Mexico

Subterms

    More stories

    • 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

    • 225 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘I decided to share my voice’: Estela Juarez on her mother, who Trump deported, and her new book

      by

      Interview‘I decided to share my voice’: Estela Juarez on her mother, who Trump deported, and her new bookRichard Luscombe Just nine when zero-tolerance policy saw her mother sent to Mexico, now a teen, the Floridian has written a book for childrenFew stories exposed the cruelty of Donald Trump’s zero tolerance immigration policies more than that of Estela Juarez. Just nine, she saw her mother, Alejandra, the wife of a decorated US marine, deported to Mexico, leaving her and her sister Pamela, then 16, to grow up in Florida on their own.‘It’s heartbreaking’: military family shattered as wife of decorated US marine deported to MexicoRead moreNow a teenager, Estela has written a book about her experiences, Until Someone Listens, which also chronicles her years-long effort to reunify her family.From missed birthdays and holidays, the smell of Alejandra’s flautas no longer wafting from their kitchen, to Pamela’s high school graduation ceremony without her mother by her side, the story lays bare the pain of forced separation, even as the family never gives up hope of being whole again.The book is not Estela’s first turn in the spotlight. Her fight included a heartbreaking video played at the 2020 Democratic convention. As images of migrant children in cages filled the screen, she read a letter telling Trump: “You tore our world apart.”Now, with a colorful illustrated book aimed at children, albeit with a powerful plea for immigration reform directed at adults in positions of power, she is bringing her story to a new generation, with the message it is never too early to stand up for what’s right.“I know that if I decided to never share my voice then my mother wouldn’t be here right now next to me, and she wouldn’t be in the US,” Estela said on a Zoom call from her home in central Florida.“And I think that’s very important for other people to share their voice and I hope that they can get inspired by my story, and know that they’re not alone, because I know it’s hard to speak out, especially at such a young age.”Alejandra was able to return to Florida in May 2021 after almost three years in exile in Yucatan, as one of the early beneficiaries of an executive order signed by Joe Biden in his first days in office.The action reversed the Trump policy of deporting undocumented residents without impunity even if, as in Alejandra’s case, they’d lived in the US for decades, paid taxes, were married to US citizens, had US citizen children and stayed out of legal trouble.Biden’s order also directed the Department of Homeland Security to form an interagency taskforce to identify and reunify families separated under Trump. An interim report in July revealed that 2,634 children have been reunified with parents, with more than 1,000 cases pending.“We’re spending as much time as we have together and we try not to think about the fact that in a year or so my mom could be deported again,” Estela told me, referring to the temporary nature of her mother’s immigration “parole”, which will be reviewed in 2023.“Knowing that my story is not finished yet has inspired me to continue to write another book that’s more for teenagers and adults, and to give them a chance to be inspired.“I love writing, it helps me get my emotions out. When it comes to children’s books it has to be brief, and my story is very complicated, so I have to make it in a way where other children would understand.“My mother was never supposed to come back from Mexico. She was told she would be there for life. And knowing that after almost three years of being there she was able to come back shows me basically that anything is possible, so I have a lot of hope for the future.”Estela has grown since the Guardian first met her, Pamela and Alejandra in a playground in Haines City, Florida, in late summer 2018, about a week before their mother was deported.But even then, having only just turned nine, an advanced awareness of her family’s plight and that of others sat comfortably alongside her joyous, playful nature. She spoke eloquently of immigration reform and working with a Florida congressman, Darren Soto, on a bill to protect military families if any member was undocumented.Now 13, Estela is in her final year in middle school. She is studying the naturalization process in civics lessons she says are helping to inspire her career path.“I hope to become an immigration lawyer,” she said. “I know that right now I’m a minor, and with my writing I’m doing all I can to help immigrants. In the future I want to continue to help them.“Seeing how the broken immigration laws hurt my family, and others, seeing how it changed them forever, really gave me the courage to continue to speak out and spend my time helping them.”As Estela says in the book: “My words have power. My voice has power. I won’t stop using my voice until someone listens.”
      Until Someone Listens: A Story About Borders, Family and One Girl’s Mission is published in the US by Macmillan
      TopicsBooksUS immigrationUS domestic policyUS politicsTrump administrationBiden administrationPolitics booksinterviewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas tragedy highlights migrants’ perilous journey to cross US border

