Border measures part of President Donald Trump’s bigger immigration crackdown
The separation of families at the U.S.-Mexico border caught the attention of the world and prompted mass outrage, but it only tells a small part of the story surrounding President Donald Trump‘s administration’s immigration policy. In reality, the government is working to harden the system on multiple fronts to curb immigration, carving a path around various court rulings to do so. The administration is seeking to lock up families indefinitely, expand detention space and tighten asylum rules and apply more scrutiny to green card applications. Many of the initiatives received little attention during the chaos over separated families, but they show how determined President Donald Trump is to stop immigrants from coming — both legally and illegally — even in cases where the administration has been stymied by the courts. Other administrations may have faced similar problems with illegal immigration and tried similar solutions, but all have been unable to stem the flow of migrants streaming through southern border. No other president, however, has campaigned so vociferously on the topic. “The United States will not be a migrant camp and it will not be a refugee holding facility,” President Donald Trump declared days before putting an end to the separation of parents from their children. “Not on my watch.” This week’s headlines were dominated by stories of reunions of immigrant parents and their young children that the Trump administration had to carry out under a court order. The White House said it “worked tirelessly” to complete the reunifications and make sure the children were put back into safe homes. In the same week, however, the administration made other moves to clamp down on immigrant families, asylum seekers and those seeking green cards. The administration’s attempts to deter Central American families and children from making the trip north are designed to send the message to immigrants — and Trump’s supporters in an election year — that reaching the United States is going to get harder, and so will getting papers to stay in the country legally. “All of these things, I think, are part of a bigger ultimate aim, which is to significantly reduce immigration of all kinds to the United States over the longer term, and in the process, the real desire is to change the character of the country,” said Doris Meissner, a former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in the Clinton administration. Before departing the White House this week for his European trip, Trump offered his own solution for the government missing a court-mandated deadline to reunite some families: “Don’t come to our country illegally.” In Europe, the president hasn’t shied away from offering his views on the flow of immigration across the pond. Trump pressed ahead with his complaints that European immigration policies are changing the “fabric of Europe” and destroying European culture. He reiterated a position he articulated in a British tabloid where he said: “I think allowing millions and millions of people to come into Europe is very, very sad.” The Trump administration announced plans in April to prosecute illegal border crossers with the crime of improper entry, and in doing so, jailed some parents caught on the border and placed their children in government custody. The U.S. government was sued and the public was outraged, prompting Trump to halt the separations. The chaos over the separations has put the administration in the difficult position of having to release families with ankle-monitoring bracelets into the public — a practice Trump has decried — while at the same time attempting a series of legal maneuvers to argue for tougher enforcement capabilities. That’s because two court cases in California restrict what the government can do in carrying out hardline immigration policies. One requires the government to release immigrant children generally after 20 days in detention. The other has banned the separation of families and placed the government under tight deadlines to reunite parents and children. In an attempt to comply with both rulings, the White House wants to present families with a choice: Stay together in detention or release the child to a government program for immigrant youth for potential placement with a relative while the parent remains locked up. It’s unclear whether the administration has enough detention beds to do so, but it’s looking. Homeland Security has formally requested 12,000 beds for family detention, with 2,000 beds to be made available immediately at U.S. military bases. The Defense Department has said it also received a request to house up to 20,000 unaccompanied immigrant children. Officials are also seeking to send immigrants back to their countries sooner and make it harder for them to seek asylum in a backlogged courts system where it can take years to get a ruling. Trump officials say too many people are claiming they are persecuted when they are not, adding that only 20 percent of asylum claims are granted. Asylum officers tasked with screening immigrants stopped at the border were told this week to heed a recent opinion by Attorney General Jeff Sessions that gang and domestic violence should not generally be a reason for asylum — reasons cited by many immigrants fleeing bloodshed in Central America. The result: fewer immigrants will pass these initial screenings that enable them to seek asylum before an immigration judge, said Megan Brewer, an immigration attorney in Los Angeles and former asylum officer. “If they don’t comply, all their decisions are going to be sent back to them,” she said. “The average officer will go with the path of least resistance.” Immigrants in the country legally also face new hurdles under various policies. Since taking office, the administration has ended protected status for hundreds of thousands of people from countries recovering from war and natural disasters, slashed the number of refugees allowed into the United States and said it will seek to strip the U.S. citizenship of those suspected of cheating to get it. And applicants for green cards and other immigration benefits are facing longer waits and more detailed questions. Immigration
