NEW! The criminal bars to asylum proposed in December 2019 are finally here.
The rule will impose sweeping new asylum bans for people convicted of misdemeanor crimes as minor as using a fake ID—something millions of American college students do every day. public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2020-23159.pdf
The new criminal bars to asylum, which include not only minor misdemeanor crimes, but even situations where an immigration judge "has reason to believe" someone committed domestic violence—even if never arrested or convicted—will go into effect 30 days from tomorrow: November 20.
DHS/EOIR acknowledge that this new asylum bar—based an immigration judge having "reason to believe" an applicant has ever committed domestic battery—doesn't even require an arrest.
Immigration attorneys better prepare for mini trials, and start exercising subpoena authority.
Notably, because the DHS portion of this rule was signed by Chad Wolf, who may *still* not be the lawful Acting Secretary, it's technically possible that the DHS rule could be blocked on those grounds alone.
Under the new asylum rule published today, people who have never even been arrested for a crime, or whose most serious conviction is a misdemeanor use of a fake ID, may find themselves barred from asylum.
The goal is to eliminate asylum for all but the lucky few.
One important clarification about the new bars to asylum rule is that it only applies to asylum applications filed on or after the effective date of the rule, which is November 20.
All pending applications filed before then will not be affected by the rule.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
- 283 children whose parents have not been found.
- 187 children whose parents have been found, but who have not been successfully contacted.
- 75 children whose parents have not been found, but telephonic outreach is expected to be successful.
The status report from today makes clear that this claim from Miles Taylor is completely wrong.
283 children remain whose parents, after “time-consuming and arduous on-the-ground searches,” cannot be found and for whom telephonic outreach is not expected be successful.
Setting aside that @MilesTaylorUSA misunderstood what today’s story was about, I want to talk about this a little more, though, because it reflects a narrative that people at DHS often used at the time reunification began—that many parents willingly gave up their kids.
Let's start with the facts he got wrong. Horowitz claims Pereida was convicted of "stealing the identity of a citizen" to get a job in Iowa.
Except he wasn't. The job was in Nebraska (despite biz having Iowa in name) and he was convicted of *attempted* "criminal impersonation."
Here's more of the sloppiness: Horowitz claims that "Even without stealing identity [sic], he came here illegally and should have no legal standing to remain in the country."
Except that's literally not how it works. For generations, Congress has created paths to avoid removal.
Wolf is making things up again. Here's what @DHSOIG said in 2005 about why Congress created ICE.
"ICE was established not with a focus on supporting a particular mission but rather on building an institutional foundation large enough to justify a new organization."
The entire OIG analysis from 2005 is amazing. Here's what OIG offered as one official's theory for why ICE was created in the first place—interior immigration enforcement alone would never "attain bureaucratic critical mass," so they threw a bunch of other things into the pot.
The 2005 OIG report is worth a read. It assessed whether CBP and ICE should be merged back into one immigration agency.
OIG said merger was "the optimal solution" with "almost universal" support among employees, most of whom used to work for INS. oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OI…
🚨 New! A.G. Barr takes ANOTHER whack at the asylum process, issuing a new precedential decision in Matter of A-C-A-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 84 (A.G. 2020) and giving both immigration judges and the BIA more leeway to deny asylum claims.
Before I go through this latest attack on the asylum process, please enjoy a picture of Petra, who is a Very Good Cat. I hope this softens the blow a tiny bit.
A.G. Barr begins his decision (issued under authority to set precedent in immigration court) by basically saying that the Board of Immigration Appeals hasn't been digging deeply enough in every single case to find ways to deny people asylum. It's hard to read it otherwise.
Under DHS's new proposed rule, if you were born in, or are a citizen of, one of the countries on this map, you would be banned from getting a four-year degree in the United States, with a student visa limited to two years maximum.