      by

      Texas tragedy highlights migrants’ perilous journey to cross US border The number of migrant deaths in 2021 was 650, a stark reminder of the human cost of US immigration policiesThe deaths of 50 migrants – traveling from Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras – in terrible conditions in Texas has cast a spotlight on the immense risks people are willing to take to cross the US border in search of a better financial life or escaping violence in their native countries.Fifty migrants found dead inside abandoned Texas trailer truckRead moreLaura Peña, the legal director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, represents asylum seekers at the border. Responding to the tragedy in San Antonio, she said both the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, and President Biden have “utterly failed people who are trying to seek safety by crossing the border”.“The closure of borders are forcing people to take more dangerous routes. That’s just the facts. It’s resulted in thousands of deaths across the border … And it’s a direct result of these efforts to harden the border and criminalize people instead of investing in processing – simple processing of people who are trying to seek asylum and refuge at our ports of entry at our borders.”The processes Peña is referring to are the same ones used to allow more than 3,000 Ukrainian refugees to enter the US at the border of Mexico.She added: “We’ve been advocating for a dignified, humane process at the border, where people are not forced to risk their lives. We’ve seen the ability of the federal government to do that. We saw all the resources come to bear for our Ukrainian brothers and sisters, rapid humane processing at the border. But when it comes to Black and brown migrants, those same benefits are completely stripped away. They are not afforded across the board. It’s the underlying racism, and how and where both the federal and the state governments choose to militarize.”On Tuesday, Biden called the deaths “horrifying and heartbreaking”.“While we are still learning all the facts about what happened and the Department of Homeland Security has the lead for the investigation, initial reports are that this tragedy was caused by smugglers or human traffickers who have no regard for the lives they endanger and exploit to make a profit.“Exploiting vulnerable individuals for profit is shameful, as is political grandstanding around tragedy, and my administration will continue to do everything possible to stop human smugglers and traffickers from taking advantage of people who are seeking to enter the United States between ports of entry.”The San Antonio fire chief, Charles Hood, said the people found were “hot to the touch”, suffering from heatstroke and heat exhaustion.The peak of summer in San Antonio, where temperatures remain consistently in the 90s or higher, is no deterrent to those seeking work or fleeing persecution. Nor is the prospect of being discovered by border patrol agents. The result of the treacherous journey, however, is the gruesome image of stacks of bodies.The number of migrant deaths in 2021 was 650, the most since 2014. The figure is a stark reminder of the human cost of US immigration policies, which generally limit the number of migrants able to seek asylum.Congressman Joaquín Castro, who represents the district that covers San Antonio, called for ending Title 42, the pandemic-era policy invoked by the Trump administration that allows for turning away migrants without offering them the chance to seek humanitarian protection ostensibly to prevent the spread of contagious diseases like Covid-19.Castro argued that was an immediate aid to the infrastructure of US immigration, which has been overwhelmed.The tragedy in San Antonio tonight, the loss of life, is horrific. My prayers are with the victims, their families and the survivors being treated in our community. May God bless them. We must end Title 42 which has put desperate, oppressed people in grave danger of death. https://t.co/P0l8YmtHmq— Joaquin Castro (@JoaquinCastrotx) June 28, 2022
      More changes to US immigration law are imminent. The conservative-majority supreme court is also set to rule on Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, which forces asylum seekers from Mexico to return home while awaiting the result of their pending immigration cases. Advocates argue the policy makes migrants face a forced return to the unsafe and vulnerable conditions from which they were escaping.And to avoid that, advocates say, migrants are willing to endure extremely dangerous conditions and risk everything in hopes of making the journey across the US border with Mexico.Biden tried to end the policy upon taking office, but was unsuccessful.The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said: “If the supreme court prevents the Biden administration from ending Remain in Mexico, it will enshrine a new legacy for the United States – a legacy of turning its back on international commitments and sending people directly into harm’s way.”Though Monday’s grim discovery stood among the deadliest tragedies involving migrants, it is not the first of its kind in San Antonio. In 2017, 10 men traveling by tractor-trailer died, having gone without water, food and air conditioning for hours.Further south in Brooks county, Texas, 10 migrants traveling by van died after crashing into a utility pole last August.In Houston, six migrants died in an SUV after being chased by police through rainy weather in 2019.Advocates have long said that those episodes illustrate the risks migrants are willing to take to access the US and leave behind uncertain lives in their native countries.The Texas senator Ted Cruz and Governor Greg Abbott quickly blamed Biden for the most recent deaths in San Antonio. Abbott said: “These deaths are on Biden. They are a result of his deadly open border policies. They show the deadly consequences of his refusal to enforce the law.”The condemnation of the president comes after members of the Texas GOP criticized Democrats such as gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke for calling for more meaningful gun control measures after the shooting deaths of 19 children and two of their teachers at a school in Uvalde.Following news of the dead in San Antonio, O’Rourke echoed calls for expanding avenues for legal migration to discourage human smuggling rings responsible for organizing such dangerous trips across the border.TopicsUS newsUS politicsTexasUS immigrationMexicoAmericasUS-Mexico borderfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Proposed Launching Missiles Into Mexico to ‘Destroy the Drug Labs,’ Esper Says

