Tag: migrant

  • Pope rebukes Trump over migrant deportations and refutes VP Vance’s theology : NPR

    Pope rebukes Trump over migrant deportations and refutes VP Vance’s theology : NPR


    Pope Francis, dressed in green and white, sits next to a crucifix and looks to the side.

    Pope Francis wrote a letter to U.S. Catholic bishops refuting Vice President Vance’s theology and taking to task the Trump administration’s stance on migrants.

    Alberto Pizzoli/AFP


    hide caption

    toggle caption

    Alberto Pizzoli/AFP

    Pope Francis criticized the Trump administration’s stance on migrants, calling the president’s pledge of mass deportations “a major crisis.”

    In a strongly worded letter to U.S. Catholic bishops, Francis wrote that it’s important for Catholics to disagree with any measure that identifies the illegal status of some migrants with criminality.

    Francis also said that deporting people — who in many cases have left their own land for reasons of extreme poverty, exploitation and persecution — “damages the dignity of many men and women, and of entire families, and places them in a state of particular vulnerability and defenselessness.”

    The letter also appears to reply to remarks by Vice President Vance in which he said people should care for their family, communities and country before caring for others.

    Francis instead wrote that people should meditate on love that builds a fraternity open to all, without exception.

    “Christian love is not a concentric expansion of interests that little by little extend to other persons and groups,” the pope writes.

    The pope is the second high-ranking Catholic leader to criticize Vance, who is Catholic.

    After Vance accused the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops of resettling immigrants to receive federal funding, New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan called the vice president’s remarks “scurrilous” and “nasty.”

    “You want to come look at our audits, which are scrupulously done? You think we make money caring for the immigrants? We’re losing it hand over fist. … We’re not in a moneymaking business,” Dolan said.



    In a recent statement, Pope Francis has criticized President Trump’s aggressive stance on migrant deportations and has also refuted Vice President Vance’s theological justifications for such actions. The Pope, known for his advocacy for refugees and migrants, expressed deep concern over the human rights implications of the deportations and urged for compassion and understanding towards those seeking a better life.

    In his rebuke, Pope Francis emphasized the importance of upholding the dignity and rights of all individuals, regardless of their immigration status. He called for a more humane and inclusive approach to addressing the complex issue of migration, urging world leaders to prioritize the well-being of vulnerable populations.

    Additionally, the Pope took issue with Vice President Vance’s theological justifications for the deportations, stating that such arguments were not in line with the core teachings of Christianity. He emphasized the need for a more compassionate and merciful response to the plight of migrants and refugees, highlighting the importance of solidarity and empathy in addressing global migration challenges.

    Overall, Pope Francis’s remarks serve as a powerful reminder of the moral imperative to treat all individuals with respect and dignity, regardless of their background or nationality. His rebuke of Trump’s policies and refutation of Vance’s theology highlights the importance of upholding human rights and promoting a more compassionate approach to immigration issues.

    Tags:

    1. Pope Francis
    2. Donald Trump
    3. Migrant deportations
    4. Vice President Vance
    5. Theology
    6. NPR
    7. Immigration policies
    8. Religious leaders
    9. Social justice
    10. Church politics

    #Pope #rebukes #Trump #migrant #deportations #refutes #Vances #theology #NPR

  • Mayor Adams rails against Biden over migrant talks on Tucker Carlson


    In an interview with conservative commentator Tucker Carlson that aired on Tuesday, New York City Mayor Eric Adams doubled down on his claims that federal prosecutors targeted him because of his criticism of President Joe Biden’s handling of what he considered a crisis at the U.S. southern border.

    In his most detailed revelations to date about his conversations with former White House officials, Adams claimed that Biden and his aides told him to tone down his comments and deal with an influx of migrants to help the party in the upcoming national election.

    “Basically, be a good Democrat, Eric,” Adams said. “That was the basic overall theme.”

    He said that one of Biden’s aides told him, “Listen, this is like a gallstone. It’ll pass.”

    The roughly 50-minute interview with Carlson, a former Fox News host and well-known ally of President Donald Trump, aired on the first full day of the second Trump administration. The previous day, the mayor canceled his appearances at Martin Luther King Jr. Day events in New York City to accept a last-minute invitation to Trump’s inauguration.

    The mayor said he spoke to Julie Chávez Rodríguez, formerly Biden’s campaign manager, and Tom Perez, then director of the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs. He also cited two meetings with Biden himself.

    “It appeared to me there was a bigger focus on the national election and not on what it was doing to the cities,” Adams told Carlson, referring to the Biden administration’s response to the migrant influx that city officials estimate as costing $7 billion.

    A former White House spokesperson said he would review the mayor’s claims.

    Adams also further distanced himself from the Democratic Party, saying he was “demonized” for promoting the interests of working class New Yorkers.

    “People often say, ‘Well, you know, you don’t sound like a Democrat and you know, you seemed to have left the party,” Adams said. “No, the party left me and it left working-class people.”

