LA TIMES: FAILURE IN A NUTSHELL: HOW THE TRUMP/SESSIONS/MILLER/ WHITE NATIONALIST IMMIGRATION AGENDA HAS BEEN A DISASTER FOR AMERICA IN EVERY WAY! — GOP Congress Shares Blame For This Mess!

It’s been six weeks since a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to fix the crisis it created when it separated more than 2,500 children from their parents under a heartless policy designed to deter desperate families from entering the United States illegally. But the job of reunification still isn’t done, in part because the government failed to devise a system to track the separated families.

Some 400 parents reportedly have already been deported without their children, and the government apparently has no idea how to reach them. It’s a colossal snafu that is as appalling as it is inexplicable. Among the many inhumane immigration enforcement policies adopted in the first two years of the Trump reign, history may well regard this bit of idiocy as the worst.

Or perhaps not; the competition hasn’t closed yet. In fact, the Pentagon is working on plans, at Trump’s direction, to house 20,000 detained immigrants — including children this time — in secured areas of military bases while they await deportation proceedings. Yes, the Obama administration did something similar when it tried to deal with the inflow of unaccompanied minors from Central America. It was a bad idea then, and it’s a bad idea now; kids don’t belong in prisons on military bases. Under a court order, the government cannot hold minors for more than 20 days before releasing them to the custody of their parents, other relatives or vetted guardians.

When it comes to immigration, there has been such a flood of bad policies and ham-handed enforcement acts since Trump took office that it can be hard to keep it all straight.

First there was the ban on travel of people from mostly Muslim countries and then the effort to eliminate protections for so-called Dreamers who have been living in the country illegally since arriving as children. Hard-line Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions has inserted himself in the immigration court system and overridden previous decisions over who qualifies for asylum; not surprisingly, the number of people granted protection has dropped as a result. President Trump also has throttled the flow of refugees resettled here; last year, for the first time since the passage of the 1980 U.S. Refugee Act, the United States resettled fewer refugees than the rest of the world, a significant step away from what had been an area of global leadership. (Over the last 40 years, the U.S. has been responsible for 75% of the world’s permanently resettled refugees.)

Then there’s this: The White House is reportedly drafting a plan that would allow immigration officials to deny citizenship, green cards and residency visas to immigrants if they or family members have used certain government programs, such as food stamps, the earned income tax credit or Obamacare.

And this: The now largely abandoned“zero tolerance” policy of filing misdemeanor criminal charges against people crossing the border illegally led to a surge of cases in federal court districts along the Southwest border as non-immigration criminal prosecutions plummeted, according to an analysis by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. In fact, non-immigration prosecutions fell from 1,093 (1 in 7 prosecutions) in March to 703 (1 in 17 prosecutions) in June, suggesting that serious crimes are taking a back seat to misdemeanor border crossing.

Meanwhile, a Government Accountability Office report this week questions how U.S. Customs and Border Patrol set priorities in planning where to build Trump’s border wall, and said the agency failed to account for wide variations in terrain in estimating the cost — which means that extending the existing border walls and fences another 722 miles could cost more than the administration’s $18-billion estimate. And while the president crows that the wall will secure the border, it won’t, experts say. People will still find a way around, over or under it. And most drug smuggling already comes hidden in motor vehicles passing through monitored ports of entry. At best, Trump’s wall — if Congress is insane enough to approve funding — would be little more than a symbol of his arrogance, and of this country’s determination to seal itself off from the world.

Trump’s immigration policy has been characterized by unnecessary detention and inadequate monitoring that has allowed for abuses at detention centers — including sexual assaults and forced medication of children. The immigration court system is now overwhelmed by a backlog of 733,000 cases.

In short, it’s been a disaster. And through all of these fiascoes, there have been zero serious efforts in Congress or by the president for comprehensive reform of a system everyone acknowledges is broken.

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

Regime change is the only answer, beginning this November and continuing until Trump and his toxically incompetent White Nationalist Cabal are removed from office!

America is a great country that could reach its full potential and regain both economic and moral leadership among the world’s nations. But, it’s never going to happen while the majority of us are being governed by short-sighted, incompetent White Nationalists bent on letting their racist agenda destroy our country. Oh, and they are corrupt grifters too, never a good sign in leadership!

PWS

08-11-18

 

 

 

KATY TUR LIVE, 08-10-19: MSNBC Correspondent Jacob Soboroff & I Discuss Jeff Sessions’s Contemptuous Behavior Toward Courts & Migrants With Katy!

Here’s the link to Katy’s entire show for August 10, 2018. My segment begins at 35:25:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9NoDoSiFtII

 

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

Thanks Katy and Jacob. It was an honor to be on with you.

Glad that the Sessions’s war on deserving asylum seekers and Due Process as well as his disrespectful treatment of asylum seekers, the judiciary, and our justice system is finally getting notice. One way or another, he will eventually be held accountable for the damage he is doing to humanity and to our country.

PWS

08-10-18

DEPORTATION OUTRAGE: JUDGE SULLIVAN THREATENS ADMINISTRATION’S ARROGANT WHITE NATIONALIST SCOFFLAWS WITH CONTEMPT: “In the event that the government does not “fully comply” with Sullivan’s order to return Carmen and her daughter from El Salvador, the judge said, Sessions, Nielsen, Cissna and McHenry must appear in court to “SHOW CAUSE why they should not be held in CONTEMPT OF COURT.””

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/09/637269721/judge-orders-return-of-deported-asylum-seekers

Judge Orders Return Of Deported Asylum-Seekers

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, pictured in 2008, has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting immigrants under new rules that largely bar asylum in domestic and gang violence cases.

Charles Dharapak/AP

Updated at 9:40 p.m. ET

A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has threatened to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen in contempt of court if they fail to return to the U.S. a mother and daughter seeking asylum. The immigrants were deported ahead of a scheduled hearing with the court on Thursday.

A transcript of Thursday’s hearing shows U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan angry after being told the asylum-seekers had been deported and were on a plane out of the U.S. even while a government attorney was telling him they wouldn’t be deported before midnight.

“This is pretty outrageous,” Sullivan said, “Somebody in pursuit of justice in a United States court is just — is spirited away while her attorneys are arguing for justice for her?”

In addition to ordering the government to get the mother and daughter back, Sullivan blocked the Trump administration from deporting eight other immigrants — currently held in detention — who are part of the same lawsuit against the government for allegedly wrongfully rejecting their claims for asylum.

The order issued Thursday stated that the defendants, including Sessions, Nielsen, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service Director Lee Francis Cissna and Executive Office of Immigration Review Director James McHenry, “shall return ‘Carmen’ and her daughter to the United States FORTHWITH.”

Carmen is a pseudonym to protect the woman’s identity.

Court documents chronicle a sequence of events that appear to have outraged Sullivan and initiated the unusual order to return the pair to the U.S.

The judge had scheduled Thursday’s emergency hearing on the motion to block the deportation after learning of their imminent removal on Aug. 9. The government agreed that Carmen and her daughter “would not be removed prior to that time.”

But despite the government’s guarantee, Sullivan learned from the American Civil Liberties Union in open court that the two had been removed from the Dilley South Texas Family Residential Center. It wasn’t until after the hearing that the government confirmed in an email that the two plaintiffs “were, in fact, on an airplane while the Court was hearing arguments” on their case.

As a result, the order states, “The Court informed government counsel that it would neither tolerate nor excuse any delay with compliance with this Order.”

