Mediaboss Marketing

Source: SCMO

The Bishops' Conference of Scotland have issued the following statement today, in response to the UK Government's Illegal Immigration Bill.

"People come to the UK for a multitude of reasons. Numerous are driven from their homes by persecution, conflict, poverty, natural disasters, or lack of opportunities. Many of them attempt the extremely dangerous journey across the Channel to reach the relative safety of the UK.

Everyone would like to see the end of dangerous Channel crossings using small boats, however, the UK Government's Illegal Immigration Bill, the stated purpose of which is to bring an end to these crossings, raises more questions than it provides answers.

The Bill fails to provide sufficient detail on the establishment of more safe and legal routes for people seeking sanctuary in the UK. These routes, which are a lifeline to many desperate and vulnerable people, are essential if the Government is serious about ending perilous Channel crossings. Due to their very vulnerability many refugees and asylum seekers cannot possibly have all the necessary documentation with them. This proposed Bill will automatically force their removal regardless of how or why they came here.

There is also a pressing need for reform of the asylum process which currently has a backlog of hundreds of thousands of asylum applications. The Government must remember that behind each application is a human being. The establishment of asylum processing centres in France could help speed up the process and provide a safe, legal route for vulnerable people to come to the UK.

We call on the UK Government to provide an assurance that it will respect the terms of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Refugee Convention, and its obligations to victims of modern slavery.

These people are our fellow human beings, our brothers and sisters, and regardless of their immigration status their intrinsic dignity must be upheld."

See the rest here:
Scottish Bishops response to Illegal Immigration Bill | ICN - Independent Catholic News

OCPA really is doubling down on giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants (by definition, repeat lawbreakers). So much for believing in the rule of law, eh?

Time to address illegal immigration, uninsured drivers

By Jonathan Small

Theres a link between illegal immigration and uninsured driving in Oklahoma. Those who enter our nation illegally cannot easily obtain auto insurance, yet they still drive on our roads every day. When those illegal immigrants are in a car accident, the other driver is then left footing the bill either out of pocket or through higher insurance premiums.

The best solution to this problem is for the federal government to control our nations borders. But, knowing that is not likely in the immediate future, state policymakers must take action to mitigate the harm caused by the federal governments failure.

One way to reduce a share of the problems created by illegal immigration is for Oklahoma state lawmakers to authorize drivers licenses for some illegal immigrantseven though that may sound counterintuitive.

Lawmakers in the Oklahoma Legislature have introduced House Bill 2114 and Senate Bill 669. Both measures would create a way for people who file taxes but are illegal aliens to receive an Oklahoma drivers license.

The license process would involve a few small differences from the normal process. First, the associated fees would be higher than for licenses issued to citizens.

Second, the licenses would clearly indicate the holder is a non-resident, which will prevent the licenses from being used as proof of citizenship or legal residency.

Third, the license information would be reported to voter registration officials.

There are several benefits to this proposal. Only those filing income taxesin other words, illegal immigrants who are gainfully employedwould benefit. Having a drivers license would make it easier for those individuals to obtain car insurance. By some estimates, if signed into law these legislative proposals could reduce uninsured driving in Oklahoma by up to 75 percent. That would benefit all Oklahomans and drive down our high auto-insurance rates, which are inflated today because of the routine cost-shifting created by uninsured drivers.

The bills also provide election-security safeguards. For the first time election officials would have data on non-citizens and could ensure those individuals are not on voter rolls and illegally voting.

I do not claim these proposals are ideal. In a nation where the rule of law was enforced and border security prioritized, these bills would not be necessary.

Oklahomans are rightfully angry about the flood of illegal immigration into our nation and state. The federal government has completely failed to secure our borders and also made it extremely cumbersome to obtain legal access to this country. Local families bear the burden of the resulting chaos in many ways.

But killing either of these two bills will not reduce illegal immigration. In contrast, passing them will help offset some harm created by illegal immigration. Its better for state policymakers to do whatever good they can, when they can, than to wait for years hoping the federal government will suddenly change course on border security.

Jonathan Small serves as president of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

More here:
OCPA column: Time to address illegal immigration, uninsured ... - Muskogee Politico

A number of people gathered in Leigh-on-Sea this weekend to hold a protest against the Government's Illegal Immigration bill. The protest, organised by All Rise Collective, saw attendees from across the political spectrum turn up.

Locals gathered outside the constituency office of the MP for Southend West, Anna Firth, on Saturday (March 18) to protest against comments made by the Tory politician. During a discussion about immigration, she said "one of the most common complaints" she hears is about the use of hotels to house asylum seekers whilst homelessness is on the rise.

Protesters brought paper boats and letters for people to sign and post to the Southend MP. The protesting group said they "felt a duty" to tell their MP "her actions are in contrast to the compassion she claims to have for vulnerable people".

READ MORE: Essex beach branded 'abysmal' and 'worst place on Earth' by TripAdvisor users

They added: "We wholeheartedly believe the Illegal Immigration Bill going through parliament and the language surrounding this bill is scapegoating the most vulnerable to distract voters from the Conservatives abysmal 13 years in power."

