Gold Medalist defies Trump stance on immigration: Darcy cartoon

CLEVELAND,Ohio — Just as California-born Chloe Kim flew through the air to become the youngest woman to win an Olympic Snowboarding Gold Medal, her family’s story flies in the face of President Trump’s icy anti-immigration positions, in spectacular fashion.

Kim, who was born in Long Beach, is the daughter of immigrants from South Korea.   Her father, Jong Jin Kim, came to the United States in 1982 with $800.    He first worked as a dishwasher, then a cashier.  Eventually he was able to work his way to entering El Camino College to become an engineer.

As his daughter competed in Pyeongchang, South Korea, Jong Jin Kim cheered her on shouting “American Dream!”   Kim told reporters that when he came to the United States, “this was my American hope.  Now this is my American dream.   I just want [Chloe] to study hard.  She’s got to go have a good experience in college.  I just hope she lives as a happy girl.   I just wish she was a little nicer to me!  She’s such a teenage girl.”

Appreciating both her heritage and growing up in California, Chloe Kim told reporters, “I’m really lucky to be Korean.  It never felt like a burden to balance two different cultures; it just came naturally.  Chloe Kim is fluent is Korean, French and English.

When the immigration story of Kim’s parents was reported, I was preparing to soon see ICE agents descending on the family to check their citizenship status, that’s how excessive and out of control ICE enforcement has become under Trump.

Fortunately for Kim, her parents at least came from Trump-tolerated Asia, instead of what Trump deemed “S-hole” countries.   Even still, under Trump’s proposed merit-based immigration system, Kim’s parents might not have been allowed into the United States of Trumpica.

Trump and John Kelly had initially assured everyone ICE would be focusing on just rounding up illegal aliens who had committed serious crimes.   Instead, ICE agents have been going after low hanging fruit, breaking up families of taxpayers who have been an asset to the community, over what amounts to traffic tickets.

Trump admin: U.S. no longer a “Nation of Immigrants.”

The U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services agency has officially changed its mission statement to eliminate the phrase “Nation of Immigrants.”

This is the old statement that previous presidents thought was appropriate:

“USCIS secures America’s promise as a nation of immigrants by providing accurate and useful information to our customers, granting immigration and citizenship benefits, promoting an awareness and understanding of citizenship. and ensuring the integrity of our immigration system.”

This the new Trumpified mission statement:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services administers the nation’s lawful immigration system, safeguarding its integrity and promise by efficiently and fairly adjudicating requests for immigration benefits while protecting  American, securing the homeland, and honoring our values.”

Next look for Trump and Stephen Miller to remove the “Give us your tired…” poem from the Statue of Liberty.

Ivanka Trump and Sarah Huckabee Sanders were sent to the Olympics to represent the United States for Sunday’s closing ceremony.   Ivanka is the Princess of Nepotism Gone Amok.  Huckster Huckabee Sanders lies to the public for Trump nearly everyday. 

Ivanka Trump and Sarah Huckabee Sanders represent the Trump administration.  Chloe Kim and her parents truly represent the United States of America, a nation of immigrants.

Powered by WPeMatico

Oakland Mayor Warns City Of Upcoming Immigration Raids After Receiving Intel

The mayor of Oakland on Saturday night warned the city’s residents of potential raids being conducted by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In a statement released at the end of the day, Mayor Libby Schaaf said she learned from “multiple credible sources” that, within the next 24 hours, ICE would be gearing up for operations in the Bay Area of Northern California, including Oakland.

She said her warning was not intended to panic residents, but protect them. Schaaf didn’t provide exact locations because she said she didn’t know which areas ICE would be targeting.

“My priority is for the well-being and safety of all residents ― particularly our most vulnerable,” Schaaf said in a statement tweeted just after sunset on Saturday.

“And I know that Oakland is safer when we share information, encourage community awareness, and care for our neighbors.”

Last summer, Oakland city council voted to end an agreement the city had with ICE that allowed police to work with ICE. Oakland then strengthened its status as a sanctuary city in January by barring any city officials from cooperating with ICE in any capacity. 

The city’s decision to double down on protecting undocumented residents came in January after immigration agents raided about 100 7-11 stores across the country before sunrise to arrest undocumented workers. Dozens of the targeted stores were located in Northern California.

Schaaf reminded citizens of these laws in her Saturday statement, while also noting a state law that prohibits business owners from helping ICE agents and bars federal agents from employee-only areas.

ICE officials told ABC 7 News that they weren’t aware of which specific immigrations operations the mayor was referencing.

“There are ICE operations every day and it is unclear what the mayor is referring to,” the agency said.

In her statement, Schaaf said that Oakland is a “city of law-abiding immigrants and families who deserve to live free from the constant threat of arrest and deportation.”

