June 18, 2018
Do Immigrants Import Their Economic Destiny?
May 28, 2018
The Truth about Separating Kids
Some economic migrants are using children as chits, but the problem is fixable — if Congress acts.
The latest furor over Trump immigration policy involves the separation of children from parents at the border.
As usual, the outrage obscures more than it illuminates, so it’s worth walking through what’s happening here.
For the longest time, illegal immigration was driven by single males from Mexico. Over the last decade, the flow has shifted to women, children, and family units from Central America. This poses challenges we haven’t confronted before and has made what once were relatively minor wrinkles in the law loom very large.
The Trump administration isn’t changing the rules that pertain to separating an adult from the child. Those remain the same. Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the child’s parent, or is a threat to the child, or is put into criminal proceedings.
It’s the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults. The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry. (Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, illegal re-entry a felony.)
When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.
The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.
If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, it’s relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, there’s only a very brief separation. Read more here.
NICK WAGNER / AMERICAN-STATESMAN
Thousands of DACA recipients with arrest records, including 10 accused murderers, allowed to stay in U.S.
June 17, 2018
Billy Inman. Screen shot: CBS 46 Atlanta
‘I Lost My Best Friend:’ American Father Fights for Justice Years After Son is Killed by Illegal Alien on Father’s Day
An American father and mother are continuing to fight for justice for their son, who was killed 18 years ago on Father’s Day in a car crash that left their family separated for life.
Billy and Kathy Inman were traveling with their son, Dustin, on Father’s Day through north Georgia when they were hit from behind by Gonzalo Harrell-Gonzalez, an illegal alien from Mexico.
Dustin was killed instantly, while Billy was in a hospital for two weeks and Kathy was in a coma for more than a month. Neither of them were able to attend Dustin’s funeral because of their injuries.
“I lost my best friend,” Billy told CBS 46 in a recent interview. “My little buddy. This is something I want nobody else to have to go through.”
Family still fights for closure 18 years after Father’s Day crash kills son, paralyzes mother04:33
Family still fights for closure 18 years after Father’s Day crash kills son, paralyzes mother
After the car crash, the illegal alien spoke to detectives but fled when he was instructed to go to the hospital. Investigators with the federal government now say Harrell-Gonzalez has been living freely in Mexico.
Today, Billy and Kathy—who is bound to a wheelchair because of the accident—are continuing to seek justice for the illegal alien killer of their son, telling CBS 46 that they have spoken to President Trump about their fight… Read more here.
June 15, 2018
We are grateful to CBS 46 Atlanta and reporter Adam Harding for this in-depth and touching report on how illegal immigration has effected the Inman family.
Family still fights for closure 18 years after Father’s Day crash kills son, paralyzes mother
June 13, 2018
54% of alien children, teens, on welfare, nearly half for adults
June 12, 2018
“The SPLC’s investment portfolio (which it justifies as a contingency “for the day when nonprofits like SPLC can no longer afford to solicit support through the mail because of rising postage and printing costs”) has steadily grown to over $300 million, and includes offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands. As Charlotte Allen drolly noted in The Weekly Standard, “SPLC is probably the richest poverty organization in the history of the world.”
Morris Dees Photo, Zimbio.com
A Demagogic Bully
The Southern Poverty Law Center demonizes respectable political opponents as “hate groups”—and keeps its coffers bulging.
H.L. Mencken described the secret of successful demagoguery as “keep[ing] the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.” Mencken was referring to “practical politics,” but his insight is equally applicable to public relations and fundraising campaigns trafficking in extravagant claims. For the past 40 years, a self-styled watchdog group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, has excelled in promoting such unwarranted alarm, with a politicized series of hobgoblins, in the process amassing a fortune from its credulous donors.
According to the SPLC, America is rife with dangerous “hate groups”: the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, racist skinheads, anti-government militia groups, radical-right terrorists, and many more. “We’re currently tracking more than 1,600 extremist groups operating across the country,” the SPLC’s website claims. Readers of SPLC’s press releases, reports, and—importantly—direct-mail solicitations would be justified in imagining an America teeming with smoldering churches and synagogues, cross burnings, storm troopers bearing swastikas, and even lynchings.
