#asylum and security regulations

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Matt Shuham at HuffPost:

The Trump administration is building a case in court for its ability to send people in the United States to an overseas detention camp — and then refuse to bring them home even if they’re innocent. In a new court filing Tuesday night, the administration referred to a group of Venezuelan migrants and asylum seekers it moved from the U.S. to an infamous Salvadoran prison — a gay makeup artist and a professional soccer player reportedly among them — as not only enemy combatants but also terrorists, supposedly subject to presidential powers that U.S. judges cannot review at all once they are outside of the country. “The President doubtlessly acts within his constitutional prerogative by declining to transport foreign terrorists into the country,” administration lawyers wrote, explaining why they assert they did not violate a judge’s order to turn around planes carrying the migrants in question and bring them back to the United States. “The President’s ultimate direction of the flights at issue here—especially once they had departed from U.S. airspace—implicated military matters, national security, and foreign affairs outside of our Nation’s borders,” government lawyers added later. “As such, it was beyond the courts’ authority to adjudicate.” Once the planes were outside of the United States, the government argued, “the Constitution itself provided sufficient authority to act, and any dispute over the President’s extraterritorial exercise of that authority would present a non-reviewable political question.” To some legal observers, it was a shocking assertion of presidential power. “This argument suggests the existence of some kind of foreign policy loophole whereby the Executive could disregard the law to bring anyone accused of a national security threat outside of US territory, at which point he, as President, could do whatever he wants to them on national security ground,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, calling the government’s argument “a WILD claim.” The Venezuelan migrants sent to El Salvador’s brutal supermax prison known as CECOT were claimed by Donald Trump’s administration to be members of a gang called Tren de Aragua — despite ample evidence, in some cases, to the contrary.

[...] The Trump administration has officially designated Tren de Aragua and other gangs as terrorist organizations. And earlier this month, Trump said that Venezuelan officials and gang members were actually both members of a “hybrid criminal state that is perpetrating an invasion of and predatory incursion into the United States.” That, Trump argued, meant he could treat the supposed gang members as enemy combatants by invoking the Alien Enemies Act. And whereas past invocations of the Alien Enemies Act have included opportunities for people to dispute their classification as enemy combatants, Venezuelan migrants who the U.S. government expelled were not given that opportunity before their planes touched down in El Salvador. “Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemy Act than what has happened here. … They had hearing boards before people were removed,” Judge Patricia Millett, of the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, said at a hearing Monday. “Here, there’s nothing about hearing boards or regulations and nothing was adopted by agency officials who were administering this. People weren’t given notice [and] weren’t told where they were going.” Even setting aside the Alien Enemies Act proclamation, which declared that supposed members of Tren de Aragua were actually part of an invading army, “the President has ample independent authority under Article II [of the U.S. Constitution] to decline to bring foreign terrorists into the United States, including by returning to the United States foreign terrorists who were previously within the United States,” the Justice Department argued in its filing Tuesday night. [...]

Trump Administration Uses Secrecy To Cover Its Tracks

At several points in the legal fight over the flights to El Salvador’s megaprison, the Trump administration has used secrecy to push back against legal accountability, including well before Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act last week. Starting in February, immigration agents began detaining Venezuelan asylum seekers who’d up to that point followed the legal process for pursuing asylum in the United States. In multiple cases, the detentions were the result of people’s tattoos, Talking Points Memo reported Tuesday, citing interviews and lawyers’ declarations in court filings. “Over the next month and a half,” the outlet reported, “detainees were progressively moved across the country towards the South Texas airfield from which the removal flights departed.” The secrecy of the operation all but ensured that lawyers for the affected migrants would not be able to challenge in court the government’s labeling of their clients as invading soldiers.

Satan-possessed traitor Donald Trump and his crooked un-American administration advances delusional claim that “terrorists” alleged to be TdA-affiliated can be sent to CECOT concentration camp in El Salvador under bogus Alien Enemies Act pretenses.

[justadaddybear]

I will not be drawn into debate over this post. I am aware of the arguments of people who disagree with the statements below. I am posting this for all those who may be living in fear in this moment so you know you are not alone. I want to share this piece in solidarity: This is where I stand. The 45/47th President, his power hungry cronies taking positions of authority in his Cabinet and administration, and the majority of Republicans in Congress are a real and active threat to me, my way of life, and all or most of the people I love. Some people are saying that we should give Trump a chance, that we should "work together" with him because he won the election and he is "everyone's president." This is my response:

•I will not forget how badly he and so many others treated former President Barack Obama for 8 years and Biden cleaning up his mess…Lies about his legitimacy and hatred for his principles and his attempts to work within the system. •I will not "work together" to privatize Medicare, cut Social Security and Medicaid. •I will not "work together" to subvert the Constitution by illegitimately pushing unfit Cabinet nominees through on recess appointments without the advice and consent of the Senate. •I will not "work together" to persecute Muslims. •I will not "work together" to shut out refugees from other countries who seek asylum. •I will not "work together" to lower taxes on the 1% and increase taxes on the middle class and poor. •I will not "work together" to help Trump use the Presidency to line his pockets and those of his family and cronies. •I will not "work together" to weaken and demolish environmental protection. •I will not "work together" to sell American lands, especially National Parks, to companies which then despoil those lands. •I will not "work together" to enable the killing of whole species of animals just because they are predators, or inconvenient for a few, or because some people want to get their thrills killing them. •I will not "work together" to remove civil rights from anyone. •I will not "work together" to alienate countries that have been our allies for as long as I have been alive. •I will not "work together" to slash funding for education. •I will not "work together" to take basic assistance from people who are at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. •I will not "work together" to get rid of common sense regulations on guns. •I will not "work together" to eliminate the minimum wage. •I will not "work together" to support so-called "Right To Work" laws, or undermine, weaken or destroy Unions in any way. •I will not "work together" to suppress scientific research, be it on climate change, fracking, or any other issue where a majority of scientists agree that Trump and his supporters are wrong on the facts. •I will not "work together" to criminalize abortion or restrict health care for women. •I will not "work together" to increase the number of nations that have nuclear weapons. •I will not "work together" to put even more "big money" into politics. •I will not "work together" to violate the Geneva Convention. •I will not "work together" to give the Ku Klux Klan, the Nazi Party and white supremacists a seat at the table, or to normalize their hatred. •I will not "work together" to deny health care to people who need it. •I will not "work together" to deny medical coverage to people on the basis of a "pre-existing condition." •I will not "work together" to increase voter suppression. •I will not "work together" to normalize tyranny. •I will not “work together” to eliminate or reduce ethical oversight at any level of government. •I will not "work together" with anyone who is, or admires, tyrants and dictators. •I will not support anyone that thinks it's OK to put a pipeline to transport oil on Sacred Ground for Native Americans. •I will not "work together" to legitimize racism, sexism, and authoritarianism.

This is my line, and I am drawing it. •I WILL stand for honesty, love, respect for all living beings, and for the beating heart that is the center of Life itself. •I WILL use my voice and my hands, to reach out to the uninformed, and to anyone who will LISTEN: That "winning", "being great again", "rich" or even "beautiful" is nothing… When others are sacrificed to glorify its existence.

[mariacallous]

Rafal Trzaskowski, the candidate for the PM’s liberal-democratic coalition, has chosen to fight his two nearest challengers on the right over immigration and security, leaving the campaign largely devoid of any fresh ideas.

“I’m proposing a fundamental change, which is that the 800+ child subsidy for Ukrainians should only be given to those who work, live and pay taxes in Poland,” the 53-year-old mayor of Warsaw, Rafal Trzaskowski, told supporters at a January campaign event in eastern Poland.