“I believe it is my duty and moral obligation as a mayor to give those families fair warning when that threat appears imminent,” she said.

Powered by WPeMatico

Oakland mayor warns that immigration raids may be coming this weekend

Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf warned Saturday night that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement could be conducting an operation in the Bay Area in the next day or so.

Federal officials have said in the past that California and the Bay Area could be an enforcement target, due in part to the sanctuary policies adopted by many local cities, which have pledged not to cooperate with immigration authorities in many of their actions.

Schaaf said in a news release her office put out shortly before 8 p.m. that she learned “from multiple credible sources,” that the federal operation was planned, “starting as soon as within the next 24 hours.”

Few details about any raids were included in the release and Schaaf said she didn’t know where they might take place.

The purpose of the announcement, she said, was not to panic residents who could be in danger of being detained and deported, but to warn and protect them.

Below is the announcement the mayor put out:

“Earlier today, I learned from multiple credible sources that the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is preparing to conduct an operation in the Bay Area, including Oakland, starting as soon as within the next 24 hours.As Mayor of Oakland, I am sharing this information publicly not to panic our residents but to protect them.

“My priority is for the well-being and safety of all residents — particularly our most vulnerable — and I know that Oakland is safer when we share information, encourage community awareness, and care for our neighbors.

“Interested residents should consult the website to understand their legal rights and options in the event they face detention or know someone who needs legal representation.

“In Oakland, OUSD public schools have strict protocols in place to protect our students and families. Oakland police officers are prohibited from participating in ICE activities.

“Additionally, California state law prohibits business owners from assisting ICE agents in immigration enforcement and bars federal agents from accessing employee-only areas.

“I have reached out to local leaders and partners in our immigrant communities to share this information. Our shared message is clear: We want residents to prepare, not panic. We understand ICE has used activity rumors in the past as a tactic to create fear; our intent is for our community to go about their daily lives without fear, but resiliency and awareness.

“I am not aware of any further details of the ICE operation, such as precise locations.

“I know that Oakland is a city of law-abiding immigrants and families who deserve to live free from the constant threat of arrest and deportation.

“I believe it is my duty and moral obligation as Mayor to give those families fair warning when that threat appears imminent.”

John Wildermuth is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: Twitter: @jfwildermuth

Powered by WPeMatico

Trump’s Hardline Approach Is Forcing Immigrant Advocates to Readjust

For years, activists have urged lawmakers to provide a path to citizenship for so-called “Dreamers,” immigrants brought to the United States illegally as minors. They’ve staged sit-ins, protested at the steps of the Capitol, and organized rallies across the country. But the Trump administration’s hardline stance has required advocate groups to go further and consider how much they’re willing to concede to protect young undocumented immigrants—potentially at the expense of other immigrant groups.

There are dozens of immigrant advocacy groups across the country, but the policies they defend can differ depending on the group of immigrants they’re serving. This includes systems to legally immigrate to the United States, some of which President Trump has proposed scrapping.

In September, the administration announced that it was ending the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program with a six-month delay, leaving a window of time for Congress to act. Democrats tried to enshrine DACA protections into law by tacking it on to must-pass legislation, such as bills funding the government. And as a result, in January, the lack of a DACA deal led to a three-day government shutdown. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pledged to hold an open-floor debate on immigration if a deal wasn’t reached before the February 8 funding deadline. This month, the Senate engaged in a debate over immigration, much of which happened behind closed doors, and failed to advance four separate proposals.

Attempts to pass the DREAM Act, a measure first introduced in 2001 that would allow some undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children to eventually obtain legal status, have stretched on for years. During his tenure, President Obama backed the legislation, but Congress failed to pass it. In 2013, the Senate passed a bill to overhaul the nation’s immigration system, but House Republicans refused to bring it up for a vote because it lacked the support of the majority of the Republican conference. Efforts have been further complicated recently as the Trump administration, along with hardline House conservatives, push for stricter immigration measures, including slashing legal immigration, in exchange for protecting the “Dreamers.”

The array of proposals puts activists in a precarious position, forcing them to decide how much they’re willing to concede to help the “Dreamers” stay. It’s not uncommon for divisions to reveal themselves in a movement of this size and scope, as one immigrant advocate told me: “I don’t think [fractures are] surprising given that there’s negotiations ongoing right now and everyone is collectively trying to advocate for their individual provisions,” adding, “At the same point, I think the question will be where folks come together in the end.”

Last month, the White House released an immigration framework that would provide a path to citizenship for 1.8 million young undocumented immigrants, in exchange for $25 billion for border security and restricting family-based migration, dubbed “chain-migration” by some conservatives, and ending the diversity visa program. The proposals would greatly slash legal immigration levels: The libertarian Cato Institute estimated that in all, Trump’s immigration framework would bar 22 million immigrants from legally immigrating to the U.S. over the next 50 years. In the Senate, Trump’s plan fell short of the 60 votes needed to advance. But a separate measure in the House has received the president’s support: A bill by Representative Bob Goodlatte would would allow young undocumented immigrants to obtain temporary legal status and slash legal immigration levels.

