"The Voice of the New Due Process Army" ————– Musings on Events in U.S. Immigration Court, Immigration Law, Sports, and Other Random Topics by Retired United States Immigration Judge (Arlington, Virginia) and former Chairman of the Board of Immigration Appeals Paul Wickham Schmidt. To see my complete professional bio, just click on the link below.
WASHINGTON — Angie Simms had been searching for her 25-year-old son for a week, filing a missing persons report and calling anyone who might have seen him, when the call came last August. Her son, Erik A. Molix, was in a hospital in El Paso, Texas, where he was strapped to his bed, on a ventilator and in a medically induced coma.
Mr. Molix had suffered head trauma after the S.U.V. he was driving with nine undocumented immigrants inside rolled over near Las Cruces, N.M., while Border Patrol agents pursued him at speeds of up to 73 miles per hour. He died Aug. 15, nearly two weeks after the crash; even by then, no one from the Border Patrol or any other law enforcement or government agency had contacted his family.
The number of migrants crossing the border illegally has soared, with the Border Patrol recording the highest number of encounters in more than six decades in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. With the surge has come an increase in deaths and injuries from high-speed chases by the Border Patrol, a trend that Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol, attributes to a rise in brazen smugglers trying to flee its agents.
The agency recorded more than 700 “use of force” incidents on or near the southern border in the last fiscal year. Customs and Border Protection does not disclose how many of those ended in death, or how many high-speed chases take place each year.
Crossing the border without documentation or helping people do so is full of risk regardless of the circumstances, and stopping such crossings — and the criminal activity of smugglers — is central to the Border Patrol’s job. But the rising deaths raise questions about how far the agency should go with pursuits of smugglers and migrants, and when and how agents should engage in high-speed chases.
Customs and Border Protection has yet to provide Ms. Simms, a fifth-grade teacher in San Diego, with an explanation of what happened to her son. She saw a news release it issued two weeks after the crash; officials say it is not the agency’s responsibility to explain. She said she understood that officials suspected her son was involved in illegal activity, transporting undocumented immigrants.
“But that doesn’t mean you have to die for it,” she said.
Customs and Border Protection, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, has a policy stating that agents and officers can conduct high-speed chases when they determine “that the law enforcement benefit and need for emergency driving outweighs the immediate and potential danger created by such emergency driving.” The A.C.L.U. argues that the policy, which the agency publicly disclosed for the first time last month, gives agents too much discretion in determining the risk to public safety.
In a statement to The New York Times, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security, said that while “C.B.P. agents and officers risk their lives every day to keep our communities safe,” the Homeland Security Department “owes the public the fair, objective and transparent investigation of use-of-force incidents to ensure that our highest standards are maintained and enforced.”
But previously unreported documents and details of the crash that killed Mr. Molix shed light on what critics say is a troubling pattern in which the Border Patrol keeps its operations opaque, despite the rising human toll of aggressive enforcement actions.
. . . .
*******************
ACLU of Texas Released the following related fact sheet:
FACT SHEET: THE DEADLY TREND OF BORDER PATROL VEHICLE PURSUITS
Vehicle pursuits may make for exciting movie scenes and reality TV, but in real life, police chases are dangerous and often deadly. Yet the United States Border Patrol, the largest law enforcement agency in the country, increasingly engages in vehicle pursuits that result in mounting injuries and deaths. The agency operates with almost no transparency. This culture of impunity puts lives and communities at risk of grave harm each time a chase occurs.
The ACLU of Texas and ACLU of New Mexico partnered to produce the following fact sheet on the disturbing trend of deadly Border Patrol vehicle pursuits. We analyzed Border Patrol’s recently released vehicle pursuit policy, which reveals troubling discretionary authority given to agents. We also evaluate the department’s deeply flawed oversight and investigation protocols surrounding the pursuits, including the involvement of Border Patrol’s Critical Incident Teams – internal investigative units tasked with protecting the agency from liability and further obscuring the truth behind deadly vehicle pursuits.
Click the link below to download and read the fact sheet.
Read Sullivan’s complete article and get the full version of the ACLU fact sheet at the above links.
ACLU of Texas Attorney Shaw Drake is one of my former Georgetown Law “Refugee Law & Policy” students and a proud member of the New Due Process Army. Proud of you Shaw! 😎It’s what the “new generation of practical scholars” or “applied scholars” does!👍🏼⚖️
ICE: The ICE Appointment Scheduler is an appointment scheduling and management tool developed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to help manage the scheduling of individual and family unit (FAMU) noncitizens required to appear before ICE for further immigration case processing. Only noncitizens apprehended and released by U.S Customs and Border Protection (CBP) via Prosecutorial Discretion (PD) can schedule appointments on the website at this time. There is a video tutorial link on the right side of the website.
EOIR has changed the automated case information website. Even though it looks like you have to type the A# one digit at a time, the web form still allows you to copy and paste a complete A# into the form, even with hyphens. Depending on the device you are using to view the website, you may need to scroll down to view the English-Spanish toggle. The web address also has changed, although the old address automatically redirects you for the time being.
USCIS: USCIS mistakenly rejected certain applications for employment authorization (Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization) from petitioners for U nonimmigrant status that were filed without a fee (or request for fee waiver) from June 14 through Sept. 29, 2021.
WaPo: The reconciliation bill would create the largest mass-legalization program for undocumented immigrants in U.S. history, but it falls well short of a path to U.S. citizenship. Roughly 7 million of the 11 million undocumented immigrants would be eligible to apply for work permits, permission to travel abroad, and benefits like state driver’s licenses, a major step for immigrants from Mexico, Central America and other lands who remain vulnerable to being deported. See also House Sends Biden’s $1.75T Budget Plan To Senate.
CNN: The Department of Homeland Security has stopped the practice of releasing migrants in the United States only with paperwork that tells them to report to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office, Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas told senators Tuesday.
Law360: Millions of people living in the U.S. illegally face barriers to accessing affordable health care due to their immigration status, but the immigration provisions of a budget bill making its way through Congress could remove some of those obstacles.
Law360: U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas blasted the previous administration’s zero tolerance immigration policy and told senators at a contentious hearing Tuesday that possible settlement payments to separated families would not necessarily incentivize future migration.
Documented: In October 2021, all remaining detained immigrants from the Hudson County Jail, and just last week from the Bergen County Jail, were either transferred to other facilities, released or deported. Most were moved from New Jersey jails to two facilities in New York State: the Orange County Correctional Facility in Goshen and the Buffalo Service Processing Center in Batavia, near Buffalo.