Reality is different. In fact, racial tolerance is at an all-time high, diversity is universally promoted as a civic virtue, and “hate crimes,” as defined and reported by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, have declined over the past decade to fewer than 6,000 incidents a year, a modest number in a country with 326 million people. The principal threats of radical extremism in the United States today are jihadist attacks (radical Islam), militant anti-police rioters (such as Black Lives Matter), and masked Antifa (so-called “anti-fascist”) mobs shutting down free speech on college campuses and violently protesting the election of President Donald J. Trump, while the greatest perpetrators of violence in America are criminal street gangs—including the deadly MS-13—that have turned some of our inner cities into war zones.
The virulently anti-Trump “Resistance” movement has fueled partisan acrimony with poisonous rhetoric, to the extent of condoning—and in some cases even encouraging—physical attacks against political opponents. Yet the SPLC largely ignores such groups, focusing instead on the moribund KKK (many of whose estimated 2,000 members are thought to be FBI informants) and similar relics from the Jim Crow era. The SPLC myopically focuses on white racism directed at minority groups, especially African-Americans. A former SPLC lawyer, Gloria Browne, charged that SPLC programs were calculated to cash in on “black pain and white guilt.” Racism undoubtedly exists, but it is neither pervasive nor exclusively practiced by whites.
Ironically, the SPLC not only overlooks most of the real hate groups in operation today, along with overtly race-based organizations, such as the pro-Latino National Council of La Raza and MEChA, but also labels moderates with whom it disagrees “extremists” if they deviate from its rigid political agenda, which embraces open borders, LGBT rights, and other left-wing totems. The SPLC has branded Somali-born reformer Ayaan Hirsi Ali an “anti-Muslin extremist” for her opposition to female genital mutilation and other oppressive Islamic practices, and designated the respected Family Research Council as a “hate group” for its opposition to same-sex marriage. Likewise, the organization deems mainstream immigration-reform advocates such as the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) as hate groups. British Muslim activist Maajid Nawaz—regarded by most observers as a human rights leader—is suing the SPLC for listing him as an extremist.
Critics of the SPLC accuse the lavishly funded organization of peddling fear and smearing political opponents—mostly conservatives—as bigots. Its “Hatewatch” list is avowedly ideological, acknowledging that it “monitors and exposes the activities of the American radical right.” Few left-wing organizations—and no Islamist groups—are branded in this way by the SPLC. Nevertheless, the SPLC, founded in 1971, has burrowed itself into the civil rights movement, the organized bar, the cloistered culture of large law firms, the education system, and even law enforcement as a champion for “the exploited, the powerless and the forgotten.” Its executives are richly compensated, some in excess of $400,000 annually. Operating from palatial six-story quarters in Montgomery, Alabama (sometimes called the “Poverty Palace”), it enjoys a $300 million endowment, including more than $23 million in cash.
It fundraises ceaselessly. It’s no coincidence that SPLC co-founder Morris S. Dees Jr. has been inducted into the Direct Marketing Association’s Hall of Fame…. read the rest here.
Photo The Daily Wire
Illegal immigration rises for third straight month despite Trump immigration crackdown.
U.S.News and World Report
Study: Arizona Employment Restrictions Deter Unauthorized Immigrants
June 6, 2018
A new study has found that an Arizona law requiring employers to confirm employees’ legal authorization to work within the U.S. decreased emigration from and increased return migration to Mexican regions with strong ties to Arizona.
The study, published in the journal Demography, examined the international migration response to the Legal Arizona Workers Act. The law requires Arizona employers to submit an electronic request to confirm each candidate’s legal authorization to work in the U.S., using the E-Verify system to confirm that prospective workers are in the country legally. The January 2008 law thus reduced the “attractiveness of Arizona as a destination for potential migrants without legal status,” according to the study.
“Mexican immigrants respond to changing job prospects both by moving within the U.S. and by moving internationally,” said Brian Kovak, co-author of the study and associate professor of economics at Carnegie Mellon University’s Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy. “The paper in question focuses on moving internationally.”
The E-Verify system compares Social Security numbers and names of new workers against a centralized database from the Social Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security, according to the research.
In 14 states – Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia – E-Verify requirements only apply to certain public-sector agencies or contractors. Meanwhile, in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Utah, universal mandates require all, or nearly all, employers to use the system to screen new hires, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas…More here.
« Previous Page
Cashing in: Illegal immigrants get $1,261 more welfare than American families, $5,692 vs. $4,431
— Next Page »