Tag Archives: asylum

New DNA Test Finds Stunning Number Of Migrants Trafficking Children

New rapid DNA testing being used at the Southern border is catching tons of migrants who are faking family relationships with children.

The reason the fake the relationships with the children is to gain accesds to the United States and to be allowed in.

But in a pilot program of the rapid DNA testing technology a whopping 30 percent of the migrants tested were found to be faking the relationships, The Daily Mail reported.

ICE conducted the pilot for a few days earlier this month in El Paso and McAllen, Texas, finding about 30 per cent of those tested were not related to the children they claimed were their own, an official told the Washington Examiner.

The official said that these were not cases of step-fathers or adoptive parents.

‘Those were not the case. In these cases, they are misrepresented as family members,’ the official said.

It is unclear whether every family unit was tested during the pilot, or only those who raised some sort of red flag. An ICE spokesman did not immediately respond to request for comment.

The official said that some migrants did refuse the test and admit that they were not related to the children they were with, when they learned their claim would be subjected to DNA proof.

ICE said the Department of Homeland Security would look at the results of the pilot to determine whether to roll out rapid DNA tests more broadly.

After President Donald Trump’s administration backpedaled on ‘family separation’ in the face of enormous backlash last summer, the number of family units arriving at the southern border has skyrocketed.

Current U.S. law and policy means that Central Americans who cross the border illegally with children can claim asylum and avoid any lengthy detention in most cases.

Trump immigration plan revamps asylum, requires work skills and learning English

President Trump unveiled his immigration plan at the White House on May 16. His plan includes creating a merit based selection process. By The White House

President Donald Trump’s new plan to overhaul the immigration system would require immigrants to learn English, create a new visa for highly skilled workers and revamp asylum laws in a push for more merit-based decisions on who is allowed to stay in the country.

Trump declared that the number of immigrants would neither increase nor decrease. He announced that his proposal would create a new “Build America Visa” for “extraordinarily talented individuals,” high-skilled professionals and top graduate students from American universities. Democrats immediately denounced the proposal.

“Our proposal is pro-American, pro-immigrant and pro-worker,” Trump said on Thursday in the White House Rose Garden. “It’s just common sense. It will help all of our people including millions of devoted immigrants to achieve the American dream.”

The Trump immigration proposal touts the “gold standard of border security” and represents an effort to rally Republicans, who are divided on key aspects of this issue. But despite stiff enforcement measures one crucial faction, the immigration hardliners who helped Trump get elected, is already wary about whether they want to remain in the inner circle if this is the starting point.

The plan led by Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior advisor, is facing push back from immigration hardliners who are concerned that it does not actually cut immigration levels as had past proposals from the Trump administration.

The plan also authorizes Customs and Border Protection to raise customs fees and fines, which will be directed to a fund to support border security and trade. A new biometric entry/exit system would also be implemented and agencies will be directed to stop issuing visas to citizens of recalcitrant countries that will not accept back deported nationals, according to a written summary obtained by McClatchy.

“It seems to me that they are trying to pack in as much stuff that hawks will like, because they know that hawks are not happy that the numbers are slated to stay the same,” said Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies for the Center for Immigration Studies, who is in regular discussions with the administration.

It also includes a mandatory federal employment verification program, such as E-Verify.

“The President’s proposal will ensure that all employees are legally authorized to work,” according to the summary.

The plan has little to no chance of going anywhere with Democrats who are already describing it as “inhumane.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham , R-South Carolina, one of Trump’s closest allies in Congress, said any potential legislation has no chance of becoming law without Democratic support. And Trump’s plan, he said, doesn’t address the 11 million people here illegally, which is a priority for Democrats.

Asked if Trump is willing to work with Democrats, Graham said: “I talked to him this morning. I hope so. It might be so poisoned around here they don’t want to give him a win on anything. If they do want to work with him then he’s gotta show a willingness to work with them. He has in the past but we fell short.”

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said the administration has yet to brief them on the plan and questioned the use of the word “merit” in the immigration plan.

“It is really a condescending word,” Pelosi said. “Are they saying families are without merit? Are they saying most of the people who come to the United States in the history of our country are without merit?”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York took to the Senate floor to criticize Trump for presenting a “political document” and not a serious plan, that he said fails to address those here illegally and the so-called Dreamers who were brought to the country illegally as children. He accused the White House of pressing “partisan, radical, anti-immigrant policies” that the administration has pushed since the beginning.

