Author Topic: Immigration; weaponized immigration  (Read 687990 times)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
AOC brings business to her district
« Reply #2150 on: March 17, 2024, 10:28:43 AM »
so Amazon backed out of building in her district

it is doing just fine attracting new business anyway:

https://pjmedia.com/rick-moran/2024/03/17/look-whose-district-has-become-a-third-world-brothel-and-bazaar-n4927389

ya

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1687
    • View Profile
Denmark: Relative Violent Crime Rates by Nation
« Reply #2151 on: March 22, 2024, 04:40:26 AM »
« Last Edit: March 22, 2024, 06:12:00 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
we should all celebrate the headline
« Reply #2152 on: March 23, 2024, 03:30:07 AM »
Chinese American Joyce Chang head of global research for JP Morgan tells us immigration is good for the country!

rah rah rah hurray!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/jpmorgan-s-head-of-research-says-immigration-is-undeniably-a-good-thing-for-the-economy-as-the-bank-forecasts-even-higher-us-gdp-growth-this-year/ar-BB1kmZEu?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=cd465f6999994ccfa86b23624ec08a3b&ei=12

what about "illegal" do you not understand.
what about 10s of millions rushing the border uncontrolled do you not understand in your Wall Street elite
wealth - sell us out Wall Street schmuck .

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
TX Border Post Overrun
« Reply #2153 on: March 23, 2024, 03:21:38 PM »
TX National Guard overrun by illegals. If this is a trend, it won’t end well. Worse yet, that’s fine by those favoring an open southern border who will use violence occurring in the wake of a human wave to argue TX needs to stand down:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/03/biden-border-crisis-illegal-immigrants-overrun-texas-national-guard/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=biden-border-crisis-illegal-immigrants-overrun-texas-national-guard

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
What’s Wrong w/ this Pic?
« Reply #2154 on: March 23, 2024, 05:47:39 PM »
Folks seeking to immigrate legally via F1 (student) visas denied at record rate. So Hapless Joe in encouraging the low skilled destitute to hop the southern border illegally, while his admin denies students that, on average, pay $30,000/year to study here, often learning highly sought after skills that would benefit the US if these skills were used here are denied entry. Talk about government getting it 180 degrees backwards….

A Record Quarter of a Million International Students Denied Visas, 36 Percent of Applicants
Cato @ Liberty / by David J. Bier / Mar 19, 2024 at 2:25 PM
David J. Bier

This updates an earlier post.

Student visas are the primary jumping‐​off point for most high‐​skilled immigrants to the United States. Immigrants study at America’s elite universities and then find jobs here when they graduate—largely through the post‐​graduate employment authorization program called Optional Practical Training. Despite the importance of these visas, the State Department rejected an unprecedented 36 percent of student visa applicants in 2023, surpassing 2022’s record.

Student visas are known as F‑1 visas. Figure 1 shows the F‑1 student visa denial rate compared to the visa denial rate for all other nonimmigrant (i.e. temporary) visa applicants. As it shows, student visas usually had a similar rejection rate to other nonimmigrant visa applicants. But from 2021 and 2023, student visas were denied at nearly twice the rate of all other applicants. The student visa denial rate increased from a low of 15 percent in 2014 to 36 percent in 2023.

In 2023, consular officers denied a record 253,355 student visas. As Figure 2 shows, more visas were denied in 2023 than were issued in 2002 and 2005. The staggering number of denials occurred even as the number of issuances remained far below the peak year of 2015. Even 2015, with far more applicants, had far fewer denials than in 2023. It now appears that the higher denial rates, which shot up in 2016, may have dissuaded some applicants from applying, and the absolute number of total student visa applicants has declined, and student visa issuances have declined 31 percent from 2015 to 2023.

It is important to understand that before a student can even apply for an F‑1 visa they must already be accepted into a government‐​approved university. This means that the US Department of State turned down 253,355 students who would have likely paid roughly $30,000 per year or $7.6 billion per year in tuition and living expenses. Over four years that number rises to $30.4 billion in lost economic benefits to the United States.

The State Department does not separately delineate the reasons for student visa denials but nearly all nonimmigrant visa denials are for failing to prove “nonimmigrant intent” (that is, the desire not to move to the United States permanently). Applicants need to show sufficient ties to their home country that would impel them to return to their home country when their reasons for visiting have ended.

The nonimmigrant intent subjective standard can be enforced in a variety of ways. Consular officers are supposed to only consider someone’s “present intent” not considering how their intention might change if opportunities arise in the United States to stay legally. In practice, there is very little consistency in application.

The unprecedented denials occurred even though the State Department officials in Washington, DC attempted to return to a lower standard of evidence for students that existed before Trump. The Foreign Affairs Manual now states that students “should be looked at differently” because “typically, students lack the strong economic and social ties of more established visa applicants, and they plan longer stays in the United States.” It concludes that “the natural circumstances of being a student do not disqualify the applicant.” This change occurred in September 2021 before the start of fiscal year 2022.

The State Department hasn’t disclosed the denial rate by nationality in 2022 or 2023, but the rise and fall of Chinese students is the most important trend in student visa policy in recent years (Figure 3). Another ground for denial—which is far less frequent but affects mainly students from China—is Presidential Proclamation 10043, a Trump proclamation that bars visas for people who studied at any university that now works with the Chinese military in any capacity.

This order—which is retroactively applied to students who studied at such universities before the order was issued—was the basis for about 2,000 visa denials in 2021 and probably about 1,600 in 2022, though the exact figure is not published. The number for 2023 is not available yet, but while that is a lot of denials in absolute terms, and it certainly deters many more applicants, it would only explain 1 percent of total student visa denials in 2023.

What may explain the sudden increase in denials is the sudden increase in issuances for Indian students. After major delays during the pandemic, Indian consulates issued an unprecedented 130,839 student visas, by far the highest total for India ever. But according to data obtained by researchers via Freedom of Information Act requests, before the pandemic, US consulates in India were far more likely to deny students than US consulates in China. Indians accounted for a record 29 percent of all visa issuances in 2023, so their higher rate of denial could have affected the worldwide average more.

This theory is plausible, but the only country‐​by‐​country visa denial data that the State Department is releasing are for B visas for tourist and business travelers. For tourist visas, the two countries switched places with Chinese applicants now much more likely to be denied than Indian applicants (Figure 5). Whether this also happened with student visas isn’t known, and the fact that student refusal visa rates stopped closely tracking other nonimmigrant refusal rates complicates the issue. But it could imply that the problem isn’t specific to India and perhaps the increase in denials is coming more from China or elsewhere.

The bigger issue here is how Consular Affairs handles visa interviews. The head of the Consular Affairs division in India is Don Heflin. Heflin explained how student visa interviews work in April 2022:

Bring [bank statements] just in case the vice consul asks, but we are looking at this less than we used to. We know Indian families usually find a way [to pay].… Mostly it’s about explaining why this school and this curriculum makes sense to you. It’s what in American English we call the Elevator Pitch. You’ll have a minute and a half to tell us why this [school] makes sense to you. Don’t walk up and recite something from memory about the campus, the student body, and how old the school is.… Listen, I have a lot of Indian friends. I know that your father may have told you where you were going to go to school and what you were going to study. That’s fine. Tell us what he told you. Show us that it makes sense for you.

