US immigration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump vows to expand Muslim ban and bar Gaza refugees if he wins presidency

      by

      Doubling down on the hardline immigration policies that have long animated his base, Donald Trump on Monday vowed to bar refugees from Gaza and immediately expand his first-term Muslim travel ban if he wins a second term following the deadly attack on Israel last week.Speaking to supporters in Iowa, the former president said that if he returns to the Oval Office, he will immediately begin “ideological screening” for all immigrants and bar those who sympathize with Hamas and Muslim extremists. The war between Israel and Hamas has sparked what is now the deadliest of five Gaza wars for both sides, with more than 4,000 dead.Though Trump’s audience in the Horizon Events Center in Clive cheered his proposals, 31-year-old information technology specialist Ritu Bansal said she supported Trump but hoped he would also show compassion for the people of Gaza.“In my opinion the US government should care for the victims of the Hamas attack on Israel and the civilian victims in Gaza,” Bansal said. “The US can care for both.”Trump’s proposals would mark a dramatic expansion of the controversial – and legally dubious – policies that drew alarm from immigrant rights and civil liberties activists, but helped him win the presidency in 2016.Trump has long railed against the US taking immigrants from countries he has called inferior, particularly in Africa and the Middle East, and told the crowd Monday that while he was president the US stood up for Israel and “Judeo-Christian civilization and values”.Trump also continued to paint himself as a martyr for his loyal supporters, railing against the four indictments he is facing along with a narrow gag order that was imposed Monday by the federal judge overseeing the 2020 election interference case against him in Washington. The order, which Trump has pledged to appeal, bars him from making statements targeting prosecutors, possible witnesses and court staff.“I am willing to go to jail if that’s what it takes for our country to become a democracy again,” he said in Clive.Trump pledged to bar the entry of refugees from Gaza fleeing Israel’s retaliatory strikes after the surprise 7 October attack, just as he tried to bar citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries during his first term with an executive order. The executive order, however, was met with fierce opposition and was fought all the way to the US supreme court. The high court eventually upheld a third version of the ban, which included travelers from North Korea and some from Venezuela.Current and former members of communist and totalitarian parties and their sympathizers are already banned from entry into the US. But Trump told about 1,500 people in suburban Des Moines that if he wins a second term, the US would no longer allow what he called “dangerous lunatics, haters, bigots and maniacs to get residency in our country”.“If you empathize with radical Islamic terrorists and extremists, you’re disqualified,” he said. “If you want to abolish the state of Israel, you’re disqualified. If you support Hamas or any ideology that’s having to do with that or any of the other really sick thoughts that go through people’s minds – very dangerous thoughts – you’re disqualified.”The ex-president and 2024 Republican frontrunner also said he would aggressively deport resident aliens with “jihadist sympathies” and send immigration agents to “pro-jihadist demonstrations” to identify violators.“In the wake of the attacks on Israel, Americans have been disgusted to see the open support for terrorists among the legions of foreign nationals on college campuses. They’re teaching your children hate,” he said. “Under the Trump administration, we will revoke the student visas of radical anti-American and antisemitic foreigners at our colleges and universities and we will send them straight back home.” More

    • 163 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s border wall won’t fix a broken immigration system – or deter migrants

