Mediaboss Marketing

President Donald TrumpDonald TrumpGeorgia special election breaks spending record CNN host: Colbert went 'too far' with Trump rant Facebooks Zuckerberg has spoken with Trump numerous times on the phone: report MORE experienced some failures with his immigration policies during his first 100 days in office, but it would be a mistake to underestimate him. He has made major changes in enforcement policy.

Destruction of the Home Free Magnet.

PresidentBarack Obamafocused his immigration enforcement efforts primarily on aliens who had been convicted of serious crimes or who had been caught near the border after making an illegal entry, and he protected aliens here unlawfully who were not in a priority category.

His administrations enforcement policy memorandum required ICE officers to obtain permission from a Field Office Director before arresting a deportable alien who was not in a priority category.

This created what I call a home free magnet. Aliens wanting to enter the United States illegally knew that they would be safe from deportation once they had reached the interior of the country unless they were convicted of a serious crime. This was a powerful incentive to do whatever was necessary to enter the United States.

Justice Dept. releases first set of Trump-ordered data on illegal immigrant incarceration rates https://t.co/niY6PLlsNE pic.twitter.com/opyNi27MSX

President Trump destroyed this magnet with tough campaign rhetoric and his Executive Order, Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, which greatly expanded enforcement priorities. No deportable alien is safe under President Trumps enforcement policies.

This seems to have improved border security already.

In April 2017, CBP reported a sharp decline in the number of aliens apprehended along the Southwest border, and in the number of aliens who were found inadmissibleat ports of entry. In March, 16,600individuals wereapprehended or deemed inadmissible, which was a 30 percent decrease from February, and a 64 percent decrease from the same month in 2016.

Interior enforcement against all aliens who are here illegally may be a more effective deterrent than a wall would be.

This is not the first time that the importance of interior enforcement has been recognized. It was the basis for the last legalization program 30 years ago.

Expansion of Expedited Removal Proceedings.

As of the end of January 2017, the immigrant court's backlog was 542,411 cases. Even if no additional cases are filed, it would take the court two-and-a-half years to catch up with its backlog.

President Trump finessed his way around this problem by expanding the use of expedited removal proceedings with hisExecutive Order, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements.

In expedited removal proceedings, which are conducted by immigration officers, an alien who lacks proper documentation or has committed fraud or a willful misrepresentation to enter the country, will be deported without a hearing before an immigration judge, unless he requests an asylum hearing.

NEW: Dems observe May Day as immigrant day of action https://t.co/ViZAVyLb8F pic.twitter.com/tdkzrg540O

Asylum hearings, which are conducted by immigration judges, are available to aliens who establish a credible fear of persecution. An asylum officer determines whether the alien has a credible fear of persecution.

The alien cannot have assistance from an attorney in these proceedings, and, because detention is mandatory, his ability to gather evidence in support of his case is severely restricted.

Moreover, Section 208(a)(2)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) limits asylum to aliens who have been in the United States for less than a year (with some exceptions).

If the asylum officer rejects the credible fear claim, the alien can request an expedited review of his credible fear case by an immigration judge, which usually is held within 24 hours but in no case later than seven days after the adverse credible fear determination.

Federal court review is available, but it is restricted to cases in which the alien makes a sufficient claim to being a United States citizen, to havinglawful permanent residentstatus, or to having been admitted previously as a refugee or an asylee.

A federal judge recently held that asylum denials in expedited removal proceedings are not reviewable in federal court and the Supreme Court let the decision stand.

Previous administrations limited expedited removal proceedings to aliens at the border and aliens who had entered without inspection but were apprehended no more than 100 miles from the border after spending less than 14 days in the country.

The Executive Order expands expedited removal proceedings to the full extent of the law. Section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(ll)of the INA authorizes expedited removal proceedings for aliens who have been physically present in the United States for up to two years.

It is likely to be very difficult for aliens to establish physical presence of more than two years, and if they do, they will be faced with the one year deadline for asylum applications, which in many cases is the only form of relief available to an undocumented alien.

President Trump will be able to use expedited removal proceedings to deport millions of undocumented aliens without hearings before an immigration judge.

The only way to stop him is to find a way to work with him on a comprehensive immigration reform bill that meets the political needs of both parties, and time is running out.

Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an Executive Branch Immigration Law Expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years. He also has been a policy advisor for the DHS Office of Information Sharing and Collaboration under a contract with TKC Communications, and he has been in private practice as an immigration lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

The rest is here:
On illegal immigration, Trump ends Obama's 'home free magnet' - The Hill (blog)

Across the world, the American Dream the idea that anyone who has the talent, intellect and drive can succeed no matter how humble their beginnings draws hundreds of thousands of people to the United States each year. Instilled in this notion is meritocracy, one of the core qualities that has historically distinguished this country from the Old World class-bound societies, where ones position in life was largely determined by lineage and birth.

Today, the U.S. remains a meritocracy in many respects, but not in one notable area: its immigration system. This is why PresidentDonald Trumps call for an immigration policy overhaul in favor of applicants whose skills and talents are most likely to benefit the country is so important. Such a merit-based policy would be a radical departure from the way we now select immigrants but one our nation desperately needs. We should not let history hold us back any longer.

For the last half century, America has maintained an immigration policy that can only be described as codified nepotism. Of the approximately 1 million new immigrants who are legally admitted to the United States each year via green cards, about 60 percent enter for no other reason than that they have a relative in most cases a recently settled immigrant living in this country. Only about 15 percent of immigrants are admitted because of their skills, while the remainder are admitted on humanitarian grounds.

Under our current immigration system, admission as a family member is not limited to the traditional nuclear family. We allot immigration benefits to parents, adult children and siblings. All of these extended relatives and their spouses, in turn, are eventually eligible to invite their own extended family members to come live in the United States.Its a nepotistic system that contains the seeds of its own growth.

Fred Prouser / Reuters

This family-based process means that every time we admit someone as an immigrant the line for future immigration gets longer, not shorter. This results in endless chains of relatives, long and frustrating backlogs and no objective assessment of the individual merits of the majority of the people who are let in.

In addition to a skills deficit, our family chain migration system also means that we often end up with those who need more support from our economy rather than those who would help boost it. In 2012, more than half of immigrant-headed households in the United States relied on at least one welfare program, compared with 30 percent of households headed by a native-born citizen, according to a report based on data from the Census Bureaus Survey of Income and Program Participation.

Put simply, our current immigration system fails to serve any identifiable national or public interests. And this isnt the first time its flaws have been brought to our attention.

In the 1990s, a bipartisan blue-ribbon commission chaired by civil rights icon and former Rep. Barbara Jordan (D-Texas), came to precisely that conclusion and offered a framework for true immigration reform. The Jordan Commissions recommendations for a merit-based immigration policy were widely endorsed, including by then-President Bill Clinton. Theywere revived by Donald Trump.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress in February, Trump called for a merit-based immigration policy. It is time for Congress to respond to his call and the demands of the American people and implement a merit-based immigration system. Here are some broad objectives such a reform should take into account:

Paul J. Richards/Getty Images

All prospective immigrants to the U.S. should be evaluated based on objective criteria. These include education, job skills and English proficiency. Admission should be granted to those who are most likely to be net contributors to our economy, complement our existing labor force and successfully assimilate into the mainstream of American society. The criteria for admission must also be fluid, understanding that the needs of the country and our economy change over time.

A merit-based immigration policy should not discriminate for or against applicants based on race, religion or national origin. All applicants, regardless of background, should have an equal opportunity to apply for admission to the U.S. based on what they have to offer this country, rather than on having a relative here.

The United States should not apologize for pursuing immigration policies that are mutually beneficial to those who seek to come here and to the American people. Like all public policies, the primary stakeholders in U.S. immigration policy are the American people. Merit-based immigration maximizes the likelihood that people we admit will be self-sufficient and minimizes the possibility that their presences here will undermine the interests of American workers and taxpayers.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

We are a nation of immigrants, is not a policy. We must understand and honor our history, but in no other area of public policy do we do things just because its the way we did them in the past. A 21st century nation should not be bound to a 19th century immigration policy.

In an economy that increasingly demands an educated and skilled labor force, 28 percent of all working-age adult immigrants in the United States, according to the Census Bureaus Survey of Income and Program Participation, possess a high school diploma or less. This is particularly troublesome as the U.S. figures out how to deal with automation.

A report by Forrester Research, a business and technology research and advisory firm, estimated that automation will create about 15 million new jobs, but wipe out close to 25 million a net loss of about 10 million jobs. In addition to training existing workers in this country to fill the 15 million jobs projected to be created, we need to evaluate carefully whether our immigration policy is admitting people who are equipped to do the jobs that are likely to be created, or whether our policy is adding to the pool of workers whose skills qualify them for the 25 million jobs that are likely to disappear.