Trzaskowski, the candidate of the Civic Platform party led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, said Poland should not repeat the mistakes made by countries like Sweden and Germany, where “it paid off [for immigrants] to come just for the social benefits.”

That proposal clearly indicated that Trzaskowski, long seen as a member of the progressive wing of the centre-right Civic Platform, was going to fight for voters on the right of Poland’s political spectrum.

Much of that work is already being done by the government itself, with Tusk introducing such populist measures as suspending the right of migrants on the Polish-Belarusian border to claim asylum on March 27 as well as announcing Poland would not henceforth adhere to various EU laws on migration, including the Dublin Regulation and the Pact on Migration and Asylum. But Trzaskowski’s statements on benefits for Ukrainians, coming from a man otherwise considered a progressive liberal, are clearly meant to build on that.

The Tusk camp’s bet is that liberal voters will vote for Trzaskowski anyway, as most believe replacing a president controlled by Law and Justice (PiS), as the incumbent Andrzej Duda is, would allow the government to take more control over the country. The main battleground, therefore, is to steal as many votes as possible from the right wing.

Current polls indicate that Trzaskowski is on track to win the election, the first round of which will be held on May 18 (if necessary, a second round will be held on June 1), although the rapid rise of Slawomir Mentzen, the candidate of the far-right Confederation alliance, is raising concerns among some over the potential long-term costs of liberals borrowing the language and themes of the radical right.

Behind the numbers

Ben Stanley of SWPS University’s Faculty of Social Sciences in Warsaw, who monitors polling trends, tells BIRN that when it comes to the main two candidates, Rafal Trzaskowski and Karol Nawrocki – presented as a “civic” candidate but endorsed by the previous ruling conservative party of Law and Justice (PiS) – the polls have been “fairly stable”.

Trzaskowski’s support tracks at 36-37 per cent while Nawrocki’s stands at around 25 per cent, with the Warsaw mayor dropping a few percentage points since January as new candidates on the left announced their candidacy (so far, over 40 individuals have announced they are running).

Yet the most dynamic evolution in support has been for the third-placed candidate, Mentzen, who started out at around 10 per cent and is now polling at 19-20 per cent.

“If current trends were to continue, Mentzen could reach Nawrocki, but that really depends,” Stanley comments. “Mentzen might actually have a ceiling for his support. And voters of Mentzen are typically male, young and from small towns, and this is a very volatile electorate who may declare their support now and later not show up on polling day.”

Stanley says a reason behind Mentzen’s success is that the 38-year-old tax adviser is seen as “hard-working and an effective campaigner”. However, the politician enjoyed a similar rise before the general election in 2023, only to struggle defending his policy proposals in the latter stages of the campaign and eventually saw his support drop significantly in the run-up to election day.

“It seems plausible that we might face a similar dynamic now,” Stanley says. “Mentzen is running an effective pre-campaign, but when faced with the detailed questioning that comes during the last part of the campaign, he might not manage so well.”

The most likely scenario for a second round remains a run-off between Trzaskowski and Nawrocki. In that scenario, Stanley’s numbers put Trzaskowski at 56 per cent support versus 44 per cent for Nawrocki.

“The race is Trzaskowski’s to lose,” Stanley thinks, adding that Nawrocki has been enjoying fairly stable levels of support from PiS’s core vote, but not bringing much additional value by himself.

“Nawrocki is a rather remote individual, not particularly appealing,” Stanley thinks. “In the past, with Andrzej Duda or [the former late president] Lech Kaczynski, PiS could count on the candidate’s appeal with heartland Poland. People could identify and feel a connection with the candidates. But this is not the case with Nawrocki.”

Security – and only security

The 42-year-old Nawrocki, who currently runs the Institute for National Remembrance, has been promoting PiS’s version of political history in this and previous posts for many years. As such, the historian’s speeches during the electoral campaign reference major events in Poland’s past to draw parallels with current challenges related to – almost invariably – immigration and security.

On March 27, Nawrocki challenged Trzaskowski to a debate on the security of the Polish state in the context of the situation globally and on its borders, where a migration crisis is being fomented by the regime of Belarusian dictator Aleksandr Lukashenko with Russia’s assistance in order to destabilise the EU.

On April 9, they finally got round to debating each other, in what actually turned out to be two separate events, hastily organised and without the presence of all the candidates in either. The confusion ensued after Trzaskowski made an open invitation to Nawrocki to debate him in the small city of Konskie in central Poland. Other candidates complained that they hadn’t been invited and some of them rushed off to Konskie to join nevertheless.

In the meantime, Trzaskowski and Nawrocki were having their own disagreements about which TV channels could broadcast the debate, with Nawrocki insisting some TV channels associated with right-wing parties be involved. In the end, one debate amongst five candidates – including Nawrocki but not Trzaskowski – was broadcast by these channels deemed right-wing. Later that evening, another debate featuring both Nawrocki and Trzaskowski was carried by the public service broadcaster, which a subsequent viewer poll showed the Warsaw mayor winning, followed by Nawrocki and parliamentary speaker Szymon Holownia.

Gavin Rae, a sociologist at Warsaw’s Kozminski University, says the candidates are mainly competing “on the right, on war and immigration, on who is the most militaristic and ready to spend more on the military.” The difficulty for PiS, Rae tells BIRN, is that “Tusk has moved so far to the right on these issues, that there is not much room left to compete with him.”

Rae describes Nawrocki as a “not likeable candidate and shady character”, and says it’s not clear why PiS picked him as their choice to stand in the election. It could be, Rae speculates, that with PiS leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski’s powers waning with age, Nawrocki was regarded as an outside option that avoids the party having to make an ultimate choice between its various competing factions.

Another source of weakness for PiS in these elections, Rae argues, is that “PiS lost its pro-social face”.

“With PiS, you used to see 15-20 per cent in support coming from core voters, nationalists and Catholics, but then they expanded because of the pro-social offer they made to people,” Rae explains. “Some voters were thinking, ‘I may not like PiS, but I’m getting the [now 800+ subsidy] so I will vote for them’.”

“But that kind of discourse is not central at all in this campaign, despite people’s living standards getting worse,” he adds.

According to Rae, Mentzen is definitely benefitting from the campaign being fought on the ground of the hard right. “They all speak about the same things, immigrants and the war, but while the others don’t want to say some things directly – for example, on the Ukrainians – Mentzen is clearly articulating those messages, and he is maybe the most believable when speaking about those things,” he says.

Rae points out that Mentzen’s popularity also comes from “articulating the frustrations of young men especially, telling them how to take care of themselves in this age of individualism.”

While the experts who spoke to BIRN for this article tend to think Mentzen is unlikely to steal second place from PiS’s Nawrocki, the fact that the campaign is being fought on topics where the far right is the most convincing comes with long-term risks.

“Poland’s government is actually making the same mistake as German mainstream parties and others in Europe did,” Olena Babakova, a Ukrainian journalist and lecturer at Vistula University in Warsaw, tells BIRN. “They think that if they use the arguments of the alt-right on migration, they will take away votes from them. But, as the situation in other countries has shown, what happens is that voters in the end decide to vote for the real thing, not a watered-down version.”

[trump47actions]

Here are some of the orders Mr. Trump signed on his first day in office:

Federal Work Force

Freeze federal hiring, except for members of the military or “positions related to immigration enforcement, national security, or public safety.”

Restore a category of federal workers known as Schedule F, which would lack the same job protections enjoyed by career civil servants.

Halt new federal rules from going into effect before Trump administration appointees can review them.

