Mediaboss Marketing

Fox News

Illegal immigration from Mexico down 40 percent in Trump's first month New York Post The number of illegal immigrants crossing into the United States from Mexico declined by 40 percent from January to February, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Wednesday. The downturn came after President Donald Trump took office on Jan. How America's Idea Of Illegal Immigration Doesn't Always Match RealityNPR Trump could make courthouse arrests of illegal immigrants the new normalFox News Report: Illegal Immigration Important for Kentucky's EconomyWKU Public Radio Newsmax all 73 news articles »

Read the original here:
Illegal immigration from Mexico down 40 percent in Trump's first month - New York Post

President Trumps temporary ban on refugees could create a new wave of illegal border crossings, experts warn.

The latest iteration of Trumps travel ban includes a provision that halts entry of all refugees into the United States for 120 days.

The Central American Minors program was created last year to reduce the number of unaccompanied minors and family units fleeing through Mexico and illegally trying to cross the southern border into the U.S.

Although the program remains in place, Trumps latest executive order sets out new rules for the number of refugees the United States will accept.

The problem is that we are maxed out, because, remember, [Trump] decreased the number of refugees that are allowed into the U.S., said Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.).

We could already be maxed out at 100 percent in 90 days. That means no one else could come in, she said.

With that avenue of escape closed, many may choose to make the dangerous crossing through Mexico instead.

Central American children and family units have become the main drivers of illegal immigration, as resettlement from Mexico has leveled off since 2009. Since 2014, Mexicans have accounted for less than half of all illegal border crossings.

Maureen Meyer, a migrant rights specialist at the Washington Office for Latin America, said the Trump administrations dissuasive efforts could change the plans of Central Americans seeking a better economic situation in the United States but are unlikely to deter those fleeing violence.

I would suspect that certain families will decide that the risk is so dangerous that theyll send their children [to the United States] either way, Meyer said.

Experts agree that its difficult to measure how many Central Americans migrate to the United States for economic reasons and how many do so because of a credible fear. But various studies point to violence as a major and growing concern for Central American migrants, particularly those from the Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

Since 2008, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reported a nearly fivefold increase in Northern Triangle asylum-seekers coming to the U.S., which its report calls a staggering indicator of the surging violence shaking the region.

That report found that homicide rates in those countries dwarf the global average of 6.2 homicides per 100,000 people.

In 2013, Honduras had a homicide rate of 90.4 per 100,000 people; El Salvadors rate was 82.2 per 100,000 people; and Guatemalas was 39.9 per 100,000 people. The UNHCR further found that 82 percent of women from those countries who claimed asylum in the United States in 2015 were found by American authorities to have a credible case.

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly has proposed action designed to deter Central Americans from migrating to the United States via smuggling routes.

I would do almost anything to deter the people from Central America from getting on this very, very dangerous network that brings people through Mexico to the United States, Kelly told CNN this week.

One proposal Kelly put forth was to detain any adults illegally entering the country with children and putting those children in the care of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Democrats have panned that idea.

Its a terror tactic; its sheer terror, said Rep. Lou Correa (D-Calif.), who questioned Kelly last month at a House Homeland Security Committee meeting. During that hearing, the Homeland Security head said he would enforce existing law as long as it was on the books but admitted there was space for reform.

I beg you to change flawed immigration laws, Kelly told Correa at the time.

When he told me that, you know, please help him change the law, I think he was being sincere. I think hes following orders from the top down, Correa told The Hill.

The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment.

Deterrence actions have had mixed results in the past.

The U.S. government for years has had many PR programs trying to tell people of the risks of the journey or that there has been no change in U.S. policy, Meyer said.

While more Central Americans are choosing to stay in Mexico than ever before, many are attracted to the United States because they have family members who are already in the country.

While Mexico, Costa Rica and other countries in the region have agreed to take in more refugees from the Northern Triangle, their programs are even more limited than that of the United States.

Costa Rica, for example, agreed to take 250 refugees a year.

Torres, who was born in Guatemala and sent by her parents to live with family in the United States at age 5, said the Trump administration should focus on programs already in place to improve conditions in the Northern Triangle, rather than implementing actions that could tear families apart.

The California lawmaker pointed out that Kelly, a former leader of U.S. Southern Command, knows the region well.

We already have a process to address the root causes of migration in the Northern Triangle, and he better than anyone else knows exactly what were doing in the Northern Triangle, she said.

Read the rest here:
Refugee ban could result in increased illegal immigration - The Hill

Illegal immigration across the southwest border plummeted in the weeks after President Trump took office, Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly announced Wednesday, calling the drop an early sign that Mr. Trumps get-tough policies are working.

In addition to a drop in the number of illegal immigrants nabbed while attempting to cross, Mr. Kelly said, they have seen a dramatic spike in the rates charged by smugglers paid to sneak people into the U.S.

Routes that cost $3,500 in November now cost $8,000, he said another signal that smuggling cartels business is suffering.

Mr. Kelly called the drop in apprehensions unprecedented. The number of people caught at the border is considered a good indication of the overall flow, so a drop in apprehensions is believed to signal a drop in total number of illegal crossings.