Vox: At the current pace, the US won’t come within striking distance of the 125,000 cap by the end of the fiscal year — and, given the State Department’s new refugee guidance, it’s unlikely that refugee agencies will be able to expand capacity to ramp up that pace soon.
Business Insider: The current dearth of workers is mirrored by the number of working-age adults who would have lived in the United States if pre-Trump immigration trends persisted, according to 2020 US Census data.
AIC: The Court’s decisions on these cases will impact access to: Federal court review over certain immigration judge decisions.
Bond hearings for certain noncitizens who have spent months in detention. Personal liability and damages for federal officers’ unconstitutional actions. The Court also will consider whether states can defend immigration policies that the federal government will no longer defend.
BIA: The respondent’s conviction for carjacking under section 215(a) of the California Penal Code is categorically a conviction for an aggravated felony crime of violence under section 101(a)(43)(F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F) (2018).
Law360: The First Circuit gave a Cape Verdean man a second shot at proving his conviction for possessing oxycodone doesn’t bar him from accessing deportation relief, ordering an immigration authority to weigh whether the decades-old precedent it applied is outdated.
AILA: The court found that the BIA erred by refusing to consider the Sri Lankan petitioner’s country-conditions evidence in its likelihood-of-torture assessment with regard to his Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim, as required by 8 CFR §1208.16(c)(3). (Arulnanthy v. Garland, 11/8/21)
Law360: A legal advocacy group that seeks to restrict immigration to the U.S. urged the full Fifth Circuit on Monday to reverse a panel decision that kept in place the Biden administration’s policy curbing immigration enforcement operations.
AILA: The court found it lacked jurisdiction to review petitioner’s challenge to his expedited removal proceedings, concluding that a recent Supreme Court decision abrogated any colorable constitutional claim exception to INA §242(a)(2)(A). (Guerrier v. Garland, 8/16/21, amended 11/9/21)
AILA: Dismissing the petition for review of an order reinstating petitioner’s removal order, the court held that the petitioner had failed to establish a gross miscarriage of justice that would permit it to entertain a collateral attack on the underlying order. (Lopez Vazquez v. Garland, 11/12/21)
Law360: The Ninth Circuit dismissed a Mexican man’s deportation appeal, finding that his past state conviction for animal cruelty encompassed both a guilty mental state and reprehensible actions, qualifying him for removal, despite his claim that he injured the animal accidentally.
Law360: A divided Ninth Circuit panel refused to reopen a convicted burglar’s deportation case following a Supreme Court decision disqualifying his removal, with two judges locking horns over whether the migrant showed enough commitment to fighting for his rights in the interim.
Law360: The Eleventh Circuit breathed life into a Sri Lankan man’s bid for deportation protections on Thursday, finding that the Board of Immigration Appeals ignored evidence and misstated facts on the record when it denied him relief.
Law360: A Texas federal judge refused to expedite the federal government’s reimplementation of a Trump-era program requiring asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico, saying the government has clearly documented its efforts to reinstate the program formally known as the Migrant Protection Protocols.
Law360: Arizona, Montana and Ohio sued the Biden administration Thursday over guidance issued to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that aims to narrow the agency’s enforcement operations, marking the second such suit brought by states challenging the policies.
AILA: DOJ provided a status update on the settlement negotiations, which states that on 11/11/21, DOJ made a counteroffer to publish BIA decisions, subject to certain limitations, on a prospective basis and going back approximately five years. (NYLAG v. BIA, 11/17/21)
Law360: The sheriff of Sacramento County has a “shadow” system for transferring inmates to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, violating California’s restrictions on local police cooperation with federal immigration authorities, according to a lawsuit announced Tuesday.
AILA: The Biden administration filed compliance reports after a district court ordered the administration to submit information on key pieces of data and steps it was taking toward implementation of MPP.
AILA: USCIS clarified that if a naturalization applicant requests oath modification but does not provide oral testimony or evidence, officers should issue a Request for Evidence. Guidance effective 11/19/21, comments due by 12/20/21.
Law360: The Biden administration on Tuesday barred Nicaraguan government officials from entering the U.S. over President Daniel Ortega’s continued assault on democratic processes, civil society and human rights, nine days after elections the White House called a “pantomime.”
Law360: The Biden administration on Thursday lifted Obama-era restrictions on Burundi government officials who that administration held responsible for the human rights abuses that plagued the African country during a former president’s controversial third term.
AILA: DHS provided an update on the horse patrol activity in Del Rio, Texas on September 19, 2021. DHS OIG declined to investigate and referred to CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility. Once an investigation is completed, CBP management will determine whether disciplinary action is appropriate.
What follows is an excerpt from my book which will be published on Oct. 12. (I also published an excerpt this week in the Times magazine.) The book is a meditation on the 1965 Immigration Act, which I argue is the starting point of the multiethnic society we live in today.
***
On Oct. 3, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson stood in front of the Statue of Liberty and said something that would be proved wrong: “This bill that we sign today is not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions. It will not reshape the structure of our daily lives.” He was referring to the Hart-Celler Immigration Act, a landmark piece of legislation that lifted restrictive quotas on immigration from Asia, Africa and southern and Eastern Europe.
Its opponents at the time it was finally passed described apocalyptic scenarios in which the United States and its white population would be overrun by a horde of foreigners. Johnson, for his part, assured the public that the easing of restrictions would have only a mild effect on the demographics of the country. Most people, he believed, would stay in their home countries.
Over the next five decades, the Hart-Celler Act would bring tens of millions of immigrants from Asia, southern and Eastern Europe, and Africa. No single piece of legislation has shaped the demographic and economic history of this country in quite the same way.
DHS Outlines Strategy to Address Increase in Migrants in Del Rio
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is immediately implementing a new, comprehensive strategy to address the increase in migrant encounters in the Del Rio sector of South Texas. It has six key components.
First, within the next 24-48 hours, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will have surged 400 agents and officers to the Del Rio sector to improve control of the area. If additional staff is needed, more will be sent. The Del Rio Port of Entry has temporarily closed, and traffic is being re-routed from Del Rio to Eagle Pass to more effectively manage resources and ensure uninterrupted flow of trade and travel.
Second, U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) is coordinating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Coast Guard to move individuals from Del Rio to other processing locations, including approximately 2,000 yesterday, in order to ensure that irregular migrants are swiftly taken into custody, processed, and removed from the United States consistent with our laws and policy.
Third, DHS will secure additional transportation to accelerate the pace and increase the capacity of removal flights to Haiti and other destinations in the hemisphere within the next 72 hours.
