Mexico

Subterms

    More stories

    • 200 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘This was my last try’: dismay at US border as Title 42 ends and little changes

      by

      “My plan is to give up,” Fernando Jesús Manzano, 32, from the state of Falcón, Venezuela, said dejectedly as he gazed at the hundreds of fellow migrants waiting to turn themselves in to US migration authorities as Thursday turned into Friday and a new policy era at the US-Mexico border.Manzano arrived at “Door 42”, a gate along the border barrier in El Paso, west Texas, shortly before the expiration of Title 42, a Trump-era rule implemented during the coronavirus pandemic that allowed the US to turn away migrants at its border with Mexico without allowing them to exercise their right to seek asylum.The man was too late. US Customs and Border Protection, as well as Texas national guard soldiers, had already set up concertina wire and were heavily patrolling the area where Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, meets its twin city across the border, El Paso, by the time he arrived.The troops in camouflage, holding their rifles across their bodies in an intimidating stance, were not allowing him or any other migrants to approach the gate to request asylum.The crowd of about 500 people at this one site was neatly organized into two groups: single men in one and families in the other. Separating them were 15 portable restrooms and two large dumpsters where all of their belongings had been discarded.The US authorities expect migrants being processed at the border not to be encumbered by the small pieces of luggage many may have carried for months on dangerous overland trips from Central and South America, through Mexico to the border.“This was my last try. I’ll have to find a job in Juárez to save for a ticket back home, and return defeated,” Manzano said.Manzano, a professional barber, said that two months ago he fled Venezuela, which has been abandoned by more than 7 million of its citizens in the last eight years amid the political and economic crisis of Nicolás Maduro’s regime.He came desperately seeking better opportunities for himself, his wife and two infant children, in contrast to growing poverty in Venezuela where money, he said, was never enough no matter how hard he worked.Frustrated, he fought back tears as he recalled the two times he previously crossed the US border with Mexico in the last month without permission and was expelled back to Mexico by the authorities.The last time, he found a lawyer in the US to help him and was on his way to New York, when agents at a migration checkpoint told him the forms he had filled out were not valid.At the border more people arrived as the night progressed. On the bank of the Rio Grande 30 more people sat quietly, all hoping authorities would let them in last minute.“No pueden entrar [you can’t come in],” a Texas national guard soldier shouted across as he adjusted a coil of the concertina razor wire marking the line between the waiting people and America. At first his action prompted some to believe they would be let in, but then they all listened and sat back down.When the clock struck 10pm local time, midnight on the US east coast, the exact moment Title 42 expired, the atmosphere at the gate in the tall border barrier remained tensely silent.Only sporadically, when small vans arrived at the gate from the US side to pick up migrants who had been allowed through and take them elsewhere for processing, would migrants clap and cheer for a few seconds.But as the night progressed, the cold did too. Temperatures dropped enough for those waiting at the gate to want a second layer of clothing. The most readily available were the sweaters, jackets and blankets in the two dumpsters where migrants had discarded all of their belongings earlier in the evening.Some grabbed the items but shook them repeatedly to get rid of the thick layer of dust and debris covering them before putting them on.“They’re not letting us in, I don’t know why,” said Oscar Adrián Izaguirre Brito, 20, a mechanic from Caracas, Venezuela.Izaguirre Brito arrived at the gate thinking the end of Title 42 meant he would be able to cross to the US that night but was met with disappointment when he arrived.“I’m tired and I want to cry, I can’t keep talking,” Izaguirre Brito said.After describing himself as desperate, he explained that he was the oldest of 10 siblings and that his parents rely on him for support.He’s made multiple attempts at crossing the border, but this was the first time he had planned to turn himself in. The last time he was expelled for going across without permission, he said, was Wednesday night and then, when border patrol agents released him back into Mexico, three armed men robbed him and took his cellphone, he said. His parents still don’t know he’s in Mexico again, he added.Because he has a permit to work in Juárez, Izaguirre Brito will go back to the car repair shop he had been working at before crossing the border last week, trying to save money to buy a new phone. With it, he would be able to try to get one of the very limited appointments for an asylum interview through the US’s CBP One app.Joe Biden’s new hardline border policies, heavily criticized by immigration advocates and progressives, were starting to bite.“If I am given the opportunity, I will take it and take full advantage of it,” Izaguirre Brito said. More

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US authorities ‘seeing large numbers of migrants at border’ before Title 42 expiration – as it happened