“That goes to the root of what is wrong with this administration’s approach to immigration,” Schumer said. “And if they think they can repeat what they failed to do in the past — if they try to repeat it saying ‘okay we’ll let Dreamers in, but you accept a whole lot of bad things,’ which is why immigration failed last time, last year. It ain’t happening. It ain’t happening.”

One of the most influential business groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has been careful in its response. Executive Vice President and Chief Policy Officer Neil Bradley said Thursday that the Chamber appreciated the administration’s efforts, and looked forward to working with the White House, but emphasized that more issues needed to addressed, “including the creation of market-based temporary worker programs and responsibly addressing the unauthorized alien population in the U.S.”

The plan is open to modification, those familiar with the discussions say, as officials in the White House keep trying to gain more Republican support. The details shared with McClatchy show the administration is making an effort to get hardliners on board by including stronger enforcement measures such as “expediting barrier construction,” tightening asylum rules, tracking down those who overstay their visas, and revisions to legal agreements that prevent children from being detained for more than 20 days.

“My plan expedites relief for legitimate asylum seekers by screening out the merit-less claims,” Trump said. “If you have a proper claim, you will quickly be admitted. If you don’t you will be promptly returned home.”

The White House estimates that now only about 12 percent of people obtaining green cards and citizenship do so based on “employment and skill,” with the majority entering through family connections, humanitarian reasons and the diversity lottery. Under Trump’s proposal, the White House says nearly 60 percent would enter due to employment and skill.

Green card applicants would also, under the proposal, need to be financially self-sufficient, have knowledge about the U.S. government — and speak English.

“The President’s plan is designed to attract immigrants who love America, share our values and want to contribute to society,” the written summary states. “This is achieved by requiring green card applicants to pass a U.S. civics exam and demonstrate English proficiency.”

Immigration hardliners have long been wary of Kushner’s plans, fearing that his corporate ties would lead him to pursue a plan that runs counter to Trump’s “Hire American” priorities.

Late last year, Kushner helped kick off a fresh discussion on immigration that reflected a new paradigm in the White House. It appeared to be a shift away from the priorities of 2017, Trump’s first year in office, that sought to prevent the influx of foreign workers who could displace American workers in favor of a new approach preferred by more traditional Republicans, particularly those close to the corporate sector who are desperate to attract more foreign workers to fill U.S. factories and tech hubs.

Trump won the Republican nomination and the presidency in 2016 by campaigning on a promise to crack down on immigration, build a border wall and end an Obama-era program that offered the so-called Dreamers temporary, renewable work permits.

Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which supports reduction in immigration numbers, said the immigration system is in crisis and this could be the best plan offered for the next several decades – especially if Democrats later take control of the White House and Congress.

While the numbers need to be reduced, Stein said the proposal’s limits to asylum, cuts to extended family migration, and movement toward a merit system would reduce pressure to increase immigration numbers. He said it would also increase the income earning ability of the immigrants who are admitted.

“It needs a top to bottom, root and branch reform. It needs to be simplified and just like anything else, you have to turn the water off before you can fix the plumbing,” Stein said.

Graham unveils bill to end asylum claims at US border, return minors to home countries

Sen. Lindsey Graham reveals new immigration bill as Feds arrest dozens over alleged immigration scam

Scam offered fake marriages for $70K; Border Patrol Foundation president Ronald Colburn weighs in.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on Wednesday unveiled a bill that would end asylum claims from Central America at the border and return unaccompanied minors to their home countries — a targeted effort to tackle the escalating migration crisis.

“This is a nightmare for smugglers,” Graham said. “This is a godsend to stop the humanitarian disaster.”

Graham’s bill is designed specifically to deal with loopholes he says are encouraging migrants from Central America to make the treacherous journey north and bring children with them. He pointed in particular to the 20-day limit for authorities to hold unaccompanied minors and families before having to release them into the U.S. homeland.

“The word is out on the street in Central America if you bring a minor child with you, your chance of being deported goes to almost zero, your hearing date is years away and we release you inside the country and that’s the goal of coming,” he said.

