dailycaller
Anders HagstromJustice Reporter
12:50 PM 02/08/2018
The state of California sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) Wednesday to force the release of records relating to Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ order to withhold funding from so-called sanctuary states.
California is one of several sanctuary jurisdictions — but the first state — to file a lawsuit relating to Sessions’ order to tie federal grants to immigration compliance. The lawsuit demands that the DOJ provide all records relating to the new eligibility requirements. Once obtained, California hopes the records will prove the DOJ didn’t consider the damage the requirements may cause, Courthouse News reported Wednesday.
“The State is concerned that OJP did not consider the harm that compliance with these conditions may cause to some state and local jurisdictions that have determined such policies would undermine trust and cooperation between law enforcement and their residents, and therefore, public safety in their jurisdictions,” the lawsuit reads.
California was expecting $31 million in Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants that would have helped fund state and local law enforcement. Sessions’ new stipulations require jurisdictions to give Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) full access to jails and 48 hours notice before releasing illegal immigrants. It also requires states to share immigration status information with federal authorities.
Chicago filed a lawsuit this fall directly challenging those requirements, claiming that Sessions had overstepped his authority. A U.S. district judge agreed in September, striking two of them down and triggering an appeal from the DOJ. In December, the National Sheriff’s Association backed the DOJ’s appeal, claiming the favorable ruling for Chicago should not have a national impact.
“The problem we have is not so much about sanctuary cities,” NSA Executive Director and CEO Jonathan Thompson told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “It’s that the political actions of one jurisdiction should never affect thousands of other counties. That’s what’s happening here and we find that objectionable.”
The DOJ has $385 million in grants, much of which remains locked up until the appeals process is complete.
Follow Anders on Twitter
Thank You Mr Hagstrom and the DC.
One word: disgusting.
Showing posts with label Immigration Reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Immigration Reform. Show all posts
Thursday, February 8, 2018
Friday, February 2, 2018
Trump: Calling Illegal Immigrants 'Dreamers' Is A Trap - All Americans Are Dreamers
dailycaller
Benny Johnson
4:46 PM 02/01/2018
Donald Trump pledged to take back the illegal immigration narrative from Democrats Thursday at the GOP retreat in West Virginia.
While speaking about DACA and illegal immigration legislation, the president echoed his remark at the State of the Union, when he said “Americans are DREAMers, too.” The comment received broad praise from conservatives and condemnation from liberals.
At Thursday’s speech, Trump said “Some people call it DREAMers. It’s not DREAMers. Don’t fall into that trap. It’s much different than DREAMers.”
Trump went on to say that he has “DREAMers” to take care of in America, too.
I said it the other night, we have DREAMers, too. We have DREAMers in this country, too. We can’t forget our DREAMers. I have a lot of DREAMers here.
Trump proceeded to say that he wanted DACA legislation passed with support of the Democrats in addition to calling for a border fence and an end to chain migration.
Thank You President Trump, Mr Johnson, the DC, and the BBC.
Benny Johnson
4:46 PM 02/01/2018
Donald Trump pledged to take back the illegal immigration narrative from Democrats Thursday at the GOP retreat in West Virginia.
While speaking about DACA and illegal immigration legislation, the president echoed his remark at the State of the Union, when he said “Americans are DREAMers, too.” The comment received broad praise from conservatives and condemnation from liberals.
At Thursday’s speech, Trump said “Some people call it DREAMers. It’s not DREAMers. Don’t fall into that trap. It’s much different than DREAMers.”
Trump went on to say that he has “DREAMers” to take care of in America, too.
I said it the other night, we have DREAMers, too. We have DREAMers in this country, too. We can’t forget our DREAMers. I have a lot of DREAMers here.
Trump proceeded to say that he wanted DACA legislation passed with support of the Democrats in addition to calling for a border fence and an end to chain migration.
Thank You President Trump, Mr Johnson, the DC, and the BBC.
Thursday, January 25, 2018
Sessions Threatens Sanctuary Cities With Subpoenas
frontpagemag
January 26, 2018
Matthew Vadum
The Department of Justice threatened to subpoena 23 jurisdictions across the country if they fail to answer questions about their lawless "sanctuary" policies that shield illegal aliens, a move that prompted left-wing big city mayors to boycott a White House meeting.
“I continue to urge all jurisdictions under review to reconsider policies that place the safety of their communities and their residents at risk,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.
“Protecting criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities defies common sense and undermines the rule of law. We have seen too many examples of the threat to public safety represented by jurisdictions that actively thwart the federal government’s immigration enforcement—enough is enough.”
The subpoena threat comes as federal prosecutors consider filing criminal charges against elected officials harboring illegal aliens in sanctuary cities.
"The Department of Justice is reviewing what avenues might be available,” Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told a Senate panel Jan. 16. “The context of this is of course not only putting my ICE officers at risk but also finding an efficient and effective way to enforce our immigration laws,” Nielsen said.
The sanctuary movement gave illegal aliens permission to rob, rape, and murder Americans by, among other things, stigmatizing immigration enforcement. Some left-wingers use the dreadful euphemism "civil liberties safe zones" to describe sanctuary jurisdictions. The phrase blurs the distinction between citizens and non-citizens by implying illegal aliens somehow possess a civil right to be present in the U.S.
These sanctuary cities really ought to be called traitor cities because they are in open rebellion against the United States. They may as well be flying the Confederate battle flag at city hall in their modern-day campaign of massive resistance against federal immigration authorities.
"Cities do not have the right to pick and choose which federal laws they will obey or defy,” Dale L. Wilcox, executive director and general counsel for the Immigration Reform Law Institute, told FrontPage by email.
“The Attorney General is right to hold them accountable for their actions. The precedent set by sanctuary cities is one this country should not and does not want to follow."—
Democrat politicians across America are defending sanctuary jurisdictions because they want the illegal aliens living there to become citizens and loyal Democrats.
One of those Democrats, New York City’s hotheaded small-c communist mayor Bill de Blasio, melted down in a temper tantrum on Twitter.
“I will NOT be attending today’s meeting at the White House after @realDonaldTrump’s Department of Justice decided to renew their racist assault on our immigrant communities. It doesn’t make us safer and it violates America’s core values.”
U.S. Conference of Mayors president Mitch Landrieu (D), who is mayor of New Orleans, La., also bowed out using overblown political rhetoric.
"Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s decision to threaten mayors and demonize immigrants yet again – and use cities as political props in the process – has made this meeting untenable," he huffed.
The threat itself was contained in letters sent to Chicago, New York City, three states, and other jurisdictions that have accepted law enforcement funding from the Justice Department, demanding records related to whether those governments are "unlawfully restricting information sharing by law enforcement officers with federal immigration authorities." New York City, for example, in fiscal 2016 accepted $4.3 million in federal funds under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG).
The letters seek documents “reflecting any orders, directives, instructions, or guidance to your law enforcement employees” about how to “communicate with the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and/or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
Federal money usually comes with strings attached, so if the states, cities, and counties that took DoJ grants are violating other laws by interfering with federal immigration enforcement, they may have to give the money back and could be barred from receiving future grants.
“We’ve given them federal dollars – your taxpayer dollars – to cooperate with federal law enforcement,” DoJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores told Fox News Channel.
“They didn’t have to take that money, but they did. And when they took it, they said they would comply with federal law. So what we’re saying is if we find out you’re not complying with federal law, we’re taking the tax dollars back.”
