Showing posts with label IMMIGRATION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IMMIGRATION. Show all posts

September 19, 2022

DeSantis sends 2 planes of migrants to Martha's Vineyard

Ron DeSantis

Florida governor Ron DeSantis chartered two planes to fly about 50 migrants, most of whom were from Venezuela, to Martha’s Vineyard, off the coast of Massachusetts.

The story is still developing. Although DeSantis is the governor of Florida, the migrants appear to have come from Texas, and it currently appears that they were lured onto the planes—paid for with taxpayer money—with the false promise of work and housing in New York City or Boston. In addition, there are allegations from a lawyer working with the migrants that officials from the Department of Homeland Security falsified information about the migrants to set them up for automatic deportation. As I write this, it is not clear what their actual status is: have they applied for asylum and been processed, or are they undocumented immigrants?

As Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo says, none of it adds up.

None of it, that is, except the politics. DeSantis apparently dispatched the migrants with a videographer to take images of them arriving, entirely unexpectedly, on the upscale island, presumably in an attempt to present the image that Democratic areas can’t handle immigrants (in fact, more than 12% of the island’s 17,000 full-time residents were born in foreign countries, and 22% of the residents are non-white). But the residents of the island greeted the migrants; found beds, food, and medical care; and worked with authorities to move them back to the mainland where there are support services and housing. In the meantime, there are questions about the legality of DeSantis chartering planes to move migrants from state to state.

There are two big stories behind DeSantis’s move.

First is that the Republicans are on the ropes over the Supreme Court’s June 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health decision and the capture of the party by its MAGA wing. That slide into radical extremism means the party is contracting, but it is not clear at all that base voters will show up in the midterms without former president Trump on the ballot.

Rallying voters with threats of “aliens” swamping traditional society is a common tactic of right-wing politicians; it was the central argument that brought Hungary’s Viktor Orbán into his current authoritarian position. Republican governors Greg Abbott of Texas and Doug Ducey of Arizona have been bussing migrants to Washington—about 10,000 of them—saying they would bring the immigrant issue to the doorsteps of Democrats. Now DeSantis is in on the trick.

Immigrants are nothing new to northern cities, of course. The U.S. is in a period of high immigration. Currently, 15% of the inhabitants of Washington, D.C., are foreign born, only slightly less than the 16.8% of the population of Texas that is foreign born. About 29% of the inhabitants of Boston come from outside U.S. borders, as do 36% of the inhabitants of New York City.

In the lead-up to the midterms, Republicans have tried to distract from their unpopular stands on abortion, contraception, marriage equality, and so on, by hammering on the idea that the Democrats have created “open borders”; that criminal immigrants are bringing in huge amounts of drugs, especially fentanyl; and that Biden is secretly flying undocumented immigrants into Republican states in the middle of the night. Beginning in July, they began to insist that the country is being “invaded.”

In fact, the border is not “open.” Fences, surveillance technology, and about 20,000 Border Patrol agents make the border more secure than it has ever been. That means apprehensions of undocumented migrants are up, with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recording more than 3 million encounters at the border since January 2021. Those high numbers reflect people stopped from coming in and are artificially inflated because many who are stopped try again. CBP estimates that about 27% of those stopped at the border are repeat apprehensions.

Although much fentanyl is being stopped, some is indeed coming in, but through official ports of entry in large trucks or cars, not on individual migrants, who statistically are far less likely than native-born Americans to commit crimes. And the federal government is not secretly flying anyone anywhere (although, ironically, DeSantis is); U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sometimes moves migrants between detention centers, and CBP transfers unaccompanied children to the Department of Health and Human Services. These flights have been going on for years.

The second story is the history of American immigration, which is far more complicated and interesting than the current news stories suggest.

Mexican immigration is nothing new; our western agribusinesses were built on migrant labor of Mexicans, Japanese, and poor whites, among others, in the late 19th century. From the time the current border was set in 1848 until the 1930s, people moved back and forth across it without restrictions. But in 1965, Congress passed the Hart-Celler Act, putting a cap on Latin American immigration for the first time. The cap was low: just 20,000, although 50,000 workers were coming annually.

After 1965, workers continued to come as they always had, and to be employed, as always. But now their presence was illegal. In 1986, Congress tried to fix the problem by offering amnesty to 2.3 million Mexicans who were living in the U.S. and by cracking down on employers who hired undocumented workers. But rather than ending the problem of undocumented workers, the new law exacerbated it by beginning the process of militarizing the border. Until then, migrants into the United States had been offset by an equal number leaving at the end of the season. Once the border became heavily guarded, Mexican migrants refused to take the chance of leaving.