The lawsuit — involving a group of asylum-seekers still in custody and others already deported — was filed Tuesday by the ACLU and Center for Gender & Refugee Studies.

It argues the administration is wrongly rejecting asylum claimsbased on domestic abuse and gang violence. The ACLU is asking the court to invalidate a decision by Sessions that says most victims of domestic abuse and gang violence cannot qualify for asylum.

“In its rush to deport as many immigrants as possible, the Trump administration is putting these women and children in grave danger of being raped, beaten, or killed,” Jennifer Chang Newell, managing attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a statement.

“We are thrilled the stay of removal was issued but sickened that the government deported two of our clients — a mom and her little girl — in the early morning hours. We will not rest until our clients are returned to safety.”

The Trump administration’s position is that many asylum-seekers are gaming the system by exaggerating their fear of returning home.

In the event that the government does not “fully comply” with Sullivan’s order to return Carmen and her daughter from El Salvador, the judge said, Sessions, Nielsen, Cissna and McHenry must appear in court to “SHOW CAUSE why they should not be held in CONTEMPT OF COURT.”

Sullivan directed the administration to give him a status update by Friday afternoon.

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

Adjoining cells? “The ICEBOX?” These are the scofflaws and abusers who often are heard disingenuously pontificating about “The Rule of Law.”

Remember folks, you read it first here at “Courtside!” I’ve been saying for a long time now that it’s time for a real Federal Judge to stand up to the disingenuous, disrespectful, and illegal actions of Sessions and his contemptuous bunch of scofflaws. Finally, Judge Sullivan is answering the bell that’s been ringing since the day Sessions was confirmed and began his reprehensible program of racism, intolerance, lies, distortions, illegality, child abuse, and dismantling the U.S. justice system in plain sight.

It’s a start in holding him accountable!

PWS

08-09-18

 

 

 

 

 

 

MORE FROM WASHPOST ON SESSIONS’S ATTACKS ON INDEPENDENCE OF US IMMIGRATION JUDGES!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/immigration-judges-worried-trump-is-seeking-to-cut-them-out-fight-back/2018/08/09/3d7e915a-9bd7-11e8-8d5e-c6c594024954_story.html?utm_term=.6b3ca4d6ec23

Antonio Olivo reports for WashPost:

The union for the nation’s immigration judges is fighting a government decision to strip a Philadelphia judge of his authority over 87 cases, arguing that the move sidelines judicial independence as President Trump seeks to ramp up deportations.

Immigration judges work under the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review, though they have independent authority to determine whether the thousands of undocumented immigrants who come before them every year can remain in the United States through asylum or some other form of relief.

In a labor grievance filed this week, the National Association of Immigration Judges says the office undercut that authority when it removed Judge Steven A. Morley from overseeing juvenile cases that he had either continued or placed on temporary hold amid questions over whether federal prosecutors had adequately notified the subjects to appear in court.

The Justice Department said in a statement Thursday that “there is reason to believe” Morley violated federal law and department policy in those cases, but it did not offer any specifics. The statement said an investigation is ongoing.

Trump alarmed immigration judges in June by tweeting that anyone caught at the border, presumably including those seeking asylum, should be deported without a trial.

“When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came,” the president wrote.

In its grievance, the judges’ union focused on a case involving Reynaldo Castro-Tum, a Guatemalan national who arrived in 2014 as a 17-year-old unaccompanied minor.

Castro-Tum’s current whereabouts are unknown, and he had not responded to recent court summonses. Morley temporarily closed his case in 2016, ordering the Justice Department to ensure that Castro-Tum was receiving the notices. He did the same with other similar cases.

Prosecutors appealed Morley’s decision, and the case eventually came to the attention of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who chose to review it in January.

Sessions concluded that Morley was wrong to close Castro-Tum’s case and ordered it resolved within two weeks.

Amiena Khan, a New York-based immigration judge who is the union’s vice president, said the intervention further raised suspicions that the administration is looking to circumvent the judicial process and move to deport people faster amid a backlog of some 600,000 cases.

“This is another transparent way, surprisingly transparent in this instance, for the agency to come in and re-create the ideology of this whole process more towards a law enforcement ideology,” Khan said.

The system “is based on our ability to look at the facts and adjudicate the claim before us to our best ability and then render a decision,” Khan said. “Not being told by someone else how to rule.”

The union, which represents 350 judges, argues that Morely should get his caseload back. It is asking the Justice Department to assure all immigration judges that their independent authority won’t be undermined.

Immigrant advocates say the dispute highlights a fundamental flaw in immigration courts, where the judges work under the same department that is tasked with prosecuting cases. Several legal groups have renewed a push for federal legislation to overhaul the system so judges can operate more independently, either through a different branch of the Justice Department or as a separate tribunal court.

“We’re very concerned the immigration judges are simply being turned into law enforcement officers,” said Laura Lynch, senior policy counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which launched a national campaign this month to lobby members of Congress to support such legislation.

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

When he isn’t busy praising hate groups, covering for police violence against the African-American community, disenfranchising minority voters, promoting the establishment of religion, using bogus stats to fabricate a connection between immigrants and violent crime, abusing brown-skinned children, forcing transgender kids to pee in their pants, thumbing his nose at Federal Judges and their orders, briefing his attorneys on how to mislead courts, mounting unconstitutional attacks on cities, ignoring environmental laws, dissing Dreamers, shilling for racist legislation, deconstructing our refugee, asylum, and legal immigration systems, filling court dockets with minor misdemeanants to the exclusion of felons, imposing deportation quotas, shafting brown-skinned refugee victims of domestic violence, huddling with fellow neo-Nazi Stephen Miller, blocking migrants from getting abortions, or hiding under his desk from Trump, one of Jeff “Gonzo Apocalypto” Sessions’s favorite pastimes is interfering with the independence of U.S. Immigration Judges while purposely jacking up the backlog in the U.S. Immigration Courts.

It remains to be seen whether our country can survive this one-man Constitutional wrecking crew and his reign of indecency and intellectual dishonesty.

PWS

08-09-18

PREDICTABLY, TRUMP/SESSIONS/MILLER WHITE NATIONALIST “GONZO” IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT DIMINISHES US AS A NATION BUT FAILS TO STEM HUMAN MIGRATION! – Resist Stupidity, Cruelty, & Calls For More Fraud & Abuse Of Taxpayer Money On Xenophobic Racist Initiatives!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ahead-of-midterms-trump-hits-a-wall-in-efforts-to-curb-illegal-immigration/2018/08/08/9bc49f4a-9a59-11e8-843b-36e177f3081c_story.html?utm_term=.702f863a3ad4

cement,  reports for the Washington Post:

President Trump, who for three years has vowed to build a massive security wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, is running into his own wall on illegal immigration, which has continued to surge in recent months despite family separations and other hard-edge policies aimed at curbing the flow.

Nearly 19 months into his presidency — and three months ahead of pivotal midterm elections — the envisioned $25 billion border wall remains unfunded by lawmakers. Deportations are lagging behind peak rates under President Barack Obama, while illegal border crossings, which plummeted early in Trump’s tenure, have spiked.

And government data released Wednesday showed that the number of migrant families taken into custody along the southern border remained nearly unchanged from June to July — an indication that the Trump administration’s move to separate thousands of parents and children did little to deter others from attempting the journey.

More than 9,200 family members entered the country illegally in July, a number on par with the past several months, according to the data. In all, more families with children have arrived in the first 10 months of fiscal 2018 than during any year under Obama.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of David’s excellent article at the link.