    After the inauguration on Monday, Adams had lunch with four New York Republicans: state Senate Minority Leader Robert Ortt, Assemblymember William Barclay and former Reps. Mark Molinaro and Anthony D’Esposito, Ortt said. The event was not on the mayor’s schedule.

    “My takeaway is that he’s running,” Ortt told reporters at the state Capitol. “Obviously he needs to take care of some things.”

    Ortt said that Adams did not discuss switching parties.

    In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, the mayor appeared to lean closer to Trump’s orbit while facing federal corruption charges. He met with Trump’s border czar Tom Homan in a meeting brokered by another conservative TV celebrity, Dr. Phil; approached Trump at a Madison Square Garden UFC fight; flew to Florida to have lunch with Trump at his golf course near Mar-a-Lago and has generally avoided criticizing the president.

    Meanwhile, the mayor has framed his federal corruption case as political retribution for his past criticism of the Biden administration’s handling of the migrant influx. Trump has said he would consider pardoning Adams.

    During a press conference at City Hall on Tuesday, Adams declined to opine on a raft of orders Trump signed on his first day in office. Those included withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement, pardoning nearly 1,600 people prosecuted for attacking the Capitol on Jan. 6, stripping federal funding from so-called “sanctuary” cities that include New York City and revoking birthright citizenship.

    “We’re not going to agree on everything,” Adams said, but he noted that the president had the power to use executive orders.

    Kayla Mamelak, Adams’ press secretary, declined to comment on the mayor’s remarks before the full interview aired.

    But the mayor’s words immediately drew criticism from Democrats seeking to unseat him and intensified speculation that Adams, a former registered Republican, might seek to return to the GOP.

    ​​“It is becoming abundantly clear that Eric Adams has neither the interest nor a path to being the Democratic nominee for mayor in 2025,” said Zohran Mamdani, a Queens state assemblymember who is challenging the mayor in the Democratic primary. “He will either return to his former status as a Republican and seek employment in the Trump administration or its affiliated media, or run outside of the Democratic primary for a second term and play spoiler in the November general election.”

    “It’s time for him to make his intentions plain,” Mamdani added.

    Adams has previously said he plans to run as a Democrat, although he has at times been coy about his allegiance to the party. He has until Feb. 14 to switch parties. Alternatively, he can seek permission from the city’s five county party leaders to run as a Democrat on the Republican party line. The deadline for petitioning to get on the ballot is April.

    Another Democratic primary challenger, city Comptroller Brad Lander, sought to paint Adams as disloyal to his party. He compared Adams to Andrew Cuomo, the former New York governor who has long been rumored to be a potential mayoral candidate.

    “A New York Democrat hasn’t sold out his party this bad since Andrew Cuomo formed the IDC,” Lander said, referring to a group of Democrats in the state Legislature who collaborated with Republicans during Cuomo’s tenure.

    State Sen. Zellnor Myrie, a Brooklyn Democrat and another competitor in the mayoral race, took a jab at the mayor’s circle of MAGA acquaintances.

    “If you’re busy tonight, you can catch him on the Steve Bannon podcast tomorrow,” he said on X.

    At the inauguration, Adams was seen with celebrity fighters Jake and Logan Paul; Charles Herbster, a Republican candidate for governor in Nebraska; and Brock Pierce, a cryptocurrency investor who previously flew the mayor to Puerto Rico on his private jet.

    The mayor’s decision to attend Trump’s inauguration drew scrutiny from Democrats, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, one of the mayor’s staunchest allies.

    “​​To say you’re not going to raise your eyebrows would be being dishonest,” Sharpton said on MSNBC. “I think this is going to cause a lot of us to say, ‘What is this all about?’”

    Adams played down the critique when asked about Sharpton’s comments on Tuesday.

    “He will tell you Eric and I disagree on some things and we agree on others,” Adams said. “But we have a long, rich history.”

    Jon Campbell contributed reporting.



    In a shocking turn of events, Mayor Eric Adams of New York City went on Tucker Carlson’s show to express his frustration and anger towards President Biden’s handling of migrant talks.

    During the interview, Mayor Adams did not hold back, criticizing the Biden administration for its lack of action and leadership on the issue of migrants crossing the border. He slammed the president for not doing enough to secure the border and address the influx of migrants entering the country.

    Mayor Adams went on to say that the situation at the border is a national crisis that needs to be addressed immediately. He called on Biden to take decisive action and implement strong border security measures to protect the country from illegal immigration.

    The mayor’s strong words on Tucker Carlson’s show have sparked a debate among politicians and citizens alike, with many questioning the Biden administration’s handling of the migrant crisis. It remains to be seen how the president will respond to Mayor Adams’ criticisms, but one thing is for sure – this issue is far from over.