      by

      The Biden administration’s plan to erect a new section of border wall is disappointing not only because it contradicts a campaign promise, nor just because physical barriers are a return to the same tired policy responses of the Trump era.Rather, this week’s news around the project – slated for a rural region along the Texas-Mexico border – is upsetting most of all because it stands in stark contrast to the solutions the US immigration system needs right now.Even the highest walls often do not deter desperate migrants and asylum seekers from trying to reach the US. That was true during the previous administration, and it remains true today. Instead, those barriers leave people who cross anyway at higher risk of injury and death, contributing to a growing list of casualties that has turned the US-Mexico border into the world’s most lethal land migration route.Already, blowback to renewed border wall construction has been swift and intense. Representative Henry Cuellar, Biden’s fellow Democrat whose large south Texas district includes the county with the new planned barriers, called it “a 14th-century solution to a 21st-century problem”. To conservation advocates, it means bulldozing “irreplaceable” habitats. Some of the local communities say it feels like “a slap in the face” that will “punish the most innocent”.And, for national immigration advocates, it is yet another letdown that demonstrates a disregard for human dignity within a larger broken immigration system.Given the absence of legislative reforms, and given pressure on the Biden administration to reduce irregular migration, the US-Mexico border is chaotic these days, though not necessarily in the way most Americans think.In the name of deterrence, people fleeing for their lives who might otherwise qualify for asylum are being presumed ineligible because of how they arrived, under a policy that has already been ruled unlawful yet remains in place. Many thousands of non-Mexicans are suddenly being sent back across the border to Mexico, a foreign country where they likely have next to no support or contacts, and where they face grave danger of sexual assault, kidnappings, extortion and other violence.In light of a humanitarian emergency and political repression in Venezuela, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has allowed Venezuelans who made it here by the end of July to access deportation protections and work authorization. Yet Venezuelans arriving today can be directly deported to the same authoritarian regime where US officials explicitly acknowledged a few weeks ago that people could not safely return.Similarly, the Biden administration continues to repatriate Haitians, even as it tells Americans and non-emergency government personnel to depart Haiti for security reasons.Meanwhile, DHS has removed or returned over 36,000 migrant family members in the last few months – more than in any previous full fiscal year. The unluckiest of asylum seekers, families included, are being put through particularly fast-tracked deportations, where they often confront a higher bar to qualify for protection and have almost no time to prepare their case.This tangle of convoluted policies demonstrates why more walls are not the answer that the US’s immigration policy strategy needs: it’s already a labyrinth. Barrier after barrier – some more visible than others, but all formidable – work together to confuse, limit and disqualify people trying to reach the US.Even so, the restrictions have not stopped newcomers.Border patrol documented over 181,000 migrant encounters between official ports of entry at the US-Mexico border in August. That number is expected to rise in September, with early estimates showing roughly 210,000 apprehensions last month, according to CBS News.To try to get here, little girls cry as they crawl beneath razor wire, and in some of the most tragic cases, kids are dying. Amid this humanitarian emergency, a sprawling border wall – to use Biden’s own words – “is not a serious policy solution”. Neither is the House GOP’s sweeping but specious legislative proposal, the Secure the Border Act, which continues to take an enforcement-only approach to immigration by gutting asylum, curtailing other existing lawful pathways, establishing new criminal penalties, and more.There’s so much work Democrats and Republicans – the White House and Congress – should take up. For one, the Biden administration could expand processing capacity at official ports of entry and let more migrants in there, even if they don’t have a pre-scheduled appointment through a government phone app, and without rendering them ineligible for asylum. That way, children and families could walk across an international pedestrian bridge with far less struggle than they can wade through a river or stumble through the desert.Ultimately, however, the buck stops with Congress. The best, most proactive way to keep many people from showing up at the US-Mexico border is to offer them a safer, more orderly pathway here, but such immigration avenues are in woefully short supply right now.It will take both parties working together in good faith to address border security and improve the legal immigration system, a compromise supported by the vast majority of American voters. Lawmakers can expand labor pathways, update the US’s humanitarian protections to meet 21st-century challenges, and offer permanent solutions for people who are already here contributing while stuck in a protracted legal limbo.In other words, they can fight arbitrary cruelty and chaos at the border by making our immigration system work again.
      Alexandra Villarreal is a policy and advocacy associate at the National Immigration Forum. More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Why is Joe Biden campaigning for Donald Trump? | Moustafa Bayoumi