Three states – California, Illinois, and Oregon – received the subpoena-related letters yesterday, according to the DoJ. The other jurisdictions were: Chicago; Cook County, Ill; New York City; Albany, N.Y.; Berkeley, Calif.; Bernalillo County, N.M.; Burlington, Vt.; the city and county of Denver, Colo.; Fremont, Calif.; Jackson, Miss.; King County, Wash.; Lawrence, Mass.; City of Los Angeles, Calif.; Louisville, Ky.; Monterey County, Calif.; Sacramento County, Calif.; the city and county of San Francisco; Sonoma County, Calif.; Watsonville, Calif.; and West Palm Beach, Fla.
California has been especially brazen in its obstruction of federal immigration laws.
The state is becoming ground zero in the battle over enforcement of the nation’s long-neglected immigration laws. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed “sanctuary state” legislation Oct. 5, dramatically curtailing the power of state and local law enforcement to hold, question, and transfer detainees at the request of federal immigration authorities. The law took effect New Year’s Day in the state that is home to more than 2 million illegal aliens. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) has been threatening to prosecute residents of his state who cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
Left-wing federal judges have been sabotaging President Trump’s immigration policies since the beginning of his term of office.
For example, on Nov. 20 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge William Orrick III, a leftist appointed by President Obama, issued a nationwide injunction against Executive Order 13768, signed by President Trump on Jan. 25, 2017, which withheld federal monies from sanctuary jurisdictions.
Meanwhile, illegal-alien activists are becoming increasingly aggressive in their tactics.
Activists with the George Soros-funded group, United We Dream, staged a mock funeral in the rotunda of the U.S. Senate Wednesday, claiming the failure of Congress and President Trump to amnesty them is “killing our dreams,” Breitbart reports.
One illegal whined that the GOP and Trump were “scaring” her fellow illegals in Long Island, N.Y. Activists have also been invading congressional offices and causing trouble there.
On Tuesday, illegal aliens stormed the residence of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D) in Brooklyn, N.Y., after he abandoned his party’s disastrous government shutdown strategy on Monday, allowing the government to reopen after being closed a mere 69 hours.
“If Chuck won’t let us dream, we won’t let him sleep!” illegals shouted outside Schumer’s home.
There are around 700,000 individuals benefitting from President Obama’s constitutionally suspect Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that he created with the stroke of a pen. Democrats shut down the government Saturday at 12:01 a.m. by denying it operating funds in hopes of extorting an amnesty package for DACA-eligible persons from the Republican-controlled Congress.
In two weeks when the government runs out of money again, Democrats are likely to press the point again. But they don’t just want amnesty for DACA individuals – they want it for all the 4 million or so so-called DREAMers, many of whom failed to apply for relief under DACA but could conceivably qualify under the kind of amnesty Democrats want. Contrary to what the word implies, DREAMers tend to be less educated and less established than typical Americans.
Come to think of it, Democrats want virtually all illegal aliens amnestied. If Americans won’t vote for them, they make up for the shortfall by importing voters.
This must stop.
Thank You Mr Vadum and FPM.
January 26, 2018
Matthew Vadum
The Department of Justice threatened to subpoena 23 jurisdictions across the country if they fail to answer questions about their lawless "sanctuary" policies that shield illegal aliens, a move that prompted left-wing big city mayors to boycott a White House meeting.
“I continue to urge all jurisdictions under review to reconsider policies that place the safety of their communities and their residents at risk,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.
“Protecting criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities defies common sense and undermines the rule of law. We have seen too many examples of the threat to public safety represented by jurisdictions that actively thwart the federal government’s immigration enforcement—enough is enough.”
The subpoena threat comes as federal prosecutors consider filing criminal charges against elected officials harboring illegal aliens in sanctuary cities.
"The Department of Justice is reviewing what avenues might be available,” Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen told a Senate panel Jan. 16. “The context of this is of course not only putting my ICE officers at risk but also finding an efficient and effective way to enforce our immigration laws,” Nielsen said.
The sanctuary movement gave illegal aliens permission to rob, rape, and murder Americans by, among other things, stigmatizing immigration enforcement. Some left-wingers use the dreadful euphemism "civil liberties safe zones" to describe sanctuary jurisdictions. The phrase blurs the distinction between citizens and non-citizens by implying illegal aliens somehow possess a civil right to be present in the U.S.
These sanctuary cities really ought to be called traitor cities because they are in open rebellion against the United States. They may as well be flying the Confederate battle flag at city hall in their modern-day campaign of massive resistance against federal immigration authorities.
"Cities do not have the right to pick and choose which federal laws they will obey or defy,” Dale L. Wilcox, executive director and general counsel for the Immigration Reform Law Institute, told FrontPage by email.
“The Attorney General is right to hold them accountable for their actions. The precedent set by sanctuary cities is one this country should not and does not want to follow."—
Democrat politicians across America are defending sanctuary jurisdictions because they want the illegal aliens living there to become citizens and loyal Democrats.
One of those Democrats, New York City’s hotheaded small-c communist mayor Bill de Blasio, melted down in a temper tantrum on Twitter.
“I will NOT be attending today’s meeting at the White House after @realDonaldTrump’s Department of Justice decided to renew their racist assault on our immigrant communities. It doesn’t make us safer and it violates America’s core values.”
U.S. Conference of Mayors president Mitch Landrieu (D), who is mayor of New Orleans, La., also bowed out using overblown political rhetoric.
"Unfortunately, the Trump administration’s decision to threaten mayors and demonize immigrants yet again – and use cities as political props in the process – has made this meeting untenable," he huffed.
The threat itself was contained in letters sent to Chicago, New York City, three states, and other jurisdictions that have accepted law enforcement funding from the Justice Department, demanding records related to whether those governments are "unlawfully restricting information sharing by law enforcement officers with federal immigration authorities." New York City, for example, in fiscal 2016 accepted $4.3 million in federal funds under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program (JAG).
The letters seek documents “reflecting any orders, directives, instructions, or guidance to your law enforcement employees” about how to “communicate with the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, and/or Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
Federal money usually comes with strings attached, so if the states, cities, and counties that took DoJ grants are violating other laws by interfering with federal immigration enforcement, they may have to give the money back and could be barred from receiving future grants.
“We’ve given them federal dollars – your taxpayer dollars – to cooperate with federal law enforcement,” DoJ spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores told Fox News Channel.
“They didn’t have to take that money, but they did. And when they took it, they said they would comply with federal law. So what we’re saying is if we find out you’re not complying with federal law, we’re taking the tax dollars back.”
Three states – California, Illinois, and Oregon – received the subpoena-related letters yesterday, according to the DoJ. The other jurisdictions were: Chicago; Cook County, Ill; New York City; Albany, N.Y.; Berkeley, Calif.; Bernalillo County, N.M.; Burlington, Vt.; the city and county of Denver, Colo.; Fremont, Calif.; Jackson, Miss.; King County, Wash.; Lawrence, Mass.; City of Los Angeles, Calif.; Louisville, Ky.; Monterey County, Calif.; Sacramento County, Calif.; the city and county of San Francisco; Sonoma County, Calif.; Watsonville, Calif.; and West Palm Beach, Fla.
California has been especially brazen in its obstruction of federal immigration laws.
The state is becoming ground zero in the battle over enforcement of the nation’s long-neglected immigration laws. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed “sanctuary state” legislation Oct. 5, dramatically curtailing the power of state and local law enforcement to hold, question, and transfer detainees at the request of federal immigration authorities. The law took effect New Year’s Day in the state that is home to more than 2 million illegal aliens. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) has been threatening to prosecute residents of his state who cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
Left-wing federal judges have been sabotaging President Trump’s immigration policies since the beginning of his term of office.
