Immigration Politics Georgia

looking for a better life • news and pro-enforcement opinion

Search Results for: court

Washington Post: Border Rush May Hit 100,000 Migrants in March

By

Image: Dustin Inman Society

“Martinez said he paid 30,000 Guatemalan quetzals, about $2,500, to a “coyote” smuggling guide. It was a cheap rate, but it meant that he and his son traveled through Mexico in trucks, like cargo.

Across rural Guatemala, Martinez said, word has spread that those who travel with a child can expect to be released from U.S. custody. Smugglers were offering two-for-one pricing, knowing they just needed to deliver clients to the border — not across it — for an easy surrender to U.S. agents.”

Breitbart, today:

Washington Post: Border Rush May Hit 100,000 Migrants in March

“The number of migrants taken into custody last year jumped 39 percent from February to March, and a similar increase this month would push levels to 100,000 detentions or more,” the Washington Post reported March 4. The paper continued:

U.S. court restrictions on the government’s ability to keep children in immigration jails — and the sheer volume of people arriving — have left Homeland Security agencies [on the border] defaulting increasingly to the overflow model Trump deplores as “catch-and-release.” Read the rest here.

 

How many illegal aliens in Georgia? Where does Georgia rank in it’s population of illegal aliens? DHS Population Estimates

By

Estimates of the Illegal Alien Population Residing in the United States: January 2015 (latest official figures)

Bryan Baker

DEFINITIONS

Legal Residents

The legally resident immigrant population as defined for these estimates includes persons granted lawful permanent residence, persons granted asylum, persons admitted as refugees, and persons admitted as nonimmigrants under classes of admission associated with residence (e.g., students and temporary workers, as opposed to tourists) and with authorized periods of admission ending after January 1, 2015.

Illegal Alien Residents

The resident illegal alien population is defined as all foreign- born non-citizens who are not legal residents (see above). Most illegal aliens either entered the United States without

  1. 1  The Department of Homeland Security refers to foreign-born non-citizens unlawfully present in the United States as “illegal aliens.” Previous versions of this report used the term “unauthorized immigrants” to refer to this population.
  2. 2  Previous editions of this report are available at:https://www.dhs.gov/immigration-statistics.
  3. 3  The estimates for Jan. 2013 and Jan. 2014 have been revised; see Appendix 2 for details and updated estimates.

inspection or were admitted temporarily and remained past the date they were required to depart. Persons who are beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status (TPS), Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) or other forms of prosecutorial discretion, or who are residing in the United States while awaiting removal proceedings in immigration court are included among the illegal alien population estimates. Illegal aliens applying for adjustment to LPR status under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) are considered to be part of the resident illegal alien population until they have been granted lawful permanent residence. Here.

Fast Fact: 900,000 illegal alien fugitives under orders of removal (deportation) are loose on the streets of the United States

By

Image: Rightwingwatch
  • Immigration detention is civil and for the purpose of ensuring appearance of aliens at removal proceedings, and for the actual removal itself.
  • Congress recognizes both qualitative and quantitative problems associated with illegal immigration in the processes and detention mechanisms it directs.
  • Claims of asylum and fear of return are a major loophole that result in release of aliens who then disappear.
  • Lack of detention space to hold aliens also contributes to the collapse of immigration and border controls, resulting in a system of “catch-and-release” that encourages more aliens to attempt to enter illegally or to overstay their visas.
  • Immigration and border security controls are at a crisis point, due to dismaying case backlogs currently clogging the immigration courts (more than 750,000 cases) and the number of fugitives (900,000) under orders of removal who are loose on the streets of the United States.
  • Migrant caravans may force both legislators and the administration to take effective remedial action to close legal loopholes and to declare a mass immigration emergency to ensure continued control of our external border(s). Here.