None of this information has anything to do with the legal requirements for a student visa. This absurd method of adjudicating student visas explains why India has a much higher than average student visa refusal rate even though Indian students are extremely successful in the United States. The United States should not pass on tens of billions of dollars in economic activity from these students just because they memorized their “elevator pitch” on why they want to study computer science in Kansas. It’s totally irrelevant. The administration needs to increase transparency about student visa denials and adopt a fair and uniform policy for reviews.

https://www.cato.org/blog/record-quarter-million-international-students-denied-visas-36-applicants

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
daily propaganda on how the illegals are good for us
« Reply #2155 on: March 24, 2024, 11:14:41 AM »
seems like every day there is at least one headline telling us we should love immigrants (illegals)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/u-s-economy-saved-by-immigrants/ar-BB1krsXz?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=b702a3cee296455a940d62c284dde6a9&ei=7

always from Wall Streeters or liberal sources
recently one by Paul Krugman  :roll:

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2157 on: March 27, 2024, 07:46:35 AM »
on the illegal to do list

get pregnant then stop at the OB clinic then 9 mo to the hospital

anchors away

 :x

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Lationos "rebuilt" Baltimore
« Reply #2158 on: March 30, 2024, 06:38:50 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/latino-communities-rebuilt-baltimore-now-they-re-grieving-bridge-collapse-victims/ar-BB1kN0Rz?ocid=msedgntphdr&cvid=e3eb4e778b064cb8b5fa83eec74fb465&ei=23

no one is against Central and S Americans who come here to build a life.
but my continues question -> what is it about *illegal* you don't understand?

OTOH I don't know those who perished in the bridge collapse were not legal but of course that is not mentioned while at the same LEFT wing USA today tries to use it to further Democrat Party agenda
nonetheless without that knowledge.

So I am responding in kind.


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Next Up? Double Secret Probation....
« Reply #2160 on: April 04, 2024, 11:22:00 AM »
Repeatedly busted illegals arrested for ... well it ought to be chutzpah but read this and weep:

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2024/04/04/rap-sheets-like-these-and-we-still-cant-deport-them-n4927885

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Who has Economic Growth Favored?
« Reply #2161 on: April 06, 2024, 03:45:35 PM »
Native-born Americans left behind as economy recovered from Covid. Immigrants, on the other hand, improved:

https://x.com/kausmickey/status/1776710930950447157

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
800,000 work permit extensions
« Reply #2162 on: April 07, 2024, 02:37:52 AM »
« Last Edit: April 07, 2024, 05:14:08 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Sen. John Thune on Myorkas trial
« Reply #2163 on: April 10, 2024, 05:07:40 AM »
https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/john-thune-alejandro-mayorkas-impeachment/2024/04/09/id/1160383/

of course, 67 votes needed to rid us of this lying treasonous criminal, but a trial would at least further expose him.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19367
    • View Profile
Re: Sen. John Thune on Myorkas trial
« Reply #2164 on: April 10, 2024, 05:45:50 AM »
https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/john-thune-alejandro-mayorkas-impeachment/2024/04/09/id/1160383/

of course, 67 votes needed to rid us of this lying treasonous criminal, but a trial would at least further expose him.

Right.  A trial would expose him, not remove him.

The article gives the example of how to avoid the trial. Biden could replace Mayorkas since it is the individual, not the administration being impeached. That seems to be the only way out other than schedule the trial for after the election.

Otherwise, aren't they constitutionally mandated to have a trial?  Wouldn't it take 60 votes to outright dismiss the charges? 

Schumer's last act as Majority Leader: whatever they choose, Senate Democrats are feeding a movement destined to put them in the minority. 

Thune wants to be Majority Leader and seems to be saying the right things in this case.

Let's see which affects swing state voters more, Trump's business valuations trial or exposure of the administration's collusion with the Mexican cartels to bring 10 million illegals into our country, including fentanyl that killed more than the Vietnam war,  human trafficking that's now greater than the drug trade, violent crime to our cities and suburbs, and terror and espionage cells.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2024, 06:02:21 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Denver funding illegals over police and fire departments
« Reply #2166 on: April 13, 2024, 08:53:54 AM »
I noticed all 5 politicians from the mayor up to the governor are crats.
The crats all on board with wiping out the Rs by flooding the future electorate with new voters and bribing them with tax payer money.

 

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2170 on: April 22, 2024, 10:04:13 AM »
I don't need to hear that "we are a nation of immigrants"
that "my ancestors came" here on and on.....

First they came here legally
Second most were proud to be here
    (A few brought their European socialism with them but they were drowned out.)
    (The socialist party was always minority not a major party like the Democrats now)
Third they received no free tax payer funded benefits from existing citizens

"Our diversity is our strength ".   
Well not without assimilation.

"All the [illegal] undocumented people are a net benefit ."
Prove it.
I see the opposite.


I could go on.



« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 10:17:37 AM by ccp »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2171 on: April 22, 2024, 10:11:09 AM »
"Our diversity is our strength " only if "E pluribus unum."   

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19367
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2172 on: April 22, 2024, 12:10:45 PM »
"Our diversity is our strength " only if "E pluribus unum."

Thumbs up to this.

I would add, besides not having an open border, you can't combine open border with unlimited free stuff and attract the right people.

Settlers came here not for an easy life, but because they were willing to do whatever it took to survive and then prosper.  Contrast that with the above.  Some come here today and work really hard today, roofers come to mind, but getting paid 'under the table' isn't part of GDP.  Prior to 1913, there was no federal income tax, there was no FICA, there was no IRS (it was a bureau, not a "service").  Working for money was not tax evasion.  There was no war on poverty, and I assume not much offered for free food, housing, healthcare, transportation, education etc.  You didn't get a free Obama phone.  If you came without money you had to work immediately for your first meal. 

Half of the first pilgrims perished the first winter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrims_(Plymouth_Colony)

No, an open border today is not a continuation of how we started and became a strong nation.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Moving from the Congress thread to here :
« Reply #2173 on: April 22, 2024, 01:28:40 PM »
I read Gallagher's case to not impeach Mayorkas and then re - listened to the below Mark Levin podcast referencing his case for impeachment:

Start at the 30 minute mark and listen through the 46:25 mark:

https://podcasts.apple.com/ly/podcast/mark-levin-podcast/id209377688

Levin makes the case as did Congress that Mayorkas is NOT GUILTY of MALADMINISTRATION (as Gallagher concludes) but of HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.

I agree 100% with Levin, unless his study of it is incorrect but I doubt it.

Sure we all know Mayorkas would never have been convicted in a 51 to 48 Senate (assuming Murkowski stabs the Rs in the back again)

but at least the case would have been made, headlines, news stories highlighting the deliberate afront to the sovereignty of the US by its own Presidential administration would be worthy of the trial.




« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 01:31:13 PM by ccp »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19367
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2175 on: April 26, 2024, 09:00:00 AM »
Interesting to get a beginning sense of where we stand as a people on this.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19367
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2176 on: April 26, 2024, 09:19:27 AM »
Interesting to get a beginning sense of where we stand as a people on this.

It's going to be very contentious but interesting to see 42% are not in synch with their party on this.

Posted previously, places like Whitewater Wisconsin are border towns now, not just NYC.

Trump won on this issue in 2016 and it's WAY worse now.

The mechanics of mass deportation have not been visualized.  I would start by looking at the welfare rolls and the arrest records.  Let's get the most costly ones out first and the most productive ones out last, if at all.

The start of deportations will slow the flow inward.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2177 on: April 26, 2024, 09:32:54 AM »
OTOH would that strategy concede that the many millions get to stay?

If so, it could be argued that realistically is that all we are likely to succeed in pulling off politically?


Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Big Buck in Servicing Illegal Immigrant
« Reply #2179 on: May 13, 2024, 02:36:03 PM »
NGO are raking it in handling illegals for the Feds:

Nonprofits Are Making Billions off the Border Crisis

Federal funding has turned the business of resettling migrant children into a goldmine for a handful of NGOs—and their top executives.

By Madeleine Rowley

May 12, 2024

While the border crisis has become a major liability for President Biden, threatening his reelection chances, it’s become a huge boon to a group of nonprofits getting rich off government contracts.

Although the federally funded Unaccompanied Children Program is responsible for resettling unaccompanied migrant minors who enter the U.S., it delegates much of the task to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that run shelters in the border states of Texas, Arizona, and California.

And with the recent massive influx of unaccompanied children—a record 130,000 in 2022, the last year for which there are official stats—the coffers of these NGOs are swelling, along with the salaries of their CEOs.

“The amount of taxpayer money they are getting is obscene,” Charles Marino, former adviser to Janet Napolitano, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security under Obama, said of the NGOs. “We’re going to find that the waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer money will rival what we saw with the Covid federal money.”

The Free Press examined three of the most prominent NGOs that have benefited: Global Refuge, Southwest Key Programs, and Endeavors, Inc. These organizations have seen their combined revenue grow from $597 million in 2019 to an astonishing $2 billion by 2022, the last year for which federal disclosure documents are available. And the CEOs of all three nonprofits reap more than $500,000 each in annual compensation, with one of them—the chief executive of Southwest Key—making more than $1 million.

Some of the services NGOs provide are eyebrow-raising. For example, Endeavors uses taxpayer funds to offer migrant children “pet therapy,” “horticulture therapy,” and music therapy. In 2021 alone, Endeavors paid Christy Merrell, a music therapist, $533,000. An internal Endeavors PowerPoint obtained by America First Legal, an outfit founded by former Trump aide Stephen Miller, showed that the nonprofit conducted 1,656 “people-plant interactions” and 287 pet therapy sessions between April 2021 and March 2023.

Endeavors’ 2022 federal disclosure form also shows that it paid $5 million to a company to provide fill-in doctors and nurses, $4.6 million for “consulting services,” $1.4 million to attend conferences, and $700,000 on lobbyists. In 2021, the NGO shelled out $8 million to hotel management company Esperanto Developments to house migrants in their hotels. Endeavors, which gets 99.6 percent of its revenue from the government according to federal disclosure forms, declined to comment to The Free Press.

The Administration for Children and Families, a division of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, funds the nonprofits through its Office of Refugee Resettlement, and its budget has swelled over the years—from $1.8 billion in 2018 to $6.3 billion in 2023. The ORR is expected to spend at least $7.3 billion this year—almost all of which will be funneled to NGOs and other contractors.
When asked about the funding increase during a January media event, Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, the chief executive of Global Refuge said, “We’ve grown because the need has grown.” The nonprofit did not make Vignarajah available for an interview.

But while it’s true the number of migrants has exploded in recent years, critics say these enormous federal grants far exceed the current need. The facilities themselves are generally owned by private companies and are leased to the NGOs, which house the unaccompanied minors and attempt to unite them with family members or, if that’s not possible, people who will take care of them—their so-called sponsors. The ORR does not publicly list the specific number of shelters it funds in its efforts to house migrants, a business The New York Times once described as “lucrative” and “secretive.”

While some NGOs have long had operations at the border, “what is new under Biden is the amount of taxpayer money being awarded, the lack of accountability for performance, and the lack of interest in solving the problem,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that researches the effect of government immigration policies and describes its bias as “low-immigration, pro-immigrant.”

Consider Global Refuge, based in Baltimore, Maryland. In 2018, according to its federal disclosure form, the Baltimore-based nonprofit had $50 million in revenue. By 2022, its revenue totaled $207 million—$180 million of which came from the government. That year, $82 million was spent on housing unaccompanied children. Global Refuge also granted $45 million to an organization that facilitates adoptions as well as resettling migrant children.

Now Global Refuge employs over 550 people nationwide, and CEO Vignarajah said in January that the nonprofit plans to expand to at least 700 staffers by the end of 2024.

Vignarajah, a former policy director for Michelle Obama when she was first lady, took the top job at Global Refuge in February 2019 after she lost her bid to be elected governor of Maryland. She has since become one of the most prominent advocates for migrants crossing the southern border, appearing frequently on MSNBC and other media as an immigration advocate. Her incoming salary was $244,000, but just three years later, her compensation more than doubled to $520,000.

In 2019, Global Refuge housed 2,591 unaccompanied children while spending $30 million. Three years later, the NGO reported that it housed 1,443 unaccompanied children at a cost of $82.5 million—almost half the number of migrants for more than double the money.
In a statement to The Free Press, Global Refuge spokesperson Timothy Young said that while in care, “Unaccompanied children attend six hours of daily education and participate in recreational activities, both at the education site and within the community.”
The man with the $1 million salary is Dr. Anselmo Villarreal, who became CEO of Southwest Key Programs, headquartered in Austin, Texas, in 2021. (Villarreal took a drop in pay compared to his predecessor, Southwest Key founder Juan Sanchez, who paid himself an eye-popping $3.5 million in 2018.)
 
Despite a number of scandals in the recent past, including misuse of federal funds and several instances of employees sexually abusing some of the children in its care, Southwest Key continues to operate—and rake in big government checks. In 2020, the year of Covid-19, its government grant was $391 million; by 2022, its contract was nearly $790 million.

Southwest Key’s federal disclosure forms show that in 2022, six executives in addition to Villarreal made more than $400,000, including its chief strategist ($800,000), its head of operations ($700,000) and its top HR executive ($535,000). Its total payroll in 2022 was $465 million.

Endeavors, Inc., based in San Antonio, Texas, is run by Chip Fulghum. Formerly the chief financial officer of the Department of Homeland Security, he signed on as Endeavors’ chief operating officer in 2019 and was promoted to CEO this year.