Trump has insisted that he’s unwilling to relent on his “four pillars,” as he calls them, but he’s previously changed his mind about what exactly he wants in a DACA deal. While proposals to change immigration policy fell flat in the Senate, the House may take up the matter next. Advocates, for their part, are continuing to pressure Congress to pass legislation before the March 5 deadline, while considering what they’re willing to give, if anything, to protect young undocumented immigrants from deportation—and how to stay united in the process.

“When I talk about unity and a movement united, it doesn’t mean carbon copy advocacy and messaging and policy,” said Cesar Vargas, the executive director of Dream Action Coalition, a pro-immigrant group. “I do mean that we all are in this together.”  

To that end, pro-immigrant groups are also in the unique position of having to defend policies that benefit the segment of the population they serve and navigate around strict immigration proposals.

Take the UndocuBlack Network, an organization that advocates for undocumented black people. Immigrants from Africa are among those who have benefited from the diversity visa program, which allocates a limited number of visas to countries that don’t usually migrate to the United States. It’s in the interest of the group to ensure the diversity visa lottery stays intact.

“There is no green card shiny enough for me to justify the devastating consequences on vulnerable communities here and abroad. So we say, not in our name,” said Jonathan Jayes-Green, the director of UndocuBlack Network and a DACA recipient, in a press call last month.

UndocuBlack Network is not alone in opposing the end to the diversity visa lottery. Gustavo Torres, the executive director of CASA, a Maryland-based organization that advocates for Latinos and immigrants, said he too is against it being scrapped. “In terms of the diversity visa and the family reunification, I am not going and I’m unwilling to sacrifice these two important issues for DACA,” Torres said.

The family-reunification system, which allows close relatives of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents to legally migrate to the country, has become a point of contention for other advocacy groups as well. According to the Department of Homeland Security, in fiscal year 2017, roughly two-thirds of new green-card holders had family connections to U.S. citizens. Immigrants from Asia make up a large share of visas issued under this category. The Asian Americans Advancing Justice—AAJC, a group focused on advancing civil and human rights for Asian Americans, has made protecting the system a priority in talks with lawmakers. “When you’re talking about cuts to legal migration, that’ll hit us really hard,” said John C. Yang, the president and executive director of AAAJ—AAJC.

Karin Wang, the vice president of programs and communications for Advancing Justice-Los Angeles, cited the troubled history between Chinese immigrants and the U.S. as reason for concern. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the first major law restricting immigration, barred the Chinese from obtaining U.S. citizenship and suspended the entry of laborers for 10 years. “I don’t know that [problems with ending the family-reunification system are] unique to Asian Americans, but I know for Asian Americans especially, given a very explicit history where we were valued at one point as low-wage laborers but not considered human enough to be allowed to have families and communities, this feels really relevant,” Wang said.

In many cases, DACA recipients live in mixed-status households, meaning that some relatives may be U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents while others may be undocumented. This plays a significant role in the debate over DACA, since proposals to cut legal immigration could directly impact the families of the program’s beneficiaries. As many recipients will tell you, it’s not just about passing legislation that provides them legal status but also one that doesn’t alienate their relatives.

But under a Republican administration and Republican-controlled Congress, a trade-in of some kind is inevitable—and advocates by and large agree a border-security package will need to be part of the deal.

“We have to be realistic in the moment we’re living in,” said Juan Escalante, the communications manager at America’s Voice and a DACA recipient. “We’re caving on the border-security package and we’re putting forth a piece of legislation that is widely accepted by the American public. If the DREAM Act was passed, Congress [could] be seen as a functioning body.”

When I asked activists to explain what that package would include, few could say for certain, often punting to lawmakers who will be tasked with writing the language, as well as groups more knowledgeable on border security. Clarissa Martinez, the deputy vice president for UnidosUS, specified the organization is open to supporting funding for border security under certain circumstances: “Reasonable border-security measures and accountability for expenditure of that money is something we’re willing to look at,” she told me.

This became a point of contention between pro-immigrant groups this month in regard to a bill co-sponsored by Senators Mike Rounds and Angus King. The proposal, which failed by a vote of 54 to 45, included a pathway to citizenship for young undocumented immigrants though it would prohibit them from sponsoring their parents, and $25 billion for border security, among other things. The large sum of money dedicated to the border frustrated members of the Southern Border Communities Coalition, which is made up of more than 60 organizations in the southern border region.

