Mediaboss Marketing

WASHINGTON, D.C. U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Bill Hagerty (R-TN) introduced theVoice for Victims Act, legislation to restitute the VOICE Office to provide proactive, timely, adequate, and professional services to victims of crimes committed by removable aliens and their families. The VOICE Office will also provide quarterly reports to Congress that examine the effects of victimization of US nationals by criminal aliens.TheVoice for Victims Actwill also expand the functions of the US Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman to include working with the VOICE Office to provide assistance to and accountability for victims of crimes by criminal aliens

Many dangerous illegal immigrants, including cartel members, are making their way further into our country committing heinous crimes,said Senator Tillis. Anyone who falls victim to a dangerous illegal immigrant deserves the proper care and attention, including bringing the illegal immigrant to account. I am proud to work with Senator Hagerty to introduce this legislation so we can give a voice to every victim.

The Biden Administrations disastrousopen-border policies have flung the door wide open for criminals to enter our country illegally and commit crimes against innocent people,said Senator Hagerty.Were seeing a national security crisis of epic proportion with over 160 different nationalities apprehended at our southern border since Joe Biden took office. Adding insult to injury, President Biden terminated the office created by President Trump to help victims of crimes by illegal aliens.This commonsense legislation willreverse President Bidens regrettabledecision and reinstate this criticalassistance forvictims of these reprehensible acts.

Background

In 2017, President Trump established the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) Office in 2017 under the Department of Homeland Security to assist victims of crimes committed by illegal immigrants. This resource served victims of crimes by criminal aliens by acknowledging and supporting victims and families, promoting awareness of available services to victims, and building partnerships with community stakeholders to assist victims. Before President Trump established the VOICE Office, victims of crimes by criminal aliens did not have a dedicated government resource to provide information about their cases and access to assistance.

In 2021, President Biden terminated the VOICE Office and replaced it with a watered-down phone line to provide resources to victims of crimes committed by anyone rather than criminal aliens. This sends a clear message to victims of crimes by criminal aliens that their voices do not matter to the Biden Administration.

Due to President Bidens failed immigration policies, Customs and Border Protection has had over 3 million encounters with illegal immigrants since President Biden took office. The chaos created by this crisis has allowed criminal aliens to cross the border undetected, and to conduct human smuggling and drug trafficking operations. For example, in FY22, CBP apprehended over 800 criminal aliens with convictions for domestic violence, over 1,100 for DUI convictions, and nearly 250 for sex crimes. The Biden Administrations catch and release policies during a surge in illegal immigration is a recipe for crimes by criminal aliens, and it is more important than ever that victims of crimes by criminal aliens are able to access dedicated resources.

###

Continue reading here:
Tillis and Hagerty Introduce Legislation Reinstating Services for Victims of Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants - Thom Tillis

China said Friday that it will stop accepting deportees from the U.S. as part of its retaliation for House Speaker Nancy Pelosis visit this week to Taiwan.

The move was among nine steps announced by Chinas Foreign Affairs Ministry, along with ending cooperation on transnational crime and drugs, and halting talks on climate change.

It also raises the stakes for the Biden administration, which under U.S. law can punish countries that refuse to cooperate on deportations by refusing to issue new visas to that countrys citizens.

That decision belongs to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

The Department of Homeland Security didnt immediately respond to a request for comment Friday, but analysts urged the Biden administration to strike back.

This is really an opportunity for the Biden administration to show its not going to be jerked around by China, said Jessica Vaughan, policy studies director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which backs stricter immigration enforcement.

Under section 243(d), the part of immigration law that governs the issue, the government could deny all visas, though traditionally administrations have been more targeted. Refusing to issue short-term tourism or business visas to government officials and their families has been the most common use of 243(d).

Ms. Vaughan said that can be highly effective in a country such as China.

Its the elite members of these societies who are able to travel to the United States any time they want to, desperately want to come here to shop, to go to Las Vegas, to send their kids to our universities, and maybe even to work. They would very likely be swayed by even a very targeted suspension of visas, she said. We dont want to suspend travel from everyone from China, and we dont need to. Thats the beauty of this kind of leverage.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which oversees deportations, has labeled China as uncooperative in the past.

