"The Trump administration’s legal efforts have only intensified, with nearly 40 new eminent domain lawsuits filed in the Southern District of Texas since Election Day."
!!!!
Historians need to delve into this! "CBP’s toughest fights over eminent domain center on Starr County...where family properties date back to original Spanish land grants issued 250 years ago, well before the Rio Grande served as an international boundary."
It gets worse, environmentalists. "CBP has awarded contracts for 55 miles, but only about 5 miles have been built, mostly on U.S. Fish and Wildlife refuge land in remote corners of the county."
!!!!!
Land cases are still pending from the GWBush admin.
So basically, landowners (mostly Mexican Americans), the courts, environmentalists, and ALL TAXPAYERS, are getting screwed by this.
I think, maybe this needs to stop?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Finally finished reading The President and Immigration Law. Of course agree all immigration policy is not fulfillment of Congressional will. But disagree thatCongressional intent is always too hard to discern--especially when it comes too the Refugee Act of 1980.
Fact of the matter is: Immigration policy starting in 1981 consistently ignored a very clear Congressional mandate: don't prevent people from seeking asylum.
Is the INA complicated: yes. But, to my mind, the way the 1996 law took away court review and gave more discretion to the executive has made things much worse.
As all comments note, this rule discriminates against ASYLUM SEEKERS (vs. other migrants). Non-response to this in final rule: No, it doesn't discriminate, because it applies to all asylum seekers.
That is not an answer.
The idea that national security means anything you say it means--especially that asylum seekers who haven't tested positive for COVID-19 will somehow spread COVID further in the US and thereby worsen its economic impact--is, frankly, beyond belief.
There's a lot that can be done with this "border wall" money to reform the asylum bureaucracy!
How about hiring new medical and social workers at ports and surging supplies?
How about, for USCIS, more asylum officers, new training, a research unit on country conditions?
Talking the anti-trafficking talk, not walking the walk. And it's much worse for immigrant victims of trafficking, especially labor trafficking (as per State Dept. 2020 TIP report).
Denial rate for T visas for victims of trafficking has risen steadily from 24 percent in 2017 to 50 percent so far this year. (Denial rate: denied/denied plus approved. Leave out pending). uscis.gov/sites/default/…
It's now official: the administration has adopted a policy of coercing poor asylum seekers into giving up their claims or pushing them into starvation and abusive work in the underground economy.
From the rule: "DHS acknowledges that these reforms will apply to aliens with meritorious asylum claims, and that these applicants may experience some degree of economic hardship as a result of heightened requirements for" work authorization.
There also seems to be a whole section of the rule--page 70-71--which essentially uses work authorization as a back handed way to raise the asylum standard from "well founded fear of persecution" to "fleeing imminent serious harm". Am I reading this right @ReichlinMelnick?