Then, in the 1990s, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) flooded Mexico with U.S. corn and drove Mexican farmers to find work in the American Southeast. This immigration boom had passed by 2007, when the number of undocumented Mexicans living in the United States began to decline as more Mexicans left the U.S. than came.

In 2013 a large majority of Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, backed a bill to fix the disconnect caused by the 1965 law. In 2013, with a bipartisan vote of 68–32, the Senate passed a bill giving a 13-year pathway to citizenship for millions of undocumented immigrants, who would have to meet security requirements. It required employers to verify that they were hiring legal workers. It created a visa system for unskilled workers, and it got rid of preference for family migration in favor of skill-based migration. And it strengthened border security. It would have passed the House, but House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) refused to bring it up for a vote, aware that the issue of immigration would rally Republican voters.

But most of the immigrants coming over the southern border now are not Mexican migrants.

Beginning around 2014, people began to flee “warlike levels of violence” in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, coming to the U.S. for asylum. This is legal, although most come illegally, taking their chances with smugglers who collect fees to protect migrants on the Mexican side of the border and to get them into the U.S.

The Obama administration tried to deter migrants by expanding the detention of families, and it made significant investments in Central America in an attempt to stabilize the region by expanding economic development and promoting security. The Trump administration emphasized deterrence. It cut off support to Central American countries, worked with authoritarians to try to stop regional gangs, drastically limited the number of refugees the U.S. would admit, and—infamously—deliberately separated children from their parents to deter would-be asylum seekers.

The number of migrants to the U.S. dropped throughout Trump’s years in office. The Trump administration gutted immigration staff and facilities and then cut off immigration during the pandemic under Title 42, a public health order.

The Biden administration coincided with the easing of the pandemic and catastrophic storms in Central America, leading migration to jump, but the administration continued to turn migrants back under Title 42 and resumed working with Central American countries to stem the violence that is sparking people to flee. (In nine months, the Trump administration expelled more than 400,000 people under Title 42; in Biden’s first 18 months, his administration expelled 1.7 million people.)

The Biden administration sought to end Title 42 last May, but a lawsuit by Republican states led a federal judge in Louisiana to keep the policy in place. People arriving at the U.S. border have the right to apply for asylum even under Title 42.

There are a lot of moving pieces in the immigration debate: migrants need safety, the U.S. needs workers, our immigrant-processing systems are understaffed, and our laws are outdated. They need real solutions, not political stunts.

August 18, 2022

Record Numbers of Migrants Arrested at Southern Border, most seek asylum or work

 


Border Patrol agents have made about 1.82 million arrests at the southern border in the government’s fiscal year so far, which ends Sept. 30


“What we see at the southern border is a reflection of demand for labor in the U.S. There’s no legal pathway at all for these jobs.”

Record numbers of migrants are being arrested while crossing the southern U.S. border with Mexico, a sustained surge of single men and families from across Latin America either seeking asylum or work, according to new figures Monday from U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Border Patrol agents have made about 1.82 million arrests at the southern border so far in the government’s fiscal year, which runs from October to the end of September. The number beats the record set last fiscal year, which was 1.66 million apprehensions in the year ending September 2021.

With about two months left in the agency’s fiscal year, full-year arrests are expected to break the two million mark for the first time, analysts said.

“We’re apprehending people left and right,” said Border Patrol agent Jesus Vasalvilbaso, surveying a section of border fencing in downtown Nogales, Ariz., on a recent day.

The surge comes amid rising political tension between the Biden administration and Republican-led states, which have filed lawsuits blocking federal government efforts to lift Trump-era immigration programs.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has made a crackdown on illegal migration the cornerstone of his campaign for a third term, busing thousands of asylum seekers to Washington, D.C., and New York City. He deployed the National Guard to the border and ordered expanded inspections of tractor trailers crossing from Mexico, a measure that disrupted cross-border trade for days in April.

Part of the explanation for the historic numbers is supply and demand. The pandemic hit Latin America’s economies harder than any region in the world, throwing millions of people out of work and creating a far greater supply of low-wage labor looking for jobs. At the same time, the U.S. economy rebounded quickly, creating strong demand for the kinds of low-paying jobs that migrants normally take. Smugglers also told migrants that President Biden’s immigration policies would prove more lenient, an idea that took hold once word spread through WhatsApp chats and Facebook posts that at least some people who had attempted to reach the U.S. were allowed to stay.

