|
PeterCat posted:Even though there is still apparently a state of emergency at the US Border, the Biden administration is going to send CBP agents to Ukraine to facilitate US personnel and refugees fleeing the conflict. Please try to link original sources (John Solomon in this case) when possible, rather than secondary ones creating a narrative around them.
|
# ? Mar 1, 2022 19:17 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 18:21 |
|
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1502318717455441922quote:Deportations by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement fell sharply last year under President Biden to the lowest levels in the agency’s history despite record-high border crossings, according to statistics released Friday in an annual report.
|
# ? Mar 13, 2022 13:58 |
|
You really missed the part of the article where they said that deportations are down because they are kicking so many people out under the auspices of Title 42. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releases-january-2022-monthly-operational-update CBP January summary posted:
|
# ? Mar 13, 2022 15:32 |
|
PeterCat posted:You really missed the part of the article where they said that deportations are down because they are kicking so many people out under the auspices of Title 42. I didn't "miss" it, it's in fact literally the second paragraph in the quote I included.
|
# ? Mar 13, 2022 16:57 |
|
Slow News Day posted:I didn't "miss" it, it's in fact literally the second paragraph in the quote I included. You also provided no commentary for the article and just spammed it in there. You know exactly what you did you posted an article that gives the impression that Biden's kicking out fewer people. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Mar 13, 2022 17:17 |
Interesting account of discrimination at the border from an attorney. https://twitter.com/JuliaNeusner/status/1506798123305234432 https://twitter.com/JuliaNeusner/status/1506798126387982340 quote:Today at the San Ysidro port of entry in Tijuana I watched as MX and US authorities allowed 26 Ukrainian asylum seekers to enter the U.S. and turned away a Mexican family who'd been waiting alongside them, saying they couldn't seek asylum bc of Title 42 and would have to wait. Is the CDC's 2020 regulation concerning Title 42 established under Trump a racist one? Why has it remained under Biden? I think these are important questions to ask ourselves if we are to seriously confront racism in this country.
|
|
# ? Mar 24, 2022 17:01 |
|
The Biden administration is ending Title 42. https://www.vox.com/23006820/title-42-border-pandemic-biden quote:The Biden administration announced Friday that it’s lifting controversial pandemic-related border restrictions under which the US has expelled thousands of migrants without giving them access to their legal right to apply for asylum.
|
# ? Apr 4, 2022 22:58 |
|
Here is the Secretary of Homeland Security's statement regarding the termination of the Title 42 Order. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2022/04/01/statement-secretary-mayorkas-cdcs-title-42-order-termination Secretary Mayorkas posted:WASHINGTON – Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas released the following statement in response to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) determination that it will, effective May 23, 2022, terminate its Title 42 public health Order. Pursuant to its Title 42 authority, the CDC has, since March 2020, required the expulsion of unauthorized single adults and family units arriving at the land borders in order to protect against the spread of COVID-19. Per the CBP's February report, here are the number of people processed under Title 42 vs Title 8. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releases-february-2022-monthly-operational-update 164,973 Total encounters in February, 2022. 126,151 single adults -83,553, single adults, expelled under Title 42. 66% -42,598, single adults, processed under Title 8. 34% 26,582 Family Units. -7,773 expelled under Title 42. 29% -18,809 processed under Title 8. 71% PeterCat fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Apr 5, 2022 |
# ? Apr 5, 2022 21:10 |
|
Here is a link to the October, 2020 Title 42 Order. It's too long to post the whole thing, though it's short enough that I encourage people to read it. tl:dr; Congregating people in CBP facilities for the amount of time necessary to process them under Title 8 creates a risk of spreading Covid to other immigrants, to the CBP agents, and therefore the US population as a whole, the CBP is authorized, under Title 42, to rapidly remove people from the US and return them to the country they crossed from or their place of origin, Mexico being one of the countries that people can be rapidly returned to. https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...a-quarantinable
|
# ? Apr 5, 2022 21:34 |
|
Here is the original March, 2020 order. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-03-26/pdf/2020-06327.pdf page 29 of the Pdf.