“SBCC has been very clear about what border communities need and what they need is a solution that not only protects Dreamers but to the extent it includes any kind of border policy, that that border policy be driven by data, analysis, and consultation,” said Andrea Guerrero, the organization’s co-chair. “The great failure of the Rounds-King bill was that it did not include data, analysis, and consultation. It predetermined that what we need is $25 billion that was based on a political agreement.” United We Dream, the largest immigrant-youth organization in the country, also opposed the measure. Greisa Martinez-Rosas, the director of advocacy and policy at United We Dream, told me the bill “crossed the line.”

UnidosUS, formerly known as National Council of La Raza, saw the bill as an opportunity. “The difference of opinion is not about the concerns over the substance. We share those concerns. We share concerns about continuing to feed this false notion about border security needing that kind of money,” Martinez said. “At the same time, because there were some limitations to how that money was going to be used and how rare it is to be bring a debate to the floor, [and] the fact that it included protection for Dreamers, we decided to support that push.”, a pro-immigration group funded by the tech industry, also backed the measure.

Guerrero called support for the Rounds-King bill a “misstep.” “Opening the door to border enforcement that was unaccountable, opening the door to the elimination of family visas, and opening the door to discretionary decisions by [Customs and Border Protection] were all extremely dangerous because we know that on the House side, this bill was going to get worse,” she said.

SBCC supports Representative Will Hurd’s immigration bill, dubbed the USA Act. The Republican congressman, who represents roughly 800 miles of Texas’ border with Mexico, has proposed legislation that offers a path to citizenship for young undocumented immigrants and bolsters border security. The legislation has more than 50 co-sponsors from both parties. A companion bill in the Senate by Republican John McCain and Democrat Chris Coons failed by a vote of 52 to 47. “The misstep last week is that we should’ve all been throwing in behind the USA Act,” Guerrero said.

The divisions within pro-immigrant groups over negotiations also became clear within the League of United Latin American Citizens, a Latino rights group. The group released a letter backing Trump’s immigration framework, then retracted it after a fierce backlash from members.

According to estimates from the liberal Center for American Progress, 122 DACA recipients are losing their protections daily. That number is likely to spike following the March 5 deadline when more permits begin to expire. (A recent court ruling allows recipients already enrolled in the program to apply for renewal, though the process to do so can be slow and as a result, briefly leave recipients without protections, leaving them subject to deportation.) Activists have cited the urgency of the matter as reason to find a legislative fix—and do so quickly. But amongst themselves, they’ll also be faced with that they’re willing to give up to protect the “Dreamers.”

“For anybody in Congress who feels that this is going away, I think that’s a mirage,” Martinez said. “If anything, the intensity is going to increase because of the deadlines that are coming up.”

Powered by WPeMatico

Local donors step up in immigration disputes

The Catholic Charities Migration and Refugee Services has a list of about 300 people waiting for their first appointment with a lawyer.

“There’s simply not enough programs like ours that have free or low-cost services to meet the needs,” said Camille Gill, managing attorney of Catholic Charities’ Immigration Legal Services.

She and others hope that a new donor-advised fund housed at the Cleveland Foundation will help add capacity to local organizations providing free or low-cost immigration legal services to residents of Northeast Ohio.

Last year, Ilana Horowitz Ratner and her family established the Cuyahoga County Immigration Legal Services Fund at the Cleveland Foundation with the goal of maintaining due process, fairness and justice for Northeast Ohio’s immigrants and families.

Following the 2016 election of President Donald Trump, Horowitz Ratner decided she wanted to get involved. After she reactivated her law license, she began volunteering with Catholic Charities Migration and Refugee Services, where she quickly discovered the lack of capacity for lawyers supporting people through immigration court proceedings.

She’d seen other communities around the country establishing legal funds for immigrants, and approached Gill to see if something would be possible in Cleveland.

“It just seemed like a no-brainer,” Horowitz Ratner said. “It wasn’t about politics; it was about due process. So it seemed to be that anybody — regardless of what your politics were — would want to support the fund.”

She and her family established the fund with a small gift and began fundraising in November. Since then, the fund has raised more than $800,000, boosted in part by a benefit concert held in early February with musicians from the Cleveland Orchestra donating their time. Mitsuko Uchida, a world-class Mozart pianist and conductor who was in town that week, also volunteered her time, Horowitz Ratner said.

Money from the fund will support grants for four nonprofit organizations that provide immigration legal services: Catholic Charities Migration and Refugee Services, The Legal Aid Society of Cleveland, Asian Services In Action, Inc. and Building Hope in the City.

They hope to invest the money so it grows to become a continual source of funding. Grants will be made based on established criteria and priorities to local nonprofit organizations who provide legal representation.

These dollars, Gill said, will go to support the four organizations in representing vulnerable populations, including unaccompanied children, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, people seeking asylum and those seeking to maintain family unity.