    Tags:

    1. Mayor Adams
    2. Biden
    3. Migrant talks
    4. Tucker Carlson
    5. NYC politics
    6. Immigration policy
    7. Eric Adams
    8. Political debate
    9. New York City mayor
    10. News commentary

    #Mayor #Adams #rails #Biden #migrant #talks #Tucker #Carlson

  • Title 42 and its Impact on Immigration and Migrant Families


    Introduction

    Title 42 of the Public Health Services Act is a public health authority that authorizes the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to suspend entry of individuals into the U.S. to protect public health. This rarely utilized authority was implemented by the Trump administration in March 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic to allow for quick expulsion of migrants, including asylum seekers, seeking entry into the U.S. at the land borders. After a series of delays due to court challenges, the restrictions were lifted when the Biden Administration declared an end to the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) on May 11, 2023. The Biden administration subsequently took increasingly restrictive executive action to restrict border entry.

    Land border entries into the U.S. decreased as a result of Title 42 since individuals who had border encounters under this authority were immediately expelled due to the public health threat outlined by the Trump administration. However, research suggests that Title 42 restrictions did not result in a “better managed border” and increased cases of unauthorized re-entry, and public health experts stated that it put the health and well-being of migrants at risk. Recent reports suggest President-elect Trump may reinvoke Title 42 restrictions during his second term to close the border between the U.S. and Mexico, along with a number of other actions to restrict immigration.

    This brief provides an explanation of Title 42 and its application in border regions, the impact of Title 42 on border expulsions and the health and well-being of migrants during COVID-19, and a discussion of the potential implications of reinvoking Title 42 restrictions for immigration and the health of migrants.

    What are policies for migrants seeking entry at the U.S. border?

    Under U.S. immigration law, individuals have a legal right to claim asylum when presenting at U.S. ports of entry. An asylee is an individual already present in the U.S. or seeking admission at a port of entry who is seeking protection based on “persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” In fiscal year (FY) 2023, the U.S. granted asylum to over 54,000 individuals from close to a dozen different countries. However, as of October 2024, over 90% of asylum cases filed in FY 2023 were still pending with only 2% being granted approval due to immigration backlogs.

    Migrants encountered at the border are processed and screened for asylum under Title 8 of the U.S. Code addressing “Aliens and Nationality. Under Title 8, those determined to have a credible fear of persecution or other threats in their home country are either held in custody or released into the U.S. while their case is pending in immigration court. Those who the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) determine not to have a credible fear are permitted to appeal this decision to an immigration judge. If an individual chooses not to appeal or the immigration judge did not find fear, then the individual is removed.

    In June 2024, the Biden administration took executive action to suspend and limit the entry of migrants at the southern border, including asylum seekers, to “address the historic levels of migration and more efficiently process migrants arriving at the southern border. Under this rule, the suspension of entry will go into effect immediately after there have been 2,500 or more average daily border encounters (not including unaccompanied children) over seven consecutive days and can be lifted once there have been fewer than 1,500 average daily border encounters over seven consecutive days. As of April 2024, there were about 4,000 average daily border encounters, leaving the restrictions in place. U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) data show that border encounters following the executive order were at a three-year low with there being a 29% reduction in encounters between May and June 2024.

    How did Title 42 change policy for migrants seeking entry at the border during the COVID-19 pandemic?

    In March 2020, the Trump administration implemented Title 42 under the Public Health Service Act, which allowed for the immediate expulsion of migrants without screening for asylum. This order applied to all migrants arriving to the U.S. from Canada or Mexico regardless of their country of origin who would otherwise be held in a congregate setting at a port of entry or border patrol station. It did not apply to lawful permanent residents and their families, members of the armed forces or their families, or people who hold valid travel documents such as tourists or those in a visa waiver program. Officials also had authority to make exceptions for individuals on a case-by-case basis. Under this order, the CDC Director was authorized to “suspend the introduction of persons into the United States” and CBP officials were directed to process migrants promptly (within 15 minutes in an outdoor setting) without screening for asylum and expel them back to Mexico or Canada or their country of origin. The CDC stated the purpose of the order was to protect CBP personnel, U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, and other individuals from an increase in COVID-19 spread at land ports of entry, Border Patrol stations, and in the interior of the country. The order pointed to the introduction of individuals into congregate settings at the border and the increased strain this would put on the U.S. health care system during a public health emergency as primary reasons for implementing the restrictions on entry.

    Title 42 continued to be enforced under the Biden administration until the end of the COVID-19 PHE declaration in May 2023. However, unaccompanied minors were exempted from the order based on a district court ruling in November 2020 and by a CDC order issued under the Biden administration in February 2021. The CDC order continued to apply the original Title 42 order to single adults and families. After facing legal challenges, Title 42 restrictions were lifted in May 2023 following the end of the COVID-19 PHE declaration.

    How did implementation of Title 42 impact immigration and the health of migrants?

