SCOFFLAWS 🏴‍☠️ STUFFED AGAIN: Split 9th Agrees That Trump’s “Stunt Wall” Illegal — Sierra Club v. Trump!

Dan Kowalski reports for LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/insidenews/posts/ca9-on-use-of-military-for-border-wall

Daniel M. Kowalski

12 Oct 2020

wall

border

CA9 on Use of Military $ for Border Wall

Sierra Club v. Trump

“This appeal presents the question of whether the emergency military construction authority provided by 10 U.S.C. § 2808 (“Section 2808”) authorized eleven border wall construction projects on the southern border of the United States. We conclude that it did not. We also consider whether the district court properly granted the Organizational Plaintiffs a permanent injunction and whether the district court improperly denied the State Plaintiffs’ request for a separate permanent injunction. We affirm the decision of the district court on both counts. … We hold that the States and Sierra Club both have Article III standing and a cause of action to challenge the Federal Defendants’ border wall construction projects, that Section 2808 did not authorize the challenged construction, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in either granting a permanent injunction to Sierra Club or in denying a separate permanent injunction to the States.”

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

PANEL: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and WARDLAW and COLLINS, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas; Dissent by Judge Collins

The only real question here is whether the Supremes will bail out the regime’s scofflaws once again.

PWS

10-13-20

NDPA SUPERSTAR ⭐️ PROFESSOR ERIN BARBATO 🦸‍♀️ ORGANIZES EVENT, SPEAKS OUT IN MADISON CAP TIMES ON ICE ABUSES IN THE “NEW AMERICAN GULAG” (“NAG”) — “We must rebuild the system from the ground up and work toward a future in which immigrants are treated with respect and dignity. Our shared humanity demands it.”

https://madison.com/ct/opinion/column/erin-m-barbato-immigrant-detention-today-relies-on-systemic-racism-and-life-threatening-policies-it/article_0b8a6c14-99bf-5aa4-bd81-30b7923d9c54.html

Last month, a nurse at a federal immigration detention center in Irwin, Georgia, filed a whistleblower complaint detailing the abhorrent treatment of people detained there. She charged that women in detention were subjected to hysterectomies and invasive gynecological exams without their knowledge or consent, and often without assistance from interpreters.

The complaint is heartbreaking, but far from surprising. These atrocities are consistent with practices employed at U.S. detention centers for decades, and they are sadly consistent with our tragic history of forced sterilization of minority women. The implications of the complaint are perfectly clear: we must end the civil detention of immigrants, so fraught with systemic racism that undervalues the lives of Black, Indigenous and other people of color. There is no other option.

With over 200 detention centers, the United States has the largest immigration detention system in the world. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has over the past two years detained an average of 40,000 daily, an astonishing number that surpasses the population of Wisconsin cities like Brookfield and Wausau. Yet the detention of immigrants is just a microcosm of the inhumanity that characterizes our immigration system today. Many immigrants come to the U.S. to seek refuge and a better life for themselves and for their families. But when they arrive in this country, they are forced into conditions that violate human rights principles under both international and domestic standards, and that, frankly, violate our moral obligations to each other as human beings.

ICE has the authority to release most people from detention through monetary bonds or parole, and ICE policy requires that people seeking asylum are released from detention when they can establish their identity and demonstrate they are neither a danger nor a or flight risk. Instead of using these tools, though, ICE almost always chooses detention, ostensibly to deter others from coming into the country. But far from showing detention to be an effective deterrent, statistics reveal the opposite: harsher penalties have not reduced the numbers of undocumented migrants crossing U.S. borders. What the data does show is how immigrant detention has become a big business, with taxpayer dollars helping to subsidize a billion-dollar private prison industry that profits from human trauma.

Often located in remote places, immigrant detention facilities are ripe for the abuse of detained migrants. There is no community oversight and little — often no — access to legal representation. People in detention will only have an attorney if they can afford one or are lucky enough to find pro bono representation.

. . . .

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

Read the rest of Erin’s article at the link! Erin reinforces points that I make often here on Courtside: the real objectives of unnecessary and highly cost-ineffective “civil detention” are to deprive migrants of access to counsel, coerce them into abandoning potentially successful claims, punish them for exercising legal rights, and deter others from asserting legal rights.

All of these are clear violations of Constitutional due process and equal protection! The conditions under which these non-criminals are held to “punish” them for their audacity to assert their legal rights also violate the Eighth Amendment, as some lower Federal Court Judges have found.

Unfortunately, too many Article III Judges have abdicated their oaths to uphold the Constitutional rights of the most vulnerable persons among us in the face of improper political pressure and a regime overtly out to undo American democracy and institute a far-right reactionary, white nationalist kakistocracy.

And, here’s info on a great “virtual event” that Erin helped organize to raise awareness of the existence and devastating effects of “Baby Jails” in the U.S. Allowing such cruel and inhuman abominations to flourish in our nation is beyond disgraceful! (See also the recent book Baby Jails: The Fight to End the Incarceration of Refugee Children in America, by my good friend and Georgetown Law colleague Professor Phil Schrag).

https://law.wisc.edu/calendar/event.php?iEventID=32578180

The Flores Exhibit: Stories of Children Held in Immigrant Detention Facilities

WHEN

Wednesday, October 14, 2020

7:30 pm to 8:30 pm

WHERE

Virtual

EVENT DESCRIPTION

Artists, lawyers, advocates and immigrants read the sworn testimonies of young people under the age of 18, who were held in two detention facilities near the U.S./Mexico border in June 2019. Followed by a discussion with panelists.

Organized by the Immigrant Justice Clinic, Latinx Law Student Association, and American Constitution Society at UW Law School.

Zoom link will be sent to via email to those who register.

Registration

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Faculty, Students, Staff

EVENT CATEGORY

Speaker/Discussion

Email this event

Download for import into your calendar

« Back to the Calendar

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

I proudly note that my good friend Judge (Ret.) Jeffrey S. Chase and other distinguished members of our Round Table of Former Immigration Judges are “readers” in “The Flores Exhibit.”