As of last August, 6,926 cases were pending in immigration court for individuals living in Ohio, only 41% of which have legal representation, according to the fund.

Gill notes that while the issue has been in the news a lot in the past year, it’s nothing new.

“This has always been an issue,” Gill said. “This need existed under all presidential administrations. This is not something that’s going to go away with a change in political leadership.”

Facing cost barriers, immigrants often appear in court without an attorney or much knowledge of how the legal system operates. Many are then ordered by courts to be removed from the country despite the fact that an attorney could have presented a defense for allowing them to remain in the United States, according to the fund.

National research shows that women and children have an 85% chance of being removed if they appear in court without legal representation, but only a 15% removal rate if they do have legal representation, according to the fund. Without representation, only one in 10 asylum seekers will win their case, but with it, nearly half are successful.

The Immigration Legal Services Fund is one of hundreds of donor-advised funds at the Cleveland Foundation, said Paul Putman, donor relations and technology officer at the foundation.

Typically, donor-advised funds are irrevocable gifts to the foundation as a public charity that the donor or donor’s advisers then appoint a representative or committee to recommends grants from the fund.

“We’re excited to work with anyone who has an idea to make the community better,” he said. “That’s why we’re here. It’s exciting to see these organizations and individuals coming together to address an issue that’s going to be a great impact on the community.”

For more information or to donate, visit

Powered by WPeMatico

Caos en el sistema de asilo político por cambios de la Administración Trump

Los Ángeles, 24 feb (EFE).- La estrategia de la Administración Trump para obstaculizar las concesiones de asilo político con el argumento de que alientan el abuso y el fraude tiene entre la espada y la pared a los solicitantes y a sus abogados.

Los plazos del proceso para pedir asilo ahora son mucho más cortos y eso “está complicando las cosas para todos, incluso para nosotros los abogados que estamos defendiendo a nuestros clientes como si tuviéramos una mano atada”, dijo a Efe el abogado de inmigración Alex Gálvez

Tanto el presidente Donald Trump como el fiscal general Jeff Sessions argumentan que el sistema de asilo está plagado de engaños y que los inmigrantes y sus abogados están jugando con las peticiones.

Los cambios hechos por la Administración están enfocados en acortar los tiempos de los procesos. El Servicio de Inmigración y Ciudadanía (USCIS) transformó el sistema de concesión de asilo a inmigrantes y está examinando primero las aplicaciones más recientes para dejar las más antiguas al final.

Con esta medida se pretende impedir que personas con reclamos no creíbles puedan acceder a un permiso de trabajo y terminen por engrosar la lista de espera que lleva años de retraso.

Entre los más afectados están los inmigrantes centroamericanos que cruzan la frontera y solicitan el amparo migratorio y los venezolanos que ingresaron a Estados Unidos huyendo de la situación política de su país.

La codirectora de la Clínica de Inmigración y Derechos Humanos en la Universidad del Distrito de Columbia Lindsay Harris dijo a Efe que el hecho de que la Administración apunte al fraude como la razón de que hayan aumentado las concesiones de asilo en los últimos años demuestra su desconocimiento de la crisis humanitaria en Centroamérica y su ceguera voluntaria ante el número sin precedentes de refugiados en todo el mundo.

Relacionado: A un paso del sueño americano tras una travesia entre la vida y la muerte 

Fernando Romo, de la Asociación de Salvadoreños de Los Ángeles (ASOSAL), explicó que el temor de los inmigrantes a presentar solicitudes de asilo y terminar siendo deportados ha aumentado. Y sus miedos están fundamentados.

El abogado de inmigración Caleb Arring denunció que este mes uno de sus clientes fue detenido por agentes del Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) después de salir de su entrevista de asilo político en las oficinas de USCIS en San Francisco.

Arring intentó detener el arresto de su cliente argumentando que este tenía una solicitud de asilo y estaba en espera de una respuesta.

No obstante, los agentes del ICE lo detuvieron respaldado la acción en el hecho de que el inmigrante estaba indocumentado. “En todos mis años de práctica nunca había visto esto”, dijo Arring.

Gálvez señala que el Gobierno usa esta estrategia de terror para hacer que los inmigrantes desistan de buscar beneficiares del sistema de asilo.

Los nuevos solicitantes no serían los únicos afectados. Harris resalta que está nueva política perpetúa el limbo en el que se encuentran los antiguos solicitantes de asilo y además pone en riesgo la credibilidad porque con el paso del tiempo los documentos o pruebas pueden quedar obsoletos y los testigos no están disponibles, entre otros problemas.

A finales de enero, la agencia registraba 311.000 solicitudes de asilo político, lo que representa un incremento del 1.750 % en los últimos cinco años.