No real surprises her for anyone who understands immigration. Obviously, irrational policies based on racial animus rather than facts, logic, common sense, or human behavior will fail every time.

We need regime change! In the meantime, Go New Due Process Army!

PWS

08-09-18

JAIL FOR SCOFFLAW SESSIONS? — U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE EMMET G. SULLIVAN HAS HAD ENOUGH OF AG’S LAWLESS BEHAVIOR – THREATENS CONTEMPT OVER ILLEGAL DEPORTATION!— “This is pretty outrageous,” said U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan after being told about the removal. “That someone seeking justice in U.S. court is spirited away while her attorneys are arguing for justice for her?”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/immigration/judge-halts-mother-daughter-deportation-threatens-to-hold-sessions-in-contempt/2018/08/09/a23a0580-9bd6-11e8-8d5e-c6c594024954_story.html?utm_term=.61aa9f3c7462

Arelis R. Hernandez reports for the Washington Post:

A federal judge in Washington halted a deportation in progress Thursday and threatened to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt after learning that the Trump administration tried to remove a woman and her daughter while a court hearing appealing their deportations was underway.

“This is pretty outrageous,” U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said after being told about the removal. “That someone seeking justice in U.S. court is spirited away while her attorneys are arguing for justice for her?”

“I’m not happy about this at all,” the judge continued. “This is not acceptable.”

The woman, known in court papers as Carmen, is a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed this week by the American Civil Liberties Union. It challenges a recent policy change by the Department of Justice that aims to expedite the removal of asylum seekers who fail to prove their cases and excludes domestic and gang violence as justifications for granting asylum in the United States.

Attorneys for the civil rights organization and the Department of Justice had agreed to delay removal proceedings for Carmen and her child until 11:59 p.m. Thursday so they could argue the matter in court.

But lead ACLU attorney Jennifer Chang Newell, who was participating in the court hearing via phone from her office in California, received an email during the hearing that said the mother and daughter were being deported.


Activists rally against the Trump administration’s immigration policies outside the New York City offices of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in July. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

During a brief recess, she told her colleagues the pair had been taken from a family detention center in Dilley, Tex., and were headed to the airport in San Antonio for an 8:15 a.m. flight.

After granting the ACLU’s request to delay deportations for Carmen and the other plaintiffs until the lawsuit is decided, Sullivan ordered the government to “turn the plane around.”

Justice Department attorney Erez Reuveni said he had not been told the deportation was happening that morning, and could not confirm the whereabouts of Carmen and her daughter.

The ACLU said later that government attorneys confirmed to them after the hearing that the pair was on a flight en route to El Salvador. The Justice Department said they would be flown back to Texas and returned to the detention center after landing, the ACLU said.

Calls and emails to the Justice Department’s communications office were not immediately returned Thursday afternoon.

“Obviously my heart sank when I found out,” Chang Newell said. “The whole point of this was to get a ruling from the court before they could be placed in danger.”

To qualify for asylum, migrants must show that they have a fear of persecution in their native country based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a “particular social group,” a category that in the past has included victims of domestic violence and other abuse.

Carmen fled El Salvador with her daughter in June, according to court records, fearing they would be killed by gang members who had demanded she pay them monthly or suffer consequences. Several coworkers at the factory where Carmen worked had been murdered,and her husband is also abusive, the records state.

Under the fast-track removal system, created in 1996, asylum seekers are interviewed by to determine whether they have a “credible fear” of returning home. Those who pass get a full hearing in immigration court.

In June, Sessions vacated a 2016 Board of Immigration Appeals court case that granted asylum to an abused woman from El Salvador. As part of that decision, Sessions said gang and domestic violence in most cases would no longer be grounds for receiving asylum.

“The mere fact that a country may have problems effectively policing certain crimes — such as domestic violence or gang violence — or that certain populations are more likely to be victims of crime, cannot itself establish an asylum claim,” Sessions wrote at the time.

The ACLU lawsuit was filed on behalf of 12 migrants from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala — three of them children — all of whom failed their initial “credible fear” interviews.

Two of the children and their mothers were deported before the suit was filed. None of the adults had been separated from their children as part of President Trump’s “zero-tolerance” policy.

The lawsuit says Sessions’s ruling, and updated guidelines for asylum officers that the Department of Homeland Security issued a month later, subject migrants in expedited removal proceedings to an “unlawful screening standard” that deprives them of their rights under federal law.

Asylum seekers previously had to show that the government in their native country was “unable or unwilling” to protect them. But now they have to show that the government “condones” the violence or “is completely helpless” to protect them, the lawsuit says.

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

Here’s Tal Kopan’s  report for CNN:

Judge blocks administration from deporting asylum seekers while fighting for right to stay in US

By Tal Kopan, CNN

A federal judge on Thursday blocked the Trump administration from deporting immigrants while they’re fighting for their right to stay in the US — reportedly excoriating the administration and threatening to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt.

DC District Judge Emmet Sullivan on Thursday agreed with the American Civil Liberties Union that the immigrants they are representing in a federal lawsuit should not be deported while their cases are pending.

During court, Sullivan was incensed at the report that one of the plaintiffs was in the process of being deported, according to The Washington Post. He threatened to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt if his order wasn’t followed, the report added.

“This is pretty outrageous,” Sullivan said, according to the Post. “That someone seeking justice in US court is spirited away while her attorneys are arguing for justice for her?”

More: http://www.cnn.com/2018/08/09/politics/judge-halts-deportations-sessions/index.html

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

Is a real judge finally going to hold America’s most notorious child abuser and scofflaw accountable? Is a strategy of sending DOJ lawyers into Article III Federal Courts to lie, misrepresent, obfuscate, and present largely frivolous legal positions finally going to backfire? Too early to tell, but this is a hopeful sign.

My recollection is that Judge Sullivan has always had a well-deserved reputation as a no-nonsense judge who demands the same professional performance from Government litigators as he does from the private bar. By contrast, I have previously pointed out how under Sessions DOJ lawyers too often conduct themselves in a flip and contemptuous manner that would have landed private lawyers in hot water. Things like falsely claiming that “there was no policy of family separation” when it was precisely what Sessions had created, as a deterrent, through his outlandish “zero tolerance” policy, and actually publicly bragged about.

That is, when Sessions wasn’t busy misrepresenting statistics, misapplying Biblical quotes, telling demonstrable lies (“asylum fraud is a major cause of eleven million undocumented individuals” — what a whopper!), and dehumanizing vulnerable asylum seekers and their families who are merely trying to get a fair chance to plead for their lives under US and international law. Or perhaps trying to promote a ludicrous fictional connection between Dreamer relief and genuine national security.

Hopefully, Judge Sullivan will continue to be outraged when he gets into the merits of the case and finds out just how Sessions has intentionally misconstrued asylum law, manipulated an agency that he de facto runs, and used CINO (“Courts In Name Only”) to deny Due Process, intentionally inflict misery, and impose potential death sentences on fine people, vulnerable human beings, many of whom deserve protection, not rejection, and all of whom deserve to be treated with respect and given a full chance to present their claims. I believe that the ACLU will be able to show Judge Sullivan how Sessions has arrogantly abused his authority and corrupted both the USDOJ and our entire justice system to advance his White Nationalist agenda.

The Government obviously knew that this mother and daughter were plaintiffs in this case. Their presence during litigation presented no threat whatsoever to the United States. The Government’s disingenuous, unnecessary, and contemptuous actions show exactly what kind of racial animus and disdain for human life and for the American justice system are behind Sessions’s actions. Let’s hope, for sake of our country and the innocent people he is harming, that Judge Sullivan finally holds “Scofflaw Sessions” accountable!