In 2022, Fulghum was paid almost $600,000, while the compensation for Endeavors’ then-CEO, Jon Allman, was $700,000. Endeavors’ payroll went from $20 million in 2018 to a whopping $150 million in 2022, with seven other executives earning more than $300,000.
Perhaps the most shocking figure was the size of Endeavors’s 2022 contract with the government: a staggering $1.3 billion, by far the largest sum ever granted to an NGO working at the border. (In 2023, Endeavors’ government funds shrank to $324 million because the shelter was closed for six months. Endeavors says this was because the beds were not needed, the border crisis notwithstanding.)

Despite these astronomical sums, the Unaccompanied Children Program is fraught with problems and suffers from a general lack of oversight. Because so many unaccompanied youths are crossing the border, sources who worked at a temporary Emergency Intake Site in 2021 said the ORR pressured case managers to move children out within two weeks in order to prepare for the next wave of unaccompanied children.

In 2022, Florida governor Ron DeSantis empaneled a grand jury to conduct an investigation, which showed how the ORR continually loosened its safety protocols so children could be connected to sponsors more quickly—and with less due diligence. The same report revealed that because there’s often no documentation to prove a migrant’s age at the time Border Patrol processes them, 105 adults were discovered posing as unaccompanied children in 2021. One of them, a 24-year-old Honduran male who said he was 17, was charged with murdering his sponsor in Jacksonville, Florida.

“We used to have DNA testing to make sure we had these family units,” Chris Clem, a recently retired Border Patrol officer, told The Free Press. But since the border crisis, the ORR has abandoned DNA testing, according to congressional testimony by the General Accountability Office. In 2021, ORR revised its rules so that public records checks for other adults living in a prospective sponsor’s home were no longer mandatory.

Tara Rodas, a government employee who was temporarily detailed to work at the California Pomona Fairplex Emergency Intake shelter in 2021, told The Free Press she also uncovered evidence of fraud within the sponsorship system. “Most of the sponsors have no legal presence in the U.S. I don’t know if I saw one U.S. ID,” said Rodas. “There were no criminal investigators at the site, and there was no access to see if sponsors had committed crimes in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Mexico.”
Last October, the ORR published a series of proposed changes to its regulations in the Federal Register that will effectively codify the more relaxed standards. The new regulations, which will go into effect in July, will allow background checks and verifying the validity of a sponsor’s identity—but wouldn’t require them.

“It is mind-boggling that ORR has not seen fit to adjust the policies for (unaccompanied children) placements, except to make them more lenient,” Jessica Vaughan at the Center for Immigration Studies told The Free Press. “They could do a much better job, but they only want to streamline the process and make the releases even easier.” The Administration for Children and Families did not respond to emailed questions from The Free Press.

Deborah White, another federal employee temporarily detailed to the Pomona Fairplex facility in 2021, told The Free Press: “Ultimately, the responsibility is on the government. But the oversight is obviously not adequate—from the contracting to the care of the children to the vetting of the sponsors. All of it is inadequate. The government blames the contractor and the contractor blames the government, and no one is held accountable.”

Maddie Rowley is an investigative reporter. Follow her on X @Maddie_Rowley. And read Peter Savodnik’s piece, “A Report from the Southern Border: ‘We Want Biden to Win.’”

https://www.thefp.com/p/nonprofits-make-billions-off-migrant-children?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Illegals Rent Driver Service IDs
« Reply #2181 on: May 14, 2024, 06:20:38 PM »
Hmm, what could possible go wrong? Uber/DoorDash drivers rent IDs to illegals to get an 85/15 earnings split. Unvetted illegals then get access to homes, info on people they serve, etc:

https://x.com/realmuckraker/status/1790536887343481060?s=61

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
International Immigration Resistance
« Reply #2182 on: May 20, 2024, 09:34:41 AM »


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19659
    • View Profile
Re: Immigration issues
« Reply #2184 on: May 22, 2024, 07:45:41 AM »
these people will simply HAVE to be found and sent home
this cannot stand!
I don't care we will get CNN and MSNBC crybabies showing sad illegal faces.

Myorkas should also be held accountable .

Biden too somehow.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
The Administrative Immigration Shuffle
« Reply #2185 on: May 22, 2024, 05:37:03 PM »
Remember the presidential administration that issued a bunch of executive orders weakening immigration enforcement? The one that was ostensibly all aflutter because Republicans wouldn’t sign on to a smoke and mirror legislative effort to putatively address the border crisis? Well that administration is now threatening to sue a state seeking to arrest those here illegally:

https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/05/doj-threatens-oklahoma-with-lawsuit-over-immigration-law/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=doj-threatens-oklahoma-with-lawsuit-over-immigration-law

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
WSJ: Open Borders produced the Biden economic boom?!?
« Reply #2186 on: May 27, 2024, 05:51:33 AM »
Much to disagree with here, but some important questions raised.

===============================================


Open Borders Produced the Biden Economic Boom
Why doesn’t he get credit for strong growth? In part because he can’t defend his immigration policies.
By Donald L. Luskin
May 24, 2024 4:35 pm ET


Migrants trying to enter the U.S. cut barbed wire fencing at the border with Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, May 13. PHOTO: AFP CONTRIBUTOR#AFP/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

Supporters of President Biden wonder why he gets such low ratings on the economy despite strong growth and low unemployment. The conventional answer is persistent inflation, and there’s truth to that. But an underappreciated factor is that Mr. Biden has achieved his economic successes via a politically unpalatable and ultimately unsustainable means: the uncontrolled influx of immigrants into the U.S. across the southern border. It’s a catastrophe of lawlessness and maladministration. But it appears to have contributed to a strong labor market and to economic growth.

Consider the 3.2 million increase in the foreign-born adult population in the U.S. in the 21 months since July 2022. We start at that date because it gives us a clean slate, free from the effects of the pandemic lockdown and reopening. And this period captures the full effect of the Biden administration’s loose border policies.

Over that period, foreign-born employment has increased 1.8 million—meaning that roughly 56% of the 3.2 million new foreign-born adult population became employed. Setting aside the political matter of how much of this employment is legal, the stereotype that immigrants don’t or can’t work appears to be false.

These numbers come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics in its monthly jobs report. They are collected in the Current Population Survey—the so-called household survey—which is used to calculate the national unemployment rate. It’s an old-fashioned door-to-door census of 60,000 households in which respondents are asked, among many questions, whether they are native-born or foreign-born. They aren’t asked if they are in the country illegally, and no doubt some are. But illegal aliens may be harder to find and less likely to answer a knock on the door, so the BLS probably undercounts them.

Even undercounted, the foreign-born represent 80% of the 4.1 million U.S. adult population increase since July 2022, and they account for 71% of the 2.5 million new jobs. All else equal, without the new foreign-born workers, total job growth in the economy would have been about 86,000 less every month—only 724,000 over the period, not 2.52 million.

Considering that population and employment growth are the most important variables in economic growth, it would seem that without the present immigration surge the economy would have grown less than a third as much as it actually has in a series of strong quarters since July 2022, across which annual real GDP growth averaged 2.8%—compared with the Federal Reserve’s estimate of growth potential at only 1.8%.

That wouldn’t be true if the new immigrants were parasitically taking jobs that the native-born would have gotten otherwise. Since July 2022, the native-born adult population grew by 821,000, and its employment grew by 724,000, which is to say that 88% of them found jobs. It would seem that the problem for new native-born adults is that there are so few of them, not that they can’t get work.