Poll: Americans open to Donald Trump’s planned North Korea talks
Americans appear open to President Donald Trump’s surprise decision to negotiate directly with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, and at the same time are less concerned than in recent months by the threat posed by the pariah nation’s nuclear weapons. That’s according to a new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, taken after Trump agreed to what would be unprecedented meeting between a U.S. and a North Korean leader. North Korea has yet to publicly confirm plans for the summit, slated for May, but the poll results suggest its potential has eased fears of war that intensified last year as the North made rapid strides in its nuclear and missile capabilities. “If you sit down and talk over any matter, there can be a resolution to it without starting a war,” said Sarah Dobbs, a 64-year-old retiree from Norman, Oklahoma, who described herself as a Democrat and is among the 48 percent of Americans who favor Trump’s plan to talk with Kim. “No other president has ever done something this bold. That’s why I think: Why not let Trump have at it?” she said. The poll found that 29 percent oppose the plans for talks between the two nations, while 21 percent say they’re neither in favor nor opposed. The survey also found an uptick in approval of Trump’s handling of relations with North Korea as the focus has shifted from possible U.S. military action to diplomacy. That figure is now 42 percent, up from 34 percent last October amid a coarse back and forth between the two leaders. Last September, Trump dubbed Kim “Rocket Man” and threatened to “totally destroy” North Korea. Kim responded with threats and insults of his own, calling Trump “deranged” and a “dotard.” North Korea’s foreign minister suggested that it might conduct an atmospheric nuclear test in the Pacific — a threat it hasn’t followed through on. Since then, the proportion of Americans who say they’re very or extremely concerned about the nuclear threat North Korea poses to the U.S. has dropped to 50 percent from 67 percent. It’s a decline that registered with both Republicans and Democrats. Americans also see the threat as having lessened for U.S. allies Japan and South Korea, as well as U.S. overseas territories such as Guam. Trump agreed to talk after Kim conveyed through South Korean intermediaries an offer to discuss “denuclearization” and halt nuclear and missile tests. South Korea’s leader is due to have his own summit with Kim in April. Americans are divided over the potential goals of U.S. discussions with North Korea. Forty-four percent say the North must completely give up its nukes, the long-standing goal of U.S. policy. Forty percent think the U.S. should consider a deal if the North agrees to make progress toward that goal. Only 13 percent think the country shouldn’t consider a deal with North Korea at all. “I would like to see a denuclearization of North Korea, but I don’t know how feasible that is,” said Aaron Saunders, a 26-year-old medical research associate from Three Rivers, Michigan, who was generally supportive of Trump’s handling of the issue — aside from his tweeting. Theresa Ferraro, 71, of Lowell, Massachusetts, said a summit might make the world safer, but she questioned the president’s temperament for negotiations. “He speaks out too much,” she said. “I’m outspoken myself, but you gotta know when to zip it and I don’t think he knows.” Despite the general openness toward negotiations with North Korea, Americans have mixed views about the direction of U.S. national security. One in three say that it will get better over the next year. Similar proportions say it will get worse and stay about the same. But there are clearer differences on partisan lines. Two-thirds of Republicans expect national security to improve, while a slightly smaller proportion of Democrats expect it to get worse in the year ahead. Americans have largely negative views about how the U.S. is viewed around the world. Some 53 percent think respect for American will decline in the next ahead, with just 26 percent expecting it to improve. And 48 percent think U.S. influence around the world will decline in the next year, compared with just 27 percent who believe it will get better. Pamela Williams, 69, of New York City, criticized Trump for boasting about U.S. military strength and having what she saw as flippant attitude to matters of war and peace. “I have not seen anything that he’s done since taking office that he’s taken seriously. Everything is a joke to him,” she said. Republished with the permission of the Associated Press.