|
# ? Apr 5, 2022 22:24 |
|
Hey, I know I don't regularly post in this thread, but I think I've seen a lot of discussion kind of break down to the intent and heart and soul of the Biden administration vs what is power within institutional power. The Times posted a pretty in-depth article about the inner-workings of the administration. I will post the whole article below, but the big takeaway is that: -- The Administration was incredibly frustrated and annoyed with the influx of immigrants -- Biden's bias does apparently seem to be with actually being more humane at the border, but a lot of administration felt that rolling back a bunch of Trump policies would lead to them being crushed in November which is kinda bullshit. -- I think most significant, Biden gave very tepid approval to exploring maintaining the Remain in Mexico policy before the courts forced his hand. The article does make it seem like his bias was against doing so, but he opened the door to it, and basically told his people that it could never get to the media that he let them explore it. -- Biden is basically the old Phil Hartman impersonation of Reagan. Anyway, I thought it would be of interest to people The Paper of Record posted:Disagreement and Delay: How Infighting Over the Border Divided the White House
|
# ? Apr 10, 2022 14:54 |
|
Yeah, I read that story, and it's pretty embarrassing. The number of refugees coming to the Southern border will only increase over time, especially as climate disasters get worse. It seems that something has to give. I just don't know what.
|
# ? Apr 10, 2022 17:34 |
|
This part stuck out to me as being particularly heinous:article posted:White House aides also clashed over whether to vaccinate migrants who were let into the United States. Last summer, a plan to administer the coronavirus vaccine was blocked by Ms. Rice and others at the White House, who feared it would encourage more migrants to swarm toward the border seeking a shot. As it currently stands, migrants are given the option of receiving the vaccine, though they are not removed from the country if they refuse it. People wishing to legally immigrate to the country are barred unless they can show proof of vaccination.
|
# ? Apr 10, 2022 22:46 |
|
https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2022-04-13/hassan-and-pappas-fight-to-preserve-trump-era-policy-that-helped-deport-thousands-of-migrants The New Hampshire Democratic delegation supports continuing Title 42 removals. https://twitter.com/SenatorHassan/status/1513627143745548299 In a move that will have no influence on anyone, but looks good to Abbott's campaign, the state of Texas is using tax funds to bus migrants to Washington D.C. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/13/politics/texas-migrants-arrive-in-dc/index.html The idea that Congress would actually give a poo poo about anyone showing up outside of the Capitol is funny, though if the migrants stormed the building it would probably see some immediate action from Congress. Homeless people in the Capitol don't get any attention from Congress, marches on the Mall don't, why would a few migrants matter?
|
# ? Apr 16, 2022 00:13 |
|
CBP March 2022 update. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releases-march-2022-monthly-operational-update update posted:Release Date: April 18, 2022 -221,303 encounters along the SWB, up 33% from February. 101,549 processed for expulsion under Title 42. 111,754 were processed under Title 8. Of those 159,900 were unique encounters, up 37% from February. -169,092 of the encounters were single adults. 101,539 processed under Title 42 67,523 processed under Title 8. -37,818 family unit encounters, up 42% from February. 7,802 processed under Title 42 30,016 processed under Title 8. -14,167 unaccompanied children encountered, up 18% from February.
|
# ? Apr 20, 2022 02:46 |
|
Ruzihm posted:Is the CDC's 2020 regulation concerning Title 42 established under Trump a racist one? Why has it remained under Biden? I think these are important questions to ask ourselves if we are to seriously confront racism in this country. Given that the number of migrants coming across the border is increasing, and that the evidence of preferential treatment of Ukrainians is anecdotal at best, I do not see any reason to say that the policy is particularly racist as much as it was used as an expedient by the Trump administration and perpetuated by the Biden administration. Outside of a small minority of political thinkers, there aren't many people who believe controlling access to the country is a bad thing, but US Government policy on immigration, like most things, is incoherent and is being used as political football by various politicians at all levels.
|
# ? Apr 20, 2022 02:50 |
|
Another thing to consider is there are a myriad of statuses that people coming into the United States can claim. Refugee status has to be requested prior to entering the US. Asylum can be requested by people who are already in the US. For people who are already in the US, they can put a pause on the time requirements for applying for further legal status if their country has been granted Temporary Protected Status. Ukraine has been granted Temporary Protected Status. As defined by the USCIS website: USCIS.GOV posted:The Secretary of Homeland Security may designate a foreign country for TPS due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country's nationals from returning safely, or in certain circumstances, where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately. USCIS may grant TPS to eligible nationals of certain countries (or parts of countries), who are already in the United States. Eligible individuals without nationality who last resided in the designated country may also be granted TPS. Here are the countries currently granted TPS by the US Government: Burma (Myanmar) El Salvador Haiti Honduras Nepal Nicaragua Syria Somalia Sudan South Sudan Ukraine Venezuela Yemen Now, people outside of the US can request refugee status. A refugee is defined as follows in the US Code: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title8-section1101&num=0&edition=prelim US Code posted:(42) The term "refugee" means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or (B) in such special circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 1157(e) of this title) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person's nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term "refugee" does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this chapter, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion. The key terms here are "Demonstrates that they were persecuted or fear persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group." So under those terms Ukrainians are being persecuted and have a fear of persecution due to their race, nationality, and political opinions, which would qualify them for refugee status. People who are fleeing due to being targeted because they ran afoul of a drug cartel are not eligible unless they fall into one of the areas listed above.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2022 05:25 |
|
When you see white Ukrainians being given preferential treatment at the border it really puts into perspective who is allowed to be considered a victim and who isn’t.