This trend is encouraging because it means many fewer people are putting themselves and their families at risk of exploitation, assault and injury by human traffickers and the physical dangers of the treacherous journey north, Mr. Kelly said.

All told, 23,589 people were caught trying to enter without permission at the border in February. That was the lowest number for the month in years and a 40 percent drop from the 42,504 caught in January.

In fact, its the lowest number for any month dating back at least to 2012, when monthly statistics were first released.

The Obama administration and its allies among immigrant rights groups had long argued that the surge of illegal immigration in recent years, chiefly from Central America, was a result of people fleeing horrific conditions.

Those groups argued that there was little the U.S. could or should do to stem the flow.

But Border Patrol officials, in internal documents, had said the surge was a result of lax enforcement within the U.S. They had predicted that a policy imposing tougher consequences for illegal immigration could stem the flow.

Mr. Kelly said Wednesday that appears to be the case.

The early results show that enforcement matters, deterrence matters, and that comprehensive immigration enforcement can make an impact, he said.

The drop was severe across all categories.

The number of unaccompanied illegal immigrant children caught by the Border Patrol fell below 2,000, while the number of people traveling as families was just 3,124. In January, that number had been 9,300, and in December, it had been more than 16,000.

Even particularly tricky countries such as Haiti saw improvement. In January, more than 1,600 Haitians showed up at ports of entry demanding to be admitted. In February, that number dropped to 218.

Mr. Kelly said the massive changes were the result of Mr. Trumps policies, which have given agents at the border and in the interior more leeway to arrest and deport illegal immigrants.

Mr. Trump has also promised to hire 5,000 more border agents and to build a wall across the southwest border, though neither of those plans has taken shape.

Instead, would-be immigrants appear to be responding to Mr. Trumps get-tough rhetoric.

Mr. Kelly said his department will be monitoring to see what happens in March, April and May, when the number of apprehensions and therefore crossers usually jumps.

President Obama oversaw a major drop in the number of Mexicans coming across the border during his time in office a result of a sour U.S. economy, an improving Mexican economy and a willingness to impose penalties on those nabbed.

But U.S. policy was more relaxed toward illegal immigrants from Central America.

They were generally arrested, given court dates and released into the interior of the U.S., where they often absconded, disappearing into the shadows with the estimated 11 million other illegal immigrants.

See original here:
Trump's get-tough policies credited for sharp plunge in illegal immigration - Washington Times

SANCTUARY COMMUNITY: Illegal aliens are welcome and, for the most part, safe from deportation in the rural community of Plainfield.

PLAINFIELD, Vt. The rural community of Plainfield on Tuesdayjoined an increasing number of Vermont jurisdictionsconsidered to be sanctuary communities for illegal aliens.

The change was adopted in a non-binding resolution put before voters on Town Meeting Day. The resolution passed by a 67-13 vote.

Andy Robinson, a local immigrant rightsactivist, led the effort by helping gather about70 signatures to get the issue on the ballot.

The goal here is to make sure Plainfield is perceived as a town that is considered welcoming and that immigrants here can feel safe, Robinsontold Watchdog.

Themeasure was taken up after careful consideration from legal experts from the Vermont League of Cities and Towns and theattorney generals office, Robinson said. He added that the main advice he received is thatlocal authorities are not required to enforce federal immigration law.The measure essentially reiterates that Plainfield authorities are not required to do so.

James Simpson, a former analyst for the White House Office of Management and Budget who now focuses on immigration, the Plainfield resolution is little more than words on paper, but nonetheless sends a message.

It doesnt matter if its just a meaningless resolution or something that becomes an ordinance, he said. It all sends the same message, and that is that the official position on illegal aliens is that they are welcome here.

Simpson sayswhile most illegal immigrants are seeking a better life, thepopulation as a whole is disproportionately more likely to be involved in crimes. As reported by Breitbart,U.S. Sentencing Commission data for fiscal year 2014shows thatwhile illegal aliens accounted for 3.5 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for 36.7 percent of federal sentencesfollowing criminal convictions.

Robinson said he understands Vermonterssecurity concerns but thinks the vast majority of those coming in are law abiding. He added that Vermont needs to embrace new young workers and entrepreneursto counterbalance the states aging population.

A concern for Plainfield and similar towns is whether the federal government will withhold discretionary grants fromjurisdictions that refuse to help feds enforce U.S. immigration laws.

While total federal funding to sanctuary cities nationwide may be as high as $27 billion, the left-wing Center for American Progressandthe American Immigration Lawyers Association released a report that states the portion of federal dollars that could be denied tosanctuary jurisdictions is$870,068,698.

Robinson said while he isnt worried about the potentialloss of federal funds, it doesnt mean it wont happen.

James Lyall, executive director of the Vermont American Civil Liberties Union, says Plainfields resolution is similar to those in other towns.

I dont know what the specific language of Plainfields resolution was, [but]its likely consistent with the other moves to affirm that those places and their public officials will respect the civil rights of immigrants, he said.