      by

      From 4h agoAs the White House press briefing kicked off, homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas warned migrants against trying to enter the United States after Title 42 ends at midnight tonight.“If anyone arrives at our southern border after midnight tonight, they will be presumed ineligible for asylum and subjected to steeper consequences for unlawful entry, including a minimum five-year ban on re-entry and potential criminal prosecution,” Mayorkas said.“We are clear-eyed about the challenges we are likely to face in the days and weeks ahead, and we are ready to meet them,” he said, noting that immigration authorities expect “to see large numbers of encounters” and “are already seeing high numbers of encounters in certain sectors”.“I want to be very clear: our borders are not open. People who cross our border unlawfully and without a legal basis to remain will be promptly processed and removed,” Mayorkas said.The Biden administration is bracing for the end of the pandemic-era Title 42 and a potential surge of migrants at the southern border. Homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas held a press conference where he warned people against trying to cross into the US, while fending off criticism from both the right and left over how the White House has prepared for this moment.Here’s what else happened today:
      A meeting between Joe Biden and the top Republicans and Democrats in Congress aimed at reaching an agreement to raise the debt ceiling was postponed, which could be a good sign for the long-running talks.
      E Jean Carroll is considering another lawsuit against Donald Trump over comments he made about her at last night’s CNN town hall. You’ll recall that a jury earlier this week found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation of Carroll, and awarded her $5m. The former president is appealing that verdict.
      CNN’s chief executive defended last night’s town hall with Trump in a call with employees.
      House Republicans approved a bill to reform the US immigration system in line with conservative priorities. It faces doom in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
      Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s Democratic leader, condemned Republican senator Tommy Tuberville for remarks that appeared to defend white nationalists in the military.
      A meeting set for Friday between Joe Biden and the top Democrats and Republicans in Congress intended to find an agreement on raising the debt ceiling has been postponed, Reuters reports.The two parties have been at odds for months over finding a way to raise the US government’s legal limit on how much debt it can take on, ahead of a 1 June deadline after which America could default on its obligation and potentially spark an economic crisis.Citing a source familiar with the negotiations, Reuters said the delay in the meeting was a good sign. “Meetings are progressing. Staff is continuing to meet and it wasn’t the right moment to bring it back to principals,” the source said.A White House spokesperson confirmed the delay, saying, “Staff will continue working and the all the principals agreed to meet early next week.”Biden had met with congressional leaders, including Republican House speaker Kevin McCarthy, earlier this week, but there seemed to be little progress made towards an agreement. McCarthy has demanded spending cuts and the enactment of conservative priorities in exchange for the GOP voting to increase the debt limit, which Biden and the Democrats have rejected.Donald Trump has formally appealed a jury’s finding earlier this week that he is civilly liable for sexual abuse and defamation of advice columnist E Jean Carroll, Law & Crime reports:The federal jury in New York City ordered him to pay a combined $5m in punitive and compensatory damages, following a trial in which Trump opted not to testify.In a sign of the complexity of US immigration law, the conservative-dominated supreme court this morning issued an unanimous decision that offers a transgender woman from Guatemala a reprieve from deportation. Here’s more about it, from the Associated Press:The US supreme court ruled on Thursday in favor of a transgender Guatemalan woman fighting deportation on the grounds that she would face persecution if returned to her native country.The unanimous decision in favor of Estrella Santos-Zacaria gives her another chance to argue that immigration officials were wrong to reject her bid to remain in the US.Lawyers for Santos-Zacaria, now in her mid-30s, said she first fled to the US after being raped as a young teenager and threatened with death because of her gender identity in a country that has targeted the LGBTQ+ community.But a US immigration judge found she did not make a strong enough case that she would face persecution if sent back to Guatemala.E Jean Carroll, the advice columnist who this week won a $5m civil judgment against Donald Trump for sexually abusing and defaming her, says she may again sue the former president over comments he made at last night’s CNN town hall.In an interview with the New York Times, Carroll described her shock at reading a transcript of Trump’s comments, which included him calling her a “whack job” and saying the sexual assault she said he committed was “fake”.Here’s more from the interview:
      Ms. Carroll said on Thursday morning that she had been asleep as Mr. Trump talked about her on the town hall program. She said that her lawyer, Roberta A. Kaplan, had sent her the transcript of his comments, and that she had read only the first paragraph.
      “It’s just stupid, it’s just disgusting, vile, foul, it wounds people,” Ms. Carroll said in an interview with The New York Times, adding that she had been “insulted by better people.”
      Ms. Carroll said she had been infuriated when her longtime stylist told her that her 15-year-old son was talking about what Mr. Trump had said.
      “I am upset on the behalf of young men in America,” Ms. Carroll said. “They cannot listen to this balderdash and this old-timey view of women, which is a cave-man view.”
      In addition to the case that ended Tuesday, Ms. Carroll has an earlier defamation suit against Mr. Trump that is still pending. Mr. Trump has argued in that case that he cannot be sued because he made those comments in his official capacity as president.
      On Thursday, Ms. Kaplan said no decision had been made on whether a new defamation suit would be filed in light of Mr. Trump’s latest comments.
      “Everything’s on the table, obviously, and we have to give serious consideration to it,” Ms. Kaplan said. “We have to weigh the various pros and cons and we’ll come to a decision in the next day or so, probably.”
      CNN is out with a statement about its town hall with Donald Trump, the target of widespread criticism since its staging in Manchester, New Hampshire, last night.The network defends both its decision to stage the event and the performance of the anchor, Kaitlan Collins, who took the hospital pass that was going one-on-one with Trump in front of a Republican audience:
      Kaitlan Collins exemplified what it means to be a world-class journalist.
      She asked tough, fair and revealing questions. And she followed up and fact-checked President Trump in real time to arm voters with crucial information about his positions as he enters the 2024 election as the Republican frontrunner.
      That is CNN’s role and responsibility: to get answers and hold the powerful to account.
      Here’s our report:The Guardian’s Alexandra Villareal has written about what the end of Title 42 will mean for the US’s commitment to being a land of refuge. Here is the top of her analysis:
      The right to seek asylum in the United States is in the balance as migrants fleeing violence and instability at home anxiously await a chance at safety – amid a major policy shift at the US’s southern border.
      The Title 42 public health order – which has allowed officials to quickly expel migrants without giving them access to asylum for years now – is expected to finally end on 11 May. What does this mean for the US’s historic commitment as a beacon for freedom from persecution?
      As government leaders brace for an anticipated uptick in migrants and asylum seekers trying to cross the border, the hardline policies they’re advancing to keep people out may spell potentially deadly consequences for some of the world’s most vulnerable.
      In Congress, an immigration and border security package that backs an enforcement-only approach is expected to receive a vote on the Republican-controlled House floor as soon as this week.