|
# ? Apr 21, 2022 16:29 |
|
Nucleic Acids posted:When you see white Ukrainians being given preferential treatment at the border it really puts into perspective who is allowed to be considered a victim and who isn’t. What perspective does it put it in?
|
# ? Apr 22, 2022 01:05 |
|
PeterCat posted:What perspective does it put it in? That we ignore the people victimized by our own imperial aggression.
|
# ? Apr 22, 2022 01:47 |
|
Nucleic Acids posted:That we ignore the people victimized by our own imperial aggression. Who do you mean?
|
# ? Apr 22, 2022 01:55 |
|
PeterCat posted:Who do you mean? Predominantly people from Central and South America and the Caribbean, but not universally (look to how we’ve handled refugees from Afghanistan after the pull out). I do think we should be helping Ukrainian refugees considering (at the very least) what the US did over the last thirty years to make this war happen, but there is absolutely a racial double standard on how we are approaching this, just as there always has been when it comes to immigration: Nucleic Acids fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Apr 22, 2022 |
# ? Apr 22, 2022 14:12 |
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Predominantly people from Central and South America and the Caribbean, but not universally (look to how we’ve handled refugees from Afghanistan after the pull out). What the US did to make the war happen? Y'know, Russia could have just not invaded Ukraine. I mean, it's really easy not to invade a country.
|
# ? Apr 23, 2022 23:01 |
|
PeterCat posted:What the US did to make the war happen? NATO expansion east of Germany and everything we did to Russia in the 90s that directly enabled Putin’s rise to power.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 04:51 |
|
Nucleic Acids posted:NATO expansion east of Germany and everything we did to Russia in the 90s that directly enabled Putin’s rise to power. Considering what Russia is doing in Ukraine, joining NATO is the smartest thing a country that shares a border with Russia could do. But if the United States is responsible for the Ukrainian refugee crisis, why shouldn't it provide refuge for Ukrainians fleeing the war?
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 05:34 |
|
PeterCat posted:Considering what Russia is doing in Ukraine, joining NATO is the smartest thing a country that shares a border with Russia could do. We should, we just are not providing for the refugees who are the prodcuts of maintaining our current imperial state.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 05:57 |
|
Nucleic Acids posted:We should, we just are not providing for the refugees who are the prodcuts of maintaining our current imperial state. Prove that the US isn't.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 06:12 |
|
PeterCat posted:Prove that the US isn't. I am not sure how I can.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 06:27 |
|
The Southwest Border mission remains dangerous for Soldiers and migrants. One Texas National Guardsman has been missing for 2 days after being swept away while assisting migrants on the Rio Grande. https://abc13.com/texas-army-national-guard-soldier-missing-eagle-pass-search/11786043/ Also, 2 North Dakota National Guardsmen have been recognized for rescuing migrants from drowning. Nationalguard.mil posted:NDNG Soldiers serving at Southwest border rescue migrants
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 21:49 |
|
The US is ending Title 42 exemptions for Ukrainians, so they will not be permitted entry at POEs on the Mexican border. To be granted refugee parole in the US, the Ukrainians must be sponsored by an individual or group prior to their arrival. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-refugee-sponsorship-program-us-resettlement/ CBS posted:The Biden administration is launching a program that will allow U.S. citizens and groups to financially sponsor Ukrainians displaced by the Russian invasion of their country so that they can come to the U.S. sooner, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and President Biden announced Thursday.