      by

      The question sounds ludicrous, but how else would you characterize Biden’s latest pronouncement to build 20 new miles of Trump’s border wall along the southern border? This is like throwing red meat to Trump’s base, who will chomp and salivate over what they will portray as an admission of defeat by the Democrats on securing the border.And why wouldn’t they? Back when he was campaigning for president, Joe Biden promised “not another foot” of Trump’s border wall would be built. He halted construction of the wall on his first day in office with a proclamation stating that “building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution. It is a waste of money that diverts attention from genuine threats to our homeland security.”Now, the government is poised to spend nearly $200m on 20 miles of border wall in the Rio Grande Valley. The administration says it has been forced into this situation because Congress appropriated $1.375bn for such border barriers in 2019, and the funds that remain must be disbursed by the end of the fiscal year. But Democrats had control over Congress for the first two years of the Biden administration. They could have reallocated those funds. Instead, this Democratic administration is now sounding very Trump-like. “There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries,” reads the notice in the Federal Register.This is a political failure by the Democrats on one of the most important issues of the looming 2024 election. And it’s a massive policy failure as well.For one thing, the border wall – what Trump called the “Rolls-Royce” of barriers – doesn’t even work. According to the Washington Post, the US Customs and Border Protection’s own records show that the wall has been breached more than 3,000 times, as it is easily hacked open by common power tools. And you know what else can breach a 30ft wall? A ladder. Smugglers also routinely hoist people over the wall and lower them down the other side with ropes. The Democratic Texas congressman Henry Cuellar was right when he said: “A border wall is a 14th-century solution to a 21st-century problem.”This newly announced policy by the Biden administration promises to be a devastating environmental failure as well. Why, exactly, has the administration waived 26 federal laws that include protections for the environment, clean air, safe drinking water and endangered species when building this policy failure? Who forced them to adopt that position? The ability to waive these protections, called the Secure Fence Act, was passed by Congress in 2006, but Biden will be the first Democratic president to use the law. And the effects could be unrecoverable.Starr county, Texas, the area designated for the new wall, is part of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Refuge, home to endangered ocelots and at least two types of endangered plants, the Zapata bladderpod and prostrate milkweed. And while the steel barriers of the wall may be permeable to human smugglers, larger mammals will have their migration routes blocked by the barrier.Laiken Jordahl, south-west conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity, stated that this new wall construction “will stop wildlife migrations dead in their tracks. It will destroy a huge amount of wildlife refuge land. And it’s a horrific step backwards for the borderlands.” Just last month, the US Government Accountability Office released a report detailing legions of harmful effects of the existing wall, from destruction of Indigenous burial grounds to damage to endangered wildlife and much more.This terrible new wall also represents a humanitarian failure from this administration. No serious person disputes that the numbers of people seeking refuge at the border is immense and that solving this issue constitutes a significant challenge to the government. But if we want to consider ourselves as a fair, just and humane society, the solution to this issue must also be fair, just and humane. What most people don’t realize is that so much of our larger border policy – including border walls, fast-track deportation flights, private immigration jails, keeping most asylum seekers from working and more – often enables smuggling and abuse more than curtails it.Greater attention must be paid to addressing root causes of human migration. Venezuelans now account for the second largest nationality group (after Mexicans) to cross the southern border, but rather than lifting punitive economic sanctions that the US has imposed on Venezuela since 2006, the administration has instead announced that it will resume deportation flights to Venezuela. But lifting sanctions would clearly help alleviate at least one important reason for migration while quickly deporting people, at best, merely treats a symptom.The Biden administration cannot have it both ways. It can’t be against the wall while arguing for its construction at the same time. This is not just bad policy. It’s bad politics, needlessly self-destructive at a time when the Republicans are willfully self-destructive. Such a policy certainly won’t win them more votes or get them re-elected. Rather, it’s like the Democrats are feeding their own flesh to Trump and his supporters, and asking us to watch the feast, proving that sometimes we truly are our own worst enemies.