Fourth, the Administration is working with source and transit countries in the region to accept individuals who previously resided in those countries.
Fifth, DHS is undertaking urgent humanitarian actions with other relevant federal, state, and local partners to reduce crowding and improve conditions for migrants on U.S. soil. DHS has already taken a number of steps to ensure the safety and security of individuals as they await processing, including having Border Patrol emergency medical technicians on hand and providing water, towels, and portable toilets.
Finally, the White House has directed appropriate U.S. agencies to work with the Haitian and other regional governments to provide assistance and support to returnees.
The majority of migrants continue to be expelled under CDC’s Title 42 authority. Those who cannot be expelled under Title 42 and do not have a legal basis to remain will be placed in expedited removal proceedings. DHS is conducting regular expulsion and removal flights to Haiti, Mexico, Ecuador, and Northern Triangle countries.
Beyond the six steps outlined above, the Biden Administration has reiterated that our borders are not open, and people should not make the dangerous journey. Individuals and families are subject to border restrictions, including expulsion. Irregular migration poses a significant threat to the health and welfare of border communities and to the lives of migrants themselves, and should not be attempted.
Haitians on Texas border undeterred by US plan to expel them
JUAN A. LOZANO, ERIC GAY and ELLIOT SPAGAT, Associated Press
Updated: Sep. 18, 2021 10 p.m.
48
1
of
48A dust storm moves across the area as Haitian migrants use a dam to cross into and from the United States from Mexico, Saturday, Sept. 18, 2021, in Del Rio, Texas. The U.S. plans to speed up its efforts to expel Haitian migrants on flights to their Caribbean homeland, officials said Saturday as agents poured into a Texas border city where thousands of Haitians have gathered after suddenly crossing into the U.S. from Mexico.Eric Gay/APShow More
2
of
48Haitian migrants use a dam to cross into and from the United States from Mexico, Saturday, Sept. 18, 2021, in Del Rio, Texas. The U.S. plans to speed up its efforts to expel Haitian migrants on flights to their Caribbean homeland, officials said Saturday as agents poured into a Texas border city where thousands of Haitians have gathered after suddenly crossing into the U.S. from Mexico.Eric Gay/APShow More
DEL RIO, Texas (AP) — Haitian migrants seeking to escape poverty, hunger and a feeling of hopelessness in their home country said they will not be deterred by U.S. plans to speedily send them back, as thousands of people remained encamped on the Texas border Saturday after crossing from Mexico.
Scores of people waded back and forth across the Rio Grande on Saturday afternoon, re-entering Mexico to purchase water, food and diapers in Ciudad Acuña before returning to the Texas encampment under and near a bridge in the border city of Del Rio.
Junior Jean, a 32-year-old man from Haiti, watched as people cautiously carried cases of water or bags of food through the knee-high river water. Jean said he lived on the streets in Chile the past four years, resigned to searching for food in garbage cans.
“We are all looking for a better life,” he said.
The Department of Homeland Security said Saturday that it moved about 2,000 of the migrants from the camp to other locations Friday for processing and possible removal from the U.S. Its statement also said it would have 400 agents and officers in the area by Monday morning and would send more if necessary.
The announcement marked a swift response to the sudden arrival of Haitians in Del Rio, a Texas city of about 35,000 people roughly 145 miles (230 kilometers) west of San Antonio. It sits on a relatively remote stretch of border that lacks capacity to hold and process such large numbers of people.
. . . .
*************
Not surprisingly, Haiti wants no part of the Biden Administration’s scofflaw nonsense:
As one of my esteemed colleagues summed up the Biden Administration’s latest attack on the rule of law and humanity: “Not a word about asylum, withholding, CAT, humanitarian parole.…”
The Biden Administration has thrown down the gauntlet! Progressive human rights experts had better get out the big litigation guns! Because Biden has basically ripped up “sign-on letters of outrage and concern” and thrown the pieces to the wind. He has delivered a Washington Monument sized “big middle finger” 🖕 to human rights advocates and Black supporters of Haitian refugees! What, if anything, will they do about it!
Whatever happened to our first Black Veep, Kamala Harris? Once, she was a strong voice for an end to racism and fair, humane treatment of asylum applicants, regardless of race. Now, she seems to have disappeared from the racial justice playing field!
Vice President Kamala Harris — Our first Black Veep has “disappeared” on the issue of human rights for Black Haitian asylum seekers! Official Senate Photo Public Realm
“Floaters — How The World’s Richest Country Responds To Asylum Seekers” — According to the NYT, Biden immigration policy officials always shared this vision of “ultimate border deterrence” with Gauleiter Stephen Miller. Now, they are secretly relieved that Trump’s righty judges have “forced” them to continue running a lawless border and killing asylum seekers without legal process. EDS NOTE: GRAPHIC CONTENT – The bodies of Salvadoran migrant Oscar Alberto Mart??nez Ram??rez and his nearly 2-year-old daughter Valeria lie on the bank of the Rio Grande in Matamoros, Mexico, Monday, June 24, 2019, after they drowned trying to cross the river to Brownsville, Texas. Martinez’ wife, Tania told Mexican authorities she watched her husband and child disappear in the strong current. (AP Photo/Julia Le Duc)
MATAMOROS, Mexico — When the Supreme Court effectively revived a cornerstone of Trump-era migration policy late last month, it looked like a major defeat for President Biden.
After all, Mr. Biden had condemned the policy — which requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico — as “inhumane” and suspended it on his first day in office, part of an aggressive push to dismantle former President Donald J. Trump’s harshest migration policies.
But among some Biden officials, the Supreme Court’s order was quietly greeted with something other than dismay, current and former officials said: It brought some measure of relief.
Before that ruling, Mr. Biden’s steps to begin loosening the reins on migration had been quickly followed by a surge of people heading north, overwhelming the southwest border of the United States. Apprehensions of migrants hit a two-decade high in July, a trend officials fear will continue into the fall.
Concern had already been building inside the Biden administration that the speed of its immigration changes may have encouraged migrants to stream toward the United States, current and former officials said.
In fact, some Biden officials were already talking about reviving Mr. Trump’s policy in a limited way to deter migration, said the officials, who have worked on immigration policy but were not authorized to speak publicly about the administration’s internal debates on the issue. Then the Supreme Court order came, providing the Biden administration with the political cover to adopt the policy in some form without provoking as much ire from Democrats who reviled Mr. Trump’s border policies.
Now, the officials say, they have an opportunity to take a step back, come up with a more humane version of Mr. Trump’s policy and, they hope, reduce the enormous number of people arriving at the border.