Review the investigative actions of the Biden administration, “to correct past misconduct by the federal government related to the weaponization of law enforcement and the weaponization of the intelligence community.”

Grant top secret security clearances to White House staff without going through traditional vetting procedures.

End remote work policies and order federal workers back to the office full time.

Immigration and the Border

Bar asylum for people newly arriving at the southern border.

Move to end birthright citizenship, which is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, for the children of undocumented immigrants. The president cannot change the Constitution on his own, so it is not yet clear how Mr. Trump plans to withhold the benefits of citizenship to a group of people born in the United States. Any move is all but certain to be challenged in court.

Suspend the Refugee Admissions Program “until such time as the further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States.”

Declare migrant crossings along the U.S.-Mexico border to be a national emergency, allowing Mr. Trump to unilaterally unlock federal funding for border wall construction, without approval from Congress, for stricter enforcement efforts.

Resume a policy requiring people seeking asylum to wait in Mexico while an immigration judge considers their cases.

Consider designating cartels as “foreign terrorist organizations.”

Gender and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Initiatives

Terminate D.E.I. programs across the federal government.

Recognize two sexes: male and female.

Remove protections for transgender people in federal prisons.

Tariffs and Trade

Direct federal agencies to begin an investigation into trade practices, including persistent trade deficits and unfair currency practices, as well as examine flows of migrants and drugs from Canada, China and Mexico to the United States.

Assess China’s compliance with a trade deal Mr. Trump signed in 2020, as well as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which Trump signed in 2020 to replace the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Order the government to assess the feasibility of creating an “External Revenue Service” to collect tariffs and duties.

Carry out a full review of the U.S. industrial and manufacturing base to assess whether further national security-related tariffs are warranted.

Energy and the Environment

Withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement, the pact among almost all nations to fight climate change.

Declare a national energy emergency, a first in U.S. history, which could unlock new powers to suspend certain environmental rules or expedite permitting of certain mining projects.

Attempt to reverse Mr. Biden’s ban on offshore drilling for 625 million acres of federal waters.

Begin the repeal of Biden-era regulations on tailpipe pollution from cars and light trucks, which have encouraged automakers to manufacture more electric vehicles.

Roll back energy-efficiency regulations for dishwashers, shower heads and gas stoves.

Open the Alaska wilderness to more oil and gas drilling.

Restart reviews of new export terminals for liquefied natural gas, something the Biden administration had paused.

Halt the leasing of federal waters for offshore wind farms.

Eliminate environmental justice programs across the government, which are aimed at protecting poor communities from excess pollution.

Review all federal regulations that impose an “undue burden” on the development or use of a variety of energy sources, particularly coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power, hydropower and biofuels.

TikTok ban

Consult federal agencies on any national security risks posed by the social media platform, then “pursue a resolution that protects national security while saving a platform used by 170 million Americans.” Mr. Trump ordered his attorney general not to enforce a law that banned the site for 75 days to give the Trump administration “an opportunity to determine the appropriate course forward.”

Other

Withdraw from the World Health Organization.

Rename Mount Denali and the Gulf of Mexico.

Ensure that states carrying out the death penalty have a “sufficient supply” of lethal injection drugs.

Fly the American flag at full-staff on Monday and on future Inauguration Days.

Implement the Department of Government Efficiency, the Elon Musk-led cost-cutting initiative.

Revoke security clearances for 51 signers of a letter suggesting that the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop could be Russian disinformation.

[meret118]

Why April 20, 2025 Could Alter the Course of American Democracy

April 20 is the deadline Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Homeland Security Agency head Kristi Noem have for submitting a joint report to President Donald Trump with their recommendations for invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 and the National Emergencies Act of 1976.

. . .

Invoking the National Emergencies Act poses additional dangers in Trump’s hands, allowing him to unilaterally activate an estimated 150 statutory powers. These include the authority to waive the minimum comment periods for proposed regulations, seize American citizens’ assets without due process, and, perhaps most alarming of all, shut down or take over private communications systems.

If any of this comes to pass, it won’t just be undocumented migrants, foreign students, asylum-seekers, and suspected gang members who end up in the crosshairs. We could all be at risk.

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/change-course-american-democracy

------

I just learned about this report, but the NEA is what I think trump will use to try and cancel the midterms if they don't believe the SAVE ACT etc is enough to rig them.

Could Trump Invoke the Insurrection Act? What to Know—and How to Prepare

But let’s be clear: this may not happen. Trump may decide the political climate isn’t right. He may worry about backlash or simply calculate that the move isn’t worth the trouble. There’s no guarantee he invokes the Act on April 20—or at all.

. . .

It doesn’t mean the military stays at the border. It means the president has triggered a rarely used federal law that allows them to deploy troops domestically to enforce laws, suppress unrest, or crack down on what they claim is rebellion. And it doesn’t require state permission.

So yes, a so-called border emergency could result in military deployment in your backyard, even if you’re hundreds or thousands of miles away. That’s the danger of how broad and unchecked the Insurrection Act is—and why it’s so vulnerable to abuse by an authoritarian leader (if you want to learn more about the Insurrection Act and why Congress must reform it, you should dig into this great piece from the Brennan Center). https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/insurrection-act-presidential-power-threatens-democracy

. . .

Author and organizer Daniel Hunter has laid out one of the clearest roadmaps in his must-read piece, What to do if the Insurrection Act is invoked for Waging Nonviolence. He walks through what this could look like on the ground, and what tactics are available to us—from direct pressure, to legal defenses, to strategic ridicule. https://wagingnonviolence.org/2025/04/what-to-do-if-the-insurrection-act-is-invoked/

Here’s a starting point for how we’d respond:

1. Sound the alarm — If it happens, we move fast to make sure people know what it is and why it matters. No euphemisms. No hedging. Just the truth.

2. Push Democrats at every level to meet the moment — We’ll need every Democratic elected official using their platform to expose and challenge this abuse of power. That includes governors preemptively activating their National Guards (which may prevent federal takeover), press conferences, legal challenges, and public pressure campaigns.

3. Stay calm, disciplined, and united — Trump wants chaos. Our power is in joyful, defiant, nonviolent action. We protect each other, stay coordinated, and refuse to play into his narrative.

4. Flip the script — If Trump claims to be stopping “insurrectionists,” we remind people that he pardoned the actual ones. We shine a light on the real threat: a president using military force to suppress dissent.

5. Use ridicule to deflate his power — Strongmen hate being mocked. So we mock. Through memes, theater, satire, and creativity, we show how ridiculous and weak this play really is.

6. Plan for the long haul — This may be the opening move in a broader power grab. So we stay ready. We build legal infrastructure, strengthen communication channels, and invest in our communities’ ability to respond.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-insurrection-act

'Arbitrary, Outlandish, and Unjustified': Raskin Warns Trump Against Invoking Insurrection Act

"There is no factual predicate for Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act at the southern border or anywhere else in the United States," said the congressman and constitutional scholar.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-insurrection-act

--------

With the avalanche of bad news since January 20th, I've had to severely edit the number of news items I post to try and keep it from being just a firehouse of despair. I started out trying to just post things that were actually enacted rather than what they said they were going to do, especially since so often in his first term trump would say outlandish things that didn't come to pass.

I hesitated about posting this since it's so horrible and may not happen, but most things he says he's going to do now actually end up happening IMO now though. I think there's at least a 50% he enacts what to me sounds like martial law this month. Part of the reason I'm posting this is I'm hoping that's just my pessimistic nature however. If you disagree I would really love to hear why. I want to be wrong!

[capesandshapes]

I am without words for how unempathetic and detached from the reality of the average immigrant's story this is. Not a single one of the people involved with this idea would pass a citizenship test, much less have the mental capability of juggling visas in this country.