      Moustafa Bayoumi is the author of the award-winning books How Does It Feel To Be a Problem?: Being Young and Arab in America and This Muslim American Life: Dispatches from the War on Terror. He is professor of English at Brooklyn College, City University of New York. He is a contributing opinion writer at Guardian US More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden criticized for waiving 26 laws in Texas to allow border wall construction

      by

      Joe Biden faced intense criticism from environmental advocates, political opponents and his fellow Democrats after the president’s administration waived 26 federal laws to allow border wall construction in south Texas, its first use of a sweeping executive power that was often employed under Donald Trump.“A border wall is a 14th-century solution to a 21st-century problem,” the Democratic Texas congressman Henry Cuellar said. “It will not bolster border security in Starr county.“I continue to stand against the wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars on an ineffective border wall.”Environmental advocates said the new wall would run through public lands, habitats of endangered plants and species such as the ocelot, a spotted wild cat.“A plan to build a wall will bulldoze an impermeable barrier straight through the heart of that habitat,” said Laiken Jordahl, a south-west conservation advocate for the Center for Biological Diversity.“It will stop wildlife migrations dead in their tracks. It will destroy a huge amount of wildlife refuge land. And it’s a horrific step backwards for the borderlands.”During the Trump presidency, about 450 miles of barriers were built along the south-west border. The Biden administration halted such efforts, though the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, resumed them.A federal proclamation issued on 20 January 2021 said: “Building a massive wall that spans the entire southern border is not a serious policy solution.”On Wednesday, border officials claimed the new project was consistent with that proclamation.“Congress appropriated fiscal year 2019 funds for the construction of border barrier in the Rio Grande Valley, and [homeland security] is required to use those funds for their appropriated purpose,” a statement said.The statement also said officials were “committed to protecting the nation’s cultural and natural resources and will implement sound environmental practices as part of the project covered by this waiver”.Observers were not convinced. Referring to a famous (and much-mocked) Trump campaign promise, Matt Stoller, research director at the American Economic Liberties Project, said: “Well Mexico didn’t pay for the wall, but Biden did.”Pointing to a campaign promise by Biden – “There will not be another foot of wall constructed in my administration” – Jason Miller, a senior Trump adviser, said: “Biden’s flip-flop here is not only a validation of President Trump’s border and immigration policies, but also a validation of President Trump’s entire 2024 America First campaign!”Polling shows Trump leads Biden when voters are asked who would handle border security better.On Wednesday, homeland security officials posted the announcement on the US federal registry. Few details were provided about construction in Starr county, Texas, which is part of a busy border patrol sector currently seeing “high illegal entry” by undocumented migrants via Central and South America.According to government data, about 245,000 such entries have been recorded this fiscal year in the Rio Grande Valley sector.“There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States in the project areas,” the homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, said in the federal registry notice.The Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act and Endangered Species Act were among federal laws waived to make way for construction. The waivers avoid reviews and lawsuits challenging violation of environmental laws.Starr county, between Zapata, Mexico, and McAllen, Texas, is home to about 65,000 people in 1,200 sq miles, part of the Lower Rio Grande Valley National Wildlife Refuge.Federal officials announced the project in June and began gathering public comments in August, sharing a map of construction that could add up to 20 miles to existing border barriers. The Starr county judge, Eloy Vera, said the new wall would start south of the Falcon Dam and go past Salineño, Texas.“The other concern that we have is that area is highly erosive,” the county judge said, pointing to creeks cutting through ranchland. “There’s a lot of arroyos.”The Associated Press contributed reporting More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Chicago police investigated over alleged sexual misconduct with asylum seekers