But ICE has declined to release an updated list of uncooperative countries over the last year, despite repeated requests from The Washington Times. ICE would not say Friday if China is still on the uncooperative list, nor would it provide the latest data on deportations.

As of 2020, when China was on the uncooperative list, ICE still managed to deport 337 people to the country. That was down from 637 in 2019 and 726 in 2018.

Ms. Vaughan said given the Biden administrations approach to immigration, anyone its trying to deport to China currently is a national security risk or has a major criminal record.

We should not sit back and let China force its deportable criminals on American communities, she said.

Administrations have traditionally been reluctant to use 243(d) visa sanctions, though the Trump team was more aggressive in flexing the tool.

Ms. Vaughan said Congress could rewrite the law to prod administrations to be more active.

Thats also the type of plan that could garner bipartisan support in Congress right now.

Ms. Pelosis visit to Taiwan, while opposed by the Biden administration, drew strong bipartisan backing on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers have long sought a tougher stance toward what they see as an increasingly aggressive China.

See the rest here:
China will refuse to take back illegal immigrants in retaliation for Pelosi visit - Washington Times

Its inspiring to see Gov. Charlie Baker, the governor of the original profiles in courage state, living up to the tradition praised by former President John F. Kennedy as acting with grace under pressure. Thats just what Gov. Baker did recently, when he vetoed legislation that would allow illegal immigrants to obtain Massachusetts drivers licenses. This kind of political courage doing whats right regardless of pressure to the contrary rarely occurs but is commendable when it does.

True, the state House and Senate have overridden his veto. The GOP governor had every reason to expect they would, given the lopsided Democratic tilt of the 192nd Massachusetts General Court. Nevertheless, he put his duty to the states lawful residents first. Because of his action and provided that the petition to hold a referendum to repeal the law receives the necessary 41,000 signatures by Aug. 24 the people of the Bay State will have the opportunity to decide whether this act will stand.

Through nearly eight years in office, Baker has seldom hesitated to air differences with fellow Republicans which is one reason he enjoys such steady support among independents and Democrats. Hes one of the few remaining examples of that now-endangered political species: the pragmatic Eisenhower Republican. His independence from current political and ideological currents makes his case against drivers licenses for illegal immigrants all the more compelling. It was driven not by ideology but by a clear-eyed understanding of what is at stake.

In his veto statement to the Legislature, Baker specifically cited concerns about the inevitable degradation of identity documents issued by Massachusetts, including the risk of compromising future Bay State elections, due to the unreliable new process for obtaining a drivers license, now set to take effect in July 2023. While the new law requires two forms of identification, they can include foreign documents whose validity the Registry of Motor Vehicles is in no position to verify and that are easily counterfeited by the criminal gangs which already supply forged and stolen documents to unlawful residents.

As Baker noted, a standard Massachusetts drivers license will no longer confirm that a person is who they say they are.

In fact, vital as concerns about document security are, the reasons to oppose this legislation go well beyond them.

First of all, it is simply common sense that making drivers licenses so easily available will make Massachusetts a more attractive destination for illegal immigrants. Most states do not grant this privilege. Massachusetts will join the 16 plus the District of Columbia that do.

Already as of 2019, some 250,000 people resided here illegally. The Boston metropolitan area ranked 11th nationally for the size of its illegal migrant population in 2018. With 3 million people entering the country illegally in 2021-22, many more will soon be arriving here.

Higher levels of illegal immigration also strain state budgets through increased demand for social services. One estimate put the cost of illegal immigration in Massachusetts in 2022 at $1.86 billion.

And immigration, in both its illegal and legal forms, also suppresses wages for American workers and legal immigrants already here. As Harvard immigration expert George J. Borjas himself an immigrant has noted, Wage trends over the past half-century suggest that a 10% increase in the number of workers with a particular set of skills probably lowers the wage of that group by at least 3%.