It is likely the case that the new foreign-born adults are diluting the productivity of the U.S. economy by arriving with few skills and with language and education deficits. But the economy needs many low-skill workers, and they rapidly acquire skills on the job, so they will surely contribute to productivity growth in the future.

Yes, new immigrants put incremental demands on roads, hospitals, schools and other resources. But so do new native-born citizens. For either population, the question is what they produce as well as what they consume. The evidence shows that the foreign born are more likely to be producers than the native-born. In total, the foreign-born employment-to-population ratio is 63.4%. For the native-born, it is only 59.6%. By hook or by crook, legal or illegal, new immigrants are working.

It would seem that in purely economic terms, and at least for the moment, the Biden administration’s loose border policy is a feature, not a bug. But politically it’s a loser this election year, and it’s no surprise that the Biden administration isn’t bragging about it.

In a February Pew poll, 77% of Americans said that the southern border is either a “crisis” or a “major problem.” Even 62% of Democrats agreed. People see the bug, not the features, because the boom in job growth from immigration is, by definition, experienced by people most Americans here already don’t know—and, presumably, who won’t be able to vote this November. And even with his own political base, it would be awkward for Mr. Biden to argue that he has produced economic growth via laissez-faire deregulation at the border.

Such a policy is unsustainable in any case. Under capitalism, economic growth depends on trust—on the ability of economic participants to rely on others’ adherence to a set of defined and stable rules. The ad hoc lawlessness of the Biden border policy undermines that, and unless it can be stabilized it will be corrosive to long-term growth prospects. On the other hand, a border crackdown such as Donald Trump has proposed could end up leading to slower growth. Whoever is president in 2025 will need to take great care in balancing these urgent interests.

Mr. Luskin is CEO of TrendMacro.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19367
    • View Profile
Re: WSJ: Open Borders produced the Biden economic boom?!?
« Reply #2187 on: May 27, 2024, 07:13:31 AM »
quote author=Crafty_Dog
Much to disagree with here, but some important questions raised.

Open Borders Produced the Biden Economic Boom
Why doesn’t he get credit for strong growth?
-------------------------------------------------

It's not just that the 'new' jobs went to the foreigners, and so those at the low end of our economic ladder were left out.  It's not just that the influx happen to be illegals, and disproportionately causing crime and chaos in our cities.  it's the imbalance of 'immigration' when it comes unchecked across the southern border.

Legal immigration can have plan and purpose to it.  Besides choosing doctors or business owners for example among the mix, the mix comes from different places and different regions into the great melting pot and that is not happening.

E pluribus unum is dead.

I have black friends, gay friends, Jewish friends, atheist friends, Christian friends, even Far Left friends, but I don't have any friends who recently came from a third world country that don't speak English.

Luskin: "The conventional answer [to why Biden doesn't get credit for economic growth] is persistent inflation, and there’s truth to that."

[Doug]  There wasn't any real growth per person in income or wealth so far under Biden other than for illegals and recent immigrants who had no US income before, and there should have been V-shaped growth coming out of the Covid closures reopening.

The growth we've had under Biden is in 3 areas, debt, foreclosures and bankruptcies.

https://fortune.com/2024/04/01/america-social-economic-scars-us-debt-gomes-price/
https://www.attomdata.com/news/market-trends/foreclosures/attom-q1-2023-u-s-foreclosure-market-report/
https://www.bankruptcywatch.com/statistics


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
Forward Observer: Mass Amnesty
« Reply #2189 on: June 04, 2024, 03:23:08 AM »


(1) BIDEN ADMIN GRANTED BACKDOOR AMNESTY TO 350K ILLEGALS: Former immigration judge Andrew Arthur said the Biden administration quietly closing 350,000 asylum cases, citing lack of criminal backgrounds or national security threat, since 2022 “is just a massive amnesty under the guise of prosecutorial discretion.”

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers said there has been an increase in illegal immigrants committing crimes after their asylum cases are closed. Still, removal proceedings after the asylum cases are dismissed can take years.

According to immigration lawyer Sergio C. Garcia, illegal immigrants can reapply for asylum or other forms of legal status after their cases are dismissed without the authorities being able to deport them.

Why It Matters: The Biden administration has been making these legal maneuvers to advance what is effectively a shadow policy to incentivize and increase illegal immigration. The Biden administration using prosecutorial discretion to close these cases does not mean the illegal immigrants seeking asylum do not have criminal backgrounds. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) authorities said during Congressional hearings that they do not have access to foreign criminal databases and rely on foreign governments to inform them if asylum seekers have criminal backgrounds. Many of these foreign governments very likely do not want criminals repatriated, or in the case of Venezuela, are purposefully exporting criminal populations and are not likely to cooperate with DHS requests for criminal background information. – R.C.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Capitán Obvio Perches on Joe’s Shoulder
« Reply #2190 on: June 05, 2024, 04:31:04 AM »
Think Biden has a tacit issue to deal with here: how dumb voters think Biden thinks they are. You may recall a lame congressional “effort” sponsored by Dems several months ago regarding legislation that was purported to address the border crisis. The usual Dem loudmouths joined by sundry RINOs declared the smoke and mirrors to be a critical tool that would address border issues, though a deep read made clear very little of practical impact would occur and indeed there appeared to be nebulous buried clauses that could be interpreted in a manner that made things worse.

If passed no doubt it would have been signed by Joe with great fanfare and then waved about to address the concerns expressed here. Thank goodness Repubs had sense enough not to let it pass:

Biden acts on the border… sort of… maybe

The orders are meant to solve a serious problem at the ballot box

June 4, 2024 | 3:53 pm
border
(Getty)
Written By:

Charles Lipson
Facebook
Twitter
The contrast between the two parties on illegal immigration couldn’t be sharper. Donald Trump erected a wall. Joe Biden erected a pole. Oops. Sorry. That should be “poll.” And Biden didn’t erect it. He was skewered by it.

Very few people think President Biden is doing a decent job at the southern border. More than twice as many think he has created a full-scale disaster. Those poll numbers aren’t just underwater. They’re headed for the Titanic in a flimsy submersible.

Faced with this disaster, Biden finally did what he has said for three years he had no authority to do. He issued some Executive Orders to close the border… .well, sort of, partially, maybe, under certain circumstances. It’s unclear why he thought he could issue orders demolishing Trump’s effective border policies during the first weeks of his new presidency but couldn’t issue others to restore tougher measures as the crisis unfolded.

And a crisis it is. Since Biden entered office, US Border Patrol has totaled some 8 million “encounters” with illegal immigrants at the southern border, overwhelming the agency’s manpower and the courts’ ability to hear cases. These migrants aren’t just coming from Mexico and Central America. They are coming from around the world, including America’s most dangerous enemies.

Once they touch US soil, these migrants are effectively home free for several years. They can available themselves of an extensive panoply of legal rights, which make deportation slow, cumbersome, and expensive.