      by

      The Chicago police department is under investigation for allegations of sexual misconduct with recently arrived asylum seekers who are living in several police precincts across the city.One case features an officer who allegedly impregnated an 18-year-old.The investigation follows a report that a police officer had “sexual contact with an unidentified underage female migrant, and indicated [that] several other unidentified officers … may also have engaged in similar misconduct”, Andrea Kersten, chief administrator of civilian office of police accountability (Copa), the city agency that investigates police misconduct, said at a summer press conference.Chicago has received 14,000 asylum seekers since August 2022. More than 7,000 are currently being accommodated in citywide shelters but almost 2,000 are living on the floors of police precincts in almost every law enforcement district of the city.People are also sleeping rough at Chicago’s O’Hare and Midway airports, and more arrive daily, some bussed there by Texas authorities who refused to liaise with the Democratic-led cities where they dispatch people who have crossed the US-Mexico border and have applied for asylum.Investigations are ongoing and began in July after claims from a city employee working at one police precinct prompted city officials to quickly move asylum seekers to another location, but then things got murky when Copa announced that officials had not identified any asylum seekers claiming to be victims of sexual misconduct by police officers. The agency said the investigation would continue and, since then, there have been no public updates.The Guardian requested comment from the mayor’s office and Copa but received no response.The Illinois Democratic congressman Jesús “Chuy” Garcia, who has joined calls for the Biden administration to expand work permits and provide more federal resources, said in a statement: “Our migrant neighbors came to Chicago seeking safety and stability. Police officers are sworn to protect our communities, not engage in illegal sexual conduct with teenagers and others in their care. This alleged behavior is completely unacceptable. I expect the city’s investigation to be timely, thorough, transparent, and lead to accountability for all who are found guilty.”As Chicago has struggled to quickly find temporary housing for thousands, asylum seekers have been obliged to bed down in police precinct lobbies, where reports vary from station to station on the quality of living conditions and what reception families have had from the cops working there.One single mother, Nelli Reina, arrived in Chicago from Colombia in early September, after being bussed from the southern border with her 14-month-old-son.“More than anything, I’m worried about the cold, because we sleep on the cold floor,” she told the Guardian in Spanish last week at precinct 12 on the Near West Side, while she waits for a shelter place.At many precincts, bedding and belongings are stacked up by the windows during the day to clear walkways, and often piled outside.As winter beckons, the new mayor, Brandon Johnson, a progressive, had talked about about erecting heated tents and shortly after that signed a $29m contract with a private security firm to install them, particularly for asylum seekers staying at police precincts and the airports, Crain’s Chicago Business and the Chicago Tribune reported.The company, GardaWorld Federal Services, already has a state contract with Illinois but is a highly controversial choice because of its role in heavily criticized migrant detention and relocations programs in other states, the Tribune further reported.Reina said: “I don’t know how much longer I’ll be here. It’s the first time I’m in this country and I don’t know the matter of the cold and all that, of the snow. So we are praying and asking God to get us out of here soon.”As she spoke, she and others opened up a trash bag filled with children’s clothes that a community volunteer had just dropped off.Reina told the Guardian that just a few days ago, her son ended up at the hospital.“He hadn’t eaten and he started to asphyxiate and cough a lot,” she said. “When we arrived at the hospital, they put him on a machine for asphyxiation, and they put me outside for dehydration.” Reina is diabetic and her blood sugar levels frequently drop due to lack of proper nutrition. She has been asking city employees if she can be transferred to a shelter, where she thought at least her son would have a warm bed to sleep in and could eat better, she said.Chicago’s response to the increase in arriving migrants is shared by various city departments and partner organizations, the office of emergency management said. The office did not give details about how and why migrants end up at police precincts and what protocols and procedures are in place.Diana Alpizar, director of career pathways at the Instituto del Progreso Latino, a non-profit organization in Chicago that provides education opportunities to immigrants, has been coordinating volunteer efforts at one police station, with some city funding.She was sorting socks, towels, diapers and other basics at her office for newly arrived families, which she put in bags ready for distribution.For asylum seekers staying at the precinct, Alpizar said: “The rule is to stay outside after 10am while the inside is cleaned and disinfected and people can come back inside when it’s time for bed.”In her opinion, the staff is “indifferent” and not “sympathizing”, she said. Police officers declined to talk to the Guardian.Precinct 12 is currently housing 10 to 15 families. There is one bathroom with a single toilet, sink and mirror, which the migrants are not supposed to use. Some started going to a splash pad for kids in a nearby public park to clean themselves, but Maria Bolivar, another woman sleeping at the precinct, said that the water playground was then closed and she believes the water supply was “locked” to stop migrants using it. Bolivar came to the US with her children aged nine and 11 from Venezuela.She said she fills up cups with water to pour on herself and her children to clean them. Then she dries off with a towel and said she also dries the floor and cleans thoroughly so that the staff doesn’t notice any mess.Another Venezuelan, Yannis Soto, said: “We are in a place that we have to keep clean so that people don’t speak ill of us.”A volunteer at another precinct said the asylum seekers she helps are desperate to work and fend for themselves while their applications go through the legal system, and one told her she meticulously cleans the police bathroom to “make sure it’s neat so they don’t close the doors on us”.On Wednesday, the Biden administration, under pressure from some senior Democrats in Washington, state governors and city mayors, said it would grant temporary legal status to hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan asylum seekers already in the US, quickly making them eligible to work.A local church provides food most days. City shelters, meanwhile, provide three meals a day, and Alpizar said the situation is more stable as asylum seekers are connected to a case manager to assist them with their immigration applications, and also to social services and possible housing.But people have reported problems at shelters too, however, including two women who told local news outlet Block Club Chicago that they were not given enough food and some of it was moldy. They also reported cold showers and strict rules preventing volunteers bringing supplies to them.Alpizar said that once at a shelter, asylum seekers begin working with a case manager who takes on their immigration cases. But not everyone will qualify for asylum. Some get permission to stay and work, some will get deported or end up living a precarious, undocumented life. “They get lost in the shadows,” she said.Meanwhile, Reina received blankets for her son and clothes from the volunteers. She’s waiting for news about a shelter. “They took my name down and gave me and my baby a number: 214. I don’t really know what my luck will be,” she said. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Dreamers face fresh blow in long fight to stay: ‘They view us as second class’