People should be able to become American citizens affordably and with goddamn dignity. They shouldn't have to jump through goddamn hoops to main visa status, stay married to people that fucking hurt them, or drop to their knees and pray that conflicts in their country qualify for asylum in America-- a bar that has been made almost impossible to clear when America is goddamn unempathetic to conflicts in less economically strategic parts of the world. Fuck, you shouldn't even have to have a noble reason, just a determination to be here and make things work.

It is so fucking disgusting that anyone thinks that the average American would want to point and laugh at immigrants, to watch them struggle with a system that has been made financially and mentally challenging. This is pathetic. The people who would want to see this are fucking pathetic. The people who want to profit from this are pathetic.

American immigrants are not a fucking sideshow. Go coo at fucking Snooki and Jwoww, no one wants to see the awful things we've done to immigrants in this country. The average American doesn't even know there's an English portion to the test, or that it isn't a regulated hundred question Scantron-- and if it is the intention of the department of homeland security to keep dicking immigrants over the way that they do, they don't want this fucking TV show to happen.

Why?

Because then people are going to wonder what our citizenship process actually looks like and see how inherently sick and discriminatory it is.

[azuremallone]

Azure's Corner

It's time to unfuck this mess, because people are being treated as if they're stupid by the media that is spoon-feeding them lies.

From: https://wgntv.com/news/politics/donald-trump-has-sweeping-plans-what-hes-proposed/

My comments are in red, the quoted news article is in blue.

A look at what Trump has proposed:

Immigration

“Build the wall!” from his 2016 campaign has become creating “the largest mass deportation program in history.” Trump has called for using the National Guard and empowering domestic police forces in the effort.

He called for using the National Guard, which is operated by the States and not the Federal Government, to secure the border as there are not enough ICE officers to do so. The domestic police forces already have authority to enforce United States laws. His call to empower them means to strip cities of their "sanctuary" status that allows them to ignore Federal law and violate the 14th Amendment.

Still, Trump has been scant on details of what the program would look like and how he would ensure that it targeted only people in the U.S. illegally. He’s pitched “ideological screening” for would-be entrants ...

Everyone entering the United States legally are given an ideological screening as part of their immigration processing. It was enacted a long, long time ago to entrap spies and saboteurs in the 30s, later it remained enacted post-70s to entrap terrorists. It's not a pitch, because the Biden Administration ended this practice by ignoring Federal law and allowing unrestricted, unmonitored, and unlawful entry into the United States.

..., ending birth-right citizenship (which almost certainly would require a constitutional change) [Won't happen, this is not something he pitched, it was listed in the stupid 2025 document that was released by a retarded thinktank no one listens to anyway. It cannot be enacted because the very birthright citizenship is a hallmark of the United States and is an internationally recognized maritime law.], and said he’d reinstitute first-term policies such as “Remain in Mexico,” limiting migrants on public health grounds and severely limiting or banning entrants from certain majority-Muslim nations. Altogether, the approach would not just crack down on illegal migration, but curtail immigration overall.

This is hyperbolic and misleading. Remain in Mexico existed prior to the Biden Administration. In fact, people were not "caught and released" prior to Biden, they were deported and had to remain in their countries to file for immigration legally -- after a period of six months to a year for violating US immigration law. This is the law that Biden and Kamala ignored. Public health and ill-intended ultra-nationalists were always factors of grounds to limit or ban people entry from any country. In fact, the only way to get into the US from a prohibited nation (like Iran) was asylum. Even then, if you had an incurable and highly infectious disease, you would be prohibited entry. This was the case with leprosy, which is now curable until it isn't. If someone cannot be cured because they're too far gone with the disease, they are still sent to leprosy colonies to avoid infecting the public. It will curtail immigration overall because we'll be enforcing the laws that have existed for nearly a hundred years.

Abortion

Trump played down abortion as a second-term priority, even as he took credit for the Supreme Court ending a woman’s federal right to terminate a pregnancy and returning abortion regulation to state governments. At Trump’s insistence, the GOP platform, for the first time in decades, did not call for a national ban on abortion. Trump maintains that overturning Roe v. Wade is enough on the federal level.

This is where people get mislead very easily. The Government does not give people rights via laws. It takes people's rights via laws. It is best to do so to prevent a patchwork of laws across various states. However, Roe v. Wade was not a Federal law. Repeal of it did not ban abortion. The problem was that abortion proponents were abusing the ruling and attempting to further push for abortions up to and even post birth. Their argument was that at any point, Human life can be extinguished at will of the mother or the state. Meaning, they wanted to codify how and when the Government could step in and order an abortion. Proponents of this only targeted minorities. In effect, Roe v. Wade was now promoting eugenics. The overturning of it returned the rights to the people, or the states where people had voted for laws restricting or defining the use of abortion. Any right not held by the state belong to the people: Removing Roe v. Wade put the right to choose back into the hands of women, taking the their right to choose away from the Government. I know, it's convoluted. I had to sit down and review it with a constitutional attorney friend because I was curious.

Still, Trump has not said explicitly that he would veto national abortion restrictions if they reached his desk. [Why should he? Just to make people feel good about a theoretical situation?] And in an example of how the conservative movement might proceed with or without Trump, anti-abortion activists note that the GOP platform still asserts that a fetus should have due process protections under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause. That constitutional argument is a roadmap for conservatives to seek a national abortion ban through federal courts.

The quoted anti-abortion activists being noted here are in the extremist category. They are not indicative of the actual conversations around abortion in general. They are also not in a position to enact this as they are not senators or representatives. In rare instances, such voices coming from senators or representatives are in staunch minority or simply singularity. The 14th Amendment being cited incorrectly in this context. The 14th Amendment requires states to apply Federal laws equally, and thus, supply equal protections for all citizens. This does not apply to non-citizens, which include the unborn as they cannot be citizens until birth on U.S. soil. [See how this comes full circle?] Due process is associated with legal persecution. Those who leverage this are the extremists who believe that the act of abortion is being carried out as a state-enacted death sentence after a criminal trial. This is just fucking stupid for them to believe, so I'm not even going to defend it. However, they would be correct if the state did call for an abortion to occur. Instead of looking at the real issue of murdering an infant and how liberals push abortion instead of education on low-income communities, pro-abortionists showcase horrors as if they're commonplace to hide the fact that they want to allow Muffy to abort a child without her wealthy multi-millionaire parents finding out she was banging the gardener while on pot, and skipping the pill because she didn't want to toxify her body. Meanwhile, they don't support nuclear families among the impoverished because it will reduce their blindly loyal low-educated voter-base.

Taxes

Trump’s tax policies broadly tilt toward corporations and wealthier Americans.

This is an ancient fear tactic. Republicans generally want common-sense regulations. This precludes the rampant spendthrift behavior of Democrats who have indebted the country to the tune of nearly 50 trillion dollars within the past 30 years, a sharp uptick from the 1980s. The Democrats routinely tax heavily to make people feel good, and then spend that money on stupid things that serve no one but their own pockets. True facts, go look.

That’s mostly due to his promise to extend his 2017 tax overhaul ...

Which benefitted lower-to-middle income families substantially until Biden reversed it and inflation exploded, hurting those same families for 4 years and sending the country toward depression by recklessly spending M2 capital to artificially prop up the economy.

... , with a few notable changes that include lowering the corporate income tax rate to 15% from the current 21% [This is why low income families can't afford eggs under Biden/Harris...]. That also involves rolling back Democratic President Joe Biden’s income tax hikes on the wealthiest Americans [This included middle-income families, despite his claims it wouldn't.] and scrapping Inflation Reduction Act levies that finance energy measures intended to combat climate change. [This is why we are heading toward a depression, since this act spent M2 capital.]

