially prior to their deportation, including their mothers (72 percent), fathers (57 percent), and siblings (26 percent).

Forty percent reported having dependents with chronic health or psychological conditions, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and autism.

Nearly one-half (48.1 percent) said that their children — some of whom lived in the United States and some in Mexico — were experiencing difficulties in school.Plans to Return to the United StatesGiven the strong ties binding survey respondents to the United States, it comes as little surprise that:

Three-quarters (73.5 percent) reported that they planned to return to the United States.

Forty-five percent identified only a little or “not at all” with their country of birth.

Only one-third (35.4) percent reported feeling safe since their deportation.The Criminalization of DeportationThe Trump administration has regularly portrayed undocumented residents, migrants seeking to request asylum at the US-Mexico border, and deportees as criminals and security threats. Most survey respondents either had not been convicted of a crime or had committed an immigration or traffic offense prior to their deportation. Nevertheless, study participants described a deportation system that treated them as criminals and instilled fear in their communities.

Nearly one-half of respondents said they had not been convicted of a crime prior to their deportation.

Of the 37 respondents (51.4 percent) who reported having been convicted of a crime,6 more than one-third (35.1 percent) had been convicted of a traffic or immigration offense, 21.6 percent of a drug-related crime (including possession), and another 21.6 percent of a violent crime.75 Mexican pesos were converted into dollars using prevailing exchange rates on August 19, 2018.
6 Only 72 respondents answered this question.
7 The study classified these self-reported crimes based on the National Crime Information Center’s (NCIC) uniform offense codes.

3

4

KBI, CMS, and OJE Report November 2018

A high percent of respondents (65.2) reported that their deportation began with a police arrest, 30.3 percent reported having been arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and less than 1 percent by Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

The majority of apprehensions took place while respondents were driving (36.1 percent), at home (26.3 percent), or at work (6 percent).

Survey respondents spent an average of 96 days in immigrant detention. Most were detained for 30 days or less, and 17 percent were detained for 180 days or more.

Only 28 percent were able to secure legal counsel.

Roughly one-fourth of survey respondents reported spending no time in criminal custody and 22.6 percent spent a week or less prior to their deportation. However, 17.3 percent spent more than one year.RecommendationsThe CRISIS Study provides a snapshot of the Trump administration’s deportation policies and their effect on established US residents (deportees), families, and communities. In order to mitigate the harsh consequences of these policies and promote the integrity of families and communities, we make the following recommendations.
To the Department of Homeland Security:

Issue prosecutorial discretion guidelines that de-prioritize the arrest and removal of long- term residents; persons with US family members; and those without criminal records or with records for only minor offenses.

Use detention only as a “last resort” and employ the least restrictive means necessary — including supervised release and other alternatives to detention (ATDs) — to ensure appearances in court, check-ins with immigration officials, and possible removal.

Adhere to ICE’s National Detention Standards, which recognize the need for access to legal counsel, generous family visitation guidelines, transparency regarding the location of detainees, and humane conditions of confinement.To Congress:

Pass broad legislation to reduce family-based visa backlogs; to align US legal immigration policies with the nation’s economic, family, and humanitarian interests; to legalize the undocumented parents of US citizens and LPRs and undocumented persons who entered as children; and to expand equitable relief from removal.

Appropriate funding to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice at levels that align with the recommendations in this report and that, in particular, assume the principled exercise of prosecutorial discretion, reduced use of detention, and expansion of community-based ATDs and legal orientation programs.

Reduce funding to ICE in light of its indiscriminate enforcement policies and their negative impact on the safety and integrity of US families and communities.

Communities in Crisis: Interior Removals and Their Human Consequences

• Provide greater oversight of formal partnerships and collaboration between state and local police and ICE and CBP to ensure that these arrangements do not undermine community safety or lead to racial profiling.

To state and local police:

Collect data to measure the prevalence of pretextual police stops and arrests (intended to lead to removal) for minor criminal violations, with a focus on the extent to which such stops involve racial and ethnic minorities.

Limit collaboration with ICE and CBP to prevent local police from acting as immigration agents, to promote public safety, and to ensure that no group of residents fears reporting crimes or otherwise cooperating with the police.

Strengthen policies against racial bias in policing, and regularly train and evaluate law enforcement officers on adherence to these policies.

Adopt and implement policies — like municipal identification cards and driver’s licenses for the undocumented — that treat immigrants as full members of their communities.To faith communities:

Address the urgent priorities of immigrants, including the need for safe and welcoming spaces, deportation planning, transportation, access to legal representation, public safety, access to the police, and accompaniment to places where they might be vulnerable to arrest.

Prioritize pastoral service to immigrants and their families; fully incorporate them into all faith institutions, ministries, and programs; and educate nonimmigrant members and the broader public on the immense challenges facing immigrants.

Identify, collect, disseminate and implement best pastoral practices for accompanying and supporting deportees and their families at all stages of the removal process.

Advocate for the generous exercise of prosecutorial discretion; humane enforcement policies that prioritize family unity and cohesive communities; expanded legal avenues to regularized status; and strong citizenship policies.

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

Takeaways:

DHS must reinstate the use of prosecutorial discretion (“PD”) (of the type heavily used by every other law enforcement agency in America) in both enforcement actions and Immigration Courts;
- Under the toxic “leadership” of former AG Jeff Sessions the discretion of both DHS and EOIR to use sensible “PD” was basically eradicated;
DHS Enforcement is over funded to the point where money and resources are routinely wasted on counterproductive politically motivated initiatives;
- Congress should resist any further increases in DHS Enforcement funding until DHS shows better management, accountability, and reasonable use of existing resources.

PWS

11-13-18

TRUMPED: Nielsen Is A Sycophant Who Lied To Cover Her Boss’s Stupid, Cruel, & Often Illegal Antics On Immigration – Reportedly, She’s About To Learn That There’s No “Graceful Exit” From The Kakistocracy – “Trump puts people like Nielsen in the position of accounting for his whims and his counterfactual claims. His expectations for how much someone like Nielsen could accomplish when it comes to securing the border were almost definitely unreasonable. She tried to compensate for those shortcomings by saying things she couldn’t possibly have believed to boost Trump.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/13/kirstjen-nielsen-repeatedly-did-trumps-bidding-her-reward-an-unceremonious-impending-exit/?utm_term=.2e8283f31a2a

Aaron Blake reports for WashPost:

We may not be there yet, but there may come a point at which it’s very difficult to find well-qualified people willing to serve in President Trump’s Cabinet. And if we do, we’ll look back on Kirstjen Nielsen’s tenure as an early indicator.

The homeland security secretary appears set for an unceremonious exit less than one year after taking over the nation’s third-largest agency, report The Post’s Nick Miroff, Josh Dawsey and Philip Rucker. The writing has been on the wall for months — and her departure could ostensibly be delayed further — but Trump’s long-standing frustration with Nielsen and the freedom he now has with the 2018 elections behind him seem to be bringing this situation to a head. Trump has previewed a potential shake-up in recent weeks, and Nielsen was always among the most endangered top officials.

The looming decision is about Nielsen’s failure to meet Trump’s expectations when it comes to curtailing illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border. An uptick in border apprehensions in recent months and the caravan of migrants coming up from Honduras have probably sealed Nielsen’s fate.

But she seems to be a victim of irrational expectations more than anything. And she has spent much of her tenure tolerating Trump’s whims and even putting her reputation on the line in the name to keeping her job. No amount of public fealty, it seems, has been enough.

Nielsen has repeatedly fed Trump’s narrative about the Russia investigation with misleading or incorrect comments. Like Trump, she declined to directly blame Vladimir Putin for Russia’s 2016 election interference, even though the U.S. intelligence community does. Months earlier, she was asked about that same conclusion and said: “I do not believe that I’ve seen that conclusion. . . . That the specific intent was to help President Trump win? I’m not aware of that.”

She also suggested that Russia’s attacks an American election infrastructure weren’t necessarily aimed at helping Trump, even though the intel community says the broader effort was — a bizarre delineation clearly aimed at appeasing the boss, who has asserted that Russia actually favored Hillary Clinton.

During testimony in January, Nielsen declined to confirm Trump’s closed-door remarks describing African nations, Haiti and El Salvador as “shithole countries” — even though she was present. Then, in an exchange that followed, she was asked to account for Trump saying the United States needed more immigrants from Norway, an overwhelmingly white country. She even tried to pretend that she wasn’t sure Norway was an overwhelmingly white country and that Trump was referring to work ethic:

LEAHY: What does he mean when he says he wants more immigrants from Norway?

NIELSEN: I don’t believe he said that specifically. . . . What he was specifically referring to is, the prime minister telling him that the people of Norway work very hard. And so, what he was referencing is, from a merit-based perspective, we’d like to have those with skills who can assimilate and contribute to the United States, moving away from country quotas and to an individual merit-based system.

LEAHY: Norway is a predominantly white country, isn’t it?

NIELSEN: I actually do not know that, sir, but I imagine that is the case.

By far the most controversial chapter of Nielsen’s tenure, though, has been the separation of migrant families at the border — a policy that led to the detention of children in large cages and the government’s failure to promptly reunite them with their families. Nielsen reportedly resisted the policy behind the scenes. But publicly, she boosted it and even made implausible arguments in favor of it. She even went so far as to argue that it wasn’t an actual policy.

“We do not have a policy of separating families at the border, period,” she said, laughably. A DHS inspector general’s report last month contradicted this and other claims Nielsen made about the policy’s implementation.

And that’s the thread that runs through all of this. Trump puts people like Nielsen in the position of accounting for his whims and his counterfactual claims. His expectations for how much someone like Nielsen could accomplish when it comes to securing the border were almost definitely unreasonable. She tried to compensate for those shortcomings by saying things she couldn’t possibly have believed to boost Trump.

If and when she is finally ousted, it should serve as notice to anybody who would succeed her, or anyone else in the administration, that fealty is a necessary but not sufficient part of the job. And there’s no guarantee that sacrificing your own reputation for Trump will be rewarded.

