PERM Ads Immigration Advertising

Labor Certification Recruitment Ad Agency

PERM Labor Certification Advertising

How Ice Helped Spread the Coronavirus

by

An investigation reveals how Immigration and Customs Enforcement became a domestic and global spreader of COVID-19.

This video was produced in collaboration with The New York Times.

Admild, an undocumented immigrant from Haiti, was feeling sick as he approached the deportation plane that was going to take him back to the country he had fled in fear. Two weeks before that day in May, while being held at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Louisiana, he had tested positive for the coronavirus — and he was still showing symptoms.

He disclosed his condition to an ICE official at the airport, who sent him to a nurse.

“She just gave me Tylenol,” said Admild, who feared reprisals if his last name was published. Not long after, he was back on the plane before landing in Port-au-Prince, one of more than 40,000 immigrants deported from the United States since March, according to ICE records.

Even as lockdowns and other measures have been taken around the world to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, ICE has continued to detain people, move them from state to state and deport them.

An investigation by The New York Times in collaboration with The Marshall Project reveals how unsafe conditions and scattershot testing helped turn ICE into a domestic and global spreader of the virus — and how pressure from the Trump administration led countries to take in sick deportees.

We spoke to more than 30 immigrant detainees who described cramped and unsanitary detention centers where social distancing was near impossible and protective gear almost nonexistent. “It was like a time bomb,” said Yudanys, a Cuban immigrant held in Louisiana.

At least four deportees interviewed by The Times, from India, Haiti, Guatemala, and El Salvador, tested positive for the virus shortly after arriving from the United States.

So far, ICE has confirmed at least 3,000 coronavirus-positive detainees in its detention centers, though testing has been limited.

We tracked over 750 domestic ICE flights since March, carrying thousands of detainees to different centers, including some who said they were sick. Kanate, a refugee from Kyrgyzstan, was moved from the Pike County Correctional Facility in Pennsylvania to the Prairieland Detention Facility in Texas despite showing Covid-19 symptoms. He was confirmed to have the virus just a few days later.

“I was panicking,” he said. “I thought that I will die here in this prison.”

We also tracked over 200 deportation flights carrying migrants, some of them ill with coronavirus, to other countries from March through June. Under pressure from the Trump administration and with promises of humanitarian aid, some countries have fully cooperated with deportations.

El Salvador and Honduras have accepted more than 6,000 deportees since March. In April, President Trump praised the presidents of both countries for their cooperation and said he would send ventilators to help treat the sickest of their coronavirus patients.

So far, the governments of 11 countries have confirmed that deportees returned home with Covid-19.

When asked about the agency’s role in spreading the virus by moving and deporting sick detainees, ICE said it took precautions and followed guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. As of last week, ICE said that it was still able to test only a sampling of immigrants before sending them home. Yet deportation flights continue.

Source: ‘It Was Like a Time Bomb’: How ICE Helped Spread the Coronavirus

Adrian Gomez, Who Cared for Migrant Youth, Is Dead at 52

by

This obituary is part of a series about people who have died in the coronavirus pandemic. Read about others here.

The Trump administration’s practice of separating parents from children in families crossing the border illegally from Mexico has received plenty of attention in recent years. So have the shelters to which those children and unaccompanied migrant teenagers are sent, like the one operated by the nonprofit Southwest Key Programs in a former Walmart superstore in Brownsville, Texas.

Less notice goes to the people employed by those shelters, like Adrian Gomez, who worked for Southwest Key for 18 years. He was an assistant program director at a smaller shelter run by Southwest Key in Brownsville.

Mr. Gomez died on June 26 in a Brownsville hospital. He was 52. The cause was complications of the novel coronavirus, his daughter, Alysha Lynn Harrington, said.

His death prompted an outpouring of online condolences from friends and colleagues who recalled his commitment as an elementary-school coach, as a Cameron County juvenile probation officer, as a personal trainer at a gym and as a shelter employee.

His job at the shelter, a relatively small one, was to make sure the young people he supervised were properly housed and educated while they were seeking asylum or until they were reunited with their families, and to help find them permanent homes through a program of the Texas Council of Child Welfare Boards.

“He chose his profession because he wanted to make a difference in others’ lives,” Ms. Harrington said. “He cared about his clients and helped them by getting them on the right path to a bright future. He wanted them to have a good education and to live happily. He loved everyone and had a huge heart.”

Mr. Gomez was born on April 13, 1968, in Brownsville and rarely ventured much beyond the city, which abuts the border next to Matamoros, Mexico. He remained closest to his mother, Maria de Gomez, who along with his daughter survives him, as do his brother John Gomez; his sister, Marisela Erwin; and two grandchildren.