I reference M2 capital because a recent analysis by Money Fool identified that the US Dollar was contracting within the United States. M2 capital is what the Federal Government reserves for banks and lending institutions to fuel loans. Every loan, from housing mortgages to pay-day lending institutions, is not funded by or protected via IDIC by M1 capital. M1 capital is the money you have in your bank, from your paycheck, and is circulated cash. M2 funds, when they restrict because the Government does not have the money to back these loans, are a prime indicator of the economic health of a country. There is a finite amount of money here, it cannot simply be "printed", as it's pinned to available money generated from GDP. When the US Government under Biden spent this money to pay down foreign debt when our country's credit rating dropped from AAA to AA, to raise it back up again, they made a serious mistake and it resulted in explosive inflation. While the stock market is in bullish territory, companies and individuals finance these through M1 capital. When M2 restricts, the internal value of the dollar diminishes. What cost $1 dollar yesterday costs $2 today, etc. The Government at a point would need to revalue the dollar, which will undeniably send the economy into a depression.

Those policies notwithstanding [This is a placation because the writer knows it's theoretical as to what they wrote], Trump has put more emphasis on new proposals aimed at working- and middle class Americans: exempting earned tips, Social Security wages and overtime wages from income taxes. [Finally, the Truth, supporting everything I just said.] It’s noteworthy, however, that his proposal on tips, depending on how Congress might write it, could give a back-door tax break to top wage earners by allowing them to reclassify some of their pay as tip income — a prospect that at its most extreme could see hedge-fund managers or top-flight attorneys taking advantage of a policy that Trump frames as being designed for restaurant servers, bartenders and other service workers. [This is unsupported by any information and is just a flight of fancy to bolster the negative opinions of the writer.]

Tariffs and trade

Trump’s posture on international trade is to distrust world markets as harmful to American interests. [Duh? Iran, Russia, China...] He proposes tariffs of 10% to 20% on foreign goods — and in some speeches has mentioned even higher percentages. [Reinforcing "Duh..."] He promises to reinstitute an August 2020 executive order requiring that the Food and Drug Administration buy “essential” medications only from U.S. companies. [To reduce the prices of medicines while increasing FDA oversight and corporate accountability.] He pledges to block purchases of “any vital infrastructure” in the U.S. by Chinese buyers. [How is this a negative when China wound up buying square miles of land next to a sensitive United States military base in Michigan? Note that Chinese businessmen did exactly this in other countries claiming it was for business and then these locations were militarized by Chinese military forces setting up listening posts and forward operating bases. Go look, it's been in the news of various countries in South America and Cuba.]

DEI, LGBTQ and civil rights

Trump has called for rolling back societal emphasis on diversity and for legal protections for LGBTQ citizens. Trump has called for ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs in government institutions, using federal funding as leverage.

Because they don't work and create a pseudo-Government within companies that is enforced by quasi-official United States Gestapo enforcing unwritten laws.

On transgender rights, Trump promises generally to end “boys in girls’ sports,” a practice he insists, without evidence [There's evidence. It's called SCIENCE!], is widespread. But his policies go well beyond standard applause lines from his rally speeches. Among other ideas, Trump would roll back the Biden administration’s policy of extending Title IX civil rights protections to transgender students [Because Title IX has clear definitions and the Executive Branch illegally made this change, as only Congress can create, change, or repeal laws.], and he would ask Congress to require that only two genders can be recognized at birth. [Based on Science.]

Regulation, federal bureaucracy and presidential power

The president-elect seeks to reduce the role of federal bureaucrats and regulations across economic sectors. [The Executive Branch under Biden enforced rules that violate US Law or are not granted the powers to do so, such as banning Citizens from purchasing Gas appliances or non-electric vehicles. Kamala even said she would dictate prices of all products people can buy, which when you think about it, is pretty fucking Draconian.] Trump frames all regulatory cuts as an economic magic wand. [This is conjecture and opinion, not fact. Fact indicates that these cuts are logical and have been done before to great success, and also have backfired with great failure when done incorrectly or blindly.] He pledges precipitous drops in U.S. households’ utility bills by removing obstacles to fossil fuel production, including opening all federal lands for exploration — even though U.S. energy production is already at record highs.

U.S. energy production is not at record highs, this is incorrect. The United States recently stated there's insufficient power in the grid to support the growing nation. It was highlighted in many news agencies that AI and Crypto are partly responsible, but also the shuttering of nuclear and fossil fueled power plants in favor for unreliable green energy plants resulted in a significant reduction of available power. Additionally, the electrical grid is on the verge of collapse due to poorly maintained and ancient power lines such as the case in California. Green and liberal laws have made it difficult to impossible for energy providers to do anything without a bureaucracy blocking them because one squirrel lives in a tree somewhere in miles of the work to be done. However, they'll happily invade a private residence with military force, in violation of the 4th and 14th Amendments to murder the squirrel if it resides in a house.

Trump promises to unleash housing construction by cutting regulations — though most construction rules come from state and local government. [This is due to a patchwork of laws across the United States enacted by Democrats abusing the 14th Amendment like Epstein.] He also says he would end “frivolous litigation from the environmental extremists.” [Good.]

The approach would in many ways strengthen executive branch influence. That power would come more directly from the White House. [This is a flight of fancy and ignorant, as he's asking Congress to do the work they're supposed to. Certain powers already reside with the White House in terms of these rules, which were never laws but were recommendations to States for their laws.]

He would make it easier to fire federal workers by classifying thousands of them as being outside civil service protections. [He's talking about Contractors, let's be clear about this and not lie to people.] That could weaken the government’s power to enforce statutes and rules by reducing the number of employees engaging in the work and, potentially, impose a chilling effect on those who remain.

This is fearmongering and a lie. The Government under Democrats must publicly report the pay of any Government worker, except for Contractors. Contractors are not empowered to the same authority as Government officials. Equally, Government officials must be appointed or elected, Contractors do not. Contractors for the Government are many and their companies or themselves are very highly paid far more than Government officials. Reducing them will reduce the tax burden on tax paying citizens, of which illegal immigrants are not. Full circle here.

Trump also claims that presidents have exclusive power to control federal spending even after Congress has appropriated money. Trump argues that lawmakers’ budget actions “set a ceiling” on spending but not a floor — meaning the president’s constitutional duty to “faithfully execute the laws” includes discretion on whether to spend the money. This interpretation could set up a court battle with Congress.

TRUE FACT! For monies provided to the Executive Branch, the President is ultimately responsible for the Federal Budget after Congress appropriates the funds during the Budgetary Sessions. Go look, it's in the Constitution. This is not a court battle with Congress, this person doesn't know what the fuck they're talking about.

As a candidate, he also suggested that the Federal Reserve, an independent entity that sets interest rates, should be subject to more presidential power. Though he has not offered details, any such move would represent a momentous change to how the U.S. economic and monetary systems work.

The Federal Reserve is a separate entity... under the Executive Branch. However, he never said it should be subject to more Presidential power, he said it should be subject to Presidential oversight for greater accountability. The President already can set forth changes to the interest rate, but the Reserve doesn't have to abide by it.

Education

The federal Department of Education would be targeted for elimination in a second Trump administration. [This is completely false, and a full bald-faced lie.]That does not mean that Trump wants Washington out of classrooms. He still proposes, among other maneuvers, using federal funding as leverage to pressure K-12 school systems to abolish tenure and adopt merit pay for teachers and to scrap diversity programs at all levels of education. [Good. It's been done before under Regan, and tenure is abused by radicalized (near terroristic) educators creating minions instead of workers.] He calls for pulling federal funding “for any school or program pushing Critical Race Theory, gender ideology, or other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children.”

