Biden Administration Announces End to Title 42 Border Policy

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced on Friday that it will be terminating the Title 42 border policy. The U.S. government has used this policy to turn away asylum seekers and migrants over 1.7 million times since March 2020. The policy will end on May 23 to give the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) time to implement the termination. After May 23, individuals approaching the border will be processed normally as they were before Title 42 went into place.

Title 42 refers to an obscure public health law that allowed the government to invoke the COVID-19 pandemic to turn away people seeking refuge in the United States. Ending Title 42 is a critical step in reforming an asylum process that has been decimated over the last six years.

More information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5411-Biden-Announces-End-to-Title-42-Border-Policy.html

Biden Will Admit Asylum Seekers Ordered Deported Under Trump’s Migrant Protection Protocols

By Melissa Cruz - www.immigrationimpact.com/

Asylum seekers who were ordered deported for missing their U.S. court hearings under the Trump administration’s so-called Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) —informally known as the “Remain in Mexico” program—will be allowed to restart their proceedings in the United States. Thousands of others whose cases were terminated because of procedural errors before they had a chance to seek asylum will also be allowed to restart the process.

This is the second phase of the Biden administration’s winddown of MPP, following its suspension and termination. Court hearings under the program had technically been paused since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020. But the Trump administration continued to place an additional 5,500 individuals into the program during its final year in office.

Who Was Subject to MPP?

It’s estimated U.S. officials sent roughly 70,000 people who came to the United States to ask for asylum back to Mexico over the course of two years. Many were from Central American countries such as Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala.
 

Continúe leyendo en https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5172-Biden-Will-Admit-Asylum-Seekers-Ordered-Deported.html

Collecting DNA From Asylum Seekers at the Border Raises Privacy Concerns

 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection is collecting DNA from asylum seekers at the border, recent media reports confirm. This is the latest expansion of DNA collection as part of a program initiated under the Trump administration that targets nearly all immigrants in government custody. A growing number of noncitizens are being subjected to this invasive collection of sensitive personal information with little knowledge or understanding of how their information will be used or stored by the federal government.

While the southern border remains largely closed to asylum seekers due to the Biden administration’s continuation of the Title 42 expulsions policy, some families and particularly vulnerable individuals are being allowed to enter to pursue their claims. And it is this population that is being subjected to DNA collection as they enter the United States.

The Biden administration has continued this policy despite privacy concerns and no clear justification.

More information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5161-Collecting-DNA-From-Asylum-Seekers-at-the-Border.html

Explaining Title 42 Expulsions at the Border

 

By: Jorge Loweree www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org - Photography: Arog Vila

The ability to seek asylum in the United States is a fundamental human right. But since March 2020, that right has largely been suspended.

U.S. government officials began “expelling” people who arrive at our southern border without any due process protections in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.

They have carried out hundreds of thousands of expulsions under a little-known provision of U.S. health law called Title 42. Despite objections from scientists, the Trump administration implemented Title 42 to close the border to immigrants and asylum seekers.

Many asylum seekers continue to be expelled back to Mexico or their home countries under Title 42. The Biden administration has not put forward any plan to end the use of Title 42 at the border.

What is Title 42 and how did it go into place?

On March 20, 2020, the Department of Health and... more information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5103-Title-42-Expulsions-at-the-Border.html

The Plan to Process Asylum Seekers Subject to the Migrant Protection Protocols

 

By: Aaron Reichlin-Melnick - www.immigrationimpact.com

The Trump administration sent over 70,000 people who came to the U.S border seeking asylum back to Mexico to wait for court hearings. This so-called “Migrant Protection Protocols” (“MPP”) program placed people in serious danger and made it nearly impossible for anyone to win protection. Court hearings under MPP were indefinitely suspended in March 2020. This left thousands of people stuck in Mexico in limbo.

One of President Biden’s first actions instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) not to put any new people into the program. Three weeks later, his administration has announced a plan to allow the thousands of people still waiting in Mexico to enter the United States.

