My latest long piece that explains how the Biden admin let the child migrant crisis develop. It chose to:
-keep kids in border cells
-separate kids from extended family
-expel kids w/ parents, causing them to come back
-keep legal crossings closed cato.org/publications/i…
1. It chose to keep kids in CBP jails in double the numbers of 2019's kids-in-cages disaster in order to maintain social distancing at ORR shelters. This made no sense and led directly to children languishing days-weeks in CBP jail cells. The space was there the whole time
2. It continued expelling kids with parents to Mexico even after it was obvious that it was causing thousands of children to come back alone. This policy is separating far more families than were separated under Trump's family separation policy in 2019.
3. It has continued to separate extended family members who were the primary caregivers for children crossing without parents, labeling the children "unaccompanied" and expelling the family members to Mexico where they have little hope of reuniting with the kids.
4. It has almost completely banned legal border crossings of asylum-seeking families and children. They are down 95% from their peak in October 2016, forcing children and families to cross illegally, dangerously, ending up in border jails
"The Biden administration has publicly committed to the right principle for addressing child migration—that is, the best interest of the child should supersede other concerns. Yet its policies have not lived up to this lofty principle."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Why didn't Fairness for High Skilled Immigrants Act, the bill that received the most votes last times, get a vote before or with these other bills? Obviously partly b/c it's not as high priority for the Dems as these other bills, but it's more complex than that. Work is ongoing
A reason these bills saw a vote when they did is b/c they had an April 1 deadline to get a floor vote w/o a hearing. Fairness has the votes to pass on suspension of the rules so there's no worry about that issue with this bill. So no deadline ultimately delayed the vote...
Unlike those other bills, this bill passed the Senate last Congress. That may seem good! Lock for a vote again! The problem is that the House disagreed with the Senate changes, and they are trying to work out the differences now so we don't end up in this back-and-forth again
In the same breath, Sec @AliMayorkas denounces Trump's "cruel" remain in Mexico while telling those wanting to come to "wait in Mexico" or be forced back to wait. Naturally, "wait in Mexico" isn't "cruel" in his opinion c-span.org/video/?509417-…
He continues to cite the CDC's bogus border declaration with a straight face as being about COVID-19. Even though health experts say it is baseless. apnews.com/article/virus-…
He continues to act as if there is no overlap between his returning of families with kids and the number of unaccompanied kids who are coming. It's causing family separation and a major humanitarian crisis.
New GAO report on 287(g): "four of five field offices... said they suspended state and local officers’ 287(g) authorizations for failure to complete training and due to complaints against a designated state and local officer" gao.gov/assets/720/711…
**Two-thirds** of 287(g) local law enforcement agencies had deficiencies or "areas of concern" when ICE sent inspectors to review their 287(g) agreement compliance.
-State and local officials failed to disseminate information, explain, or report complaints.
-failed to meet their annual training requirements to maintain their 287(g) authorization
-were not providing interpreter services during immigration screenings
I suspect I differ with most/many advocates on:
-Naturalization timing & rules
-Noncitizen welfare/entitlement eligibility
-Guest workers
-Discriminatory labor rules
-Min wage
-Prioritizing those already here over those banned abroad
-I believe in a presumptive right to migrate
More or less the order of how strongly I feel about them.
-I don't have strong feelings about naturalization, but I strongly think noncitizens should get far more civil rights/due process/economic liberty immediately, while I lean toward it taking longer to become full citizens
-Welfare. No one is entitled to any taxpayer $. Limiting welfare would increase the economic benefits from immigration, which would increase political support for it. Very little evidence of net harm from restricting welfare. $ can directly & indirectly cause govts to restrict
Most of what I said here based on the outline is true for the bill as well with one important exception: the bill bars all legal immigrants from the path to citizenship except for H-2As and those in "essential critical infrastructure labor or services"
There is a drafting error, but as it is actually written now, only A nonimmigrants (diplomats) are excluded, but that's clearly an error b/c the list after "other than" doesn't make sense. That means Dems will have to double down on this to remove legal immigrants from the bill
The fact is that many Hs, Ls, Es, and other nonimmigrants will meet the definition of "‘essential critical infrastructure labor or services" but many will not. It's both better than being totally left out and bizarre to exclude those following the law cisa.gov/publication/gu…
This is probably the best provision on legal immigration in the U.S. Citizenship Act (Biden bill). It would make family-sponsored immigration functional and realistic for the first time in many decades.
At the same time, it effectively increases the family-sponsored cap from the FB floor of 226,000 to the cap of 480,000 by ending the requirement to deduct immediate relatives from the cap.
It also increases the EB cap, though not by nearly as much😡, from 140K to 170K and recaptures the 225K unused EB green cards since 1992. That would help with backlog reduction, but not dramatically. Demand would still far exceed supply