      by

      The Texas federal judge Andrew Hanen found the revised Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program (Daca) policy, which shields thousands of immigrants brought to the US as children, illegal last week – after a five-year legal battle about the program’s existence that has left many Daca recipients in limbo about their future in America.For one educator and activist, Alondra Garcia, the ruling is another blow in the long fight for a permanent solution for many like her to be seen in the country they have called home for years.“My reaction [to the ruling] is one I have felt since the first attacks on Daca,” Garcia, a Daca and U-visa recipient who has lived in the US for more than two decades, said. “Fear, uncertainty, sadness, anger – a mix of emotions.”Since she was three, Garcia has only known America – Milwaukee, Wisconsin, specifically.In October 1999, along with her mother and younger sister, she arrived from Morelia, Mexico, on a temporary visiting visa and never returned, putting them in an illegal status. Thirteen years later, on 15 June 2012, executive actions by the then president, Barack Obama, provided deportation relief for undocumented immigrants who came illegally to America as children through Daca. Garcia applied for and received the status two years later, in 2014.That law has since granted relief to more than 600,000 undocumented young adults. It has allowed them to live fuller, richer lives where they can rent or buy homes, work and attend school. Some have become more active in their communities, more productive at work, and better educated, while others have tried to enlist in the nation’s military.“We belong here and need more recognition,” Garcia said, adding that though the status had made it possible for many like her to “belong”, there was more work to be done because the Daca bill remains embattled with political maneuvering.Hanen wrote in his ruling: “While sympathetic to the predicament of Daca recipients and their families, this court has expressed its concerns about the legality of the program for some time … The executive branch cannot usurp the power bestowed on Congress by the constitution – even to fill a void.”In response, the Biden administration said in a statement that it was “deeply disappointed”.“Hundreds of thousands of Daca recipients have been able to live and work lawfully in our country without fear of deportation,” the statement said. “We have long maintained, we disagree with the district court’s conclusion that Daca is unlawful, and will continue to defend this critical policy from legal challenges.”Hanen’s decision allows for existing Dreamers, as Daca recipients are interchangeably called, to keep and renew their status. However, no new applications are permitted.“Dreamers continue facing legal battles because of politicians who don’t see the contributions we make in society,” Garcia said. “They view us as second class. They continue to use Dreamers as a scapegoat to defer attention from the real issue; that the immigration system is broken. Politicians, specifically Republicans, do not want to invest time and money on comprehensive immigration reform because that would mean their chance of staying in office would be jeopardized.”Kica Matos, the president of the National Immigration Law Center, agreed that though the policy had been transformative, Daca recipients and immigrant youth were still treated as a “political football … forcing them to endure excruciating uncertainty”.While acknowledging that the case “will almost certainly be appealed to the fifth circuit and potentially to the US supreme court,” Matos called for an end to the government’s reluctance to recognize Dreamers and a bipartisan permanent legislative solution.Congress has the power to provide such remedies to recipients, but “its repeated failure to do so comes down to political will”, she said. “In poll after poll, Americans across the political spectrum overwhelmingly support a pathway to citizenship for immigrant youth. And yet, a loud minority has repeatedly derailed good-faith efforts to get it done so they can keep leverage and advance an extremist agenda. That comes at great cost to all of us.”That cost can be seen in America’s economy.For example, in Garcia’s home state of Wisconsin – residence for more than 70,000 undocumented people, of which 8,000 are Daca recipients – Dreamers play a vital role in the state’s economy. Like any other citizen they pay taxes – $48m in local, state and federal deductions. Their contribution is so considerable that the state would lose $427m in GDP annually without them.One of the first things Garcia did in 2014 when she was granted Daca status was get her work permit. She said it made her feel like her “American friends” and “allowed me to work and start saving up for college”.Mo Kantner, American Immigration Council’s senior director of policy and research, told the Guardian: “Daca recipients have been contributing to the US economy for years, filling workforce shortages and starting businesses.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“In 2019 alone, the Daca-eligible population earned $26.4bn and paid $5.8bn in federal, state and local taxes,” she said. “There are over 46,000 Daca-eligible entrepreneurs innovating our industries and creating even more local jobs. A solution for Dreamers will strengthen both our community and our economy.”The president and CEO of the National Immigration Forum, Jennie Murray, added that Dreamers were “deeply rooted members of our communities – at our churches, our workplaces and our schools.“Nearly 1 million Dreamers have been standing shoulder-to-shoulder with native-born Americans and working in essential industries aiding in the response to and recovery from Covid-19,” she said. “Daca recipients have been able to work legally in the US since 2012. In the midst of labor shortages in key industries, we can’t afford to risk losing hundreds of thousands of legal workers.”Advocates like Murray, Kantner and Matos, who have long touted the benefits for “Dacamented” immigrants, also acknowledge some of the limitations this demographic faces.Dreamers, who notably have much narrower higher education and employment options, account for more than 400,000 of the student population at higher education institutions. In some states, they bear a financial burden substantially higher for them than other students.Wisconsin, for example, is one of five states in America that prohibits Daca recipients from receiving in-state tuition and financial aid – all because they lack a social security number.“I didn’t know that to go to college, you need a social security to apply for Fafsa [Free Application for Federal Student Aid],” Garcia said. And though some schools offer privately financed scholarship funds for Dreamers, “the system”, the 26-year-old said, continues to deny thousands of students access to financial resources for an affordable college education solely based on their immigration status.This was a setback for Garcia when it was time to apply to college.After months of dead-end research with some of her top college choices – some out of state – not accepting of or providing aid for Daca recipients, she decided on Cardinal Stritch University, a private college in northern Wisconsin. Not being able to qualify for any financial aid to foot the $33,000 yearly tuition, Garcia said she worked three part-time jobs “on top of studying, doing homework and being a [financial] support system to my family, because my sister was going to college too. So it was, like, a lot of pressure.”This was a similar undertaking her father underwent to keep a roof over their heads, “working three jobs and still making sure to take us to school [when we were in grade school]”, she recalled. “Education is everything to him.”Since graduating in 2019, Garcia has been a second-grade bilingual teacher.Being a Daca recipient “has taught me that no matter what your status is, you can make something out of it”, Garcia said. “It was hard to navigate higher education opportunities … yet, I made it happen because no matter how limited you are, you can get around it.”Now on the frontlines of the Dreamer movement, Garcia has regularly organized grassroots events with the immigrant advocacy group Wisconsin’s Voces de la Frontera/Voces de la Frontera Action. And despite the many setbacks in the fight for a permanent solution for Dreamers and immigrant youths, Garcia’s focus remains unwavering.“[My family] is as American as any other family,” she said before adding how “limited” this legal challenge has made her feel. “It’s something that I can’t change – just myself. This has to come from the community being vocal and the people we vote into office.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      US federal judge rules revised Daca policy illegal and halts new applications