Para desatascar el sistema, el Gobierno de Trump ha apretado el acelerador dando como plazo un año para resolver los casos.

“No se puede impartir justicia con restricciones de tiempo”, se queja Gálvez

Según los datos de TRAC, un proyecto de análisis de datos de la Universidad de Syracuse, el años pasado las cortes de inmigración resolvieron un 35 % más de casos de asilo que en el 2016.

El porcentaje de solicitudes denegadas aumentó a un 70 % y eso que las cifras no muestran el impacto de los últimos cambios.

Harris, del Comité de Asilo y Refugiados de la Asociación Americana de Abogados de Inmigración (AILA), explica que a partir de este mes los abogados han tenido que cambiar sus estrategias porque necesitan estar más preparados cuando presenten la solicitud de asilo y anexar todas las pruebas antes de la entrevista.

Según la nueva política, la entrevista se produce en un plazo de 3 a 6 semanas después de la presentación.

Romo asegura que como hay menos tiempo para presentar las pruebas, el proceso de recolección es más corto, al igual que el de los testimonios, situación que puede obligar a los inmigrantes y abogados a retirar o aplazar la solicitud.

“Esto se está convirtiendo en un dolor de cabeza, que en menos de tres semanas ya deja a muchos afectados”, enfatizó Gálvez.

VIDEO RELACIONADO: Saturación en el procesamiento de asilo político

Powered by WPeMatico

Jefe de agencia federal eliminó frase ‘nación de inmigrantes’ y es hijo de una inmigrante

La agencia federal que supervisa la inmigración legal a Estados Unidos y otorga visas y ciudadanías, ya no describe al país como una “nación de inmigrantes” en su declaración de misión.

El cambio fue ordenado esta semana por Lee Francis Cissna, director del Servicio de Inmigración y Ciudadanía de EEUU (USCIS).

Cissna dijo a la agencia The Associated Press que eliminó la referencia porque no cree que la frase pertenece a lo que calificó como un documento burocrático, y es más apropiada para un monumento.

El cambio fue criticado por grupos que defienden a los inmigrantes, quienes lo han calificado como un intento de “reescribir la historia de EEUU” para “subestimar el aporte de los inmigrantes” al país.

El sábado, Cissna se declaró sorprendido por las críticas y negó que la nueva declaración de misión sea antiinmigrante.

“Una y mil veces no”, dijo, a la vez que aclaró que la Casa Blanca no tiene nada que ver con el cambio.

El diario The Washington Post reportó que la madre de Cissna inmigró de Perú a Estados Unidos. Durante su audiencia de confirmación como director de USCIS, Cissna dijo que “la experiencia del inmigrante siempre ha sido una parte fundamental de mi familia, y estaría orgulloso de llevar esa herencia conmigo”.

Cissna, quien dijo que creció hablando español en su hogar y habla exclusivamente en español con sus hijos, enfatizó durante la audiencia que su familia “es literalmente un producto del sistema de inmigración legal de nuestra nación”.

La nueva declaración de misión dice: “El Servicio de Ciudadanía e Inmigración de Estados Unidos administra el sistema de inmigración legal de la nación, salvaguardan su integridad y promesa al adjudicar de manera eficiente e imparcial las solicitudes de beneficios de inmigración, mientras protege a los estadounidenses, asegura la patria y honra nuestros valores”.

La antigua declaración decía: “USCIS asegura la promesa de Estados Unidos como una nación de inmigrantes al proporcionar información precisa y útil a nuestros clientes, otorgar beneficios de inmigración y ciudadanía, promover conciencia y comprensión de la ciudadanía, y garantizar la integridad de nuestro sistema de inmigración”.

En una carta a los 18,000 empleados de USCIS, Cissna dijo que el nuevo texto define claramente el papel de la agencia y establece que a quien sirve es a los estadounidenses.

“El pueblo estadounidense, a través del Congreso, le ha confiado a USCIS la administración de nuestros programas legales de inmigración que permiten a los ciudadanos extranjeros visitar, trabajar, vivir y buscar refugio en los Estados Unidos”, escribió Cissna en su carta, según reportó el Washington Post. “También somos responsables de garantizar que, aquellos que se naturalicen, se dediquen a este país, compartan nuestros valores, se asimilen en nuestras comunidades y comprendan su responsabilidad de ayudar a preservar nuestra libertad”.

En su memorando, Cissna prohibió también el uso del termino “clientes” para referirse a las personas que están solicitando visas, ciudadanías u otros beneficios. El director dijo que la palabra clientes “promueve una cultura institucional que enfatiza la satisfacción final de los solicitantes, en lugar de la adjudicación correcta de dichas solicitudes y peticiones de acuerdo con la ley”.