I am also inspired by all that Erin has accomplished and the lives she and her students have saved through the Immigrant Justice Clinic at my alma mater, UW Law!

Erin and others like her are exactly the type of progressive, practical, scholar-problem solvers that we need as Federal Judges and in key Government policy-making positions. We need to replace the reactionary kakistocracy with a progressive, equal justice oriented, practical, problem-solving humanitarian meritocracy.

“Equal Justice For All” isn’t just a “throwaway slogan.” It’s a vision of a better, more efficient, more effective, more tolerant, more inclusive, more diverse, more representative Government that will work with people of good faith everywhere to maximize opportunities for all and promote a brighter future for everyone in America! It’s in our power to make it happen,and the necessary change starts this Fall.

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-12-20

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

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

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

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

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

By Katherine Mangan

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Michele

Michele R. Pistone

Professor of Law

_{Villanova University, Charles Widger School of Law}

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

Founder, VIISTA Villanova Interdisciplinary Immigration Studies Training for Advocates

Co-Managing Editor,Journal on Migration and Human Security

Adjunct Fellow, Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation

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

Many well-deserved congrats, Michele, my friend!

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

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

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-07-20

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oct. 6, 2020

505

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

. . . .

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

Read the complete article at the link.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-07-20

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

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

. . . .

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

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

. . . .

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

Read the full article at the link.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-06-20

Why Legal Representation Is Essential To Due Process For Asylum Seekers (In Fewer Than 200 Words)

Why Legal Representation Is Essential To Due Process For Asylum Seekers (In Fewer Than 200 Words)

By. Paul Wickham Schmidt

Retired U.S. Immigration Judge

Courtside Exclusive

Oct. 5, 2020

Unlike criminal defendants, asylum seekers have no right to “appointed counsel.” Yet, never in the history of our country has access to legal assistance been more important to asylum seekers’ Fifth Amendment Due Process rights.

The Justice Department and the DHS have actively sought to skew asylum law against asylum seekers by reversing favorable precedents and promulgating restrictive regulations intended to evade the protections available under the Refugee Act of 1980, the Immigration & Nationality Act, and international conventions. They have also used arrests, detention, shortened filing deadlines, pressure on Asylum Officers and Immigration Judges to deny more asylum applications, and other “gimmicks” to discourage legitimate asylum seekers from filing, documenting, and pursuing their applications.

Without access to competent counsel, experienced in the latest developments in asylum law and enforcement, asylum seekers have little chance of prevailing at the administrative level and virtually no chance of successfully seeking review and intervention from Article III Courts to protect and vindicate precious, often life-saving, statutory and Constitutional rights.

THE GIBSON REPORT — 10-05-20 — Compiled By Elizabeth Gibson, Esquire, NY Legal Assistance Group — Federal Judge Rules Trump Not A Monarch; More Intentional Cruelty, Lies, & Threats Of Politically-Inspired Racist Attacks On Ethnic Communities From DHS; Trump Regime Dumps On Refugees & Commies; Cert. Granted In Credibility Case Apparently Seeking To Screw Refugees At Request Of SG; & Other “Interesting & Sometimes Disturbing Stuff”⚖️

COVID-19

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

New

EOIR Status Overview & EOIR Court Status Map/List: Hearings in non-detained cases at courts without an announced date are postponed through, and including, October 23, 2020. [Note: Despite the standing order about practices upon reopening, an opening date has not been announced for NYC non-detained at this time.]

Closures

EOIR Operational Status & Standing Orders

EOIR Case Status

ICE Updates (Including ERO and Detention)

USCIS Updates

Consular Updates

NY Courts Updates

Guidance:

IJ Email Filings

BIA Email Filings

EOIR Standing Orders

EOIR Electronic Signature Guidance

EOIR Update Regarding EOIR Practices Related to the COVID-19 Outbreak

USCIS Visitor Policy

USCIS Extends Flexibility for Responding to Agency Requests

Electronic database of COVID-19 related materials

NY Notary Guidance

TOP NEWS

SIJS Priority Dates

For the first time in more than two years, the priority dates for SIJS applicants from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala have advanced. The new priority date is February 1, 2018. All I-360 SIJS applications filed on or before February 1, 2018 may now file for adjustment of status. The priority date for Mexican SIJS cases is current which means that any Mexican SIJS applicant may file now for adjustment of status. SIJS adjustment cases will not be able to waive the considerable filing fees if/when the new rules go into effect and given the opacity of the visa bulletin, we are not sure the priority dates will remain at the current dates past October 31.

Trump Virtually Cuts Off Refugees as He Unleashes a Tirade on Immigrants

NYT: The change in the number of refugees that Mr. Trump plans to admit is not drastic: no more than 15,000 in the fiscal year that began Thursday, down from 18,000 in the 2020 fiscal year, which was a record low. The number was set in a notice sent to Congress late Wednesday, shortly before the statutory deadline to set the new limit. Both numbers are slivers of the 110,000 slots that President Barack Obama approved in 2016. See also World Grows Less Accepting of Migrants.

United States closes immigration door to communists in clear swipe at China

SCMP: The United States has released guidance on its immigration laws that will make it almost impossible for members of a Communist party or similar to be granted permanent residence or citizenship of America. The announcement was made in a policy alert issued on Friday by the US Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS). In a sign Washington is dusting off its Cold War-era legislation, the agency said: “In general, unless otherwise exempt, any intending immigrant who is a member or affiliate of the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party … domestic or foreign, is inadmissible to the United States.”

Pence ordered borders closed after CDC experts refused

AP: Vice President Mike Pence in March directed the nation’s top disease control agency to use its emergency powers to effectively seal the U.S. borders, overruling the agency’s scientists who said there was no evidence the action would slow the coronavirus, according to two former health officials. The action has so far caused nearly 150,000 children and adults to be expelled from the country.

