For expert commentary on the impact of this order, see @IRAP@RCUSA_DC@RESCUEorg@HIASrefugees@LIRSorg & many more groups that have done the hard work of protecting refugees during the dark recent times.
I just want to point out some elements for the tech community...
2/
Important call for more efficient collection & sharing of biometric data, along with interviews via teleconferencing—these are tech-driven opportunities to streamline the whole system & put the President's goal of 125,000 annual refugee admissions within reach.
The federal gov't is going to need a lot more people to work on refugee adjudications, & @USOPM is called on to make "expanded use of direct hiring authority"—this allows qualified applicants to skip a lot of the usual civil service hiring requirements.
5/
I hope that @DHSgov & @StateDept do a major recruiting drive for mission-driven individuals to join up for the hard & noble task of rebuilding our refugee system.
Meantime, tech talent should check out the @USDS application page!
The argument is rooted in demographics: America's "Old Age Dependency Ratio" (# working-age vs. retirement-age adults) is plummeting, which is very bad news for future economic growth, Social Security solvency, etc.
To stay at par (3.5 ratio) by 2060, we need more immigrants. 2/
Specifically, 37% more immigrants—a total of ~1.37M/year.
Consider that Canada & Australia already welcome *200-300%* more immigrants than America does, adjusted for population.
America's immigration policy is among the stingiest in the @OECD.
How does DHS justify delaying the effective date without notice & comment?
"USCIS will not have adequate time to complete system development, thoroughly test the modifications, train staff,
& conduct public outreach needed to ensure an effective & orderly implementation."
2/
Also:
"During the delay, while USCIS works through the issues associated with implementation, DHS leadership will also evaluate [Trump's] January 8th rule & its associated policies, as is typical of agencies at the beginning of a new Administration."
Joe Biden will present Congress with an immigration reform bill on his first day in office—Wednesday!—including a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, immediate green cards for DACA & TPS holders, & more...
Legal immigration items newly reported:
*Recapturing unused green cards
*Work permits for spouses & children of H-1B workers
Prior promises by candidate Biden:
* No green card caps for STEM PhD grads
* No caps on spouses & children of permanent residents
* No country caps
2/
Lots to anticipate starting on Jan. 20—not only these legislative proposals that Congress will still need to pass, but also a great many new executive actions to start rebuilding our immigration system in the meantime.
3/3
It's no surprise that Joe Biden plans to begin his administration with a flurry of executive actions—that's what presidents tend to do as leaders of the Executive Branch.
"Executive action" isn't the same as "executive fiat" or "executive overreach." 1/
In the end, "executive overreach" is whatever the courts find to be outside the authorities granted to the Executive Branch by Congress or the Constitution.
But in the beginning, as a policy takes shape, you could say that executive overreach is a state of mind.
2/
Under Obama, executive actions went through layers & layers of scrutiny from gov't lawyers before they were initiated.
It wasn't just fear of losing in court—officials wanted to stay on the lawful side of statute & judicial precedent.
If Dems control the Senate, then the Congressional Review Act (CRA) suddenly snaps into major relevance as a blunt instrument to eliminate Trump-era rules—at least from the past 6 months or so.
The CRA lets Congress take a simple majority vote on eliminating most any rule from the past 60 "days of continuous session"—when you include recess days, that ends up being several months.
The CRA is a two-way bazooka: It destroys the existing rule *&* in the future prevents the agency from issuing a "new rule that is substantially the same" or reissuing the rule in "substantially the same form."