Share this page!

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
Twitter logo
9 Dec, 4 tweets, 2 min read
Tom Homan sold his soul to Fox News, and with it every shred of dignity he once had.

This is, of course, a lie. Jeff Sessions said early in 2017 the purpose of Zero Tolerance was separating families—and even a parent which served 24 hours in jail wasn't reunited with their kid.
Why is Homan on Fox News talking about this? Because he JUST wrote an op-ed trying to "debunk" the idea that family separation was bad.

Again, the families that have chosen not to reunite haven't done so because it would mean deporting their children.
washingtontimes.com/news/2020/dec/…
Homan's op-ed is *riddled* with errors. For example, he claims here that children were only held in ORR custody "until their parents were released."

This is flatly wrong. @DHSOIG and @OIGatHHS have both independently confirmed no such plans to reunite kids existed.
Homan hasn't worked for ICE for years, and yet he keeps getting invited on Fox News to pontificate. And when he shows up on TV or in front of Congress, he's often wildly wrong about details.

You should pay him as much attention as he pays to facts and to fairness—very little.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Aaron Reichlin-Melnick

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ReichlinMelnick

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
10 Dec
🚨 The June "Death to Asylum" regulation has been finalized. It is set to go into effect on Monday, January 11, just nine days before inauguration.

federalregister.gov/public-inspect…
Under this new rule, one of Trump's last parting body blows to the United States' system of humanitarian protection, none but the lucky few will be able to win asylum.

The regulation creates near-total bans on asylum for wide swathes of people and herculean procedural barriers.
Before I get into just how horrific this new anti-asylum regulation is, a picture of Petra I took this morning to soften the blow of what is a terrible thing to read through—even though the Biden administration will be working to end it ASAP and court challenges are certain.
Read 23 tweets
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
9 Dec
A few interesting things from this Fall Regulatory Agenda (most of which will be cancelled under Biden).

DHS suggests it's going to publish a final regulation this month "delegating authority for temporariness determinations in H-2A [applications] to the Department of Labor." Image
We also now have more information on the pending-for-months proposal to issue a temporary final rule that would invoke COVID to totally ban all humanitarian protections for people crossing the border from Mexico.

The rule is still pending at OIRA. reginfo.gov/public/do/eAge… Image
USCIS also lists on the agenda a possible proposed rule (which won't happen) that would have eliminated the ability to concurrently file a visa petition and an I-485 application for a green card—more dismantling of legal immigration. reginfo.gov/public/do/eAge… Image
Read 5 tweets
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
4 Dec
Judge Chhabria has had enough of ICE and GEO’s failure to protect people from COVID!

“From the start of the public health crisis until now, the conduct of the key ICE and GEO officials in charge of operations at Mesa Verde has been appalling.” From the start of the public health crisis until now, the co
“These [ICE and GEO] officials knew that they needed a clear and detailed plan to minimize the risk of an outbreak (and to contain an outbreak if one occurred), but nine months later they still have not created one. They deliberately avoided testing detainees ...”
“... and staff for fear that the results would require them to take expensive and logistically challenging safety measures. They failed to address the safety concerns created by Mesa Verde’s unique layout, which makes it far more dangerous ... “
Read 13 tweets
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
3 Dec
New! @DOJ_EOIR is *finally* moving forward with its long-planned deployment of electronic filing at the immigration courts, through a new Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that may hopefully bring the agency into the 21st century.

Digging into it now.

federalregister.gov/public-inspect…
In the new Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, EOIR is proposing to expand its e-filing pilot program (ECAS) to all immigration courts nationwide.

ECAS post-dates my time in immigration court so I'll defer to others on how well that system has worked so far.
EOIR proposes that all new cases in immigration courts which implement the new e-filing programs would get an "electronic Record of Proceedings" rather than a paper file.

BUT—this would only apply to NEW cases. The current 1.25 million cases would not be converted to electronic.
Read 10 tweets
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
1 Dec
Yesterday, @DOJ_EOIR continued down the path of turning the immigration courts into a due-process-free deportation machine.

This time, they're ending initial hearing dates (the equivalent of arraignments) for immigrants with lawyers, setting strict new deadlines, and more.
The new policy memo from @DOJ_EOIR declares that, because in "most cases" immigrants with counsel waive the required reading of rights that occurs at the initial hearing, it's okay to end initial hearings for ALL immigrants with counsel—a wildly arbitrary decision. Image
Furthermore, @DOJ_EOIR's new policy memo contains a wildly inaccurate claim; that asylum seekers are highly likely to have counsel. They rely on a warped statistic—the percent of asylum APPLICANTS who have counsel.

But that ignores people who, without a lawyer, can't apply! Image
Read 6 tweets
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick Profile picture
30 Nov
In today's oral argument, 7 of 9 Supreme Court justices used the phrase "illegal alien" to describe individuals currently lacking a lawful immigration status in the US.

A brief thread on the origin of the phrase, whether judges are required to use it, and why they shouldn't.

1/
Many people claim that the phrase "illegal alien" is somehow required by law—that it's the only accurate one.

But the entire Immigration and Nationality Act (and indeed all of Title 8 of the U.S. Code) uses the phrase just six times total—and most of those date back to 1996.

2/
Since "illegal alien" isn't a term that comes from the black letter law, is it a phrase with a long history in the courts?

Nope! The first use of the phrase in a federal case came from a 1950 case called Waisboard v. United States, from the following very colorful opening.

3/
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @ReichlinMelnick has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @ReichlinMelnick!

Read all threads by @ReichlinMelnick