Judge Blocks USCIS Fee Increases: Here’s Why It Happened

Forbes: On September 29, 2020, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White, in the Northern District of California, enjoined the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), USCIS and officials serving in those agencies “from implementing or enforcing the Final Rule or any portion thereof.” The preliminary injunction is in effect nationwide. Immigrant Legal Resource Center, et al. v. Chad F. Wolf, et al. involved 8 non-profit organizations that provide services to immigrants.

Judge Rules Against Trump’s H-1B Visa Ban: President Is Not A Monarch

Forbes: In a closely watched case on the limits of presidential authority over immigration, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction against the Trump administration’s June 2020 proclamation that suspended the entry of foreign nationals on H-1B, L-1, H-2B and most J-1 temporary visas. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White ruled the president does not possess the power of a monarch to cast aside immigration laws passed by Congress. See also IT stocks rise up to 5% as US judge temporarily blocks ban on H-1B visa.

Palantir Admits to Helping ICE Deport Immigrants While Trying to Prove It Doesn’t

Vice: Palantir responded to Amnesty International with a letter of its own—a master class in hair-splitting that hit familiar points, used old arguments that have been dismissed, and accidentally admitted Palantir’s technology is used for deportations.

Trump administration puts up billboards of immigration violators in Pennsylvania

CNN: The Trump administration has put up billboards in Pennsylvania of immigration violators, an unprecedented move taken in a swing state a month before the presidential election. The plan targeting “sanctuary cities,” which limit cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, is in step with President Donald Trump’s law-and-order message.

ICE preparing targeted arrests in ‘sanctuary cities,’ amplifying president’s campaign theme

WaPo: The Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation, known informally as the “sanctuary op,” could begin in California as soon as later this week. It would then expand to cities including Denver and Philadelphia, according to two of the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe sensitive government law enforcement plans.

Trump administration wants to screen credit scores, tax returns of immigrants’ U.S. sponsors

Miami Herald: The proposed rule would require those who sponsor a green card for an immigrant to provide — along with the affidavit form — credit reports and credit scores, certified copies of income tax returns for the last three years, and bank account information, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said on Thursday.

“The Cruelty Is the Point”: U.S. Still Denying Protection to Severely Ill People With No Legal Status—Despite Announcing Otherwise

Ms.: Remarkably, USCIS announced on September 19, 2019 that deferred action was reinstated by USCIS. Despite the reinstatement, the outcome in deferred action cases we handled or tracked across the country continue to raise concerns.

Federal Agency Will Pay $336K in Legal Fees, Ending Immigrant Minors’ Abortion Rights Case

NLJ: After three years of litigation over the Trump administration’s policy of restricting undocumented minors’ access to abortion, the government on Tuesday agreed to change its policy and to pay more than $330,000 in legal fees and costs to the American Civil Liberties Union, which initiated the challenge.

New Jersey Doubles Immigrant Legal Representation Budget

DocumentedNY: New Jersey had no such program until last year, until Murphy allocated $3.1 million to hire lawyers. Now, he’s doubled that figure to more than $6 million.

NY City Council Announces $28.4 Million for Immigrant Services

City Council: The Council funding includes $3.25 million for the successful program, CUNY Citizenship Now!, which provides free legal services to assist New Yorkers and their families as they navigate the application process to become U.S. citizens. The Council funds also include $16.6 million for the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project (NYIFUP), the nation’s first public defender system to assist detained immigrant facing deportation proceedings. In addition, the City Council designated almost $4 million to fund legal representation services for unaccompanied minors separated from their families and who are facing immigration proceedings.

Changes to VAWA and T-Visas: DHS Proposed Rule on Collection of Biometrics

ImmProf: Rather than attempting to reduce fraud, the proposed rule seems designed to intimidate applicants from applying and increase the burden if they decide to do so. This invidious motivation can be seen more clearly in the proposed rule’s seemingly random attempt to change the framework for assessing the Good Moral Character of VAWA and T-visa applicants. Instead of presumptions and letters from respected law enforcement officers, these petitioners would be subject to DNA collection and associated background checks in a determination of their Good Moral Character.

LITIGATION/CASELAW/RULES/MEMOS

SCOTUS grants cert on asylum credibility case Barr v. Dai

SCOTUSblog: (1) Whether a court of appeals may conclusively presume that an asylum applicant’s testimony is credible and true whenever an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals adjudicates an application without making an explicit adverse credibility determination; and (2) whether the court of appeals violated the remand rule as set forth in INS v. Ventura when it determined in the first instance that the respondent, Ming Dai, was eligible for asylum and entitled to withholding of removal.

District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Halting Implementation of USCIS Fee Rule

The district court stayed the implementation and the effective date of the August 2020 Final Rule, which changed the fee schedule and required new versions of several forms, in its entirety pending final adjudication of this matter. (ILRC et al., v. Wolf, et al., 9/29/20) AILA Doc. No. 20092990

USCIS Issues Update on 2020 Fee Rule Preliminary Injunction

USCIS issued an update stating that while the 2020 Fee Rule is enjoined, it will continue to accept USCIS forms with the current editions and current fees. AILA Doc. No. 20100190

District Court Orders DOS to Reserve 9,095 FY2020 Diversity Visa Numbers

The court ordered DOS to reserve 9,095 of the approximately 40,000 unused diversity visa numbers for future processing of both the named plaintiffs’ and class-members’ diversity visa applications, pending final adjudication of the matter. (Gomez, et al., v. Trump, et al., 9/30/20) AILA Doc. No. 20100100

District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction Halting Proclamation Suspending Entry of Nonimmigrants

The court granted the motion for preliminary injunction, preventing the government from implementing Section 2 of Presidential Proclamation 10052. Note, injunction only applies to named plaintiff groups. (National Association of Manufacturers et al., v. DHS, et al., 10/1/20) AILA Doc. No. 20100200

District Court Says Grant of TPS Constitutes an Admission for Adjustment of Status Purposes and Qualifies as a New Entry