Who will be allowed to enter?

Under the Biden administration’s plan, the only people who will be allowed to reenter the United States are the roughly 25,000 individuals who have pending MPP cases.

Importantly, far fewer people are likely still waiting at the U.S.-Mexico border. While exact figures are not available, it is likely that many have already returned to their home countries or left for safer locations in Mexico.

Those who have been waiting the longest will be prioritized for readmission. Some people have been waiting

More information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5063-Process-asylum-seekers-with-migrant-protection-protocols.html

Trump Administration Begins Sending Asylum Seekers To Guatemala

In yet another major blow to America’s asylum system, on Wednesday the Trump administration reportedly began sending some asylum seekers from Honduras and El Salvador to Guatemala rather than permit them to seek protection in the United States.

Under the “Asylum Cooperative Agreement” deal signed with Guatemala in July, the Guatemalan government will process the asylum claims of people who arrive at the U.S. border without visas.

For the first time in American history, large numbers of refugees can now be returned to a third country without their consent.

This denies them any opportunity to seek protection in the United States. Instead, people will be required to apply for asylum in Guatemala, a country with one of the highest rates of poverty and malnutrition in the entire Western Hemisphere...

 

More information: https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4632-Sending-Asylum-Seekers-to-Guatemala.html 

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

Immigration Agencies’ Intrusive Searches Of Cell Phones, Laptops Are Ruled Unconstitutional

By Emma Winger

A federal court ruled this week that sweeping policies permitting U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to search personal cell phones, laptops, and other electronic devices without reasonable suspicion are unconstitutional.

The policies that the court rejected authorized CBP and ICE officers to search the contents of electronic devices of people arriving at U.S. borders, including U.S. airports, without reasonable suspicion that those devices might have evidence of illegal activity and without a court order. Immigration officers could randomly search the cell phones and laptops of anyone arriving in the United States, including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.

In Alasaad v. McAleenan, ten U.S. citizens and one lawful permanent resident challenged these policies, arguing, in part, that they violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. On Tuesday, the court agreed.

More information...

 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4626-search-the-cell-phones-and-laptops-of-anyone-arriving.html

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

New Process In El Paso Seeks To Deport Asylum Seekers In Less Than 10 Days

By Katie Shepherd

The Trump administration began a secretive new asylum process in El Paso, Texas that came to light late last week. It seeks to deter asylum seekers from coming to the United States and to remove them as quickly as possible once they’re here.

The process—dubbed the “Prompt Asylum Claim Review” or “PACR”—condenses the asylum process from several months or more to under 10 days. It is riddled with due process concerns and will likely result in countless individuals’ deportation to imminent harm. Media reports indicate that the program is being piloted in El Paso and is a joint initiative between the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department.

Under PACR, individuals apprehended in the El Paso area are kept in holding cells (known in Spanish as hieleras) or are taken to a local 1,500-bed soft-sided facility operated by Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

They are given 24 hours to make a phone call to an attorney or otherwise prepare for their case before having an interview with an asylum officer. The officer will decide whether they have a credible fear of persecution if returned to the country they fled.

Many asylum seekers being processed at the border are subjected to the asylum transit ban, which blocks asylum eligibility for those who traveled through another country before reaching the United States. As a result, Central Americans are especially impacted by the ban. They are only eligible for a more limited form of relief (withholding of removal) under a heightened fear screening standard that is much harder to meet.

Those who fail these screening interviews may have their case reviewed via telephone by an immigration judge. The judge conducts a cursory review of the case.

Even if someone can secure a lawyer within 24 hours, they are unable to meet with them in person at the facility. CBP does not permit attorneys to physically access the facilities. Detainees only have limited access to phone calls.

Individuals seeking asylum will remain in CBP custody during their credible fear interview. This is a big departure from previous procedures. Typically, individuals only spend a few days in CBP custody before being transferred to a detention center operated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

CBP facilities are notorious for their terrible conditions and have long been the subject of litigation. The facilities are designed to hold individuals only for short-term stays. Government guidance advises that individuals be held for no longer than 72 hours—far less than the 10 days called for under PACR.