PWS

08-08-18

 

GOOD NEWS CORNER: SEE THE ANIMATED VIDEO OF HOW THE AMAZING JOAN HODGES WU & HER ASYLUM SEEKER ASSISTANCE PROJECT (“ASAP”) ARE DOING SPECTACULAR THINGS TO CONNECT OUR NEWEST RESIDENTS AND THEIR LIFE SKILLS WITH OUR COMMUNITY! — Talk About A Low Budget, High Results Win – Win!

This is Joan, and here’s the ASAP video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQbcohzT_U0

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

Joan Hodges Wu is an amazing person — a bundle of intellectual power, creativity, endless optimism, energy, inspiration, common sense, compassion, and understanding. She literally “electrifies” any room she enters — a natural leader and role model.

Her organization, ASAP, which I have personally visited to have lunch with the group, is equally amazing. First, there are the amazing community volunteers, of all ages and from all walks of life. And then, the amazing asylum seekers: Impressively accomplished people like the Ethiopian gentleman in the video.

They were successful businesspeople, teachers, students, agriculturists, merchants, government officials, scientists, computer engineers, health care professionals, and many others, from many different countries and cultures, who were making good lives in their home countries but were forced to flee by powers over which they had no control. Now, they want to contribute their skills and become integral parts of our communities and help insure that they, their children, and all members of the American community will continue to flourish in the future.

Often, all that is standing in the way is the need for “cultural translation” — the ability to understand how to approach employers, neighbors, government officials, teachers and others in the community and to understand how their skills and experiences might best be used.  They also seek to understand the resources available to help them fit in and contribute. No government agency or NGO currently provides this information. That’s where Joan and her network of volunteers, religious groups, and other volunteers come in. They fill the gap and create success stories.

ASAP does all of this on a shoestring budget. A dollar seems to go further when it is used to unleash human kindness and caring and when the grateful “target group” is willing to contribute and give back to others themselves.

Imagine what our world and our communities could be like if we spent more on projects like ASAP? What if we recognized, valued, and utilized the humanity of all people, not just a selected few? What if we worked together to solve problems rather than attempting to impose futile non-solutions on one segment of our society?

Read more about Joan, ASAP, how you can volunteer, and how you can contribute to the effort here:

https://www.asylumprojectdc.org/

I think it is a real shame that our Government expends so much time and so many resources in a futile attempt to divide us and to punish, de-humanize, and discourage asylum seekers and other migrants. In other words, intentionally creating “lose-lose” situations.

There are lots of good folks out there whose lives we could save and who also could make great contributions to our country. Seems like we’re letting bias and myths blind us to the many “win-wins” there for the taking under wiser, more foresighted, and more humane national leadership.

Perhaps, the “New Due Process Army” will take us to the better places that our generation failed to reach.

 

PWS

08-08-18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHITE NATIONALIST ADMINISTRATION’S NEXT TARGET FOR ABUSE: LEGAL IMMIGRANTS! — PLUS, SESSIONS’S CONTINUING “DECONSTRUCTION” OF DUE PROCESS AND JUSTICE IN THE U.S. IMMIGRATION COURTS!

Tal Kopan reports for CNN:

Sources: Stephen Miller pushing policy to make it harder for immigrants who received benefits to earn citizenship

By Tal Kopan, CNN

White House adviser Stephen Miller is pushing to expedite a policy that could penalize legal immigrants whose families receive public benefits and make it more difficult to get citizenship, three sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.

The White House has been reviewing the proposal since March at the Office of Management and Budget, which is the last stop for regulations before they are final. But concerns over potential lawsuits have delayed the final rule, and the draft has undergone numerous revisions, multiple sources say.

The crux of the proposal would penalize legal immigrants if they or their family members have used government benefits — defined widely in previous drafts of the policy.

The law has long allowed authorities to reject immigrants if they are likely to become a “public charge” — or dependent on government. But the draft rule in its recent forms would include programs as expansive as health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, as well as some forms of Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit.

The rule would not explicitly prohibit immigrants or their families from accepting benefits. Rather, it authorizes the officers who evaluate their applications for things like green cards and residency visas to count the use of these programs against applicants and gives them authority to deny visas on these grounds — even if the program was used by a family member.

Two non-administration sources close to US Citizenship and Immigration Services, which would publish and enforce the proposal, say that Miller has been unhappy by the delay and has pushed the agency to finish it quickly. The sources say Miller even instructed the agency to prioritize finalizing the rule over other efforts a few weeks ago.

Miller is an immigration hardliner within the administration, a veteran of Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Senate office who has been at President Donald Trump’s side since the early stages of his presidential campaign.

But two other administration sources downplayed the idea of any instructions to defer other policies until it’s done, though they acknowledged Miller is keenly interested in the rule.

The White House and Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment.

More: http://www.cnn.com/2018/08/07/politics/stephen-miller-immigrants-penalize-benefits/index.html

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

Tal also highlights the continuing bias and political interference with the U.S. Immigration Courts under Sessions, spotlighting the continuing vocal public opposition of “Our Gang” of retired U.S. Judges, led in this case by Judge Jeffrey Chase, to the wanton destruction of  Due Process in our Immigration Courts as well as the NAIJ, representing current Immigraton Judges (I am a member):

Immigrant ordered deported after Justice Department replaces judge

By Tal Kopan, CNN

Judge Steven Morley has overseen the immigration case of Reynaldo Castro-Tum for years. But last month when Castro-Tum was officially ordered deported, it wasn’t Morley at the bench.

Instead, the Justice Department sent an assistant chief immigration judge from Washington to replace Morley for exactly one hearing: the one that ended Castro-Tum’s bid to stay in the US.

The unusual use of a chief immigration judge from headquarters has raised concerns from retired immigration judges, lawyers and the union for active immigration judges. They say the move seems to jeopardize the right to a fair process in immigration courts.

It also highlights the unique structure of the immigration courts, which are entirely run by the Justice Department, and the ways that Attorney General Jeff Sessions — who serves as a one-man Supreme Court in these cases — has sought to test the limits of his authority over them.

The saga of Castro-Tum starts in 2014, when he crossed the border illegally as a 17-year-old. The Guatemalan teen was apprehended by the Border Patrol, which referred him to custody with the Health and Human Services Department as an unaccompanied minor. He was released to his brother-in-law a few months later and registered his brother-in-law’s address with the government. Multiple notices of court hearings were sent to that address, the government said.

But after the fifth time Castro-Tum failed to appear in court, immigration Judge Morley closed the case until the government provided him with evidence that Castro-Tum had ever lived at the address they were sending the notices to. The Board of Immigration Appeals sent the case back to Morley to reconsider with instructions to proceed even if Castro-Tum failed to show again. His current whereabouts are unknown.

Earlier this year, Sessions referred the case to himself and ruled that immigration judges across the board could no longer close immigration cases as they saw fit. The attorney general said immigration judges lack the authority to make such “administrative closures” of cases.

Sessions gave Morley 14 days to issue a new hearing notice to Castro-Tum. The Philadelphia-based immigration attorney Matthew Archambeault, who had begun following the case, appeared in court and volunteered to represent Castro-Tum, as well as to track him down. He asked the judge to postpone the case a bit longer to give him time to do that, which Morley granted.

More: http://www.cnn.com/2018/08/07/politics/immigration-judge-replaced-deportation-case-justice-department/index.html

ICYMI:

Trump nominates new ICE director:

http://www.cnn.com/2018/08/06/politics/ice-trump-vitiello/index.html

 

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

Thanks, again, Tal, for your reporting and for all you do to expose the Administration’s daily scofflaw performances in mal-administering our immigration laws.

Folks, we are in a battle for the “hearts and minds of America.” Will we fulfill our destiny as a vibrant, diverse, creative “nation of immigrants?” Or, will be become a “shell of a nation” controlled by emotionally stunted, scared, White Nationalist bigots pursuing a philosophy of White racial favoritism, discrimination, persecution, and “beggar thy neighbor” economics.  

The next election will be the test. Statistically, Trump’s White Nationalist Nation, pushing a platform of overt xenophobia and bigotry, does not represent the majority of Americans. But, they (with the help of their “fellow travelers” in the GOP)  have seized effective control of our Government on many levels. Unless we dislodge them at the ballot box and take back America for the majority of us who neither are nor sympathize with White Nationalism, our nation may well be doomed to a gloomy future.

Get out the vote! Just say no to Trump, Sessions, Miller and their White Nationalist cronies!

PWS

08-08-18

VAL BAUMAN @ DAILY MAIL — NOW THERE IS PROOF! — Sessions’s “Zero Tolerance” Prosecutions Of Asylum Seekers Displace Real Criminal Prosecutions & Investigations, Actually Making America Less Safe! — When Will The Waste, Fraud, & Abuse Of Our Justice System By The Sessions DOJ End? — “‘Unless crimes are suddenly less prevalent in the districts along the southwest border, the odds of being prosecuted for many federal offenses have declined,’ the report found.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6036081/Prosecution-non-immigration-crimes-57-Southern-U-S-border-immigration-cases-balloon.html

Val writes:

The rate of non-immigration prosecutions at the southern U.S. border was down 57 percent in June compared to March as federal officials changed focus under the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance immigration policy, according to a new report.

In March 2018, non-immigration prosecutions accounted for one in seven (14 percent) of all total prosecutions at the southern border’s five federal districts.

That rate fell steadily over the next several months, and by June the ratio had fallen to one in seventeen (or six percent) of all prosecutions, according to an analysis of government data by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.

In March 2018, non-immigration prosecutions accounted for one in seven (14 percent) of all total prosecutions at the southern border's five federal districts. By June the ratio had fallen to one in seventeen (or six percent) of all prosecutions

In March 2018, non-immigration prosecutions accounted for one in seven (14 percent) of all total prosecutions at the southern border’s five federal districts. By June the ratio had fallen to one in seventeen (or six percent) of all prosecutions

‘Unless crimes are suddenly less prevalent in the districts along the southwest border, the odds of being prosecuted for many federal offenses have declined,’ the report found.

The timing of the change coincides with the Trump administration’s April 6 announcement that the government was taking a zero-tolerance approach to immigration at the southern U.S. border.

Statisticians at TRAC concluded that the push to prioritize prosecuting illegal border crossers had taken focus away from other crimes that federal prosecutors are charged with enforcing – including narcotics trafficking, weapons offenses and pollution crimes, among other things.

‘There are these capacity issues; everything can’t be your top priority,’ said Susan Long, a statistician for TRAC. ‘I think it’s difficult to believe that the stepped-up immigration prosecutions were just happenstance and didn’t have anything to do with policy.’

Former immigration judge Paul Wickham Schmidt agreed, saying most illegal immigration cases are misdemeanors that result in time served – typically 2-3 days.

‘Courts have limited capacity, prosecutors have limited capacity and when you prioritize one thing that means deprioritizing something else,’ he said. ‘In this case, what they’ve deprioritized is absolutely insane. There are real crimes out there.’

The TRAC report also bolsters assertions by San Diego-based Justice Department prosecutor Fred Sheppard that the zero-tolerance policy would be ‘diverting staff, both support and attorneys, accordingly’ from non-immigration cases, according to a June report by USA Today.

Sheppard warned border authorities that prioritizing immigration cases would ‘occupy substantially more of our resources,’ according to an email obtained by the paper.

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

Clearly, Sessions’s obscene, irrational, xenophobic fixation on brown skinned asylum seekers (who, in most cases should just be taken to the nearest port of entry and processed civilly through the credible fear/removal system) is destroying the U.S. Justice system. His insane program ignores the fundamental truth of law enforcement in any system: putting minor first offenders of regulatory laws in court displaces the cases of  major offenders. 

That’s why no well functioning justice system does it! What would you think if your local courts and prosecutors were so busy processing jaywalking cases that they couldn’t investigate and prosecute burglaries and bank robberies? But, that’s essentially what Sessions is doing here.

Moreover, the Federal Prosecutors, Federal Judges, and Federal, Magistrates who have failed to use their independent authority to put an end to these abuses are also complicit.

While much has been written about the supposed “resilience” of our democratic institutions and their ability to stand up to Executive abuses and tyranny, in this case it’s not happening. The system is essentially letting Sessions “get away with murder.” As Americans we should all be both outraged and appalled by this failure!

Stop the abuses! Stand up for Due Process, humanity, and rationality!

PWS

08-08-18

 

 

 

 

 

 

MIRIAM JORDAN @ NYT – CREDIBLE FEAR APPROVALS FOR REFUGEES AT BORDER PLUNGE AS A RESULT OF SESSIONS’S ASSAULT ON DUE PROCESS, WOMEN, HISPANICS, & THE US ASYLUM SYSTEM – ACLU Sues To Thwart White Nationalist AG’s Efforts To Make Border A Killing Field For The Most Vulnerable Among Us!

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/07/us/migrants-asylum-credible-fear.html

Miriam writes for the NY Times:

Nine years ago, a Guatemalan woman named Irene said, she watched as gangs murdered her husband in front of her when he refused to pay them a “tax,” or extortion fee, to keep the family musical-instruments business open. Some of the assailants were imprisoned, and she continued to run the shop on her own.

Recently, though, the menace resumed, she said. The perpetrators, fresh out of prison, threatened to kill Irene if she did not pay. Fearing for her life, she fled to the United States with her 17-year-old daughter. They arrived at the southwest border seeking asylum on June 13.

Under the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance border enforcement policy, the 47-year-old woman was detained and her daughter was sent to a shelter. A few weeks later, Irene had her initial interview with an asylum officer, the first hurdle applicants must clear in the asylum process.

The officer, who conducted the interview over the phone, determined that Irene had not proved a “credible fear” of persecution if she returned home. Irene was dumbstruck. What was their definition of fear?

“I can’t go back to my country,” Irene, who asked that only her first name be used because she feared reprisals, said this week in a phone interview. “They’ll kill me if I go back.”

Immigration attorneys and advocates report that asylum applicants in recent months are failing their crucial initial screenings with asylum officers at the border in record numbers, the first sign that the Trump administration is carrying out promises to reduce the number of people granted asylum in the United States and limit the conditions under which it is granted.

New reports that people are being rejected at the border with only a cursory review of their claims has raised an alarm among immigrant advocates, who warn that many of those with legitimate claims are being sent home to face danger, or even death, despite international laws that guarantee the right of the persecuted to seek sanctuary in other countries.

Behind the new practices are recent changes to asylum adjudication unveiled by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in June. Critics have said those changes render it all but impossible for those fleeing domestic abuse, gang brutality and other violence to win protection in the United States.

Mr. Sessions’s decision was codified in a memo issued in July to the officers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services who conduct credible-fear interviews at the border.

. . . .

Data suggests that the number of people succeeding in making a case for credible fear began to decline sharply earlier this year, even before Mr. Sessions announced his new legal guidance.

According to figures collected and released by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, which tracks immigration statistics, findings of credible fear in immigration court began to “plummet” in what appeared to be a “dramatic change” during 2018. During the six months ending in June, only 14.7 percent of the case reviews in immigration court found the asylum seeker had a credible fear. Approval levels were twice that level during the last six months of 2017, the researchers found.

Eileen Blessinger, the attorney representing Irene, the Guatemalan woman, tweeted a photograph on July 12 of a stack of papers. “This is what 29 blanket credible-fear interview denials looks like,” she wrote, noting that among her clients who had been detained apart from their children, “every single separated parent” who was interviewed had received a negative determination.

She said that the trend has persisted since last month’s tweet.

“I haven’t met a single person in the last few weeks who passed their credible-fear interview,” said Allegra Love, executive director of the Santa Fe Dreamers Project, who leads a team of lawyers assisting migrants in detention in New Mexico. She added, “We have never seen such a high volume of denials.”

On Tuesday, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the new policies, which it argues violate due process “in numerous respects” and effectively close the door to asylum to people fleeing domestic abuse and gang brutality.

The lawsuit, filed in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, asks the judge to declare the new credible-fear policies illegal and to enjoin the government from applying the new standards.

“This is a naked attempt by the Trump administration to eviscerate our country’s asylum protections,” Jennifer Chang Newell, the managing attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a statement. “It’s clear the administration’s goal is to deny and deport as many people as possible, as quickly as possible.”

. . . .

Paul W. Schmidt, who retired as an immigration judge in 2016, said it appears that the attorney general’s move to reinterpret judicial precedent was “very intentional — to undermine claimants from Central America.”

“Sessions has made it much, much more difficult to fit your case into a category for relief, even if you have suffered very serious harm,” said Mr. Schmidt, who served as chairman of the Board of Immigration Appeals from 1995 to 2001.

One case decided before Mr. Session’s decision provides an example of how such cases were often handled in the past. In 2015, a Guatemalan woman named Ana decided that she and her then 11-year-old daughter could no longer endure the relentless psychological and physical aggression inflicted on them by her former partner. They had reported the abuse to local police, to no avail, and finally journeyed north to seek refuge in the United States.

Ana passed the credible-fear interview and moved with her daughter to Kentucky, where a lawyer helped them make their case before an immigration judge.

In early June, a week before Mr. Sessions’s new legal guidance, Ana was granted asylum and the right to remain legally in the United States. “I thank God we can be where we are safe, instead of returning to danger,” she said.

********************************************
Read Miriam’s entire story at the link.
I’ve heard USCIS officials claim that “nothing has changed” in the credible fear interview process or results as the result of Sessions’s rewrite of asylum law in Matter of A-B-, and his overtly anti-asylum, anti-Hispanic, anti-female message which has certainly been echoed by the actions of USCIS Director Cissna. Cissna has removed “customer service” (read “human service”) from the agency’s mission. I have been and remain highly skeptical of those claims of “business as usual.”
Perhaps those officials need to go down to the border and watch while the “Irenes of the world” are improperly blocked by their officers from even having a chance to put on a full asylum case before an Immigration Judge. This is neither Due Process nor is it compliance with the Refugee Act of 1980, the 1951 Refugee Convention, and the Convention Against Torture. It’s disgusting, plain and simple! A low point in U.S. history for which even career Civil Servants who are “going along to get along” with Sessions’s vile and lawless message have to bear some responsibility. And that definitely includes some U.S. Immigration Judges “rubber stamping” these parodies of justice. History is recording who you are and what you have done and continue to do.
Indeed, what is “their definition of fear?” Obviously, nothing suffered or to be suffered by those with brown skins under the Sessions regime.
For years, even before Trump, the law has been intentionally manipulated and unfairly tilted against asylum seekers from Central America by “captive” judges working for the DOJ and responding to political pressure to reduce the flow of refugees across the Southern Border. But, Sessions has removed all vestiges of Due Process and legality —  he overtly seeks to send vulnerable asylum seekers back to danger zones without fair hearings.
If these folks could get lawyers, gather evidence, and have a fair hearing before an impartial judge, and an interpretation of protection law consistent with the generous aims of the Refugee Act of 1980 and the international Convention that it implements, and a right to seek corrective review before “real courts” (those not working for Sessions) they would have a decent chance of qualifying for protection. Beyond that, even those who don’t satisfy all of the arcane technical requirements for asylum often face life-threatening danger in countries where the government protection system has broken down or joined forces with gangs and abusers. They should also be offered some type of at least temporary refuge.That’s exactly what the 1959 Convention and Protocol contemplated and some other countries have implemented. 
Some day, we as a nation will be held accountable, if only by history, for what Trump, Sessions, and the White Nationalists are doing to refugees and migrants of color under the cover of, but actually in contravention of, the law (and human decency). But those who are “going along to get along” by not standing up to these abuses of Executive Power, Due Process, and human rights will also be complicit!
PWS
08-08-18

WASHPOST: CHILD ABUSERS AND SCOFFLAWS ARE RUNNING AMOK IN WASHINGTON – NOBODY IS WILLING OR ABLE TO STOP THEM FROM STRIKING AT WILL AND THUMBING THEIR NOSES AT COURT ORDERS!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-its-not-the-aclus-job-to-reunite-the-families-you-sundered-mr-president/2018/08/06/1dda78d0-99b3-11e8-8d5e-c6c594024954_story.html?utm_term=.9c56baeaaa29

August 6 at 7:53 PM

AS ONE strolls the stately streets of Washington, D.C., taking in the breathtaking scale and august architecture of the federal government’s multifarious departments, agencies and commissions — more than 430 of them, by some estimates — one can only stand in awe of the sheer size, resources and power of the . . . American Civil Liberties Union. That, in a nutshell, was the stance the Justice Department seemed to take in court last week. It argued that the ACLU, not the U.S. government, is capable of cleaning up the ongoing mess stemming from the Trump administration’s brief but incalculably damaging campaign to separate hundreds of migrant children from their parents.

As the government said in court filings, the ACLU, which represents the parents, should use its “considerable resources” and network of advocacy groups, lawyers and volunteers to reunify hundreds of families that remain sundered despite U.S. District Judge Dana M. Sabraw’s order that they be reunified. The judge was having none of it. “This responsibility is 100 percent on the government,” he said.

Edging away from his characteristic understatement, Mr. Sabraw, a Republican appointee, went further. “The reality is that for every parent that is not located, there will be a permanently orphaned child and that is 100 percent the responsibility of the administration,” he said.

The ACLU says it is ready to help reunite families, but it’s preposterous that the government would try to outsource the job and shed its own responsibility. When considering the tragedy visited upon hundreds of families by the heedless, ham-handed cruelty of the Trump administration’s family-separation foray, the statistics may mask the depth of suffering inflicted on individual children, including toddlers and tweens, by President Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.

They devised the separation policy, specifically intending to deter future migrants. In the face of public outrage, Mr. Trump reversed the “zero tolerance” policy six weeks after it was proclaimed. But the damage is lasting. Despite Mr. Sabraw’s order that more than 2,500 children be returned to their parents by late July, more than 400 of them, whose parents were deported, remain in government shelters. Federal officials, who had no plan for reuniting families, also have no plan for locating parents, most of them in Guatemala and Honduras , who have already been removed.

A measure of the administration’s callous recklessness is that officials often failed to collect contact information for deported mothers and fathers — cellphone numbers, addresses — that could facilitate reunions with their children. In some cases, government forms list deportees’ addresses in Central America as “calle sin nombre” — street without a name. Very useful.

Mr. Sabraw ordered the administration to appoint an individual to oversee what will be the painstaking process of tracking down deported parents. In the meantime, administration lawyers might take a refresher course on the meaning of accountability and personal responsibility. Of course, ultimate responsibility lies with administration leaders who cared so little for the human beings who are now paying such a high price.

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

Simply breathtaking lack of accountability, personal responsibility, morality, and human decency by the government officials responsible for this abuse. And, some stunning ethical lapses by the DOJ attorneys who presented this insulting, demonstrably untrue, nonsense in Federal Court. But, the key is that only the victims of the abuse suffer. The perpetrators walk free to strike again, emboldened by having gotten away with a mere slap on the hand for abusing children and insulting a Federal Judge and the opposing party.

We need regime change!

PWS

08-07-18

PROFESSOR PHIL SCHRAG IN THE SEATTLE TIMES: FAMILY SEPARATION IS JUST PRELIMINARY TORTURE IN SESSIONS’S GULAG – THE NEXT STEP: DEPORTATION OF BROWN-SKINNED REFUGEE FAMILIES TO DEATH ZONES — “And so they will be deported back to the situations of rape, beating and slashing they fled.”

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/a-fate-worse-than-separation-awaits-central-american-families/

 

Professor Phil Schrag writes in theSeattle Times:

Under two court orders, the government is now reuniting migrant children with their mothers. Although the California court that ordered the reunification may permit continued detention of the families until their asylum claims can be decided, something worse than separation or detention awaits those mothers who are deported: rape and death.

Many of the mothers and children who previously could have won asylum will now be sent back to Central America, where they face horrific violence at the hands of the brutal gangs from which they fled.

That risk is now very great because Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently changed policy that had allowed immigration judges to grant asylum to victims of domestic violence.

In 2016, I volunteered as a lawyer at the family detention center in Dilley, Texas. Every mother I met had fled to the United States to escape brutal domestic violence, threats of rape or death from gangs. Nearly all were found by asylum officers to have “credible fear of persecution,” enabling them to claim asylum in hearings before federal immigration judges.

Immigration advocates who work on the cases of mothers in the family detention centers in Texas estimate that more than 85 percent of them are at risk of serious bodily harm or death at the hands of violent men in El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala.

Federal statistics for family cases are unavailable, but until recently, many of the families fleeing from those countries eventually did win asylum from immigration judges. In the clinic that I codirect at Georgetown Law, and at other law-school clinics, students have won asylum for several of them. We also know from data collected by the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at the University of California Hastings that hundreds of other Central American families have obtained protection in immigration courts around the country. It had become well established that victims of domestic violence could win asylum. In some cases, asylum was also granted to families fleeing threats of violence in countries where the police are unable to prevent such violence.

But the Immigration and Nationality Act allows the Attorney General unilaterally to tell immigration judges how to interpret the law. Attorney General Sessions recently overruled the appellate case that supported asylum for domestic-violence victims.

Reversing that woman’s asylum grant, he wrote that her ex-husband “attacked her because of his pre-existing relationship with the victim” rather than because she was a member of a “group” of women who were violently attacked by husbands or gang members.

Our attorney general’s view of the law, apparently, is that domestic violence is a purely private affair, unrelated to social norms or patterns in countries in which such violence is endemic. By characterizing domestic violence as “private criminal activity,” even when the police can’t prevent or stop it, he also apparently intends to bar the victims from winning asylum.

Immigration judges don’t enjoy deporting genuine victims of violence. Perhaps some will find creative ways to grant relief to these families, rather than becoming cogs in the giant femicide machines of northern Central America. But many will feel bound to follow Sessions’ official guidance.

If the women fleeing for their lives have to prove that those who want to rape and kill them bear animus toward all women similarly situated, and not just their actual victims, they will be hard pressed to win asylum. And so they will be deported back to the situations of rape, beating and slashing they fled.

The public should not be distracted by the government’s reunification of families. The families now being released may stay together for a few months. But they remain in terrible peril because of the Trump administration’s lack of empathy and humanitarian concern for the parents and children who quite reasonably fear for their lives.

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

Phil is a good friend, and a practicing scholar who has actually been to the border. He knows that these most vulnerable individuals qualify as refugees under a correct application of legal standards and that they merit and deserve protection as human beings. He can also see how the system has been “gamed” by Sessions and how USCIS and EOIR are both complicit.

What’s being done by Sessions and his White Nationalist cabal is both illegal and immoral. Our shame as a nation will be enduring for 1) giving such a totally unqualified, corrupt, and evil individual a chance to take control of American immigration policy; and 2) not acting more quickly to stop him from implementing his racist agenda.

Meanwhile, his victims are likely to pay the price with their lives.

PWS

08-06-18

MIKE VICK WANNABES WATCH OUT – THE BIA HAS YOUR NUMBER! — Matter of ORTEGA-LOPEZ, 27 I&N Dec. 382 (BIA 2018) — CIMT — Animal Fighting

3931

Matter of Ortega-Lopez, 27 I&N Dec. 382 (BIA 2018)

BIA HEADNOTE:

(1) The offense of sponsoring or exhibiting an animal in an animal fighting venture in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 2156(a)(1) (2006) is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude. Matter of Ortega-Lopez, 26 I&N Dec. 99 (BIA 2013), reaffirmed.

(2) An alien is ineligible for cancellation of removal under section 240A(b)(1)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(C) (2012), for having “been convicted of an offense under” section 237(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(i) (2012), irrespective of both the general “admission” requirement in section 237(a) and the temporal (within 5 years of admission) requirement in section 237(a)(2)(A)(i)(I). Matter of Cortez, 25 I&N Dec. 301 (BIA 2010), reaffirmed.

PANEL: APPELLATE IMMIGRATON JUDGES MALPHRUS, MULLANE, and LIEBOWITZ

OPINION BY: JUDGE GARRY D. MALPHRUS

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

Woof, woof! 🐕🐕🐕

PWS

08-06-18

 

 

THE HILL: NOLAN COMMENTS ON RISING IMMIGRATION COURT BACKLOG!

http://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/400627-is-the-drop-in-credible-fear-findings-an-omen-that-hard-times-are

Family Pictures

Nolan writes:

. . . .

In the first two quarters of fiscal 2018, the immigration court only completed 92,009 cases. At this rate, the immigration court will have completed only 184,000 cases when fiscal 2018 ends on Sept. 30.

Even if DHS stopped arresting deportable aliens, it would take the immigration court four years to eliminate its backlog.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is clarifying asylum eligibility requirementsto make it easier to screen out aliens who do not have a legitimate persecution claim, but this will just slow down the rate at which the backlog increases. It won’t reduce it.

To reduce the backlog, Trump will have to pull aliens from the immigration court’s backlog and put them in expedited removal proceedings, and presumably this is why he is planning to expand the use of expedited removal proceedings.

In January, Trump instructed the DHS to apply expedited removal proceedings to the fullest extent of the law. This would extend it to include undocumented aliens who were not admitted or paroled into the United States and cannot prove that they have been here for two years.

It will be extremely difficult to help aliens who are caught up in this expansion. Congress has severely limited federal court jurisdiction over expedited removal proceedings.

The courts cannot consider expedited removal orders on a petition for review.