The federal district court in Minnesota held that a grant of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) under INA §244a constitutes an admission for purposes of adjustment of status, and that such an admission qualifies as a new entry. (Hernandez de Gutierrez, et al. v. Barr, et al., 9/28/20) AILA Doc. No. 20092935

CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Ecuadorian Petitioner Who Feared Harm from Brother Involved in Narcotics Trafficking

The court held that the record supported the BIA’s and IJ’s conclusion that family ties did not motivate the petitioner’s persecution at the hands of his adopted older brother, even though those ties brought the petitioner into proximity with his persecutor. (Loja-Tene v. Barr, 9/21/20) AILA Doc. No. 20100141

CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial to Honduran Petitioner Who Feared Attacks Motivated by His Father’s Gang Affiliation

The court held that the petitioner did not meet his burden of showing that the government of Honduras was unwilling or unable to protect him, where the evidence in the record indicated that the police had investigated the threats and attacks against him. (Gómez-Medina v. Barr, 9/15/20)AILA Doc. No. 20100140

CA2 Says Conviction for Third-Degree Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in New York Is an Aggravated Felony

The court upheld the BIA’s determination that the petitioner’s conviction for third-degree criminal possession of stolen property in violation of New York Penal Law §165.50 was an aggravated felony offense under INA §101(a)(43)(G). (Santana v. Barr, 9/18/20) AILA Doc. No. 20100206

CA2 Finds Petitioner’s Conviction in New York for Sexual Abuse in the First Degree Was an Aggravated Felony

The court held that the petitioner’s conviction under New York Penal Law §130.65(3) for sexual abuse in the first degree constituted an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(A). (Rodriguez v. Barr, 9/18/20) AILA Doc. No. 20100142

CA3 Finds District Court Lacked Jurisdiction to Review Appellant’s Challenges to the Execution of His Removal Order

Where the appellant had raised two challenges to the execution of his removal order, the court found that he had pursued his claims in the wrong proceeding, and reversed and remanded to the district court with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. (Tazu v. Att’y Gen., 9/14/20) AILA Doc. No. 20100209

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance on Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party

USCIS issued policy guidance to address inadmissibility based on membership in or affiliation with a totalitarian party in the context of adjustment of status applications. The guidance provides an overview of the inadmissibility determination, evidence, burden of proof, exceptions, and waivers. AILA Doc. No. 20100201

DOS Provides Information on National Interest Exceptions for Certain Travelers from Europe

DOS announced that certain business travelers, investors, treaty traders, academics, students, and journalists from the Schengen Area, the U.K., and Ireland may qualify for National Interest Exceptions under Presidential Proclamations 9993 (Schengen Area) and 9996 (U.K., Ireland). Updated 10/1/20. AILA Doc. No. 20071733

EOIR Launches Immigration Court Online Resource (ICOR) and Pro Bono Portal

EOIR announced the launch of the Immigration Court Online Resource (ICOR), which provides resources on immigration proceedings before EOIR, and the Pro Bono Portal, which allows for the initiation and management of applications to be included in the EOIR List of Pro Bono Legal Service Providers. AILA Doc. No. 20100139

RESOURCES

EOIR Immigration Court Online Resource (Not to be confused with the EOIR virtual law library and country conditions)

EOIR Pro Bono Portal

CBP Did Not Adequately Oversee FY 2019 Appropriated Humanitarian Funding September 28, 2020 OIG-20-78

Practice Alert: Advising Clients Concerning Impact of Preliminary Stay in Gomez v. Trump on DV-2020 Selectees

E-Signatures: Six Uses in Immigration Practice

Practice Advisory: Requesting Congressional Liaison Assistance

CLINIC Summary of Immigrant Ineligibility for Federal Public Benefits

CLINIC TPS Terminations: Understanding the 9th Circuit’s Ramos Decision and How it Affects TPS Clients

ILRC § 1473.7 Motions to Vacate a Conviction or Sentence in California

ILRC Public Charge: Community Meeting PowerPoint with Presentation Script, and Sample Audience Questions and Answers

ILRC Public Charge: Community Messages

ILRC Public Charge and Advising Permanent Residents at the Time of Naturalization

ILRC Public Charge Outreach Toolkit

ILRC Public Charge: What the Community Needs to Know

ILRC The Rights of Lawful Permanent Residents (Fact Sheet)

Resources Related to Presidential Proclamations Temporarily Suspending Entry of Certain Immigrants and Nonimmigrants into the United States

MPI: College-Educated Immigrants in the United States

EVENTS

10/5/20 Green Light Law Training

10/07/20 Conceptualizing Migrant Farmworker Rights in Asia

10/6/20 Public Charge Updates

10/06/20 Medical Abuse and Neglect in Immigration Detention

10/6/20-10/27/20 Webinar Series: Understanding and Preparing Waivers

10/7/20 The Role of Local Elections in Shaping Immigration Policy

10/8/20 Racial Justice Film Series: The Fight, Q&A with Lee Gelernt

10/9/20 IACHR hearing to discuss the human rights situation of migrants, refugees, and unaccompanied children

10/9/2020 Conozca Sus Derechos: Como interactuar con la migra en su casa, en las calles, en sus automóviles, y más!