Reports have surfaced in recent weeks exposing these substandard conditions and inadequate access to medical care. This is particularly concerning, since those subject to the program include families with young children and infants.

The obstacles set before asylum seekers along the U.S.-Mexico border—and El Paso in particular—are almost insurmountable. Individuals placed in PACR must secure counsel within 24 hours, endure deplorable conditions for days in CBP custody, and meet a much higher legal standard than before.

This pilot process is yet another example of the Trump administration setting up asylum seekers to fail. The program entirely disregards due process for those who the asylum system was specifically designed to protect.

 

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4571-New-Process-Seeks-To-Deport-Asylum-Seekers.html

Chaos And Dysfunction At The Border: Remain In Mexico Program

By Aaron Reichlin-Melnick www.immigrationimpact.com

The first thing many people forcibly returned to Mexico tell you is that they’re afraid. Afraid of the cartels, afraid of Mexican immigration officials, and afraid of the months of uncertainty. This is what they’ve faced since the Trump administration sent them back to Mexico as part of the “Remain in Mexico” program—formally called the “Migrant Protection Protocols” (MPP).

Last week, I visited El Paso, Texas and Ciudad Juárez in Mexico to witness the effects of MPP firsthand. What I saw was chaos, dysfunction, and a policy that has removed what little remaining due process protections existed in immigration court.

Under MPP, individuals who cross the border or arrive at ports of entry are given a notice to appear in immigration court and then sent back to Mexico through a port of entry. Only Mexicans, unaccompanied children, and “vulnerable” individuals are excluded from the program. But that hasn’t stopped U.S. Customs and Border Protection from forcing back extremely pregnant women and vulnerable LGBT+ individuals.

In Ciudad Juárez, those subject to MPP are largely waiting in a network of private and publicly operated shelters. Although some lucky few have managed to obtain jobs and alternate housing, most people subject to MPP will spend the next several months confined to small, crowded spaces because they are too afraid to leave the shelter.

Kidnappings, assaults, rapes, and murders are routine in Ciudad Juárez, and most everyone I talked to had either been victimized themselves or knew someone who had been.

With over 42,000 people sent back across the border under MPP since the program began in January 2019, MPP has rapidly become the most effective tool in the Trump administration’s efforts to stop asylum seekers from coming to the United States. When individuals are sent back under MPP, they are required to wait in Mexico until the date of their next court hearing. This can often take months. I talked to some people in Ciudad Juárez who were sent back in June 2019 and still hadn’t had their first court hearings.

If people survive the wait, they must return to the port of entry on the day of their hearing. They are then taken by armed guards to the nearest immigration court for a hearing.

Those subject to MPP will likely have to go through this process three or four times at a minimum before their case is resolved. Those who are actually able to file for asylum—likely only a small number, given that barely one percent of people subject to MPP have found lawyers—will wait even longer. It will likely take six months to a year for a resolution of their case. Throughout this whole time, they remain vulnerable in Mexico.

When I visited the El Paso immigration court, I was told that more than 15,000 people had been returned to Mexico from the El Paso region alone.

This massive swell of new cases has overwhelmed the small El Paso Immigration Court, which in 2018 saw just 1,464 new cases filed. The court only has four judges, which means that each judge has been assigned thousands of MPP cases.

Despite the small size of the court, judges have been forced to take on hundreds of cases a day. On one of the days I visited the court, a single judge had been assigned 161 cases total on her morning and afternoon dockets. By the end of the day, she had been unable to complete all the cases and was forced to send some people back to Mexico without any movement on their cases.

The sheer size of the MPP docket has also crowded out observers from the El Paso Court. Despite waiting all day at the court, I was told I was not allowed to observe any of the supposedly public hearings. They needed every available seat in the courtroom for individuals subject to MPP. This has plunged the court in El Paso into a state of secrecy, making it virtually impossible to track what’s happening in hearings.