Opinion: IERB dismissed my complaints without allowing presentation of any evidence – Plyler v Doe does not apply to public benefits for parents of illegal aliens

By

Image: Bensbiltong.com

 

IERB complaints: responses to responses

 

1) The 1982 SCOTUS Plyler v Doe decision made us do it:

 

Plyler v. Doe has essentially guaranteed a right to pursue a high school diploma to all students (children) regardless of immigration status. It applies to K-12 education.

 

An easy to read and accurate synopsis: Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down both a state statute denying funding for education to undocumented immigrant children and a municipal school district’s attempt to charge undocumented immigrants an annual $1,000 tuition fee for each undocumented student to compensate for the lost state funding.[1] The Court found that any state restriction imposed on the rights afforded to children based on their status as immigrants must be examined under an intermediate scrutiny standard to determine whether it furthers a “substantial” government interest.

 

The application of Plyler v. Doe has been limited to K-12 schooling. Other court cases and legislation such as Toll v. Moreno 441 U.S. 458 (1979) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996[2] have allowed some states to pass statutes that deny undocumented immigrants students eligibility for in-state tuition, scholarships, or even bar them from enrollment at public colleges and universities.

 

Plyler v Doe applies to admittance, enrollment and education of illegal alien students in K-12 . It does not provide for any education of parents of students. Neither does it mean that school systems can or should provide any public benefit to parents (adults) in the name of furthering the education of the child/student. The argument that parents of illegal aliens are somehow exempt from proving eligibility for public benefits because of Plyler v Doe is absurd. Do we also exempt parents from proving work eligibility under Georgia’s E-Verify laws? Are parents of illegal aliens excluded for the affidavit process in 50-36-1 and 13-10-91 because they have children in Georgia K-12 schools? (No).

 

The USDOE has distributed guidance letters which are linked below. Although many of the responses from Georgia school districts cite Plyler v Doe and these letters as evidence of the legality of adult education for already enrolled K-12 students, the letters all clearly address enrollmentof K-12 students, not adult education.

 

The (English) guidance documents:
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201405.pdf
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201405.pdf
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl-factsheet-201405.pdf

 

Lastly, the argument that verifying the eligibility/immigration status of parents for public benefits or not providing illegal aliens parents (adults) of K-12 students language classes hinders the education of the child can be expanded to say that we cannot verify the legal status of the parents for a teaching or contractor job in the school system and that use of the E-Verify or SAVE system aimed at a parent is a “civil rights violation” or somehow damages the child’s education. Taken to extremes, use of the E-Verify system for parents of any or all Georgia K-12 students could be said to hinder the education of an illegal alien’s child because the parent cannot lawfully be employed. Shorter: The Plyer v Doe argument is intended for people who do not know the law.

 

2) Title lll made us do it and authorizes English classes for illegal alien parents of K-12 students already enrolled in Georgia’s school system.

 

I do not dispute that there is language in Title lll concerning parents and English language assistance. But partial quoting of Title lll without noting the federal requirement that all programs be in compliance with individual state law is incomplete and deceptive.

 

I insert a link to Title III text here

 

Title III — Language Instruction for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students

 

Please note Section 3116 Local Plans “(a) PLAN REQUIRED – Each eligible entity desiring a subgrant from the State educational agency under section 3114 shall submit a plan to the State educational agency at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the State educational agency may require.

(b) CONTENTS – Each plan submitted under subsection (a) shall —

…(1) each local educational agency that is included in the eligible entity is complying with section 3302 prior to, and throughout, each school year;

(2) the eligible entity annually will assess the English prof iciency of all children with limited English proficiency participating in programs funded under this part;

(3) the eligible entity has based its proposed plan on scientifically based research on teaching limited English proficient children;

(4) the eligible entity will ensure that the programs will enable children to speak, read, write, and comprehend the English language and meet challenging State academic content and student academic achievement standards; and

à(5) the eligible entity is not in violation of any State law, including State constitutional law, regarding the education of limited English proficient children, consistent with sections 3126 and 3127.