If we continue down our current path, the result will likely be an increase in competition for the 15 million jobs that are left and an increase in the number of people in this country who are unemployed. Bottom line: we need to act fast to diversify our ranks.

The Washington Post via Getty Images

The United States is now a nation of about 320 million people. At current levels of legal and illegal immigration, our population is projected to reach about 438 million by 2050.Immigration-driven population growth of this magnitude is ecologically and socially unsustainable and serves no national interest. The Jordan Commission recommended that admissions be capped at 550,000 a year, while others, including my organization, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR, support lower levels.

Family-based immigration should be limited to nuclear families. People who choose to immigrate to the United States are making the decision to live apart from their extended families. There should be no reasonable expectation on the part of people who immigrate to the U.S. that our laws will guarantee them the right to have their entire extended families join them here. Moreover, in an age of modern communications and relatively affordable travel, extended family connections can be maintained without chain migration.

Yuri Gripas / Reuters

As we are all painfully aware, very little gets done in Washington just because it serves the best interests of the American people. The narrow entrenched political and economic interests that are benefiting from the current immigration policies will not give up without a fight. But a large part of the reason why Donald Trump is president is because the American public wants him to disrupt the status quo.

Left to its own devices, the congressional leadership will do little to reform our immigration policies, even though they are widely acknowledged to be a failure. Affecting real change will require the president to put pressure on Congress by making the appeal for a merit-based immigration policy directly to the voters who put him in office.

Trump has demonstrated his ability to shake up the system in his unlikely rise to the Oval Office. Now, he must use those same skills to fulfill the promises he made to transform our immigration policy into one that serves the best interests of the nation.

Original post:
Trump Is Right: America Needs A Merit-Based Immigration Policy - Huffington Post

Fox News host Tucker Carlson began his show Tuesday by debating with an illegal immigrant on the issues of immigration reform and Mondays violent May Day protests and it went about as well as could be expected.

Speaking withjournalist Jose Antonio Vargas, an illegal immigrant from the Philippines, Carlson wanted to know why the American political left so readily embraces violence.

But instead of answering the question, Vargas immediately pushed back over Carlsons word choice.

I dont know if weve talked to all of those people protesting and asked them if all of them arefrom the left, Vargas said using air quotes. How do you know that? Did you talk to all of those people?

Those shouting left-wing slogans are left-wing, Carlson shot back. Almost all of the political violence in the past five months has been perpetrated by the left in the name of fighting against fascism.

Well first of all, I really take offense to the very simplistic left and right way youre framing this. It suits your viewers and Fox News, but it doesnt suit reality, Vargas replied.

Carlson explained that in the U.S.right now its only a subset of the left that uses violence as a means to obtain and advocate their political goals.

Im merely saying: Where are people who agree with these folks standing up and saying, Youre not allowed to block traffic. You cant break things, you cant set fires? Carlson asked. Its pretty simple.

Vargas, however, didnt answer the question and began to steer the debate toward immigration.

What I can tell you is that for many of us this issue is, not just political, its personal, Vargas said. Were talking about millions of people who are related to undocumented immigrants that you call criminal every day.

I, as a person, am not illegal, he explained.

Carlson explained that when someone says illegal immigrant, theyre not deeming the immigrant as a bad person, just simply stating that the immigrants status is in violation of the law.

He then pressed Vargas over whether or not he believes Americans should have a say in immigration policy, given that people born in the U.S. see their country changing and becoming really chaotic.

Your argument appears to be that they have noright to have a say in who comes here, Carlson said. Youre here illegally, and youre basically saying: I dare you to do something about it.

Carlson went on to statethat he doesnt believe illegal immigrants should have a say in American immigration policy given their legal status.But Vargas again took issue with Carlsons words.

Im not from Mars, he said, noting his disagreementwith Carlsons use ofthe words illegal and alien to describe illegal immigrants.

Toward the end of the interview, Carlson pressed Vargas for nearly two minutes over how many immigrants the U.S. should allow in each year. But Vargas failed to give Carlson a real answer citing a lack of time.

Ill give you eight minutes next time to tell me the number, Carlson said before ending the interview.