. . . .
*******************
Read the rest of Natalie’s article at the link.
Who would have thought that neo-Nazi Stephen Miller would be the real winner of the 2020 election?
When he ”wins,” America and humanity “lose.” But, apparently that’s “A-OK” with some Biden Administration officials who lack the expertise, ability, courage, and political will to establish the rule of law for asylum seekers at our Southern Border! Attribution: Stephen Miller Monster by Peter Kuper, PoliticalCartoons.com.
Five decades of experience, including plenty of wall and fence building, civil detention, expedited dockets, restrictive interpretations, criminal prosecutions, family detentions, toddlers without lawyers, money to corrupt foreign governments, “don’t come, we don’t want you and care nothing about your lives messages,” in English and Spanish, says the Biden version of the “Miller Lite” approach will fail and ultimately expand the extralegal population of the U.S.
Of course, it also will kill more desperate humans in the desert, in Mexico, in squalid “camps,” and back in their home countries. Just so long as it’s “out of sight, out of mind.” The great thing about desert deaths is that often the bodies are never found or identified. Therefore, nothing can be proved, and it’s like these people “never happened.” It’s a real bureaucratic triumph! Foreign deaths are almost as good, as they seldom get much “play” in U.S. media and always can be blamed on something other than failed U.S. policies or foreign interventions.
I’d already observed that the DOJ’s “defense” of undoing Trump immigration policies seemed as half-hearted as it was ineffective. Perhaps their lackadaisical approach came right from the top!
And, the “policy geniuses” in the Biden Administration who think “Miller-Lite Time” will be a political “happy hour” (at humanity’s expense) should remember that the right will still successfully label them as “open borders” just as they did when Obama established himself as “deporter-in-chief!”
Meanwhile, their former progressive supporters will see through the false humane rhetoric. Does it really matter if we call individuals “foreign nationals” rather than “illegals” while we’re illegally exterminating them?
I’m afraid we know the answer to “Casey’s question:” NO!
”Sorry, Casey! Not only can’t anyone in the Biden Administration ‘play this game,’ they don’t even have the guts to suit up! They view a ‘forfeit’ to “Team Miller” as good as a ‘W.’ Remember, it’s not THEIR family, friends, or relatives dying at our border. It’s just ‘the other guys,’ so who cares? When it comes to U.S. immigration policy, foreign nationals all too often find that their lives and human dignity are just another form of expendable political capital.” PHOTO: Rudi Rest Creative Commons
I personally don’t make much of Scott’s ability to reason. This is the same man who said in March that “woke supremacy,” whatever that is, “is as bad as white supremacy.” There is no world in which recent efforts at enlightenment can be equated to enslavement, lynching and mass incarceration. None.
It seems to me that the disingenuousness on the question of racism is largely a question of language. The question turns on another question: “What, to you, is America?” Is America the people who now inhabit the land, divorced from its systems and its history? Or, is the meaning of America inclusive of those systems and history?
When people say that America is a racist country, they don’t necessarily mean that all or even most Americans are consciously racist. However, it is important to remember that nearly half the country just voted for a full-on racist in Donald Trump, and they did so by either denying his racism, becoming apologists for it, or applauding it. What do you call a country thus composed?
Historically, however, there is no question that the country was founded by racists and white supremacists, and that much of the early wealth of this country was built on the backs of enslaved Africans, and much of the early expansion came at the expense of the massacre of the land’s Indigenous people and broken treaties with them.
Gathering the dead after the Colfax massacre, published in Harper’s Weekly, May 10, 1873
Eight of the first 10 presidents personally enslaved Africans. In 1856, the chief justice of the United States wrote in the infamous ruling on the Dred Scott case that Black people “had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”
The country went on to fight a Civil War over whether some states could maintain slavery as they wished. Even some of the people arguing for, and fighting for, an end to slavery had expressed their white supremacist beliefs.
Abraham Lincoln said during his famous debates against Stephen A. Douglas in 1858 that among white people and Black ones “there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I, as much as any other man, am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man.”
Some will concede the historical point and insist on the progress point, arguing that was then and this is now, that racism simply doesn’t exist now as it did then. I would agree. American racism has evolved and become less blunt, but it has not become less effective. The knife has simply been sharpened. Now systems do the work that once required the overt actions of masses of individual racists.
. . . .
As Mark Twain once put it: “The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter. ’Tis the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.”
Being imprecise or undecided with our language on this subject contributes to the murkiness — and to the myth that the question of whether America is racist is difficult to answer and therefore the subject of genuine debate among honest intellectuals.
Saying that America is racist is not a radical statement. If that requires a longer explanation or definition, so be it. The fact, in the end, is not altered.
***************
Read Blow’s full article at the link.
Four things that are clear to me:
The “history” that most of us in my generation learned in high school was “whitewashed;”
The monumental achievements of non-white Americans, women, and children which allowed this country to exist, prosper, and flourish have consistently been ignored or downplayed;
America still has race issues;
The GOP, in particular, has failed to come to grips with the issue of race in 21st century America (apologists Scott & Graham notwithstanding).
🇺🇸⚖️🗽Due Process For All Persons Under Law, Forever!
Ms. McGhee is the author of “The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together,” from which this essay is adapted.
Over a two-decade career in the white-collar think tank world, I’ve continually wondered: Why can’t we have nice things?
By “we,” I mean America at-large. As for “nice things,” I don’t picture self-driving cars, hovercraft backpacks or laundry that does itself. Instead, I mean the basic aspects of a high-functioning society: well-funded schools, reliable infrastructure, wages that keep workers out of poverty, or a comprehensive public health system equipped to handle pandemics — things that equally developed but less wealthy nations seem to have.
In 2010, eight years into my time as an economic policy wonk at Demos, a progressive policy research group, budget deficits were on the rise. The Great Recession had decimated tax revenue, requiring more public spending to restart the economy.
But both the Tea Party and many in President Barack Obama’s inner circle were calling for a “grand bargain” to shrink the size of government by capping future public outlays and slashing Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. Despite the still-fragile recovery and evidence that corporations were already paring back retirement benefits and ratcheting down real wages, the idea gained steam.
On a call with a group of all-white economist colleagues, we discussed how to advise leaders in Washington against this disastrous retrenchment. I cleared my throat and asked: “So where should we make the point that all these programs were created without concern for their cost when the goal was to build a white middle class, and they paid for themselves in economic growth? Now these guys are trying to fundamentally renege on the deal for a future middle class that would be majority people of color?”
Nobody answered. I checked to see if I was muted.
