LaxPower Back-Up Stick

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 5:03 pm
Here's a couple good explainers on the asylum loopholes :
https://www.heritage.org/immigration/re ... ern-border
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/a-borde ... mmigration

There’s a lot in the article that is accurate, and helpful to understanding the problem, but the pieces that are wrong in the article are most critical. Most important:

The standard for asylum (or refugee) status is that you have a well-founded fear of your home government not protecting you because of your religion, political views and so forth - as the article says. But one of the “so forths” is your membership in a “particular social group.” That is not something Obama invented. It’s in the Geneva Protocol on Refugees, a treaty we are a signatory to. We are obligated to to consider what defines a “particular social group” as the world changes. During the Bush administration it was determined, for example, that being a gay man from a country where the government allows violence against gays qualified as membership in a “particular social group.” The veiled reference to the Obama administration is that judges decided cases (judges! not the president…) during the Obama administration (cases brought much earlier but were ultimately decided early in the Obama presidency) that if individuals were fleeing domestic violence or gang violence in countries where the government refused to protect individuals might qualify for asylum. This is what the law requires. Jeff Sessions tried to issue a decision to stop the possibility of these people qualifying for asylum.

And the article gives short shrift to some key points, like frivolous asylum claims and the wall:

• I recently was able to look at some backlog data for USCIS generally (including but not limited to asylum) and it _is_ true that a shocking percentage of the backlog is just people putting forward a case in the hope of getting a work permit until they wait a couple of years for a denial. When USCIS moves to a LIFO plan (Last In First Out) for adjudications, the backlog reduces by 20% and sometimes 30% because less people file. Terrible - argh.

• But, as the article says, building a wall won’t solve this problem. The article implies theoretically the wall would help a bit - but it would not.

The bottom line is actual asylum reform is needed. Not executive orders or announcements by the president of new ultimatums or bars for entry to the country or a new unilateral policy (like sending Central American refugees back to Mexico to wait there).

Also, fun fact: The Obama administration had a similar (but not quite as large) surge in asylum applications in 2014-2015 and it tried to detain families indefinitely and was told by the court it could not, so the Obama administration piloted a new “catch and release” program where all adults released had ankle bracelets and had a case manager who checked up on them. Over 90% showed up for their asylum hearings in immigration court and of those denied asylum over 90% departed voluntarily. Not only was there a high compliance rate but the cost was pennies on the dollar compared to detention (which any way was outlawed by the courts, saying you cannot detain children longer than 20 days, whether with a parent or not).

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:09 pmWhat they can do is have ICE track down & start deporting asylum seekers who failed to make their court date. Declare it a national emergency & federalize the National Guard to assist ICE in this process. That would be within the law. Is that what it's going to take ?

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:30 pm ^^^ ??? source/link for quotes ?

Growth industry : 53k family units/mo ; 3 year wait time for adjudication.

That's a lot of ankle monitors & case managers to track them, for a long time.

Document/source of the 90% of 90% claim for Obama family units.

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:30 pm ^^^ ??? source/link for quotes ?

Growth industry : 53k family units/mo ; 3 year wait time for adjudication.

That's a lot of ankle monitors & case managers to track them, for a long time.

Document/source of the 90% of 90% claim for Obama family units.

CU77 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:42 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:09 pmWhat they can do is have ICE track down & start deporting asylum seekers who failed to make their court date. Declare it a national emergency & federalize the National Guard to assist ICE in this process. That would be within the law. Is that what it's going to take ?

So why doesn't Trump do it?

Why doesn't Trump turn on e-verify?

Why does Trump declare an emergency to build the wall, when the wall will not help nearly as much as the two items above?

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:07 pm

CU77 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:42 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:09 pmWhat they can do is have ICE track down & start deporting asylum seekers who failed to make their court date. Declare it a national emergency & federalize the National Guard to assist ICE in this process. That would be within the law. Is that what it's going to take ?

So why doesn't Trump do it?

Why doesn't Trump turn on e-verify?

Why does Trump declare an emergency to build the wall, when the wall will not help nearly as much as the two items above?

Can Trump just "turn on" E verify ? No legislation required ? “E-Verify today is largely a volunteer system where employers can check the employment status of workers after they have hired them as part of the I-9 process,” Calabrese told the NewsHour. “It’s mandatory for federal contractors and in some states, and it’s also mandatory for most government workers.”

E-verify is going to be very disruptive to the economy & can't be introduced alone. It has to be part of comp imm reform that offers some form of amnesty to wotkers already illegally employed.Gee, and we wonder why nothing gets done.

It's not a quick fix to this unique border crisis of family units claiming asylum.
It could be abated with a simple legislative fix, tied to measures which more effectively address the needs & root causes of the legit asylum seekers, in &/or closer to their home countries.It may not be a quick fix regarding the asylum issue, but it sure would have an impact of those trying to get in for a job.

foreverlax wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:01 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:30 pm ^^^ ??? source/link for quotes ?

Growth industry : 53k family units/mo ; 3 year wait time for adjudication.

That's a lot of ankle monitors & case managers to track them, for a long time.

Document/source of the 90% of 90% claim for Obama family units.