    Between FY 2021 and 2023, there were over 6.5 million encounters at the Southwest land border of which about four in ten (41%) were under Title 42 authority. Enforcement encounters refer to “apprehensions or inadmissibles processed under CBP’s immigration authority;” these include individuals apprehended under Title 8 as well as individuals expelled under Title 42. While Title 42 applies to both the Northern and Southwestern Borders, nearly all Title 42 encounters occurred at the Southwestern Border. Between FY 2021 and FY 2023, Title 42 encounters at the Southwest Border accounted for about four in ten (41%) of all Southwest Border encounters. The share of encounters that were under Title 42 varied by demographic group with Title 42 accounting for a majority (56%) of single adult encounters and one in six (17%) family encounters, while Title 8 accounted for virtually all (99%) encounters with unaccompanied minors reflecting their exemption from expulsion under Title 42 (Figure 1).

    As of May 2023, there were over 2.5 million single adult expulsions, nearly 320,000 expulsions of individuals in a family unit, and nearly 16,000 expulsions of unaccompanied minors under Title 42. The number of family expulsions under Title 42 grew between FY 2020 and FY 2021, while expulsions of unaccompanied minors decreased, reflecting their exemption beginning in February 2021. These encounter counts reflect repeat encounters with individuals, as each attempt by the same individual to cross the border is counted as a new encounter.

    Data indicate that Title 42 did not lead to a reduction in border encounters, but border entries into the U.S. went down due to the nature of the authority. While Title 42 was intended to reduce COVID-19 exposure risk at the border, it led to an increasing number of encounters at the border largely due to repeat encounters. This is in large part because, unlike Title 8, migrants apprehended under Title 42 were immediately expelled and those with repeat encounters did not face any penalties. Data from 2020 through 2023 suggest that while there were close to 3 million Southwest border expulsions under Title 42 authority, many of those expulsions were of the same individuals making repeated attempts to cross the border. In the last 6 months of 2021, a quarter of the encounters under Title 42 were of the same individuals on multiple occasions, with recidivism rates under the authority being at their highest levels in over a decade. In addition, there has not been a significant increase in border encounters since Title 42 was lifted with border encounters in FY 2024 (2.1 million) being lower than border encounters in FY 2022 (2.4 million) and FY 2023 (2.5 million). However, entries into the U.S. through land borders decreased as a result of Title 42 since individuals who had border encounters under this authority were immediately expelled due to the public health threat outlined by the Trump administration.

    Research suggests Title 42 expulsions negatively impacted the health and well-being of migrant families while having little to no impact on preventing the spread of COVID-19 in the U.S. Physicians, epidemiologists, and public health experts repeatedly stated that Title 42 was counterproductive to preserving health and protecting individuals from COVID-19. Physicians suggested that being in close proximity with other individuals while being temporarily detained or transported back to Mexico, lack of medical screenings, and lack of provision of necessary medication could have adverse impacts on physical and mental health. Typically, the CDC recommends that asylees be provided an initial medical screening within 30-60 days of arriving in the U.S., but since Title 42 called for immediate expulsion, such screenings were not provided. Interviews conducted with over two dozen asylum seekers who were expelled under Title 42 authority found that a vast majority reported symptoms of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and many reported that their children’s mental health was also impacted. Sending individuals back to potentially dangerous situations they were fleeing also poses risks. Title 42 may also have contributed to increases in family separations at the border. Media reports suggested that some families were separating from their children so that the children could seek entry as unaccompanied minors, who were exempt from Title 42 expulsions. These separations may have led to children facing dangerous situations traveling to the border and expose them to trauma and toxic stress. The impact of Title 42 on migrant families may also have been exacerbated by the “Remain in Mexico” or Migrant Protection Protocols program implemented under the first Trump administration, which required thousands of migrants (including children) to wait for their U.S. immigration court hearings in Mexican border towns that can be dangerous and unsafe. Close to 80% of migrants receiving medical treatment from Doctors without Borders/Medecins Sans Frontieres at border locations in Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, reported being victims of violence, with many experiencing depression, severe anxiety, and post-traumatic stress.

    What are the potential implications of reinvoking Title 42?

    The incoming Trump administration has indicated plans to reinvoke Title 42. President-elect Trump has proposed an array of policies focused on restricting immigration. Recent reports suggest that the incoming Trump administration is planning to reinvoke Title 42 to restrict immigration under the rubric of public health protection. Experiences during COVID-19 suggest Title 42 was not effective at reducing border encounters or preventing COVID-19 and had negative health impacts for migrants. Reinvocation of such a policy also raises questions about its use as a border enforcement tool and could potentially fuel xenophobic sentiment towards immigrants.



    Title 42 and its Impact on Immigration and Migrant Families: A Closer Look

    In response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the United States government implemented Title 42, a provision that allows for the expulsion of individuals who pose a public health risk. While this policy was intended to curb the spread of the virus, it has had significant implications for immigrants and migrant families seeking asylum in the US.