 

 

And Section 3126 LEGAL AUTHORITY UNDER STATE LAW.

à“Nothing in this part shall be construed to negate or supersede State law, or the legal authority under State law of any State agency, State entity, or State public official, over programs that are under the jurisdiction of the State agency, entity, or official.

 

 

SEC. 3127. CIVIL RIGHTS.

Nothing in this part shall be construed in a manner inconsistent with any Federal law guaranteeing a civil right. Use of Funds Requirements in OMB Circular A – 87

 

3) Title lll and Title l made us do it:

 

“Translation and Interpretation for English Learners – Requirements under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Related to National Origin Discrimination and Use of Funds Under Title III, Part A andTitle I, Part A of the ESEA.” See linked info ( for some reason, the link must be pasted into your browser to open the fed document).https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/titleititleiii421.pdf

 

“Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A – 87 requires that the use of funds for a specific purpose be: necessary and reasonable for the proper and efficient performance and administration of the program; and authorized and not prohibited under State and local laws or regulations.

—

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cato Institute: Forget the Wall Already, It’s Time for the U.S. to Have Open Borders

By

 

Jeffery Miron, image: CATO INSITUTE.

Jeffrey Miron is director of economic studies at the Cato Institute and the director of undergraduate studies in the Department of Economics at Harvard University.

Cato Institute

Forget the Wall Already, It’s Time for the U.S. to Have Open Borders

This article appeared on USA Today on July 31, 2018.

“President Donald Trump’s recent tweets against open borders come as no surprise. Indeed, even fervent immigration advocates worry that open borders would lower the wages of low-skilled natives, erode national security, and overburden the social safety net. Trump doubled down, tweeting that he would be “willing to ‘shut down’ government” unless Congress approves funding for a border wall with Mexico.

Trump, however, has it exactly backwards: The solution to America’s immigration problems is open borders, under which the United States imposes no immigration restrictions at all. If the U.S. adopts this policy, the benefits will far outweigh the costs.

Legalize ALL immigration

Illegal immigration will disappear, by definition. Much commentary on immigration — Trump and fellow travelers aside — suggests that legal immigration is good and that illegal immigration is bad. So, legalize all immigration.

America has nothing to fear, and much to gain, from open borders.

Government will then have no need to define or interpret rules about asylum, economic hardship, family reunification, family separation, DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and so on. When all immigration is legal, these issues are irrelevant.

The question of fairness about who enters first — those who waited in line or those who entered illegally — disappears. Amnesty for existing illegal immigrants also becomes a non-issue. Or an open borders policy could require anyone who entered illegally to exit the country — for exactly five minutes — and then re-enter legally.

Think about the money we could save and make

Expenditure on immigration enforcement would shrink to nothing, because open borders means no walls, fences, screening at airports, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), deportations, detention centers or immigration courts. A 2013 report estimated that immigration enforcement cost more than $18 billion annually, and standard indicators suggest costs have grown further since then.

Last year, U.S. employers filed over 336,000 petitions for H1-B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, but only 197,129 were approved. Complicated visa rules – for tourists versus job-seekers, STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) workers versus agricultural laborers, and students versus non-students – would all vanish. This would save resources and give employers new access to talented human capital.

The time people waste re-entering the country will evaporate. How often do you face long delays when entering Oklahoma from Texas? Never. But how often do you experience delays when you leave other countries for the United States? Almost always. One study pegs the cost of wait times at the U.S.-Mexico border alone to be more than $12 billion a year.

Economic efficiency will increase both in the USA and in immigrant-sending countries, because different kinds of labor will be better matched around the world to their most productive activity. This benefits the immigrants who earn higher incomes, but also U.S. consumers who face lower prices for imported goods and services. One academic study predicts that if borders were open everywhere, world gross domestic product could be twice its current value.

They will send their best…” Read the rest here. 

