Mexico

Subterms

    More stories

    • 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

    • 75 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      México restringe a su instituto electoral

      by

      Los cambios suceden en la antesala de los comicios presidenciales de 2024 y son parte de un patrón de desafíos a las instituciones democráticas en el hemisferio occidental.Los legisladores mexicanos modificaron el miércoles el sistema electoral del país, dando un golpe a la institución que supervisa las votaciones y que hace dos décadas ayudó a sacar al país de un régimen unipartidista.Los cambios, que reducirán el personal del organismo electoral, disminuirán su autonomía y limitarán su capacidad de descalificar a los candidatos que quebranten leyes electorales,son los más significativos de una serie de medidas adoptadas por el presidente de México que socavan las frágiles instituciones independientes, y forman parte de un patrón de desafíos a las normas democráticas en todo el hemisferio occidental.El presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador, cuyo partido controla el Congreso junto con sus aliados, argumenta que las medidas ahorrarán millones de dólares y harán que las votaciones sean más eficientes. Las nuevas reglas también buscan facilitar que los mexicanos que viven en el extranjero emitan su voto en línea.Pero los críticos —entre ellos algunas personas que han trabajado con el presidente— dicen que los cambios son un intento de debilitar un pilar clave de la democracia de México. El líder del partido del presidente en el Senado ha calificado de inconstitucional la medida.Ahora se avecina otra prueba: se espera que en los próximos meses la Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación, que se ha convertido en el blanco frecuente de la ira del presidente, evalúe una impugnación a las medidas.Si los cambios se mantienen, las autoridades electorales mexicanas afirman que podría dificultarse la realización de elecciones libres y justas, incluida la contienda presidencial clave del próximo año.“Lo que está en juego es si vamos a tener un Estado de derecho y una división de poderes”, dijo Jorge Alcocer Villanueva, quien trabajó anteriormente en la Secretaría de Gobernación durante el gobierno de López Obrador. “Eso es lo que quedaría en riesgo, la certeza de que el voto va a ser respetado”.El organismo de supervisión, llamado Instituto Nacional Electoral (INE), ganó reconocimiento internacional por facilitar elecciones limpias en México, allanando el camino para que la oposición ganara la presidencia en el año 2000 tras décadas de un gobierno dominado por un solo partido.Manifestantes marcharon en distintas ciudades del país contra los cambios electorales propuestos por López Obrador.Luis Cortes/ReutersSin embargo, desde que perdió unas elecciones presidenciales en 2006 por menos del 1 por ciento de los votos, López Obrador ha sostenido en repetidas ocasiones, sin aportar pruebas, que el instituto ha perpetrado en realidad fraude electoral, una afirmación que se asemeja a las teorías de conspiración de fraude electoral propagadas en Estados Unidos y Brasil.El escepticismo del líder mexicano sobre las elecciones de 2006 fue incluso retomado el año pasado por el embajador estadounidense en México, Ken Salazar, quien declaró a The New York Times que él también dudaba de la legitimidad de los resultados.El principal asesor para América Latina del presidente Joe Biden aclaró posteriormente que el gobierno reconocía el resultado de aquella contienda. La embajada de Estados Unidos en México ha estado enviando informes a Washington en los que se evalúan las posibles amenazas a la democracia en el país, según tres funcionarios estadounidenses que no estaban autorizados a hablar públicamente.Pero si bien algunos legisladores han expresado su preocupación por los cambios en materia electoral, el gobierno de Biden ha dicho poco sobre el tema en público.El gobierno estadounidense considera poco ventajoso provocar a López Obrador y confía en que las instituciones mexicanas sean capaces de defenderse, dijeron varios funcionarios estadounidenses.El presidente mexicano sigue siendo extremadamente popular, y Morena, su partido, va a la cabeza en las encuestas de las elecciones presidenciales de 2024. Es muy probable que uno de los protegidos políticos de López Obrador quede al frente de la candidatura presidencial del partido.Esa dinámica ha ocasionado que muchos en México se pregunten: ¿por qué impulsar cambios que podrían suscitar dudas sobre la legitimidad de las elecciones que se espera que favorezcan a su partido?“Lo que se buscaba era ahorros”, dijo el vocero del gobierno, Jesús Ramírez Cuevas, en una entrevista, “sin afectar el funcionamiento del INE” . El presidente tiene una política de austeridad de “cero déficit”, comentó, y preferiría gastar los fondos públicos en “inversión social, la salud, educación, infraestructura”.Venta de artesanías en la marcha a favor de López Obrador en Ciudad de México en noviembreLuis Antonio Rojas para The New York TimesLópez Obrador ha dicho que quiere agilizar una burocracia inflada.