    Since Title 42 was enacted in March 2020, thousands of individuals, including families with young children, have been expelled from the US without due process or the opportunity to seek asylum. This has led to a humanitarian crisis at the US-Mexico border, with many families being forced to return to dangerous conditions in their home countries.

    The impact of Title 42 on immigrant and migrant families cannot be understated. Families are being torn apart, children are being traumatized, and individuals are being denied their basic human rights. The policy has also strained relationships with neighboring countries and undermined the US’s reputation as a leader in refugee protection.

    As the Biden administration grapples with how to address the legacy of Title 42, it is crucial that policymakers and advocates prioritize the needs and rights of immigrant and migrant families. This includes ending the use of Title 42, reinstating asylum protections, and providing support and resources to those affected by the policy.

    In the meantime, it is important for the public to stay informed and engaged on this issue, and to support organizations and initiatives that are working to protect the rights and dignity of immigrant and migrant families. Together, we can create a more just and compassionate immigration system for all.

    Tags:

    Title 42, immigration policy, migrant families, border control, public health measures, asylum seekers, US immigration laws, Covid-19 restrictions, immigration detention, immigration regulations, migrant children, immigration crisis, immigration advocacy, immigration reform.

    #Title #Impact #Immigration #Migrant #Families

  • The Senate advances a migrant detention bill that could be Trump’s first law to sign


    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is heading toward a final vote on legislation that would give states the power to challenge federal immigration policies and require federal authorities to detain migrants accused of theft and violent crimes, setting a new tone on immigration as Donald Trump enters the White House.

    Newly in the majority, Senate Republicans have made the so-called Laken Riley Act — named after a Georgia student who was killed last year by a Venezuelan man — a top priority, potentially making it the first bill Trump signs as president.

    On Friday, it cleared a key procedural hurdle 61-35, with 10 Democrats voting with Republicans to advance it to a final vote. The Senate is set to vote on final passage Monday after Trump’s inauguration, but the House will also need to take up changes made to the bill.

    Democrats, who last year allowed similar legislation to languish, initially supported opening debate on the bill, signaling a new willingness to consider crackdowns on illegal immigration following their election losses. However, most voted against advancing the bill to a final vote after they were unable to make significant changes to the legislation.

    “The American people are rightly concerned about the illegal immigration crisis in this country, and they sent a clear message in November that they want to see it addressed,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, who described the bill as “the first of many” on the topic.

    In the early days of the new Congress, Republicans have dared Democrats to join them in efforts to restrict illegal immigration and deport migrants who are tied to crimes. In several cases, they have. Most Senate Democrats voted to advance the Laken Riley Act last week as they bartered for changes to the bill.

    In the House, all Republicans, as well as 48 Democrats, voted to pass a similar version of the bill this month. And this week, 61 Democrats also voted for a separate bill to require deportation and block entry into the U.S. for foreign nationals who are convicted of physical or sexual abuse.

    The votes have given Republicans some early wins as they enjoy a trifecta of power across the House, Senate and White House, though the bills have mostly retread on policy where federal authorities already have discretion to act.

    Once Trump enters office and attempts to set up large-scale deportation operations, congressional Republicans will face intense pressure to pay for his priorities while also balancing their pledges to tame budget deficits and concerns about the economic, as well as humanitarian, impacts of mass deportations.

    The Laken Riley Act does not have any new funding for immigration officials, but Democratic staff on the Senate Appropriations Committee estimate the bill would cost $83 billion over the next three years, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.

    Republicans pushed back on that figure. At the same time, they are debating how to pass a major funding package through a process known as reconciliation that would allow the Trump administration to spend up to $100 billion on border and immigration enforcement.

    Democrats, meanwhile, are searching for a path forward on their approach to immigration. The party is divided between those who now prioritize restrictions on illegal immigration and those who argue the party should also champion help for migrants who are already here or who are seeking relief from violence or persecution in their home countries.

    “We Democrats want to see our broken immigration system fixed,” said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who supported negotiations on the bill but voted against its advance Friday.

    He pointed to Democrats working with Republicans on a larger bill last year that would have clamped down on the asylum process. That legislation was rejected by Republicans after Trump came out in opposition to it, but Schumer said he would still “stand ready” to work with the GOP on border security and immigration.

    “I think we have to prove that we’re the only party serious about border security,” said Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat.

    He criticized the Laken Riley Act because it would require immigration authorities to give priority to detaining migrants accused or convicted of crimes like shoplifting, but potentially force authorities to release others convicted of more serious crimes. Murphy said it would just “make the system more convoluted and more chaotic.”

    The Senate will vote Monday on expanding the bill to also target migrants who assault a police officer or are accused of crimes that kill or seriously injure someone.

    The legislation, as well as Riley’s name, became a rallying cry for Republicans last year as they spotlighted President Joe Biden’s handling of the border. Riley, a Georgia nursing student, was killed in February, and Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan man who entered the country illegally and was allowed to stay to pursue his immigration case, was convicted of her murder.