Finally, one of the economists breached the awkward silence. “Well, sure, Heather. We know that — and you know that — but let’s not lead with our chin here,” he said. “We are trying to be persuasive.”
The sad truth is that he was probably right. Soon, the Tea Party movement, harnessing the language of fiscal responsibility and the subtext of white grievance, would shut down the federal government, win across-the-board cuts to public programs and essentially halt the legislative function of the federal government for the next six years. The result: A jobless recovery followed by a slow, unequal economic expansion that hurt Americans of all backgrounds.
The anti-government stinginess of traditional conservatism, along with the fear of losing social status held by many white people, now broadly associated with Trumpism, have long been connected. Both have sapped American society’s strength for generations, causing a majority of white Americans to rally behind the draining of public resources and investments. Those very investments would provide white Americans — the largest group of the impoverished and uninsured — greater security, too: A new Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco study calculated that in 2019, the country’s output would have been $2.6 trillion greater if the gap between white men and everyone else were closed. And a 2020 report from analysts at Citigroup calculated that if America had adopted policies to close the Black-white economic gap 20 years ago, U.S. G.D.P would be an estimated $16 trillion higher.
. . . .
I’ll never forget Bridget, a white woman I met in Kansas City who had worked in fast food for over a decade. When a co-worker at Wendy’s first approached her about joining a local Fight for $15 group pushing for a livable minimum wage, she was skeptical. “I didn’t think that things in my life would ever change,” she told me. “They weren’t going to give $15 to a fast food worker. That was just insane to me.”
But Bridget attended the first organizing meeting anyway. And when a Latina woman rose and described her life — three children in a two-bedroom apartment with bad plumbing, the feeling of being “trapped in a life where she didn’t have any opportunity to do anything better” — Bridget, also a mother of three, said she was struck by how “I was really able to see myself in her.”
“I had been fed this whole line of, ‘These immigrant workers are coming over here and stealing our jobs — not paying taxes, committing crimes and causing problems,’” Bridget admitted. “You know, us against them.”
Soon after she began organizing, the cross-racial movement had won a convert. “In order for all of us to come up, it’s not a matter of me coming up and them staying down,” she said. “It’s the matter of: In order for me to come up, they have to come up too. Because honestly, as long as we’re divided, we’re conquered.”
*******************
Read the complete article at the link.
Inability to think beyond racist myths and false narratives is holding America back from realizing our full potential.
“Dividing and conquering” is the strategy of the modern GOP. If one could get behind the racist stereotypes and white resentment, rural America probably has far more in common with hard-working undocumented immigrants, African Americans, and Latinos than with elitist GOP politicos and corporate moguls — certainly more than with the notoriously lazy, dull, corrupt grifter Trump! But, the key seems to be to promote minority rule by sowing hate and distrust, thereby preventing the common good of the majority from prevailing.
While much of the “beggar thy neighbor” fear mongering comes right out of the current GOP playbook, Dems, including many in the Obama Administration, have also been guilty, as Heather points out. Just read some the alarmist stuff being put out by former Obama economic honcho Larry Summers.
And, contrary to White Nationalist myths about “job stealing,” much of American economic growth and innovation can be traced directly to immigrants, both documented and undocumented.
WASHINGTON — When President Biden swore in a batch of recruits for his new administration in a teleconferenced ceremony late last week, it looked like the country’s biggest Zoom call. In fact, Mr. Biden was installing roughly 1,000 high-level officials in about a quarter of all of the available political appointee jobs in the federal government.
At the same time, a far less visible transition was taking place: the quiet dismissal of holdovers from the Trump administration, who have been asked to clean out their offices immediately, whatever the eventual legal consequences.
If there has been a single defining feature of the first week of the Biden administration, it has been the blistering pace at which the new president has put his mark on what President Donald J. Trump dismissed as the hostile “Deep State” and tried so hard to dismantle.
From the Pentagon, where 20 senior officials were ready to move in days before the Senate confirmed Lloyd J. Austin III as defense secretary, to the Voice of America, where the Trump-appointed leadership was replaced hours after the inauguration, the Biden team arrived in Washington not only with plans for each department and agency, but the spreadsheets detailing who would carry them out.
A replacement was even in the works for the president’s doctor: Dr. Sean P. Conley, who admitted to providing a rosy, no-big-deal description of Mr. Trump’s Covid-19 symptoms last year, was told to pack his medical kit. While all presidents eventually bring in their own doctor, Mr. Biden wasted no time bringing back a retired Army colonel, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, who was his doctor when he was vice president.
Mr. Biden had named nearly all of his cabinet secretaries and their immediate deputies before he took office last Wednesday, most of them familiar faces from the Obama administration. But the president’s real grasp on the levers of power has come several layers down.
. . . .
Ashley Tabaddor, a constant critic of the Trump administration as the former head of the union that represents immigration judges, will take over as chief counsel at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal legal immigration agency.
At the Justice Department — where morale was largely decimated and Biden administration officials are eager to begin reversing Trump policies on civil rights, immigration and police oversight — all of the department’s top incoming acting department heads are alumni, some of whom worked under multiple administrations.
Until Judge Merrick B. Garland is confirmed as attorney general, Monty Wilkinson, a longtime career employee who worked closely with Eric H. Holder Jr. when he was attorney general, is serving in an acting capacity.
The acting deputy attorney general is John P. Carlin, who ran the national security division of the Justice Department during the Obama administration. He is holding the office only until Lisa Monaco, who has worked closely with Mr. Carlin over the years, can be confirmed as deputy attorney general. She served as homeland security adviser under Mr. Obama and, during the Trump years, she and Mr. Carlin ran a group studying the hardest issues in cyberpolicy.
Much as the politicization of the Justice Department angered Mr. Trump’s critics, the neutering of the Environmental Protection Agency prompted outrage from progressives, and it is probably no surprise that the agency is already in the throes of transformation.
. . . .
**********************
Read the complete article at the link.
Trump spent his first week in office spouting lies about the size of his inauguration crowd and launching a White Nationalist assault on Muslim refugees. Biden came in with a detailed plan for governing America and is putting it into effect on multiple fronts notwithstanding the crises and absolute mess left behind by the defeated kakistocracy!
The Biden-Harris plan reflects three truths:
Government is a powerful force for the common good;
Most governing takes place at the “retail level;” and
Competence, honesty, and courage count.
The Tabaddor appointment is a powerful signal to civil servants who stand up for their rights and the rights of others. Judge Tabaddor undoubtedly is one of the most talented, dynamic, and capable leaders at any level of the Federal Judiciary. But, that didn’t protect her from the DOJ/EOIR bureaucracy.