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

As I said in connection with the recent Sessions firing, nobody should be surprised by these totally irrational moves against his own loyal toadies. Trump and his policies are failures; so, he obviously needs someone else to blame because he isn’t man enough to take accountability for his own mistakes. It might be hard to find such complete lackeys for these key jobs, but maybe not in today’s GOP.

(I note that Sessions only recused himself from the Russia probe because failure to do so could have been a clear ethical breach that could well have cost him his law license. While Sessions is definitely a sleazy character, for the top law enforcement official in the country to willingly ignore advice of his own ethics officials would take sleaze to an even higher and much more publicly obvious level.)

As I have said before, while public humiliation of loyal toadies is never a pretty sight, nobody should shed tears for either Sessions or Nielsen. They weren’t required to take these jobs and Trump’s lack of character and willingness to bully and publicly humiliate those who had loyally worked for him were well-known long before he became President. He might value sycophantic loyalty (see Mike Pence), but he has none to give. It’s the victims for whom we should feel sorry — families, immigrants, communities, and others who have been hurt by Nielsen’s willingness to ignore the law, human decency, and rational policies in a vain effort to hold onto her job.

PWS

11-13-18

THE GIBSON REPORT 11-12-18—Compiled by Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

THE GIBSON REPORT 11-12-18—Compiled by Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

TOP UPDATES

Trump signs proclamation blocking asylum seekers caught at the U.S.-Mexico border<https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/09/trump-order-migrants-asylum-956717>

Politico: The ban will last 90 days or until the U.S. strikes a “safe third country” asylum deal with Mexico, according to the text of the proclamation…Migrants arrested between ports of entry will still be able to apply for humanitarian relief through other legal avenues, such as “withholding of removal” or protection under the Convention Against Torture.

*   Withholding of Removal and the U.N. Convention Against Torture-No Substitute for Asylum, Putting Refugees at Risk<https://www.humanrightsfirst.org/resource/withholding-removal-and-un-convention-against-torture-no-substitute-asylum-putting-refugees>
*   Proclamation<https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-addressing-mass-migration-southern-border-united-states/> and Rule<https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/11/09/2018-24594/aliens-subject-to-a-bar-on-entry-under-certain-presidential-proclamations-procedures-for-protection>
*   Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Acting Attorney General Matthew G. Whitaker Statement on DHS-DOJ Asylum Regulation<https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/11/08/secretary-kirstjen-m-nielsen-acting-attorney-general-matthew-g-whitaker-statement>
*   Acting Attorney General Whitaker Statement On Presidential Proclamation<https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/acting-attorney-general-whitaker-statement-presidential-proclamation>
*   White House Fact Sheet<https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-upholding-rule-law-ensuring-consequences-illegally-cross-border/>
*   DHS Myth v. Fact<https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/11/09/dhs-myth-vs-fact-asylum-proclamation-and-rule>
*   EOIR Memo<https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1109531/download>
*   USCIS Guidance<https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2018/2018-11-09-PM-602-0166-Procedural_Guidance_for_Implementing_Regulatory_Changes_Created_by_Interim_Final_Rule.pdf>

Immigration Court Backlog Surpasses One Million Cases<http://trac.syr.edu/whatsnew/email.181106.html>

TRAC: The Immigration Court backlog has jumped by 225,846 cases since the end of January 2017 when President Trump took office. This represents an overall growth rate of 49 percent since the beginning of FY 2017.

USCIS to Continue Implementing New Policy Memorandum on Notices to Appear<https://www.aila.org/infonet/uscis-continue-implementing-new-policy-memorandum>

USCIS announced that starting 11/19/18, it may issue Notices to Appear (NTAs) based on denials of Forms I-914, I-914A, I-918, I-918A, I-360, I-929, I-730, and I-485 as part of its continued implementation of its 6/28/18 policy memo on issuance of NTAs. AILA Doc. No. 18110833. See also USCIS Invitation to Teleconference on Continued Expansion of NTA Policy Guidance<https://www.aila.org/infonet/uscis-invitation-to-teleconference-on-continued>

Catalina Cruz becomes first former ‘Dreamer’ elected to New York state Assembly<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/catalina-cruz-becomes-first-former-dreamer-elected-to-new-york-state-assembly.html>

ImmProf: Democratic candidate Catalina Cruz is now the first “former Dreamer” ever elected to the New York state Assembly and the third in office nationwide. See also Election 2018: Somali Refugee Elected to Congress, Afghan Refugee Elected to New Hampshire House of Representatives<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/somali-refugee-elected-to-congress.html>.

What are 5,200 troops going to do at the border? Maybe not much<https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/what-are-5-200-troops-going-do-border-maybe-not-n934501>

NBC: Troops are not allowed to apprehend immigrants like border agents do. For the most part, they are laying barbed wire barriers and erecting tent facilities for themselves and the Border Patrol. The only armed troops are military police, who are there to protect the encampments where troops are staying.

ICE Is Imprisoning a Record 44,000 People<https://www.thedailybeast.com/ice-is-imprisoning-a-record-44000-people>

Daily Beast: That massive increase in detentions by the highly controversial agency has prompted questions from rights groups about how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) obtained the money to place into its custody 4,000 more people than Congress has funded.

Jeff Sessions May Be Gone, But His Impact On Immigration Policy Will Live On<https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hamedaleaziz/jeff-sessions-impact-immigration-trump>

Buzzfeed: Though he lasted less than two years, Sessions made use of his limited time: He sued sanctuary cities and states. He recommended that the president rescind a popular program that protected immigrants from deportation (DACA) and later announced its end. He implemented a “zero tolerance” policy at the border that resulted in parents being separated from their children. And, perhaps most consequentially, in his role overseeing the immigration courts, made monumental changes to the way judges could oversee their cases and rule on asylum claims.

With or without criminal records, some immigrants spend many years in detention<http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-immigrant-detainees-20181112-story.html>

LA Times: The men have been at the Farmville Detention Center since February 2007 – longer than any other immigrants in the U.S. But no crimes blot their history in the U.S. Two dozen other detainees in California alone have spent more than three years in ICE custody, according to data obtained through a public records request by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse of Syracuse University and released last month.

Street Vendors’ GPS Trackers Have Immigration Advocates Worried<https://documentedny.com/2018/11/12/early-arrival-street-vendors-gps-trackers-have-immigration-advocates-worried/>

Documented: To assign the grades, the department will attach GPS devices to vendors’ carts to track where they are located. The decision to use GPS trackers has been met with fierce backlash from advocates who fear the mostly immigrant street vendors could face privacy concerns if Immigration and Custom Enforcement got ahold of the data. In New York City, about 85 percent of those who own a street food vendors are immigrants.

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

ACLU sues over presidential proclamation on asylum<https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/deportation-and-due-process/president-trumps-proclamation-suspending-asylum>

ACLU: The Trump administration’s action is contrary to the founding values of the country – welcoming homeless refugees to our shores. It also violates U.S. law, so we, along with the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Southern Poverty Law Center, filed suit against the administration on behalf of several nonprofit organizations that provide assistance to refugees and asylum seekers. The plaintiffs include the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Al Otro Lado, Innovation Law Lab, and the Central American Resource Center.

After federal government filing, 9th Circuit rules in DACA dispute<http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/11/after-federal-government-filing-9th-circuit-rules-in-daca-dispute/>

SCOTUSblog: Three days ago, the federal government went to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to weigh in on a dispute over the Trump administration’s decision to end a program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals even before the federal courts of appeals – and in particular the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit – could review the government’s appeal from district court rulings against it. Today the 9th Circuit issued its ruling in the challenge to the termination of the program, known as DACA, which allows some undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children to apply for protection from deportation. The ruling means not only that the Supreme Court is now more likely to take up the DACA dispute, but that it could do so this term.

RESOURCES

*   Resources Related to DOD’s Tightening of Rules and Discharges of Immigrants from the Military<https://www.aila.org/infonet/dod-tightens-rules-for-immigrants-joining-military>
*   Know Your Rights: What to Do If You Are Detained at a Port of Entry (LPR)<https://www.aila.org/advo-media/tools/psas/what-to-do-detained-port-of-entry-lpr>

EVENTS

*   11/13/18 CGRS best practices for working with medical and mental health professionals who provide expert testimony in asylum cases<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdUH3NiTlKVx3qcSizbxUVF9-1y8xmAoo7CqwDRywI70xzugQ/viewform>
*   11/26-28/18 CLINIC & NITA “Advocacy in Immigration Matters”<https://cliniclegal.org/calendar/nita-clinics-advocacy-immigration-matters-training>
*   11/29/18 The Ins and Outs of Lawful Admission<https://aila.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=285482eaa25f6af572462f19e&id=257ceb8a3f&e=9f707adf3e>
*   12/11/18 Accidental Adjustments: How to Handle Wrongly Issued Status<https://aila.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=285482eaa25f6af572462f19e&id=b2dc22a372&e=9f707adf3e>
*   12/17/18 20th Annual AILA New York Chapter Immigration Law Symposium<https://aila.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=285482eaa25f6af572462f19e&id=aa74902e0c&e=9f707adf3e>
*   12/20/18 Mental Incapacity: Merging Treatment and Enforcement<https://aila.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=285482eaa25f6af572462f19e&id=c77d41e6e2&e=9f707adf3e>
*   2/7/19 Basic Immigration Law 2019: Business, Family, Naturalization and Related Areas<https://www.pli.edu/Content/Seminar/Basic_Immigration_Law_2019_Business_Family/_/N-4kZ1z0zgl8?ID=348125>
*   2/8/19 Asylum, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, Crime Victim, and Other Immigration Relief 2019<https://www.pli.edu/Content/Seminar/Asylum_Special_Immigrant_Juvenile_Status/_/N-4kZ1z0zgl7?ID=348126>
*   03/12/19 AILA Spring Federal Court Litigation Conference<https://www.aila.org/conferences/in-person/2019-aila-spring-federal-court-litigation-conf>