    Trump in the campaign repeatedly raised the issue of crimes committed by migrants, but there is no evidence that immigrants are more prone to violent crime. Several studies have found immigrants commit lower rates of crime than those born in the U.S. Groups that advocate for restrictive immigration policies dispute or dismiss those findings.

    Ultimately, immigration experts said the most lasting effects of the legislation could be the provision that gives legal standing to state attorneys general to sue the federal government for harm caused by federal immigration policies.

    That gives states new power in setting immigration policy when they have already been trying to push back against presidential decisions under both the Trump and Biden administrations. Democrats unsuccessfully pushed to have that provision stripped from the bill, saying it could open the door to major changes in federal policy.

    “We have a really overwhelmed and stretched immigration system as it is and additional litigation just adds chaos,” said Kathleen Bush-Joseph, a lawyer and policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute.





    The Senate has taken a significant step towards passing a bill that would authorize funding for migrant detention facilities. This controversial bill, which has already been approved by the House of Representatives, has sparked heated debate among lawmakers and activists alike.

    If signed into law by President Trump, this bill would allocate billions of dollars towards expanding and maintaining detention centers for migrants at the southern border. Proponents argue that this funding is necessary to address the influx of migrants crossing into the United States, while critics argue that it will only exacerbate the humanitarian crisis at the border.

    With the Senate’s advancement of this bill, it could potentially become the first legislation related to immigration that President Trump signs into law. As the 2020 election approaches, this bill is sure to further ignite the immigration debate and shape the political landscape in the coming months.

    Stay tuned for updates on the progress of this bill and its potential impact on the immigration system in the United States.

    Tags:

    1. Senate migrant detention bill
    2. Trump’s first law
    3. Immigration detention legislation
    4. Senate approval for migrant detention bill
    5. Trump administration immigration policy
    6. Congress passes migrant detention bill
    7. President Trump’s signature on immigration law
    8. Detention bill updates
    9. Impact of migrant detention legislation
    10. Senate decision on migrant detention bill

    #Senate #advances #migrant #detention #bill #Trumps #law #sign

  • Trump says he is a ‘believer’ in H-1B visas for skilled migrant workers as right spars on immigration: report

    Trump says he is a ‘believer’ in H-1B visas for skilled migrant workers as right spars on immigration: report


    President-elect Trump appeared to agree with Elon Musk in support of H-1B visas for skilled workers in the U.S., as the right spars on the ongoing immigration debate.

    “I’ve always liked the visas, I have always been in favor of the visas. That’s why we have them,” Trump told the New York Post Saturday.

    Trump said that he recognizes the visas on his properties, saying, “I’ve been a believer in H-1B. I have used it many times. It’s a great program.”

    MUSK INFLAMES X WITH PROFANE MOVIE QUOTE IN DEFENSE OF H1-B VISA

    President-elect Donald Trump smiles during Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest at the Phoenix Convention Center, Dec. 22, in Phoenix.  (Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)

    Trump’s comments come as the right clashes over immigration and the place of foreign workers in the U.S. labor market.

    Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who have been tapped by Trump to lead his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), argued earlier this week that American culture has not prioritized education enough, and therefore that foreign workers are needed for tech companies like Musk’s SpaceX and Tesla. 

    Many tech companies have embraced the H-1B visa program, which allows U.S. companies to hire foreign workers in specialty occupations, but critics of the program say H-1B holders are often chosen over U.S. citizens for jobs. 

    Conservative pundit Laura Loomer speaks to the media in New York City.  (David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

    One such critic, Laura Loomer, set off a firestorm on X when criticizing Trump’s selection of Sriram Krishnan, an Indian American venture capitalist, to be an adviser on artificial intelligence policy.

    MUSK AND RAMASWAMY IGNITE MAGA WAR OVER SKILLED IMMIGRATION AND AMERICAN ‘MEDIOCRITY’

    In a post, she said she was concerned that Krishnan, a U.S. citizen, would have an influence on the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

    “It’s alarming to see the number of career leftists who are now being appointed to serve in Trump’s admin when they share views that are in direct opposition to Trump’s America First agenda,” she wrote.

    Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk. (Getty Images/AP Images)

    Musk has doubled-down on his position, taking to X on Friday to blast a user who showed a video of him discussing SpaceX processes to go after the billionaire’s stance on the visa program.  

    “The reason I’m in America along with so many critical people who built SpaceX, Tesla and hundreds of other companies that made America strong is because of H1B,” Musk wrote on X.

    He then went on to quote the 2008 action-comedy movie, “Tropic Thunder,” which was a box office hit. 

    “Take a big step back and F— YOURSELF in the face,” Musk railed. 

    A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket with a NASA spacecraft bound for Jupiter lifts off from pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center, Oct. 14, in Cape Canaveral, Fla. (AP Photo/John Raoux)

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Ramaswamy has similarly been pro-H-1B visa, writing: “American culture has venerated mediocrity over excellence.”