Of course, most illegal immigrants are relatively low-skilled, so they compete directly with the most disadvantaged Americans. Borjas wrote in 2016 that the wages of high-school dropouts were $800-$1,500 lower per year because of the 25% increase in the size of that demographic group due to arrivals of unskilled immigrants in recent decades. Partly as a result, unskilled native workers are dropping out of the labor force in record numbers.

Bakers veto of this legislation shows he understands the risks that illegal migration poses for this state and its workers. The Legislature, sadly, does not. If the petition to repeal this law receives enough signatures to place the issue on the ballot in November the people will cast the deciding vote.

Steve Kropper and John Thompson are the Democratic and Republican co-chairs of the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform.

Read more:
Kropper and Thompson: On immigration, Charlie Baker is a profile in courage - Boston Herald

Austin, TX, 13 hours ago The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request to stay the ruling of an April decision by a federal judge asserting the University of North Texas (UNT) could not charge out-of-state residents higher tuition than illegal immigrants.

Judge Sean Jordan of the Eastern District Court of Texas claimed it was unconstitutional to charge different tuition rates under a 1996 federal immigration law.

In his decision from July 15, Jordan wrote that the law clearly states, If a State makes an unlawfully present alien eligible for a postsecondary education benefit on the basis of state residency, it must make a United States citizen eligible for the same benefit regardless of whether the citizen is such a resident.

However, a 2001 Texas law allows some illegal immigrants to qualify for in-state tuition if they meet certain residency and education requirements.

Under this law, along with Jordans decision, all Texas public universities may be barred from charging out-of-state students higher rates as long as the 2001 statute is in place. This ruling also calls into question the constitutionality of that law altogether.

According to the judge, the 1996 federal law preempts the 2001 Texas law under the supremacy clause, a finding that the Fifth Circuit agreed with.

In their appeal, UNT attorneys claim that the impacts of this decision on the research and educational capabilities of the university are significant, now and in the future. The injunction is already having substantial, irreversible financial impacts, the attorneys wrote. UNT has projected it will lose approximately $5.7 million annually based on the number of currently enrolled out-of-state U.S. citizens.

According to the UNT website, the average cost of attendance for in-state students is approximately $26,000 per year. For out-of-state students, that cost jumps almost 50 percent to around $38,000.

Without the funds generated from out-of-state tuition, the school says it will go from a surplus in funding to a deficit. Leadership claims this will force the school to limit class sizes, cut research budgets, and issue staff layoffs. Given the implications of this ruling, other public Texas universities may have to follow suit.

The plaintiffs, student organization Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT), tout this ruling as a major win for their organization and Texas at large. This may prompt the Texas legislature to address this apparent inconsistency between federal and state laws, in order to continue charging out-of-state residents higher tuition.

The Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a conservative think tank, is representing YCT in the case.

When asked for comment regarding the case, TPPF Litigation Director Chance Weldon said, The district court looked at the plain text of the federal statute, and found that our client should prevail.

The reason this case is interesting comes less from the statutory claims that are at the heart of the merits, but from the aggressive procedural claims made by UNT, he continued. At the Fifth Circuit and below, what UNT has argued is that even though this law is preempted and unlawful, they cannot comply with federal law because of their budget. We believe that position is an extremely radical one.

Asked about the implications of this ruling on other public Texas universities tuition schemes, Weldon surmised that under the 2001 Texas law, universities must continue to provide the same tuition to unlawful aliens as in-state residents. What they may not do is charge American citizens more than this rate.

Here is the original post:
University of North Texas Cannot Charge Out-of-State Students Higher Tuition Than Illegal Immigrants, Court Rules - The Texan

A forum about immigration started with the grim reality many who try to enter the country face at one point in their journey: a 911 call.

We need help, a man repeats in Spanish, shouting in a winded voice.

I need the directions, the operator replies.

The recording continues with a brief, inaudible response, then the mans voice goes quiet, and the call ends with the sound of a busy signal.

The message set the tone for Monday evenings town hall meeting, which was organized by Bexar County Sheriff Javier Salazar and led entirely in Spanish by hosts Antonio Guillen with Univision and Jessica Montoya of Telemundo. The two stations that dominate Spanish-language news in San Antonio hosted the forum out of the University of Texas at San Antonios downtown campus and streamed footage of it on their respective social media pages.