Most immigrants have learned to say the magic words, “political asylum,” since that phrase ensures a long wait before deportation hearings. The real engine of migration is poverty, high crime, and political oppression, but those are losers in court. So the migrants ask for political asylum. Since there are no courts to hear their cases, they are simply released into the US “on parole” and asked to return for a hearing in a few years. That’s going as well as you might expect.

This influx of 8 million illegal immigrants would be bad enough. But they aren’t the only ones coming. Several hundred thousand more have entered the US secretly during the Biden presidency but escaped contact with border patrol.

These “gotaways” are not a random sample of all illegal immigrants. They are a particularly dangerous bunch, who have powerful reasons to escape contact with law enforcement. They are bringing in vast quantities of fentanyl and heroin, trafficking young girls for prostitution, setting up spy networks, and assembling terror groups to attack America’s cities and military bases. That’s the conclusion of FBI director Christopher Wray, who has issued that warning repeatedly to Congress. The threats posed by illegal immigrants, he says, are unprecedented in scale and scope, and many seem well-coordinated.

None of this is news to the Biden White House. The crisis has been building since the first week of his presidency, when the president began dismantling America’s borders. Voters shouldn’t be surprised, either. They voted for it. Biden promised these “progressive” changes when he campaigned in 2020.

Why is he issuing new orders now? Because his pollsters and political advisors have seen what voters think. They aren’t just unhappy about illegal immigration; they are furious. They rank illegal immigration alongside the economy as their top concern, and they blame Biden for the mess.

With only five months until the election, the White House has decided it’s time to at least look like they care enough to act. That signal will be particularly important if there is a terrorist attack associated with the open border.

The goal of these Executive Orders is the oldest one in the politician’s playbook: CYA. The orders are meant to solve a serious problem at the ballot box, not a serious one at the border. In fact, they don’t even try to close the border, only diminish the massive surge of daily arrivals. Stronger measures don’t take effect until more than 2,500 illegal immigrants arrive each day. Why not 250? Why not zero? Because the left-wing of the Democratic Party is fuming that the number is as low as 2,500. They would prefer no limits at all.

Biden and his advisors have genuflected to that wing of the party for three years. Now, they are looking at dreadful poll numbers and realizing that Bernie Sanders, AOC and George Soros are not the entirety of the party. They certainly aren’t representative of centrist, swing-state voters, the ones Biden needs to win.

The big political question is whether these Executive Orders will sway those undecided voters. Will they see them a strong action. Or will they see them tepid half-measures they can summarize in just four words, “Too little. Too late.”

By
Charles Lipson

Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma professor of political science emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he founded the Program on International Politics, Economics and Security, and a Spectator contributing writer.

https://thespectator.com/topic/joe-biden-acts-border-maybe-executive-order/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Biden’s Southern Border Immigration Theater
« Reply #2191 on: June 05, 2024, 02:45:43 PM »
Interesting point: when Trump used the same executive authority to invoke his travel ban, the left had kittens and temporary restraining orders were sought from various Dem friendly judges. Biden invokes the same authority, and must know TROs will follow, making this more about election theater and less about effective border policy enforcement:

[Josh Blackman] Travel Ban, Redux
The Volokh Conspiracy / by Josh Blackman / Jun 5, 2024 at 1:07 AM
[President Biden invokes Section 212(f) of the INA to block asylum seekers from entering the United States.]

On Tuesday, President Biden issued a travel ban of asylum seekers:

The entry of any noncitizen into the United States across the southern border is hereby suspended and limited, subject to section 3 of this proclamation. This suspension and limitation on entry shall be effective at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on June 5, 2024. The suspension and limitation directed in this proclamation shall be discontinued pursuant to subsection

The order invokes Section 212(f) of the INA, or for those who are not immigration lawyers, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f). It provides, in part:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

This was the same section invoked by President Trump in each iteration of his travel ban. Between 2017 and 2018, I wrote more about Section 212(f) than I'd care to recall. In Trump v. Hawaii, Chief Justice Roberts described the provision with sweeping language:

By its terms, §1182(f) exudes deference to the President in every clause. It entrusts to the President the decisions whether and when to suspend entry ("[w]henever [he] finds that the entry" of aliens "would be detrimental" to the national interest); whose entry to suspend ("all aliensor any class of aliens"); for how long ("for such period as heshall deem necessary"); and on what conditions ("any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate"). It is therefore unsurprising that we have previously observed that§1182(f) vests the President with "ample power" to impose entry restrictions in addition to those elsewhere enumerated in the INA. Sale, 509 U. S., at 187 (finding it "perfectly clear" that the President could "establish a naval blockade" to prevent illegal migrants from entering theUnited States); see also Abourezk v. Reagan, 785 F. 2d 1043, 1049, n. 2 (CADC 1986) (describing the "sweeping proclamation power" in §1182(f) as enabling the President to supplement the other grounds of inadmissibility in theINA).

In the wake of Trump v. Hawaii, there were calls to repeal Section 212(f). I was skeptical that even a Democratic President would remove such a potent arsenal from his executive power toolkit. (There is a reason that Congress did not enact any of the Post-Trump reform of the executive branch.) And after nearly four years of a Biden Presidency, Section 212(f) remains intact.

The policy went into effect about thirty minutes ago. The Northern District of California has not yet enjoined the policy, but it will. Judge Tigar probably has a macro for these sorts of TROs. I'm sure the Department of Justice will go through the motions to defend the policy. But does the Biden DOJ actually want to win here? Wouldn't the best case scenario be for Biden to take political credit for doing something about the border, and then blame the courts not allowing him to do so something, as his supporters will be content that asylum seeker scan continue entry? I wonder if any DOJ lawyers will refuse to sign the briefs, as some did with the Trump orders.

The post Travel Ban, Redux appeared first on Reason.com.

https://reason.com/volokh/2024/06/05/travel-ban-redux/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Immigration Rises While Productivity Doesn’t
« Reply #2192 on: June 09, 2024, 11:09:20 AM »
One argument for immigration is that it confers economic benefits, such as an increase in productivity. That doesn’t appear to be happening in the UK despite huge increases in immigration:

Record immigration has failed to raise living standards in Britain, economists find
Population surge is masking ‘exceptionally bad’ productivity since 2008

Szu Ping Chan

9 June 2024 • 6:00am

Record immigration has failed to make Britons richer and is masking a crisis in productivity, a leading think-tank has warned.

The Resolution Foundation said the fastest population growth in a century had propped up the British economy since 2010, with three quarters of the six million increase accounted for by inward migration.

However, it added that Britain’s “middling growth record” since the Tories took power had done little to boost GDP per person – which economists believe is a better proxy for living standards because it accounts for population growth.

Resolution Foundation analysis showed GDP per capita has grown by 4.3pc over the past 16 years in total, just a fraction of the 46pc increase seen in the previous 16 years.

The end of a decade-long jobs boom had also exposed the UK’s “exceptionally bad” productivity record since the 2008 financial crisis according to the Resolution Foundation, which is typically regarded as Left-leaning and whose former chief executive Torsten Bell is running to be a Labour MP.

It said average annual productivity growth of 0.4pc over the past 16 years represented the slowest increase in almost 200 years, leaving the average wage more than £14,000 below its pre-crisis trend.