      If enacted, the proposed legislation would significantly curtail asylum, limit other humanitarian pathways, restart border wall construction, do away with safeguards for migrant kids and otherwise rewrite the US’s laws to be far less welcoming to those in need of protection.
      With Title 42 set to expire within hours, my colleague Joanna Walters has put together this guide explaining what it is, how it started, why it’s ending and what happens next:As Mayorkas mentioned in the White House briefing, there have been large numbers of people gathering at the southern border. Here are some of the pictures sent to us on the newswires:The Democratic US Senate leader, Chuck Schumer, has condemned as “utterly revolting” remarks in which the Alabama Republican Tommy Tuberville appeared to defend white nationalists in the US military.In an interview with the Alabama station WBHM, published on Monday, Tuberville was asked: “Do you believe they should allow white nationalists in the military?”He answered: “Well, they call them that. I call them Americans.”The Senate armed forces committee member added: “We are losing in the military so fast. And why? I can tell you why. Because the Democrats are attacking our military, saying we need to get out the white extremists, the white nationalists, people that don’t believe in our agenda, as Joe Biden’s agenda.”Tuberville is currently attempting to impose his own agenda on the US military, by blocking promotions and appointments in protest of Pentagon rules about abortion access.On Thursday, Schumer said: “Does Senator Tuberville honestly believe that our military is stronger with white nationalists in its ranks? I cannot believe this needs to be said, but white nationalism has no place in our armed forces and no place in any corner of American society, period, full stop, end of story.”Previously, Sherrilyn Ifill, a former president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) legal defense fund, said: “I hope we are not getting so numb that we refrain from demanding that Mr Tuberville’s colleagues in the Senate condemn his remarks.”Schumer added: “I urge Senator Tuberville to think about the destructive spectacle he is creating in the Senate. His actions are dangerous.”Read on …The Biden administration is bracing for the end of the pandemic-era Title 42 and a potential surge of migrants on the southern border. Homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas just concluded a press conference where he warned people against trying to cross into the US, while fending off criticism from both the right and left over how the White House has prepared for this moment.Here’s what else has happened today so far:
      Debt ceiling negotiators from the White House and Congress’s leaders are back at the Capitol to break the high-stakes deadlock ahead of a 1 June deadline for a potential default.
      CNN’s chief executive defended how last night’s town hall with Donald Trump went in a call with employees.
      House Republicans are expected to later today approve a bill to reform the US immigration system in line with conservative priorities. It faces doom in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
      Joe Biden campaigned on undoing Donald Trump’s hardline immigration policies, but in recent months, the president has announced new rules for migrants that advocacy groups say are strikingly similar to those of his Republican adversary.Mayorkas was challenged to respond to those claims at the briefing. Here’s what he had to say:
      This administration stands markedly different than the prior administration … We have, in fact, a family reunification task force that has now reunified, I think, more than 700 families that were cruelly separated … We have rescinded the public charge rule that punishes individuals who have migrated to the United States just for accessing public resources to which they are entitled. We have granted temporary protected status to quite a number of countries. This president has led the unprecedented expansion of lawful pathways. We stand markedly different than the prior administration. We do not resemble it at all.
      He concluded by saying: “We are a nation of immigrants, and we are a nation of laws. And those laws provide that, if one qualifies for humanitarian relief, then one has established the basis to remain in the United States. And if one has not, then one is to be removed. And that is exactly what is going to happen.”Since Joe Biden took office, Republicans have repeatedly accused his administration of “opening” the southern border.Asked about that claim, Mayorkas said that’s not the case.“We removed, returned and expelled 1.4 million people last year,” he said. “Ask those 1.4 million people if they think the border is open. Our apprehension rate at the border is consistent with the average apprehension rate in prior years.”Mayorkas warned that “we could see very crowded border patrol facilities” after Title 42’s end, but declined to say how long that situation could last.“We are working as hard as we can to make sure that that time it takes is as little as possible,” the homeland security secretary said. “This is a challenge, and we’re going to meet this challenge.”Republican administrations in states such as Texas have lately taken to bussing recently arrived migrants to Washington DC, with a new group being dropped off outside Kamala Harris’s residence this morning.Asked about that at the press conference, Mayorkas condemned the practice:
      It is a both sad and tragic day when a government official uses migrants as a pawn for political purposes.”
      Mayorkas was challenged by a reporter about why the Biden administration didn’t move faster to prepare for Title 42’s end, considering they’ve known it was going to expire for about two years.Here’s what he had to say:
      I have said for months and months that the challenge at the border is, and is going to be, very difficult. And we have spoken repeatedly about the fact that that difficulty may actually only increase at this time of transition. It is going to take a period of time for our approach to actually gain traction and show results. And I’ve been very clear about that … The fundamental reason why we have a challenge at our border, and we’ve had this challenge many a time before, is because we are working within the constraints of … a fundamentally broken immigration system. And we also are operating on resources that are far less than those that we need.”
      Mayorkas had some choice words for Congress, which he blamed for not changing immigration law to better react to the latest trends in immigration.“Our current situation is the outcome of Congress leaving a broken, outdated immigration system in place for over two decades, despite unanimous agreement that we desperately need legislative reform,” Mayorkas said. “It is also the result of Congress’s decision not to provide us with the resources we need and that we requested.”“We … yet again, call on Congress to pass desperately needed immigration reform,” he concluded.There are plenty of ideas for immigration reform in Congress – in fact, the House will probably pass a measure to do that later today. What’s lacking is enough common ground between Democrats and Republicans, and even within the parties, to get a bill through Congress.As the White House press briefing kicked off, homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas warned migrants against trying to enter the United States after Title 42 ends at midnight tonight.“If anyone arrives at our southern border after midnight tonight, they will be presumed ineligible for asylum and subjected to steeper consequences for unlawful entry, including a minimum five-year ban on re-entry and potential criminal prosecution,” Mayorkas said.“We are clear-eyed about the challenges we are likely to face in the days and weeks ahead, and we are ready to meet them,” he said, noting that immigration authorities expect “to see large numbers of encounters” and “are already seeing high numbers of encounters in certain sectors”.“I want to be very clear: our borders are not open. People who cross our border unlawfully and without a legal basis to remain will be promptly processed and removed,” Mayorkas said.The White House press briefing should be getting under way any minute now.This blog will follow it live as homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas speaks. Or, you can watch it as it happens at the livestream above. More