The bill would end asylum claims at the U.S. border for migrants from the Northern Triangle of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. Instead, those applications would be filed at refugee processing centers set up in the Northern Triangle and Mexico. The legislation would also allow unaccompanied minors to be returned to their country of origin, which Graham said would be treating them the same as minors from Canada and Mexico.

His bill would extend the time families can be held together from 20 days to 100 days to help allow claims to be filed without families being released into the U.S. It would also add an additional 500 immigration judges to deal with the backlog of asylum claims.

Until these loopholes are dealt with, Graham said, other border security measures and funding are pointless — including President Trump’s call for a wall on the southern border.
TSA planning to deploy hundreds of volunteer staff to southern borderVideo

“No matter how high the wall will be built, how many drones you have, no matter how many agents you have in the border, they’ll keep coming because they want to get caught,” he said.

Graham told reporters he was prepared to work with Democrats on moving the bill in Congress.

“If we do these four things, then the incentives created by our laws will cease to exist, this humanitarian disaster will begin to repair itself and I am willing to sit down with Democrats and find a way to address the underlying problem in Central America,” he said. “I am willing to put other immigration ideas on the table to marry up with this but what I am not willing to do is ignore this problem any longer.”

Democrats initially appeared skeptical, with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., telling ABC News: “Any immigration proposal that is harsh on children seeking asylum and does not address the root causes that are forcing them to flee their home countries will fail to stem the flow of migrants and is a nonstarter.”

Graham’s proposal comes after Customs and Border Protection said it apprehended or turned away more than 109,000 migrants attempting to cross the border in April, the second month in a row the number has topped 100,000.

Fox News confirmed Wednesday that The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is planning to send hundreds of officials to the southern border to help the Department of Homeland Security with the crisis.

Former ICE chief: ‘Forget Congress’ when it comes to dealing with border security crisis

The former interim chief of Immigration and Customs Enforcement said the best way for POTUS Donald Trump to deal with the burgeoning security crisis along the U.S.-Mexico border is to “forget Congress” and act on his own in ways that are both legal and constitutional.

“Look, I don’t have any faith in Congress. Congress has failed this president from day one,” former ICE Acting Director Thomas Homan said during an interview Thursday on “Fox & Friends,” Fox News‘ morning show.

“They talk about the president obstructing justice — who’s obstructing more than Congress? They obstructed this president from day one,” he continued.

“Forget about Congress. There are certain things we can do operationally if Congress is going to fail legislatively. There’s three things they could do right now that they’re not doing,” Homan added.

For one, Homan said ICE should conduct a “national operation” to deal with so-called family units that are currently arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border, 90 percent of whom, he said, would lose their asylum claim.

“Seek them out, detain them, and remove them,” Homan said, adding that sending all U.S. immigration judges to the border to deal with the influx of migrant families now arriving and thus immediately “send home” those that don’t qualify for asylum would send a message to others enroute to the border not to come.

MASSIVE asylum fraud: Central American kids being ‘recycled’ as family members to cheat U.S. immigration system, Border Patrol says

Immigration reformers from the lowest-ranking federal agent all the way up to POTUS Donald Trump know that the biggest change Congress could and should make to blunt the endless migrant caravans and free-for-all along the U.S.-Mexico border is to change asylum laws.

But because Democrats (and too many Chamber of Commerce-supported Republicans) love their open borders and cheap labor and, thus, refuse to implement changes, Mexico-based cartels, Left-wing immigration groups, and foreign governments seeking to export their poverty are exploiting our asylum laws so they can flood our country with third-world poverty.

And they are using children as part of their effort to defraud America.

As CBS Valley Central reveals, Border Patrol officials report that children are being ‘recycled’ among groups of migrants to pose as family members in order to ‘qualify’ for entrance under current asylum law.

“We’ve uncovered child recycling rings where the same child is brought across the border multiple times, with a different adult to try to gain that release family units are required under court orders,” Acting Department of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan said, adding that the practice has become a trend.

According to Customs and Border Protection records, family units are up 374 percent from this same time last year throughout the southwest border.

“This is about the safety of children and that’s our first and foremost responsibility. In the last six months, we’ve identified over 3,000 families that were determined to be fraudulent,” a CBP report said.