10/14/20 Immigration, Healthcare, and the Coronavirus Crisis

10/14/20 Understanding Retroactivity in Immigration Matters

10/15/20 Maintenance of Status: What You Need to Know in the Current Climate

10/16/20 New EAD Rules for Asylum Seekers

10/20/20 Immigration in the 2020 Election

10/20/20 Fee Rule Implementation: Effects on Survivor Relief

10/21/20 Advising TPS Clients in Light of Recent Developments

10/21/20 Rule of Law Forum – Preserving the Rule of Law in an Age of Disruption

10/21/20-10/23/20 Case Management Skills & Database Functions

10/21/20 Migrations and One Health: Human, Animal, and Environmental Interactions and Emerging Diseases

10/22/20 Non-LPR Cancellation: Overview of Eligibility & Proving Continuous Presence

10/23/20 Migration as Resistance: The Underground Railroad

10/27/20 Seeking Special Immigrant Juvenile Status in Removal Proceedings

10/28/20 Advanced U Visa Hot Topics

10/28/20 The Ecology of State-Building: Moving Capitals in Indonesia

10/29/20-10/30/20 2020 Crimes & Immigration Seminar

10/29/20 Presenting the Case

10/29/20 Marijuana: Bridging the Divide Between State and Federal Law

11/4/20 Program Strategies for Removal Defense Practice

11/10/20 Pursuing Immigration Pro Bono Opportunities in Private Practice

11/11/20 Climate Change and Oceanic Migrations

11/12/20 Defying Non-Reviewability: How to Proceed After a Consular Denial

11/17/20 Make the Government Pay! Attorney fees in Immigration

11/17/20 Employment-Based Immigration Opportunities for Immigrant Youth

11/18/20 Applying for Asylum and Related Relief for Clients with Convictions

11/24/20 VAWA Self-Petitioning Fundamentals

12/2/20 Migration, Climate Change, and Human Adaptation

12/2/20 An Overview of Naturalization

12/3/20 Representing Permanent Residents in LPR Cancellation Cases

12/3/20-12/4/20 53rd Annual Immigration and Naturalization Institute

12/8/20 Litigating Your Way Out of Delay

12/9/20 Public Charge in Consular Processing

12/15/20 Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude

12/16/20 LPRs and Public Charge

12/16/20 Program Strategies for Removal Defense Practice

2/4/21 Basic Immigration Law 2021: Business, Family, Naturalization and Related Areas

2/5/21 Asylum, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, Crime Victim, and Other Immigration Relief 2021

ImmProf

Monday, October 5, 2020

Immigrantly, A Podcast

PBS Documentary on Proposition 187 and Change in Latinx Voting in California

USCIS Issues Policy Guidance Regarding Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party

Immigration Article of the Day: A Domestic Reign of Terror by Ediberto Roman

Sunday, October 4, 2020

VP ordered borders closed after CDC experts refused

How a 1965 immigration law forever changed the makeup of America

‘Overlooked’: Asian American Jobless Rate Surges But Few Take Notice

TRUMP’S TURN FROM IMMIGRATION TO THE ENEMY WITHIN: Trump’s shift from demonizing immigrants to targeting leftists is straight out of the fascist playbook.

Saturday, October 3, 2020

From The Bookshelves–The Good Immigrant: 26 Writers Reflect on America

ICE Launches Billboard Campaign Targeting “Criminal Aliens”

Secretly recorded tapes show Melania Trump’s frustration at criticism for family separation policy

Friday, October 2, 2020

Suprme Court to Review Asylum Credibility Decisions

Court Halts Trump’s COVID-19 Work Visa Ban

Thursday, October 1, 2020

UK Considers Off-Shoring Asylum Seekers

College-Educated Immigrants in the United States

The Beat Goes On: DHS Tightens Affidavit of Support Requirements

President’s Report to Congress on the Proposed Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2021

60 Minutes: Why a private section of the border wall is allegedly failing

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

Take Back Tech fellowships relating to immigration

Immigration Article of the Day: Undocumented Activism and Minor Politics: Inside the Cramped Political Spaces of Deportation Defense Campaigns by Austin Kocher and Angela Stusse

Guest Post by Hunter Knapp: DHS Proposed Rule on Collection of Biometrics

Immigration Revelation: A Podcast

From the Bookshelves: Inventing Latinos: A New Story of American Racism by Laura E. Gómez

Duke Law Immigration Speaker Series

ICE to Raid Sanctuary Cities

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

Immigration fee hikes blocked by federal court

Presidential Debate and Immigration

Gallup: World Grows Less Accepting of Migrants

Implications of Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s textualism, deference to executive for immigration law

Immigration Article of the Day: Distancing Refugees by Geoffrey Heeren

Monday, September 28, 2020

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

Wow! Imagine how much time and money could be saved, and problems solved rather than aggravated, by a Government that actually provided due process, honored human rights, promoted equal justice for all, and respected the rule of law and the proper role of courts!

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

PWS

10-06-20

“A Complete Abdication of Our Humanitarian and Moral Duty” – Outside News – Immigration Law – LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom

Syrian Refugee photography work by Bengin Ahmad
Creative Commons License

From Dan Kowalski @ LexisNexis Immigration Community:

https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/outsidenews/posts/a-complete-abdication-of-our-humanitarian-and-moral-duty

“A Complete Abdication of Our Humanitarian and Moral Duty”

LIRS, Oct. 1, 2020

“The Trump administration proposed its annual refugee admissions ceiling just before midnight on Wednesday, September 30, committing to resettle just 15,000 individuals in Fiscal Year 2021, which would be the lowest admissions ceiling since the inception of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP).

The announcement comes on the heels of what was previously the lowest level of refugee admissions in American history. For FY 2020, which ended on September 30, the administration had set a goal to welcome just 18,000 refugees, in stark contrast to the average admissions ceiling of approximately 95,000 since the beginning of the USRAP. Despite this historically low target, the administration barely attained 65% of allotted admissions – resettling only 11,814 refugees this fiscal year, according to Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service.

“In just four years, this Administration has cut the refugee resettlement program from 110,000 to a historic low of fifteen thousand. At a time of unprecedented global need, today’s decision to further cut the refugee admissions ceiling is a complete abdication of our humanitarian and moral duty.” said Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, a resettlement agency that has welcomed hundreds of thousands of refugees since 1939. “Let this serve as a wake-up call to those who believe this administration supports avenues of legal immigration. Refugees go through extreme vetting and have done everything our government has asked of them, yet they continue to be met with open hostility and egregious processing delays from this administration”

The record-low admissions figures have also disproportionately impacted certain groups. Admissions of Muslim refugees have declined to just 2,503, down from approximately 38,900 in FY 2016 and approximately 4,900 in FY 2019. Additionally, the Trump administration set aside 4,000 slots for Iraqi allies who assisted U.S. interests in their home country. However, it fell drastically short, resettling only 123 individuals in this category, or just 3% of the admissions goal.