    • 75 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Your Monday Briefing: Kishida Visits Seoul

      by

      Also, the U.S. braces for a surge of immigrants this week.President Yoon Suk Yeol’s critics say he has given too much and has received too little in return from Japan.Pool photo by Jung Yeon-JeJapan’s leader visits SeoulPrime Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan is in South Korea today, where he is meeting President Yoon Suk Yeol in an effort to nurture a fledgling détente. Yesterday, in Seoul, the two leaders agreed to press ahead with joint efforts to improve bilateral ties — even though Kishida did not apologize for Japan’s colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula in the early 20th century.Kishida went no further than saying that Japan stood by past statements, when some of his predecessors expressed remorse and apologies. He said that his “heart ached” when he thought of the suffering of the Koreans, but his words fell short of the clear and direct apology that many South Koreans, including the head of the main opposition party, had demanded.Yoon said he would not dwell on seeking such an apology, despite criticism from some Koreans: “It’s not something we can unilaterally demand; it’s something that should come naturally from the other side’s sincerity.” Instead, Yoon urged his nation to focus on the immediate challenges from North Korea and China.Context: Kishida’s two-day trip follows a visit in March by Yoon to Tokyo. It means that shuttle diplomacy is back on track after regular exchanges between the countries’ leaders ended in 2011 over historical differences.The U.S. angle: The vows to deepen national ties are another encouraging sign for the U.S., which has been urging Japan and South Korea to let go of past grievances and cooperate.In El Paso, Texas, migrants wait outside churches where they can get donated food and clothing. Justin Hamel for The New York TimesU.S. readies for immigration surgeThe U.S. is preparing to lift a pandemic-era emergency health rule that prevented hundreds of thousands of people from entering the country. It is bracing for a crush of people at the border with Mexico — and a flare in political tensions.The U.S. is expecting as many as 13,000 migrants each day beginning Friday, immediately after the measure expires. That’s up from about 6,000 migrants on a typical day. Three cities in Texas declared a state of emergency, and President Biden recently ordered 1,500 troops to the border.More people are coming from far-flung nations in economic distress or political turmoil — like Venezuela, China, India and Russia. Inside the U.S., the debate over the broken immigration system is still polarized and overheated, posing a serious political risk as the 2024 campaign starts.Context: The order, known as Title 42, allowed the U.S. government to swiftly expel citizens of several countries back to Mexico. Asylum: A tough new rule that disqualifies asylum seekers who did not first seek protection elsewhere will go into effect on Thursday.Mayor Ken Sim, right, in Vancouver’s Chinatown.Jackie Dives for The New York TimesDid China interfere in Canadian elections?The mayor of Vancouver, Ken Sim, is caught in a political storm over reports of Chinese efforts to sway elections. Sim, Vancouver’s first mayor of Chinese descent, said his sweeping victory had been hard won and suggested that he was being targeted because of his ethnic background.The debate gained steam in February when the Globe and Mail newspaper said classified intelligence reports showed that China tried to manipulate Canadian elections — including in Vancouver. The reports have not been made public, but are said to conclude that China tried to ensure victory for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party in the two most recent federal elections and support for candidates of Chinese descent.China’s former consul general in Vancouver sought to groom local Chinese Canadian politicians, according to the reports. Sim’s rival is also calling for China’s interference to be investigated. Sim rejects claims that Beijing meddled, and instead points to his tireless campaigning and more appealing policies to explain his landslide victory. “If I was a Caucasian male, we wouldn’t be having this conversation,” he said.Analysis: Canada’s former ambassador to China said that Canada was seen by Beijing as a target of influence partly because Beijing sought to use Canada as a lever to press the U.S. to soften its opposition to China.THE LATEST NEWSAround the WorldAs of May, a nonprofit group has recorded 192 mass shootings in the U.S.Jeremy Lock/ReutersAt least nine people died, including the gunman, in a mass shooting at a mall in Texas.King Charles III was crowned on Saturday. Here are pictures from the coronation.Arab nations agreed to let Syria rejoin the Arab League, a step toward ending the country’s 12-year-long international ostracism.Israel is refusing to hand over the body of a prominent Palestinian prisoner, drawing scrutiny of the country’s practice of keeping bodies as leverage to bargain for Israeli remains.The War in UkraineUkraine is feeling immense pressure from Western allies for success in a looming counteroffensive.More than 5.5 million Ukrainians who left after the war began have returned home — even if it is near the front line.The Dnipro River, a front line in the war, is an ancient battleground. Our photographer spent weeks traveling along the waterway. See her images.Asia PacificThe violence in Manipur erupted over a question of who gets to claim special tribal status.Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesEthnic clashes have killed dozens of people in Manipur, a remote state in northeast India.A group of top Indian wrestlers, who accused the sport’s top official in the country of serial sexual harassment, vowed to continue pushing for his arrest.DNA evidence helped confirm that a “great father” who lived in Australia under an alias was actually a convicted killer and an escaped inmate from Nebraska.Netflix, encouraged by the success of “The Glory,” plans to spend $2.5 billion more on Korean content.The Australia Letter: Can Warner Bros. stop a Tasmanian sports team from being called the Tasmanian Devils?A Morning ReadSaumya Khandelwal for The New York TimesSherpa guides are leaving the industry of taking trekkers up Mount Everest and encouraging their children to pursue other careers. There are many reasons for the shift: The job is dangerous, the pay is modest and there’s scant job security.“I see no future,” Kami Rita Sherpa, a renowned guide pictured above in blue, told his son.SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAThis family left Khartoum and traveled 10 days to reach Aswan, Egypt.Heba Khamis for The New York TimesOn the run, againSudan’s war, sparked by two feuding generals, has driven more than 100,000 civilians across borders, and aid workers say as many as 800,000 could be forced to flee in the coming months.Thousands have fled to Egypt and Saudi Arabia and to relatively safer towns within Sudan. For many on the run, flight is not new. “The really, really sad thing about this is that this is not the first time these people are fleeing,” said Charlotte Hallqvist, a spokeswoman for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for South Sudan.Sudan had more than a million refugees from countries already torn apart by civil war, like Syria and South Sudan. It also had millions of internally displaced people fleeing conflict within Sudan. Now, as the new fighting enters a fourth week, these people are on the move again, facing another wave of violence and trauma.In the Darfur region of Sudan, more than three million were driven from their homes during a civil war in the early 2000s. Just weeks before the latest violence broke out, local authorities had started planning the gradual voluntary return of refugee communities in Darfur, said Toby Harward, principal situation coordinator in Darfur for the U.N.H.C.R. Instead, more are now fleeing the region. — Lynsey Chutel, a Times writer in JohannesburgPLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookKelly Marshall for The New York Times. Food Stylist: Roscoe Betsill. Prop Stylist: Paige Hicks.These toasted sesame and scallion waffles are light and savory.What to Listen toTimes music critics curated a playlist of 11 new songs.The News QuizTest your memory of last week’s headlines.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: Theater backdrops (four letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. The W.H.O. announced that smallpox had been eradicated 43 years ago today.“The Daily” is about the Hollywood strike. “Hard Fork” is on the social media site Bluesky.Email us at briefing@nytimes.com.Lynsey Chutel, a Times writer in Johannesburg, wrote today’s Spotlight on Africa. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      House G.O.P., Divided Over Immigration, Advances Border Crackdown Plan