He earned a bachelor of science degree in criminal justice at the University of Texas in Brownsville and worked for Southwest Key for 18 years.

“He had no underlying health issues,” Ms. Harrington said. “He was 52 and could have had many more years ahead of him.”

Source: Adrian Gomez, Who Cared for Migrant Youth, Is Dead at 52

Immigration Provisions in the Biden Unity Plan

by

On July 8, the campaign of former Vice President Joe Biden released its long-awaited “Unity Plan,” a joint platform created by supporters of Biden, as well as those of the socialist firebrand Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). The 110-page document touches on almost every policy issue at stake in the 2020 presidential election, including immigration.

The “unity plan” is the result of the strength of Sanders’ brand of democratic socialism. Although Sanders officially withdrew from the Democratic Party’s presidential primary contest, his effect on the 2020 Democratic primary was profound. Building on his momentum from his 2016 run, the self-described socialist moved the politics and policies of his fellow candidates to the left almost single-handedly.

This pressure to move to the left impacted Joe Biden, who voted for the Secure Fence Act and who has suggested that a border wall would stop “tons” of drugs from coming into the country. His initial immigration plan suggested creating a pathway to citizenship for the 14.3 million people in the United States illegally, legalizing temporary agricultural guest workers, and giving states and localities the ability to petition for visas themselves. The unity plan shares some similarities with that document, but diverges in other areas.

The plan mainly addresses immigration enforcement. First and foremost, Biden reaffirms his commitment to provide a pathway to citizenship for every single illegal alien in the United States. This goes far beyond previous suggestions to amnesty so-called “Dreamers” or even farmworkers. This calls for the largest amnesty in American history, with absolutely zero reforms to stop future flows of illegal entrants.

The unity plan also calls for eliminating all executive actions taken by the Trump Administration since January 2017, including the president’s travel ban and the successful agreements made with the Northern Triangle countries and Mexico to slow the arrival of asylum-seeking aliens.

The plan would halt removals for 100 days to allow for a government review of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and end the use of private facilities to house ICE inmates. Private facilities currently house a significant number of ICE detainees. Eliminating private detention without building new federal facilities would shackle ICE’s ability to house dangerous criminal aliens.

Incredibly, the plan suggests, “Enforcement should sanction employers, not workers. End workplace raids and ensure that I-9 audits do not undermine workers’ ability to organize and assert their rights.”

This is completely contradictory. Workplace enforcement is ICE’s best tool at sanctioning employers. Employers subjected to relentless worksite pressure by ICE will not hire illegal aliens. How can ICE sanction employers without the use of worksite raids? How would I-9 audits differ from worksite raids if an employer’s I-9 forms reveal that there are numerous illegal workers present?

Outside of enforcement, the unity plan calls for an increase in overall levels of legal immigration. Further, Biden calls for a refugee ceiling of 125,000 annually, a stark contrast to the current ceiling of 13,000. Unlike other parts of immigration law, the refugee ceiling is solely created at the discretion of the president and does not require congressional approval. The plan suggests exempting STEM PhD program graduates from any visa caps, without clarifying whether the degree came from an American university or not.

The plan “reaffirms family migration as a cornerstone of U.S. immigration policy” and “prioritize(s) family reunification, including by eliminating family-based green card backlogs and reforming the system to speed up family-based visas.” This completely contradicts the will of the American public who generally support moving the United States to a merit-based immigration system rather than one based simply on chain migration.

Finally, the unity plan states, “Democrats believe that our fight to end systemic racism in our country extends to our immigration system, including the policies at our borders and ports of entry, detention centers, and within immigration law enforcement agencies and their policies and operations” [emphasis added]. This declaration reveals that the plan’s authors reject the notion that opposition to widespread immigration is rooted in anything other than nativism, xenophobia, and racism.

Biden’s advocates did reject some of Sanders’ most radical proposals, such as eliminating immigration enforcement agencies and decriminalizing illegal border crossings. But even still, what remains in the Biden unity plan is anathema to advocates of immigration reform.

Instead of moving to a merit-based system, the unity plan proposes simply increasing total numbers and keeping chain migration as the “cornerstone” of our system. Instead of giving ICE and CBP the tools they need to do their congressionally-authorized job, the unity plan proposes to shackle and audit them for at least 100 days. Instead of prioritizing the safety of American citizens and legal immigrants, the unity plan encourages the growth of dangerous sanctuary jurisdictions.