Separate analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) found that surging debt interest and a ballooning benefits bill meant Rishi Sunak had presided over the biggest increase in the size of the state of any post-war Conservative government.

The IFS said the size of the state was likely to remain bigger than before the pandemic, as an ageing population and geopolitical tensions pile pressure on the public purse.

Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, has already committed to increasing defence spending as a share of national income from 2pc to 2.5pc, a policy Labour has said it shares as an “aspiration”.

The IFS said public spending is now forecast to be £80bn higher in today’s money by the end of the decade than pre-pandemic levels, which it said was based on “unrealistic” spending plans.

The think tank said: “Health spending is likely to continue to rise and, after decades of cuts, so is defence spending. Without a cut in the scope of what the state does, given demographic and geopolitical pressures, an overall increase in the size of the state will be hard to avoid.”

It added that overall growth in the 2010s was “largely driven by an employment boom”, with the rate peaking at 76.1pc before the pandemic. The think-tank said this had now “turned to bust”, with a shrinking workforce and rising inactivity owing to long-term sickness exposing the UK’s poor record on productivity, which keeps prices in check and drives higher pay.

The think tank described overall UK growth since the Tories took power in  2010 as “solid, if unspectacular, when compared to other rich countries”, with average output of around 1.5pc per year between the end of 2009 and the end of 2023. This is stronger than Germany and France but behind the US and Canada.

It also highlighted that Germany has not grown at all this decade, with the country’s weak performance likely to continue as it weans itself off cheap Russian energy.

While the International Monetary Fund has said UK growth is likely to outpace its European peers in the medium term, the Resolution Foundation noted that Britain’s jobs miracle was unlikely to continue.

It said: “The next parliament may have to do without the demographic trends that flattered GDP in the 2010s.

“Although the UK population is projected to grow by 1.8 million people over the next parliament, the number of hours worked isn’t expected to rise as quickly, as population growth is offset by a higher share of employment made up by groups who work shorter hours on average (such as women and young people), and an older workforce who are less likely to be employed in the first place.”

Greg Thwaites, research director at the Resolution Foundation, said: “The economy is at the centre of the election campaign, and the UK’s economic record is bang average when it comes to GDP growth. But beneath this ‘middle-of-the-pack’ position lies some major strengths and weaknesses that hold the key to the UK’s future economic performance.

“Britain’s middling growth record has been propped up by a booming population. The extra six million people in Britain have certainly made the economy bigger, but has done little for GDP per capita. In fact, the UK’s record on productivity – which is what really matters for living standards – is exceptionally bad.

“There is widespread consensus on the need to turnaround the UK’s productivity record, which is far easier to talk about than deliver. But if the next government is looking for encouragement, it should seek to build on Britain’s already booming services exports, which could really go gangbusters over the coming decade.”


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
FO: Who could have seen this coming?
« Reply #2193 on: June 11, 2024, 02:14:35 PM »


(3) ICE TO CLOSE MAJOR TEXAS DETENTION FACILITY: According to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memo to Congress, ICE is planning to close down the South Texas Family Residential Center detention facility in Dilley, Texas.

Biden administration officials said the White House is considering a plan to give work permits and expand deportation protections to illegal immigrants through federal immigration parole authorities.

Why It Matters: ICE says closing the Dilley detention center will free up money for beds elsewhere. However, this move appears designed to decrease detention capacity and undermine the ostensible intent of Biden’s recent Executive Order. Progressive lawmakers and immigration activists are pressuring the White House to expand pro-immigration policies through this “parole in place” program. The Biden administration has previously used parole authorities to circumvent the border by flying asylum seekers directly into the United States. – R.C.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
More Biden Bait & Switch
« Reply #2194 on: June 11, 2024, 06:57:47 PM »
Looks like San Diego is also being told to catch and release, much like in Craft’s piece above. I’d remark on how stupid they must think we are if in fact Biden that was the case. Rather, Biden’s handlers don’t care what the right thinks, and can count that the left will carry this deceptive water for him:

https://x.com/billmelugin_/status/1799875111228694594?s=61

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
Can’t Skip Hearing & then Stay when Caught
« Reply #2195 on: June 14, 2024, 08:31:16 PM »
SCOTUS says you can’t skip your immigration hearing and then cite a technicality as a reason to stay. Wonder who paid to back these 3 illegals all the way o the highest court in the land?

Supreme Court Erases Loophole That Kept Foreigners Inside The U.S. Illegally

BY: BRIANNA LYMAN
JUNE 14, 2024

“[The law] does not allow aliens to seek remission of removal orders in perpetuity based on arguments they could have raised in a hearing that they chose to skip”

In a 5-4 ruling Friday, the Supreme Court erased a loophole that allowed foreigners to avoid deportation proceedings by citing a paperwork technicality.

The case centered on three illegal immigrants: Moris Esmelis Campos-Chaves, an El Salvador native who entered the country illegally in 2005 through Texas; Varinder Singh, a man from India who illegally entered the U.S. in 2016 by “climbing over a fence” in California; and Mexico-native Raul Daniel Mendez-Colín, who illegally entered the U.S. in 2001 in Arizona.

The trio argued that their deportation notices did not meet the criteria for a proper notice as prescribed by the law.

Title 8 USC § 1229 (a) describes two types of notices. The first is a general initial notice to appear that shall include, among other specificities, a “time and place” for the proceeding. The second notice regards a “change or postponement in the time and place of such proceedings.” The Supreme Court previously ruled in 2021 that “this information must be provided in a single document in order to satisfy [the law].”

If an alien does not appear at his removal proceeding, the government has the authority to remove him. If the alien, however, can prove he did not receive the notice, he can seek to have the removal order rescinded.

The Supreme Court was technically hearing three separate cases, as one case stemmed from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled in favor of the government while the other two, from the 9th Circuit, ruled in favor of the illegal immigrants.

The trio were ordered to be deported after they failed to appear at their deportation hearings. But the three illegal immigrants argued that the notices they received were improper since they initially lacked a specific date and time.

Campos-Chaves was served a notice to appear three days after he illegally entered the country. The notice to appear indicated the location of the hearing but said a “date” would be provided at a later time. Months later, Campos-Chaves received a notice that the hearing had been set for September 20, 2005, the Court wrote. Campos-Chaves did not show and a judge ordered him removed in absentia. Campos-Chaves filed a motion to reopen his removal proceedings in 2018, arguing he didn’t receive a proper notice to appear.

Singh was served with a notice to appear “several weeks” after illegally crossing that stated the date and time was “[to be determined].” The government sent a follow up notice five days later specifying the date and time, and two years later the court sent another notice that rescheduled his hearing for November 26, 2018. Singh did not appear, but since the government “did not have his file” they sent an additional notice to him for the newly rescheduled hearing date of December 12, 2018. Singh failed to appear yet again and was ordered removed in absentia. Singh argued he did not receive a proper notice to appear and therefore his removal order should be tossed.

Mendez-Colín was served with a notice to appear the day after he illegally entered the country that provided the location of the hearing but noted the time and date would be specified at a later point. The court sent Mendez-Colín a notice of the hearing that included a specified time and date, to which Mendez-Colín appeared. Mendez-Colín or his attorney attended subsequent hearings but was ordered removed, the Court explained. Mendez-Colín indicated he would apply to cancel the removal proceedings with a judge sending a notice to his attorney for another hearing. Days before that hearing, Mendez-Colín’s attorney filed a motion to withdraw as counsel citing lack of contact between him and his client. The attorney still showed up to the hearing, however, where a judge determined that Mendez-Colín “abandoned any and all claim(s) for relief from removal” and ordered him removed in absentia. Mendez-Colín now argues his absentia order was the result of a “defective [notice to appear].”

The Court therefore set out to answer whether an alien “can seek remission of an in absentia removal order indefinitely whenever the Government fails to provide a single-document [notice to appear].”

The court notes the “Government concedes” that in all three cases the initial notices to appear failed to provide a specific time and date. Therefore, the Court said, each alien had to then prove to the Court they “did not receive notice in accordance with [the law].”

But the Supreme Court ruled that while the government “failed to provide a single-document [notice to appear]” it “eventually provided each alien with a notice specifying the time and place of the removal hearing.”

Therefore, the Supreme Court rules, satisfying either type of notice described by Title 8 USC § 1229 satisfies the basis for ordering removal in absentia and therefore the three illegal immigrants are ineligible to have their absentia removal orders rescinded.

“Today’s decision does not mean that the government is free of its obligation to provide an [notice to appear]. But [the law] does not allow aliens to seek remission of removal orders in perpetuity based on arguments they could have raised in a hearing that they chose to skip,” Alito wrote for the majority.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissenting alongside Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch, argued the majority was shifting the burden onto “noncitizens” who are “perhaps unfamiliar with this country and its laws” and “tasking them with the responsibility of addressing the government’s mistakes.”

Surely the burden is always on the government when dealing with the rights of citizens. But to claim that noncitizens — in this case people who knowingly broke the law and entered the country illegally — deserve the same right as an American to absolve themselves of the burden of proof is ludicrous.

Millions of illegal immigrants have flooded our border and overwhelmed not only Border Patrol, but the court system. The idea that these “noncitizens” should be allowed to stay in the country if the overwhelmed court system fails to provide a single document notifying them of their hearing is insanity.

Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist.You

https://thefederalist.com/2024/06/14/supreme-court-erases-loophole-that-kept-foreigners-inside-the-u-s-illegally/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3135
    • View Profile
No Papers? No Problem! Get in the Short Line
« Reply #2196 on: June 15, 2024, 07:08:26 AM »
Illegals in San Antonio get their own TSA line, much shorter than the one folks who actually belong in the country endure. Having worked in airline food service for a bit I’m all to aware that, at its root, the TSA provides little more than security theater. Oh, and long lines. Lotsa long lines:

https://x.com/alibradleytv/status/1800863476509814809?s=61

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72081
    • View Profile
WT: Parole test case shows enforcement problems
« Reply #2197 on: June 17, 2024, 08:48:40 AM »
IMMIGRATION

‘Parole’ test case results show Biden enforcement problems

Migrants duck deportation

BY STEPHEN DINAN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

More than 99% of illegal immigrants caught and released a year ago as part of a special border “parole” program are still at large, according to government data that signals how difficult it will be to unwind the millions of migrants who have gained a foothold under President Biden.

These migrants present a critical test case for the Biden administration. A federal judge has demanded unprecedented transparency in the Department of Homeland Security’s handling of 2,572.

All of them were supposed to have reported in by last summer, but data filed with the judge at the one-year mark shows 25 hadn’t checked in with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

ICE, meanwhile, has failed to issue immigration court summonses to 340 others, meaning they are not in deportation proceedings after a year.

ICE said it can confirm the deportation, departure or death of just 14 people, meaning 99.5% of all of the migrants caught and released under this parole program are thought to still be in the U.S. Only one of the migrants was being held at the time ICE reported to the court in late May.

Andrew “Art” Arthur, a former immigration judge, said the migrants epitomize the problems for Mr. Biden’s administration.

“Those 2,572 people are not even just a case study in Biden immigration enforcement. They are the Biosphere 2 of Biden immigration enforcement,” he said.

“It is a high-profile case with a judge that is laser-focused on

DHS’s immigration enforcement efforts, and yet they still can’t do what Congress said they are supposed to do,” Mr. Arthur said.

ICE didn’t respond to inquiries for this report.

Judge T. Kent Wetherell II ordered ICE to report on the migrants after the government released them in contradiction to his order last year, halting the Border Patrol’s parole program.

The Homeland Security Department released the migrants without immigration court dates but told them they needed to check in with the department within 60 days to collect a court summons or notice to appear (NTA), officially starting deportation proceedings.

More than 40% of the migrants violated the 60-day check-in, and even more had yet to be served an NTA.

Under Judge Wetherell’s prodding, ICE managed to get more check-ins and serve more NTAs, but the latest filing underscores how much trouble the agency has had tracking down all of them.

Even though more than 300 migrants remain free without an NTA, ICE managed to serve just one new summons over the month preceding the latest report.

One other migrant filed an asylum application with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

“The individual was not detained, and an NTA was not served,” Marc A. Rapp, a senior ICE official, told Judge Wetherell.

The parole migrants are now part of a total backlog of some 7 million people ICE has in its deportation system.

Some have been ordered removed and are defying those orders, and others are awaiting final court decisions.

In 2018, ICE’s docket stood at 2.6 million. At the end of fiscal 2020, toward the end of the Trump administration, it was 3.3 million.

The growth since then has largely reflected the border chaos under President Biden.

After more than three years in office, Mr. Biden took decisive steps this month with a policy intended to severely limit asylum claims, which have become the loophole illegal immigrants use to win a quick catch-and-release.

Immigration advocates have sued to stop the policy, but it remains in effect.

Homeland Security officials report that Border Patrol apprehensions are down 10%, and they expect that figure to increase as would-be migrants alter their plans.

Even if the border crisis is resolved, unwinding the years of chaos will be a gargantuan challenge.

Like the test group that Judge Wetherell is monitoring, many of the catchand- release migrants under Mr. Biden were set free under “parole.” That is a special power of the homeland security secretary that is supposed to be exercised only in unusual instances where a major U.S. interest or special humanitarian case is involved.

Experts say Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has used that power in millions of cases and the ouster rates are likely no better than for the test group in Judge Wetherell’s case.

The test group migrants demonstrate the breadth of nationalities arriving at the southern border, representing nearly four dozen countries.

Some 22% were Venezuelan, 17% were Colombian and 14% were Peruvian. Others were from Somalia, Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Ghana.

Among the 25 who have yet to check in are 10 Venezuelans, seven Guatemalans, three Hondurans, two Salvadorans, two Peruvians and one Ecuadorian.

Venezuelans make up more than onethird of the migrants who have yet to be served an NTA. Colombians and Indians rank second and third. Others on the list include Chinese, Georgians, Angolans, Nepalese and Senegalese.