      by

      Republicans are eyeing a vote next month on legislation that would reinstate Trump-era policies, after feuding that led leaders to drop some of the plan’s most extreme provisions.WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Thursday pushed ahead with a sweeping immigration crackdown that would codify several stringent border policies imposed by the Trump administration, after months of internal feuding that led G.O.P. leaders to drop some of the plan’s most extreme provisions.The House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees in recent days approved their pieces of the plan, which has little chance of being considered in the Democratic-led Senate but sets up a pivotal test of whether Republican leaders can deliver on their campaign promise to clamp down on record migrant inflows.For Republicans, who have repeatedly attacked President Biden on his immigration policies and embarked on an effort to impeach his homeland security secretary, the measure is a chance to lay out an alternative vision on an issue that galvanizes its right-wing base.The legislation, now expected on the floor next month, would direct the Biden administration to resume constructing the border wall that was former President Donald J. Trump’s signature project. It would also mandate that employers check workers’ legal status through an electronic system known as E-Verify and reinstate the “Remain in Mexico” policy, forcing asylum applicants to wait in detention facilities or outside the United States before their claims are heard.The plan “will force the administration to enforce the law, secure the border, and reduce illegal immigration once again,” Representative Mark E. Green, Republican of Tennessee and the Homeland Security Committee’s chairman, said during the panel’s debate on Wednesday.Democrats have derided the package as misguided and draconian, accusing Republicans of seeking to invigorate their core supporters in advance of the 2024 election by reviving some of Mr. Trump’s most severe border policies. They made vocal objections to provisions that would ban the use of the phone-based app known as “C.B.P. One” to streamline processing migrants at ports of entry, expedite the deportation of unaccompanied minors, and criminalize visa overstays of more than 10 days.Republicans “want to appeal to their extreme MAGA friends more than they want progress,” Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the top Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, said Wednesday, calling the Republican legislation a “profoundly immoral” piece of legislation that would “sow chaos at the border.”Still, the package represents a compromise of sorts between hard-right Republicans and more mainstream G.O.P. lawmakers, including a mostly Latino group from border states that balked at proposals that threatened to gut the nation’s asylum system.The party’s immigration plan — which top Republicans had hoped to pass as one of their first bills of their new House majority — has been stalled for months. A faction led by Representative Tony Gonzales, Republican of Texas, has raised concerns about the asylum changes, threatening to withhold votes that Speaker Kevin McCarthy, Republican of California, cannot afford to lose given his slim majority.Over the last week, G.O.P. leaders have quietly made a series of concessions to win over the skeptics. Republicans on the Judiciary Committee agreed to drop a provision that would have effectively stopped the intake of asylum seekers if the government failed to detain or deport all migrants seeking to enter the country without permission. But the measure still contains a number of new asylum restrictions.“It’s in a good spot,” Mr. Gonzales said of the legislation on Thursday, saying that the changes made to the asylum provision had satisfied his concerns. “As long as nobody does any funny business — you’ve got to watch it till the very end.”G.O.P. leaders predicted on Thursday that they would be able to draw a majority for the legislation when it comes to the House in mid-May, a timeline selected to coincide with the expected expiration of a Covid-era policy allowing officials to swiftly expel migrants at the border. The termination of the program, known as Title 42, is expected to inspire a new surge of attempted border crossings and supercharge the already bitter partisan debate over immigration policy.But it was unclear whether Republicans who had objected to the E-Verify requirement would be on board.Representative Thomas Massie, Republican of Kentucky withheld his support for the Judiciary Committee’s bill because of the work authorization mandate, arguing that people “shouldn’t have to go through an E-Verify database to exercise your basic human right to trade labor for sustenance.”Such databases “always get turned against us, and they’re never used for the purpose they were intended for,” added Mr. Massie, a conservative libertarian.Representative Dan Newhouse, a Republican farmer in Washington State, has expressed concern that the E-Verify mandate could create labor shocks in the agricultural sector, which relies heavily on undocumented immigrant labor. Though the legislation delays the requirement for farmers for three years, Mr. Newhouse has argued that any such change should be paired with legislation creating more legal pathways for people to work in the United States.With the expected floor vote just weeks away, G.O.P. leaders have been treading carefully, even making last-minute concessions to Democrats in hopes of bolstering support for the legislation.During the wee hours on Thursday morning, as the Homeland Security Committee debated its bill, Republicans pared back language barring nongovernmental organizations that assist undocumented migrants from receiving funding from the Department of Homeland Security. They did so after Democrats pointed out the broadly phrased prohibition could deprive legal migrants and U.S. citizens of critical services as well.Their changes did not go far enough to satisfy Democrats, who unanimously opposed the package on the Judiciary and the Homeland Security panels — and are expected to oppose the combined border security package en masse on the House floor.They have also argued that any measure to enhance border security or enforcement must be paired with expanded legal pathways for immigrants to enter the United States. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Más de 100.000 personas marchan en México contra el Plan B