Editorial: Without reforms to immigration, horror will go on

In the blue hue of the theater lights at the Buena Vista Theater downtown, the panelists sat in black chairs as the hosts tossed the panelists questions prepared both beforehand and taken from members of the audience. The crowd of more than 100 people included both political figures and candidates, as well as people who wanted to learn more about efforts to help immigrants.

And much like the nations long-running immigration debate, it also included vocal opponents.

People critical of illegal immigration heckled the hosts. One woman who kept interrupting the panelists was escorted from the room by a deputy.

An hour later, more people who said that English should be spoken because this is America engaged in a few brief, hushed arguments with other attendees who were interested in hearing what the panelists had to say.

The rabble-rousers left the hall to the sound of applause and cheers from other attendees.

County Commissioner Rebecca Clay-Flores detailed efforts by the county to help undocumented immigrants facing deportation. She said that although the county does not have the authority to set its own laws and policies regarding immigration, the commissioners voted last month on a $1 million immigrant defense fund to help organizations that offer legal and other services.

Later in the forum, an audience member confronted Clay-Flores over the efforts put into helping people who come to the country illegally.

The commissioner was firm in her response.

How easy its been for you to forget that this is a country of immigrants, she said, saying that many in the audience have blood of immigrants running through their veins.

She said the defense fund might seem like a lot of money, but its only a drop in the bucket compared to the $2.8 billion budget approved in the Commissioners Court last year.

She jousted momentarily with an audience member who said that his parents came to the United States legally.

Clay-Flores, who is a dual citizen of the U.S. and Mexico, asked, What kind of misery are people fleeing that they risk dying in a trailer?

She was referencing the deadly smuggling incident that left 53 migrants from Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras dead in June in South Bexar County, one of the many horrific incidents undocumented immigrants have faced that also spurred Monday nights discussion.

She recalled the 13-year-old boy as the youngest who died among the migrants, saying that children dont understand the risks of coming to the U.S.

For me, its a humanitarian issue, she said.

The commissioner also reiterated a portion from one panelist, Erica B. Schommer, a law professor at St. Marys University, saying that there are racist laws, such as those in Africa and the Caribbean, that prevent people from obtaining a legal visa.

Schommer earlier said its difficult for refugees to seek political asylum as people have to demonstrate that their lives were in danger from religious, political or LGBT persecution. That process takes years.

Asylum seekers may also ask for a work permit in the meantime, but that can be complicated and time-consuming, too, she said.

The professor said the U.S. has not seen any changes in immigration laws for many years, and that theres a lot of injustice in the process itself.

The reality in San Antonio is totally different now than what it was when the current immigration laws were passed, Schommer said. We need to make changes so there can be an appropriate response to what the international situation is now.

State Sen. Jos Menndez, D-San Antonio, fielded a question from Guillen, who said that immigrants are being sent to Washington and New York, shifting responsibilities to other communities. He asked Menndez whether Gov. Greg Abbott has the authority to do so.

On ExpressNews.com:S.A. archbishop calls for immigration reform at Mass for victims of migrant trailer tragedy

Menndez said Abbott, when he was lieutenant governor, used to complain about how the federal government would butt into state affairs, and now hes pushing state issues back onto Washington.

Hes doing it for political reasons, he said in Spanish. He wants political recognition for doing this; hes not helping anybody.

While attempting to detail efforts his office makes with Catholic Charities to help migrants, the senator was interrupted by hecklers asking for the forum to continue in English.

He later said that people living in the shadows would love to pay their fair share of taxes just to live a normal life.

One migrant interviewed by Telemundo on video said they dont have the time or money they need to get to where theyre going. Theyre held for three days until theyre deported to another state.

J. Antonio Fernandez, CEO of Catholic Charities, said they are trying to find a way the city can help buy tickets for them to get to where they need to go.

Its not fair for them to be here and having nothing to do, he said. They dont have any notice of where theyre going to go or how theyre going to get there.

jbeltran@express-news.net

The rest is here:
Spanish forum on immigration interrupted by calls for English - San Antonio Express-News