Another factor behind the surge, however, is more surprising: a U.S. policy meant to deter migration but which appears to have backfired. At the outset of the pandemic, the Trump administration implemented a little known health law from the 1940s called Title 42 that allowed it to quickly expel any migrants at the border on grounds they might bring Covid-19 into the U.S. The Biden administration recently attempted to end the policy, but it was blocked by a federal court.

U.S. Border Patrol agents enter the Santa Cruz tunnels in Nogales, Ariz., last week.PHOTO: ASH PONDERS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Initially, Trump administration officials thought Title 42 would suppress border crossings because it denies migrants a chance to ask for asylum, the first step in a process that allows them to remain in the country while they pursue their claim. At the time, most illegal border crossings were made by Central American families doing just that.

But under the law, there is no penalty for repeated crossings—migrants are simply apprehended and sent back across the border. Border Patrol figures estimate about one in four migrants have tried to enter the U.S. more than once over the past 12 months because they won’t face prison for repeated entry, as they would under normal U.S. immigration law.

Lately, around 70% of illegal crossings are made by single adults in search of work, for whom the policy is an advantage, compared to about one in four during previous border surges over the past decade.

“We have never seen numbers like this, and Title 42 is in full effect,” said Adam Isacson, a border security expert at WOLA, a Washington-based human-rights advocacy group. Numbers are likely to remain high for some time if Title 42 is in place, he added.

Rafael Ruiz, left, Eduardo Ramirez, right, and Roberto Lopez, center, look at the border wall from Tijuana.PHOTO: ARIANA DREHSLER FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Rafael Ruiz, a 54-year-old Mexican, said he has already tried to cross the border three times and vows to keep trying. “I won’t give up. I have nothing here” in Mexico, he said.

He and a group of fellow migrants were recently apprehended by Border Patrol agents near Dulzura, Calif. The group had crossed the border from Tecate, Baja California, and walked some 15 miles over three days through steep hills and narrow paths.

“In the end we grew desperate because we ran out of water,” Mr. Ruiz said. It was almost at the end of their journey that the Border Patrol spotted them. Eduardo Ramírez, one of his companions, said he told one of the Border Patrol agents: “We just want to work, we are not looking for help from the government.”

Back in Tijuana, the group was now planning its next crossing by studying Google maps at the doorstep of the First Migrant Embassy, a shelter facing Tijuana’s iconic beach, where the tall border fence recedes into the Pacific Ocean.

Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz said his agents like Title 42 because it has made processing migrants faster. But he said it is proving less useful in the face of repeat crossings and a surge in migrants who can’t be deported using Title 42.

Migrants seeking asylum in the U.S. at a shelter in Tijuana.PHOTO: ARIANA DREHSLER FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Children at the asylum-seeker shelter in Tijuana.PHOTO: ARIANA DREHSLER FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

“I recognize that it’s becoming less of a tool,” he said.

The Border Patrol is starting a new initiative to jail some single adults who normally would be deported under Title 42 to create a deterrent for people trying again, Mr. Ortiz added.

While Mexicans and Central Americans continue to be the two biggest groups of migrants, other countries such as Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela are sending far greater numbers than ever before, due to a combination of a harsh political crackdown by authoritarian regimes and economies hard-hit by the pandemic. Migrants from those countries can’t be deported because the U.S. doesn’t maintain relations with their governments, and the countries have refused to take back deported citizens from the U.S., adding to the draw of coming. They are most often released into the U.S., or sometimes detained, while pursuing asylum claims.

Agents have apprehended more than 175,000 Cubans so far this fiscal year, far exceeding the 125,000 who arrived in the U.S. during the Mariel boatlift in 1980.

Migrants from countries other than Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador accounted for more than 40% of total apprehensions at the southern border so far this fiscal year.

Fresia Matamoros in the dressing room of El Marinero strip club in Tapachula, Mexico, in June.PHOTO: FRED RAMOS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Fresia Matamoros fled Nicaragua in March to avoid being arrested by President Daniel Ortega’s regime. A child-psychology student, the 25-year-old said she joined the student protests that shook the regime in 2018. She said many of her classmates were killed by security forces.

Arriving in the southern Mexican border city of Tapachula in April penniless, she began working as a bar girl at El Marinero, a local strip club.

“I took the job because I needed the money. On a good night you can make some $250, and that allows you to send money to your family back home,” she said. “It helps that I studied psychology. Many clients cry, seeking refuge in someone else.”