"From a real expert on immigration" - family member who ha specialized in immigration law for over 3 decades.

foreverlax wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:13 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:07 pm

CU77 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:42 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:09 pmWhat they can do is have ICE track down & start deporting asylum seekers who failed to make their court date. Declare it a national emergency & federalize the National Guard to assist ICE in this process. That would be within the law. Is that what it's going to take ?

So why doesn't Trump do it?

Why doesn't Trump turn on e-verify?

Why does Trump declare an emergency to build the wall, when the wall will not help nearly as much as the two items above?

Can Trump just "turn on" E verify ? No legislation required ? “E-Verify today is largely a volunteer system where employers can check the employment status of workers after they have hired them as part of the I-9 process,” Calabrese told the NewsHour. “It’s mandatory for federal contractors and in some states, and it’s also mandatory for most government workers.”

E-verify is going to be very disruptive to the economy & can't be introduced alone. It has to be part of comp imm reform that offers some form of amnesty to wotkers already illegally employed.Gee, and we wonder why nothing gets done.

It's not a quick fix to this unique border crisis of family units claiming asylum.
It could be abated with a simple legislative fix, tied to measures which more effectively address the needs & root causes of the legit asylum seekers, in &/or closer to their home countries.It may not be a quick fix regarding the asylum issue, but it sure would have an impact of those trying to get in for a job.

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:19 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 1:01 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:30 pm ^^^ ??? source/link for quotes ?

Growth industry : 53k family units/mo ; 3 year wait time for adjudication.

That's a lot of ankle monitors & case managers to track them, for a long time.

Document/source of the 90% of 90% claim for Obama family units.

"From a real expert on immigration" - family member who ha specialized in immigration law for over 3 decades.

Thanks. I saw that 90% of 90% stat on ankle monitors when we discussed it on LP.
I think it was from an immigrant advocate group's website.

From what I've found today -- the ankle monitors & closer case management trial projects were successful in the small sample pool selected for the trial program (250 ankle monitors), but were abandoned by ICE because the program was cost prohibitive to upscale to this volume of migrants, just as detention is impractical/cost prohibitive for these numbers, leaving "catch & release" the only option, ...until the asylum loopholes are closed, aligning Northern Triangle migrants with Mexican & Canadian asylum seekers.

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 2:59 pm 53k ankle monitors/mo & the technology & case managers necessary to monitor, or detain 53k additional families/mo ?
For the length of an adjudication process so backlogged it takes years ?
Yes. That's cost prohibitive.
Fix the asylum loopholes & we won't need more ankle monitors, case managers, detention beds OR wall.

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:00 pm THE FACTS: THERE IS NO CRISIS AND NO EMERGENCY, JUST TRUMP’S CAMPAIGN

"After mixing it up with a old conservative over spring break — someone who doesn’t watch Fox News but spends too much time with people who do — it’s clear Trump’s and Fox’s lies have deeply infected right-wing minds.

They believe Trump’s falsehoods about a crisis at the border, that there was reason for Trump to declare an emergency.

They’re also incapable of fact checking. They’re authoritarians and believe whatever current authority figure tells them; the motivation to validate authority doesn’t exist.

They appear unable to analyze what they do see to make an independent assessment of their own. It doesn’t occur to them to ask, What would be so bad a family with toddlers and infants would flee their home, walking over a thousand miles for more than a month and through a desert to escape?"

Check out the FACTS...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... co/576781/

The Remain in Mexico plan would change this dynamic. Those asylum seekers who pass the credible-fear test would be expected to remain in Mexico while their cases are adjudicated. Exceptions would be made for those who can establish that they have a reasonable fear of temporarily residing in Mexico, but that would be a higher bar to clear. In practice, one of the main reasons Central American migrants prefer to live in the U.S. over Mexico is that, simply put, wages are higher north of the border, which is not in itself grounds for asylum. López Obrador has often expressed a desire to aid Central American migrants, and that has been echoed by Mexican officials who’ve pointed to job openings in the maquiladoras of Tijuana and other growing cities that could be filled by asylum seekers.

In an interview with The Washington Post, Sánchez Cordero underscored that “we want [Central American migrants] to be included in society, that they integrate into society, that they accept the offer of employment that we are giving them.” Elsewhere, she has discussed granting 1 million work visas to Central American migrants, in keeping with López Obrador’s concept of employing said newcomers in his efforts to revitalize southern Mexico. Though Remain in Mexico would not be a “safe third-country agreement,” which would essentially bar migrants passing through Mexico from applying for asylum in the U.S., it has the potential to bring an end to the periodic border crises that have roiled the country since the summer of 2014.

It is easy to see why such an arrangement would suit Trump, who could point to a more orderly southern border as the fulfillment, at least in spirit, of his campaign pledge to strengthen immigration enforcement. But what’s in it for López Obrador, whose chief objective is to combat Mexico’s entrenched poverty and therefore to ensure that, as he wrote to the U.S. president in July, not long after his election victory, “people find work and wellbeing in their places of origin, where their families, their customs, and their cultures are”?

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:43 pm EZ solution -- let everyone in, give them a court date, put 'em on a bus to Pelosi's district, to be released there, to return for their court date.