During the Trump regime, she led the effort of the National Association of Immigration Judges (“NAIJ”) to expose bias and political interference with judicial functions, gross mismanagement, disregard for due process, and suppression of First Amendment free speech by the DOJ/EOIR kakistocracy.
“Billy the Bigot” Barr & his toady McHenry punished the NAIJ by filing to “decertify” the union — a move to silence Judge Tabaddor and her her colleagues and deflect Congressional attention from the ongoing chaos and dysfunction the Trump DOJ had created in the Immigration Courts.
Apparently, somebody on the Biden Team was paying attention to this travesty, recognized the grotesque abuses going on at the EOIR Clown Show🤡, and the courage and leadership shown by Judge Tabaddor in the battle for integrity and“good government.”
So far, so good. Looks like the “EOIR Clown Show”🤡 is finally “going to go” and be replaced with real judges and pros in judicial administration who will refashion it into a real, functioning, due-process-oriented, model court system that will compliment the legislative initiative to create an independent Article I U.S. Immigration Court of which we all can be proud.
“Through teamwork and innovation be the world’s best tribunals guaranteeing fairness and due process for all!” Still the “right vision.” And with the right judicial leadership and judges who are experts in human rights, immigration, and “applied due process” it can become a reality!
Pennsylvania Lawmaker Played Key Role in Trump’s Plot to Oust Acting Attorney General
The congressman’s involvement underlined how far the former president was willing to go to overturn the election, and Democratic lawmakers are beginning to call for investigations into those efforts.
Representative Scott Perry first made President Donald J. Trump aware that a relatively obscure Justice Department official was sympathetic to Mr. Trump’s view that the election had been stolen.
WASHINGTON — When Representative Scott Perry joined his colleagues in a monthslong campaign to undermine the results of the presidential election, promoting “Stop the Steal” events and supporting an attempt to overturn millions of legally cast votes, he often took a back seat to higher-profile loyalists in President Donald J. Trump’s orbit.
But Mr. Perry, an outspoken Pennsylvania Republican, played a significant role in the crisis that played out at the top of the Justice Department this month, when Mr. Trump considered firing the acting attorney general and backed down only after top department officials threatened to resign en masse.
It was Mr. Perry, a member of the hard-line Freedom Caucus, who first made Mr. Trump aware that a relatively obscure Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, the acting chief of the civil division, was sympathetic to Mr. Trump’s view that the election had been stolen, according to former administration officials who spoke with Mr. Clark and Mr. Trump.
Mr. Perry introduced the president to Mr. Clark, whose openness to conspiracy theories about election fraud presented Mr. Trump with a welcome change from the acting attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen, who stood by the results of the election and had repeatedly resisted the president’s efforts to undo them.
Mr. Perry’s previously unreported role, and the quiet discussions between Mr. Trump and Mr. Clark that followed, underlined how much the former president was willing to use the government to subvert the election, turning to more junior and relatively unknown figures for help as ranking Republicans and cabinet members rebuffed him.
It is unclear when Mr. Perry, who represents the Harrisburg area, met Mr. Clark, a Philadelphia native, or how well they knew each another before the introduction to Mr. Trump. Former Trump administration officials said that it was only in late December that Mr. Clark told Mr. Rosen about the introduction brokered by Mr. Perry, who was among the scores of people feeding Mr. Trump false hope that he had won the election.
But it is highly unlikely that Mr. Trump would have known Mr. Clark otherwise. Department officials were startled to learn that the president had called Mr. Clark directly on multiple occasions and that the two had met in person without alerting Mr. Rosen, those officials said. Justice Department policy stipulates that the president initially communicates with the attorney general or the deputy attorney general on all matters, and then a lower-level official if authorized.
As the date for Congress to affirm Mr. Biden’s victory neared, Mr. Perry and Mr. Clark discussed a plan to have the Justice Department send a letter to Georgia state lawmakers informing them of an investigation into voter fraud that could invalidate the state’s Electoral College results. Former officials who were briefed on the plan said that the department’s dozens of voter fraud investigations nationwide had not turned up enough instances of fraud to alter the outcome of the election.
Mr. Perry and Mr. Clark also discussed the plan with Mr. Trump, setting off a chain of events that nearly led to the ouster of Mr. Rosen, who had refused to send the letter.
After The New York Times disclosed the details of the scheme on Friday, the political fallout was swift. Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois and the incoming chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told the Justice Department in a letter on Saturday that he would investigate efforts by Mr. Trump and Mr. Clark to use the agency “to further Trump’s efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election.”
. . . .
**************
Uh, seems like criminal schemes to interfere with free and fair elections, manufacture false claims, pressure Government officials tofalsely endorse clearly baseless claims, file bogus suits before Supremes are acts of treason, even if eventually thwarted!
“The beginnings of a Congressional investigation by Dems” seems like a totally inadequate response! These are crimes, and all who participated, particularly Trump,Perry, and Clark belong behind bars. Action should also be taken against the officials who stopped them, but failed to disclose the plot to those who might have taken immediate action to remove the unhinged, patently unqualified to serve Traitor/President.
🇺🇸Due Process Forever! Treason & Insurrection, Never! No “Bogus Unity” With Insurrectionists!
Watching the Trump campaign’s attacks on the election results, I now see what might have happened if, rather than nip and tuck the Trump agenda, responsible Justice Department attorneys had collectively — ethically, lawfully — refused to participate in President Trump’s systematic attacks on our democracy from the beginning. The attacks would have failed.
. . . .
*******************
Read the full op-ed at the link. That’s right Erica. Lack of ethics, morality, and failing to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law have consequences. Helping to “custom design” obvious pretexts for racist and hate inspired policies, for consumption by right-wing judges who only seek “cover” for going along to get along with fascism, is wrong. Duh!
It’s no surprise that the clearly unconstitutional and racially and religiously bigoted “Travel Ban,” willingly embraced by an intellectually dishonest and morally compromised Supremes majority, was first on the list in Erica’s “confession.”
But, don’t expect any apologies from the vast majority of Trumpist lawyer/enablers who violated their oaths of office or from the big time law firms (one where I was formerly a partner) who have granted them undeserved refuge at fat salaries! Nor should we expect large-scale redemption from the legions of Government lawyers in DOJ, DHS, and elsewhere who will assert the “Nuremberg defense” of “just following orders.”But, that doesn’t mean that the rest of us can’t demand some accountability for participation inwhat are essentially “crimes against humanity.”