Days after receiving her Mexican asylum visa in June, Ms. Matamoros headed north with a group of Nicaraguan friends, crossed the Rio Grande and turned herself in to Border Patrol agents. She settled in Miami, where her cousin lives, after being allowed to proceed with her asylum claim.

Migrants from Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba are increasing and generally aren’t sent back home because the U.S. doesn’t maintain relations with those governments. Migrants from Mexico in total remain much larger, but a large proportion are turned away.

Expulsions and regular apprehensions of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, by country

Expulsions

Apprehensions

MEXICO

FY2020

FY2021

FY2022*

0 thousand

200

400

600

VENEZUELA

NICARAGUA

CUBA

FY2020

FY2021

FY2022*

0

thousand

50

100

0

thousand

50

100

0

thousand

50

100

150

 
*Through July 2022
Note: Fiscal year ends Sept. 30.

Source: U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Ming Li/THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

While Mexican adult males dominated most crossings in the 1990s and 2000s, that began to change about a decade ago, when Central American families and children started to cross in greater numbers. Unlike most of the adult males looking for work, the families didn’t try to evade capture at the border and instead asked for asylum. The majority of such claims are eventually rejected, but the migrants were usually allowed to stay in the U.S. while the cases wound their way through courts, which in some cases takes several years. Migrants not granted asylum are generally deported, although that may not be carried out immediately or could be appealed.

Alejandra Castillo with her sons, Samuel de La Rosa and Diviani Hernandez, in Tapachula.PHOTO: FRED RAMOS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Reyna Nunez from Honduras and Marelyn Waldes from Nicaragua cook meals for migrants at the shelter in Tapachula.PHOTO: FRED RAMOS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

In contrast, under Title 42 tens of thousands of families from Central America have been quickly expelled and are now stranded in Mexican communities along the U.S.-Mexico border.

To reach the U.S. southern border, asylum seekers must cross Mexico, where they become targets of kidnapping or extortion by criminal groups and corrupt government officials.

The Mexican government has turned Tapachula, a city of some 350,000 people near the Guatemalan border, into a migrant containment point. Migrants can’t leave town without an asylum visa issued by Mexico’s government, which operates one of the largest immigration detention systems in the world with more than 6,000 staff and close to 70 immigration detention centers, according to Human Rights Watch, an international human-rights monitoring organization.

Some 30,000 soldiers and immigration agents have been deployed by the Mexican government to break up caravans of migrants and help turn away hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers heading north.

At the start of the pandemic, migration slowed dramatically as countries imposed travel restrictions. When Latin American governments lifted travel restrictions in early 2021, the numbers of migrants picked up.

One of them was Jharson Valera, who worked as an engineer for 13 years at a plant run by consumer products giant Procter & Gamble Co. in the Venezuelan northwestern city of Barquisimeto. After the plant closed several years ago, Mr. Valera said he used his $8,000 severance to open a motorcycle parts business that he said failed due to constant police extortion.

Jharson Valera in Tapachula.PHOTO: FRED RAMOS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

The 34-year-old said goodbye to his wife and three children in May. It took him and some fellow travelers one month to get to Tapachula. A trek through the dense Darien jungle in Colombia and Panama cost him his toenails, and he and his companions were then robbed by Guatemalan police, he said.

“I lost everything along the way,” Mr. Valera said.

As the group ran out of money, Ricardo Angulo, a travel companion and former P&G colleague of Mr. Valera, sold the Nautica watch that the company gave him on his 10-year work anniversary so they could have something to eat when they entered Mexico.

Shortly after, they were granted asylum visas and took a bus north. It took about 20 days for the group to reach a sparsely populated area near Del Rio, Texas, where asylum seekers then cross through the waters of the Rio Grande.

Mr. Valera has now settled in Atlanta after being allowed to proceed with his asylum claim. He is currently working for a moving company. “It is not an easy job, but I have faith in God that I will find something better,” he added.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sought to end Title 42 in late May, but a federal judge blocked the Biden administration from doing so after several Republican-led states, including Texas, filed a lawsuit. The policy will likely stay in place for months as the case is appealed.

U.S. Border Patrol agents talk with Mexican National Police at the border near Tucson last week.PHOTO: ASH PONDERS FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

U.S. government data show that Title 42 can increasingly only be used against single adults, as Mexico has sharply limited who it is willing to take back under the policy.