ImmProf

Monday, November 12, 2018

*   President Trump should withdraw his asylum proclamation<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/president-trump-should-withdraw-his-asylum-proclamation.html>
*   From the Bookshelves: The Golden State by Lydia Kiesling<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/from-teh-bookshelves-the-golden-state-by-lydia-kiesling.html>
*   There is No “Invasion” at the Border: The U.S. Government’s 2018 Border Data Clearly Shows Why the Trump Administration is on the Wrong Track<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/there-is-no-invasion-at-the-border-.html>
Sunday, November 11, 2018

*   Happy Veterans Day<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/happy-veterans-day.html>
*   High Profile Immigration Hardliners Who Lost at the Polls<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/high-profile-immigration-hardliners-who-lost-at-the-polls.html>
*   Catalina Cruz becomes first former ‘Dreamer’ elected to New York state Assembly<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/catalina-cruz-becomes-first-former-dreamer-elected-to-new-york-state-assembly.html>
Friday, November 9, 2018

*   Breaking News: Presidential Proclamation Addressing Mass Migration Through the Southern Border of the United States<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/breaking-news-presidential-proclamation-addressing-mass-migration-through-the-southern-border-of-the.html>
*   Sessions: The Trump Administration’s Once-Indispensable Man on Immigration<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/sessions-the-trump-administrations-once-indispensable-man-on-immigration.html>
Thursday, November 8, 2018

*   New Asylum Regulation! Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Acting Attorney General Matthew G. Whitaker Statement on DHS-DOJ Asylum Regulation<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/new-asylum-regulation-secretary-kirstjen-m-nielsen-acting-attorney-general-matthew-g-whitaker-statem.html>
*   Ninth Circuit Affirms Injunction Barring the Rescission of DACA<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/ninth-circuit-affirms-injunction-barring-the-rescission-of-daca.html>
*   Birthright Citizenship: A Look at Other Nations<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/birthright-citizenship-a-look-at-other-nations.html>
*   Election 2018: Somali Refugee Elected to Congress, Afghan Refugee Elected to New Hampshire House of Representatives<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/somali-refugee-elected-to-congress.html>
*   Symposium Available On-Line: Immigration Law & Resistance: Ensuring a Nation of Immigrants<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/symposium-available-on-line-symposium-immigration-law-resistance-ensuring-a-nation-of-immigrants.html>
*   Latino Peoples in the New America: Racialization and Resistance by José A. Cobas, Joe R. Feagin, Daniel J. Delgado, Maria Chávez, editors<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/-latino-peoples-in-the-new-america-racialization-and-resistance-by-jos%C3%A9-a-cobas-joe-r-feagin-daniel-.html>
Wednesday, November 7, 2018

*   TRAC : Immigration Court Backlog Hits One Million Cases!<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/trac-immigration-backlog-hits-one-million-cases.html>
*   From the Bookshelves: Lucy E. Salyer, Under the Starry Flag: How a Band of Irish Americans Joined the Fenian Revolt and Sparked a Crisis over Citizenship<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/from-the-bookshelves-lucy-e-salyer.html>
*   Sessions is out!<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/sessions-is-out-.html>
*   Should Noncitizens Be Allowed to Vote?<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/should-noncitizens-be-allowed-to-vote.html>
*   Conference: Access to Justice, Due Process and the Rule of Law in the US Immigration System – Honoring Jose P. Osuna<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/conference-access-to-justice-due-process-and-the-rule-of-law-in-the-us-immigration-system-honoring-j.html>
*   Doris Meissner: Asylum Reform – Not National Guard – Needed at Border<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/doris-meissen-asylum-m-reform-not-national-guard-needed.html>
Tuesday, November 6, 2018

*   Memes of the Day. Enjoy.<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/memes-of-the-day-enjoy.html>
*   Seton Hall Law School Job Opening: Practitioner-in-Residence, Immigration<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/seton-hall-law-school-job-opening-practitioner-in-residence-immigration.html>
*   DHS Seeks SCOTUS Review of DACA Before Courts of Appeal Issue Decisions<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/dhs-seeks-scotus-review-of-daca-before-courts-of-appeal-issue-decisions.html>
*   Last Day to Comment on Fed Reg re: Flores Settlement<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/last-day-to-comment-on-fed-reg-re-flores-settlement.html>
*   Call for Papers: AILA Law Journal<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/call-for-papers-aila-law-journal.html>
Monday, November 5, 2018

*   NBC Airs Immigration Trump Ad Deemed Racist by CNN<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/nbc-airs-immigration-trump-ad-deemed-racist-by-cnn.html>
*   The President’s Immigration Guru: Stephen Miller<https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/the-presidents-immigration-guru-stephen-miller.html>

AILA NEWS UPDATE

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

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

Thanks, Elizabeth. Most impressive, as usual!

PWS

11-12-18

THE HILL: NOLAN SAYS TRUMP’S BORDER ORDER IS NQRFPT!

“NQRFPT” = “Not Quite Ready for Prime Time” (as some might remember from my days on the bench)

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/416195-trump-should-withdraw-his-asylum-proclamation

Nolan writes:

. . . .

Detention will continue to be a major problem, regardless.

Under the proclamation, DHS would not have to screen aliens to determine whether they have a credible fear of persecution for asylum purposes, but it would have to screen them to determine if they have a reasonable fear of persecution.

The United States is a signatory to the Refugee Convention, which prohibits expelling a refugee to a country where it is likely that he will be persecuted. Asylum just requires a well-founded fear of persecution.

This condition is met with the withholding of deportation provision in the INA for aliens who establish that it is more likely than not that they will be persecuted.

America also is a signatory to the Convention Against Torture (CAT), which provides that, “No State Party shall expel … a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.”

Relief under these provisions is limited to sending the alien to a country where he would not be persecuted or tortured.

The proclamation should be withdrawn until these problems can be resolved.

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

Go on over to The Hill at the link to read Nolan’s complete article (I have just reprinted the concluding section above). It also was a “headliner” at ImmigrationProf Blog: https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2018/11/president-trump-should-withdraw-his-asylum-proclamation.html

Nolan’s conclusion ties in nicely to my preceding posts that confirm, as Nolan points out, that CBP, the Asylum Office, the Immigration Courts, and probably the Federal Courts are woefully unprepared for the additional chaos and workload that is likely to be created by Trump’s shortsighted actions. Like most of what Trump does in the immigration areas it demonstrates a chronic misunderstanding of the laws, how the system operates, the reality of what happens at the border, and ignores the views of career civil servants and experts in the area. In other words, a totally unprofessional performance. But, that’s what “kakistocracy” is all about.

We’ll see what happens next. I expect a U.S. District court ruling on the ACLU’s suit to stop implementation of the Executive Order and the “Interim Regs” to be issued in the near future.

PWS

11-13-18

TRUMP’S “APPLY AT THE PORT OF ENTRY” ASYLUM DIRECTIVE IS A CRUEL HOAX – The Administration Already Is Failing In Its Legal Obligation To Give Those Applying At The Ports Reasonable Access To The System – And There Are No Known Plans To Remedy The Obvious Staffing Shortages, Despite Advance Notice!

https://apple.news/A25H8GAtMQTi8685OH1RqpQ

Justin Glawe reports for the The Daily Beast:

EL PASO, Texas—Huddled in blankets on a crisp morning last Tuesday, Gerson Valeriano and Yossira Gil were first in line on the Paso Del Norte bridge from Mexico to apply for asylum in the United States. It was their eighth day waiting with more than 100 migrants for Border Patrol to let them pass an invisible line just five feet away to apply for asylum.

The Trump administration wants all migrants and refugees to apply for asylum this way thanks to an executive order issued Friday that will make migrants who illegally cross at places other than ports of entry like Paso Del Norte ineligible for asylum. The administration would ram more people into bottlenecks like Paso Del Norte without providing more capacity to process aslyum-seekers, immigrant advocates and attorneys say.

“This administration is narrowing down their interpretation of who qualifies for asylum while literally physically preventing people from seeking asylum in the so-called right way,” said Alan Dicker, a volunteer with the Detained Migrant Solidarity Community in El Paso.

Trump achieves this by having federal law enforcement prevent migrants from entering the U.S. to claim asylum, often forcing them into making a difficult decision of whether to enter illegally. Doing so after the executive order is signed will make them ineligible for asylum.

The 100 migrants in line behind Valeriano and Gil—about half of them children—would wait even longer to apply for asylum, if they made it at all. Most wouldn’t, because Mexican immigration authorities kicked the migrants off the bridge on Friday afternoon, an advocate in El Paso told The Daily Beast.

CBP said in a statement it put officers on the bridge to “ensure that arriving travelers have valid entry documents in order to expedite the processing of lawful travel. That being said, CBP processes undocumented persons as expeditiously as possible without negating the agency’s overall mission, or compromising the safety of individuals within our custody.”

But even when there isn’t a line—as was the case in June, at the height of the family separation crisis—migrants are sometimes told by Border Patrol agents that there is “no room” in processing centers at ports of entry like Paso Del Norte. Both in June and in recent weeks, agents have stood at the apex of the bridge here, preventing migrants from physically entering United States territory where the government will then be legally required to process them for asylum if they simply say the word, asilo.

The Department of Homeland Security’s Office Inspector General confirmed these “turnbacks” after having denied it over the summer. The inspector general’s office noted that the practice sometimes resulted in migrants crossing illegally.

“If you are physically present in the U.S. you can apply for asylum, which is why [Customs and Border Patrol] has gone out of its way over the summer and now to prevent people from entering,” said Iliana Holguin, an El Paso immigration attorney.

CBP said its facilities were not “designed to hold hundreds of people at a time who may be seeking asylum” and that “as in the past when we’ve had to limit the number of people we can bring in for processing at a given time, we expect that this will be a temporary situation.”

Trump’s executive order seeks to bar those who enter illegally from applying for asylum. Instead, they’ll have to seek other forms of relief from deportation, proving that they have a “reasonable fear” of persecution in their home countries as opposed to the much lower threshold of “credible fear” that’s required as part of asylum cases, Holguin said.

“Those protections are much more difficult to obtain, have a much higher burden of proof, and are much, much harder to prove than asylum claims,” Holguin said.