While state and local authorities have for decades voluntarily helped feds identify illegal immigrants, Lyall claimed it is not legally aresponsibility of local law enforcement to concern themselves with federal immigration enforcement.

Based on that distinction between what is legally required versus what is voluntary, about 600 cities and counties nationwide have adopted policies that mandatenoncooperation from local police, investigators and other officials. Suchnoncooperation limits the ability offederal immigration authorities to identify and deport illegal immigrants.

Lyall said in some cases local police lackauthority to pursue immigration enforcement, such as in asking for immigration status without appropriate probable cause. Hesaid that Vermont police must adhere to Fair and Impartial Policing, a policy that prohibits police from gathering immigration status from suspects.

Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told Watchdog in a recent interview that refusing to givefederal authorities information aboutimmigration statusis illegal.If [the state] passes an ordinance saying police may not notify the federal government of immigration status, that is in clear violation of [federal law], he said.

Robinson said he pushed the initiative in Plainfield as a response to thetough immigration rhetoric and policies out of the Trump administration. Lyall said it would be better if state legislators wouldpass laws so that smaller communities would not have tocome up with their own resolutions.

Simpson said giving any immigrant a free passisdisrespectful to all the immigrants who come to the United States legally.

Its really an outrage, he said. All their effort, and this is really just making a fool of them.

We go through all that stuff and then illegal aliens can just breeze on in and not merely have the door open but have their hand held and they are protected. Its simply incredible.

Robinson said while he sympathizes with the frustrations of those who go through the often-tedious legal immigration process, he said he also knowsundocumentedimmigrants who have been waiting as long as five years, going through multiple background checks, and are still waiting.

I think what we need is a more streamlined way, he said.

Michael Bielawski is a freelance reporter for Vermont Watchdog. Contact [emailprotected]

Original post:
Small town of Plainfield adopts sanctuary status for illegal aliens ... - Watchdog.org

Homeland Security could begin separating illegal immigrant mothers and children caught sneaking across the border, Secretary John F. Kelly said Monday, floating another get-tough proposal designed to make families from Central America think twice before making the treacherous journey north.

Stemming the surge of migrants is among President Trumps top immigration goals, and his administration is searching for any answers to a problem that bedeviled President Obama. But this latest proposal enraged immigrant rights advocates, who say the children and families should be treated as refugees deserving compassion, not as illegal immigrants seeking to thwart American laws.

Mr. Kelly, speaking on CNN, said his goal is to try to keep people from making the trip at all.

I would do almost anything to deter the people from Central America to getting on this very, very dangerous network that brings them up through Mexico into the United States, he said.

Those who have made the journey report being beaten, robbed and raped. Some women who make the journey begin to take birth control ahead of time specifically to prevent pregnancy from rapes they expect along the way.

If Mr. Kelly pulls the trigger on the change, it would mark a major reversal in U.S. policy.

The Obama administration worked to keep families together, opening new detention facilities in order to be able to keep mothers and their children in the same place. But after federal courts fretted over the conditions in which children were kept, the Obama administration began to quickly process and release families, with the often vain hope that they would return for their deportation hearings.

Border Patrol officials have said that those lax policies served as enticements for the wave of illegal immigrant children and families streaming out of Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.

Over the past five years, since Mr. Obama announced his 2012 deportation amnesty for young adult illegal immigrants known as Dreamers, some 227,000 unaccompanied children and 245,000 people traveling as families have been caught at the border.

The latest numbers suggest this year is shaping up to set a record.

The children, in particular, put burdens on agents, who have been relegated to what their chief called professional child care duties rather than patrolling the border. The federal government has paid millions of dollars to shuttle immigrant children inside the U.S., and the Health and Human Services Department has struggled to find sponsors to take in the children.

Those sponsors are often illegal immigrant parents already in the U.S. awaiting the arrival of their children.

If the administration follows through on Mr. Kellys proposal, its not clear who would take in the children if they arrive with a parent who gets detained. Children who dont find sponsors to take them in the U.S. end up in dormitory-type detention homes.

The children could apply for protection in the U.S. even as their parents face deportation, immigrant rights advocates said.

Democrats said the proposed policy change stems from xenophobia and racism.

Breaking apart families flies in the face of the family values Republicans have campaigned on for decades, said Rep. Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee. This is just the latest terrible proposal from this disastrous administration, and any humane and decent person should reject it outright.

The Womens Refugee Commission said it already had seen some mothers separated from their children at the border and called it a horrific trauma.

For some mothers, going back to what they are fleeing is not an option, said Michelle Brane, director of the migrant rights program at the commission. They feel they have no choice but to hope that by staying in detention, and letting their child be taken, that they might eventually be safe. The daily torture of sitting in detention, and not knowing what has become of their child is unimaginable.

Mr. Kelly, though, said the answer is for families to not begin a journey that could end with the separation of children and parents.

Im considering it in order to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network, he said. I am considering exactly that. They will be well cared for as we deal with their parents.

More here:
DHS proposes separating illegal immigrant mothers, children caught sneaking across border - Washington Times