      by

      A federal judge on Wednesday declared illegal a revised version of a federal policy that prevents the deportation of hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the US as children.US district judge Andrew Hanen agreed with Texas and eight other states suing to stop the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca) program. The judge’s ruling was ultimately expected to be appealed to the US supreme court, sending the program’s fate before the high court for a third time.“While sympathetic to the predicament of DACA recipients and their families, this Court has expressed its concerns about the legality of the program for some time,” Hanen wrote in his 40-page ruling. “The solution for these deficiencies lies with the legislature, not the executive or judicial branches. Congress, for any number of reasons, has decided not to pass DACA-like legislation … The Executive Branch cannot usurp the power bestowed on Congress by the Constitution – even to fill a void.”Hanen barred the government from approving any new applications, but left the program intact for existing recipients during the expected appeals process. Hanen said his order does not require the federal government to take any actions against Daca recipients.Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which is representing Daca recipients in the lawsuit, said it will ultimately be up to higher courts, including the supreme court, to rule on Daca’s legality and whether Texas proved it had been harmed by the program.“Judge Hanen has consistently erred in resolving both of these issues, and today’s ruling is more of the same flawed analysis. We look forward to continuing to defend the lawful and much-needed Daca program on review in higher courts,” Saenz said.The Texas attorney general’s office, which represented the states in the lawsuit, and the US Department of Justice, which represented the federal government, didn’t immediately return emails or calls seeking comment.The states have argued the Obama administration didn’t have the authority to first create the program in 2012 because it circumvented Congress.In 2021, Hanen had declared the program illegal, ruling it had not been subject to public notice and comment periods required under the federal Administrative Procedures Act.The Biden administration tried to satisfy Hanen’s concerns with a new version of Daca that took effect in October 2022 and was subject to public comments as part of a formal rule-making process.But Hanen, who was appointed by then-President George W Bush in 2002, ruled the updated version of Daca was still illegal. He had previously said Daca was unconstitutional and it would be up to Congress to enact legislation shielding people under the program, often known as “Dreamers”.Hanen also had previously ruled the states had standing to file their lawsuit because they had been harmed by the program.The states have claimed they incur hundreds of millions of dollars in health care, education and other costs when immigrants are allowed to remain in the country illegally. The states that sued are Texas, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas and Mississippi.Those defending the program – the federal government, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the state of New Jersey – had argued the states failed to present evidence that any of the costs they allege they have incurred have been tied to Daca recipients. They also argued Congress has given the Department of Homeland Security the legal authority to set immigration enforcement policies.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionDespite previously declaring the Daca program illegal, Hanen had left the Obama-era program intact for those already benefiting from it. But he had ruled there could be no new applicants while appeals were pending.There were 578,680 people enrolled in Daca at the end of March, according to US Citizenship and Immigration Services.The program has faced a roller coaster of court challenges over the years.In 2016, the supreme court deadlocked 4-4 over an expanded Daca and a version of the program for parents of Daca recipients. In 2020, the high court ruled 5-4 that the Trump administration improperly ended Daca, allowing it to stay in place.In 2022, the 5th US circuit court of appeals in New Orleans upheld Hanen’s earlier ruling declaring Daca illegal, but sent the case back to him to review changes made to the program by the Biden administration.President Joe Biden and advocacy groups have called on Congress to pass permanent protections for “dreamers”. Congress has failed multiple times to pass proposals called the Dream Act to protect Daca recipients. More

    • 200 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      From abortion to January 6: where each Republican candidate in the debate stands on big issues