    Fox News Digital has reached out to the Trump Transition Team for comment.

    Fox News Digital’s Michael Dorgan contributed to this report.





    In a recent statement, President Trump has expressed his support for H-1B visas for skilled migrant workers, calling himself a “believer” in the program. This comes as the right wing of the political spectrum continues to spar over immigration policies.

    The H-1B visa program allows highly skilled foreign workers to come to the United States to fill job vacancies in fields such as technology, engineering, and healthcare. Critics argue that the program takes away job opportunities from American workers, while supporters say it is essential for filling high-demand positions that cannot be filled domestically.

    President Trump’s stance on the H-1B visa program has been somewhat ambiguous in the past, with conflicting statements on whether he supports or opposes the program. However, in a recent interview, he stated that he is a “believer” in the program and that it is necessary for attracting top talent to the United States.

    As the debate over immigration policies continues to heat up, it will be interesting to see how Trump’s support for H-1B visas plays out in the larger conversation around immigration reform. Stay tuned for updates on this developing story.

    Tags:

    1. Trump H-1B visa support
    2. Skilled migrant workers immigration
    3. Trump stance on H-1B visas
    4. Immigration policy debate
    5. Trump and skilled labor migration
    6. H-1B visa controversy
    7. Trump immigration report
    8. Skilled workers visa debate
    9. Trump immigration policy update
    10. H-1B visa news analysis

    #Trump #believer #H1B #visas #skilled #migrant #workers #spars #immigration #report

  • Illegal migrant indicted on murder charges after woman is burned to death on subway

    Illegal migrant indicted on murder charges after woman is burned to death on subway


    The illegal migrant accused of burning a New York City subway rider to death on Sunday has been indicted on murder charges. 

    Sebastian Zapeta, 33, was indicted on one count of murder in the first degree, three counts of murder in the second degree and one count of arson after a woman was lit on fire and burned to death on a subway train in Brooklyn, New York. The indictment was filed Thursday and will be unsealed at an arraignment hearing on Jan. 7.

    Zapeta’s attorney told the judge he spoke with his client Friday and asked for permission to waive his client’s appearance. The judge granted the request. 

    Zapeta is a previously deported immigrant from Guatemala who first entered the country in June 2018. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) told Fox News that it has lodged an immigration detainer with the New York City Department of Corrections for Zapeta, but the corrections department has indicated it will not honor the detainer, per its current policy. An immigration detainer is a request by ICE to take a person into its custody. 

    Sebastian Zapeta, accused of setting a woman on fire inside a New York City subway train, appears in court, Tuesday, Dec. 24, 2024, in New York. (AP Photo/Curtis Means via Pool)

    SANCTUARY CITY NEW YORK PRESSURED TO MAKE DRASTIC CHANGE AFTER ILLEGAL MIGRANT ALLEGEDLY BURNS WOMAN ALIVE

    It comes as police and the medical examiner are still working to identify the victim of the attack days after the horror because she was so severely burned.

    They have made some progress in identifying her, but Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez said he is not at liberty to discuss the progress. Investigators also believe that she was homeless and are working to track down any possible family members.

    Surveillance video of Sunday’s attack showed the suspect approaching the woman, who was sitting motionless and may have been sleeping, while aboard a stationary F train at the Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue subway station and then setting her on fire.

    “As the train pulled into the station, the suspect calmly walked up to the victim,” Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said during a press conference on Sunday evening, adding that the female victim was in a seated position. “The suspect used what we believe to be a lighter to ignite the victim’s clothing, which became fully engulfed in a matter of seconds.”

    CRITICS WARN OF ‘DANIEL PENNY EFFECT’ AFTER WOMAN BURNED ALIVE ON NYC SUBWAY CAR AS BYSTANDERS WATCHED

    The suspect then stayed on the scene and sat on a bench just outside the train car, as officers and a transit worker extinguished the flames. The woman was pronounced dead at the scene.

    Gonzalez said at a Friday press briefing that he believes the case should be tried in state court. His remarks come after New York City Mayor Adams’ office tells Fox News that the mayor believes Zapeta should face federal criminal charges.

    “We believe very strongly that this case belongs in state court because the charges here are more significant in state court than currently in federal court,” Gonzalez said. “But we have a very strong working relationship with our federal partners and we always do what’s in the best interests of the people in the state of New York and in the city of Brooklyn (sic) because we want to make sure that he is held fully accountable.”

    Zapeta faces life without the possibility of parole on the murder in the first-degree charge, while second-degree murder carries 25 years to life, Gonzalez said. 

    “This was malicious. A sleeping, vulnerable woman on our subway system,” Gonzalez added. “This act surprised many New Yorkers as they were getting ready to celebrate the holidays but now New Yorkers are waking up and understanding that on the 22nd of this year, this happened. This was intentional and we hope to prove this.”