Attorneys for every migrant who fails a reasonable fear interview and is processed for deportation, Holguin said, will almost surely file appeals and lawsuits on their clients’ behalf alleging Trump’s order is in violation of U.S. law. Those cases will be in addition to the lawsuits that will be filed by aid and advocacy organizations as soon as the executive order is entered into the federal register.

“I don’t think Trump understands, and I don’t think he cares, that this will not reduce the caseload in immigration court but increase it,” Holguin said. “Like sending troops to the border, I think he’s doing this for show. I think he’s doing it to look tough against desperate migrants who are fleeing violence and poverty.”

Instead of sending troops to the border, Holguin, Dicker and others say, the Trump administration should be allocating more resources to process asylum claims to reduce the backlog at ports of entry like Paso Del Norte.

“The administration is not interested in solving this complex humanitarian situation that is forcing families and children to flee for their lives and come to our border,” Greg Chen of the American Immigration Lawyers Association told The Daily Beast. “It’s a gross waste of American taxpayer dollars to deploy thousands of troops to the border instead of doing what would really address the problem, which is sending more asylum and refugee officers to screen the vulnerable people that are arriving.”

Valeriano and Gil fled Honduras because of rampant violence there. After a few years living in Mexico, the pair took a bus to Juarez, where they got in line with hundreds of other migrants from South America, Cuba and elsewhere.

“I believe that God has the power to give us the opportunity to be an American,” Valeriano said.

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

It’s hardly news that the Trump Administration has no intention of solving immigration problems. It’s all a political show for the “base.”

But what about the career civil servants who are knowingly participating in this sham, and in too many cases furthering and repeating knowingly false narratives? What about the government lawyers who are defending “bad faith positions” in court? What happened to their ethical responsibilities? What about their oaths of office?

PWS

11-12-18

JULIA PRESTON @ THE MARSHALL PROJECT: Unfinished Business – Sessions Leaves Behind An Unprecedented Man-Made Human Rights Disaster & A Demoralized, Rapidly Failing U.S. Immigration Court — “I’ve never seen an attorney general who was so active in the immigration sphere and in a negative direction,” said Daniel Kowalski!”

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/11/07/the-immigration-crisis-jeff-sessions-leaves-behind

Julia writes:

ANALYSIS

The Immigration Crisis Jeff Sessions Leaves Behind

Assessing the ousted attorney general’s legacy on President Trump’s favorite issue.

By JULIA PRESTON

Graphic by YOLANDA MARTINEZ

“I don’t have an attorney general,” President Donald Trump said in an interview recently, venting his frustration with Jeff Sessions for recusing himself from overseeing the investigation by the special counsel, Robert Mueller.

But anyone who was following Sessions’ actions on immigration had no doubt that he was working hard. Before he was forced to resign on Wednesday, Sessions was exceptionally aggressive as attorney general, using his authority to steer the immigration courts, restrict access for migrants to the asylum system and deploy the federal courts for immigration enforcement purposes.

Under American law, the attorney general has broad powers over the immigration courts, which reside in the Justice Department not in the independent federal judiciary. Sessions, who made immigration a signature issue during his two decades as a Republican senator from Alabama, exercised those powers to rule from on high over the immigration system.

While Trump complained about Sessions, on immigration he was an unerringly loyal soldier, vigorously executing the president’s restrictionist policies.

Sessions made it his mission to reverse what he regarded as a failure to enforce order in the system by President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress, despite plunging numbers of illegal border crossings and record deportations under the previous administration.

“No great and prosperous nation can have both a generous welfare system and open borders,” Sessions told a gathering of newly-appointed immigration judges in September. “Such a policy is both radical and dangerous. It must be rejected out of hand.”

BECOME A MEMBER

Join the community that keeps criminal justice on the front page.

A primary goal he declared was to speed the work of the immigration courts in order to reduce huge case backlogs. But according to a report this week by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, or TRAC, the backlogs increased during his tenure by 49 percent, reaching an all-time record of more than 768,000 cases. That tally doesn’t include more than 330,000 suspended cases, which justice officials restored to the active caseload.

“I’ve never seen an attorney general who was so active in the immigration sphere and in a negative direction,” said Daniel Kowalski, the editor of Bender’s Immigration Bulletin, a widely-used reference for lawyers. Kowalski said he’s been practicing immigration law for 33 years.

Here are some of Sessions’ measures that shaped the crisis the next attorney general will inherit:

He imposed case quotas on immigration judges, which went into effect Oct. 1, demanding they complete at least 700 cases a year. With compliance becoming part of a judge’s performance evaluation, the immigration judges’ association has said the quotas impinge on due process.

He made frequent use of the attorney general’s authority to decide cases if he doesn’t like opinions coming from the immigration courts. Sessions used that authority to constrain judges’ decision-making. He made it more difficult for them to grant continuances to give lawyers time to prepare, and he limited judges’ options to close cases where they concluded deportation was not warranted, as a way to lighten overloaded court dockets.

Sessions discouraged immigration judges from allowing prosecutors to exercise their discretion to set aside deportations for immigrants with families or other positive reasons to remain in the United States.

He issued decisions that made it far more difficult for migrants, like those coming in recent years from Central America, to win asylum cases based on fears of criminal gang violence, sexual abuse or other persecution by “private actors,” rather than governments.

In a policy known as zero tolerance, in April Sessions ordered federal prosecutors along the southwest border to bring charges in federal court against migrants caught crossing the border, for the crime of illegal entry. The policy resulted in parents being separated from their children, in episodes last summer that drew outrage until Trump ordered the separations to stop. But the prosecutions continue for illegal crossers who aren’t parents with children, swelling federal dockets and making it harder for prosecutors to pursue other border crimes, like narcotics and human trafficking, weapons offenses and money-laundering. In September, according to TRAC, 88 percent of the prosecutions in the Southern District of Texas were for an illegal entry misdemeanor; 65 percent of the cases in the Southern District of California were for the same minor crime.

Zero tolerance at the border

Under former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, federal prosecutors in five border districts significantly ramped up the number of misdemeanor cases they filed against migrants crossing illegally this year, particularly in south Texas.

Sessions took the position that a program initiated by Obama, which gave protection from deportation to undocumented immigrants who came here as children, was an overreach of executive authority. He declined to defend the program, called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, and praised Trump’s decision last year to cancel it. After federal courts allowed the program to continue, the Justice Department fought to bypass the appeals courts and get a hearing before the Supreme Court for its efforts to terminate the program.

Even though his relations with Trump soured early in his tenure, Sessions maintained a line of communication to the White House through Stephen Miller, a senior adviser. Miller was a senior staff member for Sessions in the Senate, and the two share similar views and goals for clamping down on immigration.

Lawyers and advocates say Sessions’ actions have politicized immigration court proceedings. “He stripped the judges of the authority to ensure due process and demonstrated how susceptible the courts are to the whim of politics,” said Mary Meg McCarthy, executive director of the National Immigrant Justice Center, based in Chicago.

Advocates for immigration reform said a new attorney general should restore the flexibility of immigration judges to manage their own dockets to find efficient ways to reduce their caseloads. But they said Sessions’ tenure provided new arguments for Congress to move the immigration courts out of the Justice Department to the federal judiciary.

Gregory Chen, director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said, “The aggressive nature of his actions infringing on the independence of the courts has made the need for a new court system even more urgent.”

ORIGINALLY FILED Wednesday, November 7, 2018 at 9:35 p.m. ET

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

Go to Julia’s article at the above link to get the accompanying graphics and pictures.

The Immigration Court backlog reported by TRAC now is over 1.1 MILLION cases, with no end in sight. More disturbingly, there is no coherent plan for addressing these cases in anything approaching a rational manner, nor is there a plan for restoring some semblance of due process and functionality to the Immigration Courts. Like most Trump/Sessions initiatives, it’s “we’ll create the problem, make it much worse, then hinder the efforts of others to fix it.”

Three “no-brainers ” that Sessions wouldn’t do:

Working with the private bar, NGOs, states, and localities to make legal representation available to everyone in Immigration Court who wants it;
Letting U.S. Immigration Judges control their own dockets and make independent decisions, free from political interference; and
Removing hundreds of thousands of older cases of individuals eligible to apply for “Cancellation of Removal For Non-Lawful Permanent Residents” from the Immigration Courts’ active dockets and having them adjudicated by USCIS in the first instance.

Of course an independent Article I Immigration Court is an absolute necessity. But, that will take legislation. In the meantime, the foregoing three administrative steps would pave the way for an orderly transition to Article I status while promoting Due Process, fairness, and efficiency in the system.

But, I wouldn’t count on anyone in the “Current Kakistocracy” doing the right thing or actually implementing “good government.” If the Article IIIs don’t put an end to this travesty, it will continue to get worse and pull them down into the muck until we get “regime change.”

Ironically, Trump isn’t the only one who “hasn’t had an Attorney General over the past two years.” The majority of Americans haven’t had one either; while he might be on the verge of getting “his” Attorney General, the rest of us can only look forward to more pain and misery!

PWS

11-12-18

GONZO’S WORLD: SNL BIDS ADIEU TO “EVIL ELF!” – See It Here!

https://slate.com/culture/2018/11/jeff-sessions-robert-mueller-robert-de-niro-kate-mckinnon-saturday-night-live.html

BROW BEAT

Jeff Sessions and Robert Mueller Say Their Goodbyes on Saturday Night Live, With a Little Help From Kate McKinnon and Robert De Niro

By MATTHEW DESSEM

NOV 11, 20184:47 AM

Friends to the end.