Biden’s unity plan is notably radical in the immigration sphere for a major presidential candidate. No serious presidential campaign has ever suggested the kind of sweeping reforms presented in this plan. If these ideas became law, they would represent the most sweeping change to the immigration system in our country since the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act.

Source: Immigration Provisions in the Biden Unity Plan

Congress Calls to Decrease ICE Detention as COVID-19 Continues to Spread

by

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security introduced their proposed budget for the Fiscal Year 2021 (beginning October 1, 2020) this week. The budget would have significant implications for the U.S.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement

(ICE) detention facilities—current hotspots of the coronavirus pandemic.

In a reversal of previous budget requests, this budget proposes a major decrease in funds for detention and other immigration operations across the board.

If approved, the spending bill would:

  • Cut the Department of Homeland Security’s deportation operations by 25%.
  • Eliminate family detention by the end of the year.
  • Impose a 20-day limit on holding individuals in detention.
  • Increase funding to expand alternatives to detention programs.
  • Avoid funding the hiring of more Border Patrol agents.

 

First, an entire dorm of immigrant detainees at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center was locked down after one of them showed symptoms of COVID-19. But the guards never explained what was happening, and they routinely walked into the dorms without wearing gloves or other protective gear.

Eventually, several dorms in the complex were locked down. “I think that if it hit here, a lot of people with underlying situations like me — we won’t make it,” said a detainee with chronic respiratory and heart problems.

At ICE facilities across the country, there’s a sense of panic or desperation as the coronavirus pandemic spreads. As of April 1, there were 11 confirmed cases among immigrant detainees and staff at ICE detention facilities.

Thousands of medical and legal professionals have asked ICE to release detainees en masse, beginning, at minimum, with those most vulnerable to complications from COVID-19.

In some cases, ICE has released small groups of detainees, mostly in response to orders from federal courts. But the vast majority of the more than 35,000 people in ICE detention remain locked up in facilities that are indistinguishable from prisons.

Notably, the spending bill calls for enough money to fund an average daily population of 22,000 adults in ICE custody. This is a huge decrease from Fiscal Year 2019, which allowed for 40,520 beds. The agency grossly overspent, however, as there were over 55,000 people in ICE custody at one point in 2019.

These proposed cuts—while far from final—would be a significant departure from detention numbers in recent years. But a commitment to reduce the number of people in ICE detention centers couldn’t be more critical or timely.

The death toll from COVID-19 in the United States has reached almost 135,000, placing United States as the world leader in terms of infections and coronavirus-related deaths. As many states consider resuming lockdowns to stem the further spread of the virus, the number of confirmed cases within ICE detention facilities continues to rise.

The agency alleges it has taken steps to reduce the overall population of people in ICE facilities. As of June 27, 2020, there were about 23,000 men and women in ICE custody. This is down from around 38,000 people on February 29. Even so, it’s not enough.

Concerns around ICE detention during the pandemic have been consistent since COVID-19 took hold in the United States this spring:

  • The longstanding lack of access to medical care within ICE facilities.
  • The inability of detained people to socially distance themselves within congregate settings.
  • Insufficient cleaning and hygiene supplies, and personal protective gear.

Hundreds of detained immigrants have been transferred by ICE between jails, prisons, and ICE detention centers. Many of them have been transferred across the country, sometimes crossing multiple state lines.

ICE stated that the transfers were sometimes done to further stem the spread of the virus. But in some cases, the transfers actually led to outbreaks in ICE facilities.

The agency is frequently unwilling to release people on parole, despite the availability of community-based alternatives to detention. In some cases, attorneys desperate to secure the release of clients with serious health conditions are being forced to file habeas petitions in federal court to force the government’s hand.

The immediate solution to the continued spread of COVID-19 within ICE detention facilities is clear – ICE should consider community-based alternatives to detention and immediately release individuals from custody, particularly those who have underlying health conditions.

In the long-term, Congress should work to reduce the overall number of people in immigration detention across and instead call on ICE to rely on viable and effective alternatives. If nothing else, the current pandemic has shown us that detaining high numbers of people in dangerous settings is unnecessary and costly.

 

Rep. Tlaib: Inmates ‘left to die’ during pandemic

Michigan Democrat Rep. Rashida Tlaib is calling for the release of eligible inmates in jail or prison during the pandemic to prevent them from contracting the virus while in custody. Tlaib introduced the legislation along with Rep. Ayanna Pressley and Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Rep. Karen Bass.

Tlaib says that mass incarceration is a problem that has unfairly plagued communities of color and now during the COVID-19 pandemic, inmates are being “left to die” in overcrowded systems that do not have the resources to treat large amounts of sick people.

