Mediaboss Marketing

For two decades a debate has swirled over legal and illegal immigration to the United States, that too often leaves the biggest questions unanswered.

Now, President Joe Biden is adding his vision.

The legislation he proposes includes many improvements that have been supported by both Republicans and Democrats in the past, albeit not often at the same time. And a lot of what he wants to change could be accomplished without legislation, because the federal courts have consistently ruled that a president has significant latitude over immigration. But Biden is right to go the legislative route, to seek a consensus on how to fix a broken system. The past cycle of executive orders loosening and tightening immigration and deportation has destabilized our policies, and caused confusion and hardships for individuals and industry.

Before parsing Bidens plan, however, there are fundamental questions to address. Do we still want to be a nation welcoming new immigrants? Can a country that built itself into a uniquely successful society by welcoming nearly all comers continue to do so?

We say yes.

The benefits of immigration for the United States do not belong only to some sepia-toned past, nor do they come only from the nations that have traditionally fed our population. The arguments against immigration are not new: the canards now used to justify closing the doors to immigrants from Central America, the Caribbean, the Middle East and Africa are the same ones leveled against the Irish, Jews, Italians and Greeks in the past.

Immigrants do learn the language, if haltingly, but their children born here speak it perfectly. Immigrants do become "Americans," embracing our customs even as they maintain their own heritage. Newcomers generally work hard, obey the law, buy homes, create more jobs especially in small businesses than they fill, and enlist in the military in large numbers.

Go inside New York politics.

By clicking Sign up, you agree to our privacy policy.

The immigrants who battle to get here are, in some sense, the most American of Americans, and we need more of them to fill the demographic and workforce needs of an aging populace.

So how do we get to a sane system that would accomplish these goals? Bidens proposal is a start. It would:

These are, broadly speaking, the right measures. Ideally, theyd be passed as one comprehensive bill, but if it has to be broken into passable pieces, that could work, too.

The goal now is a humane, fair and welcoming policy that keeps criminals out while ushering aspiring Americans in, via laws our nation can feel are equitable and reasonable to enforce. Thats the litmus test that President Ronald Reagans comprehensive overhaul of immigration in 1986 failed to meet, souring many on later efforts to provide a path to citizenship for people who came here illegally after that amnesty. Under Reagan, 4.5 million undocumented immigrants were granted a path to citizenship on the premise that the new rules would be tough enough to stem the influx of more people who dont follow the legal steps for residency.

Thirty-five years and 11 million more undocumented immigrants later, the lessons are clear. The worldwide hunger to become an American is unchecked, as poverty and violence in other nations contrast with the unlimited opportunity here.

The time has come to establish immigration laws and policies compassionate enough that we dont balk at enforcing them, and strong enough to keep our nation safe. Bidens plan, in both tone and text, is a strong start.

- The editorial board

See the original post:
The United States needs a humane immigration system - Newsday

FILE PHOTO: Border security soldiers guard border control as Haitians wait to cross the border, in Dajabon, Dominican Republic, September 22, 2019. . REUTERS/Ricardo Rojas/File Photo

SANTO DOMINGO (Reuters) - The Dominican Republic will begin constructing a fence along its 376-kilometer (234 mi) border with Haiti later this year to curb unauthorized migration and illicit trade, President Luis Abinader said on Saturday.

In a period of two years, we want to put an end to the serious problems of illegal immigration, drug trafficking and the movement of stolen vehicles, Abinader said in a presentation to Congress.

Construction of the border fence, whose cost has not been disclosed, will begin in the second half of 2021, Abinader said.

The barrier will include a double-fence in the most conflictive sections, along with motion sensors, facial recognition cameras and infrared systems, he added, speaking on the 177th anniversary of the countrys independence from Haiti.

According to government estimates, about 500,000 Haitian immigrants resided in the Dominican Republic as of 2018, along with tens of thousands of their children born in the Caribbean country. A large part of the Haitian community, which makes up about 5% of the total population, does not have residency permits.

The announcement came a month after the government agreed to help Haiti provide identity documents to its citizens living in Dominican territory.