“Se va a mejorar el sistema de elecciones”, dijo López Obrador en diciembre. “Se logran compactar algunas áreas para que se haga más con menos”.Muchos coinciden en que el gasto podría recortarse, pero argumentan que los cambios adoptados el miércoles afectan la base de la función más elemental del organismo electoral: supervisar el voto.Los funcionarios electorales argumentan que las modificaciones los obligarán a eliminar miles de puestos de trabajo, incluida buena parte de las personas que organizan las elecciones y gestionan la instalación de casillas electorales a nivel local en todo el país. Los cambios también limitan el control de la agencia sobre sus propios gastos y la capacidad del instituto para inhabilitar a candidatos por infracciones de gastos de campaña.Uuc Kib Espadas, consejo del INE, dijo que las modificaciones podrían tener como resultado “que no se instale un número significativo de casillas privando de su derecho al voto a miles o cientos de miles de personas”.Ramírez Cuevas calificó dichas inquietudes como “una exageración” y dijo que “no va haber despido masivo” en el INE.Pero el presidente mexicano no ha disimulado su desdén hacia la institución que su partido ahora tiene en la mira.Luego de que las autoridades electorales confirmaron su derrota en 2006, López Obrador impulsó a miles de sus seguidores a manifestarse en protestas que paralizaron la capital durante semanas.Al final pidió a sus seguidores salir de las calles, pero nunca dejó de hablar de lo que él llama “el fraude” de 2006.López Obrador rodeado de seguidores en un mitin en noviembre.Luis Antonio Rojas para The New York Times“El presidente de México tiene una especie de resentimiento contra la autoridad electoral”, dijo Alcocer Villanueva, el exfuncionario de la Secretaría de Gobernación. “Ese resentimiento lo hace actuar de una manera irracional en este terreno”.López Obrador no siempre pareció decidido a reducir al órgano electoral.Alcocer Villanueva contó que cuando fue coordinador de asesores del secretario de Gobernación, de 2018 a 2021, él y su equipo propusieron analizar posibles cambios electorales, pero el presidente decía que no estaba entre sus prioridades.Luego, el organismo de control electoral empezó a ser un obstáculo para la agenda del presidente.En 2021, el INE inhabilitó a dos candidatos del partido gobernante por no declarar aportes de campaña relativamente pequeños, decisiones que algunas personas al interior de la institución cuestionaron.“Era una sanción desproporcionada”, dijo Espadas Ancona.Pronto, el presidente empezó a dedicar mucho más tiempo a hablar del organismo electoral, por lo general de forma negativa. Para 2022 mencionaba a la institución en sus conferencias matutinas más del doble de veces que en 2019, según el instituto.Ha señalado al organismo como “podrido” y “antidemocrático” y convirtió en blanco de sus ataques al líder del instituto —un abogado llamado Lorenzo Córdova— a quien el presidente ha calificado como alguien “sin principios, sin ideales, un farsante”.Desde que no logró llegar a la presidencia en 2006, por una diferencia de menos del 1 por ciento de los votos, López Obrador ha atacado a las autoridades electorales.Luis Antonio Rojas para The New York TimesCórdova, quien fue nombrado por el Congreso de México, ha tomado protagonismo en su propia defensa, al responder directamente al presidente en un torrente de entrevistas en medios de comunicación y conferencias de prensa. “Es una estrategia política muy clara y evidente: vender al INE como una autoridad parcial, sesgada”, dijo Córdova en una entrevista, utilizando las siglas de la institución. “¿Cuál es nuestro dilema como autoridad?, ¿cómo manejamos esto? Si no decimos nada, públicamente, estamos convalidando el dicho del presidente”.Los críticos del presidente han aplaudido la disposición de Córdova a enfrentarlo. Pero algunos en México se preguntan si Córdova ha encontrado el equilibrio adecuado.“El tono del presidente del INE debe ser con más discreción y de no responder con tanta víscera y con tanto coraje”, dijo Luis Carlos Ugalde, quien dirigió la agencia de 2003 a 2007 , y añadió: “Genera que del otro lado, del lado de Morena, haya más ganas, más ganas de atacar, de destruir al instituto”.Córdova se mantuvo firme en su enfoque.“Es muy fácil juzgar desde fuera”, dijo Córdova. “Al que le ha tocado conducir esta institución en el peor momento he sido yo”.El mandato de Córdova termina en abril. El Congreso, controlado por el partido del presidente, elegirá a cuatro nuevos consejeros para el organismo electoral.Oscar Lopez More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s proposal denying asylum at border would cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, say critics