Despite the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe, there is no sign that the Trump administration is planning to reverse course on MPP. In the next few weeks, tents housing MPP “immigration courts” are set to open in Laredo and Brownsville, Texas, where tens of thousands of new cases will begin. And until a court or Congress steps in, the chaos, dysfunction, and harm caused by this program will continue.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4468-Chaos-and-Dysfunction-Remain-in-Mexico-Program.html

Investigation Demanded As Medical Care For Detained Immigrant Children Worsens

By Katy Murdza www.immigrationimpact.com

Border Patrol agents placed a detained 9-year-old girl with a kidney disease at high risk of a urinary tract infection by not allowing her to shower or change her underwear for five days. Agents also denied a 3-year-old medical care after she vomited 10 times in an hour. Agents failed to schedule a doctor’s appointment for a 2-year-old with diarrhea so severe his desperate mother had to change his diaper every 15 minutes. Other Border Patrol agents told a family that no detained children will see a doctor unless they have a fever.

Now, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—Border Patrol’s parent agency—is being held accountable for these and other accounts of inadequate medical care for children held in its custody. The American Immigration Council and American Immigration Lawyers Association filed an administrative complaint on Wednesday with the FBI and two oversight branches of the Department of Homeland Security calling attention to these incidents.

The complaint includes excerpts from firsthand accounts of 200 asylum-seeking mothers about the inadequate care they received while held in CBP facilities. Each mother was later transferred with her child from CBP custody to the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, Texas, where their statements were collected.

Taken together, the testimonies show the consistent denial of medical care and unsafe conditions at CBP facilities:

• 67% of mothers stated that their child was not seen at all by a medical provider while in CBP custody, beyond a check for lice.
• 58% of the women who requested medical care for their child reported that they received no medical attention.
• 48% reported being detained with their child for longer than three days, in violation of CBP’s own guidelines.

Parents frequently report sleeping on cement floors for days with 24-hour light and noise. They often say their children’s health deteriorated in CBP custody without access to medical care, while they were forced to remain cold and wet with only thin mylar blankets.

CBP has repeatedly failed to follow even the very low standards that currently regulate its detention conditions.

The 1997 Flores Settlement Agreement requires that any facility holding children be “safe and sanitary,” but 22 years later, the government routinely violates its terms.

In 2017, Federal Judge Dolly Gee determined that the government was violating the agreement by failing to provide children adequate food, water, and basic hygiene items. In August 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision.

In July 2019, DHS’ Office of the Inspector General issued a management alert about “dangerous overcrowding” in the Rio Grande Valley Processing centers. The report revealed inadequate access to showers, changes of clothing, and hot meals. 31% of the children in the inspected facilities were there longer than 72 hours.

The consequence of being held in these substandard conditions can be devastating for children. At least seven immigrant children have died in government custody since last year.

According to Dr. Julie Linton, co-chair of the immigrant health special interest group at the American Academy of Pediatrics:

“Children are not like adults. They get sick more quickly and each hour of delay can be associated with serious complications, especially in cases of infectious diseases. Delays can lead to death.”

As the complaint demands, CBP must improve conditions and medical care in processing facilities. CBP agents who interact with children need to have child welfare experience. They should be trained to screen for medical issues and refer children to medical experts. Finally, all children should be released as quickly as possible, with an absolute maximum of 72 hours in CBP custody.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4453-Detained-Immigrant-Children-Worsens.html

Which Military Construction Projects Are Losing Funds to Build Trump’s Wall?

By Walter Ewing www.immigrationimpact.com

The Trump administration is raiding the Department of Defense’s budget to fund construction of its border wall. According to Pentagon officials, 127 military construction projects will be canceled in order to free up $3.6 billion to build 175 miles of wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

President Trump previously said this would happen when he declared a “national emergency” along the southern border in February 2019. At the time, he designated a total of about $8 billion in existing federal funds for wall construction—$3.6 billion of which was to be diverted from the military construction budget.