Reporting by Ezequiel Abiu Lopez; Editing by Daina Beth Solomon; Editing by Leslie Adler

Go here to read the rest:
Dominican Republic to construct fence along border with Haiti - Reuters

McALLEN, Texas (Border Report) U.S. Attorney Ryan Patrick who was instrumental in carrying out several hard-line immigration policies during the Trump administration, like zero-tolerance and border wall land condemnation cases, is stepping down as the chief law enforcement officer for the Southern District of Texas, his office announced Monday.

Patrick, who is son of Republican Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, had served in the role since January 2018. His resignation is effective on Feb. 28.

In his first year alone, his office found itself at the forefront of a nationwide immigration debate, his office said in a news release, which characterized him as a prominent leader of the ever-increasing immigration debate.

He frequently discussed and addressed challenging border issues andprotecting people from the harms associated with illegal immigration and human smuggling, the statement said.

But migrant advocates claim that Patricks actions have led to the harsh treatment of asylum-seekers. And in the summer of 2018, he was in the center of the Trump administrations zero-tolerance policy, which led to the separation of thousands of migrant families and children, including those crossing into South Texas.

While he was in that position, hundreds perhaps thousands of parents were separated from children in the Southern District of Texas and he is directly responsible for that, said Efren Olivares, deputy legal director for immigrant justice at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

The statement that he was protecting people from the harms of illegal immigration is just a talking point from the hard-liners within certain circles so it is not surprising, but Im hopeful that whoever takes the position will take a more humane and smart approach to the administration of criminal justice, Olivares said.

Olivares pointed out that the crime rate along border cities, including the Southern District of Texas, are some of the lowest in the country.

Latest estimates are that over 600 migrant children remain separated from their families and in the care of U.S. Health and Human Services, nearly two years after they were removed from families who crossed illegally into the Southern border of the United States.

Since 2014, South Texas has been a hotspot for families to cross into, but the Trump administration tried to stop that trend by implementing the controversial zero-tolerance policy that resulted in the separation of families.

Under his leadership, the department also pursued hundreds of border landowners to give up right of entry onto their properties to survey the land for placement of a border wall.

Although the Biden administration has put a halt to the construction of the border wall, many cases still are pending in federal courts under Patricks jurisdiction.

Upon hearing that he was resigning, Melissa Cigarroa, a landowner in Zapata County who has been sued by Patricks assistants for the right of entry onto her border property exclaimed, Its fabulous! Im assuming hes the reason this all happened on my property after the election and after he knew the new administration would be taking a new direction.

Cigarroa, who is president of the board for the Rio Grande International Studies Center in Laredo, Texas, said the land case against her continued under Patricks leadership without even the ability to discuss other outcomes or consider other alternatives.

Her case is scheduled for the Southern District Court in Laredo in early March, just days after Patrick is set to leave office.

Her parting words to him: Dont let the door slap you in the ass when youre going out.

Added Cigarroa: Im so happy that the Biden administration is righting wrongs.

Here is the original post:
Immigration hard-liner US attorney stepping down in South Texas - KGBT-TV

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The Republicans are learning quickly how to be in the minority in Congress, and thats good news.

How can you tell? Thats easy. They are starting to use the legislative process to move their own agenda and tangle the other side. As part of that, Sens. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Mitt Romney of Utah on Thursday morning are set to introduce the Higher Wages for American Workers Act.

The legislation would phase in an increase in the federal minimum wage to $10 by 2025 and index it to inflation thereafter, while requiring employers to E-Verify their employees, phasing in implementation over 18 months to allow small businesses additional time to compl). The verification process prevents fraud by requiring workers 18 and older to provide photo identification to their employer, which will be cross-referenced through the federal E-Verify system.

The genius of the legislation is that it harnesses the progressives burning desire to raise the federal minimum wage to the single most important element of immigration reform making sure that employers are hiring those legally eligible for employment.

The verification of employees in a comprehensive, timely and thorough manner has been the grail of immigration reformers for years. No one has yet been skillful enough to get it through Congress or bold enough to mandate it administratively, not even President Trump.