Erica’s article largely echoes what my friend and colleague Judge Jeffrey Chase, many of our colleagues in the Round Table of Former Immigration Judges, ⚔️🛡 and numerous members of the New Due Process Army (“NDPA”) have been saying throughout this Administration. Indeed, I frequently have noted that the once-respected Solicitor General’s Office and EOIR operated as basically “ethics free zones” under the disgraced “leadership” of Sessions, Whitaker, and Barr.
It’s also why the the Biden-Harris team that takes over at DOJ must:
immediately remove all the current “executives” (and I use that term lightly) at EOIR as well as all members of the BIA and transfer them to positions where they can do no further damage to asylum seekers, migrants, their (often pro bono or low bono) lawyers, or the rest of humanity;
replace them with qualified individuals from the NDPA; and
be circumspect in eventually making retention decisions for Immigration Judges, taking into account public input as to the the degree to which each such judge’s jurisprudence during the Trump kakistocracy continued to reflect adherence to constitutionally required due process and fundamental fairness to migrants, respect for migrants and their representatives, best practices, and interpretations that blunted wherever reasonably possible the impact of the kakistocracy’s xenophobic, racist, White Nationalist policies.
American justice has been ill-served by the DOJ and the Immigration Courts over the past four years. That’s something that must not be swept under the carpet (as is the habit with most incoming Administrations).
The career Civil Service overall, and particularly complicit and often ethics-free government lawyers,failed to put up the necessary resistance to an overtly anti-American regime with an illegal and immoral agenda. Lives were lost or irreparably ruined as a result. That’s a big-time problem that if not addressed and resolved will likely make continuance of our national democratic republic impossible.
⚖️🗽🧑🏽⚖️👍🏼🇺🇸Due Process Forever! Complicity Never☠️🤮🏴☠️👎🏻!
PWS
12-21-20
“EOIR Clown Show Must Go” T-Shirt Custom Design Concept
Even in the hot-button area of immigration, most Americans agree on the need to address the plight of so-called Dreamers, the undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. A Pew poll this summer showed that around three-quarters of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, favor granting them permanent legal status. If lawmakers could stop demagoguing long enough to pass a version of the Dream Act, iterations of which have been circulating for a while, the majority of Americans would be grateful.
Consider all of this a starting point — with other, even more promising avenues out there to explore. As always, the details matter. So does the degree to which lawmakers in both parties decide that it’s in their political interest to gum up the works. Mr. Biden and, perhaps more important, American voters will need to make clear their expectations for action and bring the necessary pressure to bear. There is common ground to be found in a host of policy areas. Political leaders should be pressed to cultivate it.
***************
Read the rest of the NYT Editorial Board’s suggestions at the link.
Sounds like a good starting point for moving forward with humanitarian actions that will benefit the common good.
In the past, the problem has been in the details of exactly what “relief” is (e.g., will it include a “path to citizenship,” and , if so, how arduous?) and who qualifies (the DACA program had a June 15, 2102 “cutoff” date, and not all of those eligible actually registered, some for fear that the information would be used to deport them). But, without Stephen Miller fouling up the works, the chances of success should be vastly improved
Let’s hope it gets done and in a fittingly generous and inclusive manner ASAP! That’s particularly true in light of the contributions that many in the DACA program have made as “essential workers” during the pandemic!
In addition to the candidates put forward by Mr. Feingold’s group after a nationwide effort, another coalition of organizations has provided the transition with over 100 names of candidates developed over the past several months.
“The process started earlier so we would be ready,” said Nan Aron, the president of the Alliance for Justice, which in cooperation with nearly three dozen other groups has given the Biden team a list of more than 100 potential nominees. “We are pushing hard for them to make judges a priority.”
. . . .
The progressives say that Democrats must use whatever leverage they can to press their nominees.
“Our view is the administration should push to make judges a critical part of the conversation,” Ms. Aron said. “The Democrats will need to fight for the judges they want.”
Though acknowledging winning confirmations will be difficult — certainly compared with the free hand Republicans have had when controlling both the White House and the Senate — Mr. Feingold said he was optimistic that Mr. Biden, using the available political tools and with strong progressive support, could get his picks on to the courts.
“I see opportunity here,” Mr. Feingold said.
****************
Thanks Nan! Read the rest of the article at the above link!
I just hope that this time around, unlike the Obama Administration, the Biden-Harris Team focuses on what former Senator Russ Feingold of the American Constitution Society might call a “golden opportunity” for broadening and improving the Federal Judiciary.
That’s, of course, the “judiciary” at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”) which operates (and I use this term loosely, given the disgraceful, deadly dysfunction sowed by the outgoing regime) entirely within the Executive Branch at the DOJ. No need to get Mitch McConnell’s sign off on these judges! (We ultimately need a fully independent Article Immigration Court, which will take legislation.)
“Eyore In Distress” Once A Symbol of Fairness, Due Process, & Best Practices, Now Gone “Belly Up”
The mess at EOIR needs immediate attention and aggressive due process reforms. Thisis no “small opportunity.” There are more than 500 Immigration Judgeships and another two dozen critically important Appellate Judgeships at the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) at stake here.
Together, this “under the radar administrative judiciary” exercises essentially life or death authority over millions of individuals and affects the lives and futures of millions more American families, employers, and communities from coast to coast. While most of the BIA’s decisions are reviewable in the Circuit Courts of Appeals, the BIA’s nationwide authority to set precedents and policies that determine not only the future of millions of humans, but also the conduct of DHS (which has been highly problematic) gives it power that in some ways exceeds that of any Federal Court short of the Supremes.
Sadly, the independence, expertise, and due process performance ofEOIR has deteriorated steadily over the past three Administrations before going into a “death spiral” under the Trump/Miller/Sessions/Barr White Nationalist kakistocracy.
The exceptionally well qualified judicial candidates and competent legal administrators to fix the EOIR disaster are out here in the New Due Process Army. There is no area of judging that combines intellectual challenge, applied due process, human relations, practical problem solving, historical perspectives, ethical norms, and fundamental human values the way that the Immigration Court experience does!
A new, due process oriented, expert, diverse, representative immigration judiciary at EOIR will not only be a model for best practices for all levels of the Federal Judiciary, but will also provide an exceptional source of experienced candidates for the Article III Judiciary and future public policy positions (the massive failures in these areas over the past four years are an example of why we must do better if we want to save lives, promote equal justice for all, and enhance our democracy). As I always tell my Georgetown Law students, if you can win in Immigration Court, everything else you do in law will be a “piece of cake!”