For example, on Nov. 20 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge William Orrick III, a leftist appointed by President Obama, issued a nationwide injunction against Executive Order 13768, signed by President Trump on Jan. 25, 2017, which withheld federal monies from sanctuary jurisdictions.
Meanwhile, illegal-alien activists are becoming increasingly aggressive in their tactics.
Activists with the George Soros-funded group, United We Dream, staged a mock funeral in the rotunda of the U.S. Senate Wednesday, claiming the failure of Congress and President Trump to amnesty them is “killing our dreams,” Breitbart reports.
One illegal whined that the GOP and Trump were “scaring” her fellow illegals in Long Island, N.Y. Activists have also been invading congressional offices and causing trouble there.
On Tuesday, illegal aliens stormed the residence of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D) in Brooklyn, N.Y., after he abandoned his party’s disastrous government shutdown strategy on Monday, allowing the government to reopen after being closed a mere 69 hours.
“If Chuck won’t let us dream, we won’t let him sleep!” illegals shouted outside Schumer’s home.
There are around 700,000 individuals benefitting from President Obama’s constitutionally suspect Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that he created with the stroke of a pen. Democrats shut down the government Saturday at 12:01 a.m. by denying it operating funds in hopes of extorting an amnesty package for DACA-eligible persons from the Republican-controlled Congress.
In two weeks when the government runs out of money again, Democrats are likely to press the point again. But they don’t just want amnesty for DACA individuals – they want it for all the 4 million or so so-called DREAMers, many of whom failed to apply for relief under DACA but could conceivably qualify under the kind of amnesty Democrats want. Contrary to what the word implies, DREAMers tend to be less educated and less established than typical Americans.
Come to think of it, Democrats want virtually all illegal aliens amnestied. If Americans won’t vote for them, they make up for the shortfall by importing voters.
This must stop.
Thank You Mr Vadum and FPM.
Justice Dept Demands Documents From Sanctuary Cities
American Thinker
Rick Moran Jan 25, 2018
The Department of Justice sent a letter to 23 states and cities demanding documentation that law enforcement agencies were complying with federal immigration law. The demand is just the latest salvo from the Trump administration to force sanctuary cities to assist federal immigration officials in enforcing the law.
The administration is threatening to cut funding for certain federal law enforcement programs if sanctuary cities refuse to cooperate in deportation efforts against illegal alien criminals.
Ed; "Yippee Ki Yay! Muther . . . . . . . "
The letters warned that failure to turn over the documents in question could result in subpoenas being issued.
Reuters:
The Justice Department said it was seeking records from 23 jurisdictions -- including America’s three largest cities, New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, as well as three states, California, Illinois and Oregon -- and will issue subpoenas if they do not comply fully and promptly.
The administration has accused sanctuary cities of violating a federal law that prohibits local governments from restricting information about the immigration status of people arrested from being shared with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.
Many of the jurisdictions have said they already are in full compliance with the law. Some sued the administration after the Justice Department threatened to cut off millions of dollars in federal public safety grants. The cities have won in lower courts, but the legal fight is ongoing.
The Republican president’s fight with the Democratic-governed sanctuary cities, an issue that appeals to his hard-line conservative supporters, began just days after he took office last year when he signed an executive order saying he would block certain funding to municipalities that failed to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. The order has since been partially blocked by a federal court.
“Protecting criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities defies common sense and undermines the rule of law,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.
Democratic mayors fired back. Some including New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, Denver Mayor Michael Hancock and New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu protested by skipping a previously planned White House meeting on Wednesday with Trump.
“This is a destructive ploy by the Trump administration’s lawyers to politicize a routine exchange of information,” Hancock said. “I refuse to meet with the president under these kinds of threats and fearmongering.”
The courts have ruled that the federal government cannot deny states and cities funding if they meet all other criteria established by Congress. While this complicates the administration's efforts, the Justice Department is seeking evidence that the states and cities are deliberately refusing to obey the law. A few days ago, the Department of Homeland Security asked DoJ to pursue criminal charges against sanctuary states and cities who refuse to cooperate with ICE agents in rounding up criminal illegals. This frames the issue in a different light and could be the basis of a case the Feds would take to the Supreme Court.
It's hard to see states and cities handing over documents that will incriminate them. That means that subpeonas will be on the way. This sets up a classic constituional showdown between states who are seeking to nullify federal law and the government that seeks to enforce it.
Thank You American Thinker, Mr Moran, and US AG Sessions.
Rick Moran Jan 25, 2018
The Department of Justice sent a letter to 23 states and cities demanding documentation that law enforcement agencies were complying with federal immigration law. The demand is just the latest salvo from the Trump administration to force sanctuary cities to assist federal immigration officials in enforcing the law.
The administration is threatening to cut funding for certain federal law enforcement programs if sanctuary cities refuse to cooperate in deportation efforts against illegal alien criminals.
Ed; "Yippee Ki Yay! Muther . . . . . . . "
The letters warned that failure to turn over the documents in question could result in subpoenas being issued.
Reuters:
The Justice Department said it was seeking records from 23 jurisdictions -- including America’s three largest cities, New York, Los Angeles and Chicago, as well as three states, California, Illinois and Oregon -- and will issue subpoenas if they do not comply fully and promptly.
The administration has accused sanctuary cities of violating a federal law that prohibits local governments from restricting information about the immigration status of people arrested from being shared with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.
Many of the jurisdictions have said they already are in full compliance with the law. Some sued the administration after the Justice Department threatened to cut off millions of dollars in federal public safety grants. The cities have won in lower courts, but the legal fight is ongoing.
The Republican president’s fight with the Democratic-governed sanctuary cities, an issue that appeals to his hard-line conservative supporters, began just days after he took office last year when he signed an executive order saying he would block certain funding to municipalities that failed to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. The order has since been partially blocked by a federal court.
“Protecting criminal aliens from federal immigration authorities defies common sense and undermines the rule of law,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement.
Democratic mayors fired back. Some including New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, Denver Mayor Michael Hancock and New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu protested by skipping a previously planned White House meeting on Wednesday with Trump.
“This is a destructive ploy by the Trump administration’s lawyers to politicize a routine exchange of information,” Hancock said. “I refuse to meet with the president under these kinds of threats and fearmongering.”
The courts have ruled that the federal government cannot deny states and cities funding if they meet all other criteria established by Congress. While this complicates the administration's efforts, the Justice Department is seeking evidence that the states and cities are deliberately refusing to obey the law. A few days ago, the Department of Homeland Security asked DoJ to pursue criminal charges against sanctuary states and cities who refuse to cooperate with ICE agents in rounding up criminal illegals. This frames the issue in a different light and could be the basis of a case the Feds would take to the Supreme Court.
It's hard to see states and cities handing over documents that will incriminate them. That means that subpeonas will be on the way. This sets up a classic constituional showdown between states who are seeking to nullify federal law and the government that seeks to enforce it.
Thank You American Thinker, Mr Moran, and US AG Sessions.
Saturday, December 16, 2017
Trump To MS-13: 'We Will Throw You The Hell Out Of The Country'
townhall
Posted: Dec 15, 2017 9:10 PM
Earlier today, Leah
covered President Donald J. Trump’s graduation speech to new law
enforcement officers at the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Virginia.