Organizaciones antiinmigración o que abogan para que se disminuya drásticamente la entrada de nuevos inmigrantes (de manera legal o ilegal) a EEUU elogiaron el cambio en la declaración de misión. Dijeron que el nuevo enfoque prioriza los intereses de los estadounidenses.

Cissna fue director de políticas de inmigración del Departamento de Seguridad Interna y consejero de asuntos de inmigración para la campaña presidencial de Donald Trump.

Powered by WPeMatico

Estas son las razones por las que a miles de venezolanos pudieran negarles el asilo en EEUU

Ante la avalancha de peticiones de asilo de venezolanos en Estados Unidos, activistas y expertos en Derecho alertan que el miedo generalizado a la inseguridad que padece un ciudadano en Venezuela no es suficiente para cumplir los requisitos a fin de evidenciar el temor real a la persecución, fundamento del asilo político.

Muchos genuinamente creen que marchar contra del régimen venezolano o enfrentarse día a día a la violencia los hace candidatos al asilo. Pero son más los factores que deben tomarse en cuenta antes de emprender este camino, explica el abogado de inmigración Marcial De Sautu, quien brinda asesoramiento a clientes venezolanos en casos de asilo.

A continuación, el experto aclara algunas de las interrogantes más comunes entre los venezolanos que contemplan solicitar asilo.

¿Cuáles son las razones más comunes por las que son rechazadas las peticiones de asilo de los venezolanos?

Los casos de asilos a venezolanos a menudo son denegados por inconsistencias en la petición. Una vez que presenta su solicitud de asilo a través del proceso de asilo afirmativo, tendrá que presentarse ante un oficial de asilo para suministrar su testimonio. Si hay inconsistencias entre el testimonio y la solicitud de asilo, el caso no será aprobado.

Adicionalmente, otra razón para denegar casos de asilo a los venezolanos es la falta de pruebas que corroboran el testimonio.

¿Cuáles son los miedos que los venezolanos presentan y no llegan a considerarse reales para calificar al asilo?

Desafortunadamente, las difíciles condiciones en Venezuela debido a los problemas de seguridad, escasez de alimentos, falta de empleo y violencia general no son suficientes para ameritar una solicitud de asilo. Ha habido muchas personas que han hecho comentarios sobre estas condiciones y han participado en protestas, pero no han estado activamente involucrados en partidos políticos o movimientos opositores.

Como la solicitud de asilo se basa en opiniones políticas, debe demostrar que sus actividades políticas causaron la persecución que sufrió o sufrirá.

Si estoy en Estados Unidos y me niegan el asilo, ¿qué opciones tengo?

Depende de una serie de factores. Si un ciudadano venezolano ingresa a Estados Unidos como turista con una visa B-2, solicita asilo afirmativo y su caso es denegado pero todavía se encuentra en estatus legal de inmigración o dentro del periodo de estadía autorizada en Estados Unidos, no será colocado en un proceso de remoción aún porque está presente legalmente en el país. Entonces podría buscar otras alternativas de visa.

Si ya no está en estatus legal, deberá comparecer ante un Tribunal de Inmigración y puede presentar su caso de asilo ante un juez de Inmigración, quien emitirá una decisión independiente.

Más noticias y consejos de inmigración en

¿Y si se vence el estatus de mi visa y me niegan la petición de asilo?

Si vence el plazo de su estadía autorizada en Estados Unidos y ha presentado una solicitud de asilo afirmativo que no es concedido, la oficina de asilo lo colocará en un proceso de expulsión ante un juez de Inmigración. Se le permitirá presentar su solicitud de asilo ante un juez de Inmigración.

¿Si presento una solicitud basada en hechos no verídicos, ¿qué tipo de problemas judiciales enfrento?

Un solicitante de asilo no puede presentar un caso falso o fraudulento. Si alguien lo hace, se le prohibirá cualquier beneficio de inmigración en Estados Unidos y pudiera estar sujeto a cargos penales.

El régimen dictatorial de Maduro se ha profundizado y hay más represión en el país, ¿es esto motivo para pedir asilo?

Las situaciones críticas en Venezuela como la falta de seguridad general, la escasez de alimentos, la falta de empleo o la violencia general, no son en sí suficientes para que prevalezca una solicitud de asilo.

El asilo lo han tomado los venezolanos como moda y muchos no califican, ¿es cierto?

Cada caso potencial es distinto. Las vivencias de una persona difieren de las de otra. No recomiendo a nadie intentar navegar el proceso de asilo por cuenta propia. El mejor consejo que puedo dar es buscar la representación jurídica de un abogado de inmigración con experiencia en este campo para obtener la máxima garantía de éxito.

Powered by WPeMatico

Agency boss who erased ‘nation of immigrants’ is the son of an…

The US Citizenship and Immigration Services director who removed the phrase “nation of immigrants” from the agency’s mission statement is the “proud” son of a Peruvian immigrant, according to a report Friday.