Ms Firth, the MP for Southend West, said in the Commons on March 7: "Constituents in Southend West will warmly welcome the fact that this Government are taking a clear stand against illegal immigration, breaking the business model that the vile people-smuggling gangs depend on and stopping the boats.

"However, one of the most common complaints I hear on the doorstep is about expensive hotels housing asylum seekers while homelessness, sometimes including our armed forces veterans, is on the rise.

"Does my right honourable and learned Friend agree with me that that is not just unfair on the British taxpayer, but deeply unfair on those genuinely in need who are waiting patiently and legally for a roof over their heads?"

Responding, the Home Secretary said: "My hon. Friend is absolutely right to speak for the good people of Southend West in the way she does. The reality is that we have far too many people coming here. They put pressure on our accommodation, and therefore we are now forced to accommodate them in the expensive hotel estate.

"That cannot continue. It is costly, it is inappropriate and, frankly, it is unfair on the asylum seeker, because it is no fit place to stay for an indefinite period of time."

The Government's new Illegal Immigration Bill has been widely criticised as being draconian, whilst the UN said it is a clear breach of the Refugee Convention. Under the new rules, those who arrive in the UK by crossing the Channel illegally will not be entitled to use Modern Slavery laws to prevent their removal.

Only unaccompanied children, those medically unfit to fly and "at risk of serious and irreversible harm" in the country they would be deported to will be allowed to stay in the UK. People face being sent to their homeland or a "safe third country" such as Rwanda, the Mirror reports.

Stephanie Golder from All Rise Collective said Annas policy on refugees is out of sight, out of mind. She doesnt want to see any more children drown in the Channel, but doesnt want to give those children a safe route to come to this country. Why are we punishing children for the choices of adults? The only way to stop gangs is to provide proper legal routes.

It is a disgrace that Anna brought up the plight of the homeless, when it is in fact a political decision by her own party not to house them and nothing to do with refugees. Her statement that criminals are pushing veterans to the back of the housing queue is based on no facts whatsoever, when ex-service personnel actually get priority for housing in Southend.

The Tories have come up with 43 schemes to deter small boat crossings and they have failed every single time. Rather than put a dent in the profits of gangs, we end up with more children dead in the Channel. We wont forget Annas callousness when we go to the polls.

You could give each person arriving by small boats a million pounds and it still wouldnt be as much as the government lost through Track & Trace and dodgy PPE contracts. Lets not allow the Tories to divide and rule through their cruel culture war.

Sarah Yapp from Southend-on-Sea Climate Coalition added: "Anna said that the small boats problem is part of a wider, global migration crisis and shes right this crisis is exasperated by her government not only selling billions of pounds of arms to human rights-abusing countries but also by refusing to take any real action on the climate crisis.

"With 1.2b climate refugees predicted by 2050, Annas government need to get a firm grip on the issue and ensure people will be safe in their own countries."

Southend-on-Sea City Council say the Park Inn by Radisson Place is operating as a bridging hotel with a capacity for up to 118 people who arrive in the UK from Afghanistan as part of the resettlement scheme. They also said there are 135 Ukrainians who have arrived in Southend.

Cllr Ian Gilbert, cabinet member for economic recovery, regeneration and housing and councillor lead for tackling the cost-of-living crisis, previously said: "These are challenging times. The council has worked extremely hard alongside local community and faith groups to support refugees arriving here from Ukraine, Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere. In many cases people are here owing to government decisions that the council has no say over. I am extremely proud of how we have responded to this challenge.

"Lack of affordable housing is a huge constraint in Southend, and we must be realistic about our capacity to help. Nevertheless, we will be positive about supporting people fleeing war and violence."

READ NEXT:

Continued here:
Southend residents protest against Government's Illegal Immigration bill that would send refugees to Rwanda - Essex Live

(The Center Square) The U.S. House Oversight Committee is demanding that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas provide information about the departments catch-and-release policy through which its released millions of foreign nationals into the country.

The policy has been struck down by a federal judge in a lawsuit brought by Florida, ruling its illegal.

Mayorkas has claimed that through the policy the vast majority of those applying for asylum claiming credible fear passed an initial screening by federal agents. Those who claim credible fear say theyd be in imminent danger if they were forced to return to their home countries.

In aninterviewwith CNN last month, Mayorkas said, The vast majority of those individuals have not sought to evade law enforcement, but have actually surrendered themselves to law enforcement and made a claim for relief under our laws And so they make their claims, and the initial threshold for those claims under the law is lower than the ultimate asylum standard.

However, in aletterto Mayorkas, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, Rep. James Comer, R-Kentucky, told Mayorkas, DHSs own data contradict your statements. Only a fraction of the illegal aliens DHS personnel apprehend receive a credible fear screening prior to being released into the country.

According to federal data for last December, for example, more than 140,000 of the 172,116 Title 8 apprehensions resulted in individuals being released into the U.S. but only 5,001 were referred for credible fear screenings. A similar pattern is reported in other months.

Because of contradictory data posted on various DHS websites, however, it is impossible to know the extent of DHSs catch and release policies, Comer said. Instead of referring the majority who were released for credible fear screenings, Comer argues, Mayorkas policy in most circumstances is to simply release illegal aliens into the country.