He lambasted a “dysfunctional immigration system” that allows in "the
worst of worst." Yet, President Trump’s comments on MS-13 gang members drew the most applause.
Referring to the “lottery system” President Trump said:
In Washington, D.C., authorities arrested 52 individuals that were gang members. However, 29 of those individuals were a part of MS-13.
Thank You Mr Meads, Townhall, and President Trump.
Referring to the “lottery system” President Trump said:
“You think the country is giving us their best people? No,” he added, referencing the lottery program. “What kind of a system is that? They come in by lottery. They give us their worst people, they put them in a bin, but in his hand when he’s picking him are really the worst of the worst.
"Congratulations, you’re going the United States, ok? What a system."Turning to gang violence, he had a specific message for MS-13 gang members. MS-13 is a violent El Salvadoran gang and drug cartel with a heavy presence in the United States.
“To any member of MS-13 listening, I have a message for you,” the President told the officers and their families. “We will find you, we will arrest you, we will jail you, we will throw you the hell out of the country," Trump said.
"Somehow I like it better than jail," he said to applause. "Jail, we have to take care of 'em. Who the hell wants to take care of 'em? You know the jail stuff is wonderful, but we have to pay for it, right," he continued.
"We don't want 'em," adding, "We don't want 'em. They're getting out of here. Our cities should not be sanctuaries for criminals. They should be sanctuaries for Americans."In May of 2017, Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 1,378 people during a nationwide crime sweep known as "Operation New Dawn." This operation was the largest of its kind.
In Washington, D.C., authorities arrested 52 individuals that were gang members. However, 29 of those individuals were a part of MS-13.
Thank You Mr Meads, Townhall, and President Trump.
Tuesday, December 12, 2017
Illegal Alien Convicted of Child Rape, Then Sexual Battery, Caught Re-entering U.S.
CNSnews
Craig Bannister | December 12, 2017 | 11:10 AM EST
Tucson, Arizona border agents have apprehended an illegal alien who had twice been convicted of sex crimes in Tennessee, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reported Monday.
After the Guatemalan man was caught illegally re-entering the U.S., a background check revealed that, on two different occasions, he had been convicted of sex crimes, CBP reported:
"Saturday afternoon in the mountains west of Arivaca after he illegally entered the United States, While processing 42-year-old Artemio Raul Escobar-Ramirez, agents discovered he had been convicted in Tennessee for rape of a child in 2006, and aggravated sexual battery in 2008.
"Records indicate Escobar has extensive criminal history in the United States and was previously removed from the country in 2014 after incarceration for his crimes. He will be held in federal custody pending prosecution for criminal immigration violations, and re-entry of an aggravated felon.
"All individuals apprehended by the Border Patrol undergo criminal history checks using biometrics to ensure illegal immigrants with criminal histories are positively identified."
Thank You Mr Bannister and CNS.
Craig Bannister | December 12, 2017 | 11:10 AM EST
Tucson, Arizona border agents have apprehended an illegal alien who had twice been convicted of sex crimes in Tennessee, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) reported Monday.
After the Guatemalan man was caught illegally re-entering the U.S., a background check revealed that, on two different occasions, he had been convicted of sex crimes, CBP reported:
"Saturday afternoon in the mountains west of Arivaca after he illegally entered the United States, While processing 42-year-old Artemio Raul Escobar-Ramirez, agents discovered he had been convicted in Tennessee for rape of a child in 2006, and aggravated sexual battery in 2008.
"Records indicate Escobar has extensive criminal history in the United States and was previously removed from the country in 2014 after incarceration for his crimes. He will be held in federal custody pending prosecution for criminal immigration violations, and re-entry of an aggravated felon.
"All individuals apprehended by the Border Patrol undergo criminal history checks using biometrics to ensure illegal immigrants with criminal histories are positively identified."
Thank You Mr Bannister and CNS.
Illegal Alien Released From Prison Convicted of Hammering 5 To Death In San Francisco
cnsnews
Terence P. Jeffrey | December 12, 2017 | 11:08 AM EST
(CNSNews.com) Binh Thai Luc, an illegal alien from Vietnam who had previously been incarcerated at San Quinten prison after committing an armed robbery in San Jose, was convicted on Monday of entering a home in San Francisco and murdering five people with a hammer.
“Prosecutors said Luc used a hammer to commit one of the worst mass homicides in modern San Francisco history, though the weapon was never found,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported yesterday.
The multiple murder took place on March 23, 2012. The jury arrived at its verdict yesterday after considering the case for seven days.
In 2014, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R.-Okla.) of Oklahoma introduced the “Keep Our Communities Safe Act," which would have ended the “catch-and-release” policy of letting illegal aliens go free in the United States when other countries will not accept them for deportation. At the time, Inhofe specifically cited Luc’s crime as the kind he was trying to stop.
“A Vietnamese immigrant, Binh Thai Luc, was ordered deported in 2006 after serving time in prison for armed robbery and assault,” said a press release Inhofe put out on June 11, 2014. “Due to the Supreme Court decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, Luc was released from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody when Vietnam refused to admit him. He is now facing charges for the murder of 5 people in San Francisco in March of 2012.”
Inhofe’s bill has not been enacted into law, but he has reintroduced it in the current Congress.
After Monday’s verdict, the San Francisco Chronicle reported the following about Luc’s previous conviction and imprisonment:
“Before the killings, Luc was convicted in 1998 of committing an armed robbery at a Chinese restaurant in San Jose. After he served eight years in San Quentin State Prison, officials handed him over to federal immigration authorities for deportation back to his home country of Vietnam.
Vietnamese authorities, however, refused to provide Luc with travel documents, and he was released from custody as required by federal law.
The Chronicle went on to report:
“Prosecutors said Luc used a hammer to commit one of the worst mass homicides in modern San Francisco history, though the weapon was never found. The defendant was also found guilty of five counts of attempted robbery and two counts of burglary.”
Luc’s victims, as reported by the Associated Press, included a man and his wife, their daughter and son, and the son’s wife. Their names were Hua Shun Lei and Wan Yi Wu; Ying Xue Lei; Vincent Lei and Chia Huei Chu.
San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon did not seek the death penalty for Luc, according to the Chronicle. Instead, according to the paper, “he faces life in prison without the possibility of parole.”
At the start of Luc's trial in October, the San Francisco Chronicle explained why he had been allowed to remain at liberty in the United States:
“He was released from San Quentin State Prison after serving eight years of his 11-year sentence, and was taken into federal custody for deportation back to his native Vietnam.
“But because Vietnamese authorities declined to take him back, he was released under a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that undocumented immigrants must be freed within six months in such cases.”
Thank You Mr Jeffrey and CNS.
Terence P. Jeffrey | December 12, 2017 | 11:08 AM EST
(CNSNews.com) Binh Thai Luc, an illegal alien from Vietnam who had previously been incarcerated at San Quinten prison after committing an armed robbery in San Jose, was convicted on Monday of entering a home in San Francisco and murdering five people with a hammer.
“Prosecutors said Luc used a hammer to commit one of the worst mass homicides in modern San Francisco history, though the weapon was never found,” the San Francisco Chronicle reported yesterday.
The multiple murder took place on March 23, 2012. The jury arrived at its verdict yesterday after considering the case for seven days.
In 2014, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R.-Okla.) of Oklahoma introduced the “Keep Our Communities Safe Act," which would have ended the “catch-and-release” policy of letting illegal aliens go free in the United States when other countries will not accept them for deportation. At the time, Inhofe specifically cited Luc’s crime as the kind he was trying to stop.