      by

      Biden’s proposal denying asylum at border would cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, say criticsProposal prompted comparisons to Trump’s policies to limit asylum for migrants, which Biden had pledged to reverseDemocrats and immigration advocates harshly criticized Joe Biden over a new proposal that could stop migrants claiming asylum when they arrive at the US-Mexico border. One advocate said the move would cause “unnecessary human suffering”.Biden unveils Trump-style plan to deter asylum seekers at Mexico borderRead moreThe pushback came after the Biden administration unveiled a proposal that would deny asylum to migrants who arrive without first seeking it in one of the countries they passed through.There are exceptions for children, people with medical emergencies and those facing imminent threats but if enacted the new proposal could stop tens of thousands of people claiming asylum in the US.The move prompted comparisons to Donald Trump’s attempts to limit asylum for migrants traveling through other countries, attempts repeatedly struck down by federal courts. As a presidential candidate, Biden pledged to reverse those policies.The proposal “represents a blatant embrace of hateful and illegal anti-asylum policies, which will lead to unnecessary human suffering”, said Marisa Limón Garza, executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center.“Time after time, President Biden has broken his campaign promises to end restrictions on asylum seekers traveling through other countries,” Limón Garza said in a statement.“These are mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles and thousands of children who are simply looking for a fair chance for their case to be heard. We urge the Biden administration to abandon policy initiatives that further the inhumane and ineffective agenda of the Trump administration.”The proposed rule was posted in the Federal Register this week, with 30 days for public comment.Mary Meg McCarthy, executive director of the National Justice Immigration Center, said the brief comment period “suggests that the president already knows that this policy is a betrayal of his campaign promises”.“The Biden administration’s proposed rule violates US obligations under international and US human rights law which ensures access to protection for people fleeing persecution,” she said.“United States federal law specifically states that the right to seek asylum is not contingent on a person’s status or the way they come to the United States. Yet with this rule, the Biden administration is creating new requirements that will result in harm and death to people who need protection and must flee their homes quickly.’”Sergio Gonzales, executive director of Immigration Hub, said the proposal “flies in the face of America’s moral leadership on the protection of refugees and President Biden’s campaign promise to rebuild a fair, humane and orderly immigration system. Instead, the proposal brings back a Trump-era ban that was declared unlawful by federal courts.”The Biden administration faces the loss of a pandemic-era rule that has been used to expel migrants. That rule, Title 42, will likely go away in May when the national Covid-19 emergency is set to end.Officials from the justice department have warned that unauthorized border crossing could increase to somewhere between 11,000 and 13,000 per day, up from 8,600 daily in mid-December, if no action is taken.Republicans have hammered Biden over his handling of the border and some have pushed for impeaching Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security.Biden has also drawn criticism from fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill, who urged him to abandon the idea.In a joint statement, the Democratic senators Robert Menendez, Cory Booker, Ben Ray Luján and Alex Padilla said: “Last month, when the Biden administration announced it would soon be issuing a proposed rule, which in effect would function as a ‘transit ban’ on asylum seekers who don’t first apply for asylum in a transit country, we urged the administration to abandon this idea.“We are deeply disappointed that the administration has chosen to move forward with publishing this proposed rule, which only perpetuates the harmful myth that asylum seekers are a threat to this nation. In reality, they are pursuing a legal pathway in the United States.”Jerry Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the House judiciary committee, also criticized the proposal.“We are deeply disappointed in the Biden administration’s proposal to limit access to asylum,” he said in a joint statement with Pramila Jayapal, a Washington state Democrat and leading congressional progressive.“The ability to seek asylum is a bedrock principle protected by federal law and should never be violated. We should not be restricting legal pathways to enter the United States, we should be expanding them.”Lee Gelernt, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who challenged similar asylum restrictions under the Trump administration, said his organization would sue the Biden administration if the rule was adopted.“We successfully sued to block the Trump transit ban and will sue again if the Biden administration goes through with its plan,” he said.TopicsUS immigrationJoe BidenMexicoUS-Mexico borderUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘I can’t plan ahead’: Dreamers speak out as US program faces new threat