CRT is not an official US Education supported curriculum. It's called a Theory because it has no supporting facts, is not proven, and is simply ignorant of actual history. Many curriculums are in place at public schools which are not founded in science, lacking evidence of their efficacy, and often times run counter to historical fact.

In higher education, Trump proposes taking over accreditation processes for colleges, a move he describes as his “secret weapon” against the “Marxist Maniacs and lunatics” he says control higher education. Trump takes aim at higher education endowments, saying he will collect “billions and billions of dollars” from schools via “taxing, fining and suing excessively large private university endowments” at schools that do not comply with his edicts. That almost certainly would end up in protracted legal fights.

FUCKING FINALLY! The Federal Government under the DOE should be responsible for ensuring these schools are conforming to regulations. However, the commentary is used to negate the real statement here. Many of these private universities have been illicitly spending endowments without oversight on everything except the students they're there to teach. That's why it's so fucking expensive to go to college, allowing only the elite few who can to do so successfully whilst indebting students for life. There's no protracted legal fights here, laws need to be considered. Trump is asking Congress to look into this.

As in other policy areas, Trump isn’t actually proposing limiting federal power in higher education but strengthening it. [The author just invalidated their entire argument in this one sentence.] He calls for redirecting the confiscated endowment money into an online “American Academy” offering college credentials to all Americans without a tuition charges. “It will be strictly non-political, and there will be no wokeness or jihadism allowed—none of that’s going to be allowed,” Trump said on Nov. 1, 2023.

Free online college education for everyone by taking from the rich kids and giving to the poor kids? I'm not seeing the problem here.

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid

Trump insists he would protect Social Security and Medicare, popular programs geared toward older Americans and among the biggest pieces of the federal spending pie each year. There are questions about how his proposal not to tax tip and overtime wages might affect Social Security and Medicare. [This is circular logic intended to confuse the reader.] If such plans eventually involved only income taxes, the entitlement programs would not be affected. But exempting those wages from payroll taxes would reduce the funding stream for Social Security and Medicare outlays. [This is intentionally misleading: Author has taken their earlier argument against the fantasy that tips would become taxable by act of Congress and reversed it to hypocritically prop up this argument.] Trump has talked little about Medicaid but his first administration, in general, defaulted to approving state requests for waivers of various federal rules and it broadly endorsed state-level work requirements for recipients. [Again, what's the problem?]

Affordable Care Act and Health Care

As he has since 2015, Trump calls for repealing the Affordable Care Act and its subsidized health insurance marketplaces. [ACA increased the cost of privatized health insurance provided by employers, who were now legally required to pass the burden on to employees in order for the ACA to subsidize itself. Most working Americans get their benefits from their employers by State and Federal Laws, so the unworking or unsupported and Elderly can get Medicaid, but the ACA added another layer to this in support of health insurance companies raking in billions in profits.] But he still has not proposed a replacement: [Medicaid & Medicare exist, we now have three different insurance programs spending taxpayer monies doing the same fucking thing.] In a September debate, he insisted he had the “concepts of a plan.” In the latter stages of the campaign, Trump played up his alliance with former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime critic of vaccines and of pesticides used in U.S. agriculture. Trump repeatedly told rally crowds that he would put Kennedy in charge of “making America healthy again.” [This is just colorization to present a negative in support of the tone of the opinionated article.]

Climate and energy

Trump, who claims falsely that climate change is a “hoax,” [Because it is, as there is equal scientific facts indicating that while Humans have had an impact on the climate, it is not the only impact as other factors have greater impacts as noted historically, and various methods in support of climate change use manipulated data to support their models. When the same data is used without manipulation, through use of statistical extrapolation to fill in blanks, climate change by Humans almost disappears. Go look, it's online and from notable scientific forums. However, climate change = money.] blasts Biden-era spending on cleaner energy designed to reduce U.S. reliance on fossil fuels. He proposes an energy policy – and transportation infrastructure spending – anchored to fossil fuels: roads, bridges and combustion-engine vehicles. “Drill, baby, drill!” was a regular chant at Trump rallies. Trump says he does not oppose electric vehicles but promises to end all Biden incentives to encourage EV market development. Trump also pledges to roll back Biden-era fuel efficiency standards. [This is good for many reasons, reducing inflation quickly is one of them.]

Workers’ rights

Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance framed their ticket as favoring America’s workers. But Trump could make it harder for workers to unionize. [This is false, Union leaders came out in vocal support for Trump, but also cited their willingness to move away from partisan politics to favor only the candidate that best meets their workers' needs.] In discussing auto workers, Trump focused almost exclusively on Biden’s push toward electric vehicles. When he mentioned unions, it was often to lump “the union bosses and CEOs” together as complicit in “this disastrous electric car scheme.” [This is true, but more investigations are needed.] In an Oct. 23, 2023, statement, Trump said of United Auto Workers, “I’m telling you, you shouldn’t pay those dues.” [This statement is presented out of context to bolster a weak argument. Go look.]

National defense and America’s role in the world

Trump’s rhetoric and policy approach in world affairs is more isolationist diplomatically, non-interventionist militarily and protectionist economically than the U.S. has been since World War II.

This is not accurately presented: Since WWII, the United States has stepped into one problem after the next, expending American lives needlessly and involving ourselves in political wars we should not be involved in. It's not isolationist to block China, Russia and Iran. It would be economically viable to restrict our involvement in overseas crises that doesn't benefit the United States in any meaningful way.

But the details are more complicated. He pledges expansion of the military [Military equipment procurement], promises to protect Pentagon spending from austerity efforts and proposes a new missile defense shield — an old idea from the Reagan era during the Cold War. [We have a modern missile defense shield, it is continuously upgraded. It's not an old idea, we have them today.] Trump insists he can end Russia’s war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war, without explaining how. [He has, and prior to Biden, there was peace based on his plans. This is either statement by ignorance, or intentionally lying via omission.] Trump summarizes his approach through another Reagan phrase: “peace through strength.” But he remains critical of NATO and top U.S. military brass. “I don’t consider them leaders,” Trump said of Pentagon officials that Americans “see on television.” He repeatedly praised authoritarians like Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Russia’s Vladimir Putin. [This is false representation. He hasn't praised them. He said he respects them, which is simply diplomatic to offer an olive branch. This is intended to dissuade and diminish the opinion of the reader regarding President Trump, rather than stick to facts.]

In short, I approve of Regan's phrase because...

KANE LIVES!

[a-god-in-ruins-rises]

What will it take to save the United States?

nurture her, then unleash her. like our founding fathers did. we have neglected her.

not sure how specific/deep you want me to get but i'll give you some ideas: we need to reshore manufacturing (specifically high-tech manufacturing. china can keep making plastic children's toys and shit (actually we should near-shore that shit to latin america) but robotics, batteries, automobiles, drones, shipbuilding, etc, need to be built in america). do this with a combination of tariffs and subsidies.

we need civil service reform. i love bureaucracy. i love the civil service. but it's become bloated and stagnant and too unruly. it needs to be reformed, purged, and revitalized.

secure the border and reform immigration to close asylum loopholes.

tax reform. reduce or abolish income tax. add vat and lvt. basic income or negative income tax or something along those lines.

streamline regulation. i love the state. and i love state intervention. but again, regulations have become unwieldy and outdated. keep the necessary shit, get rid of the bloat.

establish my dream agency -- OPUS. cultivate and preserve american culture and way of life. foster a new american renaissance. a new great awakening. a new wave of national identity and patriotism and unification. sounds nebulous but i believe there are concrete steps to this end.

reform education. again, not sure how in depth you want to get. but i think it's overdue.

i could keep going but i gotta start dinner.