D.H.S. Media release Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen Announces Historic Action to Confront Illegal Immigration

By

 

 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 20, 2018

Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen Announces Historic Action to Confront Illegal Immigration

Announces Migration Protection Protocols

WASHINGTON – Today, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen M. Nielsen announced historic action to confront the illegal immigration crisis facing the United States.  Effective immediately, the United States will begin the process of invoking Section 235(b)(2)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.  Under the Migration Protection Protocols (MPP), individuals arriving in or entering the United States from Mexico—illegally or without proper documentation—may be returned to Mexico for the duration of their immigration proceedings.

“Today we are announcing historic measures to bring the illegal immigration crisis under control,” said Secretary Nielsen.  “We will confront this crisis head on, uphold the rule of law, and strengthen our humanitarian commitments.  Aliens trying to game the system to get into our country illegally will no longer be able to disappear into the United States, where many skip their court dates.  Instead, they will wait for an immigration court decision while they are in Mexico.  ‘Catch and release’ will be replaced with ‘catch and return.’  In doing so, we will reduce illegal migration by removing one of the key incentives that encourages people from taking the dangerous journey to the United States in the first place.  This will also allow us to focus more attention on those who are actually fleeing persecution.

“Let me be clear:  we will undertake these steps consistent with all domestic and international legal obligations, including our humanitarian commitments.  We have notified the Mexican government of our intended actions.  In response, Mexico has made an independent determination that they will commit to implement essential measures on their side of the border.  We expect affected migrants will receive humanitarian visas to stay on Mexican soil, the ability to apply for work, and other protections while they await a U.S. legal determination.”

Background

Illegal aliens have exploited asylum loopholes at an alarming rate.  Over the last five years, DHS has seen a 2000 percent increase in aliens claiming credible fear (the first step to asylum), as many know it will give them an opportunity to stay in our country, even if they do not actually have a valid claim to asylum.  As a result, the United States has an overwhelming asylum backlog of more than 786,000 pending cases.  Last year alone the number of asylum claims soared 67 percent compared to the previous year.  Most of these claims are not meritorious—in fact nine out of ten asylum claims are not granted by a federal immigration judge.  However, by the time a judge has ordered them removed from the United States, many have vanished.

Process

  • Aliens trying to enter the U.S. to claim asylum will no longer be released into our country, where they often disappear before a court can determine their claim’s merits.
  • Instead, those aliens will be processed by DHS and given a “Notice to Appear” for their immigration court hearing.
  • While they wait in Mexico, the Mexican government has made its own determination to provide such individuals humanitarian visas, work authorization, and other protections. Aliens will have access to immigration attorneys and to the U.S. for their court hearings.
  • Aliens whose claims are upheld by U.S. judges will be allowed in. Those without valid claims will be deported to their home countries.Anticipated Benefits
  • As we implement, illegal immigration and false asylum claims are expected to decline.
  • Aliens will not be able to disappear into U.S. before court decision.
  • More attention can be focused on more quickly assisting legitimate asylum-seekers, as fraudsters are disincentivized from making the journey.
  • Precious border security personnel and resources will be freed up to focus on protecting our territory and clearing the massive asylum backlog.
  • Vulnerable populations will get the protection they need while they await a determination in Mexico.

IERB

Georgia’s Immigration Enforcement Review Board – A parody of a Kangaroo Court

Third-world-style “justice” on the road to Georgiafornia

Image: Bensbiltong.com

 

In a real court, both sides of a complaint are heard, evidence is allowed to be introduced, judges do not serve illegally beyond their term and the object is to enforce the law. None of this is true in the parody of a Kangaroo Court that is Georgia’s Immigration Enforcement Review Board.

The IERB was created by the establishment it was supposedly designed to oversee and serves its real purpose of insuring there isn’t an excessive amount of compliance with several Georgia state laws aimed at the crime of illegal immigration. Dear Georgia conservatives: You’ve been had by the Republicans. Again.

