Mediaboss Marketing

Chad Wolf, acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is directing all components to conduct a review of states' driving license issuance and sharing policies.

This is in no small measure due to the recently enacted New York State "Green-Light" statute that:

New York's law is so broad that many county clerks object that it will open the door to massive identity theft, voter fraud, and even possibly providing licenses to terrorists and other national security threats. Litigation by counties fighting against implementation has begun (see here, here, and here).

The analysis Wolf has requested is an excellent idea. One wonders, in fact, why his own Office of Policy at DHS didn't take this upon itself earlier. Note that it is not just DHS's immigration agencies such as CBP, ICE, and USCIS that are impinged by these laws, but also the Transportation Security Administration, which relies upon the secure and appropriate issuance of state driver's licenses and official ID cards in its mission of granting or denying access to individuals seeking to board commercial aircraft in the United States. There are a number of problem areas that need to be explored in these analyses, some of which are discussed below.

First, state statutes that prohibit sharing of information on licenses issued to aliens, whether those aliens are legally or illegally in the United States, violate two federal statutes, 8 U.S.C. Section 1373 and 8 U.S.C. Section 1644.

This is no small matter, given the damaging implications not just in routine illegal immigration removal cases, but more significantly to national security, alien fugitive, and criminal alien cases. My colleague Art Arthur recently blogged about a Liberian war criminal who was released by New York City Police rather than honor an immigration detainer. Think how likely such interactions will likely play out with aliens seeking licenses, which is a much more common occurrence than being taken into custody by local police. How ironic that, in pursuit of "progressive" values, the state of New York chooses to turn a blind eye toward such individuals rather than cooperate with immigration officials.

Second, there are cogent reasons to think that states that issue driver's licenses to illegal aliens most especially when the acceptance threshold for documents submitted to verify identity, citizenship, and status are so broad as to raise significant possibilities of rampant fraud, identity theft, or national security threats cannot possibly be in substantive compliance with the provisions of the federal Real ID Act (Title II of Division B of Pub. Law 109-13).

The Real ID Act prescribes minimal thresholds that must be met for states to issue driver's licenses and identification cards (IDs) that will be accepted by the federal government for specified official purposes:

The term ''official purpose'' includes but is not limited to accessing Federal facilities, boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft, entering nuclear powerplants, and any other purposes that the [DHS] Secretary shall determine. [Emphasis added.]

The Act is clear and detailed in its mandate that states accept only foreign passports for documentation, and also that state authorities verify the individual's status prior to issuance, through exchange of information with the federal SAVE (Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements) database.

States that issue driver's licenses and IDs to illegal aliens will no doubt argue that they have created a bifurcated system for issuing two types of licenses and IDs: those that are Real ID Act compliant, and those that are not, which therefore satisfies the requirements of the law. Of course, such a two-tier system vitiates the intent behind the Real ID Act, which obviously was to leverage federal powers and systems to aid states in ensuring that their documents are not provided to those who would do us harm, leaving one to ponder exactly what "compliance" means. But how can a state purport to be submitting names and other biographic data through the SAVE system (which is maintained by immigration officials) in order to produce Real ID Act-compliant licenses and IDs as federal law requires, when their own law prohibits sharing information with the federal government? How do states purport to square that circle?

We also must ask how a state using a two-tier system can possibly ensure there is no bleed-over of ineligibles who end up receiving documents that assert Real ID compliance (usually with a gold star or some other indicia) when these individuals are illegally in the United States, or have engaged in identity theft by providing fake supporting documents to obtain the license or ID card. Time after time, we have seen state motor vehicle officials engage in exactly such confusion by allowing aliens to register to vote under the motor-voter law at the time they issue a driver's license (see here and here). Why should we think they would be any more discriminating or proficient with bifurcated document-issuing systems, especially when they are being obliged to accept a proliferation of foreign documents in other languages, including from countries in which there is endemic corruption and such documents are routinely forged or obtained through illicit means?

Part of the problem, though, is with DHS itself. The department has been absurdly lenient in how it chooses to accept a state's certification that it is Real-ID Act compliant. (This is self-evident with even the most cursory glance at the compliance map on DHS's website). Not one state has been found noncompliant, and only one is "under review" but how can that possibly be when so many states have gone down the two-tier path?

It is worse when states go further to prohibit access to a state's licensing and ID database(s) for cross-check and auditing purposes, because absent such access, DHS cannot possibly ensure that a state certification isn't literally a paper exercise with no legitimate foundation on which to believe that the "compliant" documents issued reflect reality. This is one of those areas where the secretary has chosen not to exercise his or her considerable powers under the law to refuse to accept at face value the assurances of states, or to conduct audits to probe under those potentially bug-ridden certifications.