[eretzyisrael]

By  Luke Rosiak

The U.S. immigration enforcement agency hired a former spokeswoman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and put her in a position to determine who gets to come into the country as an immigrant or “asylum seeker.” Now the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officer is repeatedly posting pictures of Hamas terrorists parachuting in with guns and writing, “F*** Israel and any Jew who supports Israel,” a Daily Wire investigation found.

Nejwa Ali worked in 2016 and 2017 as a public affairs officer for the Palestinian Delegation to the U.S., which according to its own website, served as the “PLO office in D.C.” That office was expelled from the country by the Trump administration, but Ali landed on her feet, according to a screenshot of her LinkedIn profile, securing a job at DHS as an “Asylum Officer,” where she was tasked with “applying immigration laws and regulations to asylum applications.”

This January, she moved over to being an Adjudication Officer for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS). People with that job, according to the agency, “analyze new or amended legislation and policy, prepare written reports of findings, and review and make determinations on cases for immigration benefits.”

Though Ali’s job at DHS included vetting people to make sure they were not a threat to the country before letting them in, it’s not clear that anyone from the agency vetted her. That her primary allegiance was to the Palestinians, not the United States, was evident from her social media profiles, where she posts as “Falastine Mi Amor.”

She has posted extremist rhetoric continuously to Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for years — rhetoric that intensified this month as Palestinian terrorists murdered over 1,000 Jews on October 7 and Ali cheered. “F*** Israel, the government, and its military. Are you ready for your downfall?” she wrote on Instagram after the attacks.

According to her social media profiles — which say she is “American born, Palestinian @ heart” — Ali is from Dearborn, Michigan, a hotbed of unassimilated immigrants where thousands reportedly took to the streets in support of the Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel.

Ali has made several posts glorifying the terrorist attacks on Israel, including one depicting armed terrorists paragliding into the Jewish state with the caption, “Free PALESTINE.”

[alenashautsovalawoffices2]

The Role of Russian Immigration Attorneys in Navigating Complex Cases

There's no denying that navigating the complexities of U.S. immigration law can be a daunting task, especially for those who are not familiar with the system. As you consider immigrating to the United States, you will likely encounter a myriad of rules, regulations, and forms that can be overwhelming. This is where Russian immigration attorneys come in - to guide you through the process and help you achieve your goals.

As you research into the world of U.S. immigration law, you will quickly discover that it is a complex and constantly evolving field. With so many different types of visas, permits, and applications, it can be difficult to know where to start. Russian immigration attorneys are well-versed in the intricacies of U.S. immigration law and can help you make sense of it all. They can address language barriers that may be hindering your progress, and provide you with expert advice on how to proceed with your case. Whether you are seeking to reunite with family members, secure employment, or seek asylum, Russian immigration attorneys have the expertise to handle even the most complex cases.

Pertaining to choosing the right Russian immigration attorney, you want to make sure that you are working with someone who has the expertise and experience to handle your case. You should look for an attorney who has a proven track record of success in cases similar to yours, and who is well-versed in the latest developments in U.S. immigration law. With the right attorney by your side, you can feel confident that your case is in good hands. Your attorney will work tirelessly to ensure that your rights are protected and that you achieve the best possible outcome.

If you are in need of a Russian immigration attorney, you should not hesitate to contact us today via our website. At Alena Shautsova Law Offices, our team of experienced attorneys is dedicated to providing you with the highest level of service and expertise. We understand that every case is unique, and we will work closely with you to develop a personalized strategy that meets your needs. Located at 2908A Emmons Ave, Brooklyn, NY 11235, United States, you can find us here and take the first step towards achieving your immigration goals.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Camilo Montoya-Galvez at CBS News:

The Trump administration is considering a regulation that would prevent most asylum-seekers from getting work permits, potentially upending longstanding U.S. immigration policy, two Department of Homeland Security officials told CBS News. A proposal by officials at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services would amount to an indefinite pause on the U.S. government's decades-old policy of allowing migrants with pending asylum claims to work in the country lawfully while their cases are decided, the DHS officials said, requesting anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The proposed changes — which have not been previously reported — would add yet another layer to President Trump's government-wide immigration crackdown, targeting a massively backlogged asylum system that his top aides have argued is being systematically exploited by economic migrants. But a halt to work permits for asylum-seekers would also trigger concerns among advocates that it could prevent migrants from supporting themselves and their families, and drive them to work illegally in the underground economy. Since the 1990s, U.S. law has allowed immigration officials to grant work permits to asylum applicants if their cases have been pending for at least 180 days. Generally speaking, that has allowed asylum applicants to request a work permit 150 days after they make their claim. Those eligible can be granted the permit after another 30 days. But a regulation under internal consideration by the Trump administration would suspend the issuance of new work permits to asylum-seekers until USCIS decides all asylum claims within an average of 180 days, the DHS officials said.

That timeframe would be exceedingly difficult to meet in the near future, given massive case backlogs and operational constraints. Last year, for example, a federal government watchdog found that over 77% of the asylum applications before USCIS had been pending for beyond 180 days. Nearly 40% of applications remained unresolved after two years. Even if the 180-day processing average is reached, the proposal would require asylum-seekers to wait one year until after they file their application — instead of six months — to be eligible for a work permit, the DHS officials said.

[...] Asylum can be granted to foreigners on U.S. soil who prove they are fleeing persecution due to their nationality, race, religion, political views or membership in a social group. While factors like nationality and legal representation play a key role, many applicants do not ultimately meet the high legal threshold to win asylum, government figures show.

The Trump Regime’s anti-immigrant and anti-refugee agenda is a farce, as they seek to craft a rule making the acquisition of work permits more cumbersome for asylum seekers.

[spandexinspace]

In regards to EarthGov like having the ability to deport Querl BACK to Colu because they feel like he is a security threat due to Lyle refusing to end his relationship with him makes me literally see shrimp colors. Do you think being a Legionnaire might somehow give ANY of them some sort of immunity? Or would 'local government laws' (EarthGov) thus bypass any U.P. regulation regarding the Legionnaire's and their otherwise politically neutral state? If that makes sense.

(Disclaimer, not an expert the factual evidence I base my ideas on might just be wrong.)

It seems like most real governments have visa exemptions for humanitarian organisations or work with them to allow them inside the country without going through the normal channels. But this also seems to mean that they can often kick them out of the country as they see fit, or at least strongly imply that they really ought to leave right now.

On the other hand, it seems like UN Peacekeepers are allowed to enter countries as mandated by the UN, usually with the consent of the host country but sometimes without.

We don't quite know where the Legion falls on this scale, but I would guess they're closer to the peacekeepers than a humanitarian organisation. Despite seemingly claiming to be an independent and politically neutral organisation they have such close ties to the UP that it's almost impossible to separate them from each other, and their activities would probably be considered illegal if the UP didn't endorse them. They have also parked their HQ either on or very close to Earth, which makes that relationship important to uphold and probably means Earth has more of an influence over them than any other planet in the UP. Also, for out of universe reasons the UP appears to be particularly Earth-centric, so it's probably safe to assume that Earth has more of an influence over them than most planets. Which becomes even more of an issue if Earth has issues with xenophobia.