      by

      Republicans vying for the 2024 party nomination are set to take the stage in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on Wednesday night for the first debate of the primary season.The candidates will certainly throw punches at each other and at Donald Trump, who has a significant lead in polls but is skipping the debate. But it’s also a chance for each candidate to present their policy agenda and voice their stance on key voter issues such as abortion and aid to Ukraine.Here’s where each candidate in Wednesday’s debate stands on issues such as abortion, immigration, the economy and continued aid to Ukraine.Ron DeSantisAbortion: DeSantis has supported bills restricting access to abortion – including a six-week ban in his own state of Florida – but has stopped short of saying he would support a federal ban.Economy: In a recently released economic plan, DeSantis said he would cut individual taxes and slash government spending. He also pushed for “American energy independence” and a rollback of electric vehicles.Immigration: As governor, DeSantis has enacted some of the country’s strictest laws against undocumented immigrants, including asking hospital patients to prove their legal status. He also made the controversial move to use public funds to send newly arrived migrants to Martha’s Vineyard in a political stunt. As president, he said he would eliminate the visa lottery and limit “unskilled immigration”.Foreign policy: He opposes additional US involvement in Ukraine and has pledged to reduce economic ties with “communist China” and said the US would no longer “kowtow to Wall Street”.January 6: DeSantis said it was “unfortunate” but “not an insurrection”.More: The current governor of Florida and a former congressman was widely expected to be Trump’s main primary challenger. But his favorability among Republicans has taken many hits, starting with a glitchy Twitter Spaces event hosted by Elon Musk. He has frequently touted his opposition to gender-affirming care for trans people and other public health measures such as mask mandates.Vivek RamaswamyAbortion: Ramaswamy told a crowd at the Iowa State Fair he is “unapologetically pro-life”. But his campaign earlier confirmed he would not back a national abortion ban.Economy: The biotech entrepreneur wants to “unshackle” the energy sector, saying the US should abandon its climate goals to drive down energy costs and boost its GDP. He is also in favor of some corporate and individual tax cuts.Immigration: Ramaswamy said he wants to deport “universally” and end birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants, who would then be required to apply to become a citizen.Foreign policy: Ramaswamy has criticized US aid to Ukraine, saying it is strengthening Russia’s alliance with China.January 6: Ramaswamy condemned Trump the week after the January 6 attack but has walked back his criticism since then. Responding to a question for an Atlantic profile about what truly happened that day, Ramaswamy said: “I don’t know.” He has defended ex-president Trump across his four indictments.More: Time magazine labeled Ramaswamy a “breakout candidate”. The political outsider has steadily climbed the polls since launching his long-shot bid as an “anti-woke” patriot.Tim ScottAbortion: Scott, an evangelical Christian, is staunchly anti-abortion and said he would support a national 15-week ban.Economy: Scott supports tax cuts and stronger economic competition with China. As a senator, Scott championed legislation establishing “opportunity zones”, which are meant to increase economic development in low-income areas by incentivizing private investment, though critics say residents may not benefit from gentrification.Immigration: He is in favor of a wall along the US southern border to curb illegal migration and drug trafficking.Foreign policy: He broadly supports continued US aid to Ukraine and said Biden has not done enough. But some conservatives think he’s soft on China.January 6: Scott said he doesn’t believe the 2020 election was stolen and does not blame Trump for the violence at the Capitol.More: The South Carolina senator, who is the only Black Republican in the Senate, is an outspoken critic when it comes to teaching kids about race and gender in schools and has said: “America is not a racist country.”Nikki HaleyAbortion: The only woman on the debate stage, Haley is anti-abortion but has also called a federal abortion ban “unrealistic”.Economy: Haley wrote in an op-ed that she opposes raising the national debt limit and would “veto spending bills that don’t put America on track to reach pre-pandemic spending levels”.Foreign policy: The former US ambassador to the United Nations under Trump, Haley has labeled the Chinese Communist party an “enemy” and criticized Trump for trying to befriend the Chinese president, Xi Jinping.Immigration: Haley has vowed to tighten security at the US-Mexico border and add 25,000 patrol agents, as well as require companies to verify employees’ status online – which she signed into law in South Carolina as governor.January 6: Haley has called January 6 a “terrible day” and said Trump “went down a path that he shouldn’t have” in an interview with Politico.Chris ChristieAbortion: He has said he would not support a federal abortion ban.Economy: The former New Jersey governor has targeted “excessive government spending” as the reason for inflation and floated cuts to social security, including Medicare.Foreign policy: Christie, who has aligned himself with the hawkish, tough-on-China-and-Russia camp, visited the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in a surprise trip earlier this month to affirm his support for continued US aid.Immigration: Christie said “immigrants are pouring over the border” in an attack against Trump’s campaign promise to build a border wall.January 6: Christie, who was in the running to be Trump’s VP after dropping out of the 2016 presidential race, is now Trump’s loudest critic. He broke with Trump over the January 6 Capitol attack, calling Trump a “coward” for not joining rioters.Mike PenceAbortion: The former vice-president, an evangelical Christian, is the loudest anti-abortion candidate and has condemned his opponents for refusing to back a six-week abortion ban.Economy: Pence has said his top priority is boosting the US economy and has called on the Fed to ditch its dual mandate – keeping employment high and inflation low – to focus solely on reducing inflation. He has also advocated for cutting social security benefits.Foreign policy: Pence has advocated for continued US aid to Ukraine and met with Volodymyr Zelenskiy during a surprise visit in June.Immigration: He has blasted the Biden administration’s immigration policy, describing a “stampede” from Central and South America, and has vowed to finish the border wall that began under Trump.January 6: Pence has campaigned heavily on his refusal to aid Trump in his effort to stop the certification of electoral results and has repeatedly condemned his ex-boss for his role in the Capitol attack.Doug BurgumAbortion: Burgum signed a law banning nearly all abortions in North Dakota but said he would not support a national ban.Economy: The governor of North Dakota, who is also a wealthy businessman, has touted North Dakota’s record as an energy-producing state and said he would prioritize growing the country’s tech and energy sectors.Foreign policy: Winning the “cold war with China” is a key pillar of Burgum’s message to voters.Immigration: Burgum said Biden hasn’t done enough to secure the US-southern border and supports stricter restrictions on migration.January 6: Burgum called for a stop to the violence at the Capitol on January 6 but said he thinks it’s time to “move on”.Asa HutchinsonAbortion: As governor of Arkansas, Hutchinson signed a near-total abortion ban and said he would support a national ban.Economy: He has floated extreme measures to balance the federal budget and reduce debt including cutting the federal non-military workforce by 10%.Immigration: Hutchinson supports harsh restrictions on immigration.Foreign policy: He said he would not cut economic ties with China but has advocated for more aggressive action to counter China’s threat against Taiwan. Politico describes Hutchinson’s foreign policy as a “compassionate internationalism” of the past.January 6: He said January 6 “disqualifies” Trump from running for president. More