“It shows the tragic extent to which we have abandoned our Iraqi allies who risked their lives, and those of their family members, to assist U.S. government and military personnel,” noted Vignarajah. “This further undermines our diplomatic and military efforts, rendering it nearly impossible to garner support from regional allies moving forward.”

Given FY2020’s record-low admissions numbers and an FY2021 proposed admissions ceiling of only 15,000, refugee advocates are deeply concerned by the human toll on the most vulnerable.

“In real terms, this means that families who have already waited years are forced to postpone reunification. It means that thousands who would otherwise find safety on our shores are left to languish in refugee camps, with no end in sight,” concluded Vignarajah. “This heartless decision is diametrically opposed to our values as a welcoming nation and it dishonors our common humanity at a time of dire need.”

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

Here’s then”Trump Regression” — From international leader, to outlier, to outlaw state!🏴‍☠️

This Fall, vote for a return to humanity and the rule of law!

PWS

10-02-20

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

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

. . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PWS

10-01-20

KAKISTOCRACY KORNER🤮👎: “WOLFMAN THE ILLEGAL” CALLED OUT AGAIN – U.S. Judge Stuffs USCIS’s Outrageously Unjustified Fee Increases – Wolfie’s “Illegality” Key To Victory For Good Guys! — ImmigrationProf Blog Reports!

Trump Regime Emoji — Trump Regime, Thieves Thrive on the Public Dole!

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

Immigration fee hikes blocked by federal court

By Immigration Prof

Share

Days before they were to go into effect, a federal court in the Northern District of California issued a national injunction blocking a dramatic fee hike for appliations for naturalized citizenship, permanent residency, asylum, and access to other immigration benefits. The new fees would have made immigration benefits unattainable for many. It would have nearly doubled citizenship from $640 to $1,170; increased lawful permanent residency and related application fees from $1,125 to $2,270; and added a $50 fee for asylum applications (the first time a fee has been assessed for asylum applications). The rule would have also eliminated most fee waivers for immigrants who cannot afford to pay the fees.

Judge Jeffrey White ruled that the nonprofit organizations that had challenged the fee increases would be likely to prevail in showing that Wolf’s appointment as Acting Director of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, without Senate confirmation, violated the rules of succession. As a result, the fees ordered under his stewardship cannot take effect while the litigation progresses. Similar reasoning had been used in a separate lawsuit regarding Ken Cucinelli and his asylum directives.

MHC

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

MHC = Professor Ming Hsu Chen one of the all-star ⭐️ team of bloggers at ImmigrationProf Blog. Thanks, Professor, for this timely item! These illegal and clearly punitive fee increases were scheduled to into effect at the beginning of October!

This is also a great illustration of why, totally contrary to the nonsense GOP party line and folks like GOP-owned Justices Thomas and Gorsuch, the nationwide injunction is an essential tool for achieving justice. According to the GOP’s false dogma, plaintiffs, many pro se, or appearing with pro bono or “low bono” representation, should be required to win their cases before over 650 U.S. District Judges and in 12 Circuits to get effective relief from the Trump regime’s unrelenting war on our Constitution and the rule of law.

While Trump and his GOP toadies and sycophants spout BS platitudes about “law and order” the truth is simple: This is a party of arrogant, immoral “scofflaws” from top to bottom!

This Fall, vote like your life and our future as a nation depend on it! Because they do! Vote the GOP kakistocracy out at every level! Don’t let their dark & dishonest plans become YOUR future!☠️⚰️

PWS

09-30-20

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

Billy Barr Consigliere — Bill Barr Consigliere
Artist: Pat Bagley
Salt Lake Tribune
Reproduced under license

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

From the EOIR website:

Garry Malphrus

Deputy Chief Appellate Immigration Judge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-29-20

“My Trials: Inside America’s Deportation Factories” — Round Table Star 🌟 Hon. Paul Grussendorf Releases Revised Edition Of His Acclaimed Book 🏆 — Help Him Self-Publish Here!

Paul Grussendorf is organizing this fundraiser.

Creative Arts, Music & Film

I am a lawyer specializing in asylum and refugee law. I have taught refugee law at George Washington University, University of San Francisco and Howard University. I have worked with the U.S. government and the UN Refugee Agency in refugee resettlement all over the world, most recently in Rwanda until COVID shut down our interviews.

In 2011 I self-published my legal memoir, My Trials: Inside America’s Deportation Factories, focusing upon the deportation system and my time as an immigration judge. It is time to update the book, given all the changes and destructive policies that have occured in recent years to our asylum system. The book received great reviews: “My Trials is both a scathing indictment of a broken immigration system that sends vulnerable immigrants back to perilous situations from which they fled, and a heartfelt call for a return to the values upon which our nation was founded.” American Immigration Lawyers Association. It was endorsed by renowned criminal defense attorney Gerry Spence.

The budget will include $2000 for editing and formatting, and $3000 for a limited publicity campaign. I am currently working with an editor to make the book available on Amazon by first week of October, so funds are essential now. It will be available on all other platforms mid-October.

This book has been a labor of love and education, and I have not profited from it. I will be tremendously grateful for assistance to make this updated book available at this critical junction in our nation’s history.