NBC

It’s been an emotional week for people who love Jeff Sessions, assuming such people exist. On the one hand, Donald Trump fired Sessions the day after the election in favor of an unqualified loyalist who used to sit on the board of a hilariously fraudulent patent marketing company. On the other hand, once Sessions skulks back to Alabama, Kate McKinnon will have no further reason to play him on Saturday Night Live, which will probably be good for his reputation. But there was no way SNL would let a walking caricature like Sessions leave the national stage without a kick in the ass on his way to the wings, so McKinnon glued on her Jeff Sessions ears this week for what might be the very last time:

Sketches like this one, in which one celebrity caricature after another marches in, does his or her thing, then leaves, almost always suffer from a lack of momentum. The payoff here, the surprise appearance of Robert De Niro as Robert Mueller, is no substitute for rising action, not least because De Niro’s performance isn’t exactly worthy of Taxi Driver. Some of the individual jokes are hilarious—see, e.g., Sessions’ mug-within-a-mug—but as a whole, the sketch feels like one damn thing after another, for much, much too long. In that sense, it brilliantly captures the essence of the Trump administration, with or without Jefferson Beauregard Sessions. Best of luck to the cast member who has to squeeze into a bald cap to play Matthew Whitaker next week.

https://youtu.be/EGy-xpK-1mw

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

Kids in cages, weeping parents, families separated, refugees turned away, African-Americans brutalized by the police, domestic violence victims sent back to torture by their abusers, minority voters suppressed, prisons overflowing with minor offenders, American youth denied opportunities and threatened with removal, scientific evidence ignored, intentionally clogged courts, open season on the LGBTQ community, vigorous defense of hate speech (but not the right to protest), glorification of bias masquerading as “religion,” judges turned into border agents in robes, judges and lawyers publicly dissed, un-prosecuted corruption in government, rampant gun violence mostly generated by disgruntled White guys, journalists attacked, bogus efforts to keep migrants from knowing their rights, lies to Congress — Man-o-Man, this Dude was just a barrel of laughs and good times! Unless, of course, you were one of the millions of men, women, and children in America who was permanently damaged or traumatized by his racist scofflaw approach to “justice” and his failure to enforce the Constitutional rights due to everyone in America. Not exactly “Janet Reno’s Dance Party!”

PWS

11-12-18

SESSIONS IS OUT @ DOJ – But, His Ugly Jim Crow Racist Legacy & Disingenuous Perversions Of The “Rule Of Law” Continue To Hang Like A Dark Cloud Over Our Nation & Our Moral Values!

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hamedaleaziz/jeff-sessions-impact-immigration-trump

Hamed Aleaziz reports for BuzzFeed News:

From the moment Donald Trump introduced Jeff Sessions as the first member of the US Senate to endorse his candidacy for president, the two men have been bound by one topic: immigration.

“When I talk about immigration, and when I talk about illegal immigration and all the problems with crimes and everything else, I think about a great man,” Trump told a rally in Madison, Wisconsin, moments before he brought out Sessions.

Sessions made it clear that in Trump he, too, saw a kindred spirit. Politicians had long promised to do something about immigration, he said. “Have they done it? No, but Donald Trump will do it.”

Nearly three years after that February 2016 rally, Trump and Sessions on Wednesday parted ways, with Sessions turning in his resignation after a tumultuous term as Trump’s attorney general. While much of the commentary about Sessions’ departure turned on what will happen next to the special counsel’s Trump–Russia probe, it’s clear now that Sessions’ biggest impact during the Trump administration will be on immigration policy.

Though he lasted less than two years, Sessions made use of his limited time: He sued sanctuary cities and states. He recommended that the president rescind a popular program that protected immigrants from deportation (DACA) and later announced its end. He implemented a “zero tolerance” policy at the border that resulted in parents being separated from their children.

And, perhaps most consequentially, in his role overseeing the immigration courts, made monumental changes to the way judges could oversee their cases and rule on asylum claims.

“Sessions was a key driver and defender of the Trump administration’s … coordinated attack on unauthorized immigrants, asylum-seekers, and legal immigration,” said Sarah Pierce, an analyst at the Migration Policy Institute. “It seems likely that in his absence the administration’s enthusiastic drive for immigration reforms will be tempered.”

Though many of his efforts failed once they reached the federal courts — his Department of Justice suffered key losses on DACA and cutting off funding to sanctuary cities — Sessions was able to make changes without impediments over one key facet of the immigration system: the courts.

In his position as the boss of the country’s immigration judges, Sessions was able to refer cases to himself and then make legal precedent with his decisions. He did that eight times, restricting the instances in which individuals could be granted asylum and stopping judges from being able to indefinitely suspend cases and allow immigrants to remain in the country without a decision.

“Here is one group of judges who happen to be under his control. He could basically say ‘jump’ and they’d say ‘how high?’ He had total control. It was like a perfect storm of all these things coming together,” said Jeffrey Chase, a former immigration judge.

After he restricted the ability of judges to set aside deportation cases, Department of Homeland Security attorneys were told to restart previously delayed cases, and thousands of cases poured back into the immigration courts.

And to push judges, Sessions instituted a quota on the number of cases they should consider every year and even told them in a speech to deliver a “secure” border and a “lawful system” that “actually works.” He cautioned them against allowing sympathy for the people appearing before them to color the orders they made.

Naturally, Sessions and the union for the immigration judges clashed over the moves, which included removing one judge from a high-profile case.

“We hope that the next attorney general will be more responsive to the issues and the challenges facing the immigration court, immigration judges, and the parties that come before the court,” said Ashley Tabaddor, an immigration judge who heads the union, the National Association of Immigration Judges, which represents around 350 judges.

For immigrant advocates, Sessions’ departure was welcomed. The ACLU called him the worst attorney general of modern history. The National Immigration Law Center tweeted that Sessions would be remembered for his “disregard of the Constitution” and “well-being of our communities.” The group Freedom for Immigrants said Sessions “never cared about justice. He only cared about making immigrants’ lives miserable.”

Supporters of a more restrictive immigration policy, however, lamented Sessions’ resignation. “Sessions’ resignation is undoubtedly a blow to the patriotic immigration reform community,” said Jeremy Carl, a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution.

“He has long been one of the strongest and most knowledgeable champions of our cause.”

Still, for many advocates, the fear was that Sessions’ impact on the system would be long lasting — regardless of who comes next.

“This attorney general has had a devastating impact on the immigration court system’s ability to provide fair decisions in the cases of individuals that come before them,” said Greg Chen, director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association. “Under his tenure, there have been dramatic changes in policy that have undermined the integrity of the immigration court system and the independence of judges.”

Sessions’ legacy on immigration will go beyond the changes he’s made in the courts — his former Senate aide, Stephen Miller, is a key adviser to the president and will continue to take a key role in drafting and leading changes to the immigration system. But he won’t be able to replace Sessions, said the Migration Policy Institute’s Pierce.

“As Jeff Sessions showed us, the attorney general is in a unique position to enact wide-reaching changes on the immigration system,” she said. “Unless another like-minded individual is appointed to that office, the administration’s immigration reform efforts have lost a key tool.”

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

I’d sure like to believe that there won’t be another Sessions at the DOJ. But, while Trump obviously views the primary role of the AG as protecting him, his family, and some of his cronies from the law, I can’t see him nominating anyone who doesn’t share his racist White Nationalist restrictionist views on immigration and civil rights. And, the GOP-controlled Senate is made up of spineless toadies who have happily confirmed a steady stream of unqualified and corrupt Trump appointees, including Sessions. I suppose the best we can hope for is that the next AG will have her or his hands full with the Russia investigation and other Constitutional showdowns Trump is likely to provoke, and therefore might put further destroying the U.S. immigration system on the back burner for a while. But, I wouldn’t count on it.

PWS

11-11-18

HOW MANY RIDICULOUS “TRUMP TROOPS” & ARMED BORDER PATROL OFFICERS IS IT GOING TO TAKE TO STOP THESE TWO FOOTSORE LITTLE GIRLS AND THEIR EXHAUSTED MOTHER? — What Kind Of A Nation Rolls Out A Bogus Military Display & Announces Plans To Trash Its Own Laws & International Norms In Response To A Non-Threatening Humanitarian Situation That It Helped Cause & Aggravate?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/11/07/story-behind-photo-little-girl-crying-migrant-caravan/?utm_term=.518223da78ac

Michael E. Miller reports for WashPost:

SAN PEDRO TAPANATEPEC, Mexico — The migrant caravan came alive one morning last week with a rustle of plastic tarps being taken down and packed. A crowd gathered well before dawn.

Near the back of that crowd stood Keila Savioll Mejia. Two weeks earlier, the shy 21-year-old had left home in Honduras to join the caravan with her 2-year-old and 4-year-old daughters. She listened as organizers announced that two trucks were available to take women and children from Tapanatepec to the next stop, 33 miles away.

Mejia thought about rushing forward to claim the last spot. Both of her daughters were sick and Camila, the oldest, was tired of walking. But she said she worried they would be crushed or suffocated in the throng. So she let others climb into the back of the truck, which soon overflowed with about three dozen people.

“There are no more trucks,” an organizer said over a loudspeaker. “Let’s go.”

And with that, Mejia and her daughters set off on foot.

President Trump has portrayed the migrant caravan as a monolithic threat, a mass of “terrorists” intent on “invading” the United States. In reality, the caravan is a collection of individuals and families, each with their own story. And few were worse off than Mejia.

As she carried 2-year-old Samantha through the streets of Tapanatepec, she saw several families with sturdy strollers they had bought for 900 pesos — around $45 — at the Mexico-Guatemala border. Others were flimsy, held together with tape or twine. One father pushed his 5-year-old son in a donated wheelchair.

Mejia had nothing, not even a baby carrier.

Keila Savioll Mejia, 21, holds her daughter Samantha, 2, left, as Johana Hernandez, 16, center, watches 4-year-old Camila. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post)

By the time the caravan reached the edge of town, Mejia’s thin arms already ached from carrying her toddler. So mother and daughters rested under a tree.

Mejia wore pink plastic slippers so thin they were like walking in bare feet. The girls wore sandals that were hardly any better. Besides a few donated diapers friends carried for them, all their belongings fit into a tiny “Mafalda” bag on Mejia’s back.

Soon, they were back on their feet, Samantha on Mejia’s shoulders and Camila holding hands with Bessi Zelaya, a friend from Peña Blanca.

As they walked through the pre-dawn darkness, the silence was broken every few minutes by the buzz of approaching motorcycle taxis. The tiny three-wheel vehicles would pull up, and half a dozen migrants would pile in, paying a few Mexican pesos to get a little closer to the next stop.

But Mejia didn’t have a few pesos.

In Peña Blanca she had made 100 lempiras — about $4 — a day selling tortillas. The girls’ father had left them long ago, so they lived with Mejia’s mother and siblings in a small cinder block house.

When she heard of the caravan forming in San Pedro Sula just 50 miles away, Mejia borrowed 500 lempiras from a friend, packed her daughter’s backpack and boarded a bus to the capital. By the time they caught up to the caravan a few days later, Mejia had spent half her money on bus fare. She quickly used the rest to buy food for the girls.

“We’ve had to walk ever since,” she said.

As young men strode past and another overloaded mototaxi sped away, an organizer in a yellow traffic vest issued a warning to those falling behind.

“Hurry up,” he said, “or immigration will grab you.”

The fear was real. The sheer size of the caravan made it difficult for Mexican authorities to stop. But small groups that had split off had reportedly been detained and deported. The same could happen to stragglers.

Camila, her tiny legs already exhausted, collapsed to the ground. The girl closed her eyes.

An exhausted Camila collapses to the ground. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post)

“Camila!” Mejia said sharply.

“Arriba,” said Zelaya, lifting her onto the shoulders of Fernando Reyes Enamorado, a neighbor from Peña Blanca. Camila drooped over the 19-year-old’s head.

They continued walking, but when they stopped at a house where the owners had brought out a jug of water for the migrants, Camila refused to get up. Mejia splashed the girl in the face with water, but she just sat on the ground, kicking off her sandals and beginning to cry.

“Levántate,” Mejia told her. “Get up.”

A family with a stroller went past. Then another, and another. Flashing lights in the distance behind them were a reminder that if they fell far enough behind, their journey could be over in an instant.

Strangers stopped to offer to carry Camila, but the girl refused to let anyone touch her.

Keila Savioll Mejia carries her two daughters during the caravan. If they fell too far behind, they risked being detained and deported. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post)

Minutes passed as Samantha cried and Camila screamed and the caravan kept going without them. Friends disappeared into the distance. Dawn began to break. Soon the sun would rise, and the temperature would climb to nearly 100 degrees.

So Mejia did the only thing she could: She lifted both girls — one over each shoulder — and started walking.

Within a few minutes, she had caught up with the others where the road met a highway. Migrants slept in the ditch as they waited for trucks on which to catch a ride.

Mejia set the girls down and handed them candy to keep them awake.

But as vehicles approached, it was the young men who always reacted first. They climbed atop oil tankers and leaped aboard moving container trucks.

So Mejia started walking again, Samantha in her arms and Camila flailing unhappily at her side.

But then their luck suddenly changed. As she passed a red car belonging to a Televisa news crew, the cameraman recognized her.

Paco Santana, a TV anchorman, had interviewed Mejia a few days earlier and had given her a lift. Now he offered to do so again.

Keila Savioll Mejia and her daughters receive a much needed lift when a local television reporter offers them a ride. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post)

“I wish I could take you all like last time, but I have a woman who is very pregnant,” he told Zelaya and Mejia’s other friends.

“No, no, no,” said Ana Velazquez, 36, who was traveling with her 16-year-old daughter. “What we want is for her to get a ride because the little girl doesn’t like to walk.”

“Well,” Santana said, turning to Mejia. “What do you think?”

She looked at her friends. Then she looked at her daughters.

“Do you want to go in the car, like the other day?” Santana asked Camila and Samantha.

With shouts of excitement, her daughters made the decision for her.

“I don’t have cookies this time,” Santana said, opening the door of his car, where the pregnant woman and her partner were already waiting for a ride. “Should we go get some?”

And then it was on to the next town, the single mother’s odyssey over — at least for another day.

Samantha Savioll Mejia, 2, peaks out the window of a car belonging to the Televisa news crew while sitting on her mother’s lap. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post)

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

At some point, there will be an accounting for Trump’s cowardly actions and his misuse of our military in this wasteful and immoral political stunt.

PWS

11-11-18

EXPOSING THE REAL ASYLUM FRAUD: The Administration’s Knowingly False Narratives About Central American Asylum Seekers & The Way DOJ & EOIR Have Intentionally Distorted The Law & The Process To Deny Asylum To Real Refugees! — “The truth about these migrants comes down to the most basic of human needs: survival. Those who have joined the caravan have done so because their reality is simple. In the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, where violence is endemic and justice is illusory, it’s a question of life or death.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-migrant-caravan-trump-central-america-trauma_us_5be31bc6e4b0769d24c8353d

Stephanie Carnes writes in HuffPost:

UPDATE: On Friday, President Trump signed a presidential proclamation denying asylum for immigrants who request it after crossing the border illegally rather than at a port of entry.

In a pre-midterms television ad deemed too racist for CNN, NBC and even Fox News, the White House described members of the large group of Central American migrants making their way through Mexico as “dangerous illegal criminals.” Ominous music played in the background of the ad as images of a convicted Mexican criminal were spliced with footage of the caravan.

This description was inaccurate, not to mention illogical ― aren’t hardened criminals and narco-traffickers wily enough to avoid such an arduous and physically taxing journey, and one that has captured such public attention and scrutiny?

The truth about these migrants comes down to the most basic of human needs: survival. Those who have joined the caravan have done so because their reality is simple. In the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, where violence is endemic and justice is illusory, it’s a question of life or death.

The truth about these migrants comes down to the most basic of human needs: survival. Those who have joined the caravan have done so because their reality is simple. In the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, where violence is endemic and justice is illusory, it’s a question of life or death.

Trump, in his roiling pre-midterm elections hate-speech tour, painted the caravan as an “invasion,” even though it’s a common occurrence that hasn’t disrupted the peace before. Traveling in a large group is far safer than traveling alone, with a human smuggler or in a small group, and migrant advocacy groups have organized large caravans for at least a decade. But beyond the president and his party’s racist rhetoric, there’s a broad assumption that such an influx of immigrants will both threaten American values and weigh heavily on the American taxpayer.

Like previous waves of immigrants, this group of new arrivals may need help to acclimate to this complex country of ours. Some will need medical care, thanks to years of living in countries with limited medical infrastructure. Others will need counseling to heal from layers of traumatic experiences against the backdrop of horrible violence ― which, lest we forget, the United States played a significant role in creating.

But they won’t need much. If I’ve learned one thing during my tenure as a trauma-focused clinician, it is this: Central American immigrants are resilient. They are driven and strong. They persevere. Despite the staggering hardships and suffering they have endured, they are defined by their ability to “seguir adelante” ― to move forward.

It’s a phrase that I’ve heard hundreds of times ― perhaps thousands ― in my therapy office. Nearly all my young clients have voiced their desire to “seguir adelante.” The 17-year-old boy who witnessed his father’s murder, finding himself alone and in grave danger; the 15-year-old girl who was kidnapped by the Zetas cartel in Mexico and held for ransom for weeks; the 18-year-old boy who served as a lookout for the MS-13 gang in exchange for his sister’s life before fleeing his country.

“Tengo que seguir adelante,” they tell me. I must continue moving forward.

The 13-year-old indigenous child who recounted months of eating “grass soup” when tortillas became too expensive. The 16-year-old who mourns the loss of her brothers ― all three of them, murdered while crossing gang-controlled territory. The 20-year-old working through the night at a bakery, then coming to school filled with energy and endless questions about the workings of American bicameral government.

Tengo que seguir adelante.

While their experiences are varied and diverse, my clients have two things in common. They have been exposed to multiple horrifying traumatic events, and they have an indefatigable desire to heal, grow stronger and move forward.

Trauma is never a desirable experience, or a deserved one. Many Central Americans have seen, experienced and survived more suffering and loss than any human should be asked to bear. But part of the “seguir adelante” mentality is the idea of being a metaphorical phoenix. Instead of allowing repeated traumatic events to crush them, many of the Central American clients with whom I work rise again as stronger, more resilient versions of themselves. While they may suffer from trauma-related symptoms like flashbacks, many are simultaneously able to devote their energy to finding a new sense of purpose in ways that I have not observed as universally in my work with American-born clients.

This phenomenon is illustrative of the positive psychology concept of post-traumatic growth, which posits that those who are exposed to trauma discover or develop new capabilities: closer social and familial bonds, increased resilience, stronger motivation and deepened spirituality.

So if the resilience of the “adelante” mentality drives these immigrants forward in spirit, what compels them to move forward physically? Perhaps they were unable to pay last month’s “impuestos de guerra,” or war taxes, to the local gang as rent for their space in the market. Maybe they refused to join the controlling gang in their neighborhood, despite the near-certainty of death if they stayed. Instead of remaining in Guatemala City, or Santa Tecla, or Tegucigalpa, they wagered it all, picked up and left.

They leave behind their families, their friends, their rich cultures, their language, their homeland. They understand the risks of the journey. They have heard the horror stories of kidnapping, rape, extortion and abandonment in the desert. Despite all this, they have decided to “seguir adelante,” fueled by hope for a brighter, safer future, to be achieved through hard work, determination and unwavering courage. Don’t those values sound reminiscent of those upon which our patchwork nation was founded?

In the end, all the migrant caravan really wants is to move forward. And as a democratic country founded on ideals of egalitarianism, isn’t it time for us to move forward, too?

Stephanie L. Carnes is a bilingual licensed clinical social worker at a large public high school in New York’s Hudson Valley. She was previously a clinician in a federally funded shelter program. She specializes in trauma treatment with Central American immigrant students and culturally competent mental health care.

The real scandal here is that although the vast majority of arrivals pass “credible fear” screening, so few them ever receive asylum. That strongly suggests that there are real problems in the “intentionally overly restrictive unduly legalistic” approach and the often dishonest ways that “in absentia orders” are used at EOIR. A better approach would probably be to allow those who have already been determined by the Asylum Office to have a “credible fear” present their initial asylum applications to those offices, rather than being forced immediately into the Immigration Courts, particularly given the current court backlogs.

The system has become far too restrictive and legalistic. Nobody has any realistic chance of winning a case without a lawyer. But, under Trump and Sessions, EOIR has abandoned efforts to insure that individuals are given reasonable access to pro bono lawyers before their cases are heard on the merits. Indeed, Sessions conducted a remarkably unethical, inappropriate, false, and vicious campaign against lawyers — right now about the only folks actually trying to make the system work and insure that our Constitution is complied with.