New POTUS plan: Border Patrol agents could soon decide migrant ‘asylum’ claims, speeding deportation

As Democrats in Congress and activist judges in federal courts continue to thwart POTUS Donald Trump’s efforts to bring sanity and security to the U.S.-Mexico border, the president and his administration continue looking for new and inventive ways to bypass the obstruction.

A new plan being considered by the White House would allow Border Patrol agents to decide whether migrant claims of “asylum” are legitimate and whether they should be processed as such — or immediately deported, the Washington Examiner reported, citing an administration source.

This would dramatically speed up the effort to clear backlogs and allow migrants to return to their home countries.

The new plan would empower specially-trained Border Patrol officers to conduct “credible fear” interviews to judge the validity of a migrant’s asylum claim. Migrants must first pass this initial interview process before they would be allowed to officially file their asylum claim.

At present, there is a backlog of about 900,000 asylum cases to be heard, a ridiculous figure considering there are less than 500 immigration judges, meaning some migrants have to wait five years before their cases are heard.

And by then, most have disappeared into the interior of the country.

The objective behind having Border Patrol agents screening asylum claims is to ensure that far fewer migrants are able to register official asylum claims and begin the process of waiting to have their claim heard by a judge; invalid cases can be immediately adjudicated.

The Blaze noted:

The current system for immigrants claiming asylum is that they surrender to Border Patrol, get held in detention for up to 72 hours. A representative from U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services comes to hear their claim and conduct the “credible fear” interview once the immigrant is in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody.

POTUS memorandum cracks down on ‘rampant abuse’ of asylum system with crafty tactic

While the White House and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) work to craft new immigration reform legislation, POTUS on Monday issued a presidential memorandum to Attorney General William Barr and acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan detailing a series of measures to strengthen the U.S.’s immigration laws.

“Our immigration and asylum system is in crisis as a consequence of the mass migration of aliens across our southern border,” the memo states. “In Proclamation 9844 of February 15, 2019, I declared a national emergency to address the security and humanitarian crisis at that border. That emergency continues to grow increasingly severe.”

The memorandum is intended to “safeguard our system against rampant abuse,” it continues. In particular, the memo directs officials to charge a fee to process asylum and employment authorization applications:

Propose regulations setting a fee for an asylum application not to exceed the costs of adjudicating the application … and other applicable statutes, and setting a fee for an initial application for employment authorization for the period an asylum claim is pending.

The president gave officials 90 days to develop the new regulations ensuring that asylum applications are adjudicated within 180 days, “absent exceptional circumstances.” According to The New York Times, “more than 800,000 cases are pending, with an average wait time of almost two years.”

In addition, the memo seeks to bar anyone who enters or attempts to enter the U.S. illegally from being able to obtain a provisional work permit. Also, work authorizations are to be revoked from any illegal immigrant who is denied asylum and ordered to be removed from the country.

The president tweeted Monday night that if Democrats continue blocking any effort to fix the nation’s immigration laws, Republicans must make enough gains in 2020 to win back the House and keep the Senate.

William Barr’s Latest Immigration Decision Forces the Courts and Congress To Choose a Side

Yesterday, Attorney General William Barr upped the ante in the combined crises of our southern border being overwhelmed by mass migration, a guerrilla war by the courts in the Ninth Circuit against any kind of enforcement of immigration laws, and the unwillingness/inability of Congress to act to resolve either of those problems.

A year ago, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions took control of the entire immigration legal system by exercising his right to be the final arbiter on all immigration cases. Other than leaving trousers befouled in the media, and among Democrats and Vichy Republicans, what this decision did was give the Attorney General a direct say in the interpretation of immigration law.

This is not a revolutionary as it has been made sound, immigration judges are Article II judges, that is, employees of the executive branch. They are answerable to the Attorney General. But in the past Republican administrations have treated these bureaucrats as though they were actual Article III judges and let them run amok through the immigration process.

Some of the changes Sessions imposed were, as expected, blocked by liberal judges but these will inevitably end up before a Supreme Court that is very, very likely to say that unless you can prove the Attorney General is obviously wrong, he gets the benefit of the doubt.

Now Barr has thrown a major wrench into the system.

The order issued by Attorney General William P. Barr was an effort to deliver on President Trump’s promise to end the “catch and release” of migrants crossing the border in hopes of escaping persecution in their home countries.