Click here it contribute to Paul’s “Go Fund Me” Campaign:

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-paul-selfpublish-his-immigration-book?utm_source=customer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=p_cf+share-flow-1

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

Judge, educator, public servant, humanitarian, author, role model, tireless advocate for due process, fundamental fairness, and equal justice for all: Thanks, Paul, for all you have done and continue to do. It’s a total honor to serve with you on the Round Table!🛡⚔️👍🏼

PWS

09-27-20

RIGHT ON CUE: Billy The Bigot’s Latest Illegal, Unethical, Absurdist Asylum Attack “Precedent” Shows Why Only A “Radical Progressive Humanitarian Judiciary” Can Save The American Justice System From Racist Fascism! — Matter of A-C-A-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 84 (A.G. 2020)

🤮☠️🏴‍☠️👎🏻🆘⚰️

The Attorney General has issued a decision in Matter of A-C-A-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 84 (A.G. 2020)

In conducting its review of an alien’s asylum claim, the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) must examine de novo whether the facts found by the immigration judge satisfy all of the statutory elements of asylum as a matter of law. See Matter of R‑A‑F‑, 27 I&N Dec. 778 (A.G. 2020).

When reviewing a grant of asylum, the Board should not accept the parties’ stipulations to, or failures to address, any of the particular elements of asylum—including, where necessary, the elements of a particular social group. Instead, unless it affirms without opinion under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(4)(i), the Board should meaningfully review each element of an asylum claim before affirming such a grant, or before independently ordering a grant of asylum. See Matter of L‑E‑A‑, 27 I&N Dec. 581, 589 (A.G. 2019).

Even if an applicant is a member of a cognizable particular social group and has suffered persecution, an asylum claim should be denied if the harm inflicted or threatened by the persecutor is not “on account of” the alien’s membership in that group. That requirement is especially important to scrutinize where the asserted particular social group encompasses many millions of persons in a particular society.

An alien’s membership in a particular social group cannot be “incidental, tangential, or subordinate to the persecutor’s motivation . . . [for] why the persecutor[] sought to inflict harm.” Matter of A‑B‑, 27 I&N Dec. 316, 338 (A.G. 2018) (citations omitted). Accordingly, persecution that results from personal animus or retribution generally does not support eligibility for asylum.

__________________________________________________

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Office of Policy

Communications and Legislative Affairs Division

PAO.EOIR@usdoj.gov

703-305-0289

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

To state the obvious, “personal animus” and “retribution” often are involved in cases where race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social, or political opinion is “at least one central reason” for the persecution. That’s what the “mixed motive” doctrine is all about.

Look at Nazi Germany where many of the persecutors stood to gain personally or professionally or to extract retribution from the removal of their Jewish neighbors or former colleagues from society. What do you think happened to the property, possessions, and positions of those sent off to be gassed?

Billy the Bigot’s unethical, illegal, and immoral attempt to rewrite asylum law is part and parcel of the “any reason to deny” program aimed disproportionally at women (probably the “most persecuted social group in the world“) and applicants of color. Yet, time and again, Article III Courts fail to effectively “call out” this racism and misogyny driving an illegal rewrite of asylum laws! Asylum is intended to “protect, not reject.”

Also to state the obvious, this decision makes party stipulations, a key to fairly reducing the backlog and achieving justice in an adversary system, meaningless. Applied across the board, this would basically disable the American justice system at both the Federal and State levels.

But, of course, the Bigot’s real intent is to dump on asylum seekers, who tend to be individuals of color. The same standards won’t necessarily be applied when the interests of certain privileged White folks are at stake. It’s the unconstitutional, intentionally “unequal justice system” promoted by the GOP.

It’s another example of “Dred Scottification” of minorities and the most vulnerable by the regime and the Federal Courts. Once, a better qualified Supremes required the Executive to carry out the statutory mandate of a generous asylum system that complied with international standards (INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca). Now, it’s all about the Supremes’ majority’s furthering the regime’s White Nationalist agenda!

The Supremes’ GOP majority has been too intellectually dishonest and past Dem Administrations too “willfully dense” to connect the dots. But, this type of neo-Fascist nonsense by a bigot totally unqualified for public office, let alone purporting to serve in a quasi-judicial capacity, is a gross violation of established ethical standards that ties directly into the breakdown in the fabric of our society in a crescendo of racism, bigotry, false narratives, public mistrust, and authoritarianism! Lawyers with immigration and human rights experience recognize this, even if others are blind — whether willfully or negligently.

There is no excuse for an intentionally enfeebled, intellectually dishonest, and too often anti-democracy Federal Judiciary that has failed to hold Trump, Barr, Wolf, Miller, Francisco, and other other members of the anti-democracy, Jim Crow movement that drives today’s GOP accountable for their unethical, unconstitutional conduct, overt racism, and other gross misdeeds!

Better judges for a better America! Vote the kakistocracy out this Fall and usher in the age of the “Radical Progressive Humanitarian Judiciary” before it’s too late! Equal justice applies to all persons, not just Billy the Bigot’s favored, largely White male, class.

Convicted felons get reduced sentenced and motions to dismiss charges. Corrupt public officials avoid the law and mock ethical standards. Refugees of color get banishment and death!

Due Process Forever! Billy The Bigot Never!

PWS

09-25-20

ATTENTION NEW DUE PROCESS ARMY: CALS Fellowships Available @ Georgetown Law – Great Training For The Radically Progressive Humanitarian Federal Judiciary Of The Future That Will Finally Make The 5th, 13th, 14th, & 15th Amendments To The Constitution A Reality!👩🏻‍⚖️⚖️🗽🇺🇸

CALS Graduate Teaching Fellowships

FELLOWSHIP ANNOUNCEMENT

2020-2022 Clinical Teaching Fellowship

The Center for Applied Legal Studies (CALS) at Georgetown Law announces that it is now accepting applications for its annual fellowship program in clinical legal education. CALS will offer one lawyer a two year teaching fellowship (July 2020 June 2022), providing a unique opportunity to learn how to teach law in a clinical setting.

At CALS, our two fellows and faculty members work as colleagues, sharing responsibilities for designing and teaching classes, supervising law students in their representation of clients, selecting and grading students, administering the clinic, and all other matters. In addition, the fellow will undertake independent legal scholarship, conducting the research and writing to produce a law review article of publishable quality.