      by

      It is one of the moments in his upcoming memoir that the former defense secretary described as leaving him all but speechless.President Donald J. Trump in 2020 asked Mark T. Esper, his defense secretary, about the possibility of launching missiles into Mexico to “destroy the drug labs” and wipe out the cartels, maintaining that the United States’ involvement in a strike against its southern neighbor could be kept secret, Mr. Esper recounts in his upcoming memoir.Those remarkable discussions were among several moments that Mr. Esper described in the book, “A Sacred Oath,” as leaving him all but speechless when he served the 45th president.Mr. Esper, the last Senate-confirmed defense secretary under Mr. Trump, also had concerns about speculation that the president might misuse the military around Election Day by, for instance, having soldiers seize ballot boxes. He warned subordinates to be on alert for unusual calls from the White House in the lead-up to the election.The book, to be published on Tuesday, offers a stunningly candid perspective from a former defense secretary, and it illuminates key episodes from the Trump presidency, including some that were unknown or underexplored.“I felt like I was writing for history and for the American people,” said Mr. Esper, who underwent the standard Pentagon security clearance process to check for classified information. He also sent his writing to more than two dozen four-star generals, some cabinet members and others to weigh in on accuracy and fairness.Pressed on his view of Mr. Trump, Mr. Esper — who strained throughout the book to be fair to the man who fired him while also calling out his increasingly erratic behavior after his first impeachment trial ended in February 2020 — said carefully but bluntly, “He is an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service.”A spokesman for Mr. Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Mr. Esper describes an administration completely overtaken by concerns about Mr. Trump’s re-election campaign, with every decision tethered to that objective. He writes that he could have resigned, and weighed the idea several times, but that he believed the president was surrounded by so many yes-men and people whispering dangerous ideas to him that a loyalist would have been put in Mr. Esper’s place. The real act of service, he decided, was staying in his post to ensure that such things did not come to pass.One such idea emerged from Mr. Trump, who was unhappy about the constant flow of drugs across the southern border, during the summer of 2020. Mr. Trump asked Mr. Esper at least twice if the military could “shoot missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs.”