“A Vietnamese immigrant, Binh Thai Luc, was ordered deported in 2006 after serving time in prison for armed robbery and assault,” said a press release Inhofe put out on June 11, 2014. “Due to the Supreme Court decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, Luc was released from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody when Vietnam refused to admit him. He is now facing charges for the murder of 5 people in San Francisco in March of 2012.”
Inhofe’s bill has not been enacted into law, but he has reintroduced it in the current Congress.
After Monday’s verdict, the San Francisco Chronicle reported the following about Luc’s previous conviction and imprisonment:
“Before the killings, Luc was convicted in 1998 of committing an armed robbery at a Chinese restaurant in San Jose. After he served eight years in San Quentin State Prison, officials handed him over to federal immigration authorities for deportation back to his home country of Vietnam.
Vietnamese authorities, however, refused to provide Luc with travel documents, and he was released from custody as required by federal law.
The Chronicle went on to report:
“Prosecutors said Luc used a hammer to commit one of the worst mass homicides in modern San Francisco history, though the weapon was never found. The defendant was also found guilty of five counts of attempted robbery and two counts of burglary.”
Luc’s victims, as reported by the Associated Press, included a man and his wife, their daughter and son, and the son’s wife. Their names were Hua Shun Lei and Wan Yi Wu; Ying Xue Lei; Vincent Lei and Chia Huei Chu.
San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon did not seek the death penalty for Luc, according to the Chronicle. Instead, according to the paper, “he faces life in prison without the possibility of parole.”
At the start of Luc's trial in October, the San Francisco Chronicle explained why he had been allowed to remain at liberty in the United States:
“He was released from San Quentin State Prison after serving eight years of his 11-year sentence, and was taken into federal custody for deportation back to his native Vietnam.
“But because Vietnamese authorities declined to take him back, he was released under a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that undocumented immigrants must be freed within six months in such cases.”
Thank You Mr Jeffrey and CNS.
Saturday, December 9, 2017
U.S., Foreign Leaders Warn Of Terror Groups Converging With Organized Crime In Latin America
freebeacon
Natalie Johnson
December 9, 2017 5:00 am
South America's tri-border region has longstanding presence of Hezbollah militants
The merging of Iranian-backed terrorist groups with transnational criminal organizations in Latin America has become a mounting national security threat to the United States, according to several U.S. and foreign officials.
South America's tri-border region, where Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay converge, is of particular concern given the longstanding presence of Hezbollah militants, who operate as money launderers for drug cartels. The collaboration generates tens of millions of dollars for the Iranian terror proxy with a cut set aside for drug lords.
The 10th Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum brought together Trump administration officials, U.S. lawmakers, and 150 foreign delegates from over 50 countries on Thursday to discuss joint efforts to combat global terrorist financing.
Rep. Robert Pittenger (R., N.C.), chairman of the congressional taskforce on terrorism and unconventional warfare, who organized the event, warned of an uptick in Hezbollah’s activities in the tri-border area and said he fears the Islamic State or affiliated groups will establish funding channels in the region.
"Hezbollah has been there for a couple of decades, but you now have an expansion of it," Pittenger told the Washington Free Beacon. "The tri-border area is fairly open, it needs more oversight, particularly with the flow of cars, boats, etcetera involved in narcotics and illicit financing."
Pittenger in November met with South American government officials in Buenos Aires to discuss greater collaboration between the United States and its regional partners to thwart terrorist financing operations. The talks, involving representatives from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Paraguay, among others, touched on the importance of multilateral intelligence sharing and cooperation between the public and private sector to confront the threat.
Mariano Federici, president of Argentina's Financial Intelligence Unit, said on Thursday the United States and Argentina are in the process of building "a strong strategic partnership for the protection of our mutual security and the integrity of our financial systems and economies."
"The risks stemming from the tri-border area are a priority concern to our government," Federici said in Washington, citing the devastating 1992 and 1994 bombings thought to be carried out by Iranian-backed militants in Buenos Aires.
He said a recent fact-finding trip conducted by U.S. and Argentinian officials confirmed ongoing money laundering operations in the tri-border area in which large volumes of cash were transferred to Hezbollah-controlled territory in Lebanon.
U.S. officials have long warned of terrorist groups taking root in Latin America.
During his time as chief of U.S. Southern Command, retired Gen. John Kelly often expressed concern about the nexus of terrorist groups and illicit narcotic and smuggling networks in the region. His successor, U.S. Navy Adm. Kurt Tidd, last year echoed similar worry of the potential for Islamist radicalization and narcoterrorism.
Pittenger said the United States must work with regional partners to deploy capabilities that better track the movement of money and drugs while simultaneously helping to ensure judicial independence so courts can better prosecute narcoterrorist networks.
Thank You Ms Johnson and Free Beacon.
Natalie Johnson
December 9, 2017 5:00 am
South America's tri-border region has longstanding presence of Hezbollah militants
The merging of Iranian-backed terrorist groups with transnational criminal organizations in Latin America has become a mounting national security threat to the United States, according to several U.S. and foreign officials.
South America's tri-border region, where Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay converge, is of particular concern given the longstanding presence of Hezbollah militants, who operate as money launderers for drug cartels. The collaboration generates tens of millions of dollars for the Iranian terror proxy with a cut set aside for drug lords.
The 10th Parliamentary Intelligence-Security Forum brought together Trump administration officials, U.S. lawmakers, and 150 foreign delegates from over 50 countries on Thursday to discuss joint efforts to combat global terrorist financing.
Rep. Robert Pittenger (R., N.C.), chairman of the congressional taskforce on terrorism and unconventional warfare, who organized the event, warned of an uptick in Hezbollah’s activities in the tri-border area and said he fears the Islamic State or affiliated groups will establish funding channels in the region.
"Hezbollah has been there for a couple of decades, but you now have an expansion of it," Pittenger told the Washington Free Beacon. "The tri-border area is fairly open, it needs more oversight, particularly with the flow of cars, boats, etcetera involved in narcotics and illicit financing."
Pittenger in November met with South American government officials in Buenos Aires to discuss greater collaboration between the United States and its regional partners to thwart terrorist financing operations. The talks, involving representatives from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Paraguay, among others, touched on the importance of multilateral intelligence sharing and cooperation between the public and private sector to confront the threat.
Mariano Federici, president of Argentina's Financial Intelligence Unit, said on Thursday the United States and Argentina are in the process of building "a strong strategic partnership for the protection of our mutual security and the integrity of our financial systems and economies."
"The risks stemming from the tri-border area are a priority concern to our government," Federici said in Washington, citing the devastating 1992 and 1994 bombings thought to be carried out by Iranian-backed militants in Buenos Aires.
He said a recent fact-finding trip conducted by U.S. and Argentinian officials confirmed ongoing money laundering operations in the tri-border area in which large volumes of cash were transferred to Hezbollah-controlled territory in Lebanon.
U.S. officials have long warned of terrorist groups taking root in Latin America.
During his time as chief of U.S. Southern Command, retired Gen. John Kelly often expressed concern about the nexus of terrorist groups and illicit narcotic and smuggling networks in the region. His successor, U.S. Navy Adm. Kurt Tidd, last year echoed similar worry of the potential for Islamist radicalization and narcoterrorism.
Pittenger said the United States must work with regional partners to deploy capabilities that better track the movement of money and drugs while simultaneously helping to ensure judicial independence so courts can better prosecute narcoterrorist networks.
Thank You Ms Johnson and Free Beacon.