Follow this link:
Watch: Fireworks explode when Tucker Carlson debates an illegal immigrant over immigration reform - TheBlaze.com

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

2

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Dreamers are children and young adults who aspire to the American dream: to get an education, to work, and to do well for themselves and their families. They deserve the chance to do so.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Dorothy Lifka, Des Moines, Letter to the Editor 6:22 p.m. CT May 3, 2017

Drake student Kenia Ornelas of Des Moines, a DREAMer and undocumented immigrant, leads a group of protesters in a chant Friday, Aug. 5, 2016, outside of a rally for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump at Hy-Vee Hall in downtown Des Moines.(Photo: Michael Zamora/The Register)Buy Photo

The editorial board of the Des Moines Register has it right: Congress should finally pass immigration reform. And a good place to start would be with the "Dreamers" or children and young adults registered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivalsprogram.

Editorial: Congress should finally pass immigration reform

Because the Dreamers were brought to the United States as children (before they could make such a decision on their own), they, themselves, broke no law coming here. As part of registering for DACA, they voluntarily revealed their undocumented status; and to qualify for DACA status, they have to be in school, have completed high school or have participated in the U.S. Armed Forces; and they can't have been convicted of committing any felonies or significant or multiple misdemeanors.

In other words, these are children and young adults who aspire to the American dream: to get an education, to work, and to do well for themselves and their families. They deserve the chance to do so.

Dorothy Lifka, Des Moines

Read or Share this story: http://dmreg.co/2oZazsn

1:44

3:09

4:34

1:15

0:55

3:44

3:04

2:56

2:14

1:22

0) { %>

0) { %>

Read the rest here:
Immigration reform should start with Dreamers - DesMoinesRegister.com

CBP horse patrol on the border with Mexico John Gastaldo/ZUMA

After several months of speculation, the Department of Homeland Security announced Tuesday that Julie Kirchner, the former executive director of the hardline anti-immigrant group Federation for American Immigration Reform, will take a top spot at US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Kirchner's appointment as ombudsman at USCISwhich processes visa and naturalization petitions, as well as asylum and refugee applicationsis yet another move signaling that the Trump administration won't be relaxing its crackdown on immigrants anytime soon.

In August 2015, Kirchner left FAIR, which the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified as a "hate group," to work as an immigration adviser on the Trump campaign. She later served "a temporary political appointment"atCustoms and Border Protection shortly after the election. Since then, the White House has rolled out its "Muslim ban," requested bids for the border wall with Mexico, and clamped down on immigration of all kinds.

According to the DHS press release, as ombudsman Kirchner will be responsible for "improving the quality of citizenship and immigration services" and "making recommendations to improve the administration of immigration benefits." The release states that "theOmbudsman is an impartial and confidential resource that is independent of USCIS." As I reported in February when rumors circulated that Kirchner would be appointed as chief of staff of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), she has a long history of promoting an anti-immigrant agenda:

Like Trump, Kirchner has characterized immigrants and refugees as dangerous and costly.Last September, Breitbart published parts of a statement written by Kirchner, who was then working as an adviser to the Trump campaign. "Before President Obama's failed presidency comes to an end, he is trying to force Americans to accept 30 percent more refugeesproviding ISIS a path for their terrorists to enter the country," she claimed. "In recent years, hundreds of foreign born terrorists have been apprehended in the United States alone." She also wrote that "instead of providing free healthcare to millions of refugees, we must focus on rebuilding our inner cities and bringing jobs back to America."

Kirchner joined FAIR in 2005 as its director of government relations. In 2007, she became the organization's executive director. During her tenure, FAIR launched aninitiativeto end the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship provision, which grants citizenship to all children born on American soil, regardless of whether their parents are legal residents. In 2010, FAIR's legal arm, the Immigration Reform Law Institute,had a hand incraftingArizona Senate Bill 1070, which required police to detain individuals suspected of being illegal immigrants and made it a misdemeanor for immigrants not to carry their immigration papers. (The Supreme Court subsequently foundmostof SB 1070's provisions unconstitutional.)

Kirchner is one of several anti-immigrant hardliners to join the administration since the election. John Feere, formerly of the Center for Immigration Studies, now works for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Stephen Miller, who worked to defeat immigration reform as a Senate staffer to current Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is now a White House senior adviser. And former Breitbart reporter Julia Hahnwhom Weekly Standard editor-at-large William Kristol called "Bannon's Bannon"is now a special assistant to the president.

Link:
Another Anti-Immigrant Hardliner Scores a Key Administration Appointment - Mother Jones