Most of the people that are going to be impacted by this are people of color. If you look at who can’t afford bail are people of color if you look at who’s an immigrant in detention are people of color,” said Tlaib. “We have better resources and a way that allows them to be held accountable. But without a way to put them in a system that is so deteriorated and allows them to get sick and, and to die.”

The Congresswoman recognizes that the push for the legislation is still in the early stages and she says will require “education and advocacy to make this a priority.” “I don’t see it there yet,” she acknowledged.

The legislation would aim to leverage federal money to encourage the release of eligible inmates up to a year after the pandemic ends.

Eligible inmates include:

  • Those awaiting trial
  • Serving misdemeanor sentences
  • Immigrants in Ice detention
  • Pregnant women and primary caregivers
  • Inmates over 55 or those medically-susceptible to coronavirus

Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics shows that more than 1,440 federal inmates have confirmed positive test results for COVID-19 nationwide.

Source: Congress Calls to Decrease ICE Detention as COVID-19 Continues to Spread

Youtube:

VICE News

A Woman Without a Country: Adopted at Birth and Deportable at 30

by

When Rebecca Trimble was a little girl, she wore red, white and blue to Independence Day parades. In middle school, she was a flag-bearer for the Girl Scouts. During her teenage years, the Backstreet Boys blared from a boom box in her bedroom.

It was on the eve of getting married in 2012 that she realized there was something amiss in her all-American upbringing. Adopted as an infant from Mexico, she discovered that what she thought was a minor mix-up in her paperwork was something else entirely. Eventually, she realized that not only was she not American, she did not, in the government’s view, belong in the United States at all.

This year, a letter from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services arrived in the remote corner of western Alaska where Trimble cooks for homeless people and where her husband, John, is the only dentist in town.

“You are not authorized to remain in the United States,” it said, ordering her to depart the country within 33 days or face deportation.

“I feel incredibly vulnerable,” Trimble, 30, said as her two boys, Elliot, 5, and Jay, 4, played in their Bethel apartment. “I am putting my faith in a miracle.”

Lax oversight of international adoptions for years fueled a booming trade in babies. In the 1980s and ’90s, Americans seeking children were tricked into paying organized rings for babies smuggled across the border. In the early 2000s, children wrongly taken from their parents by brokers in Vietnam, Guatemala and other countries were presented as orphans to American adoption agencies. In other cases, parents did not understand, or did not follow, the rules for making foreign adoptions fully legal.

“There are too many people in limbo through no fault of their own,” said Susan Jacobs, a retired ambassador who was the special adviser on adoptions at the State Department between 2010 and 2017. “They find out in their 20s, and are held accountable for what their parents did or didn’t do when they were babies.”

The Adoptee Rights Campaign, a group that promotes citizenship for adoptees, estimates that at least 35,000 people in the United States lack U.S. citizenship because their adoptive parents failed to secure it for them.

They have started families of their own, only to learn the truth when they went to vote, tried to obtain a passport or got into trouble with the law. More recently, their precarious status has been laid bare when they applied for a Real ID, a license with stricter standards that will be required for domestic air travel in 2021.

“Adopted adults are discovering they are not citizens after thinking they were Americans all their lives,” said Gregory Luce, an immigration and adoptee rights lawyer in Minneapolis.

Adopted adults are discovering they are not citizens after thinking they were Americans all their lives.” – Gregory Luce, Minneapolis lawyer

In 2001, Congress provided relief for adoptees below the age of 18 who lacked citizenship, and the federal government has been willing to help others adjust their status on a case-by-case basis. But that flexibility appears to have diminished under the Trump administration’s restrictive immigration agenda.

Trimble’s story began when her adoptive father, George Wilson, a recreational vehicle mechanic in Salem, Oregon, and his wife, Pamela Edmonds, gave up on conceiving a child after eight years of trying. One day in 1989, they got word from friends in Mexico that a baby about to be born there would need a home. They agreed to pay the medical bills and headed for Mexico.

Three days later, they were homebound with their daughter. At the border, a U.S. agent peered into their vehicle, where Rebecca was bundled up in her new mother’s arms; he waved them through. The next month, a birth certificate arrived from Mexico that listed them as Rebecca Lynn Wilson’s parents, which they thought — incorrectly — was all they needed to render the adoption legal.

Becky, as they called her, “was such a joy, so smart and so loving,” Edmonds, now 62, recalled.

Eventually, Becky learned that she was adopted. “I didn’t think I was any less American.”

After her parents separated, Trimble and her mother moved to Vancouver, Washington. At Hudson’s Bay High School, Becky excelled in her classes, took up bowling and managed the track team.

One of her teachers encouraged the class to register to vote ahead of the 2008 presidential election, and that November, Trimble voted for the only time in her life.

She fell in love with a fellow student, John Trimble, a distance runner who took her to the prom. After high school, the couple decided to get married and thought about a road trip to Canada for their honeymoon.

In the spring of 2012, Rebecca Trimble applied for an enhanced ID, an alternative to a passport that Americans can use to enter the United States from Canada or Mexico.

A clerk studied her Mexican birth certificate, handed it back to her and said that Trimble had to show further proof of U.S. citizenship, such as a naturalization certificate. She was stumped.

“I go to my mom and ask her questions, and she doesn’t know. John and I started researching,” she recalled.

Only much later did the extent of the problems with how her parents handled her adoption become apparent. Before leaving Mexico, Rebecca Trimble’s parents should have obtained official custody of their new baby from a Mexican judge and then secured an immigrant visa for her at a U.S. consulate.

In February, Rebecca Trimble received a two-page decision denying her a green card.

The denial stated that on Jan. 17, 2008, she had illegally registered to vote and that she had then voted in a general election that November. “Therefore, your application must be and hereby is denied,” it said.

Trimble had 33 days to depart the country, or face deportation.

“I felt I had no identity at that moment. I meant nothing,” she said, her voice breaking.

In March, the Trimbles’ lawyer, Margaret Stock, filed a motion to reopen Trimble’s case, and the Bethel City Council passed a resolution urging federal representatives and agencies to recognize “the uniqueness of Rebecca Trimble’s situation.”

Last month, Immigration Services declined the request. Stock’s next move is to sue the agency in federal court to secure a green card or citizenship for her client.

Both Alaska senators have introduced a private bill “for the relief of Becky Trimble” that would be required to pass the House and the Senate, a process that could take years.

Rebecca Trimble, whose legal bills have mounted, has not been informed that a deportation case has commenced against her, perhaps because the coronavirus pandemic has slowed immigration enforcement.

For now, she is trying to resume what she called “a quiet, normal life.” On Jay’s birthday, she baked lemon cake with tundra-blueberry frosting, and the family celebrated on Zoom with friends and relatives. She tried to suppress fears of immigration agents showing up to take her away.

This story was originally published at nytimes.com.
Read it here.
Source: A Woman Without a Country: Adopted at Birth and Deportable at 30
YouTube:

KGW News

ICE Says International Students Must Take Classes in Person or Leave the Country

by

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to surge across the United States, many universities have chosen to temporarily move to online-only classes to protect public health. However, new guidance from the Trump administration will not allow international students to stay in the United States if their classes move online this fall.

 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

(ICE) oversees the program and the data/tracking system schools use to enroll international students. Over one million students participate in the program each year. This allows them to study at K-12 schools, colleges, universities, seminaries, conservatories, and language training programs.

By regulation, academic students (F-1) are limited to one online class or three credit hours per term as part of their full course load. Vocational students (M-1) cannot take any. When the COVID-19 pandemic first hit in March, ICE issued temporary exemptions allowing international students to move to online-only classes during the spring and summer semesters. ICE originally stated that these exemptions would apply “for the duration of the emergency,” but now will not continue into the fall.

Students whose programs have moved fully online will no longer be allowed to remain in the United States. They either “must depart the country” or transfer to a school offering in-person instruction. If they do not leave the United States or transfer, ICE says that students “may face immigration consequences including, but not limited to, the initiation of removal proceedings.”

The restrictions apply to both incoming and continuing international students. If an international student wishes to attend an American school that only offers online classes, the student won’t be granted a visa.

Students already in the United States would have to transfer universities or leave the country even if their program switches to fully online partway through the semester. Exceptions exist for the very limited number of students who qualify for a reduced course load or medical leave.

Students whose programs switch to a “hybrid” model, with some in-person classes and some online classes, can remain in the United States. However, these students will need certification from their university that they are taking the minimum number of online courses possible. Students in vocational or English language training programs will not be allowed to take any online classes.

Many universities have already announced that they will be holding classes completely or partially online this fall. The majority plan to hold in-person classes, but 9% plan to hold classes fully online,  24% are planning for a hybrid model, and 7% have not yet decided.

These decisions could change depending on the progression of COVID-19 over the summer. Yet ICE has imposed very short deadlines on universities to update operational plans and issue new eligibility certificates to international students.

 

Coronavirus: International students react to U.S. decision they must leave if taking online courses

Two international students studying in the U.S. reacted on Tuesday to the decision by the government that they will have to leave the country if their classes are all taught online this fall, with one student saying he was crying upon hearing the news because he would face difficulty, both in returning home due to no flights and in school due to internet capacity in his home country of Venezuela.

Another student from the Bahamas said while her school is offering in-person classes, she was cautioned it could change due to a local COVID-19 outbreak, which she worries would prevent her from completing her MBA. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) said it would not allow holders of student visas to remain in the country if their school was fully online for the fall.

ICE said these students must transfer to schools that teach in-person classes or leave, or they potentially face deportation proceedings. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to hit the U.S., with cases passing three million, colleges and universities have begun to announce plans for the fall 2020 semester, with Harvard stating it would conduct course instructions online, while Eastern Kentucky University plans to hold classes in-person.

 

The end of the exemptions will impose an unreasonable hardship on students and universities. Students may not be able to participate in online courses from their home countries due to internet connectivity issues or time differences. Certain online resources are not available in some countries, such as G Suite in China. Some students may not be able to return home due to financial hardship or ongoing COVID-19 travel bans. For some, returning would mean separation from a U.S. citizen spouse or child.

Academic institutions are already under financial pressure, with enrollment dropping due to the economic recession and loss of the in-person college experience. Students who cannot study this semester might not return to their programs later, choosing to drop out. Some who try to return may be prevented from doing so by COVID-19 travel restrictions. ICE’s guidelines force schools to choose between losing international students and risking public health. The decision also damages the United States’ reputation as a leader in international education.

Harvard University, which recently announced that its classes will be completely online in the fall, stated:

“This guidance undermines the thoughtful approach taken on behalf of students by so many institutions, including Harvard, to plan for continuing academic programs while balancing the health and safety challenges of the global pandemic.”

Losing international students could also result in an economic loss at a time when the U.S. economy is already in trouble. International students contribute over $40 billion to the economy and support over 400,000 jobs each year.

The COVID-19 pandemic has required unprecedented flexibility in procedures at every level of our society. Immigration should be no different. Immigration agencies should make exceptions to requirements that cannot reasonably be followed during the pandemic.

Source: ICE Says International Students Must Take Classes in Person or Leave the Country

Appeals Court Strikes Down Trump Administration’s Asylum Ban

by

LOS ANGELES — A federal appeals court on Monday struck down President Trump’s policy that barred most migrants from seeking asylum in the United States if they had passed through another country, concluding that the government did “virtually nothing” to make sure that another country is “a safe option” for those fleeing persecution.

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco affirmed the decision of a federal judge who ruled last year that the so-called third-country transit rule was unlawful, with one judge calling it “perhaps the most significant change to American asylum in a generation.”

The ruling was an interim but important step. In September, the Supreme Court had allowed the Trump administration’s rule forbidding most Central American migrants from seeking asylum in the United States to take effect while the appeals courts deliberated its legality.

That stay remains in place until the Supreme Court takes up the case or the Trump administration abandons the policy. In the meantime, nearly all asylum seekers have been temporarily blocked from entering the country under a separate administration directive, issued as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, that closed the border to all but United States citizens and lawful permanent residents.

Still, Monday’s opinion was an important legal milestone, a 66-page opinion that found serious legal deficiencies in one of the administration’s signature immigration policies.

“The Trump administration is sure to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court,” said Stephen Yale-Loehr, a professor of immigration at Cornell Law School.

The transit rule was issued jointly by the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security in July 2019, when thousands of migrant families were pushing toward the southwestern border, many of them seeking asylum from violence in Central America. Countering decades of law and policy, under which the United States had long provided refuge in such cases, it declared that any migrant who passed through another country en route to the border would be ineligible for asylum, with few exceptions.

The policy required migrants traveling over land from El Salvador, Honduras or other countries to apply for and be denied asylum by Mexico, Guatemala or another country through which they traveled before they could be eligible to make a claim for protection in the United States.

If they did not, those who managed to reach the United States would be automatically considered to lack a credible fear of persecution in their home countries.

The appeals court said there was evidence that contradicted the administration’s assertion that migrants could obtain safe protection in Mexico and other countries.

It also said the administration had not justified its assumption that a person who failed to apply for asylum in a third country was unlikely to have a meritorious claim.

Judge William A. Fletcher, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, wrote the opinion for the panel, which also included Judge Eric D. Miller, who was appointed by President Trump this year, and Judge Richard R. Clifton, appointed by former President George W. Bush.

Judge Miller concurred in part and dissented in part, writing that the federal agencies’ “deficient” justification for the transit rule was “particularly troubling because the rule represents such a major change to policy — perhaps the most significant change to American asylum in a generation.”

The main opinion said there was “no evidence in the record” to support the rule’s assumption that migrants who do not apply for asylum in Guatemala or Mexico en route from, say, El Salvador or Honduras, can be assumed to lack a credible fear of persecution in their home country.

“This ruling says very simply that Congress is in control of asylum, and the administration cannot act unilaterally to destroy our asylum system,” said Lee Gelernt, the lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union who argued the appeal on behalf of several groups challenging the rule.

Neither the Justice Department nor the Department of Homeland Security had any immediate comment on the decision.

In a related case this month, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the administration had illegally put into place the transit rule by not allowing public comment first.

That decision resulted in a suspension of the transit ban on more narrow grounds.

The order that effectively closed the border to asylum seekers, using the coronavirus pandemic as justification, is being challenged in a federal court in Washington.

 

Supreme Court Limits Failed Asylum Seekers’ Rights to Appeal

YouTube: VOA News

 

Source: Appeals Court Strikes Down Trump Administration’s Asylum Ban

USCIS Rule Strengthens Employment Eligibility Requirements for Asylum Seekers

by

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services today announced a regulatory change to deter aliens from illegally entering the United States and from filing frivolous, fraudulent, or otherwise non-meritorious claims for asylum to obtain an employment authorization document. This rule does not alter asylum eligibility criteria in any way and will be effective on Aug. 25.

This rule stems from the April 29, 2019, Presidential Memorandum on Additional Measures to Enhance Border Security and Restore Integrity to Our Immigration System, which emphasizes that it is the policy of the United States to manage humanitarian immigration programs in a safe and orderly manner, and to promptly deny benefits to those who do not qualify.

“Safeguarding the integrity of our nation’s legal immigration system from those who seek to exploit or abuse it is key to the

USCIS

mission,” said Joseph Edlow, the USCIS Deputy Director for Policy. “The reforms in this rule are designed to restore integrity to the asylum system and to reduce any incentive to file an asylum application for the primary purpose of obtaining work authorization.

It also deters frivolous and non-meritorious applications by eliminating employment authorization for aliens who have failed to file for asylum within one year of their last entry until USCIS or an immigration judge determines the alien’s eligibility for asylum.”

The rule prevents aliens who, absent good cause, illegally entered the United States from obtaining employment authorization based on a pending asylum application.

Additionally, the rule defines new bars and denials for employment authorization, such as for certain criminal behavior; extends the wait time before an asylum applicant can apply for employment authorization from 150 days to 365 calendar days; limits the employment authorization validity period to a maximum of two years; and automatically terminates employment authorization when an applicant’s asylum denial is administratively final.

Source: USCIS Rule Strengthens Employment Eligibility Requirements for Asylum Seekers

One Brother Got DACA, One Didn’t. It Made All the Difference.

by

Chad F. Wolf, the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, has said that after the Supreme Court’s decision, the government would continue to process renewals, but the question of new applications remains up in the air. President Trump pledged on Twitter after the court’s ruling to try anew to rescind the entire program, a move the administration could initiate at any time.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1273967324681338880?s=20

“If you are relying on a new application to be approved, you should have real concerns about whether that will happen,” said Ian Macdonald, a lawyer who is a chair of Greenberg Traurig’s immigration compliance practice in Atlanta.

But the financial woes of the immigration agency, which is in the process of furloughing a large share of its workforce, could have the effect of preventing new applications in any case.

“The Supreme Court decision requires the government to take new applications, but there are many, many ways that the administration can slow that down to such an extent that it doesn’t really happen,” said Michael Kagan, who teaches immigration law at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Research has shown that DACA has had a transformative impact on recipients, offering them access to higher education, jobs and temporary protection from deportation that otherwise would be unavailable to them.

Jack Miralrio and his younger brother Owen, were both born in Mexico and then brought into the United States illegally by their mom at a very young age.  Growing up, they both loved to play video games, play soccer, build things, and both excelled throughout their academic career especially college.

Now, Jack is 20 and is on his way to becoming a  mechanical engineer. Owen, 17, is become a mechanic but not his first choice, his dream was to become a mechanical engineer just like his brother.

Give me your tired,
Your poor,
Your huddled masses,
Yearning to breathe free,
And we’ll tear gas them.

 

Although Their lives were very similar, their paths have recently diverged as a result of Jack being a beneficiary to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, which allows him to get a driver’s license and monetary support to continue college.

Owen on the other hand was getting ready to finalize his paperwork and submit in September 2017, but the Trump administration ended the program on September 5th, 2017, and stopped accepting any new applications.

“I have to stop persuing my dream profession and accept being a mechanic,” mentioned Owen, who still lived together with his mother and father, older brother and two U.S.-born sisters in Milwaukee.

“College would be way too expensive, and then I wouldn’t be able to use my degree,” said Owen, who graduated from high school in June.“I know people who own garages and hire mechanics without papers,” he said, sounding defeated.

His older brother sympathized with him while realizing that their differences are only due to bad timing and politics.

Nevertheless, Owen accepted his fate and was now among one of the 66,000 dreamers who were also shut out of DACA since it was terminated almost three years ago.

Will new applicants be allowed to enroll in the life-changing immigration program?

Recently,  in June, the Supreme Court gave Owen hope again, by ruling that DACA was improperly terminated. 

Most legal scholars believe that to comply with the court’s decision, the administration must revive DACA, which would mean that new applications would have to be accepted. Refusal to accept them would incite lawsuits, they said.“The Supreme Court decision makes it clear that the original program is still in place,” said Geoffrey Hoffman, director of the immigration clinic at the University of Houston Law

 

 

Here is another story about Juan Escalante and his brother:

Juan Escalante is an immigrant advocate and online strategist who has been fighting for the Dream Act and pro-immigration policies at all levels of government for the past 10 years.

IMG_6736.JPG

You can read the full story titled “Juan Escalante: American” here: https://www.kulturamag.com/article/juan-escalante-american

Today, Juan is a spokesperson for America’s Voice and the writer of a bi-weekly column on HuffPost. Last year he moved from Florida to Washington, D.C. in order to further the fight he’s helping lead for himself, his community, and our country. Though the progress that’s been made is overshadowed by the toxic political climate, he emphasizes the changes that have taken place in the last eleven years such as DACA, in-state tuition for undocumented students, and many more.

The fight continues for many……

 

 

Source: One Brother Got DACA, One Didn’t. It Made All the Difference.

Protesting U.S. Immigration Policies, Artists Aim for the Sky

by

CASSILS The urgency of “In Plain Sight” has become paramount as people began to die from Covid-19 in detention camps. We had initially planned for this project to occur without any press, but when the pandemic hit, we launched our Instagram page that features short interviews with our artists and calls to action. It’s been a great opportunity to take action. In recent months, I’ve had 11 exhibitions canceled or paused. Almost every artist I know has, too.

There is a rich history of artists looking toward the sky for inspiration. Yves Klein used it as inspiration for his conceptual blue paintings. Recently, the artist Jammie Holmes flew George Floyd’s final words above five cities across the country. What other works have inspired your skytyping project?–

ESPARZA “Repellent Fence” (2015) by the art collective Postcommodity was particularly important for us. They created a metaphorical suture along the migration path between the United States and Mexico with tethered balloons to speak about land art in relation to permanence and shifting landscapes. In the same way that they used the land to talk about the divisive power of colonial structures, we are hoping to index the sky as a symbol of inspiration and hope. And the sky is able to migrate messages across borders. When our message is skytyped above San Diego, the words will likely drift into Tijuana. And when our words are written above Los Angeles, they will have a shared orbital path, allowing phrases like “Abolition Now” and “Stop Crimigration Now” to coalesce into a circular message.

CASSILS We are also thinking of artists who have used the language of advertisement to get their points across. Artists like Lynda Benglis and Barbara Hammer. The AIDS Memorial Quilt was another important reference because it demonstrates how people can come together through a patchwork of activism.

Many artists involved with the project are also queer, which may or may not be a coincidence. We are thinking about the words of José Esteban Muñoz, who wrote in 2009 that “queerness exists for us as an ideality that can be distilled from the past and used to imagine a future.” We see a liberation for queer, migrant and Black communities as deeply bound together because they are all rooted in the issues of white supremacy and colonization. Our jobs as queer artists is to imagine the future.

ESPARZA And we are putting the proposal of care, which is central to many queer communities, at the forefront of this project. We want to imagine what care looks like for people who are impacted by migrant detention and Covid-19.

CASSILS Bringing the skytypers into the fold has also been a unique experience. And with some messages being written in Cree, Farsi and Urdu, this will likely be the first time many people will see their own languages in the sky. There has also been a challenge to imagine how to write languages in the sky that don’t use the Roman alphabet. Skytypers usually work in fleets of five planes each, so any image or letter must exist along a five-point matrix. For artists on the project, that means experimenting with the grid and drawing out words like “freedom” in Farsi or Urdu. It’s interesting to note the challenges of what we can put into the sky, and how we might overcome those barriers.

Source: Protesting U.S. Immigration Policies, Artists Aim for the Sky