|
# ? Apr 24, 2022 21:59 |
|
Body of Texas National Guardsman who drowned saving immigrants from a river has been recovered. https://www.stripes.com/branches/ar...viZ9aeClLtDC6G8 Stripes.com posted:AUSTIN, Texas — The body of Spc. Bishop E. Evans was found Monday, three days after the Texas National Guard soldier jumped into the Rio Grande to rescue two migrants trying to cross from Mexico into the Texas city of Eagle Pass, the state’s military department reported.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2022 00:18 |
|
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-us-sponsor-application-form-website/ U.S. launches online portal with application to sponsor Ukrainians fleeing war https://www.dhs.gov/ukraine After doing a bit of research, a Ukrainian who seeks Humanitarian Parole in the US must be sponsored by an American citizen or organization. This means that the sponsor agrees to be financially responsible for the Ukrainian refugee, and must prove that the sponsor has the financial means to provide for the refugee once they come to the United States. The process seems to be some what onerous, as most bureaucratic things are. I'm posting the instructions from the USCIS website to demonstrate this. It is not surprising that it is not as simple as just buying a ticket to the US and declaring refugee status once you hit customs. USCIS posted:I-134, Declaration Of Financial Support
|
# ? Apr 26, 2022 01:48 |
|
Did we have a separate immigration a/t thread or was it just this one? I know this isn't a policy thing but I got myself into a dumb situation and maybe someone ITT would know what's up. Otherwise I'll delete this if it's too offtopic. I'm flying to the US next Friday and when getting my stuff ready, I realized that the tickets are booked under my name with my EU citizenship that requires ESTA authorization. I started filling it out but there's a question about previously denied visas. I had my first attempt rejected like 12 years ago, before I got my EU citizenship. I since got two B2 visas, the last one valid until 2028, in my other passport. The name is spelled completely differently in that passport and doesn't match the ticket though. So, wtf. I don't want to answer "No" and do a fraud, but if I say yes I probably won't get approved for VWP. I feel like it doesn't have to be a an issue as long as they're not anal about the name on the ticket matching a document under which I'd be authorized for entry, but I've no idea if I can rely on that. I'm on hold with the airline trying to see if I can do a name chaneg, and I'l try calling the consulate tomorrow of course but if anyone knows how that works, it would help me sleep at night
|
# ? May 1, 2022 11:40 |
|
I would advise contacting the consulate or the US state department.
|
# ? May 1, 2022 23:53 |
|
PeterCat posted:I would advise contacting the consulate or the US state department. Thanks, yeah that's the way to go. But it was Sunday so I was only able to reach the preclearance desk in Dublin and some sort of CBP info line. Both said it's fine as long as all the documents are valid. Also stopped by the airport and the check-in clerk reviewed everythign and said. Still, a bit sketchy. It's one thing to have a verbal answer and another to actually get it. So I gave ESTA a shot, answered "YES" on the visa question, and was approved anyway. So a bit of a false alarm, but better safe than sorry. Thanks again.
|
# ? May 2, 2022 12:26 |
|
mobby_6kl posted:Thanks, yeah that's the way to go. But it was Sunday so I was only able to reach the preclearance desk in Dublin and some sort of CBP info line. Both said it's fine as long as all the documents are valid. Also stopped by the airport and the check-in clerk reviewed everythign and said. You have to be on some pretty bad lists to get denied for Esta. The whole thing is more of a security theater.
|
# ? May 6, 2022 01:31 |
|
April, 2022 update from CBP. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/nation...nited%20States. cbp.gov posted:201,000 total encounters along the SWB a 4% decrease from March.
|
# ? May 18, 2022 00:30 |
|
Also, here is the CBP's statement regarding Title 42, which is being revoked in 6 days depending on how the Federal injunction goes:CBP.gov posted:Preparations for a Potential Increase in Migration You can read the Biden-Harris administration's plan here: https://www.dhs.gov/publication/dhs-plan-southwest-border-security-and-preparedness
|
# ? May 18, 2022 00:32 |
|
Celexi posted:You have to be on some pretty bad lists to get denied for Esta. The whole thing is more of a security theater. Apparently. It was the first time I applied for it and they really try to scare you off answering YES on one of the questions. Like "Are you sure you want to admit you had a visa application rejected? Better double check to make sure you don't gently caress up your trip!".
|
# ? May 18, 2022 01:24 |
|
|
# ? May 16, 2024 18:21 |
|
PeterCat posted:
I-134 for a refugee? I thought that was just reserved for immigrant/non-immigrant visa holders going for a green card... well the upshot is it's a direct line to a Green Card instead of some temporary special visa status with no pathway to GC/Citizenship I would guess. I may be incorrect there. Hopefully it's not some temporary protected status where the can is kicked down the road for a few years. I had to fill out an I-134 as a visa worker, even though I had already completed over 40 quarters of work and FICA contributions to the point where I would qualify for social security/Medicare. On a work visa A lot of the visa paperwork processes could be streamlined/simplified but it'll take a mountain of congressional support to do that and immigration reform no matter at what level is generally low priority for most Americans. I naturalize this year, so it'll remain a big priority for me going into the future after dealing with US immigration for 15 years with tons of paperwork.
|
# ? May 18, 2022 07:19 |