The order — which directs immigration judges to deny some migrants a chance to post bail — will not go into effect for 90 days. It is all but certain to be challenged in federal court, but immigrant rights lawyers said it could undermine the basic rights of people seeking safety in the United States.

“They want to send a message that you will get detained,” said Judy Rabinovitz, a deputy director of the Immigrants Rights’ Project at the American Civil Liberties Union. “We are talking about people who are fleeing for their lives, seeking safety. And our response is just lock them up.”

Mr. Barr’s order is the latest effort by the Trump administration to reduce the number of immigrants who are able to seek protection from violence, poverty and gangs by asking for legal status in the United States. It has slowed the processing of asylum requests at ports of entry, and it has ordered that some asylum seekers be required to wait in Mexico.

Important points: this decision only covers illegals who are apprehended inside the United States and then make a claim of asylum; the decision does not cover families as they, under the Flores settlement, can’t be detained longer than 20 days. The decision seems to be a direct challenge to a decision by the Ninth Circuit that illegals were entitled to a habeas corpus hearing before being deported.

All of this is taking place in a a ecosystem that is stressed to the breaking point by sanctuary cities, hostile Democrat judges, restrictive court rulings, nationwide injunctions issued by single Democrat judges, and inadequate resources. So why, one could ask, is the administration creating another pain point by mandating the detention of people who where being released on parole.

I’d guess two things.

There is an election in 2020 and the administration is raising the visibility of issues, such as sanctuary cities, to use them as a campaign issue. At this stage, every administration policy that gets an injunction from the Ninth Circuit should be forced by the FEC to label itself as an in-kind donation to Trump-Pence 2020.

Despite numerous setbacks, the Trump administration had remained focused on border security and it has kept border security in the spotlight. Many of these short term defeats, like the “kids in cages” stuff, are ephemeral because the lead to some logical questions being asked by a large number of Americans. Wait, you mean if you cross into the US illegally but have a kid with you, you get a get-out-of-jail-free card? Hold on, all you have to do is say you felt threatened at home and you’re free to go until your hearing?

A lot of this is not and can never be made defensible. To understand how this plays electorally, let’s go to the

“Well, let me say, you’re referencing a comment because— And when we won this election, it wasn’t in districts like mine or Alexandria’s, however wonderful—she’s a wonderful member of Congress, I think all of our colleagues will attest. But those are districts that are solidly Democratic. This glass of water would win with a ‘D’ next to its name in those districts.

“And not to diminish the exuberance and the personality and the rest of Alexandria and the other members, but when I said three, they were talking about three that were getting a good deal of press on it. But the 43 districts – we won 43, net gain of 40 – were right down the middle, mainstream, hold the center victories.

How is this going to play in those 43 districts the Democrats managed to flip? How are those people going to defend doing nothing while the the administration can make the case that it is trying to secure the border but the Democrats are not serious?

The second issue is deeper. I’ve never credited the people who claims Trump plays multidimensional chess. He doesn’t. He plays checkers like my brother does. When he starts losing he knocks the board over and you can’t reset the pieces so you either start over or you play a different game. But he does have some very shrewd people working with him. I think we’re seeing the natural inclination of Trump to get mad and knock the board over combined with folks who are well acquainted with the Cloward-Piven Strategy–named after leftist social activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, who advocated that the quickest way of getting universal income guarantee (and universal everything) was by overloading the current system until if failed and change was demanded–and they are doing it at the border.

What better way of changing the game than by actually enforcing the laws, placing the system under maximum stress, and communicating the impossibility of contending with the border crisis and with a hostile judiciary? How do you change visibly failing to staunch the flow of illegals from a negative to a positive? You create a nemesis in the form of the judges of the Ninth Circuit and the mayors of sanctuary cities who seem to have a greater affection for illegals than for citizens? What better way to do this than by interpreting the law as rigidly as possible and by getting rid of anyone in your organization who has any loyalty to the old way of doing things? And what better cover for a strategy of deliberately breaking the untenable status quo than President Trump’s angry tweets about illegal immigration and Democrat judges?