The diverted funds are coming out of the Pentagon’s Fiscal Year 2019 budget and take a disproportionate toll on military construction projects that had been slated for congressional districts represented by Democrats.

The canceled or delayed projects include:

• A childcare center at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. Parents say the center is in desperate need of repair, as it deals with frequent power outages, spotty air conditioning, broken equipment, and damage to the infrastructure after a car hit the building.
• Roads near Fort Meade, Maryland (site of the National Security Agency). These roads have already been in varying stages of construction for a while, to residents’ annoyance.
• A hazardous materials warehouse in Norfolk, Virginia. There is concern that the Navy base warehouse needs to be replaced.
• A cyber-operations facility at Joint Base Langley-Eustis near Newport News, Virginia. The facility will lose $10 million and face possible startup delays.
• A much-needed new middle school for students living at Fort Campbell, a military base along the Kentucky-Tennessee border. The current school suffers from cramped classrooms and outdated equipment.
• Over $400 million worth of construction projects in Puerto Rico. Most of the halted projects were for repairs after Hurricane Maria.

Some lawmakers on the House Armed Services Committee are questioning the administration’s priorities. Why bleed money from 127 projects rather than go through the proper congressional channels to fund the wall?

History has shown that when barriers are erected along the border, people don’t stop crossing. They simply attempt to cross at more remote and dangerous locations. That is why, according to Border Patrol statistics, the southwest border witnesses approximately one death per day.

For this reason, until recently, prominent federal officials publicly doubted the usefulness of a border wall. Outgoing Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Gil Kerlikowske said in January 2017:

“I think that anyone who’s been familiar with the southwest border and the terrain… recognizes that building a wall along the entire southwest border is probably not going to work,” adding that he does not “think it is feasible” or the “smartest way to use taxpayer money on infrastructure.”

Draining the Defense Department to fund President Trump’s crusade for an extravagantly expensive border wall that won’t actually work is a waste of federal funds. It will yield no appreciable benefit for either U.S. border security or the U.S. taxpayer.

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4451-Which-Military-Construction-Projects.html

Tent Immigration Courthouses Are Being Built At The Texas Border

By Melissa Cruz www.immigrationimpact.com 

Immigration judges from across the country will soon be reassigned from their normal caseload to preside over thousands of immigration cases along the U.S.-Mexico border, reportedly in an effort to speed up hearings under the controversial “Remain in Mexico” program. 

To handle the cases faster, the Trump administration is in the process of building makeshift immigration courthouses out of tents in the border towns of Laredo and Brownsville, Texas. 

Immigration judges will conduct these hearings via video teleconferencing from their court rooms, while the individuals will reportedly appear for court in the tents. Contracted assistants will organize the hearings in person by taking roll call, sending case documents to judges, and operating the video systems. 

Over 1,000 people may appear at one of these two courts each day. This means that people who fled violence in their home countries and were then forced to wait in cartel-controlled Mexican towns will be allowed to enter the United States—and the tents—for their hearings. 

The challenges of using a tent for a courthouse include notoriously spotty video teleconferencing with a judge thousands of miles away, and the likelihood that few people will have access to an attorney to guide them through the process. This makes a person’s chance at receiving asylum protections even slimmer. It’s reported that only 1% of people subject to the Remain in Mexico program have been able to obtain a lawyer. 

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials expect that around 150 immigration judges will be reassigned to handle the cases of asylum seekers and others who were forced to remain in Mexico while awaiting their U.S. immigration court case. More than 35,000 people have been sent back since Remain in Mexico’s implementation in January 2019. 

Removing judges off their regular dockets to process asylum cases at the border could also worsen the backlog of pending immigration cases. 

Judges will likely need to postpone their own hearings in order to prioritize these cases. This means immigration court cases around the country could be delayed for months or years. 

A former immigration judge under President Trump, Rebecca Jamil, told BuzzFeed News this shuffle could have a profound impact on those waiting for their court hearing outside of the border region: 

“Those families have been waiting for years to have their cases heard, and now will wait another two or three years, and due process is denied by the delay—evidence becomes stale, witnesses die, country conditions change.” 