This fellowship is particularly suitable for lawyers with some degree of practice experience who now want to embark upon careers in law teaching. Most of our previous fellows are now teaching law or have done so for substantial portions of their careers.

Since 1995, CALS has specialized in immigration law, specifically in asylum practice, and our docket focuses on presenting asylum claims in immigration court. Applicants with experience in U.S. immigration law will therefore, be given preference. The fellow must be a member of a bar at the start of the fellowship period.

The fellow will receive full tuition and fees in the LL.M. program at Georgetown University, and a stipend of 57,000 in the first year and 60,000 in the second year. On successful completion of the requirements, the Fellow will be granted the degree of Master of Laws (Advocacy) with distinction.

Former holders of this fellowship include Mary Brittingham (1995-97), Andrea Goodman (1996-98), Michele Pistone (1997-99), Rebecca Story (1998-2000), Virgil Wiebe (1999-2001), Anna Marie Gallagher (2000-02), Regina Germain (2001-2003), Dina Francesca Haynes (2002-2004), Diane Uchimiya (2003-2005), Jaya Ramji-Nogales (2004-2006), Denise Gilman (2005-2007), Susan Benesch (2006-2008), Kate Aschenbrenner (2007-2009), Anjum Gupta (2008-2010), Alice Clapman (2009-2011) Geoffrey Heeren (2010-2012), Heidi Altman (2011-2013), Laila Hlass(2012-2014), Lindsay Harris (2013-2015), Jean C. Han, Rebecca Feldmann, Pooja Dadhania, and Karen Baker. The current fellows are Faiza Sayed and Deena Sharuk. The faculty members directing CALS are Andrew Schoenholtz and Philip Schrag.

To apply, send a resume, an official or unofficial law school transcript, a writing sample, and a detailed statement of interest (approximately 5 pages). The materials must arrive by December 2, 2019. The statement should address: a) why you are interested in this fellowship; b) what you can contribute to the Clinic; c) your experience with asylum and other immigration cases; d) your professional or career goals for the next five or ten years; e) your reactions to the Clinic’s goalsand teaching methods as described on its website, https://www.law.georgetown.edu/experiential-learning/clinics/center-for-applied-legal-studies/; and f) anything else that you consider pertinent. Address your application to Directors, Center for Applied Legal Studies, Georgetown Law, 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Suite 332, Washington, D.C. 20001, or electronically to lawcalsclinic@georgetown.edu.

Georgetown University is an equal opportunity affirmative action employer. We are committed to diversity in the workplace. If you have any questions, call CALS at (202) 662-9565 or email to lawcalsclinic@georgetown.edu.

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

Great opportunity, at a great school, with great Clinical Professors! (Full disclosure: I am an Adjunct Professor @ Georgetown Law.)

The “CALS Alumni List Above” reads like the “All-Star Team of Social Justice.” They are doing great things and teaching others, literally from coast to coast.

There is only one place where they can’t be found – yet! That’s the Federal Government, particularly our failing Federal Judiciary!

One of the reasons our nation is in turmoil, governed by a kakistocracy, with failing institutions, is the glaring lack of immigration and human rights expertise and the concomitant courageous commitment to Constitutional principles of Due Process, Fundamental Fairness, Equal Justice for All, and practical problem solving that it brings! The stunning and disgraceful lack of all these necessary qualities for a successful, prosperous, vibrant 21^st Century democratic republic runs throughout the Executive, Legislature, and particularly the Judiciary – including both the Article IIIs and the “wannabes” (like Immigration “Courts” that don’t function like “courts” but could be fixed with better leadership and a merit-based judiciary.)

So, what about teaching and advocacy? Aren’t they supposed to be the goals of CALS? Well, as once pointed out to me by a colleague, judges are teachers and courtrooms at every level also function as classrooms. And, advocacy? Well, what is great judging if not a form of unswerving fearless advocacy for due process, fundamental fairness, and equal justice for all?

There is no doubt that CALS and similar programs at other institutions have played a seminal role in improving advocacy. Today’s leading immigration advocates are superstars in what has become the most important field in today’s law – one that combines intellectual challenge with practical humanity, all in the context of the highest stakes imaginable for individuals, our nation, and our world.

But, too often today that great advocacy is falling on the tone-deaf ears of a non-responsive, non-representative, far right-wing judiciary selected for their commitment to a cruel, exclusive, basically anti-Constitutional, and often virulently anti-democracy agenda. In this toxic context, even the greatest advocacy becomes largely an exercise in futility. It’s past time for the leading lights of immigration and human rights advocacy, many of them CALS alums, to penetrate the Federal Judiciary and eventually dominate it.

To survive, prosper, and lead into the future, our diverse and talented nation needs a “radical progressive humanitarian judiciary.” So, my advice to those of you wanting to lead the way to a better and more just future: Get your CALS Fellowship Application in now! Prepare yourself aggressively to seek political, governmental, and judicial power and progressively to use it for the common good!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

09-24-20

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

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1933-2020
Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States, Photographer: Steve Petteway
Public Realm

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

Karen Tumulty in WashPost:

. . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

. . . .

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

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

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

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

PWS

09-22-20

Related posts:

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Many well-deserved congrats, Michele, my friend!

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Why Legal Representation Is Essential To Due Process For Asylum Seekers (In Fewer Than 200 Words)

By. Paul Wickham Schmidt

Retired U.S. Immigration Judge

Courtside Exclusive

Oct. 5, 2020

Related posts:

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

Related posts:

“A Complete Abdication of Our Humanitarian and Moral Duty”

This Fall, vote for a return to humanity and the rule of law!

Related posts:

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

Related posts:

This Fall, vote like your life and our future as a nation depend on it! Because they do! Vote the GOP kakistocracy out at every level! Don’t let their dark & dishonest plans become YOUR future!☠️⚰️

Related posts:

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Related posts:

Due Process Forever! Billy The Bigot Never!

Related posts:

CALS Graduate Teaching Fellowships

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Related posts: