BILLS INTRODUCED AND CONSIDERED
LEGISLATIVE FLOOR CALENDAR
UPCOMING HEARINGS AND MARKUPS
THEMES IN WASHINGTON THIS WEEK
GOVERNMENT REPORTS
SPOTLIGHT ON NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM RESOURCES
BILLS INTRODUCED AND CONSIDERED
There were no immigration-related bills introduced or considered in Congress on the week of Monday, November 5, 2018.
LEGISLATIVE FLOOR CALENDAR
The U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives will be in session from Tuesday, November 13, 2018 to Friday, November 16, 2018.
UPCOMING HEARINGS AND MARKUPS
Nomination of Ronald D. Vitiello to be Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Date: Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. (Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee)
Location: 342 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Witness:
Ronald Vitiello, Nominee to be Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
THEMES IN WASHINGTON THIS WEEK
Federal
Democrats Win the House, Republicans Hold Senate; Border Wall Funding and Immigration Oversight Likely on the Agenda
The midterm elections on November 6 concluded in victory for Democrats in the House of Representatives, while Republicans appeared to strengthen their position in the Senate.
The election followed a campaign that featured distortions and anti-immigrant rhetoric on immigration, including a video produced by the White House that various news organizations called “racist” and refused to air. Immigration advocates called the election a “stunning rebuke for the leaders of the hardline, anti-immigrant movement,” with a number of high-profile anti-immigration candidates losing their bids for public office.
Following the election, President Trump said he hopes to work with Congress to fully fund a wall along the Southern border and expressed openness to “really do something having to do with DACA” if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the administration’s action to end DACA. Yet, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi – the likely Speaker of the House in the next Congress – asked this week, “Why would we compromise on the wall now?” and noted that the election would likely provide Democrats with more leverage. At the same time, the possibility of a partial government shutdown during the lame duck session remains, with government funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other departments set to expire on December 7. President Trump and some congressional Republicans reportedly think that next month’s budget fight could be their last opportunity to obtain funding for the border wall.
As for the next Congress, the new Democratic majority in the House is expected to provide oversight on a number of the Trump administration’s immigration policies. Oversight investigations could look into family separations at the border, the rescission of DACA and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for certain countries, and the administration’s deportation priorities. The Democratic majority in the House could also counter the administration’s request for higher spending for immigration enforcement and detention.
Trump Signs Proclamation Limiting Certain Migrants from Seeking Asylum
President Trump signed a proclamation on November 9 limiting access to asylum for migrants who crossed the U.S. border between ports of entry without proper documentation. The measure, which is aimed at targeting asylum seekers traveling with the Central American caravan, will be in effect for 90 days unless the U.S. receives permission to remove the affected immigrants to Mexico. The policy already faces a legal challenge, since U.S. law and international treaties allow anyone in the U.S. to request asylum, regardless of how and where they crossed the border. While the administration claims the policy is meant to streamline the asylum process, immigration rights advocates believe it is another step in President Trump’s attempts to restrict immigration into the U.S.
In conjunction with the proclamation, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and DHS issued a joint interim final regulation making anyone who crosses the U.S. border between ports of entry ineligible to apply for asylum in an affirmative process, in contradiction to what is allowed by current U.S. immigration policies. Although such individuals will be allowed to apply for asylum defensively, they will have to prove “reasonable fear,” a higher standard of evidence showing they face persecution in their home countries. The rule was issued as a fast-track regulation that comes into effect immediately, a procedure used in cases of emergencies and other urgent circumstances. The administration will be gathering public comments on the rule until January 8, 2019.
Military to Deploy Up to 8,000 Troops to the Southern Border; Expected to Cost More than $200 Million
The Pentagon announced on November 5 that the number of U.S. troops deployed to the Southern border to support U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will reach up to 8,000, up from an estimate of 5,200 days earlier. At the same time, the Pentagon estimates that the cost of the deployment, including National Guard troops that have been there since this spring, will total between $200 and $300 million by the end of 2018, and could increase significantly if the deployment continues into 2019.
The Pentagon said the recent increases in the number of troops expected to be deployed, up from the 800 that were originally proposed, are based on requests from DHS. By the morning of November 6, Pentagon had deployed about 5,000 troops in three states. Of those, 2,700 are in Texas, 1,200 in Arizona, and 1,100 in California. The troops are performing tasks such as logistics and engineering support, including laying razor wire along the border. The Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff said that the troops will not be “involved in the actual mission of denying people entry to the United States” and that “there is no plan for soldiers to come in contact with immigrants.” The Pentagon reportedly declined a request from DHS to use the military to construct facilities to detain migrants.
Former military officials expressed concern that President Trump’s decision to send troops to the Southern border is “wasteful” and uses the military as a political tool. Military documents reportedly show that only one-fifth of the 7,000 Central American migrants traveling by foot to the U.S. as part of a caravan, many of them to request asylum, will actually complete the journey, contrary to the Trump administration’s argument that the caravan represents an “invasion.”