Attorney General Barr Ends Catch And Release, Illegals To Be Held Indefinitely

The U.S. Attorney General on Tuesday struck down a decision that had allowed some asylum seekers to ask for bond in front of an immigration judge, in a ruling that expands indefinite detention for some migrants who must wait months or years for their cases to be heard.

The first immigration court ruling from President Donald Trump’s newly appointed Attorney General William Barr is in keeping with the administration’s moves to clamp down on the asylum process as tens of thousands of mostly Central Americans cross into the United States asking for refuge. U.S. immigration courts are overseen by the Justice Department and the Attorney General can rule in cases to set legal precedent.

Barr’s ruling is the latest instance of the Trump administration taking a hard line on immigration. This year the administration implemented a policy to return some asylum seekers to Mexico while their cases work their way through backlogged courts, a policy which has been challenged with a lawsuit.

Several top officials at the Department of Homeland Security were forced out this month over Trump’s frustrations with an influx of migrants seeking refuge at the U.S. southern border.

Barr’s decision applies to migrants who crossed illegally into the United States.

Typically, those migrants are placed in “expedited removal” proceedings – a faster form of deportation reserved for people who illegally entered the country within the last two weeks and are detained within 100 miles (160 km) of a land border. Migrants who present themselves at ports of entry and ask for asylum are not eligible for bond.

But before Barr’s ruling, those who had crossed the border between official entry points and asked for asylum were eligible for bond, once they had proven to asylum officers they had a credible fear of persecution.

“I conclude that such aliens remain ineligible for bond, whether they are arriving at the border or are apprehended in the United States,” Barr wrote.

Barr said such people can be held in immigration detention until their cases conclude, or if the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) decides to release them by granting them “parole.” DHS has the discretion to parole people who are not eligible for bond and frequently does so due to insufficient detention space or other humanitarian reasons.

Barr said he was delaying the effective date by 90 days “so that DHS may conduct the necessary operational planning for additional detention and parole decisions.”

The decision’s full impact is not yet clear, because it will in large part depend on DHS’ ability to expand detention, said Steve Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas.

“The number of asylum seekers who will remain in potentially indefinite detention pending disposition of their cases will be almost entirely a question of DHS’s detention capacity, and not whether the individual circumstances of individual cases warrant release or detention,” Vladeck said.

DHS officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the decision. The agency had written in a brief in the case arguing that eliminating bond hearings for the asylum seekers would have “an immediate and significant impact on…detention operations.”

In early March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the DHS agency responsible for detaining and deporting immigrants in the country illegally, said the average daily population of immigrants in detention topped 46,000 for the 2019 fiscal year, the highest level since the agency was created in 2003. Last year, Reuters reported that ICE had modified a tool officers have been using since 2013 when deciding whether an immigrant should be detained or released on bond, making the process more restrictive.

The decision will have no impact on unaccompanied migrant children, who are exempt from expedited removal. Most families are also paroled because of a lack of facilities to hold parents and children together.

Michael Tan, from the American Civil Liberties Union, said the rights group intended to sue the Trump administration over the decision, and immigrant advocates decried the decision.

Barr’s decision came after former Attorney General Jeff Sessions decided to review the case in October. Sessions resigned from his position in November, leaving the case to Barr to decide.

USA: Attorney General Barr Blocks Catch and Release by Migration Judges

Immigration judges cannot release migrants who are caught sneaking into the United States, even if the migrants ask for asylum, says a binding legal decision by Attorney General William Barr.

The decision will dramatically shift the migration-caused civic and housing crises from the nation’s blue-collar communities over to the Congress and the Department of Homeland Security, whose budget and detention centers only have enough resources to house about 50,000 people year-round.

“The [text of the relevant] Act provides that, if an alien in expedited proceedings establishes a credible fear, he “shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum,” says Barr’s April 16 decision, titled. Matter of M-S-. Because of the law, “I order that, unless DHS paroles the respondent under section 212(d)(5)(A) of the Act, he must be detained until his removal proceedings conclude.”

This is a HUGE ruling that will harm thousands seeking protection from persecution at the US border since far more will be held in detention even after passing the threshold screening under the credible fear standard,” complained Greg Chen, director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

The association’s lawyers make their money by guiding migrants and corporate hiring managers through the extremely dense network of migration laws and regulations. But Barr’s decision blocks the use of a common path for migrants who are trying to get through the courts and into the U.S. jobs they need to repay the smuggling fees they owe to the cartels.