The Biden administration recently began taking in scores of asylum seekers a day at various points along the border, in coordination with aid groups such as All Otro Lado, which selects migrants from Tijuana shelters based on their health, vulnerability and how long they have waited, said Soraya Vásquez, the organization’s deputy director of Mexico programming.

If Title 42 should end, the number of asylum-seeking families is likely to increase, said Mr. Isacson of WOLA. The number of non-asylum seekers is likely to drop significantly, along with repeat crossings, he added.

“It may not go down to the low levels we saw in the early 2010s, but it wouldn’t stay this insanely high,” Mr. Isacson said.

The Biden administration has tried to curb the surge by making deals with other countries to increase their own border enforcement. The administration has also started a pilot program in the U.S. to significantly shorten the time it takes to decide an asylum case.

Meanwhile, the U.S. economy needs migrants to help fill some 11 million job openings, most of them low-wage, nonfarm jobs in sectors such as construction, poultry processing or restaurants, said David Bier, a migration expert at the Cato Institute, a libertarian Washington think tank that favors increasing immigration to the U.S.

“What we see at the southern border is a reflection of demand for labor in the U.S.,” he said. “There’s no legal pathway at all for these jobs.”

The border near No

August 10, 2022

Biden Administration to End Trump-Era ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy

 A court cleared the last legal hurdle for the administration to end the policy, which denies U.S. entry to migrants seeking asylum while their claims are pending

Migrants walked across a bridge to Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, in June after being turned back by U.S. authorities.PHOTO: JOSE LUIS GONZALEZ/REUTERS

The Biden administration said it would wind down use of a controversial immigration policy known as Remain in Mexico after a federal court removed a final procedural hurdle preventing it from doing so on Monday.

The Department of Homeland Security said Monday evening it wouldn’t place anyone new into the program, which requires migrants seeking asylum to live in northern Mexican border cities during their U.S. court proceedings. Migrants currently living in Mexico under the program will be allowed to enter the U.S. at their next court date, when they can choose where to live and finish pursuing their asylum claims in local immigration courts around the country.

“DHS is committed to ending the court-ordered implementation of MPP in a quick, and orderly, manner,” the department said.

The latest development for the program comes as the Biden administration faces pressure over border crossings ahead of the midterm elections. U.S. Border Patrol agents made 191,898 arrests at the southwest border in June. Since the start of the budget year in October, agents have made roughly 1.6 million arrests.


NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Capital Journal

Scoops, analysis and insights driving Washington from the WSJ's D.C. bureau.

SUBSCRIBED

About 5,000 migrants were enrolled in the Remain in Mexico program between December and the end of May, according to government data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.

First created in 2019 by then-President Donald Trump, the program was intended as a deterrence measure against migrants crossing the border illegally into the U.S. to seek asylum. It forced them to live in Mexico rather than the U.S. for the duration of their claims, which can frequently take more than five years to complete.

Republicans have argued for the Biden administration to keep the policy in place, with Texas and Missouri suing to prevent the lifting of Remain in Mexico. The Supreme Court ruled June 30 in the administration’s favor in that lawsuit, allowing the federal government to end the program as Mr. Biden had intended early on.

Administration lawyers privately felt that they couldn’t immediately end the program despite the high court win because of a procedural technicality, according to people familiar with their thinking. The lower court in Texas hadn’t yet lifted its injunction blocking them from doing so. The lawyers argued internally that even sending no more new migrants back to Mexico could still technically be a violation of that court’s injunction.

On Monday, the lower court lifted its injunction, freeing the administration’s hands.

Later on Monday, Texas and Missouri filed an amended complaint and asked the judge in Texas to bar the government from ending the program for now. While the initial lawsuit was ongoing, the Biden administration scrapped its original policy memo ending the program and replaced it with a new one. The second memo, issued late last October, is what the states are now challenging.

The Wall Street Journal previously reported that ending the policy altogether was a matter of debate inside the administration. Some White House officials felt that dropping it could harm continuing immigration negotiations with Mexico, whose government preferred to see it stay in place, the people familiar with the matter said. Most other immigration-policy officials, including at the Department of Homeland Security, favored ending the policy altogether.

Meanwhile, immigration advocates grew vocally angry with the administration as weeks passed after the Supreme Court’s ruling and the administration appeared not to be planning for a wind-down of the program.

Refugees International, one of several groups that had been pressing the Biden administration to end the program again, applauded the late Monday announcement.

“We hope this marks the beginning of the end of dangerous externalization policies…and to fulfilling a promise to rebuild a fair asylum system,” said Yael Schacher, the group’s deputy director for the Americas and Europe.