Of course, not every migrant from the Northern Triangle is a refugee as our law defines that term. But, we should recognize that almost all of them are decent people with good reasons for coming, even when those reasons don’t fit within our legal system. Even when they are not entitled to protection or to remain here, they deserve to be treated humanely, fairly, respectfully, and impartially, and have a full opportunity to present their claims.

The intentional demonization and dehumanization of asylum applicants, advanced by immoral and unethical folks like Trump, Sessions, Miller, and Nielsen, has now been picked up by lower level bureaucrats, who are spreading lies, promoting knowingly false narratives, and generally “taking a dive” to preserve their jobs (or, in a few cases, to gratify their own biases which match those of the Trump Administration.)

If we don’t figure out a way to stop their assault on humanity and human decency, eventually all of us will be splattered with the slime that is the Trump Administration’s approach to immigration! History will not judge us kindly for our subservience to evil.

PWS

11-10-18

THE HILL: Nolan Discusses Birthright Citizenship In Developed Countries

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/415647-most-countries-agree-with-trump-about-birthright-citizenship

Nolan writes:

President Donald Trump said recently that, “We’re the only country in the world where a person comes in and has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United States for 85 years, with all of those benefits.”

He’s wrong. According to the CIA World Factbook, 39 countries have birthright citizenship.

But the rest of the 195 countries (80 per cent) base citizenship at birth on the nationality or resident status of the child’s parents.

Perhaps Trump should have said instead that the United States and Canada are the only two developed countries that have it, and Canada is in the process of deciding whether to stop using it.

Why have most of the countries in the world rejected birthright citizenship?

. . . .

The fact that so many countries have rejected birthright citizenship doesn’t justify giving it up, but it does warrant taking a closer look at the practice.

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

Go on over to The Hill at the link to read Nolan’s complete article. Among other things, he discusses the approaches of the UK, Canada, and Ireland.

PWS

11-10-18

GROUPS SUE TO BLOCK TRUMP’S ATTACK ON ASYLUM LAWS — Administration Outraged At Prospect Of Being Held Accountable For Violating Laws!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/09/trump-asylum-seekers-mexico-border-ban-lawsuit-aclu-splc?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Amanda Holpuch in New York

Published: 17:44 EST Friday, 09 November 2018

Following Amanda Holpuch

Leading civil rights groups have filed a lawsuit asking a federal court to end Donald Trump’s ban on people seeking asylum at the US border with Mexico because it violates US law.

Migrant caravan families face illness, exhaustion and danger

Starting on Saturday, people fleeing persecution can be barred from the asylum process if they do not approach the border at designated border checkpoints.

The order will remain in effect for at least three months, unless a judge rules in favor of the lawsuit filed in federal court by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Center for Constitutional Rights.

Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said Trump and his administration were trying to override US law by instituting the ban. “This action undermines the rule of law and is a great moral failure because it tries to take away protections from individuals facing persecution – it’s the opposite of what America should stand for,” Jadwat said.

The government considers the bar an emergency measure to respond to people fleeing violence in the Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, but it comes after Trump repeatedly described desperate Central Americans as “an invasion”.

The 18-page lawsuit challenges Trump administration claims that the border is in “crisis” and instead describes how illegal border crossings have declined significantly from record highs in the early 2000s – 1.25 million fewer people were processed at the southern border in fiscal year 2018 than the in fiscal year 2000.

While Trump administration officials have for years accused many asylum seekers of manipulating the system, the lawsuit said many people seeking refuge are not well informed about the process or know that they should approach a designated port of entry to request asylum.

“Even those refugees who know that designated ports of arrival exist often have no idea where they are or how to find them,” the suit said.

The suit also claims asylum processing has slowed in recent months in ways that can be “life-threatening” for people seeking refuge.

“The region of Mexico near the border with the United States is a particularly violent area with limited law enforcement capacity,” the suit said. “Asylum seekers turned back from a port of entry have been raped, beaten and kidnapped and held for ransom by cartel members waiting outside.”

In a joint statement, the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice said the president’s order was lawful. “We should not have to go to court to defend the president’s clear legal authority or our rights as a sovereign nation, but we will not hesitate to do so,” the statement said. “We are confident that the rule of law will prevail.

“The fact that the ACLU and its partners would go to court to specifically sue for the right for aliens to enter the country illegally is demonstrative of the open border community’s disdain for our nation’s laws that almost all rational Americans find appalling.”

The suit was brought on behalf of the immigrant advocacy groups East Bay Sanctuary Covenant and Al Otro Lado, as well as the Innovation Law Lab and Central American Resource Center in Los Angeles. The suit says the new ban forces these aid groups to divert their resources from providing assistance and support to individuals fleeing persecution and violence.

Judge orders Trump administration to continue ‘Dreamers’ program

The bar follows two years of efforts by the Trump administration to restrict legal and illegal immigration to the US, including by targeting the asylum and refugee process.

In June, former attorney general Jeff Sessions ordered US immigration courts to stop granting asylum to victims of domestic abuse and gang violence.

In August 2017, the Trump administration announced it shut down the Central American Minors (Cam) program, which allowed people lawfully in the US to apply for refugee resettlement or temporary immigration status for their children or other eligible family members.

It has also shrunk refugee admissions to a record low – making it more difficult for people to apply for refuge from their home country instead of pursuing a case at the border.

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

Trump’s attempt to rewrite asylum law is a total sham. We’ll see how the Federal Court reacts.

Also interesting that there is no evidence that the Administration is sending additional Asylum Officers to ports of entry. Another indication that this is a sham meant to punish, discourage, and deter asylum seekers — not just to encourage them to go to ports of entry which many do already.

PWS

11-10-18

TRUMP’S BOGUS BORDER CRACKDOWN & ATTACK ON ASYLUM EXPLAINED: Professor Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia & The Penn State Law Center For Immigrants Rights Clinic Provide “Fact Sheet”

Blocking those Seeking Entry PolicyFinal

Joint Rule and Presidential Proclamation On Entry and Asylum: What You Need To Know

Updated November 9, 2018

What are these new policies?

On November 9, 2018, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) issued an interim final rule and a presidential proclamation affecting individuals seeking entry at the southern border of the United States. These executive actions place restrictions on asylum for certain noncitizens arriving in the United States.

What are these policies intended to do?

The interim final rule governs eligibility for asylum and screening procedures for those subject to a new presidential proclamation. Together, these executive actions suspend entry for noncitizens crossing the southern border and bar such noncitizens from asylum.

What is the scope of the joint interim rule and presidential proclamation?

The rule applies prospectively, so individuals who arrived in the United States before the effective date of November 9, 2018 are not covered. The rule also does not impact two related forms of relief known as withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. These forms of relief are narrower and without the same benefits of asylum protection. No later than 90 days from the date of the presidential proclamation, November 9, 2018, the Secretary of State, Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security should submit to the President a

recommendation on whether the suspension should be extended or renewed.

What legal authority is the administration relying upon to issue the interim final and

presidential proclamation?

The joint interim rule points to several sections in the immigration statute known as the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Some of these sections are summarized below.

● INA § 212(f) states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of anyclass of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

The goal of this document is to provide general information and is not meant to act as a substitute to legal advice from an attorney.
1

● INA § 208(d)(5)(B)● INA §
●

Has the administration used INA § 212(f) before?

Yes. Most recently, INA § 212(f) was used as a basis for three travel bans issued by the President, each of which prohibits the entry of nationals from certain countries. On June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an opinion in the case of Hawaii v. Trump (Travel Ban 3.0). Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Roberts held that the travel ban does not violate the INA and described INA § 212(f) as a “comprehensive delegation” which “exudes deference to the President in every clause.”

Is the President’s use of INA § 212(f) in the Travel Ban distinguishable?

Yes. In Hawaii v. Trump, the courts did not analyze the suspension clause at INA § 212(f) against the asylum provision at INA § 208(a).

What are the legal concerns with these executive actions?

There is a concern that the executive actions violate the immigration statute and other laws. While the interim final rule and presidential proclamation identify some sections of the immigration statute, these sections cannot be read in isolation to the statute as a whole, nor can it conflict with the U.S. Constitution, statutes and other laws. One concern is that these actions violate the statutory provision that governs asylum law and other laws. INA § 208 states that any person physically present in the United States, regardless of how or where he or she entered is eligible to apply for asylum. The section states in part, “

ated port of arrival.

The goal of this document is to provide general information and is not meant to act as a substitute to legal advice from an attorney.

states that “[t]he Attorney General may provide by regulation for any

other conditions or limitations on the consideration of an application for asylum not

inconsistent with this Act.”

215(a) states that it is “unlawful . . . for any alien to depart from or enter or attempt

to depart from or enter the United States except under such reasonable rules, regulations,and orders, and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may prescribe.”

INA

§

208(b)(2)(C) states that the “Attorney General may by regulation establish

additional limitations and conditions, consistent with this section, under which an alien

shall be ineligible for asylum under paragraph (1).”

Any alien . . . who arrives in the United States (whether or not

at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters) irrespective of such alien’s status,

may apply for asylum . . .” (emphasis added).

Because

the plain language of the INA is clear that

any noncitizen is eligible for asylum regardless of her manner of entry, there is a concern that these policies violate the statute by restricting the availability of asylum seekers only to those who

present at a design

2

Why is the administration issuing these policies?

It is the administration’s position that the United States has seen an increase in the number of noncitizens arriving at the United States between ports of entry along the southern border and that

many of the asylum claims brought forth by this population are without merit.

What are some of the countervailing views to the administration’s position taken by some

refugee advocates and scholars?

Many asylum seekers arriving at the southern border are from the Northern Triangle which is comprised of Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras. The violence and danger in these countries is well documented. Individuals who have suffered or will suffer individual harm for a specific

reason are eligible to apply for asylum under the immigration statute and other laws. Many of the

asylum claims by individuals from the Northern Triangle are with merit.

What is an “Interim Final Rule”?