      by

      Se registraron manifestaciones en más de un centenar de ciudades del país contra una serie de medidas que van a limitar a la autoridad electoral y que, según sus funcionarios, dificultará garantizar elecciones libres y justas.Demonstrators gathered in Mexico City’s main square to protest new measures diminishing the nation’s electoral watchdog, changes they see as a threat to democracy.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesCIUDAD DE MÉXICO — Más de 100.000 personas salieron a las calles de México el domingo para protestar las leyes recién aprobadas que restringen al instituto electoral del país, en lo que los manifestantes dijeron era un repudio a los esfuerzos del presidente de debilitar a un pilar de la democracia.Vestidos en varios tonos de rosa, el color oficial del órgano de supervisión electoral que ayudó a terminar con el régimen de partido único hace dos décadas, los manifestantes llenaron el Zócalo de la capital y gritaron: “¡El voto no se toca!”.Los asistentes dijeron que buscaban enviar un mensaje al presidente de México, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, quien respaldó las medidas y reside en el Palacio Nacional, frente a la principal plaza de la capital.Pero también se dirigían directamente a la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, que se espera que atienda las impugnaciones a las modificaciones al instituto electoral en los próximos meses. Muchos consideran que se trata de un momento que plantea un desafío crucial a la corte, que ha sido objeto de críticas por parte del presidente.La mañana del domingo, los manifestantes también gritaron: “¡Yo confío en la corte!”.Horas antes del inicio oficial de la protesta, los asistentes, algunos vistiendo camisas de botones bien planchadas y sombreros de paja, se reunían en cafeterías y tomaban desayuno en una terraza con vista a la sede de gobierno.Los manifestantes dijeron que los cambios ponen en riesgo a un pilar clave de la democracia del país.Luis Antonio Rojas para The New York TimesPero en la calle, el ambiente era de ansiedad.“Yo pagué mis propios gastos y mi estancia, pero no me pesa: haría eso y más por mi país”, dijo Marta Ofelia González, de 75 años, quien voló de Mazatlán, en el estado costero de Sinaloa, y llevaba una visera de paja para cubrirse de un sol intenso.Acudió, dijo, porque teme “perder la democracia y que nos convirtamos en una dictadura”.El presidente argumenta que los cambios van a ahorrar millones de dólares y mejorarán el sistema de votación. Pero los funcionarios electorales comentan que la modificación va a dificultar que se garanticen elecciones libres y justas, incluida la contienda presidencial del próximo año.“Es la última esperanza”, dijo Guadalupe Acosta Naranjo, un exdiputado de izquierda y uno de los organizadores de la protesta. “Queremos generar un respaldo”, dijo, “para fortalecer la idea de que la Suprema Corte debe declarar inconstitucionales estas leyes”. De otro modo, agregó Acosta Naranjo, “tendríamos que ir a la elección con un árbitro parcial y un árbitro disminuido”.No se sabía con certeza de inmediato cuántas personas protestaron en todo el país —se organizaron manifestaciones en más de 100 ciudades— a pesar de que las cifras solo en Ciudad de México superaron los 100.000 asistentes, según organizadores y autoridades locales.Sobre las protestas se cernía la condena reciente en un tribunal de Brooklyn de Genaro García Luna, un exalto funcionario de seguridad mexicano, quien fue declarado culpable de recibir sobornos de los cárteles del narcotráfico: en México, el veredicto se percibe ampliamente como dañino a uno de los partidos de la oposición que ayudaron a organizar la protesta del domingo.José Ramón Cossío Díaz, un ministro retirado de la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, habló el domingo frente al edificio del tribunal.Luis Antonio Rojas para The New York TimesGarcía Luna fungió como un funcionario de seguridad de alto rango durante más de una década con dos presidentes del Partido Acción Nacional —Vicente Fox y Felipe Calderón— que hicieron llamados públicos para que los ciudadanos se unieran a la protesta.En las calles que recorrieron los manifestantes el domingo había afiches con el rostro de García Luna y la palabra “culpable”.El presidente ha insinuado que a los manifestantes los motiva el deseo de devolver el país a manos de los líderes corruptos del pasado.“Van a venir porque hay un grupo de intereses creados, de corruptos, que quiere regresar al poder para seguir robando”, dijo López Obrador en una conferencia de prensa reciente refiriéndose a los manifestantes del domingo. “No vengan aquí a decir: ‘Es que nos importa la democracia, es que se afecta la democracia’”.Era la segunda vez en alrededor de cuatro meses que los mexicanos se habían manifestado en apoyo del instituto de vigilancia electoral, que el presidente y sus seguidores aseguran que se ha convertido en una burocracia inflada cooptada por intereses políticos.“Tiene un poder desmesurado y desviado”, dijo Pedro Miguel, un periodista de La Jornada, un diario de izquierda, quien se describió como “militante” del proyecto político del presidente. Miguel criticó al INE por pagarle demasiado a sus integrantes, incluido un bono al retirarse.“Esa marcha parece más bien en defensa de ese bono y de esos sueldos miserables”, dijo de la protesta del domingo.Fue la segunda vez en unos cuatro meses que los mexicanos mostraron apoyo público al Instituto Nacional Electoral, que el presidente y sus seguidores aseguran se ha convertido en un organismo con burocracia inflada.Luis Antonio Rojas para The New York TimesLas medidas, aprobadas la semana pasada por la legislatura, van a recortar el personal del instituto, socavar su autonomía y limitar su capacidad para sancionar a los políticos que quebranten la ley electoral. Los funcionarios electorales indican que la modificación también eliminará a la mayoría de trabajadores que supervisan directamente el voto e instalan las casillas de votación en todo el país.“Pone en riesgo incluso la validez de las propias elecciones”, dijo en una entrevista Lorenzo Córdova, el presidente saliente del INE.Las manifestaciones suceden cuando el país se prepara para el inicio de la campaña presidencial de 2024, en medio de serias dudas sobre si una oposición maltrecha e incipiente cuenta con los medios para ganarse a los votantes desencantados.“Es una prueba muy importante de qué tanto van a poder movilizar a su base social”, dijo Blanca Heredia, profesora en el Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, refiriéndose a los partidos que se oponen al presidente, conocido por sus iniciales, AMLO.La multitud del domingo, según algunos analistas, era suficientemente grande para señalar que muchos mexicanos están ansiosos de apoyar a sus instituciones y también de expresar su descontento con el presidente.González, la manifestante de Mazatlán, dijo que no había votado por López Obrador, “porque todavía me sube el agua al tinaco”.Está por verse si la oposición puede sacar provecho electoral de ese desencanto.“Nada más tienen el sentimiento anti-AMLO”, dijo Heredia de los partidos que se enfrentan a López Obrador. “Si quieren captar a más votantes, distintos a los que son anti-AMLO, necesitan un proyecto en positivo, algún plan que proponer al país”.Los manifestantes que marcharon contra las medidas impulsadas por el presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador, quien ha insinuado que los que protestan buscan volver a poner el país en manos de líderes corruptos.Luis Antonio Rojas para The New York TimesElda Cantú More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Large Crowds Across Mexico Protest Overhaul of Election Watchdog