As a practical matter, by tying together the federal minimum wage and employment verification, the legislation ensures that rising wages will go to legally authorized workers.

Thats essential. Workers and companies understand that immigration, legal and (especially) illegal, serves primarily to suppress wages in the marketplace. It is no accident that in the previous century wages increased the fastest from the 1920s to the 1960s a period that saw a pause in immigration into the United States.

By mandating employment eligibility verification, the legislation leverages the weakest link in an immigration system that sometimes seems largely indifferent about legality companies fear of participating in criminality. It is not accidental that the legislation increases civil and criminal penalties on employers that hire ineligible employees or file fraudulent paperwork.

Forget the border wall. If the United States is serious about reducing illegal immigration, it needs to start putting those who employ ineligible workers in jail. Illegal immigration would dry up in a matter of weeks.

Moreover, rather than destroy 1.4 million jobs like the $15 federal minimum wage is projected to do, the proposed legislation would raise wages for 3.5 million workers without harming the very people it is intended to protect.

In short, mandating E-Verify would preserve American jobs for legal workers and rebalance the risk-reward equation for corporations on illegal immigration. The federal minimum wage increase and the verification would work in tandem to create upward pressure on wages. The phase-in would help employers adjust.

The legislation is also politically graceful. For the Republicans, they now have a better alternative with respect to the federal minimum wage. For the Democrats, especially for moderates in the House and Senate, the legislation creates a problem. They will need to explain to voters why they excluded consideration of employment eligibility when raising the minimum wage.

Mr. Cotton and Mr. Romney were also careful enough to leave themselves some room to negotiate. By setting the federal minimum wage at $10 an hour, they can offer a concession to increase the number to $11 West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin IIIs new number or even $12 or $13 if that helps make the deal.

This is what legislating looks like. It is good to see that Congress can still do it.

Michael McKenna, a columnist for The Washington Times, is the president of MWR Strategies. He was most recently a deputy assistant to the president and deputy director of the Office of Legislative Affairs at the White House.

Excerpt from:
Forget the border wall. To reduce illegal immigration, jail employers who hire ineligible workers - Washington Times

Recent moves toward paying illegal aliens to stay in the U.S., at both the federal and state levels, are extreme and radical, as the mainstream media does not seem to realize.

There are, to condense the options available about enforcing the immigration law, five different levels:

In other words simply proposing to suspend most deportations, one of President Biden's policies, while drastic enough, is just one step along the way to open borders, while paying disaster grants or extra unemployment insurance to those in illegal statusis a fifth step in the same direction. The media simply does not understand this, or if it does, it ties itself in knots trying not to convey this reality.

For a good example of this kind of journalistic denial, one only has to read a February 20 Washington Post article about how some Maryland Democrats are trying to add illegal aliens to the list of families about to receive state-level disaster grants of $300 to $500 each.

Erin Cox, writing on tax credits for illegal aliens in Maryland, so shrank from that term that she used, inaccurately, the following terms: "noncitizen Marylanders" in the print version headline, "immigrants who are not citizens", and the value-loaded "taxpayers without Social Security numbers" in the text. "Noncitizen Marylanders" is inaccurate in this context because some of them are here legally and eligible for the payments, and some are not.

Maryland Governor Larry Hogan's posture on this issue do not pay illegal aliens to stay in the country is the correct one. Noncitizens should get these benefits if they are here permanently and legally as permanent resident aliens (those with green cards); aliens who are here legally on temporary visas, and those here without papers should receive nothing.

Maryland's position, more precisely, that benefits should not go to aliens without Social Security numbers, is the right one; these numbers are supposed to be handed out only to people here legally. There are ITINs (individual tax identification numbers) for aliens who are not here legally; no benefits should go to them.

While Maryland, so far, is doing the right thing on this issue, California and the feds are not. We reported earlier that the U.S. Senate, on a party-line vote, decided that illegal aliens could get the next round of $1,400 disaster payments. Similarly, the state legislature in California made the same decision about its last round of such payments, $500 for adult illegal aliens.

Read more:
Paying Illegal Aliens to Stay Is a Radical Position - Immigration Blog