Nor does it appear that any DHS secretary has fully considered the meaning of the statutory phrase "other purposes that the Secretary shall determine", as emphasized above, in order to fully flesh out the applicability of compliant (or noncompliant) licenses or IDs to places and circumstances beyond the bare bones of nuclear plants, airplanes, and federal installations.

Finally, there appears to be a failure on the part of DHS to coordinate its mandates and obligations with other federal departments and agencies. Consider, for example, the Department of Defense (DOD). There have been a number of instances in which illegal aliens have been part of the workforce permitted onto military facilities to engage in various kinds of construction or repair work (see, e.g., here and here). How do they get in at all, if the base commander is ensuring access only to individuals possessed of Real ID-compliant licenses or ID cards? Generally under DOD policy, each base commander sets, and oversees compliance with, the rules outlining access to the facility he or she commands. Some commanders are more stringent and demanding of accountability than others.

Similarly, consider the provisions of 49 U.S.C. Section 30302, which establishes a National Driver Register maintained by the federal Department of Transportation (DOT). States choose whether to participate, but because it's in their interest, almost all do. The registermaintains a database of driver's license offenders those whose licenses have been suspended, revoked, etc. for various reasons. It is of real use when an individual applies in any state so that state may make judgments about whether it should deny a license based on violations in other states that suggest the individual is unfit to operate a motor vehicle. For this reason, 45 states and the District of Columbia apparently have signed on (see here and here).

The DOT secretary is authorized to provide information in the registerto other federal departments and agencies upon request. Its use against aliens charged for DUI/DWI and hit-and-run or vehicular homicide offenses is self-evident. While the provisions establishing the registrermake clear that provision of information must be consistent with the federal Privacy Act, it's worth noting that the only individuals who are covered by the Privacy Act are U.S. citizens and alien residents nonimmigrants and aliens illegally in the country are excluded from coverage. But the question here is simple: Has DHS ever even reached out to DOT to negotiate a memorandum of understanding for access to the register? If not, why not?

Astute readers may have noticed that I mentioned, but have not discussed, illegal voting and registration fraud by aliens. DHS agents certainly have authority to conduct investigations of such cases. Voting by aliens and false claims to U.S. citizenship are federal criminal offenses; they are also a basis for removal. But principal authority for oversight of state voter registration lists was vested in the attorney general by the National Voter Registration Act ("NVRA", found at 52 U.S.C. 20501 et seq., see here and here), the "motor-voter" law that authorized registering voters when providing driver's licenses and official ID cards.

Readers may also recall that early in his tenure President Trump called for a commission to study the problem of alien voter fraud; certainly there have been plenty of indicators that such fraud exists (see here, here, here, and here). The commission disbanded without completing its work after recalcitrant states refused to cooperate. Unfortunately, the commission had no statutory basis to compel cooperation.

This is not true with the attorney general, who has authority under the NVRA to ensure against unlawful disenfranchisement of legitimate voters a significant concern, given our country's history but also to ensure that state-maintained voter registration lists consist only of legitimate voters, to ensure against the kind of fraud that dilutes the popular vote and throws close elections, such as double-voting, voting by dead people, voting by disenfranchised felons and, significant for this report, voting by aliens. The problem is that almost all of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division's efforts have been devoted to the first concern, and virtually none toward the second.

Should Attorney General Barr decide to right this imbalance, and there's every reason to think he should, then it would be right and appropriate for his office to reach out to the DHS secretary to seek assistance in the vetting of state lists through computer matching and other techniques, in order to identify aliens who may be illegally registered to vote in federal elections, purge them from the rolls, and take appropriate follow-up enforcement action against them.

Go here to see the original:
DHS Belatedly Initiates Analysis of State Laws Granting Driver's Licenses and IDs to Illegal Aliens - Immigration Blog

Dont let them find out about Wall Street.

The City Councils Committee on Immigration is mulling a bill that would bar municipal government workers from using the terms alien, illegal alien or illegal immigrant in official documents.

I introduced this bill because words matter and the language we use or choose to use has power and consequences, said Councilman Francisco Moya (D-Queens) who first floated the proposal late last month in a Thursday committee hearing.

The legislation proposes the term noncitizen as an alternative.

This isnt about replacing one word with another, said Moya. It is about treating the individuals these terms describe as human beings.

Not everyone is on board, though, with Councilman Joe Borelli calling it political correctness run amok.

Here we are, its 2020 and were banning words, said Borelli (R-SI).