    Adams’ office tells Fox News Digital that the mayor has directed the NYPD and ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) team to explore criminal charges against Zapeta under the federal arson statute.

    “Like all New Yorkers, Mayor Adams is deeply disturbed by the heinous and depraved act that Sebastian Zapete-Calil is accused of,” a spokesperson for the mayor said in a statement. “Lighting another human being on fire and watching them burn alive reflects a level of evil that cannot be tolerated.”

    Zapeta was apprehended by Border Patrol and subsequently deported by the Trump administration on June 7, 2018 after he crossed illegally into Sonoita, Arizona a week prior, ICE spokesperson Jeff Carter tells Fox News. Zapeta later re-entered the U.S. illegally on an unknown date and location, Carter said. 

    NYPD officers escort Sebastian Zapeta off an F Train in Coney Island on Dec. 22, 2024. Zapeta has been indicted on murder charges in relation to the burning death of a woman earlier that day. (Courtesy: G.N. Miller/New York Post)

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    The indictment was filed just weeks after Daniel Penny was acquitted in the subway chokehold death of Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man with schizophrenia who barged onto a train shouting death threats while high on a type of synthetic marijuana known as K2.

    Penny, a 26-year-old Marine veteran and architecture student, put Neely into a chokehold as straphangers on the train said they feared for their safety due to Neely’s threats. 

    Penny was charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide but was ultimately acquitted. 

    Fox News’ Mollie Markowitz and Stepheny Price contributed to this report.



    In a shocking and tragic incident, an illegal migrant has been indicted on murder charges after a woman was burned to death on a subway in a horrific attack. The suspect, whose identity has not been disclosed, allegedly doused the victim with a flammable liquid and set her on fire, causing her to suffer fatal injuries.

    This senseless act of violence has sparked outrage and disbelief among the community, with many calling for justice to be served swiftly and decisively. The victim, whose name has not been released, was described as a kind and loving individual who did not deserve such a brutal and untimely end.

    As the case unfolds and more details emerge, it is important to remember that this tragedy should not be used to further stoke anti-immigrant sentiments or promote xenophobia. Every individual should be judged based on their actions and not their immigration status.

    Our thoughts and prayers are with the victim’s family and loved ones during this difficult time. May justice be served and may the memory of the victim be honored and remembered. Let us come together as a community to support one another and work towards a safer and more compassionate society for all.

    Tags:

    1. Illegal migrant
    2. Murder charges
    3. Woman burned to death
    4. Subway crime
    5. Criminal indictment
    6. Immigration crime
    7. Tragic subway incident
    8. Justice for victim
    9. Legal consequences
    10. Public safety concern

    #Illegal #migrant #indicted #murder #charges #woman #burned #death #subway

  • Morocco migrant boat wreck left 70 missing, says Mali government

    Morocco migrant boat wreck left 70 missing, says Mali government


    The sinking of a vessel carrying migrants in Moroccan waters on December 19 left 70 people missing, including 25 from Mali, that country’s government said on Thursday, December 26.

    Around 80 migrants were on board the vessel heading for Spain and 11 survivors were rescued, with “25 young Malians unfortunately identified among the victims,” the government said in a statement.

    Nine of those rescued were Malians, it said in the statement, which cited embassies in the region, officials, victims’ families and survivors.

    Thousands of migrants have attempted perilous sea crossings from African shores trying to reach Europe, often in flimsy makeshift vessels.

    More than 10,400 migrants have died trying to reach Spain since 2024, including a record number heading for the Canary Islands, the Spanish migration NGO Caminando Fronteras said in a report on Thursday. That was an average of about 30 a day, making it the deadliest year in the organisation’s records.

    Mali has been suffering a serious security crisis since 2012, facing attacks from jihadist groups linked to Al-Qaeda and Islamic State, as well as by separatist movements and criminal gangs.

    Le Monde with AFP

    Reuse this content



    In a tragic turn of events, a migrant boat carrying individuals from Mali to Morocco has reportedly capsized, leaving 70 people missing. The Malian government has confirmed this devastating news, adding to the growing concern surrounding the dangers faced by migrants attempting to cross the treacherous waters of the Mediterranean.

    Our thoughts are with the families and loved ones of those missing, and we urge for swift action to be taken to prevent further tragedies like this from occurring. The need for safe and legal pathways for migration is more pressing than ever, and we must work together to address the root causes driving individuals to undertake such perilous journeys. #MoroccoBoatWreck #MigrantCrisis #SafePassageNow.

    Tags:

    1. Morocco migrant boat wreck
    2. Mali government
    3. Missing migrants Morocco
    4. North Africa migrant crisis
    5. Mediterranean migrant boat tragedy
    6. Mali news updates
    7. Morocco refugee boat accident
    8. Search for missing migrants
    9. Humanitarian crisis in North Africa
    10. Mali government response to migrant boat wreck

    #Morocco #migrant #boat #wreck #left #missing #Mali #government

Chat Icon