It’s clear the Trump administration has devastated the U.S. asylum system and continues to disregard the basic due process rights of those seeking protection in the United States.

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4431-Tent-Immigration-Courthouses-Are-Being-Built.html

No Freedom, Education, Or Privacy: Over 2,000 Immigrant Children Detained

By Melissa Cruz

Over 2,000 immigrant children are being detained by the Trump administration at a “temporary emergency” facility in Homestead, Florida. All of the children at the facility have been designated by the government as “unaccompanied” minors. However, not every “unaccompanied” child came to the border alone—some were intentionally separated from their guardians by U.S. officials.

Under normal procedures, children are supposed to be transferred from temporary facilities to the care and custody of permanent, state-licensed Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) shelters within 20 days. Instead, many children have been detained at this “temporary shelter” for months at a time. The average length of stay has fluctuated between 64 and 89 days in recent months. 

Why are children being detained at Homestead for so long? One significant factor is that it’s harder for immigrant family members to get custody of their children due to several policy changes implemented under the Trump administration. 

Most of the children have “sponsors”—parents or immediate family members already in the United States—who are waiting to take them into their custody. But the administration has made the sponsoring process even more difficult, often using it to arrest and ultimately deport family members that come forward. This information-sharing with immigration enforcement, which ORR agreed to scale back after outcry, has forced children at Homestead to languish in shelters for longer periods of time. The conditions at Homestead—whether the stay is one week or one month—are not suitable for children. A research team from Amnesty International toured the facility in April 2019, and in a damning report, revealed how Homestead compromises the safety and well-being of the children in its custody. 

As of April 2, 2019—the date of Amnesty International’s inspection—Homestead housed children ranging from 13- to 17-years-old. Around 75 percent were boys and 25 percent were girls. Most fled from dangerous conditions in Central American countries. 

Amnesty International reports that Homestead looks and feels like an “industrial-scale facility” and is made up of “…brick and mortar buildings; metal shipping containers converted into offices for legal and other services and administration; and soft-sided structures.” 

Children are housed in two campuses. The South Campus houses 13- to 16-year-olds and the North Campus holds 17-year-olds. 

At the South Campus, there are 144 beds per floor. There are 12 children per room. They sleep in bunk beds and only have one shower and one toilet for the group, with no privacy. The North Campus—where the 17-year-old children are detained—is a former military vocational building. It has eight “bays” filled with bunk beds; each bay houses around 144 children. There are 30 only showers and a row of toilets in each bay. 

The children have highly restrictive schedules. In contrast to other ORR facilities, the children at Homestead begin their days at 6:30 a.m. and end at 10:00 p.m., with only one hour and 50 minutes of free time for recreation. They spend most of their days indoors and must wear identifying bar codes at all times. At permanent shelters, children are allowed more outside time. 

Their access to resources is limited. For instance, staff members said that girls must submit a service form request if they need sanitary pads. 

Other required services—such as the ability to safely disclose allegations of sexual abuse within the facility—are woefully inadequate. There have been at least six allegations of sexual abuse made by children since the facility opened in 2018, at least two of which involved staff members. Children can use pre-programmed telephones in the facility to report abuse. But those telephones are in an open-air cubicle in a recreation space—just five feet away from a ping pong table. 

In interviews, children who had stayed at Homestead said the education they received was poor. During Amnesty International’s visit, for instance, students were copying out the words of the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance in a math class. 

The facility does not hire certified teachers like permanent ORR shelters. Homestead also does not follow the Miami-Dade County public school curriculum and instead relies on teaching developed by its for-profit, private contractor. 

Amnesty International concluded that the Trump administration allows Homestead to defy these legal standards of care by designating it a “temporary” shelter instead of a permanent one, even though some children are detained there for close to a year. No child should be forced to live like this. The administration is ignoring what is in the best interests of these children by housing them in prison-like conditions. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4351-Over-2000-Immigrant-Children-Detained.html