The push, however, actually comes on the heels of a city measure passed last year making it against the law to call someone an illegal alien or threaten to call immigration authorities on them when motivated by hate, under penalty of fines as high as $250,000.

Bitta Mostofi, commissioner of Mayor Bill de Blasios Office of Immigrant Affairs, at the hearing signaled support for banning the offensive and dehumanizing term alien.

Originally posted here:
City Council introduces bill to bar the term 'illegal alien' - New York Post

Giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens is nothing new. Typically, Democrat-controlled states, like California and New York, are the ones who dole them out like candy.

A Republican in Idaho is shaking things up. Sen. Jim Guthrie introduced legislation that would allow illegal aliens to "earn" driver's licenses. The illegal alien would still have to undergo the same driving requirements as American citizens. The only difference is that illegal aliens would have to renew their driver's licenses on an annual basis and couldn't be used for voting or purchasing alcohol, the Idaho State Journal reported.

The reason Guthrie decided to make the move? He believes this would help attract agricultural workers throughout the state.

We have undocumented aliens in the country, and thats a given, Guthrie told the State Journal. Until the federal government decides to address the illegal alien situation, (the proposed legislation) gives us the opportunity to maximize that workforce while theyre here, because theyre here anyway and driving anyway.

The state senator has heard issues from his constituents who are farmers and ranchers. Some farmers haven't had enough truck drivers to transport their harvest. Other farmers have been concerned about field workers driving to and from work without a license.

One of the responsibilities of the Legislature is to be responsive to the needs of constituents, and Im hearing a very considerable need for this from my constituents, Guthrie said. I genuinely think it will help agriculture, and Im getting a receptive ear on the issue.

The Idaho Dairymens Association has helped Guthrie on the proposal and is taking the lead to promote it.

I think its way beyond dairy and way beyond agriculture. I think it has impacts on all of society collectively, Idaho Dairymens Association Bob Naerebout said. Quite frankly, if you take the time to look at (the issue) you should be supportive. You should be supportive of the fact that if we have people driving on the roads, they should be properly educated and trained to drive. We want people on the roads who have insurance."

Guthrie plans to introduce the legislation later this month or in February.

This is a disaster.One of the many, many reasons I left California was because of illegal immigration and the detrimental impact it has on the economy. Not only do they drag wages down but they also take away jobs from American citizens.

I've had personal experience with illegal aliens benefiting from these types of laws. An illegal alien hit my mom. Her car was totaled. And guess what? The guy walked away scot-free, even though the accident was 100 percent his fault. He had bogus insurance. Some companies exist where people pay $50 a year to get a piece of paper saying they're insured. And that's exactly what this guy had.

Giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens does nothing but gives them yet another incentive to break the law and come to America.

It's disastrous policies like these that will make the gorgeous state I've called home the last 3.5 years into the nightmare that New York and California have become. Once we give these people driver's licenses then they're going to want more: health care, welfare, child care. You name it and they'll demand it.

Read more here:
A Republican In a Red State Introduced Legislation to Provide Illegal Aliens a New Benefit - Townhall

Anand Kumar

Anand KumarAssociate Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses

The recent changes in the Indian citizenship law were meant to give relief to the Assamese people from illegal migration from Bangladesh. Ironically, it has made a section start a new movement. These people are opposing the new Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), fearing that Assam would be swamped by migrants from across the border. They want all illegal migrants who came to Assam after March 24, 1971 evicted from the state. This is an almost impossible task to achieve as the situation in the state has changed dramatically since the Assam Accord was signed in 1985 between the Central government and the protesters.

The signing of the Assam Accord brought peace to the state agitating against the illegal migration from Bangladesh. Unfortunately, not much was done to stop the Bangladeshis from illegally infiltrating into India once the accord was signed. In states like West Bengal, the Left Front government actually actively encouraged people from Bangladesh to come to India. This has changed the demography of a number of districts in West Bengal that border Bangladesh.

To make matters worse, in 1990, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) came to power in that country. This party is quite hostile to the minorities. The period also saw the rise of Islamist extremism in Bangladesh. Jihadis, who had fought in Afghanistan, were returning to Bangladesh after the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

This development made the life of the minorities further difficult in Bangladesh and people migrated to India in large numbers.

Things somewhat improved when the Awami League led by Sheikh Hasina came to power in 1996. However, even Hasina could not do much for the minorities during her first tenure. Weak Central governments in India could not effectively take up their cause. Rather, it would not be incorrect to say that persecution of minorities and illegal immigration from Bangladesh have never been high on the agenda of the governments in India in the past. This allowed an exodus and because of this, the number of Hindu migrants from Bangladesh has increased even in Assam.