USCIS to Begin Issuing Notices to Appear for Humanitarian Applications
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it will begin to implement the updated guidance on issuing Notices to Appear (NTAs) on November 19 for humanitarian applications. Under the new policy, immigrants will receive an NTA – the first step in starting removal proceedings – if they apply for any modification of status or for a visa and are denied, and there is evidence of fraud, misuse of public benefits, or the applicant no longer holds a valid immigration status, among other reasons. The policy applies to several categories of humanitarian applications, including refugee and asylum petitions (Form I-730) when the beneficiary is in the U.S., U-visas for victims of qualifying criminal activity (Form I-918) and T-visas for victims of a severe form of human trafficking (Form I-914).
USCIS released the updated guidance on July 28 and began to implement it incrementally starting in early October. Previously, USCIS issued NTAs sparingly, usually only when the applicant had a criminal conviction.
Legal
Ninth Circuit Upholds Injunction Blocking Trump Administration from Ending DACA
On November 8, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s decision to stop the Trump administration from immediately ending Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit found that the administration’s decision to end DACA is likely based on a “misconceived view of the law” and subject to review by federal courts. One judge in the panel also stated in a concurring opinion that the plaintiffs reasonably alleged that the decision was motivated by racial animus, which warranted the court to stop the rescission. President Trump said on November 9 the Ninth Circuit’s decision is “good news,” because it means that the administration can “finally … get [the issue] to the Supreme Court.”
Earlier in the week, the Trump administration took the unusual step of asking the Supreme Court to bypass the Ninth Circuit and take up the case directly. The Trump administration had previously warned the Ninth Circuit that it would ask the Supreme Court to intervene if the appellate court did not issue a decision by October 31, stating that a ruling from the appellate court was necessary so that the government can petition the Supreme Court to consider the legal status of DACA during its current term.
Three federal district judges, including one in California, have separately issued nationwide injunctions requiring the government to continue to process DACA renewals while the cases make their way through the court system.
Supreme Court Allows Trial on Citizenship Question to Proceed
On November 2, the Supreme Court announced it would not delay an upcoming trial regarding the Department of Commerce’s decision to include a citizenship question in the 2020 U.S. Census. The court’s brief order did not provide details on the decision. However, the lawsuit in question, filed by New York and other states and localities, argues that the citizenship question was a calculated effort to discriminate against immigrants. It also argues that it would “fatally undermine” the accuracy of the census by raising fears among immigrant communities that government agencies would use the information to carry out immigration enforcement. At least six former census directors and a Census Bureau internal analyst have also argued the question would harm the census count.
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross initially stated before a congressional committee that the request to include the citizenship question came from the Justice Department, purportedly to enforce voting rights. E-mails later revealed that Ross initiated discussion on the citizenship question and Ross later admitted to discussing the question with former White House adviser Stephen Bannon. The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to delay the trial while a district court determines whether a review of Ross’ decision is confined to the administrative record.
At least five justices voted to refuse the Trump administration’s request to delay the trial, with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch in dissent. The trial began on November 5.
State and Local
Oregon Voters Overwhelmingly Uphold “Sanctuary” Law
On November 6, Oregon voters rejected a ballot initiative by an estimated 63 percent to 37 percent vote to repeal the state’s so-called sanctuary law. The initiative, Measure 105, would have repealed Oregon’s 1987 law that limits local law enforcement from using public resources to find or detain undocumented immigrants not suspected of a crime beyond those resources already required under federal law.
Measure 105 faced significant opposition from the business community, law enforcement, and elected officials. Opponents of Measure 105 noted that the 1987 “sanctuary” law, which passed with bipartisan support, helps foster trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement by allowing undocumented immigrants to report crimes in their communities without fear that local police could apprehend them because of their immigration status. Measure 105 opponents also highlighted research that shows undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. tend to commit crimes at lower rates than other individuals.
GOVERNMENT REPORTS
There were no immigration-related government reports published on the week of Monday, November 5, 2018.
SPOTLIGHT ON NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM RESOURCES
Comments on the DHS Public Charge Rule
Those wishing to make public comments on the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) proposed regulations that would redefine the meaning of the legal term “public charge” may do so through the National Immigration Forum’s Legislative Action Center. The proposed regulations would redefine “public charge” to reject immigrants applying for an immigrant visa (green card) or a temporary visa if they have previously accessed or are deemed likely to rely on certain forms of public assistance in the future.
Dreamer Advocacy Resources
This webpage includes resources to help advocate for a permanent solution for Dreamers, including talking points, data on the economic benefits of Dreamers, and summaries of key legislation pending in Congress.
Fact Sheet: U.S. Asylum Process
This fact sheet provides an overview of the U.S. asylum process, including how an individual can apply for asylum in the U.S., how long the asylum process takes and how many people acquire asylum each year.
* * *
*This Bulletin is not intended to be comprehensive. Please contact Christian Penichet-Paul, National Immigration Forum Policy and Advocacy Associate, with comments and suggestions of additional items to be included. Christian can be reached at cpenichetpaul@immigrationforum.org. Thank you.