      by

      Demonstrations took place in over 100 cities against the recent overhaul of the country’s electoral watchdog, which officials say could make fair and free elections difficult.More than 100,000 people took to the streets of Mexico on Sunday to protest new laws hobbling the nation’s election agency, in what demonstrators said was a repudiation of the president’s efforts to weaken a pillar of democracy.Wearing shades of pink, the official color of the electoral watchdog that helped end one-party rule two decades ago, protesters filled the central square of the capital, Mexico City, and chanted, “Don’t touch my vote.”The protesters said they were trying to send a message to the president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who backed the measures and lives in the national palace on the square’s edge.They were also speaking directly to the nation’s Supreme Court, which is expected to hear a challenge to the overhaul in the coming months. Many see the moment as a critical test for the court, which has been a target of criticism by the president.Protesters also chanted on Sunday morning, “I trust in the court.”Hours before the demonstration officially began, attendants, many wearing crisp collared shirts and Panama hats, lined up outside upscale cafes and sat for breakfast on a terrace overlooking the seat of government.Protesters said the changes imperiled a key pillar of the nation’s democracy.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesBut on the streets, the mood was anxious.“I paid my own expenses and my stay, but it doesn’t bother me, I’d do that and more for my country,” said Marta Ofelia González, 75, who flew in from Mazatlán, on the coast of Sinaloa State, and wore a straw visor to block the punishing sun.She came, she said, because she fears “we will lose democracy and become a dictatorship.”The president argues the changes will save millions of dollars and improve the voting system. Electoral officials, though, say the overhaul will make it difficult to guarantee free and fair elections — including in a crucial presidential election next year.“This is our last hope,” said Guadalupe Acosta Naranjo, a former leftist congressman and one of the demonstration’s organizers. “We want to defend the court’s autonomy so it can declare these laws unconstitutional.” Otherwise, Mr. Acosta Naranjo said, “we will have to hold an election with a partial and diminished arbiter.”It was not immediately clear how many people protested across the country — demonstrations had been organized in more than 100 cities — though the numbers in Mexico City alone were above 100,000, organizers and local officials said.Looming over the protests was the recent conviction in a Brooklyn courtroom of Genaro García Luna, a former top Mexican law enforcement official, who was found guilty of taking bribes from cartels — a verdict widely viewed in Mexico as damaging to one of the opposition parties associated with the demonstration on Sunday.José Ramón Cossío Díaz, a retired minister of the Supreme Court, spoke in front of the court building on Sunday.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesMr. García Luna served in high-profile security roles for more than a decade under two conservative National Action Party presidents — Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderón — both of whom publicly called for citizens to attend the protest.The streets where protesters roamed on Sunday were lined with posters bearing Mr. García Luna’s face and the word “guilty.”The president has suggested that the protesters are motivated by the desire to put the country back in the hands of the corrupt leaders of the past.“They’re going to show up because there are vested, corrupt interests that want to return to power to continue stealing,” Mr. López Obrador said at a recent news conference. “So don’t try to say ‘it’s that we care about democracy, it’s that democracy is being damaged.”It was the second time in about four months that Mexicans had demonstrated in support of the election watchdog, which the president and his supporters say has become a bloated bureaucracy captured by political interests. “It has too much power, perverted power,” said Pedro Miguel, a journalist at La Jornada, a leftist newspaper, who describes himself as a “militant” of the president’s political project. Mr. Miguel criticized the agency for paying its governing members too much, including a bonus after stepping down.“This is a march in defense of that bonus and those miserable salaries,” he said of the demonstration on Sunday.It was the second time in about four months that Mexicans had rallied in support of the election watchdog, which the president and his supporters say has become a bloated bureaucracy.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesThe measures, passed by the legislature last week, will cut the agency’s staff, undermine its autonomy and limit its capacity to punish politicians who break electoral law. Electoral officials say the overhaul will also eliminate the majority of workers who directly oversee the vote and install polling stations across the country.“It threatens the validity of elections themselves,” said Lorenzo Córdova, the departing president of the agency, in an interview.The protest comes as the country gears up for the start of the 2024 presidential campaign, amid serious questions about whether a battered and inchoate opposition has the wherewithal to win over disenchanted voters.“It’s an important test of how much they’re able to mobilize their base,” said Blanca Heredia, a professor at Mexico’s Center for Research and Teaching in Economics, referring to the parties opposing Mr. López Obrador, known by his initials, AMLO.The crowd was big enough on Sunday, analysts said, to suggest that many Mexicans are eager to support their institutions — and vent their anger at the president.Ms. González, of Mazatlán, said she had not voted for Mr. López Obrador “because my brain still works.”It remains unclear whether the opposition can use that bitterness to its electoral advantage.“All they have is that anti-AMLO sentiment,” Professor Heredia said of the parties opposing Mr. López Obrador. “If they want to gain more voters that aren’t just anti-AMLO, they’re going to need a positive project — a plan for the country.”Demonstrators marching against the measures pushed by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who has suggested that protesters want to place the country back in the hands of corrupt leaders.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesElda Cantú More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Mexico Hobbles Election Agency That Helped End One-Party Rule

