Unbelievable! USCIS delayed the #H2B rule for 55 days past employer's start dates. Then tells them all that their labor certifications are "out of date" if the start date was more than 45 days ago, forcing them to redo the whole process. Wonder why we've got illegal immigration?
I'm certain that #H2B employers will do this, but it is absolutely ridiculous and unfair to employers that are trying to follow the law. They met all the requirements. They did everything right, and now USCIS says they have to redo it b/c the agency messed up. Unbelievable.
USCIS says every employer under this rule will have to prove "irreparable harm" if they don't get visas and that the visas will help preserve US workers jobs. Yet it is arbitrarily capping the number of visas at 1/3 the number Congress allowed. It doesn't even try to justify it
It's literally baked into the rule that companies who don't get visas will face irreparable harm and that US workers will suffer, and USCIS even says so. Yet it's still moving forward with this 22K cap when Congress gave them 64K
I love this. USCIS says we're acting to prevent "serious economic harm to the H-2B community" but then never acknowledges that the 22K will cause that as well. Also, never acknowledges that it wouldn't need to bypass comments if it proposed the rule in Dec or Jan or Feb or Mar!
Here's the reason. Economically obtuse labor union advocacy. Unemployment is *always* higher in these occupations because the jobs are inherently temporary, so more stints of unemployment are guaranteed. That's why US workers are less likely to apply!
I explain this issue in my #H2B paper. More stints of unemployment, but of much shorter duration. cato.org/publications/p…
Why is this issue so important? Because H-2 visas are the main or only way for poor foreign workers without families already here to come to the United States legally. Saying you don't want H-2B workers is basically just saying you don't want poor workers coming.
Here's a bizarre thing. USCIS will reallocate the visas set aside for Central America to other countries if they aren't used by July 8 to "help ensure that supplemental H-2B visas do not go unused." Your whole rule is about ensuring that most supplemental visas *do* go unused!
So USCIS is undermining the efficacy of the Central American set-aside in an effort to make sure that visas don't go unused. Why not just make the other visas available? What on Earth is going on here?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Today Cato published a comprehensive assessment of Trump’s record toward noncitizen criminals. Partly using FOIA data, we find Trump released more criminals, oversaw a major increase in criminal entries, and deprioritized criminal arrests. cato.org/blog/trump-rel…
Trump demonizes immigrants as uniquely criminal, even though all the evidence we have from the Census Bureau and other sources, show that they are less likely to commit serious crimes. But was Trump focused on the minority who do commit crimes?
Trump’s first week in office he *personally* revoked Obama-era memos that prioritized the detention and removal of serious criminals. Hundreds of agents were reassigned to low-level enforcement work targeting visa overstays rather than terrorists or traffickers.
🚨Dealing a devastating blow to those who want to restart expulsions, Border Patrol Chief @USBPChief just reported numbers that confirm a dramatic 70% decline in gotaways, or successful evasions of Border Patrol, since Title 42 ended in May 2023. cato.org/blog/border-pa…
Even when arrests rose back to Title 42 levels, the number of gotaways remained low. This is huge win for the Biden administration which took a massive political risk by ending Title 42. It should stick to its guns and not reverse course now.
The gotaway rate, the share of crossers who evade, has remained at the lowest sustained level on record. This is a remarkable accomplishment that @USBPChief and @AliMayorkas should be touting. They are building a more secure border.
Does the US have "open borders"? In my new paper, I provide the 1st-ever look at total green card requests over time. Since 1922, every year, most applicants didn't receive green cards. In 2024, just 3% will receive a green card, down from 99% in 1890. cato.org/briefing-paper…
Applicants are not being denied primarily because they are not qualified, but rather because the numerical caps don’t allow them to receive green cards. The caps haven’t been adjusted since 1990. Since 1996: way more requests, but no more green cards.
I dug through thousands of pages of little-noticed archival records from the State Department to put together this complete accounting for the immigration backlog, but this period was what infuriated me the most: this is how we got the Jews of Europe killed.
🧵OK, Mayorkas's impeachment: 1st 5 charges are Mayorkas not complying with various detention mandates, even though Congress has not funded this mandate and it would be unconstitutional detain everyone without feeding them. Even sleep deprivation conditions are unconstitutional:
They say his enforcement priorities that are mandated by 6 U.S. Code § 202 are illegal and cite a 5th circuit decision from 2022 that was *reversed by the Supreme Court*.
Oh, and guess what? Mayorkas in his first 2 years was less likely to release migrants than Trump's DHS secretaries were in his last 2 years, despite a massive increase in the flow. Charging Mayorkas over this is comical. cato.org/blog/new-data-…
Fareed Zakaria believes Biden can simply say: "You can't come in" and then people wouldn't be able to come in and they'd stop coming. He thinks that it's political insanity for Biden not to play this card. But the card doesn't exist... washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/…
Zakaria believes that most people are released **because of an asylum claim.** But this is easily disproven. Title 42 had outright banned asylum for 3 years, but people kept being released because of bottlenecks in the removal process. Now there's an asylum ban. Same thing!
If no one was ever released, would the total numbers entering detention fall? Certainly. But the number of people evading detection would rise (as it has during the Title 42/asylum ban era). Is that a politically useful answer to the problem? Doubtful.
New US Sentencing Commission data show that 89% of convicted fentanyl traffickers in 2022 were U.S. citizens. The new data came out just as members of Congress were frantically whipping the public into a frenzy over the need to ban asylum to stop fentanyl cato.org/blog/us-citize…
The new data are completely compatible with other data showing that 93% of fentanyl seizures occur at legal crossing points, where U.S. citizens are subject to the least scrutiny and have the right to enter whenever they want.
The government reported in July of this year that in 2021, it estimated that less than 3% of hard drugs are interdicted at ports of entry. This compares to an interdiction rate of more than 75% for illegal crossers. It's easier to get drugs undetected in than people!