This is more than just “an opportunity.” Human lives are at stake! National values and the future of the rule of law in America hang in the balance! This isn’t “optional,” nor is it a “back burner” issue! Reforming the Immigration Judiciary is a national imperative that we must insist upon!
Hey hey, ho ho, the EOIR Clown Show 🤡 has got to go! Let the Biden-Harris Team know!
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to review two major Trump administration immigration initiatives: a program that has forced at least 60,000 asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their requests are heard and the diversion of $2.5 billion in Pentagon money to build a barrier on the southwestern border.
Lower courts blocked both measures.But the Supreme Court, in earlier orders, allowed them to remain in effect while appeals moved forward.
The arguments in the two cases will not be heard until after the November election. Should President Trump’s Democratic opponent, Joseph R. Biden Jr., win, his administration could take steps to make the cases moot.
In the case on asylum seekers, an appeals court in February blocked the program, known as Remain in Mexico, saying it was at odds with both federal law and international treaties and was causing “extreme and irreversible harm.”
. . . .
*************************
Read the rest of the article at the link.
The losers in these cases have already been determined: the innocent human lives destroyed, the rule of law, the Constitution, human decency, and the Supremes’ reputation. If the Supremes’ majority hadn’t already “pre-judged” these cases in the regime’s favor, then their unwarranted and ethically questionable “early intervention” in the process to allow the abuses of humanity, Congressional authority, and the public fisc to continue would be even more unconscionable.
Indeed, both of these cases are examples of a democracy in danger, a judicial system in decay, and a Supremes who have established themselves as part of the problem, not the solution.
Better Federal Judges for a Better America! It starts at the polls!
Donald J. Trump Famous American Clown (Officially titled “Ass Clown”) Artist: Scott Scheidly Orlando, FL Reproduced by permissionD. Vader Minister of Justice Banana Republic of TrumpTrump Regime
Donald Trump’s re-election campaign poses the greatest threat to American democracy since World War II.
Mr. Trump’s ruinous tenure already has gravely damaged the United States at home and around the world. He has abused the power of his office and denied the legitimacy of his political opponents, shattering the norms that have bound the nation together for generations. He has subsumed the public interest to the profitability of his business and political interests. He has shown a breathtaking disregard for the lives and liberties of Americans. He is a man unworthy of the office he holds.
WASHINGTON — The five U.S. attorneys along the border with Mexico, including three appointed by President Trump, recoiled in May 2018 against an order to prosecute all undocumented immigrants even if it meant separating children from their parents. They told top Justice Department officials they were “deeply concerned” about the children’s welfare.
But the attorney general at the time, Jeff Sessions, made it clear what Mr. Trump wanted on a conference call later that afternoon, according to a two-year inquiry by the Justice Department’s inspector general into Mr. Trump’s “zero tolerance” family separation policy.
“We need to take away children,” Mr. Sessions told the prosecutors, according to participants’ notes. One added in shorthand: “If care about kids, don’t bring them in. Won’t give amnesty to people with kids.”
Rod J. Rosenstein, then the deputy attorney general, went even further in a second call about a week later, telling the five prosecutors that it did not matter how young the children were. He said that government lawyers should not have refused to prosecute two cases simply because the children were barely more than infants.
“Those two cases should not have been declined,” John Bash, the departing U.S. attorney in western Texas, wrote to his staff immediately after the call. Mr. Bash had declined the cases, but Mr. Rosenstein “instructed that, per the A.G.’s policy, we should NOT be categorically declining immigration prosecutions of adults in family units because of the age of a child.”
The Justice Department’s top officials were “a driving force” behind the policy that spurred the separation of thousands of families, many of them fleeing violence in Central America and seeking asylum in the United States, before Mr. Trump abandoned it amid global outrage, according to a draft report of the results of the investigation by Michael E. Horowitz, the department’s inspector general.
The separation of migrant children from their parents, sometimes for months, was at the heart of the Trump administration’s assault on immigration. But the fierce backlash when the administration struggled to reunite the children turned it into one of the biggest policy debacles of the president’s term.
Though Mr. Sessions sought to distance himself from the policy, allowing Mr. Trump and Homeland Security Department officials to largely be blamed, he and other top law enforcement officials understood that “zero tolerance” meant that migrant families would be separated and wanted that to happen because they believed it would deter future illegal immigration, Mr. Horowitz wrote.
The draft report, citing more than 45 interviews with key officials, emails and other documents, provides the most complete look at the discussions inside the Justice Department as the family separation policy was developed, pushed and ultimately carried out with little concern for children.
This article is based on a review of the 86-page draft report and interviews with three government officials who read it in recent months and described its conclusions and many of the details in it. The officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to discuss it publicly, cautioned that the final report could change.
Before publishing the findings of its investigations, the inspector general’s office typically provides draft copies to Justice Department leaders and others mentioned in the reports to ensure that they are accurate.
Mr. Horowitz had been preparing to release his report since late summer, according to a person familiar with the investigation, though the process allowing for responses from current and former department officials whose conduct is under scrutiny is likely to delay its release until after the presidential election.
Mr. Sessions refused to be interviewed, the report noted. Mr. Rosenstein, who is now a lawyer in private practice, defended himself in his interview with investigators in response to questioning about his role, according to two of the officials. Mr. Rosenstein’s former office submitted a 64-page response to the report.
“If any United States attorney ever charged a defendant they did not personally believe warranted prosecution, they violated their oath of office,” Mr. Rosenstein said in a statement. “I never ordered anyone to prosecute a case.”
The Government did not seriously question the correctness of this finding!
Intentionally violating Constitutional rights (not to mention lying and attempting to cover it up) is clearly a violation of 18 USC 242.
Here’s the text of that section from the DOJ’s own website:
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Sure looks like an”open and shut” case for prosecution.
The irony: Families and their kids have been traumatized for life, perhaps even killed or disabled by the actions of these criminal conspirators; however, the “perps” remain at large.
Hamilton is on the public dole continuing to wreak-havoc on the Constitution, the rule of law, the Immigration Courts, and human decency at the corrupt Barr DOJ; Rosenstein works for a “fat cat” law firm hauling down a six figure salary while he avoids justice and accountability for his misdeeds; “Gonzo” had the absolute audacity to try to reinsert himself onto the public dole by running for the Senate from Alabama (thankfully, unsuccessfully, even though he previously held the seat for years and misused it as a public forum to spread his racist ideas, xenophobic venom, lies, false narratives, and unrelenting cruelty).
Where’s the “justice” in a system that punishes victims while letting “perps” prosper and go free?