      by

      ‘I can’t plan ahead’: Dreamers speak out as US program faces new threatImmigrants express frustration as nine Republican-led states ask judge to end Obama-era program that gives temporary deportation relief It’s been almost 10 years since Areli Hernandez received her first US government work permit in her mailbox. Hernandez remembers staring at her own photograph and touching the scripted name on the card in disbelief, feeling that a long-sought dream had finally materialized.US court orders review of landmark immigration program for DreamersRead moreBut earlier this week, the program that gives temporary deportation relief to Hernandez and hundreds of thousands of other immigrants known as Dreamers, allowing a chance to live and work legally in the US, came under threat once again in a federal court.Nine Republican-led states asked Judge Andrew Hanen in Texas to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca) policy, a request that if successful would stop nearly 600,000 immigrants brought to the US as undocumented children from being able to renew their work permits and continue to be protected from potential deportation.“I can’t plan ahead because my future consists of judges’ decisions,” said Hernandez, who was born in Mexico City and brought to the US at the age of five in the late 1980s. Hernandez was referring to her own Daca status, which is set to expire later this year. “I want to make choices that don’t depend on my card and an expiration date.”The latest filing from the coalition of states led by Texas denounced Daca as “unlawful” and “unconstitutional”. The states urged Hanen to strike down the program, which was fortified by the Biden administration as a federal regulation last year after originally being created by the Obama administration in 2012.Since its implementation, Daca has lifted the threat of deportation for approximately 825,000 individuals lacking legal status who were brought to the US by age 16 and before 15 June 2007, have studied in a US school or served in the military and don’t have a serious criminal record.The name Dreamers originated with a bill first proposed in the 2001-2002 Congress, the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (Dream) Act, but which did not pass. Obama referred to these so-called Dreamers as “young people, who, for all intents and purposes, are Americans”.Daca was meant to be a stopgap until Congress passed immigration reform legislation and put Dreamers like Hernandez on a path to US citizenship. That has not happened and instead the program – and Dreamers’ futures – end up batted back and forth by the courts.Last year Kevin McCarthy, now speaker of the House, called “amnesty” for undocumented immigrants a “nonstarter” and the only immigration policy his Republican House majority would support was “securing” the US-Mexico border.Donald Trump had announced as president that he was scrapping Daca. This was blocked by the courts, including the US supreme court in 2020, but still left Dreamers in turmoil.Then-rival presidential candidate Joe Biden pledged that he would change things, saying: “As president, I will immediately work to make Daca permanent by sending a bill to Congress on day one of my administration.”Biden did so, but immigration reform legislation is still stuck in Congress. Then states hostile to Daca persuaded Hanen in July 2021 to ban new applicants.Hernandez was a student in southern California in the early 2000s, before Daca.She told the Guardian this week: “I learned that I couldn’t be a social worker because in order to apply for a license I needed a social security number,” adding that as an undocumented immigrant: “I was also looking at programs that had federal grants that required US citizenship, and again, I couldn’t.”She worked as a janitor before graduating in psychology from California State University, Northridge, then spent years working under weekly or monthly contracts in jobs unrelated to her degree.It wasn’t until Hernandez, 39, became a Daca recipient in 2013 that she landed a full-time position at the non-profit Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (Chirla), where she earned enough to do a master’s in public administration, and is now director of executive affairs.Many of the almost 600,000 current Dreamers are essential workers who have supported the nation’s classrooms and hospitals throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. They are also sports stars, award-winning journalists and academics, or successful in countless other walks of life.Dreamers pump billions into the US economy and, according to the progressive thinktank the Center for American Progress, households with Daca recipients pay almost $10bn in taxes each year.When the Dream Act was introduced on Capitol Hill in 2001, Juliana Macedo do Nascimento coincidentally arrived in Buena Park, Orange county, California, from Brazil at the age of 14.Since 2001 at least 11 versions of the Dream Act have been introduced in Congress but never passed.“We really see the cruelty of what Texas and the other plaintiffs are asking for, it’s just anti-immigrant rhetoric,” said Macedo do Nascimento, who now lives in Baltimore. “It’s all part of this narrative that mostly brown people shouldn’t be in this country.”Her current Daca protections expire in March 2024 and Dreamers once again wait in anxious limbo, first for Hanen’s ruling then, if he agrees to shut down Daca, the likely Biden appeal all the way back up to the now-conservative-controlled supreme court.“Daca recipients are allowed to buy houses, buy cars, and have these long-term debts,” said Macedo do Nascimento, 37, referring to the typical American burdens of student loans, mortgages and vehicle financing. “But we can’t plan a family. We deserve a path to citizenship, it will allow us to have a sense of security.”TopicsDream ActUS immigrationUS politicsTexasMexicofeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A storm is coming’: migrants stuck on US-Mexico border as temperatures plummet