New Supreme Court Ruling A Boon To Trump's Bid To Defend DACA Cancellation
dailycaller
Kevin Daley Supreme Court Reporter
8:31 PM 12/08/2017
A closely divided Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump to shield documents relating to the cancellation of DACA, an Obama-era amnesty initiative that extended temporary legal status to foreign nationals who illegally entered the country as children.
The Court divided five to four along ideological lines in a late Friday ruling that temporarily permits the administration to conceal records relating to the program. Justice Stephen Breyer dissented from the decision, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
The ruling is likely a boon to Trump’s efforts to defend DACA’s termination.
“The Department of Justice is pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision today putting on hold the district court’s overreach,” DOJ spokesman Devin O’Malley said. “The Department of Homeland Security acted within its lawful authority in deciding to wind down DACA in an orderly manner, and the Justice Department believes the courts will ultimately agree.”
The case was occasioned when a coalition of four states sued the administration over its September decision to end DACA, which has benefited some 800,000 individuals. Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, now president of the University of California system, also joined with the plaintiffs.
In response to the lawsuit, the administration furnished nearly 250 pages of documents relating to the program’s termination. Plaintiffs, suspecting that the government was hiding DACA records, argued that the administration would have produced a greater body of work before cancelling such a sprawling, consequential program. U.S. District Judge William Alsup agreed, and ordered the Department of Homeland Security to release more documents. A divided panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Alsup’s ruling, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court.
In an extraordinary move, Alsup filed his own brief at the high court, arguing Solicitor General Noel Francisco, the government’s Supreme Court lawyer, misrepresented the scope of his order. The Daily Caller News Foundation was unable to determine when a trial court judge had last filed a brief in the Supreme Court concerning their own ruling.
The Court nonetheless sided with the administration, but did not explain its reasons for doing so.
In dissent, Breyer argued that courts cannot effectively supervise federal agency action without reviewing all relevant materials.
“[J]udicial review cannot function if the agency is permitted to decide unilaterally what documents it submits to the reviewing court as the administrative record,” Breyer wrote. “Effective review depends upon the administrative record containing all relevant materials presented to the agency, including not only materials supportive of the government’s decision but also materials contrary to the government’s decision.”
Breyer also noted it is highly unusual for the Court to rule on a matter involving discovery or document production.
The case will now return to federal court in San Francisco for further proceedings.
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Send tips to kevin@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Thank You Mr Daley and the DC.
Kevin Daley Supreme Court Reporter
8:31 PM 12/08/2017
A closely divided Supreme Court allowed President Donald Trump to shield documents relating to the cancellation of DACA, an Obama-era amnesty initiative that extended temporary legal status to foreign nationals who illegally entered the country as children.
The Court divided five to four along ideological lines in a late Friday ruling that temporarily permits the administration to conceal records relating to the program. Justice Stephen Breyer dissented from the decision, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
The ruling is likely a boon to Trump’s efforts to defend DACA’s termination.
“The Department of Justice is pleased with the Supreme Court’s decision today putting on hold the district court’s overreach,” DOJ spokesman Devin O’Malley said. “The Department of Homeland Security acted within its lawful authority in deciding to wind down DACA in an orderly manner, and the Justice Department believes the courts will ultimately agree.”
The case was occasioned when a coalition of four states sued the administration over its September decision to end DACA, which has benefited some 800,000 individuals. Former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, now president of the University of California system, also joined with the plaintiffs.
In response to the lawsuit, the administration furnished nearly 250 pages of documents relating to the program’s termination. Plaintiffs, suspecting that the government was hiding DACA records, argued that the administration would have produced a greater body of work before cancelling such a sprawling, consequential program. U.S. District Judge William Alsup agreed, and ordered the Department of Homeland Security to release more documents. A divided panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Alsup’s ruling, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court.
In an extraordinary move, Alsup filed his own brief at the high court, arguing Solicitor General Noel Francisco, the government’s Supreme Court lawyer, misrepresented the scope of his order. The Daily Caller News Foundation was unable to determine when a trial court judge had last filed a brief in the Supreme Court concerning their own ruling.
The Court nonetheless sided with the administration, but did not explain its reasons for doing so.
In dissent, Breyer argued that courts cannot effectively supervise federal agency action without reviewing all relevant materials.
“[J]udicial review cannot function if the agency is permitted to decide unilaterally what documents it submits to the reviewing court as the administrative record,” Breyer wrote. “Effective review depends upon the administrative record containing all relevant materials presented to the agency, including not only materials supportive of the government’s decision but also materials contrary to the government’s decision.”
Breyer also noted it is highly unusual for the Court to rule on a matter involving discovery or document production.
The case will now return to federal court in San Francisco for further proceedings.
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Send tips to kevin@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Thank You Mr Daley and the DC.
Thursday, December 7, 2017
National Sheriffs' Association Backs AG Sessions In Push To Defund Sanctuary Cities
dailycaller
Anders Hagstrom Justice Reporter
5:40 PM 12/07/2017
The National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) came out in favor of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Thursday in Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s push to withhold funds from Chicago and other sanctuary cities.
The NSA — which represents more than 3,000 sheriffs nationwide — will file an amicus brief in support of the DOJ in ongoing litigation between Sessions and the city of Chicago, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned. Chicago sued the DOJ in August over his order to withhold certain funding grants from sanctuary cities, and the city won the case in September, but the DOJ has appealed the decision. Notably, the judge’s September ruling included a nationwide injunction on Sessions’s order, which effectively blocked funds from reaching non-sanctuary jurisdictions as well.
“The problem we have is not so much about sanctuary cities,” NSA Executive Director and CEO Jonathan Thompson told TheDCNF. “It’s that the political actions of one jurisdiction should never affect thousands of other counties. That’s what’s happening here and we find that objectionable.”
The actual federal grants involved are the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants. Chicago received $2.3 million in Byrne JAG funding in 2016 and has applied for $2.2 million in 2017.
The DOJ hopes to impose requirements that, in order to be eligible for funding, cities must share immigration status data with ICE officials, not bar ICE officials access to police stations, and give ICE officials 48 hours notice before releasing illegal immigrants from detainment.
Chicago argues the requirements are unconstitutional and that Sessions has no authority to impose them.
“The executive branch of the federal government may not arrogate to itself the powers that our Constitution reserves for Congress, on the one hand, or to state and local governments on the other,” the lawsuit claimed. “It may not concoct … sweeping new policy conditions that were never approved by Congress and that would federalize local jails and police stations.”
The NSA has until Dec. 15 to file an official amicus brief to the Seventh District Court.
Follow Anders on Twitter
Thank You Mr Hagstrom and the DC.
Anders Hagstrom Justice Reporter
5:40 PM 12/07/2017
The National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) came out in favor of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Thursday in Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s push to withhold funds from Chicago and other sanctuary cities.
The NSA — which represents more than 3,000 sheriffs nationwide — will file an amicus brief in support of the DOJ in ongoing litigation between Sessions and the city of Chicago, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned. Chicago sued the DOJ in August over his order to withhold certain funding grants from sanctuary cities, and the city won the case in September, but the DOJ has appealed the decision. Notably, the judge’s September ruling included a nationwide injunction on Sessions’s order, which effectively blocked funds from reaching non-sanctuary jurisdictions as well.
“The problem we have is not so much about sanctuary cities,” NSA Executive Director and CEO Jonathan Thompson told TheDCNF. “It’s that the political actions of one jurisdiction should never affect thousands of other counties. That’s what’s happening here and we find that objectionable.”