An Interim Final Rule becomes effective immediately upon publication and is an exception to the general rule that public notice and comment must take place before the effective date of a regulation. DOJ and DHS have concluded that a “good cause” exception exists to publish this asylum regulation as an interim final rule. Written comments can be submitted by the public for a period of sixty days from the date of publication.

What is a presidential proclamation?

A presidential proclamation is one form of presidential power and similar to an executive order. It is an order issued by the President of the United States and may possess the authority of law. See e.g., Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952).

What comes next?

Given the legal concerns of restricting asylum, litigation is expected. Further, under section 4 of the presidential proclamation, if any section of the proclamation is found to be invalid, the remainder of the proclamation shall remain effective.

Where can I find more resources?

See the Penn State Law Center for Immigrants’ Rights Clinic website for updates on this and other immigration policies. Also visit:

● Department of Homeland Security

● American Immigration Lawyers Association

● American Immigration Council

● Human Rights FirstThe goal of this document is to provide general information and is not meant to act as a substitute to legal advice from an attorney.
3

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

It’s critically important to the future of our nation and the world that the actions of Trump and his White Nationalist scofflaws be resisted in the courts and in our political system.

In the meantime, since virtually everything the Administration says on this topic is a false narrative or obfuscation of their real racist agenda, an honest expert analysis like this is a “gold mine.”

We can (and are) diminishing ourselves as a nation, but it won’t stop human migration!

PWS

11-09-18

TRUMP’S TOADIES: EOIR JOINS “PARTNERS” AT DHS IN FRIVOLOUS “INTERIM” REG THAT CLEARLY VIOLATES ASYLUM STATUTE! — All In Pursuit Of Trump’s Racist, Anti-Asylum Agenda!

Here’s a link to the “Interim Regulations:”

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2018-24594.pdf

Here’s “Tal’s Take:”

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Trump-administration-to-issue-travel-ban-like-13376110.php

Trump administration to issue travel ban-like rule at southern border

Tal Kopan Nov. 8, 2018

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is using travel ban-like authority to substantially curtail immigrants’ ability to seek asylum in the U.S.

The administration took the first step Thursday to bar immigrants from applying for asylum if they cross the southern border illegally. On Friday, President Trump is likely to issue a proclamation implementing the ban, a senior administration official suggested in a briefing.

The ban will apply to future illegal border crossers, not those who have already entered the country, the official said.

The move, which was first reported by The Chronicle last month, comes as a caravan of thousands of impoverished migrants is slowly traveling through Mexico toward the U.S. The migrants are still several weeks away from the border, but Trump has already sent 5,000 troops to the Southwest to prepare for their possible arrival.

Related Stories

Trump’s proclamation will apply only apply to those who cross the U.S.-Mexican border illegally. The goal, said a second administration official, is to “funnel” asylum seekers to legal border crossings, where the government is “better resourced” and has “better capabilities and better manpower and staffing.”

But the rule could have overwhelming consequences for crossings like San Ysidro in San Diego County. The busiest land crossing in the Western hemisphere, that port of entry already struggles to process immigrants who arrive seeking asylum, with wait times often approaching weeks.

The administration officials did not answer a question about how the ports of entry would be able to accommodate even more immigrants.

The San Ysidro crossing can process 50 to 100 immigrants a day, according to Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan. There were days in July when the line was 1,000 people long.

Officials cannot legally turn away immigrants seeking asylum at recognized border crossings. But they do conduct “metering,” stopping immigrants before they get to the crossing and telling them they have to come back.

That has created desperate situations south of the border. An inspector general’s report analyzing the administration’s handling of the family separation crisis this summer blamed “metering” for causing more people to cross into the U.S. illegally.

Federal law says asylum protections, which afford a path to citizenship for qualifying immigrants who fear persecution in their home countries, are available to immigrants “whether or not” they arrive at a legal crossing. The administration argues that other provisions of the law allow them to restrict that.

Immigrant advocates disagree, and have already said they will sue to block Trump’s expected proclamation.

“The asylum ban is patently unlawful and disregards our nation’s long commitment to providing a safe haven for those fleeing danger. Court challenges are coming,” said Lee Gelernt, a lead immigration attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.

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

These “Interim Regs” are 78 pages of pure legal gobbledygook, bureaucratic doublespeak, and irrelevant and intentionally misleading stats purporting to “justify the unjustifiable.” So, I’ll make this simple.

The asylum statute says individuals have a right to apply for asylum regardless of legal status and without regard to whether they arrived or entered at a legal “port of entry;”
This “Interim Regulation” purports to make those who don’t arrive at a port of entry ineligible to apply for asylum;
The regulation cites a statutory provision that allows the AG and the Secretary of DHS to create “exceptions” and “conditions” on applicants by regulation;
But, that statute actually says those “exceptions and conditions” must be “consistent with” the statute;
The “exception” to eligibility in this Interim Regulation specifically contradicts the clear language of the statute permitting those who enter or arrive illegally to apply for asylum;
Therefore, the exception is beyond the authority of the AG and the Secretary to create by regulation;
Indeed, the facial invalidity of this Interim Regulation is so clear that the EOIR and DHS position is frivolous— not passing the “straight face test” — and the policy officials and bureaucrats involved are promoting frivolous litigation before the Federal Courts — generally frowned upon when done by members of the public!
Perhaps at some point the Federal Courts will assert themselves by starting to “take names” of those US Government officials wasting court time in pursuit of illegal, racially-motivated objectives.

No wonder the Dudes who drafted this piece of garbage wanted to bury their real actions and intent in 78 pages of pure nonsense! This from an Administration supposedly committed to cutting bureaucracy and eliminating unnecessary and burdensome regulations!

Tomorrow, as previously promised, Trump will continue to carry out his racist, White Nationalist political agenda by declaring a totally bogus “immigration emergency” by Executive Order (similar to the bogus emergency he used to justify the discriminatory and bogus “Travel Ban”). The only question is whether the Federal Courts will let him get away with thumbing his nose at the statute, our Constitution, and the authority of the Article III Courts themselves.

Stay tuned!

PWS

11-08-18

9TH CIR: SCOFFLAWS OUTED, DREAMERS WIN AGAIN: Sessions Is Gone, But He & Trump Just Can’t Stop Losing On Their Stupid, Cruel, Wasteful, & Illegal Attack On Kids Who Are Our Future!

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/08/politics/daca-9th-circuit/index.html

The rescission of DACA—based as it was solely on a misconceived view of the law—is reviewable, and plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that it must be set aside under the APA. We therefore affirm the district court’s entry of a preliminary injunction.31 The district court also properly dismissed plaintiffs’ APA notice-and-comment claim, and their claim that the DACA rescission violates their substantive due process rights. The district court also properly denied the government’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ APA arbitrary-and-capricious claim, their claim that the new information-sharing policy violates their due process rights, and their claim that the DACA rescission violates their right to equal protection.
***
The Executive wields awesome power in the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws. Our decision today does not curb that power, but rather enables its exercise in a manner that is free from legal misconceptions and is democratically accountable to the public. Whether Dulce Garcia and the hundreds of thousands of other young dreamers like her may continue to live productively in the only country they have ever known is, ultimately, a choice for the political branches of our constitutional government. With the power to make that choice, however, must come accountability for the consequences.

Here’s a link to the full decision by the 9th Circuit:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/11/08/18-15068.opinion.pdf

PWS

11-08-18

Tag: Executive Order

CRUEL, INHUMANE, INEFFECTIVE, WASTEFUL: New Report From CMS, KBI, & CBE Shows How Trump’s Racist Immigration Enforcement Policies Are Destroying & Dividing America, Not Protecting Us!

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

THE GIBSON REPORT 11-12-18—Compiled by Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group

THE HILL: NOLAN SAYS TRUMP’S BORDER ORDER IS NQRFPT!

“NQRFPT” = “Not Quite Ready for Prime Time” (as some might remember from my days on the bench)

The Immigration Crisis Jeff Sessions Leaves Behind

Assessing the ousted attorney general’s legacy on President Trump’s favorite issue.

GONZO’S WORLD: SNL BIDS ADIEU TO “EVIL ELF!” – See It Here!

Jeff Sessions and Robert Mueller Say Their Goodbyes on Saturday Night Live, With a Little Help From Kate McKinnon and Robert De Niro

SESSIONS IS OUT @ DOJ – But, His Ugly Jim Crow Racist Legacy & Disingenuous Perversions Of The “Rule Of Law” Continue To Hang Like A Dark Cloud Over Our Nation & Our Moral Values!

THE HILL: Nolan Discusses Birthright Citizenship In Developed Countries

GROUPS SUE TO BLOCK TRUMP’S ATTACK ON ASYLUM LAWS — Administration Outraged At Prospect Of Being Held Accountable For Violating Laws!

TRUMP’S BOGUS BORDER CRACKDOWN & ATTACK ON ASYLUM EXPLAINED: Professor Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia & The Penn State Law Center For Immigrants Rights Clinic Provide “Fact Sheet”

TRUMP’S TOADIES: EOIR JOINS “PARTNERS” AT DHS IN FRIVOLOUS “INTERIM” REG THAT CLEARLY VIOLATES ASYLUM STATUTE! — All In Pursuit Of Trump’s Racist, Anti-Asylum Agenda!

These “Interim Regs” are 78 pages of pure legal gobbledygook, bureaucratic doublespeak, and irrelevant and intentionally misleading stats purporting to “justify the unjustifiable.” So, I’ll make this simple.

9TH CIR: SCOFFLAWS OUTED, DREAMERS WIN AGAIN: Sessions Is Gone, But He & Trump Just Can’t Stop Losing On Their Stupid, Cruel, Wasteful, & Illegal Attack On Kids Who Are Our Future!

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

“NQRFPT” = “Not Quite Ready for Prime Time” (as some might remember from my days on the bench)

Related posts:

Related posts:

The Immigration Crisis Jeff Sessions Leaves Behind

Assessing the ousted attorney general’s legacy on President Trump’s favorite issue.

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

These “Interim Regs” are 78 pages of pure legal gobbledygook, bureaucratic doublespeak, and irrelevant and intentionally misleading stats purporting to “justify the unjustifiable.” So, I’ll make this simple.

Related posts:

Related posts: