Tommy Tuberville and colleagues express concern about policy that allows terrorism supporters to immigrate to the U.S.
On Tuesday, U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville joined nine of his Senate colleagues in a letter to Department of Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Secretary of State Antony Blinken expressing their concerns over their departments’ recent determination allowing individuals who provided “insignificant material support” or “limited material support” to terrorist organizations to legally immigrate to the United States. This determination which dates to June 8, changes the current U.S. immigration policy. “We write because the American people deserve an explanation regarding the broad, open-ended nature of this authority for exempting individuals who would otherwise be barred from immigration to the United States for supporting a terrorist organization,” Tuberville and the other Senators wrote. “In contrast, the June 8 determination is not limited to certain conflicts, terrorist organizations, geographic regions, or time periods. Instead, it “broadly permits the admission of foreign individuals who provided material support to terrorist organizations that the Biden Administration deems insignificant or limited. This could include, for example, current or former members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and IRGC-linked entities, which are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of U.S. service members in Iraq and Afghanistan. It could include individuals seeking asylum at the southern border.” “The timing of the June 8 Determination, nearly a year after the Administration’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, also raises questions. If its intent is to ensure that Afghan refugees are able to gain asylum in the United States, there is no explanation regarding why this decision was not made months ago with prudent restrictions limiting its application to Afghan refugees,” the letter continued. The Senators requested that Secretaries Mayorkas and Blinken provide a timely explanation and justification for this broad new authority, which they claim substantially changes U.S. immigration policy. Sen, Tuberville was joined in the letter by Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tennessee), Rick Scott (R-Florida), Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Marco Rubio (R-Florida), Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), Roger Marshall (R-Kansas), John Hoeven (R-North Dakota), and Steve Daines (R-Montana). There does appear to be a renewed effort by terrorists to enter the United States. “Democrats are more focused on raising your taxes than resolving the crisis at our southern border,” Tuberville said on social media. “In July alone, 10 people on the FBI’s terrorist watch list illegally crossed into the U.S.” Thus far this year 66 individuals on the FBI’s terror watchlist have been apprehended trying to enter the United States. This is double the number of incidents that occurred in the last five years combined. U.S. forces are continuing to fight the War on Terror. On Tuesday, airstrikes were conducted against militia bases linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Syria after a remote U.S. outpost was attacked by a drone that intelligence sources believe came from the groups. The airstrikes were ordered by President Joe Biden. Tuberville is in his first term representing Alabama in the U.S. Senate after his election in 2020, where he defeated incumbent U.S. Sen. Doug Jones (D-Alabama). To connect with the author of this story, or to comment, email brandonmreporter@gmail.com.
Fiscal year through June: More than 2 million encounters at southern border
More than 2 million people have been encountered/apprehended at the U.S. southern border in fiscal 2022 through June, according to official data released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It’s the greatest number recorded in a fiscal year in U.S. history. They total 2,002,604 from over 150 countries. In June, a record 207,416 people were apprehended, the highest number recorded in June in the history of the Department of Homeland Security. The total includes those apprehended and encountered by U.S. Border Patrol and Office of Field Operations staff. They exclude gotaways first reported by The Center Square, which includes at least another 50,009 people. The total for June, including gotaways, was 257,425, a record high for the month. “Gotaways” is the official term used by Border Patrol to describe foreign nationals who enter the U.S. illegally and don’t surrender at ports of entry but intentionally seek to evade capture from law enforcement. They are currently in the U.S., and no one in law enforcement knows who or where they are. The last time encounters were nearly this high was the last summer of the presidency of Bill Clinton. In June 2000, 117,469 people were encountered/apprehended at the southern border, excluding gotaways. In May, CBP reported the highest monthly total of apprehensions at the southern border in recorded U.S. history of 239,416, excluding another minimum 70,793 recorded gotaways. In April, CBP reported 235,478 total encounters/apprehensions; in March, 222,239; in February, 165,902; in January, 154,816. The totals all exclude gotaway data. CBP Commissioner Chris Magnus said the June numbers represent a 14% decrease in encounters compared to May. “We are committed to implementing our strategy of reducing irregular migration, dissuading migrants from undertaking the dangerous journey, and increasing enforcement efforts against human smuggling organizations,” Magnus said. “We continue to rescue and provide medical assistance to those who are in distress.” And to those coming to the country illegally, he said, “My message to those considering taking this dangerous journey is simple: this is not an easy passage, the human smugglers only care about your money – not your life or the lives of your loved ones, and you will be placed in removal proceedings from the United States if you cross the border without legal authorization and are unable to establish a legal basis to remain.” The overwhelming majority of those apprehended in June – 68% – were single adults totaling 140,197. CBP says 44% of all adult encounters and 27% of family unit individuals were processed for expulsion under the public health authority, Title 42. Unaccompanied minors are not processed for expulsion. The number of unaccompanied children brought to the U.S. by alleged smugglers increased by 4%, totaling 15,271. In June, the average number of unaccompanied children in CBP custody was 752 a day compared to 692 a day in May. Despite a record number of people coming to the southern border, CBP says it “continues to enforce U.S. immigration law and apply consequences to those without a legal basis to remain in the U.S. “Current restrictions at the U.S. border have not changed; single adults and families encountered at the southwest border will continue to be expelled, where appropriate, under CDC’s Title 42 Order. Those who are not expelled will be processed under the long-standing Title 8 authority and placed into removal proceedings.” But this isn’t what’s happening, Republican governors and attorneys general nationwide argue. This week, 19 AGs filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of a lawsuit filed by Texas and Louisiana. The lawsuit was filed in response to a directive issued by DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas that drastically altered deportation policy, which the states argue contradicts federal law established by Congress and allows more people to stay in the U.S. illegally, including violent criminals. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis implemented a range of policies to combat what he describes as the “Biden border crisis,” including suing over the Biden administration’s “catch and release” and other programs. Texas and Missouri have sued the administration over several border security issues, including halting border wall construction and reimplementing an Obama-era program allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the country. Texas and Arizona also have implemented a range of border security measures costing their states’ taxpayers a combined multiple billions of dollars to thwart criminal activity stemming from the southern border. And Texas Gov. Greg Abbott says his state’s law enforcement officials have confiscated enough fentanyl to kill nearly every man, woman, and child in the U.S., which is brought into Texas illegally from Mexico. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Supreme Court: Joe Biden can end Donald Trump-era asylum policy
The Supreme Court said Thursday the Biden administration can scrap a Trump-era immigration policy that was at the center of efforts to deter asylum-seekers, forcing some to wait in Mexico. Two conservative justices joined their three liberal colleagues in siding with the White House. The justices’ decision came in a case involving former President Donald Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, formally known as Migrant Protection Protocols, which enrolled about 70,000 people after it was launched in 2019. President Joe Biden suspended the program on his first day in office in January 2021. But lower courts ordered it reinstated in response to a lawsuit from Republican-led Texas and Missouri. The current administration has sent far fewer people back to Mexico than did the Trump administration. The ruling was released on the same day that the court dealt the administration a blow in an important environmental case about the nation’s main anti-air pollution law. That ruling could complicate the administration’s plans to combat climate change. The heart of the legal fight in the immigration case was about whether U.S. immigration authorities, with far less detention capacity than needed, had to send people to Mexico or whether those authorities had the discretion under federal law to release asylum-seekers into the United States while they awaited their hearings. After Biden’s suspension of the program, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas ended it in June 2021. In October, the department produced additional justifications for the policy’s demise, but that was to no avail in the courts. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that an appeals court “erred in holding that the” federal Immigration and Nationality Act “required the Government to continue implementing MPP.” Joining the majority opinion was fellow conservative Brett Kavanaugh, a Trump-appointee, as well as liberal justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Kavanaugh also wrote separately and noted that in general, when there is insufficient detention capacity, both releasing asylum-seekers into the United States and sending them back to Mexico “are legally permissible options under the immigration statutes.” Cornell University law professor Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration expert, said the Biden administration does not need to take any further action to end the policy but that Texas and Missouri can pursue a challenge over whether the administration followed appropriate procedure in ending the program. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement that the decision was “unfortunate.” He argued it would make “the border crisis worse. But it’s not the end. I’ll keep pressing forward and focus on securing the border and keeping our communities safe in the dozen other immigration suits I’m litigating in court.” Because of lower court decisions, MPP resumed in December, but the administration has registered only 7,259 migrants in the program, about 6 of every 10 of them Nicaraguans. The administration has said it would apply the policy to nationalities that are less likely to be subject to pandemic-era asylum limits. Strained diplomatic relations with Nicaragua makes it extremely difficult for the U.S. to expel people back to their homeland under the pandemic rule, known as Title 42 authority. U.S. authorities stopped migrants 1.2 million times on the Mexico border from December through May, illustrating the limited impact that “Remain in Mexico” has had under Biden. Democratic-led states and progressive groups were on the administration’s side in the case. Republican-run states and conservative groups sided with Texas and Missouri. The case is Biden v. Texas, 21-954. Republished with the permission of The Associated Press.
Steve Marshall joins 16 attorneys general to file legal brief in support of Florida law banning sanctuary cities
Seventeen Republican attorneys general have filed an amicus brief with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in support of a Florida law banning sanctuary cities. The brief was filed by the attorneys general of Alabama and Georgia, Steve Marshall and Christopher Carr. Joining them were the attorneys general of Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia. The Florida case is currently on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division. In 2019, the Florida legislature passed a bill signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis requiring state and local government officials and employees to comply with federal immigration enforcement. DeSantis said he was proud to sign the bill “to uphold the rule of law and ensure that our communities are safe.” He thanked state legislators “and the Angel Parents for their commitment to seeing this bill across the finish line. Their leadership has made Florida safer.” Shortly thereafter, the city of South Miami sued, and later several other groups, claiming the law discriminated against foreign nationals living in Florida illegally. U.S. District Court Judge Beth Bloom granted the city’s request for an injunction, halting the law from going into effect. Florida then appealed. The attorneys general argue Bloom legislated from the bench and exceeded her constitutional authority. “The amici States must constantly defend against legal challenges to state statutes brought by those who oppose the results of the legislative process,” they argue in the brief. “These litigants invite federal courts to substitute their own judgment for that of the legislature. Too often, courts accept the invitation to usurp the legislative role by ascribing invidious intent to legislative enactments based on sheer policy disagreement, dressed up as supposed discrimination. “The Constitution forbids that, and for good reason. … Federal courts are poorly positioned to weigh the many interests at stake. Their decisions are rendered without public debate. And, because they are not elected, they cannot be held accountable by the people.” They argue Bloom “fell prey to exactly this temptation.” “A legislative judgment that the country’s existing laws should be enforced is not an extreme or suspect position,” they argue. “Yet the district court held the law facially invalid because it was supposedly enacted with discriminatory intent, even though the law specifically prohibits racial discrimination. The Court did not point to any discrimination apparent in the text of the law (there is none).” AG Marshall said, “An unelected federal judge apparently disagrees with Florida’s political judgment about whether immigration laws should be enforced, but that should not be relevant,” adding that he hopes the court undoes Bloom’s “troubling ruling and puts an end to this practice of legislation by judicial fiat.” In Florida, AG Ashley Moody’s brief filed with the 11th Circuit argued Judge Bloom “committed numerous errors to arrive at the remarkable conclusion that the Florida Legislature had secret racist motivations in enacting SB 168.” “The law promotes public safety in facilitating federal immigration enforcement against criminal aliens while expressly prohibiting racial discrimination in its implementation,” the brief states. “The district court found a hidden racist motive only by ignoring key provisions of the statute, failing to afford the Legislature a presumption of good faith and placing great weight on the thinnest of evidence.” There are currently more than 300 so-called sanctuary cities in the U.S. whose officials won’t cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimates. “Many sanctuary policies restrict law enforcement agencies from cooperating with federal immigration officials, including prohibiting their compliance with immigration detainers,” it states. According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement estimates, more than 2.1 million illegal immigrants are living in the U.S., with more than 1.9 million of them having deportation orders from a judge. In a recent letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz estimates that it would take 14.5 years to deport “just the aliens DHS has released under the Biden Administration,” into the interior of the U.S., including Florida. This is in addition to the 1.9 million with deportation orders who haven’t been deported. He also recently cited DHS data indicating that the Biden administration has the lowest deportation rate in the history of the agency. According to DHS data, 48% fewer criminal illegal immigrants have been arrested, and 63% fewer convicted criminals have been deported under the administration, he said. Republished with the permission of The Center Square.
Mike Rogers and Mike Johnson introduce bill to defund Biden Administration’s “Ministry of Truth”
U.S. Reps. Mike Rogers and Mike Johnson have introduced legislation to immediately defund the Biden Administration’s “Ministry of Truth.” The bill follows Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ announcement that DHS will convene a “Disinformation Governance Board.” The bill has 50 cosponsors and would completely bar federal funding for the DHS’ “Disinformation Governance Board,” something Johnson said the Republicans will do if President Joe Biden does not get rid of the board. The board is set to be led by Nina Jankowicz. Republican lawmakers in both chambers have introduced legislation to block the board. According to The Hill, the board was designed to coordinate DHS’s disinformation efforts on topics like migration, natural disasters, and plots by foreign actors while offering oversight to ensure civil liberties and free speech are protected. Republican lawmakers aren’t seeing it that way. “The creation of a Disinformation Governance Board is violation of our First Amendment rights,” Rogers stated. “I’m glad to join my colleagues in introducing a bill to immediately defund Biden’s Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth’. The government should have no role in policing free speech.” “The Biden Administration’s decision to stand up a ‘Ministry of Truth,’ is dystopian in design, almost certainly unconstitutional, and clearly doomed from the start,” Johnson stated. “The government has no role whatsoever in determining what constitutes truth or acceptable speech. President Biden should dissolve this board immediately and entirely. If he won’t then Republicans will.” Mayorkas defended the creation of the board, stating, “It’s not about speech. It’s about the connectivity to violence.” After announcing her new position, Jankowicz stated on Twitter, “A HUGE focus of our work, and indeed, one of the key reasons the Board was established, is to maintain the Dept’s committment to protecting free speech, privacy, civil rights, & civil liberties.” Here's my official portrait to grab your attention. Now that I've got it: a HUGE focus of our work, and indeed, one of the key reasons the Board was established, is to maintain the Dept's committment to protecting free speech, privacy, civil rights, & civil liberties. 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/C4xiEGfhDt — Nina Jankowicz (@wiczipedia) April 27, 2022
Supreme Court weighs policy for migrants to wait in Mexico
When a woman gashed her leg in mountains inhabited by snakes and scorpions, she told Joel Úbeda to take her 5-year-old daughter. Úbeda refused to let the mother die, despite the advice of their smuggler and another migrant in a group of seven, and helped carry her to safety by shining a mirror in sunlight to flag a U.S. Customs and Border Protection helicopter near San Diego. The motorcycle mechanic, who used his house in Nicaragua as collateral for a $6,500 smuggling fee, says the worst day of his life was yet to come. Arrested after the encounter with U.S. agents, Úbeda learned two days later that he could not pursue asylum in the United States while living with a cousin in Miami. Instead, he would have to wait in the Mexican border city of Tijuana for hearings in U.S. immigration court under a Trump-era policy that will be argued Tuesday before the U.S. Supreme Court. President Joe Biden halted the “Remain in Mexico” policy on his first day in office. A judge forced him to reinstate it in December, but barely 3,000 migrants were enrolled by the end of March, making little impact during a period when authorities stopped migrants about 700,000 times at the border. Úbeda, like many migrants at a Tijuana shelter, had never heard of the policy, officially called “Migrant Protection Protocols.” It was widely known under President Donald Trump, who enrolled about 70,000 migrants after launching it in 2019 and making it a centerpiece of efforts to deter asylum-seekers. “It’s a frightening experience,” Úbeda said after a telephone call with his mother to consider whether to return to Nicaragua to reunite with her, his wife, and his daughter. He was perplexed that a vast majority of Nicaraguans are released in the U.S. to pursue asylum, including the woman he saved and her daughter. Nearly 2,200 asylum-seekers, or 73% of those enrolled through March, are from Nicaragua, with nearly all the rest from Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, and Venezuela. Yet even among Nicaraguans, the policy is small in scope. U.S. authorities stopped Nicaraguans more than 56,000 times from December to March. Criticisms of the policy are the same under Biden and Trump: Migrants are terrified in dangerous Mexican border cities and it is extremely difficult to find lawyers from Mexico. U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, in an October order to end “Remain in Mexico,” reluctantly conceded that the policy caused a drop in weak asylum claims under Trump but said it did not justify the harms. Emil Cardenas, 27, said he bloodied his foot and drank his urine after running out of water on a three-day hike in mountains near San Diego with a smuggler who took a $10,000 installment toward his fee and stole his passport, phone, and other identification. Cardenas hoped to live near his brother, a Catholic priest in New Jersey, while seeking asylum but waits at the Tijuana shelter for his first hearing in San Diego on May 18. He is disheartened to see others at the shelter on their third or fourth hearing. “One has to find a way to get across,” said Cardenas, a Colombian who had attempted twice to enter the U.S. “I’m thinking about what to do.” While waiting for hearings, men at the shelter are attached to smartphones — reading, watching videos, and occasionally calling friends and family. A large television facing rows of tables and plastic chairs helps defeat boredom. Many have been robbed and assaulted in Mexico, making them too scared to leave the shelter. Some chat in small groups but most keep to themselves, lost in thought. Carlos Humberto Castellano, who repaired cellphones in Colombia and wants to join family in New York, cried for two days after being returned to Tijuana to wait for a court date in San Diego. It cost him about $6,500 to fly to Mexico and pay a smuggler to cross the border, leaving him in debt, he said. “I can’t leave (the shelter) because I don’t know what could happen,” said Castellano, 23, recalling that his smuggler took a photo of him. “Getting kidnapped is the fear.” The issue before the Supreme Court is whether the policy is discretionary and can be ended, as the Biden administration argues, or is the only way to comply with what Texas and Missouri say is a congressional command not to release the migrants in the United States. Without adequate detention facilities, the states argue the administration’s only option is to make migrants wait in Mexico for asylum hearings in the U.S. The two sides also disagree about whether the way the administration ended the policy complies with a federal law that compels agencies to follow certain rules and explain their actions. A ruling is expected shortly after the administration ends another key Trump-era border policy, lifting pandemic-related authority to expel migrants without a chance to seek asylum on May 23. The decision to end Title 42 authority, named for a 1944 public health law, is being legally challenged by 22 states and faces growing division within Biden’s Democratic Party. Due to costs, logistics, and strained diplomatic relations, Title 42 has been difficult to apply to some nationalities, including Nicaraguans, which explains why the administration has favored them for “Remain in Mexico.” The administration made some changes at Mexico’s behest, which may explain low enrollment. It pledged to try to resolve cases within six months and agreed to shoulder the costs of shuttling migrants to and from the border in Mexico for hearings. As under Trump, finding a lawyer is a tall order. U.S. authorities give migrants a list of low- or no-cost attorneys but phone lines are overwhelmed. Judges warn migrants that immigration law is complicated and that they face longer odds without an attorney. Migrants respond that calls to attorneys go unanswered and they can’t afford typical fees. “I’ve seen lots of people in your situation who have found attorneys, often for free,” Judge Scott Simpson told a migrant this month in a San Diego courtroom before granting
Jerry Carl and Barry Moore call on Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to resign
U.S. Reps. Jerry Carl, Barry Moore, and 44 GOP colleagues sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, calling on him to resign. The group blames Mayorkas for the current border situation. According to Rep. Andy Barr (KY), under Mayorkas’ leadership, the Remain in Mexico Policy is largely ignored, despite court orders to restore the program. Additionally, border apprehensions have more than tripled over FY 2020, while deportations have dropped by 70%. FY2021 saw over 100,000 fentanyl overdose deaths, and border agents have apprehended over 11,000 pounds of fentanyl at the border in FY 2021. During Donald Trump’s presidency, the Remain in Mexico policy required tens of thousands of migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. to turn back to Mexico. It was meant to discourage asylum seekers, but critics said it denied people the legal right to seek protection in the U.S. The letter states, “In light of recent reports displaying your failure to execute the primary mission of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to secure our nation from its many threats through your inability and refusal to enforce the immigration laws, we call on you to resign as Secretary of Homeland Security.” The letter also states that Border Patrol agents are not feeling supported by Mayorkas. “A leaked recording from a recent meeting in Yuma, Arizona, confirmed the dwindling confidence Border Patrol agents have in the Department and its Secretary. In the recording, you acknowledged those agents are doing tasks outside of their job description and that their job is continually demonized. Additionally, they asserted that they feel no support from their Secretary. You have admitted to making border Patrol agents’ jobs more difficult, yet do nothing to ameliorate that problem. Instead, you make it exponentially harder for agents to do their job by implementing Biden administration directives that go against their Congressionally-mandated responsibilities.” In a statement, Rep. Carl argued that Mayorkas had put the U.S. at risk. “The primary mission of Homeland Security is to keep our nation safe and secure from threats, but Secretary Mayorkas has utterly failed to execute this mission. Because of Secretary Mayorkas’ failures, hundreds of thousands of immigrants are attempting to cross our southern border every single month. “Many of these migrants are bringing crime and illegal drugs with them, and this is making America FAR less safe. My colleagues and I are calling for Secretary Mayorkas to immediately resign and for President Biden to finally get serious about fixing the crisis at our border.” Additional Members of the House of Representatives who signed the letter are Andy Barr (KY), Brian Babin (TX), Andy Biggs (AZ), Tom Tiffany (WI), Tom Rice (SC), Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA), Clay Higgins (LA), Yvette Herrell (NM), Bob Good (VA), Lauren Boebert (CO), Scott Perry (PA), Ronny L. Jackson (TX), Glenn Grothman (WI), Louie Gohmert (TX), Randy Weber (TX), Mary Miller (IL), Barry Loudermilk (GA), Doug LaMalfa (CA), Chris Jacobs (NY), Dan Bishop (NC), Tim Burchett (TN), Ben Cline (VA), Matthew Rosendale, Sr. (MT), Victoria Spartz (IN), Diana Harshbarger (TN), Cliff Bentz (OR), Jack Bergman (MI), Debbie Lesko (AZ), Roger Williams (TX), Bob Gibbs (OH), Byron Donalds (FL), Lisa McClain (MI), Bill Posey (FL), Madison Cawthorn (NC), Greg Murphy (NC), Ralph Norman (SC), Chip Roy (TX), John Rose (TN), August Pfluger (TX), Doug Lamborn (CO), Beth Van Duyne (TX), Carlos Giménez (FL), and Russ Fulcher (ID).
No settlement for separated migrant families amid criticism
Migrants whose children were taken from them under former President Donald Trump’s zero-tolerance border policy have not reached a settlement agreement with the U.S. government, a lawyer for the families said Thursday as he and other advocates pushed back at increasing criticism of a proposal to pay compensation to them. Attorney Lee Gelernt of the American Civil Liberties Union would not discuss details of the talks nor confirm a previously reported settlement proposal of several hundred thousand dollars to each affected person. He did, however, hold out the possibility of a trial, featuring parents separated from children as young as six months as witnesses, if there’s no agreement to end the litigation. “All I can say is there’s no deal on the table, and we have no timeframe necessarily,” Gelernt said in a conference call with reporters. The settlement talks, which would typically be private until an agreement is finalized, have instead become a new line of attack for Biden administration critics seeking to tie the issue to the increasing number of migrants seeking to cross the U.S.-Mexico border over the past year. Republicans grilled Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas about it this week when he appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee. “As you can imagine, many Americans think it’s a pretty outrageous idea to offer massive taxpayer-funded payments to illegal immigrants who broke our laws, particularly in the middle of a record-shattering border crisis that this administration has created,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, said at the hearing Tuesday. Mayorkas referred questions from the senators to the Department of Justice, which is handling the negotiations, though at one point, he disputed the suggestion that a settlement would encourage future migrants to seek to come to the U.S. About 5,500 children were forcibly removed from their parents under Trump’s zero-tolerance policy in which parents were separated from their children as the administration sought to discourage people from crossing the border, even if they were presenting themselves to authorities to seek asylum. Trump halted the practice in June 2018 amid widespread outrage, including from many Republicans, just six days before a judge ordered an end to the program in response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU. In addition to negotiating a potential settlement, the Biden administration has also been working to reunite some of the families. There are believed to be hundreds, and perhaps as many as 1,000-2,000, parents who were separated from their children and still haven’t been located. The settlement talks had been going on quietly for months when The Wall Street Journal reported in October that the Justice Department was considering paying about $450,000 to each person affected. The Associated Press later confirmed the figure had been under consideration. In addition to the payment, settlement talks have also included a discussion of granting the families legal U.S. residency and providing counseling services. Asked about the amount on Nov. 3, Joe Biden appeared to misunderstand the question and said a payment of about $450,000 per person was “not going to happen.” He later said he supported a settlement without specifying an amount. “If, in fact, because of the outrageous behavior of the last administration, you coming across the border, whether it was legally or illegally, and you lost your child — You lost your child. It’s gone — you deserve some kind of compensation, no matter what the circumstance,” Biden said. “What that will be, I have no idea. I have no idea.” Migrant advocates say the amount of the settlement and the legal status of the families misses the point. “What’s really an issue is the question of whether we as a country are OK with ripping babies out of the arms of their parents,” said Conchita Cruz, co-executive director of the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project. Gelernt noted in the call with reporters that many of the separated families were not entering the country illegally, as critics claim because they were presenting themselves to authorities to seek asylum, which is legal under U.S. law. He also pointed out that even non-citizens can sue the U.S. government, regardless of their immigration status. “The truth is that lawyers always settle cases, and it’s usually because it’s in their financial interest to do so,” he said. The advocates gave a sense of what a trial might entail, bringing a woman to the call who gave her name only as Leticia and tearfully described having her son taken from her as she sought asylum in 2017. It was 2 1/2 years before they were reunited, and she said the boy showed signs of psychological trauma from the separation. “Even now, after being reunited together, we live in fear a day that we could still be separated,” she said. “I could not imagine living through this pain again.” Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
Border residents rejoice as U.S. says it will lift travel ban
Beleaguered business owners and families separated by COVID-19 restrictions rejoiced Wednesday after the U.S. said it will reopen its land borders to nonessential travel next month, ending a 19-month freeze. Travel across land borders from Canada and Mexico has been largely restricted to workers whose jobs are deemed essential. New rules will allow fully vaccinated foreign nationals to enter the U.S. regardless of the reason, starting in early November, when a similar easing of restrictions is set for air travel. By mid-January, even essential travelers seeking to enter the U.S., such as truck drivers, will need to be fully vaccinated. Shopping malls and big-box retailers in U.S. border towns whose parking spaces had been filled by cars with Mexican license plates were hit hard by travel restrictions. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said the economic impact was hard to quantify but can be seen in the sparse presence of shoppers at a high-end outlet mall on the city’s border with Tijuana, Mexico. The decision comes at a critical time ahead of the holiday shopping season. In Nogales, Arizona, travel restrictions forced about 40 retail businesses to close on the main strip in the city of 20,000 people, said Jessy Fontes, board member of the Nogales-Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce and owner of Mariposa Liquidation Store, which sells household appliances. His sales fell 60%, and he considered closing but instead cut his staff from seven to two. In Del Rio, Texas, Mexican visitors account for about 65% of retail sales, said Blanca Larson, executive director of the chamber of commerce and visitors bureau in the city of 35,000 people. “Along the border, we’re like more of one community than two different communities,” she said. The ban has also had an enormous social and cultural impact, preventing family gatherings when relatives live on different sides of the border. Community events have stalled even as cities away from U.S. borders have inched toward normalcy. In Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, where hockey and ice skating are ingrained, the Soo Eagles haven’t had a home game against a Canadian opponent in 20 months. The players, 17 to 20 years old, have been traveling to Canada since border restrictions were lifted there two months ago. Now the U.S. team can host. “I almost fell over when I read it,” said Ron Lavin, co-owner of the Eagles. “It’s been a long, frustrating journey for people on a lot of fronts far more serious than hockey, but we’re just really pleased. It’s great for the city.” Fully vaccinated U.S. citizens and permanent residents have been allowed into Canada since August, provided they have waited at least two weeks since getting their second vaccine dose and can show proof of a recent negative COVID-19 test. Mexico has not enforced COVID-19 entry procedures for land travelers. The latest move follows last month’s announcement that the U.S. will end country-based travel bans for air travel and instead require vaccination for foreign nationals seeking to enter by plane. The new rules only apply to legal entry. Those who enter illegally will still be subject to expulsion under a public health authority that allows for the swift removal of migrants before they can seek asylum. Travelers entering the U.S. by vehicle, rail, and ferry will be asked about their vaccination status as part of the standard U.S. Customs and Border Protection inspection. At officers’ discretion, travelers will have their proof of vaccination verified in a secondary screening process. Unlike air travel, for which proof of a negative COVID-19 test is required before boarding a flight to enter the U.S., no testing will be required to enter the U.S. by land or sea, provided the travelers meet the vaccination requirement. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. will accept travelers who have been fully vaccinated with any of the vaccines approved for emergency use by the World Health Organization, not just those in use in the U.S. That means that the AstraZeneca vaccine, widely used in Canada, will be accepted. Officials said the CDC was still working to formalize procedures for admitting those who received doses of two different vaccines, as was fairly common in Canada. U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said he was “pleased to be taking steps to resume regular travel in a safe and sustainable manner” and lauded the economic benefits of it. Mexico, Canada, and elected officials from U.S. border regions have pressured the Biden administration for months to ease restrictions. “This is a win for families who’ve been separated and businesses and tourism industries whose operations have been blocked since the start of the pandemic,” said U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, echoing reactions of other federal, state, and local officials. Mexico President Andres Manuel López Obrador said it took “many meetings to achieve the opening of the border.” Bill Blair, Canada’s minister of public safety, called the announcement “one more step toward returning to normal.” Cross-border traffic has plummeted since the pandemic, according to U.S. Department of Transportation figures. The number of vehicle passengers entering the U.S. in Niagara Falls, New York — the busiest land crossing on the Canadian border — fell 83% to 1.7 million in 2020 and has remained low this year. “Losing those customers over the last 18 months has been one of the primary reasons our hotels, restaurants, and attractions have been suffering,” said Patrick Kaler, president and chief executive of Visit Buffalo Niagara, the area’s tourism agency. At San Diego’s San Ysidro border crossing, the nation’s busiest crossings dropped 30% last year to 18 million. Taxi drivers were largely idled Wednesday on a nearby bridge, including one who did exercises. COVID-19 cases in the U.S. have dropped to about 85,000 per day, the lowest level since July. Per capita case rates in Canada and Mexico have been markedly lower than in the U.S. for the duration of the pandemic, which amplified frustrations about the U.S. travel restrictions. Republished with the permission of the Associated
Border Patrol: Despite Alejandro Mayorkas’ claims, 60% of migrants being released into U.S. communities
Despite claims made by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, the majority of those entering the U.S. illegally are not being deported by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the head of the Border Patrol union, Brandon Judd, told The Center Square. Mayorkas, who traveled to Del Rio, Texas, where nearly 15,000 Haitian migrants gathered this past week, warned illegal immigrants at a news conference, “If you come to the United States illegally, you will be returned, your journey will not succeed, and you will be endangering your life and your family’s life.” Likewise, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that DHS, Border Patrol, ICE, and the U.S. Coast Guard were moving individuals from Del Rio to other processing locations in order to take individuals into custody, process them and remove them from the country. It added that DHS was securing additional transportation to accelerate the pace and increase the capacity of removal flights to Haiti and other destinations in the hemisphere within the next 72 hours. But the agency hasn’t confirmed how many flights and how many Haitians have been deported. A few days later, at another news conference in Del Rio on Tuesday, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, when asked about the Biden administration’s deportation flight plans, said, “They have shown no capability of being able to process these migrants by the end of this week. The only thing they’ve shown is an incapability of dealing with this crisis, candidly, in a way they pretend it doesn’t even exist. And we’re here to tell you it exists.” The Associated Press reported that Haitians have been released on a “very, very large scale” in recent days, with one official estimating the number of those releases is in the thousands. “The first three [deportation] flights that went to Haiti included family units” who were deported, Judd said. But deportations are on a case-by-case basis, he added, and inconsistent. For example, “if the flights focus on deporting people to Haiti, the flights to Guatemala stop, and those people are released,” he said. “So, all you’re doing is robbing Peter to pay Paul. You’re shifting resources to handle one segment, and you’re releasing the other segment. Not all the people from Haiti are being flown back; not all the people are being expelled from under Title 42. A good number of them are, in fact, being released with an NTA (Notice to Appear) or NTR (Notice to Return),” notices related to the immigration court process. Border Patrol agents make official arrests and transfer individuals to ICE facilities. ICE then determines whether they are released with an order to reappear for court hearings to go through the process to remain in the U.S. or be deported. Haitians already processed and released into the community were observed boarding buses at the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition in Del Rio. Roughly 50-60 Haitians at a time boarded a large commercial charter bus, and smaller groups were shuttled in a grey rundown minivan to the local bus station. With brown envelopes in hand, a mix of families and individuals also carried with them food, cash, and papers to help them reach their next destination. When asked where the bus was going, the first stop was San Antonio, with a final destination of Houston, The Center Square was told. Officials wouldn’t confirm if the Haitians were boarding planes to another destination or if San Antonio or Houston were their final destinations. This group of Haitians had already been processed by Border Patrol and released into the general population. Meanwhile, a steady flow of people continued to cross the Rio Grand River farther upstream from the bridge, crossing onto private property on a heavily trafficked area on Vega Verde, where Texas Department of Public Safety officers were waiting to detain them and call Border Patrol for pickup. DHS has also been busing Haitians to El Paso, Laredo, and cities in the Rio Grande Valley for processing, also adding them to flights to Tucson, Arizona, the Associated Press reported. Judd said of the roughly 200,000 apprehensions that Border Patrol makes, “they are probably dealing with 120,000 people because sometimes the same person or people are apprehended more than once. Of those, it’s right about 60-68 percent are being released [into the community] with NTAs. The vast majority are not being expelled or deported. The majority are being released into the United States.” When asked if this ratio applied to Haitians under the Del Rio Bridge, he said, “If we go off, historically speaking, the majority of the ones under the bridge will be released.” But this number can shift depending on which segment of the population ICE chooses to deport, he added. ICE “can say we’re going to send all the Haitians back, but then we’re going to release all the other people from another country. Or we can release the Haitians.” In response to being asked if there’s consistency in this process, he replied, “Zero consistency.” Bethany Blankley | The Center Square contributor
Many migrants staying in U.S. even as expulsion flights rise
Three hours after being freed from a giant migrant camp under an international bridge, Mackenson Veillard stood outside a gas station and took stock of his sudden good fortune as he and his pregnant wife waited for a Greyhound bus to take them to a cousin in San Antonio. The couple camped with thousands for a week under the bridge in Del Rio, Texas, sleeping on concrete and getting by on bread and bottled water. “I felt so stressed,” Veillard, 25, said this week. “But now, I feel better. It’s like I’m starting a new life.” Many Haitian migrants in Del Rio are being released in the United States, according to two U.S. officials, undercutting the Biden administration’s public statements that the thousands in the camp faced immediate expulsion to Haiti. Haitians have been freed on a “very, very large scale” in recent days, one official said Tuesday. The official, who was not authorized to discuss the matter and thus spoke on condition of anonymity, put the figure in the thousands. Many have been released with notices to appear at an immigration office within 60 days, an outcome that requires less processing time from Border Patrol agents than ordering an appearance in immigration court and points to the speed at which authorities are moving. The releases come despite a massive effort to expel Haitians on flights under pandemic-related authority that denies migrants a chance to seek asylum. A third U.S. official not authorized to discuss operations said there were seven daily flights to Haiti planned starting Wednesday. Ten flights arrived in Haiti from Sunday to Tuesday in planes designed for 135 passengers, according to Haitian officials, who didn’t provide a complete count but said six of those flights carried 713 migrants combined. The camp held more than 14,000 people over the weekend, according to some estimates. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, during a visit Tuesday to Del Rio, said the county’s top official told him the most recent tally was about 8,600 migrants. U.S. authorities have declined to say how many have been released in the U.S. in recent days. The Homeland Security Department has been busing Haitians from Del Rio, a town of 35,000 people, to El Paso, Laredo, and the Rio Grande Valley along the Texas border, and this week added flights to Tucson, Arizona, the official said. They are processed by the Border Patrol at those locations. Criteria for deciding who is flown to Haiti and who is released in the U.S. are a mystery, but two officials said single adults were a priority. If previous handling of asylum-seekers is any guide, the administration is more likely to release those deemed vulnerable, including pregnant women, families with young children, and those with medical issues. The Biden administration exempts unaccompanied children from expulsion flights on humanitarian grounds. Wilgens Jean and his wife, Junia Michel, waited in Del Rio this week for relatives to send the $439 in bus fare to get to Springfield, Ohio, where Jean’s brother lives. Michel, who is pregnant, huddled under the little shade the parking lot had to offer from the brutal heat. Her only request was for sunscreen that she softly rubbed on her pregnant belly. On the concrete in front of them lay two backpacks and a black garbage bag which held everything the couple owns. The pair left in Haiti in April and were in the Del Rio camp for five days. Jean said because his wife is expecting, they were released from the camp on Monday. “I entered by crossing the river,” Jean said. “Immigration gave me a ticket.” The system is a “black box,” said Wade McMullen, an attorney with the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights, who was in Del Rio. “Right now, we have no official access to understand what processes are underway, what protections are being provided for the migrants.” Accounts of wide-scale releases — some observed at the Del Rio bus station by Associated Press journalists — are at odds with statements Monday by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who traveled to Del Rio to promise swift action. “If you come to the United States illegally, you will be returned, your journey will not succeed, and you will be endangering your life and your family’s life,” he said at a news conference. Homeland Security asked to comment on releases in the United States, said Wednesday that migrants who are not immediately expelled to Haiti may be detained or released with a notice to appear in immigration court or report to an immigration office, depending on available custody space. “The Biden Administration has reiterated that our borders are not open, and people should not make the dangerous journey,” the department said in a statement. “Individuals and families are subject to border restrictions, including expulsion.” Meanwhile, Mexico has begun busing and flying Haitian migrants away from the U.S. border, signaling a new level of support for the United States as the camp presented President Joe Biden with a humanitarian and increasingly political challenge. The White House is facing sharp bipartisan condemnation. Republicans say Biden administration policies led Haitians to believe they would get asylum. Democrats are expressing outrage after images went viral this week of Border Patrol agents on horseback using aggressive tactics against the migrants. Immigrants have described a screening process at the camp where individuals are given colored tickets for four categories: single men, single women, pregnant women, and families with young children, McMullen said. The vast majority of immigrants he and other advocates have interviewed and who have been released into the U.S. have been families with young children and pregnant women. About 200 migrants were released on Monday in Del Rio. About 50 of them, mostly Haitian and many pregnant or with small children, boarded a bus to Houston, from where they would fly to destinations across the country. The Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition advocacy group arranged the charter bus and supplied sack lunches of a sandwich and cookies. After an initial stay with family
White House faces bipartisan backlash on Haitian migrants
The White House is facing sharp condemnation from Democrats for its handling of the influx of Haitian migrants at the U.S. southern border after images of U.S. Border Patrol agents on horseback using aggressive tactics went viral this week. Striking video of agents maneuvering their horses to forcibly block and move migrants attempting to cross the border has sparked resounding criticism from Democrats on Capitol Hill, who are calling on the Biden administration to end its use of a pandemic-era authority to deport migrants without giving them an opportunity to seek asylum in the United States. At the same time, the administration continues to face attacks from Republicans, who say Joe Biden isn’t doing enough to deal with what they call a “crisis” at the border. Reflecting the urgency of the political problem for the administration, Homeland Security chief Alejandro Mayorkas said Tuesday the images “horrified” him, a seeming shift in tone from a day earlier when he and others were more sanguine about the situation at the border. It’s a highly uncomfortable position for the administration, led by a president who has set himself up as a tonic for the harshness of his predecessor. But immigration is a complex issue, one no administration has been able to fix in decades. And Biden is trapped between conflicting interests of broadcasting compassion while dealing with throngs of migrants coming to the country — illegally — seeking a better life. The provision in question, known as Title 42, was put in place by the Trump administration in March 2020 to justify restrictive immigration policies in an effort to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. But the Biden administration has used Title 42 to justify the deportation of Haitian migrants who in recent days have set up an encampment in and around the small city of Del Rio, Texas. The provision gives federal health officials powers during a pandemic to take extraordinary measures to limit the transmission of an infectious disease. A federal judge late last week ruled the regulation was improper and gave the government two weeks before its use was to be halted, but the Biden administration on Monday appealed the decision. “The Biden administration pushing back on this stay of expulsions is another example of broken promises to treat migrants with respect and humanity when they reach our borders to exercise their fundamental right to asylum,” said Karla Marisol Vargas, senior attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project and co-counsel on the litigation. NAACP President Derrick Johnson demanded a meeting with Biden to discuss the situation and called the treatment of the Haitian migrants “utterly sickening.” “The humanitarian crisis happening under this administration on the southern border disgustingly mirrors some of the darkest moments in America’s history,” he said in a statement. Shortly after the judge’s decision on Friday, Homeland Security officials formed a plan to begin immediately turning the groups of Haitian migrants around, working against the clock. But people kept coming. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, an administration ally, said images of the treatment of the migrants “turn your stomach” and called on the administration to discontinue the “hateful and xenophobic” policies of Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump. “The policies that are being enacted now — and the horrible treatment of these innocent people who have come to the border — must stop immediately,” he told the Senate on Tuesday. Trump essentially put a chokehold on immigration. He decreased the number of refugees admitted to a record low, made major changes to policy, and essentially shut down asylum. Biden has undone many of the Trump-era policies, but since his inauguration, the U.S. has seen a dramatic spike in the number of people encountered by border officials. The Haitian migrants are the latest example. More than 6,000 Haitians and other migrants have been removed from the encampment in Del Rio, and Mayorkas predicted a “dramatic change” in the number of migrants there within the next two to four days as the administration continues the removal process. As the controversy swirled around him, Biden spent his Tuesday address at the U.N. General Assembly in New York calling for the global community to come together to defend human rights and combat injustice worldwide, declaring, “the future will belong to those who embrace human dignity, not trample it.” The remarks stood in notable contrast to images of the Border Patrol agents on horseback. Biden himself seemed to acknowledge the challenge his administration faces with immigration, offering a clipped response when asked by a reporter after his U.N. remarks to offer his reaction to the images. “We’ll get it under control,” he insisted. Vice President Kamala Harris also weighed in, telling reporters in Washington that she was “deeply troubled” by the images and planned to talk to Mayorkas about the situation. Harris has been tasked with addressing the root causes of migration to the U.S. and emphasized that the U.S. should “support some very basic needs that the people of Haiti have” that are causing them to flee their homes for the U.S. Videos and photos taken in recent days in and around Del Rio show Border Patrol agents confronting Haitians along the Rio Grande near a border bridge where thousands of migrants have gathered in hopes of entering the country. One Border Patrol agent on horseback was seen twirling his long leather reins in a menacing way at the Haitian migrants but not actually striking anyone. There was no sign in photos and videos viewed by The Associated Press that the mounted agents were carrying whips or using their reins as such when confronting the migrants. The agents, wearing chaps and cowboy hats, maneuvered their horses to forcibly block and move the migrants, almost seeming to herd them. In at least one instance, they were heard taunting the migrants. Asked about the images on Tuesday, Mayorkas told lawmakers that the issue had been “uppermost in my mind” ever since he had seen them. He said the department had alerted its inspector general’s