      by

      ‘A storm is coming’: migrants stuck on US-Mexico border as temperatures plummet Trump’s pandemic-era immigration restrictions lock migrants on both sides of the border in perilous situationsChristmas was not uppermost in their minds. Bitter cold, uncertainty and urgency were.Just after 1am at an intersection in downtown El Paso on Thursday, Arturo folded a backpack to make a pillow on the street. The 22-year-old Venezuelan wore a sweater underneath an oversized hoodie wrapped around his face as the temperature plummeted.‘No money, nowhere to stay’: asylum seekers wait as Trump’s border restrictions drag onRead moreA fellow countryman huddling on the concrete nearby broke the news: “Se viene una tormenta” – a storm is coming. Hundreds stuck on both sides of the US-Mexico border are being blown every which way by a legal tempest, but this was a literal, Arctic-level storm.‘Once in a generation’ freeze for Christmas as bomb cyclone hits USRead moreArturo, who asked for his last name to be withheld out of fear of being expelled back across the border, looked up at the lights of one of the tallest buildings in this Texas city, a hotel that he couldn’t afford, and spoke of wishing for a warm bed.What little he had left after a long and dangerous overland journey, which included being robbed, he was planning to spend to get to Chicago, where compatriots have promised him a construction job, he said. The work will allow him to send money back to his home town of Yaracuy in western Venezuela, a nation barely functioning for many of its citizens. The money would go to his nine-month-old daughter who was born with respiratory issues.“Each medical exam was $30 and the medicine was around $25. I was making between $15 and $25 a week,” Arturo said, while showing a photograph of his daughter on his phone. “That’s why five days after my wedding, I decided to leave.”City authorities in El Paso have been unable to shelter many sleeping rough on the streets or at the bus station in recent days after crossing the border unlawfully amid US restrictions and crises in their home countries.Eight miles away from where Arturo was shivering, Samuel Zelaya stretched a thin blanket on the floor inside El Paso’s airport.The 32-year-old from Nicaragua said he would also have been sleeping outside if it wasn’t for another migrant who told him he could spend the night at the airport. This was the fourth night in a row and the American Red Cross was giving out some food and clothing.“It’s hard when a son tells you ‘Dad, I’m starving’ and you don’t have money, that’s why I am here,” Zelaya said softly, trying not to awaken an Ecuadorian migrant sleeping on the floor nearby.After quitting his job as a cook in the Nicaraguan capital Managua, Zelaya dared a brutal 16-day trek across Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Mexico. In Juarez, the Mexican sister city to El Paso, he and other migrants had to burn their own clothes and old car tires found in the streets to stay warm, before crossing into the US.More than 800 miles away, at the eastern end of the border, where the Mexican city of Matamoros sits across the international line from Brownsville, Texas, there was a different scene.Around 3,000 people fleeing chaos, hardship and danger, mainly in Venezuela or tumultuous Haiti, have formed the kind of makeshift camp near the international bridge that some border cities have become all too accustomed to.Many face a catch-22. Try to get your name on a list asking to bypass the border restriction known as Title 42 and claim asylum in the US – but probably be unsuccessful – or avoid barriers and closed border posts, cross unlawfully and turn yourself in to federal border agents, claim asylum and probably be expelled anyway. Either way, you end up stuck and at risk in Matamoros.Arizona governor builds border wall of shipping crates in final days of officeRead moreHundreds on Wednesday formed a line to put their details onto a list