Lee Francis Cissna’s mother immigrated to the US from Peru more than 50 years ago, and his wife Tiffany’s mother comes from the Middle East, he told the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Washington Post reported. Both women became US citizens.

“The immigrant experience has always been a fundamental part of my family life, and I would be proud to carry that heritage with me should I be confirmed to be the director of USCIS,” Cissna told the committee at his confirmation hearing in May.

Cissna said he grew up speaking Spanish and speaks the language exclusively to his son and daughter.

“Our family is literally a product of our nation’s legal immigration system,” he told the committee. “Should I be confirmed, these experiences will undoubtedly illuminate everything I do as USCIS director.”

USCIS’s original mission statement read:

“USCIS secures America’s promise as a nation of immigrants by providing accurate and useful information to our customers, granting immigration and citizenship benefits, promoting an awareness and understanding of citizenship, and ensuring the integrity of our immigration system.”

Cissna announced late Thursday that that would be updated to:

“U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services administers the nation’s lawful immigration system, safeguarding its integrity and promise by efficiently and fairly adjudicating requests for immigration benefits while protecting Americans, securing the homeland, and honoring our values.”

Cissna defended the broad change, saying the new “simple, straightforward statement clearly defines the agency’s role in our country’s lawful immigration system and the commitment we have to the American people.”

Cissna, who was appointed under the Trump administration, previously served as director of immigration policy at the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Policy.

The White House wasn’t behind USCIS’s change in mission statement, according to the Washington Examiner.

“The White House did not direct USCIS to change its mission statement,” a USCIS official told the Examiner. “It was developed and debuted within the agency by USCIS Director Cissna during his first senior leadership conference with USCIS staff, and reflects the director’s guiding principles for the agency. The new mission statement also has the support of the secretary of Homeland Security.”

Powered by WPeMatico

El servicio de inmigración de Estados Unidos actualiza su declaración y ya no habla de “país de inmigrantes”

Warning: preg_replace(): Unknown modifier '0' in /hermes/bosnacweb01/bosnacweb01aj/b676/ipg.luggagesetclearancec/asiloenusainfo/wp-content/plugins/jetpack/class.photon.php on line 331

(CNN) – La agencia encargada de los servicios de inmigración en Estados Unidos ha actualizado el texto de su declaración y ya no incluye la frase “nación de inmigrantes”.

En su lugar, la nueva declaración de misión de los Servicios de Ciudadanía e Inmigración de Estados Unidos (USCIS, por sus siglas en inglés) enfatiza en “salvaguardar su integridad” y “asegurar la patria”.

LEE: Este es el lugar de EE.UU. donde más han aumentado los arrestos de inmigrantes

Esta nueva declaración fue anunciada a los empleados de la entidad este jueves, según un funcionario de USCIS.

Banderas de Estados unidos en Nueva York

“La nueva misión del centro fue desarrollada y estrenada por el director de USCIS, Francis Cissna, durante su primera conferencia con altos directivos del centro en todo el mundo”, dijo el funcionario. “Refleja los principios rectores del director para la agencia. Incluye un enfoque en la equidad, la legalidad y la eficiencia, la protección de los trabajadores estadounidenses y la protección de la patria. Esas prioridades clave se reflejan en la nueva declaración de la misión de la agencia”.

La actualización de su misión fue primero reportada por The Intercept.

La declaración completa dice: “Los Servicios de Ciudadanía e Inmigración de Estados Unidos administran el sistema legal de inmigración en la nación, salvaguardan su integridad y prometen juzgar de manera eficiente y justa las solicitudes de beneficios de inmigración mientras protegen a los estadounidenses, aseguran la patria y honran nuestros valores”.

MIRA: DACA, entre los temas de inmigración que debate el Senado de EE.UU.

De acuerdo con un exfuncionario del Departamento de Interior, la anterior declaración incluía la noción de salvaguardar “la promesa de Estados Unidos como una nación de inmigrantes”.

“USCIS asegura la promesa de Estados Unidos como una nación de Inmigrantes al proporcionar información precisa y útil a nuestros clientes, otorgar beneficios de inmigración y ciudadanía, promover una conciencia y comprensión de la ciudadanía y garantizar la integridad de nuestro sistema de inmigración”, decía la declaración antigua proporcionada por el exfuncionario.

MIRA: Inmigrantes en California: vivimos con miedo

Una carta del director de USCIS a sus empleados dice: “Respondemos ante los estadounidenses que nos miran para asegurarse de que quienes son elegibles para los beneficios de la inmigración los reciban y aquellos que no, ya sea porque tienen la calificación o porque intentaron defraudar, no los reciban. Y que aquellos que nos perjudicarían no reciban los beneficios de la inmigración”.

Powered by WPeMatico