“They don’t have control of their own country,” Mr. Esper recounts Mr. Trump saying.When Mr. Esper raised various objections, Mr. Trump said that “we could just shoot some Patriot missiles and take out the labs, quietly,” adding that “no one would know it was us.” Mr. Trump said he would just say that the United States had not conducted the strike, Mr. Esper recounts, writing that he would have thought it was a joke had he not been staring Mr. Trump in the face.In Mr. Esper’s telling, Mr. Trump seemed more emboldened, and more erratic, after he was acquitted in his first impeachment trial. Mr. Esper writes that personnel choices reflected that reality, as Mr. Trump tried to tighten his grip on the executive branch with demands of personal loyalty.Among Mr. Trump’s desires was to put 10,000 active-duty troops on the streets of Washington on June 1, 2020, after large protests against police brutality erupted following the police killing of George Floyd. Mr. Trump asked Mr. Esper about the demonstrators, “Can’t you just shoot them?”Mr. Esper describes one episode nearly a month earlier during which Mr. Trump, whose re-election prospects were reshaped by his repeated bungling of the response to the coronavirus pandemic, behaved so erratically at a May 9 meeting about China with the Joint Chiefs of Staff that one officer grew alarmed. The unidentified officer confided to Mr. Esper months later that the meeting led him to research the 25th Amendment, under which the vice president and members of the cabinet can remove a president from office, to see what was required and under what circumstances it might be used.Mr. Esper writes that he never believed Mr. Trump’s conduct rose to the level of needing to invoke the 25th Amendment. He also strains to give Mr. Trump credit where he thinks he deserves it. Nonetheless, Mr. Esper paints a portrait of someone not in control of his emotions or his thought process throughout 2020.Mr. Esper singles out officials whom he considered erratic or dangerous influences on Mr. Trump, with the policy adviser Stephen Miller near the top of the list. He recounts that Mr. Miller proposed sending 250,000 troops to the southern border, claiming that a large caravan of migrants was en route. “The U.S. armed forces don’t have 250,000 troops to send to the border for such nonsense,” Mr. Esper writes that he responded.In October 2019, after members of the national security team assembled in the Situation Room to watch a feed of the raid that killed the Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Mr. Miller proposed securing Mr. al-Baghdadi’s head, dipping it in pig’s blood and parading it around to warn other terrorists, Mr. Esper writes. That would be a “war crime,” Mr. Esper shot back.Mr. Miller flatly denied the episode and called Mr. Esper “a moron.”Mr. Esper also viewed Mark Meadows, Mr. Trump’s final White House chief of staff, as a huge problem for the administration and the national security team in particular. Mr. Meadows often threw the president’s name around when barking orders, but Mr. Esper makes clear that he often was not certain whether Mr. Meadows was communicating what Mr. Trump wanted or what Mr. Meadows wanted.He also writes about repeated clashes with Robert C. O’Brien, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser in the final year, describing Mr. O’Brien as advocating a bellicose approach to Iran without considering the potential fallout.Mr. O’Brien said he was “surprised and disappointed” by Mr. Esper’s comments. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      México va a las urnas en la primera revocación de mandato