arranged by Felicia Rangel-Samponaro, a co-director of the Sidewalk School, a small organization that helps people in what she refers to as refugee camps there and in Reynosa a little to the west.She submits lists to border agents, who decide which few will be granted exemption from Title 42, can apply for asylum in the US and join the unprecedented 2 million-strong backlog of people waiting for a date in immigration court.Joe Biden pledged to end the use of Title 42, Republicans have sued to keep it in place and federal courts have gone back and forth. The rule was imposed in 2020 by Donald Trump to curb Covid-19, but critics say it soon became, and remains, just another anti-immigration tool.“You have to keep in mind the exemption process may end, but all this still serves a purpose,” Rangel-Samponaro said, indicating her list, as people thronged to add their names, while volunteers locked arms and formed a human perimeter to the process, to try to keep it orderly.“We are tired of waiting,” Marielysa Rodriguez, a 25-year-old mother of twofrom Venezuela, said on Wednesday. “Everything is a list.”Rodriguez, her husband and two young children had gotten themselves on the list to be considered for exemption, but had yet to receive further news. On Wednesday she considered the other option in Matamoros a Hobson’s choice.She approached the river, the Rio Grande that flows sometimes shallow and safe, sometimes deeper, fast and deadly between Texas and Mexico.“My husband is around. That’s why I haven’t crossed yet,” Rodriguez said, looking about her for him. On the riverbank, dozens of families and individuals were jumping into the water, struggling across and turning themselves in to US border agents.Nearly a hundred people from the camp were watching, some even climbed trees for a better view of the crossings, to see how things went for people.A man broke through the crowd on crutches. He took off a red sweatshirt and walked into the river wearing his prosthetic leg. He floundered, grabbed onto an inflatable mattress and made it to the other side.Aryelis, a 39-year-old, who allowed just her first name to be used, said disapprovingly of those plunging into the river: “I think they’re violating the rules of the United States.”She read about the US abruptly applying Title 42 restrictions to Venezuelans in October.But some parents grow desperate.“In the end, they don’t tell us if we’re crossing the border or not. If they [advocates or officials] talk to us clearly and tell us: ‘You’re going to cross,’ we’d wait,” Rodriguez said.She added: “We’re wasting time. The new year is coming and my children have a cold. They’ve gotten fever, diarrhea. They’ve picked up all kinds of illnesses during the journey.”Jose Baldayo, 24, also from Venezuela, and his wife, Iris Diaz Herrera, 25, their four-year-old twins and another daughter arrived in Matamoros about a month ago. As they joined the long line to sign the list, things got rowdy.“The disorder is the result of the desperation of families who think they won’t be able to get on the list,” Diaz said.The family lives day by day and Christmas was not on their minds, she said.“Taking a shower, eating, everything becomes a challenge. It becomes a goal for the day to be able to cook something,” Diaz said.Both El Paso and Matamoros authorities were talking this week of opening temporary shelters for warmth in the cold snap.Back at El Paso airport, Zelaya said that unlike so many other nationalities, he’d been released and allowed to head to his final American destination and check in with immigration officials there. And thanks to a donation from a Nicaraguan friend in the US, Zelaya planned to fly to New York on Saturday. He did think about Christmas, then, a bittersweet one.“My first Christmas without my family,” he said, burying his face in his hands. “I won’t have my daughter and my wife to give me a hug.”TopicsUS-Mexico borderTexasUS immigrationUS politicsMexicofeaturesReuse this content More