The committee requested DHS provide all documents and communications on how many people were released into the U.S. This includes how many were processed under Title 8 who claimed they planned to apply for asylum and how many were referred to a credible fear screening. Among them, the committee asked for data on how many received a positive credible fear determination and how many were detained during their pending asylum applications, were paroled into the U.S., released with a notice to appear, released on recognizance, or released with instructions to report to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for further processing (notice to report). The committee also asked how many received a negative credible fear determination.

It also asked for documents and communications about how many were processed under Title 8 who didnt claim asylum and how many of them were removed from the U.S., paroled into the U.S., released with a notice to appear, released on recognizance, or released with a notice to report.

The committee also asked for all documents and communications on how many were processed under Title 8 who were referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution for a violation of 8 U.S.C. 1326, which governs illegal entry and reentry into the U.S.

The request was madeaftermore than 1.6 million people were apprehended or reported evading capture by law enforcement after illegally entering the U.S. this fiscal year to date. Despite Mayorkas claiming the border is closed and secure and CBP reports its making progress on less apprehensions being reported, the committee says its investigating the Biden administrations creation of and failure to resolve the worst border crisis in American history.

U.S. District Judge T. Kent Wetherell for the Northern District of Florida Pensacola Divisionruled the Biden administrations catch-and-release policy effectively turned the Southwest Border into a meaningless line in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens flooding into the country by prioritizing alternatives to detention over actual detention and by releasing more than a million aliens into the country on parole or pursuant to the exercise of prosecutorial discretion under a wholly inapplicable statute without even initiating removal proceedings.

He also said the administrations collective policies were akin to posting a flashing Come In, Were Open sign on the southern border.

See the article here:
House committee demands answers from Mayorkas on catch-and ... - Heartlander News

A record 35,500 migrants from Nicaragua were encountered at Americas southern border in December. So what did the Department of Homeland Security do? It added Nicaraguans to a lengthening list of foreign nationals who can use a reservation system to enter thiscountry.

DHS calls its system rigorous security vetting, but, in fact, the agency has no way to check for criminal histories in a diplomatically estranged nation that is a pariah of LatinAmerica.

The Migration Policy Institute reports that more than 200,000 Nicaraguans fled their country last year. In response, neighboring Costa Rica, the nearest landing spot, imposed new restrictions on incoming Nicaraguans, citing widespread abuse of the asylum system. Costa Rican officials said many are simply seeking economic opportunities (not legal grounds for asylum) and would not be at risk of harm or persecution in their native land. Rebuffed, tens of thousands have headednorth.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) encountered Nicaraguan migrants nearly 165,000 times in fiscal 2022, a 52-fold increase over 2020. Notably, 57 percent who received a decision on asylum in U.S. immigration courts during 2022 wererejected.

Since the Biden administration is more about accommodating historic waves of migrants than actually securing the border, DHS in January added Nicaraguans along with Cubans, Venezuelans, and Haitians to a plethora of nationalities that have been entering the U.S. at designated ports of entry via their cellphones.

Using the bilingual CBP One app, migrants can schedule appointments with the agency and submit biographical information prior to arrival. According to one report, CBP One expedites the admission process while applying a thin veneer of legality. Migrants no longer have to enter illegally to be granted parole, allowing them to live and work here for years while their asylum applications languish in immigration court. All they have to do is show up at a port ofentry.

How convenient! No need to hang around the old country waiting for U.S. approval to fly to America. And yet how dangerous. CBP One is one more way the Biden administration encourages perilous journeys throughMexico.

The latest statistics seem to bear this out. Some 212,266 border encounters were reported in February, but only 128,877 were recorded by CBP, while the Office of Field Operations, which handles app entries, registered 83,389 encounters at legal ports ofentry.

Though the government did not break down the 83,389 encounters by nationality, FAIR says moving that number off the books is a ploy to mask the scope of illegal migration. One can only assume that the increase in app users is feeding the presidents illegal paroleprogram.

In theory, CBP One is a pre-legalization program that enables U.S. border officials to expeditiously process Nicaraguans and hundreds of thousands of other foreign nationals through biometric data, fingerprints, and personal testimonies of clean living backhome.

In reality, CBP is flying blind. Agents cannot possibly vet criminal histories from hostile or chaotic regimes that have no capacity to run such checks, or no interest in doingso.

For super-majorities of all the foreign nationals who have and will use this new ad hoc parallel immigration system, meeting the programs top requirement of rigorous security vetting will turn out to be all but impossible, writes Todd Bensman, of the Center for Immigration Studies. Security vetting for the entire program stands as an empty promise, an unfulfillable requirement that will bring danger into thenation.

Meantime, Managuas disregard for international law was on display last month when Daniel Ortegas regime brazenly flew 222 of his countrymen, purported political prisoners, into the United States without even bothering to consultWashington.

Nicaragua can save the jet fuel. When it comes to immigration enforcement and security, DHS is literally phoning it in at ourborder.

Read more:
Southern Border Security? DHS Phones It In For Nicaraguan Migrants - Federation for American Immigration Reform