      by

      La votación tiene el potencial de cambiar el sistema político del país. Pero hay quienes temen que no sea más que un instrumento de propaganda.CIUDAD DE MÉXICO — Al pasear por la capital de México en estos días, sería fácil asumir que el presidente del país está en riesgo inminente de perder su trabajo.Las calles de la ciudad están llenas de carteles, volantes y vallas publicitarias que instan a los mexicanos a votar para saber si deben sacar del poder al presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador en una elección revocatoria este domingo.Solo que no es la oposición la que le dice a la gente que vaya a las urnas. Son los leales al presidente.“Apoya al presidente López Obrador,” dice un volante. “Si NO participas, los corrupto$ nos quitarán las becas, los apoyos y las pensiones que hoy recibimos”.Durante la mayor parte de un siglo, los presidentes mexicanos han cumplido sus mandatos de seis años sin falta, hayan sido o no elegidos limpiamente, o hayan llegado a ser despreciados por gran parte de la población. La elección revocatoria, propuesta por López Obrador y la primera de este tipo en México, tiene el potencial de cambiar el sistema político del país, al dar a los ciudadanos una herramienta nueva y poderosa para hacer que sus líderes rindan cuentas.El domingo se pedirá a los votantes que digan si quieren que a López Obrador “se le revoque el mandato por pérdida de la confianza” o “siga en la presidencia de la república hasta que termine su periodo”. Para que sea vinculante, debe participar el 40 por ciento del electorado.Lo llamativo es que el promotor más entusiasta de la votación —y la persona más interesada en poner a prueba la consolidada popularidad del mandatario— ha sido el propio presidente. Los líderes de la oposición han pedido a sus seguidores que boicoteen el ejercicio, y los analistas creen que la participación podría ser demasiado baja para que los resultados cuenten.Un simpatizante del presidente en Ciudad de México da información sobre dónde y cuándo votar en el referendo revocatorio.Alejandro Cegarra for The New York TimesAsí que, aunque López Obrador ha calificado la revocatoria de mandato como “un ensayo democrático del primer orden”, muchos temen que se convierta en algo mucho menos significativo: una herramienta publicitaria destinada principalmente a reforzar la afirmación de poder del presidente.“Se supone que es un mecanismo de control cívico del poder, pero se ha convertido en un instrumento de propaganda política”, dijo Carlos Bravo Regidor, analista político y crítico del gobierno. El partido en el poder, dijo Bravo Regidor, “quiere que esto sea una demostración de fuerza, de músculo y capacidad para sacar a la gente a las calles y hacer explícito su apoyo a López Obrador”.En un cálido lunes en Ciudad de México, los voluntarios de la campaña del presidente se desplegaron por un barrio residencial armados con volantes y amplias sonrisas, anunciando alegremente los centros de votación cercanos y diciendo a cualquiera dispuesto a escuchar que fuera a votar en la revocación de mandato.Allan Pozos, uno de los líderes del grupo, dijo que esperaba que el ejercicio sentara “un precedente” para que los futuros líderes pudieran ser expulsados si fuera necesario. Esta vez, sin embargo, solo quiere que el presidente sepa que se le quiere.“Es para demostrar que Andrés Manuel tiene el fuerte apoyo del pueblo”, dijo Pozos. “Andrés muchas veces se siente solo, porque tiene que ir contra todo un sistema y no tiene apoyo”.Allan Pozos, uno de los líderes de los voluntarios que hacen campaña por el presidente en Ciudad de México.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesTal muestra de apoyo no podría llegar en un mejor momento para el presidente, que ha completado la mitad de su mandato mientras enfrenta dificultades para cumplir con las promesas clave de la campaña que lo llevó al cargo en una victoria arrolladora en 2018. Prometió una “transformación” del país que iba a reducir la pobreza, poner en marcha la economía y atajar la violencia endémica de raíz.Pero después de una pandemia y una recesión mundial, las tasas de pobreza siguen siendo persistentemente altas, el crecimiento económico es anémico y los homicidios siguen rondando niveles récord.Sin embargo, López Obrador sigue siendo muy popular, ya que más de la mitad de los mexicanos aprueban su gestión, según las encuestas. Su gobierno ha tratado de mejorar la situación de los pobres, al aumentar el salario mínimo cuatro veces e incrementar el gasto en bienestar social.López Obrador también ha ganado puntos con gestos simbólicos, como convertir la residencia presidencial en un museo abierto al público, y volar en avión comercial, incluso al visitar Estados Unidos.Un cartel de apoyo a López Obrador en un autobús.