The actual federal grants involved are the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants. Chicago received $2.3 million in Byrne JAG funding in 2016 and has applied for $2.2 million in 2017.
The DOJ hopes to impose requirements that, in order to be eligible for funding, cities must share immigration status data with ICE officials, not bar ICE officials access to police stations, and give ICE officials 48 hours notice before releasing illegal immigrants from detainment.
Chicago argues the requirements are unconstitutional and that Sessions has no authority to impose them.
“The executive branch of the federal government may not arrogate to itself the powers that our Constitution reserves for Congress, on the one hand, or to state and local governments on the other,” the lawsuit claimed. “It may not concoct … sweeping new policy conditions that were never approved by Congress and that would federalize local jails and police stations.”
The NSA has until Dec. 15 to file an official amicus brief to the Seventh District Court.
Follow Anders on Twitter
Thank You Mr Hagstrom and the DC.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
Obama Blocked Deportation of 550,000 Illegals, More Than Atlanta's Population
washington examiner
Paul Bedard | Dec 6, 2017, 10:20 AM
U.S. immigration officials have revealed that they face a deportation backlog of 550,000 illegal immigrants who were given temporary amnesty by former President Obama or simply let off the hook by liberal judges.
The massive backlog is being tackled by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but the sheer numbers — bigger than the populations of Atlanta or Sacramento -- is overwhelming the agency’s enforcement and removal department.
This week as ICE and other immigration officials reviewed successes under President Trump, a reporter asked Matthew T. Albence, executive associate director for enforcement and removal operations, if he knew the number of outstanding deportation orders. The conversation went this way:
Albence: “Ballpark is going to be around 550,000.”
Reporter: “Whoa. Why is it so high?”
Albence: “Well for a large part of the last four or five years we’ve been unable to take enforcement action against those individuals.”
Under Obama, many deportation actions were delayed starting in 2014, he said.
Even if ICE officers found one in a jail, Albence said that they were advised against seizing the illegal. “Our officers had to turn their heads and walk the other way. So that’s a large part of that problem, the fact that we couldn’t enforce the law,” he said.
Read More
Thank You Mr Bedard and Wash Ex.
Paul Bedard | Dec 6, 2017, 10:20 AM
U.S. immigration officials have revealed that they face a deportation backlog of 550,000 illegal immigrants who were given temporary amnesty by former President Obama or simply let off the hook by liberal judges.
The massive backlog is being tackled by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but the sheer numbers — bigger than the populations of Atlanta or Sacramento -- is overwhelming the agency’s enforcement and removal department.
This week as ICE and other immigration officials reviewed successes under President Trump, a reporter asked Matthew T. Albence, executive associate director for enforcement and removal operations, if he knew the number of outstanding deportation orders. The conversation went this way:
Albence: “Ballpark is going to be around 550,000.”
Reporter: “Whoa. Why is it so high?”
Albence: “Well for a large part of the last four or five years we’ve been unable to take enforcement action against those individuals.”
Under Obama, many deportation actions were delayed starting in 2014, he said.
Even if ICE officers found one in a jail, Albence said that they were advised against seizing the illegal. “Our officers had to turn their heads and walk the other way. So that’s a large part of that problem, the fact that we couldn’t enforce the law,” he said.
Read More
Thank You Mr Bedard and Wash Ex.
SCOTUS To Lower Courts On The Travel Ban: Knock It Off.
dailycaller
Kevin DaleySupreme Court Reporter
4:57 PM 12/06/2017
The U.S. Supreme Court appears somewhat irritated with federal courts that have repeatedly barred the Trump administration from enforcing immigration policies halting the entry of certain classes of migrants and refugees.
The high court’s latest orders sent three clear signals to lower courts, all of which are positive signs for President Donald Trump.
First, the Supreme Court is quite clearly expressing its view that the government will prevail on the merits of this dispute. The Court would not grant an application with these facts if a majority of the justices did not believe the administration will ultimately be vindicated. As such, the orders appear to be a signal to the 4th and 9th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, two venues currently adjudicating travel ban challenges — proceed prudently, and with sufficient respect for the presumption that the administration is acting in good faith.
Secondly, the Court, for the most part, spoke as an institution. The order was forthright and terse, suggesting the Court sees little ambiguity in this case. The sober style means to communicate decisiveness, competence and the sense that the Court is conducting its business without dramatics, unlike the rest of the government. What’s more, just two of the nine justices registered their dissent. Given these facts, it appears the justices are doing their best to speak as a Court and not as an amalgamation of nine separate jurists.
Third, the order instructs the 4th and 9th Circuits to “render [their] decision with appropriate dispatch.” This language is highly unusual in a Supreme Court order. It seems to suggest that the justices plan to take the case themselves, and dispose of it as quickly as possible. Timing is especially relevant here. The Court’s current term ends in June, leaving just six months from this writing for briefing, argument, and deliberation.
All told, the coalition of civil rights groups and Democratic attorneys general fighting the latest iteration of Trump’s travel restrictions would seem to have trouble ahead of them.
The 9th Circuit will hear a travel ban challenge Wednesday, and the 4th Circuit will hear a second challenge Friday. Decisions are expected before the end of the year.
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Thank You Mr Daley and the DC.
Kevin DaleySupreme Court Reporter
4:57 PM 12/06/2017
The U.S. Supreme Court appears somewhat irritated with federal courts that have repeatedly barred the Trump administration from enforcing immigration policies halting the entry of certain classes of migrants and refugees.
The high court’s latest orders sent three clear signals to lower courts, all of which are positive signs for President Donald Trump.
First, the Supreme Court is quite clearly expressing its view that the government will prevail on the merits of this dispute. The Court would not grant an application with these facts if a majority of the justices did not believe the administration will ultimately be vindicated. As such, the orders appear to be a signal to the 4th and 9th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, two venues currently adjudicating travel ban challenges — proceed prudently, and with sufficient respect for the presumption that the administration is acting in good faith.
Secondly, the Court, for the most part, spoke as an institution. The order was forthright and terse, suggesting the Court sees little ambiguity in this case. The sober style means to communicate decisiveness, competence and the sense that the Court is conducting its business without dramatics, unlike the rest of the government. What’s more, just two of the nine justices registered their dissent. Given these facts, it appears the justices are doing their best to speak as a Court and not as an amalgamation of nine separate jurists.
Third, the order instructs the 4th and 9th Circuits to “render [their] decision with appropriate dispatch.” This language is highly unusual in a Supreme Court order. It seems to suggest that the justices plan to take the case themselves, and dispose of it as quickly as possible. Timing is especially relevant here. The Court’s current term ends in June, leaving just six months from this writing for briefing, argument, and deliberation.
All told, the coalition of civil rights groups and Democratic attorneys general fighting the latest iteration of Trump’s travel restrictions would seem to have trouble ahead of them.
The 9th Circuit will hear a travel ban challenge Wednesday, and the 4th Circuit will hear a second challenge Friday. Decisions are expected before the end of the year.
Follow Kevin on Twitter
Thank You Mr Daley and the DC.
Federal Grand Jury Indicts Steinle Killer
It is an absolute travesty of justice that the former San Francisco DA's organization of Ca. Senator Kamala Harris acquitted this Illegal Alien of murder or manslaughter.
Double Jeopardy.
dailycaller
Alex PfeifferWhite House Correspondent
9:53 PM 12/05/2017
A federal grand jury on Tuesday indicted the illegal immigrant killer of Kate Steinle on gun charges.