Review is available in habeas corpus proceedings, but it is limited to determinations of whether the petitioner is an alien; whether his removal has been ordered in expedited removal proceedings; and whether he has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or has been granted refugee or asylum status.

Other provisions permit challenges to the constitutionality of the system and its implementing regulations, and claims that the written policies and procedures issued under it are in violation of law. These challenges must be brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia within 60 days of when the challenged policy or procedure is implemented.

The expansion should greatly reduce the backlog, but it will not eliminate it. Too many of the aliens in removal proceedings have been physically present for two years.

Trump will need a legalization program to finish the job, but he has shown a willingness to work with the Democrats on legalization. But will they work with him?

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

Go on over to The Hill at the link to read the rest of Nolan’s article.

  • Even assuming that the vastly expanded use of expedited removal were upheld by the Article III Courts (I think it’s unconstitutional), cases couldn’t be “pulled from the backlog.” The Immigration Court backlog is made up almost entirely of cases where the individuals have already been here more than two years. Thus, expedited removal wouldn’t apply.
  • Interesting that notwithstanding the attention given to immigration, the DHS hasn’t gotten around to publishing the necessary regulatory change to expand expedited removal. That might suggest that “cooler, smarter heads” within DHS might actually be pointing out why that would be stupid.
  • The real “take away” here is that under Sessions’s gross mismanagement of the Immigration Courts more Immigration Judges produce fewer completed cases and more backlog. Basically, what I had predicted. And that’s with all sorts of pressure to churn out orders, cutting Due Process, unnecessary wasteful coercive detention, “aimless docket reshuffling,” some politicized personnel actions, and other “pedal faster gimmicks” by Sessions. 
  • What that really shows is that Immigration Court cases are difficult cases and that even with Sessions’s shameless gaming of the system against migrants, Due Process has a certain largely irreducible minimum time for hearings.
  • Given that, increasing so-called “expedited removal” to reduce the existing backlog clearly would be irrational and present severe Constitutional difficulties under the Due Process clause.
  • Like it or not, a substantial legalization program combined with an independent Article I Immigration Court, more rational DHS enforcement priorities, and a healthy dose of prosecutorial discretion is the only way of getting the Immigration Courts back on track.
  • And, while I’ve said before that Democrats bear a fair share of the blame for the current Immigration Court dysfunction, Sessions has certainly made it immeasurably worse; the current barrier to reasonable immigration reform is clearly Trump and the GOP restrictionists, not the Democrats.
  • Indeed, the Trump-led GOP’s inability to accomplish the “no brainer” of DACA relief shows that it’s going to take “regime change” to solve this problem.
  • That means that things are likely to continue to get worse before they improve — that is, unless the Article IIIs step in and take control of the Immigration Courts away from Sessions as an act of Constitutional self-preservation.
  • Drastic action? Sure. Likely? Maybe not. But, the Article IIIs might eventually have to do it, since Sessions’s scofflaw actions on immigration are starting to run the entire Article III system into the ground, just like he is destroying the Immigration Courts.

PWS

08-07-18

 

HON. JEFFREY CHASE: THE COMPELLING CASE AGAINST UNREGULATED, UNENDING CIVIL IMMIGRATION DETENTION! – The Drafters Of The U.S. Constitution Never Contemplated Indefinite So-Called “Civil” Imprisonment In Squalid Conditions In The “New American Gulag.”

https://www.jeffreyschase.com/blog/2018/8/5/the-case-against-indefinite-detention

The Case Against Indefinite Detention

An amicus brief was recently filed on behalf of a group of 20 former Immigration Judges and BIA Members (including myself) in the case of Rodriguez et. al. v. Robbins.  The case, which was remanded back to the Ninth Circuit by the U.S. Supreme Court in its February 2018 decision in Jennings et. al. v. Rodriguez, is the latest chapter in an ongoing conflict over the constitutionality of indefinite civil detention of noncitizens.

 

The concept of indefinite detention is at odds with our legal system’s well-known practice of meting out specific time frames for incarceration as part of the sentencing of convicted criminals.  Indefinite non-punitive civil detention is even stranger to American concepts of liberty. For this reason, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rendered its decision in Rodriguez in 2015, requiring three classes of indefinitely detained noncitizens – those seeking entry to the U.S., those awaiting decisions on their removal from the U.S., and those convicted of certain classes of crimes but not subject to a final order of removal – to be afforded bond hearings every six months.  The court noted that its order did not require “Immigration Judges to release any single individual; rather, we are affirming a minimal procedural safeguard…to ensure that after a lengthy period of detention, the government continues to have a legitimate interest in the further deprivation of an individual’s liberty.”

At around the same time the Ninth Circuit decided Rodriguez, the Second Circuit took the same approach in Lora v. Shanahan, also requiring bond hearings every 6 months, and further holding that bail must be afforded unless ICE establishes “by clear and convincing evidence that the immigrant poses a risk of flight or a risk of danger to the community.”

The Supreme Court disagreed with Rodriguez, and remanded the matter back to the Ninth Circuit, where that court will consider the issue of whether the detainees have a constitutional right to a bond hearing.

Our amicus brief argues that not only is the right to a bond hearing every six months consistent with principles of due process, but that such policy also assists with the immigration court’s efficient administration of justice.  Given the huge backlog of some 715,000 cases in the nation’s immigration courts, the brief argues that prolonged detention has the effect of bogging down immigration court dockets by decreasing the detainees’ ability to obtain representation, impeding on the ability of represented detainees to communicate with their counsel, and creating obstacles for unrepresented respondents to present their cases.  Many ICE detention facilities are in remote locations, often 100 or more miles from the nearest legal services provider or from cities with sizable populations of immigration lawyers. As a result, a recent study found that only 14 percent of detained immigrants obtain representation. Such distances create obstacles to communication between the lucky few who are represented and their counsel. The great majority who are left to defend themselves are hindered by the detention centers’ inadequate legal resources, including a lack of foreign language materials.  As a result, cases take longer to complete, and the lack of legal briefs and supporting documentation places a greater burden on the already overworked immigration judges.

Our brief also argues that those facing the longest periods of detention are often those with the strongest cases for relief.  The brief further opines that immigration judges are well-equipped to make individualized bond determinations, and that those released on bond do not present a flight risk.

The full brief can be viewed here:  http://immigrationcourtside.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/AS-FILED-Rodriguez-Amicus-Brief-For-Filing.pdf.

We offer our heartfelt appreciation to attorneys David Lesser, Jamie Stephens Dycus, Adriel I. Cepeda Derieux, and Jessica Tsang of the law firm of WilmerHale for their outstanding efforts in the drafting of the brief.

Copyright 2018 Jeffrey S. Chase.  All rights reserved.

 

 

fullsizeoutput_40da.jpeg

Jeffrey S. Chase is an immigration lawyer in New York City.  Jeffrey is a former Immigration Judge, senior legal advisor at the Board of Immigration Appeals, and volunteer staff attorney at Human Rights First.  He is a past recipient of AILA’s annual Pro Bono Award, and previously chaired AILA’s Asylum Reform Task Force.

Blog     Archive     Contact\

*********************************************
The guys who had risked their lives to ditch the Star Chamber, Bills of Attainder, Cruel & Unusual Punishment, Ex Post Facto Laws, and were suspicious of unbridled coercion exercised by the Executive against individuals would roll over in their graves if they knew about the current abusive use of “civil immigration detention” by the Executive and the Legislature.
PWS
08-06-18