Barr directed officials to delay implementation of the law for 90 days, giving DHS managers — and congressional leaders — three months to decide which migrants should be released into the nation’s cities and towns.

The delay gives time for DHS to set up tent cities where migrants can be held until the judges decide the asylum pleas. If DHS detains most of the migrants — and so prevents them from working — the next wave of migrants may decide that any effort to get into the United would be an economic disaster for their families.

Barr’s decision is part of a large legal battle of move-countermove between President Donald Trump’s deputies and the many pro-migration progressive judges in the federal courts. Massive resistance by those judges has blocked and delayed many of Trump’s policies, but Trump’s deputies are expected to win most of the decisions if and when the U.S. Supreme Court decides to rule on each dispute.

Barr’s new ruling does not apply to the many “UAC” migrant minors who are being smuggled northwards by parents living illegally in the United States. It also does not apply to migrants who walk up to the nation’s official ports of entry to ask for asylum.

But the ruling will apply to the huge number of migrants who cross the borderline away from the ports of entry.

Those migrants must now be held for many months — or even years — unless DHS leaders formally release the migrants. The decision ensures that migration judges’ preference — and migration lawyers’ pleadings — will not allow the illegal migrants to be released on bonds which are often a tiny fraction of the economic value gained by the migrants from working illegally in the United States.

However, the decision also raises the incentives for migrants to legally apply for asylum through the formal process at the ports of entry, instead of trying to sneak past the border patrol.

The decision does not overcome the 2015 Flores decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California, which forces DHS to release migrants who bring children. Federal agencies, however, are drafting a regulation that may bypass that court Flores ruling.

The AG’s decision is based on the treatment of a migrant from India, who is part of a small but fast-growing stream of very cheap laborers who are being hired by the growing population of Indian legal immigrants. According to Barr:

The respondent here is a citizen of India. He traveled to Mexico and crossed illegally into the United States. He was apprehended within hours about 50 miles north of the border. DHS placed him in expedited removal proceedings.

After the respondent claimed a fear of persecution in India, DHS referred him for an asylum interview. The asylum officer determined that the respondent lacked a credible fear, but, at the respondent’s request, DHS reconsidered and reversed its determination. DHS then transferred the respondent to full proceedings. Upon his transfer, DHS issued the respondent a Notice to Appear (DHS Form I-862) and a Notice of Custody Determination (DHS Form I-286), the latter of which informed the respondent that, “pending a final administrative determination in your case, you will be . . . [d]etained by the Department of Homeland Security.” The respondent requested that an immigration judge review that custody determination. Without mentioning section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii), the immigration judge held that the respondent “is not subject to mandatory detention.” Matter of M-S-, Order on Motion for Custody Redetermination at 2 (Immig. Ct. July 18, 2018). The immigration judge ordered that the respondent be released if he could produce a valid Indian passport and post a bond of $17,500. Id. at 3. The respondent appealed to the Board, arguing that his bond should be reduced.


A different immigration judge agreed, but increased the respondent’s bond to $27,000. Matter of M-S-, Order on Motion for Custody Redetermination at 2 (Immig. Ct. Sept. 17, 2018). The respondent posted that amount and was released on September 27, 2018.


Here, despite the respondent being bond ineligible, the second immigration judge ordered DHS to release him on a bond of $27,000. The respondent posted that bond in September 2018, and was released from custody. I reverse the order granting bond to the respondent. I order that, unless DHS paroles the respondent under section 212(d)(5)(A) of the Act, he must be detained until his removal proceedings conclude.

Migration lawyers complained bitterly about the Barr decision:

Each year, roughly four million young Americans join the workforce after graduating from high school or university.

But the federal government then imports about 1.1 million legal immigrants, refreshes a resident population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar guest workers in addition to approximately 500,000 blue-collar visa workers, and also tolerates about eight million illegal workers and the inflow of hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants.

This federal policy of flooding the market with cheap white-collar graduates and blue-collar foreign labor is intended to boost economic growth for investors.

This policy works by shifting enormous wealth from young employees towards older investors and real-estate owners, even as it also widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts children’s schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines millions of marginalized Americans, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.