    • 63 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      ¿México será la próxima Venezuela?

      by

      En 2018, escribí una columna en la que describía al futuro presidente de México, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, o AMLO, como una versión de izquierda de Donald Trump. Los lectores no estaban convencidos. La comparación entre los dos hombres, escribió una persona en los comentarios, “es absurda”. Otro dijo que la columna era “asombrosamente ignorante”.Permítanme retractarme. AMLO no es solo otra versión de Trump. Es peor, porque es un demagogo y un operador burocrático más eficaz.Eso volvió a quedar claro cuando los mexicanos salieron a las calles el 13 de noviembre en marchas contra los esfuerzos de AMLO para desmantelar el Instituto Nacional Electoral (INE). Durante tres décadas, el organismo independiente, pero financiado por el Estado (que antes se llamaba Instituto Federal Electoral) ha sido crucial para la transición de México de un gobierno de partido único a una democracia competitiva en la que los partidos en el poder pierden elecciones y aceptan los resultados.Entonces, ¿por qué el presidente, que ganó la elección de manera abrumadora y mantiene un alto índice de aprobación —en parte por un estilo político que se sustenta en el culto a la personalidad y por programas de transferencias de efectivo a los pobres, su principal base electoral—, iría tras la joya de la corona de los organismos civiles del país? ¿No se supone que López Obrador debe representar a las fuerzas de la democracia popular?La respuesta de AMLO es que solo busca democratizar al INE al hacer que sus integrantes sean elegidos por voto popular después de que instancias bajo su dominio nominen a los candidatos. También reduciría el financiamiento del instituto, le quitaría el poder de elaborar padrones de votantes y eliminaría las autoridades electorales estatales. De manera trumpiana, AMLO llamó a sus críticos “racistas”, “clasistas” y “muy hipócritas”.La realidad es distinta. AMLO es producto del viejo partido gobernante, el Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), que dominó casi todos los aspectos de la vida política mexicana desde finales de la década de 1920 hasta finales de la década de 1990. Ideológicamente, el partido estaba dividido en dos alas: los tecnócratas modernizadores contra los nacionalistas estatistas. Sin embargo, el partido estaba unido en su preferencia por la represión, la corrupción y, sobre todo, el control presidencial como medio para perpetuar su permanencia en el poder.AMLO puede haber pertenecido al ala estatista, pero sus ideas sobre la gobernabilidad salen directamente del manual del viejo PRI, solo que esta vez a favor de su propio partido, Morena. “Constantemente, su impulso ha sido recrear la década de 1970: una presidencia poderosa y sin contrapesos”, me escribió el lunes Luis Rubio, uno de los analistas más importantes de México. “Por lo tanto, ha intentado debilitar, eliminar o neutralizar toda una red de entidades que se crearon para ser controles del poder presidencial”. Eso incluye la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, las agencias reguladoras del país y la comisión de derechos humanos de México. El INE y el banco central se encuentran entre las pocas entidades que se han mantenido relativamente libres de su control.