Jose Inez Garcia-Zarate admitted to the killing of Steinle in 2015, but said that the gun he found under a San Francisco bench went off accidentally. Last week, a jury found Garcia-Zarate guilty of felony possession, but not murder or involuntary manslaughter.
Garcia-Zarate, 54, will now face federal charges for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, as well as for being an illegally present alien in possession of a firearm and ammunition.
Garcia-Zarate is a seven-time convicted felon and had been deported from the U.S. five times. The Mexican national was released from a San Francisco jail prior to the killing of Steinle, which led to a national outrage over sanctuary cities.
“The Kate Steinle killer came back and back over the weakly protected Obama border, always committing crimes and being violent, and yet this info was not used in court,” Trump tweeted Friday. “His exoneration is a complete travesty of justice. BUILD THE WALL!”
Thank You Mr Pfieffer, the DC, President Trump, and this particular Grand Jury.
Double Jeopardy.
dailycaller
Alex PfeifferWhite House Correspondent
9:53 PM 12/05/2017
A federal grand jury on Tuesday indicted the illegal immigrant killer of Kate Steinle on gun charges.
Jose Inez Garcia-Zarate admitted to the killing of Steinle in 2015, but said that the gun he found under a San Francisco bench went off accidentally. Last week, a jury found Garcia-Zarate guilty of felony possession, but not murder or involuntary manslaughter.
Garcia-Zarate, 54, will now face federal charges for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, as well as for being an illegally present alien in possession of a firearm and ammunition.
Garcia-Zarate is a seven-time convicted felon and had been deported from the U.S. five times. The Mexican national was released from a San Francisco jail prior to the killing of Steinle, which led to a national outrage over sanctuary cities.
“The Kate Steinle killer came back and back over the weakly protected Obama border, always committing crimes and being violent, and yet this info was not used in court,” Trump tweeted Friday. “His exoneration is a complete travesty of justice. BUILD THE WALL!”
Thank You Mr Pfieffer, the DC, President Trump, and this particular Grand Jury.
Tuesday, December 5, 2017
Refugee Admissions To U.S. Down 83% So Far In Fy18
CNSNews
Patrick Goodenough | December 4, 2017 | 4:34 AM EST
(CNSNews.com) – Refugee admissions to the United States were down 83 percent in the first two months of fiscal 2018 (October and November) compared to the first two months of fiscal 2017.
A total of only 3,108 refugees were admitted in October and November down from the 18,300 refugees who were admitted in October and November of last year.
Meanwhile, fourteen months after the Obama administration backed a push at the U.N. for global responsibility-sharing for refugees and migrants, the Trump Administration has pulled out of the intitiative. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley said it “is simply not compatible with U.S. sovereignty.”
The weekend announcement comes amid a sharp drop in the number of refugees admitted to the United States during the first two months of fiscal year 2018.
Continue reading.
Thank You Mr Goodenough and President Trump.
Patrick Goodenough | December 4, 2017 | 4:34 AM EST
(CNSNews.com) – Refugee admissions to the United States were down 83 percent in the first two months of fiscal 2018 (October and November) compared to the first two months of fiscal 2017.
A total of only 3,108 refugees were admitted in October and November down from the 18,300 refugees who were admitted in October and November of last year.
Meanwhile, fourteen months after the Obama administration backed a push at the U.N. for global responsibility-sharing for refugees and migrants, the Trump Administration has pulled out of the intitiative. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley said it “is simply not compatible with U.S. sovereignty.”
The weekend announcement comes amid a sharp drop in the number of refugees admitted to the United States during the first two months of fiscal year 2018.
Continue reading.
Thank You Mr Goodenough and President Trump.
Thursday, March 17, 2016
124 Illegal Aliens Released From Jail By Obama Were Later Charged In 138 Murder Cases
weaselzippers
Thank You Wash Ex and Nick.
Standard Gripe?
Building a Voting base?
How about needing an Army of Disposable Research subjects to feed through the Govt funded (meaning you and your kids pockets) mind and mood control, 'Mental Health' Empire?
What is so difficult to understand about the word illegal?
Stench And The City: San Francisco's Summer Of Urine
At least 138 people who would be alive, if not for Obama.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has revealed that 124 illegal immigrant criminals released from jail by the Obama administration since 2010 have been subsequently charged with murder.A Center for Immigration Studies report on the data from ICE to the Senate Judiciary Committee added that the committee is not releasing the names of the murder suspects.“The criminal aliens released by ICE in these years — who had already been convicted of thousands of crimes — are responsible for a significant crime spree in American communities, including 124 new homicides. Inexplicably, ICE is choosing to release some criminal aliens multiple times,” said the report written by CIS’s respected director of policy studies, Jessica M. Vaughan.
Thank You Wash Ex and Nick.
Standard Gripe?
Building a Voting base?
How about needing an Army of Disposable Research subjects to feed through the Govt funded (meaning you and your kids pockets) mind and mood control, 'Mental Health' Empire?
What is so difficult to understand about the word illegal?
Stench And The City: San Francisco's Summer Of Urine
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Obama To Defy Voters (As Expected) And Focus On Amnesty
Obama knows best.
There are several reasons why Republican leaders don’t want President Obama to use unilateral executive action to legalize millions of illegal immigrants. First, House and Senate GOP leaders oppose bypassing Congress on principle. Second, they disagree with the policy. And third — perhaps most importantly — they know voters want lawmakers to focus on the economy.The president has other ideas — again. Back in 2009 and 2010, voters virtually pleaded with Obama and fellow Democrats to focus exclusively on jobs and economic growth. Instead, Obama devoted a year to passing, on a strict party-line basis, his party’s national healthcare scheme. It’s still unpopular.Now voters have sent a similar message: Stay on the economy. But Obama is determined to have his way on immigration.That’s not what voters want right now. Exit polls from last week’s midterms show a deep and continuing economic anxiety still at the top of the public’s concerns.First, 78 percent of the voters said they were very or somewhat worried about the direction of the economy in the next year. Second, just 22 percent described the state of the economy as good, while 48 percent called it not so good, and 22 percent said the state of the economy is poor.
Thank You Wash Examiner and Zip.
Poll: Americans Want GOP Congress To Set Agenda (not Obama)
Election? What Election?
Gallup Poll: Democrats Approval Rating Hits All Time Low, 36%
Poll: 59% of Veterans Voted Republican In Midterms, Just 39% Went For Dems
And from the most 'Mentally Healthy' District in America:
Pelosi On GOP Midterms Rout: "I Don't Believe What Happened Was A Wave"
Bill Clinton: I Wish I Could Have Made Political Opponents Disappear Like They Do In TV Shows.
The Clinton "Dead Pool"
Thursday, August 1, 2013
GAO Audit: Homeland Security Has Lost More Than A Million Visa Holders
weaselzippers
GAO Audit: Homeland Security Has Lost More Than A Million Visa Holders
Nothing to see here, likely just another “phony” scandal. I’m sure none of those lost are going to bomb us like the Tsarnaev brothers. Oh wait, DHS did lose track of Tamerlan, didn’t they?
Get the report at Newsmax
thank You Newsmax and Zip
But the Federal Govt/State Govt/Local Govts are going to give EVERYBODY Affordable Healthcare coverage, by charging fines/taxes whatever, because EVERYBODY simply can't Live without Govt Healthcare.
Kind'a makes you feel all "Mentally Healthy' knowing that these people are in Charge of Everything, including your Thought Diseases, now doesn't it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)