      by

      The changes come ahead of a presidential election next year and are part of a pattern of challenges to democratic institutions across the Western Hemisphere.Mexican lawmakers passed sweeping measures overhauling the nation’s electoral agency on Wednesday, dealing a blow to the institution that oversees voting and that helped push the country away from one-party rule two decades ago.The changes, which will cut the electoral agency’s staff, diminish its autonomy and limit its ability to punish politicians for breaking electoral laws, are the most significant in a series of moves by the Mexican president to undermine the country’s fragile institutions — part of a pattern of challenges to democratic norms across the Western Hemisphere.President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, whose party and its allies control Congress, argues that the measures will save millions of dollars and make voting more efficient. The new rules also seek to make it easier for Mexicans who live abroad to cast online ballots.But critics — including some who have worked alongside the president — say the overhaul is an attempt to weaken a key pillar of Mexico’s democracy. The leader of the president’s party in the Senate has called it unconstitutional.Now, another test looms: The Supreme Court, which has increasingly become a target of the president’s ire, is expected to hear a challenge to the measures in the coming months.If the changes stand, electoral officials say it will become difficult to carry out free and fair elections — including in a crucial presidential contest next year.“What’s at play is whether we’re going to have a country with democratic institutions and the rule of law,” said Jorge Alcocer Villanueva, who served in the interior ministry under Mr. López Obrador. “What’s at risk is whether the vote will be respected.”The watchdog, called the National Electoral Institute, earned international acclaim for facilitating clean elections in Mexico, paving the way for the opposition to win the presidency in 2000 after decades of rule by a single party.Demonstrators marching against the electoral changes proposed by Mr. López Obrador in November.Luis Cortes/ReutersYet since losing a presidential election in 2006 by less than 1 percent of the vote, Mr. López Obrador has repeatedly argued, without evidence, that the watchdog actually perpetrated electoral fraud — a claim that resembles voter-fraud conspiracy theories in the United States and Brazil.The Mexican leader’s skepticism about the 2006 election was even echoed last year by the American ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, who told The New York Times that he, too, had questions about the results’ legitimacy.President Biden’s top Latin America adviser later clarified that the administration recognized the outcome of that contest. The U.S. Embassy in Mexico has been sending reports to Washington assessing potential threats to democracy in the country, according to three U.S. officials who were not authorized to speak publicly.But while some lawmakers have expressed concern about the electoral changes, the Biden administration has said little about the issue in public.The American government sees little advantage in provoking Mr. López Obrador, and has faith that Mexican institutions are capable of defending themselves, several U.S. officials said.The Mexican president remains extremely popular, and his Morena party is ahead in 2024 presidential election polls. One of Mr. López Obrador’s political protégés is likely to be the party’s candidate.That dynamic has many in Mexico wondering: Why push for changes that could raise doubts about the legitimacy of an election his party is favored to win?“We were looking to save money, without affecting the work of the I.N.E.,” Jesús Ramírez Cuevas, the president’s spokesman, said in an interview, using an acronym for the watchdog. The president has a “zero deficit” policy of austerity, he said, and would prefer to spend public money on “social investments, in health, education, and infrastructure.”Indigenous vendors selling handicrafts during Mr. López Obrador’s rally in Mexico City last year.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesMr. López Obrador has said he wants to make a bloated bureaucracy leaner.“The electoral system will be improved,” Mr. López Obrador said in December. “They are going to shrink some areas so that more can be done with less.”Many agree that spending could be trimmed, but say the changes adopted on Wednesday strike at the heart of the watchdog’s most fundamental role: overseeing the vote.Electoral officials say the overhaul will force them to eliminate thousands of jobs — including the vast majority of workers who organize elections at the local level and install polling stations across the country. The changes also limit the agency’s control over its own spending and prevent it from disqualifying candidates for campaign spending violations.Uuc Kib Espadas, a member of the watchdog’s governing council, said the changes could result in “the failure to install a significant number of polling stations, depriving thousands or hundreds of thousands of people of the right to vote.”Mr. Ramírez Cuevas called those concerns “an exaggeration” and said “there won’t be massive layoffs” at the watchdog.But the Mexican president has not hidden his disdain for the institution his party is now targeting.After electoral officials confirmed his defeat in 2006, Mr. López Obrador led thousands of supporters in protests that paralyzed the capital for weeks. He eventually led his followers off the streets, but never stopped talking about what he calls “the fraud” of 2006.Mr. López Obrador surrounded by supporters during his rally last year.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York Times“He’s resentful of the electoral authority,” said Mr. Alcocer Villanueva, the former interior ministry official. “That resentment makes him act irrationally on this issue.”Mr. López Obrador did not always seem determined to pare down the electoral body.Mr. Alcocer Villanueva said that when he was chief of staff to the interior minister, from 2018 to 2021, he and his team proposed studying possible electoral changes, but the president said it was not one of his priorities.Then the electoral watchdog started to get in the way of the president’s agenda.In 2021, the agency disqualified two candidates from his party from running for office for failing to declare relatively small campaign contributions — decisions that some within the institution questioned.“It was a disproportionate sanction,” said Mr. Espadas Ancona.Soon, the president began spending a lot more time talking about the watchdog — usually negatively. In 2022, he mentioned it in daily news conferences more than twice as often as he did in 2019, according to the agency.He has denounced the agency as “rotten” and “undemocratic” and made a punching bag out of its leader — a lawyer named Lorenzo Córdova — calling him “a fraud without principles.”Mr. López Obrador has railed against Mexican electoral authorities since his failed presidential bid in 2006, when he lost by less than 1 percent of the vote.Luis Antonio Rojas for The New York TimesMr. Córdova, who was appointed by Mexico’s Congress, has taken center stage in his own defense, responding directly to the president in a torrent of media interviews and news conferences. “It is a very clear political strategy, to sell the I.N.E. as a biased, partial authority,” Mr. Córdova said in an interview, referring to the agency by its initials. “What is our dilemma as an authority? How do we handle it? If we say nothing, publicly, we are validating the president’s statements.”The president’s critics have cheered Mr. Córdova’s willingness to take him on. But some in Mexico question whether Mr. Córdova has struck the right balance.“He shouldn’t respond to the president so viscerally and with so much anger,” said Luis Carlos Ugalde, who led the agency from 2003 to 2007, adding: “It generates a stronger desire from the other side, from Morena, to attack and destroy the institute.”Mr. Córdova stood by his approach.“It’s very easy to judge from the outside,” Mr. Córdova said. “It’s been me who’s had to lead this institution in the worst moment.”Mr. Córdova’s term will expire in April. Congress, controlled by the president’s party, will elect four new members of the watchdog’s governing body.Oscar Lopez More