¿Qué significaría que AMLO se saliera con la suya? Su mandato presidencial de seis años termina en 2024 y es poco probable que permanezca formalmente en el cargo. Pero hay una antigua tradición mexicana de gobernar tras bambalinas. Llenar el INE con personas cercanas es el primer paso para regresar a los días de votos manipulados que caracterizaron al México en el que crecí, en las décadas de 1970 y 1980.Pero también implica un deterioro más profundo, de tres maneras importantes.La primera es el papel cada vez mayor de las fuerzas armadas durante el sexenio de AMLO. “El ejército ahora está operando fuera del control civil, en abierto desafío a la Constitución mexicana, que establece que el ejército no puede estar a cargo de la seguridad pública”, escribió la analista política mexicana Denise Dresser en la edición vigente de Foreign Affairs. “A partir de órdenes presidenciales, los militares se han vuelto omnipresentes: construyen aeropuertos, administran los puertos del país, controlan las aduanas, distribuyen dinero a los pobres, implementan programas sociales y detienen a inmigrantes”.La segunda es que el gobierno mexicano a todas luces se ha rendido ante los cárteles de la droga que, según una estimación, controlan hasta un tercio del país. Eso se hizo evidente hace dos años, después de que el gobierno de Trump regresara a México a un exsecretario de Defensa, el general Salvador Cienfuegos, quien había sido arrestado en California y acusado de trabajar para los cárteles. AMLO liberó al general con rapidez. Ocho de las ciudades más peligrosas del mundo ahora están en México, según un análisis de Bloomberg Opinion, y 45.000 mexicanos huyeron de sus hogares por temor a la violencia en 2021.Y, por último, el nuevo estatismo de AMLO funciona incluso peor que el anterior. Un intento de reforma del sistema de salud de México ha provocado una escasez catastrófica de medicamentos. Ha invertido bastante en la empresa petrolera del Estado, PEMEX, que se las ha arreglado para perder dinero a pesar de los precios históricamente altos de la materia prima. El gasto en bienestar aumentó un 20 por ciento respecto al gobierno de su antecesor, pero su gobierno eliminó uno de los programas de combate a la pobreza más exitosos de México, que vinculaba la asistencia a mantener a los niños en la escuela.Los defensores de AMLO pueden argumentar que el presidente sigue siendo popular entre la mayoría de los mexicanos debido a su preocupación por los más pobres. A menudo, ese ha sido el caso de los populistas, desde Recep Tayyip Erdogan en Turquía hasta los gobiernos de Kirchner en Argentina. Pero la realidad tiene una forma de pasar factura. Lo que los mexicanos enfrentan cada vez más con AMLO es un ataque a su bienestar económico, seguridad personal y libertad política y al Estado de derecho. Si los mexicanos no tienen cuidado, este será su camino a Venezuela.Bret Stephens ha sido columnista de Opinión en el Times desde abril de 2017. Ganó un Premio Pulitzer por sus comentarios en The Wall Street Journal en 2013 y previamente fue editor jefe de The Jerusalem Post. Facebook More