I think the UP would be willing to stretch their limits quite far to keep the Legion intact and functional, even going so far as to offer Earth other boons in order to keep them from acting out, but much like the UN is an umbrella organisation without much actual power, the UP probably mostly relies on strongly worded suggestions. Their role isn't really to control the minute details of any planet's policies as long as those policies aren't actively and acutely harmful. Especially not if Earth can come up with some half-way believable criminal act to accuse the Legionnaire in question of, which in Querl's case is so easy that it's happened before.

The UP could maybe decide to convince the Legion to move out of Earth space and settles somewhere else, which would of course lessen Earth's influence over them, but I'm not sure they'd pull something so drastic for just one member.

However, it feels like Querl in particular has a decent chance of being able to either seek asylum or obtain a visa from another planet. There are probably a few places that'll put up with him if they think he could be willing to help them in the future. And if nothing else he can probably bribe his way onto Rimbor. Or Sklaria.

[mariacallous]

New regulations on the screening of non-EU nationals at the bloc’s external borders, which come into force this week, could have major implications for migrants and asylum seekers’ privacy rights, campaigners warn.

Ozan Mirkan Balpetek, Advocacy and Communications Coordinator for Legal Centre Lesvos, an island in Greece on the so-called Balkan Route for migrants seeking to reach Western Europe, says the new pact “will significantly expand the Eurodac database [European Asylum Dactyloscopy Database], creating overlaps with other databases, such as international criminal records accessible to police forces”.

“Specific provisions of the pact directly undermine GDPR regulations that protect personal data from being improperly processed,” Balpetek told BIRN. “The pact only expands existing rights violations, including data breaches. Consequently, information shared by asylum seekers can be used against them during the asylum process, potentially leading to further criminalization of racialized communities,” he added.

The European Council confirmed the deal in May, and it should start being implemented in June 2026.

This legislation sets out new procedures for managing the arrival of irregular migrants, processing asylum applications, determining the EU country responsible for these applications, and devising strategies to handle migration crises.

The pact promises a “robust” screening at the borders to differentiate between those people deemed in need of international protection and those who are not.

The screening and border procedures will mandate extensive data collection and automatic exchanges, resulting in a regime of mass surveillance of migrants. Reforms to the Eurodac Regulation will mandate the systematic collection of migrants’ biometric data, now including facial images, which will be retained in databases for up to 10 years. The reform also lowers the thresholder for storing data in the system to the age of six.

Amnesty International in Greece said the new regulation “will set back European asylum law for decades to come”.

“These proposals come hand in hand with mounting efforts to shift responsibility for refugee protection and border control to countries outside of the EU – such as recent deals with Tunisia, Egypt, and Mauritania – or attempts to externalize the processing of asylum claims to Albania,” the human rights organisation told BIRN.

“These practices risk trapping people in states where their human rights will be in danger, render the EU complicit in the abuses that may follow, and compromises Europe’s ability to uphold human rights beyond the bloc,” it added.

NGOs working with people in need have been warning for months that the pact will systematically violate fundamental principles, resulting in a proliferation of rights violations in Europe.

Jesuit Refugee Services, including its arm in Croatia, said in April in a joint statement that it “cannot support a system that will enable the systematic detention of thousands of people, including children, at the EU’s external borders.

“The proposed legislation will exponentially increase human suffering while offering no real solutions to current system deficiencies,” JRS said.

Despite criticism, the European Parliament adopted the regulation in April.

Individuals who do not meet the entry requirements will be registered and undergo identification, security, and health checks. These checks are to be completed within seven days at the EU’s external borders and within three days for those apprehended within the EU.

Under the new system, EU member states can either accept a minimum of 30,000 asylum applicants annually or contribute at least 20,000 euros per asylum applicant to a joint EU fund.

After screening, individuals will be swiftly directed into one of three procedures: Border Procedures, Asylum Procedures, or Returns Procedures.

[mightyflamethrower]

In 2021, Joe Biden opened wide an inherited, secure southern border that had finally stopped mass illegal immigration.

When he overturned Donald Trump’s efforts, a planned flood of over 8 million illegal immigrants entered the U.S.

Almost all arrived without background checks, health screening, or vaccination certificates—but with massive needs for free housing, education, healthcare, and food entitlements and subsidies.

For four years, Donald Trump battled the courts, his Democratic opposition, and the open-border establishments within his own party to ensure legal-only immigration. Somehow, he rebuilt some of the old porous border fence. He had begun to build his long-promised new wall to the Gulf of Mexico. He had ended Obama-era catch-and-release.

Would-be refugees had to apply for asylum in their home country. Trump leveraged Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to police his own border and stop cynically transiting millions of illegal aliens into the U.S.

There was general Democratic Party opposition to all of Trump’s measures, both through Congress and via the courts.

For the last three years of Biden’s mass influx, the left has applauded open borders. That is, until late last year, when overwhelmed southern border state governors began busing and flying illegal immigrants en masse to northern sanctuary-city jurisdictions.

For years, these sanctuary zones had preened their liberality about open borders. They smeared as “racists” and “xenophobes” any who insisted on legal-only immigration.

But now they were subject to the real-life ramifications of their own destructive ideologies.

Major blue-state cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., became outraged that they were inundated with tens of thousands of immigrants, all without legality, veritable identification, or background checks.

Some proved violent. Others crowded out scarce resources essential to millions of inner-city poor.

The liberal architects of illegal immigration are usually rich and powerful enough to be insulated from the consequences of their utopian policies.

But not so their poor or minority constituents. They deal first-hand with spiking crime, appropriation of their parks and civic centers, and restricted access to now overwhelmed social services.

So the once open-border Democrat Party and Joe Biden are in a quandary. They now fear mass defections of core Latino and Black voters in an election year.

But how can they square the circle of insisting on open borders with the need to appear to their own voters as determined to close them?

We saw the absurd answer this week. Shameless Democrats tried to enlist naïve and foolish Republicans to bail them out with a “comprehensive immigration bill.”

It was really designed to keep the border open while spending billions of dollars to facilitate more rapid and orderly transits—and more substantial welfare support for millions of illegals here and still to come.

Now Democrats, in lunatic fashion, claim that anyone who did not sign on to codify and regulate illegal immigration was responsible for their own deliberate open border policies in the first place!

To add insult to injury, they next sought to piggyback their toxic immigration bill onto massive aid for Israel and Ukraine. It was a transparent effort to blame any Republicans for harming Israel and aiding Putin, should they not sign on to a more efficient open border.

The real agendas of the bill’s supporters were absolutely no return to Trump’s legal-only immigration and a secure border.

That simple solution requires no new legislation and almost no new spending. But it does imply acknowledgement that the hated Trump had solved the problem executively—and that admission is apparently taboo.

Finally, public outrage from the left and conservative anger at foolish and naïve Republican enablers stopped the bill.

Still, it remains somewhat unclear why Biden and his Homeland Security chief, Alejandro Mayorkas, destroyed what Trump had achieved. Why would they ensure such misery for both American hosts and millions of illegal immigrants?

Did they want new long-term constituents, given that their neo-socialist agendas cannot win over a majority of current Americans?

Is importing millions of the poorest and most in need on the planet a way to ensure a still larger Great Society of entitlements and, with it, higher taxes on the “filthy rich?”

Do they assume that America’s increasingly non-Election-Day balloting ensures far less authentication and rejection of mail-in ballots, and thus it will be relatively easy for non-citizens to vote?

Many, left and right, make no effort to hide their desire for cheap imported labor—even though the current labor participation rate is only 62 percent of the potential American workforce.

Finally, one might expect this artifice from the left that is wedded to open borders.

But why some establishment Republicans aided and abetted these disingenuous efforts is yet another reminder why the doctrinaire Republican Party had to be reinvented by Donald Trump.