However, under political pressure, for the first time, the National Population Register (NPR) was created in 2010 and updated in 2015. The NRC exercise was undertaken in Assam only when the Supreme Court intervened in the matter. The updating of the NRC on August 31, 2019, has thrown up its own challenges. As no serious step was taken to check the illegal migration even after the signing of the accord in 1985, people kept coming to Assam unhindered.

The NRC exercise left nearly 1.9 million out of the citizenship register of which more than a million were Hindus. These are the people who had left Bangladesh under difficult circumstances after facing religious persecution in that country. If the Central government tries to send them back or leaves them stateless in India, it would create a new problem. The CAA has been created to deal with this challenge. Besides, it will also help the non-Muslim minorities who have fled from Muslim-majority countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The argument that the CAA goes against the spirit of the Indian Constitution and secularism is bogus. People who say this have to look at the history of South Asia and how states were created here. Pakistan was created as a homeland for the Muslims as Jinnah and his party, the Muslim League, argued that Muslims and Hindus were two nations. He further argued that Muslims were not safe in Hindu-majority India. If this is so, then how can a Muslim be persecuted in his homeland of Pakistan or Bangladesh? Some critics of the CAA say that the Ahmadis are persecuted in Pakistan. Interestingly, Ahmadis, on the other hand, take pride in supporting Jinnah and helping him create Pakistan.

The issue of illegal migration from Bangladesh has become complicated because of the inaction of the Central governments in the past. This has led to a massive increase in their numbers and infiltrators have now moved to almost all parts of India.

The states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and West Bengal have borne the brunt for being the bordering states of Bangladesh. Its hardly surprising that the people of Assam, Meghalaya and Tripura are concerned about the changing demography of these states. However, they should also realise that at present, the judiciary in India, including the Supreme Court, and the Central government, seem serious and are working in tandem to deal with this vexed issue of illegal migration.

People who dont want a solution to the problem of illegal immigration are spreading the lie that the CAA would lead to a large-scale migration from Bangladesh and the Assamese people would be overrun. Nothing could be far from the facts. Political parties which did nothing to check illegal immigration since Independence are now talking of protecting the Assamese language and culture. Clearly, they dont mean what they are saying. They just want to put the whole process in limbo to gain political and electoral advantage. They also argue that they dont want Assam to be run by Nagpur. But if the illegal immigration from Bangladesh continues, it would be a recipe for Islamist rule in Assam.

The issue of illegal immigration has always been a political football. Its high time political parties in India stop acting on the basis of their short-term political and electoral interests.

The Central government has already declared the cut-off date of December 31, 2014, even for the Hindu migrants. At this point, the interests of the affected states in the North-East are better served by cooperating with the authorities.

If the exercise of NRC and NPR is halted for whatever reason at this time, then there will be no solution to the issue of illegal migration in the foreseeable future.

View original post here:
Take holistic view to check illegal immigration - The Tribune

In a Dec. 17 article, the Washington Post pointed out that President Donald Trump reneged on his border-wall promises ("What is Donald Trump's border wall really for?"). His plan now cuts the wall by more than half, and much of what has been done has only been the maintenance of barriers that stop or slow the entries of cars and trucks, not people.

The piece pointed out an important item Trump neglects: that huge numbers, "two-thirds," arrive by legal visas and choose to stay as illegals.

The piece, however, did not mention that walls work. Israel built a 440-mile wall that stopped all uninvited guests. It worked so well another 100 or more miles of wall is being added. Remember the Great Wall of China? For centuries, it stopped or slowed invaders intending on changing Chinas society and religion. There are lots of examples that walls work.

In addition to a wall, the U.S. should limit total immigration to no more than 200,000 per year, take the steps necessary to prevent illegal border crossings, prevent visa overstaying, set up a comprehensive monitoring system, make E-Verify mandatory for all U.S. employers, fine employers who hire illegal immigrants, eliminate federal money for colleges that admit illegal immigrants, enforce laws against state and city sanctuary practices, end chain migration, end birthright citizenship, end the catch and release of illegal immigrants, deny visas to nations that refuse to repatriate citizens, and require asylum-seekers to apply in their own country with the agreement that it's only a temporary status of no more than a few months.

Looking at the list above, we can better understand why there are so many illegal immigrants in the U.S. with more coming. Law enforcement is broken. Desperately needed policies are ignored.

Dell Erickson

Brooklyn Center, Minn.

Originally posted here:
Reader's View: Story ignored that border walls work - Duluth News Tribune