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesSu alta estima entre los votantes es también un tributo, según coinciden partidarios y críticos, a su implacable difusión de una narrativa oficial en la que se presenta como un guerrero solitario del pueblo, que se enfrenta a los grupos corruptos del poder tradicional.“Los resultados han estado por debajo de las expectativas del propio gobierno”, dijo Jorge Zepeda Patterson, un destacado columnista mexicano que ha apoyado al presidente, refiriéndose a los logros de López Obrador durante su mandato.“La polarización es muy rentable políticamente, sobre todo si no tienes resultados”, dijo Zepeda Patterson, y agregó: “Al menos puedes construir la narrativa de que estás luchando”.El principal riesgo de la revocatoria para el presidente es la posibilidad de que grandes sectores del país simplemente ignoren el ejercicio por completo, especialmente porque tiene lugar el Domingo de Ramos. Por ley, para que el voto se convierta en vinculante, al menos 37 millones de mexicanos necesitan participar, significativamente más que el número de personas que votaron por López Obrador en las elecciones de 2018 y que lo llevaron a la presidencia en una victoria contundente.Una manifestación en apoyo a López Obrador, en la capital mexicana el miércolesAlejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesPero López Obrador ya ha identificado un chivo expiatorio en caso de baja participación: el organismo de control electoral del país.Durante meses, el presidente ha atacado al Instituto Nacional Electoral porque considera que ha fracasado al no dedicar suficientes recursos a la publicidad y la gestión del proceso.“Desde el principio debieron promover la consulta, no actuar de manera tramposa, guardando silencio, no difundiendo la consulta para que la gente no se enterara, instalando casillas en lo más apartado”, dijo el presidente en una reciente conferencia de prensa, refiriéndose al instituto electoral. “Pura trampa y luego abiertamente en contra de nosotros, en contra mía”.El instituto pidió al gobierno federal más dinero para supervisar la contienda, con pocos resultados. Con solo aproximadamente la mitad del presupuesto que dijo necesitar, el organismo electoral instaló aproximadamente un tercio de las mesas que colocaría en una elección normal.Partidarios de López Obrador en la manifestación el miércolesAlejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesLorenzo Córdova, el presidente del instituto electoral, conocido por su acrónimo INE, dice que le están tendiendo una trampa para que fracase.“No es solo el presidente”, señaló Córdova, “hay una campaña sistemática y bien organizada para descalificar al INE”. El objetivo, dijo, es “lesionar al árbitro y eventualmente propiciar su captura política”.La Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación ha dicho que los partidos políticos no pueden hacer publicidad de la revocatoria, y, sin embargo, el rostro de López Obrador ha aparecido en carteles en todo el país.Córdova dice que el instituto electoral no ha determinado quién paga por todos los anuncios, pero dijo que hay al menos el doble de ellos en los estados donde el partido del presidente competirá en las elecciones para gobernador en junio.“Hay que sospechar que hay una intencionalidad política”, detrás de la campaña de mercadotecnia, dijo Córdova.La Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación dijo que los partidos políticos no pueden anunciar la revocación y, sin embargo, el rostro de López Obrador ha aparecido en carteles en todo el país.Alejandro Cegarra para The New York TimesHay, por supuesto, beneficios estratégicos que podrían provenir de pedir al país que opine sobre si les gusta o no el presidente en este momento particular. López Obrador fundó su partido político y tiene un interés obvio en hacer todo lo posible para asegurar la victoria en las elecciones generales para reemplazarlo en 2024.Los patrones de votación en la revocatoria de mandato le indicarán al presidente dónde están los puntos débiles de su lado, y cuál de los posibles candidatos a la presidencia es capaz de lograr que la gente acuda a las urnas.“Es una especie de experimento, un ensayo”, dijo Blanca Heredia, profesora del CIDE, un centro de investigación de Ciudad de México. “De cara al 24, para ir midiendo qué capacidad tienen sus operadores para movilizar el voto”.Pase lo que pase el domingo, para muchos en México es difícil ver cómo la primera revocatoria presidencial de la historia del país perjudicará seriamente a este presidente.“Andrés Manuel tiene esa cosa de que hasta cuando pierde, gana”, dijo Heredia. “Siempre tiene una manera de volver la derrota un triunfo”.Oscar Lopez More