We have written several times about the IERB here and here are but two examples. This space will be be filled-in gradually as we get time on the most IERB recent scandals that Governor Deal has ignored and participated in and what the politically appointed IERB bosses have been allowed to get away with. Stay tuned, much more to come.

90,000 Illegal Aliens Have Come to America Since the Caravan Formed in October

By

“Since the caravan formed in mid-October, we’ve seen 90,000 people come to our border. Eighty-five percent of those crossing illegally between ports of entry and all lured by the fact that our legal framework has huge gaps that create the opportunity to stay in the U.S. while awaiting a court hearing even if they don’t a lawful permission or protection claim,…”

Photo: Townhall

Townhall

Katie Pavlich
Katie Pavlich
|
 @KatiePavlich
|
Posted: Dec 04, 2018

90,000 Illegal Aliens Have Come to America Since the Caravan Formed in October

As the situation in Tijuana, Mexico continues to deteriorate as thousands of illegal aliens wait to gain access to the United States, the crisis continues along many different sectors of the border.

This week in Yuma, a number of individuals were caught dropping children over the border fence. Thousands of illegal aliens from Central America have flooded into the country since October.

“We have a challenging and still potentially volatile situation in Tijuana. We’ve got well over 7,000 migrants there. They’re well organized and brought to the border by a group and we told they would be able to cross easily into the U.S. to present an asylum claim. That is not the case,” U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said in an interview Tuesday morning.”We do see individuals trying to cross illegally in the San Diego sector, we are addressing that activity and then of course you saw the scenes of the family literally dropping children over the fence. That was in the Yuma Sector in Arizona, also interdicted and apprehended by Border Patrol agents.”

“Since the caravan formed in mid-October, we’ve seen 90,000 people come to our border. Eighty-five percent of those crossing illegally between ports of entry and all lured by the fact that our legal framework has huge gaps that create the opportunity to stay in the U.S. while awaiting a court hearing even if they don’t a lawful permission or protection claim,” he continued. “It’s a huge challenge that we need to work with Congress to address…We’ve got criminal organizations profiting off of vulnerable families, charging $5000-$7000 per person. That’s a $2.5 billion business of exploitation and we’ve got to stop it.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

D.A. King, Jorge Ramos 2013. Image, Univision.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

 

Donald (“D.A.”) Arthur King, 1 April 1952 – 5 March 2025.

We are sorry to inform you that D.A. King, President and founder of the Dustin Inman Society, has left us.

D.A. King left this life and his work for the nation that he loved, confident that he has done his best. D.A. passed on peacefully after a private battle with cancer.

“Once a Marine, always a Marine” – D.A. was always visibly proud of his service and his honorable discharge from the U.S. Marine Corps (1970-1976).

D.A. described himself as “pro-enforcement” on immigration and borders, an issue on which he dedicated the last 21 years of his life as an expert activist, writer and public speaker.

________________________________

 

D.A. King, who describes himself as “pro-enforcement on sustainable immigration” is a former U.S. Marine and a nationally recognized authority on immigration-related matters who has been to the Southwest border many times and has been a reluctant denizen of the Georgia State Capitol for the last eighteen years. He has organized more than twenty rallies against a repeat of the 1986 amnesty of illegal aliens, both in the Atlanta area and in Washington DC.

D.A. is president and founder of the Georgia-based Dustin Inman Society. In addition to appearing on countless TV and radio and networks, since 2003 when he put aside his own insurance business and became active on immigration enforcement, his columns on immigration and legislative capers have been published in many newspapers – including a thirteen-year stint in the Marietta Daily Journal – as well as Breitbart News and the subscription website, Insider Advantage Georgia.

King has been profiled by the Atlanta Journal Constitution, the Associated Press, on the front page of the New York Times and has been interviewed by Univision’s open borders advocate, Jorge Ramos. He is hated by the discredited SPLC and the corporate-funded anti-enforcement lobby and has been blacklisted by the liberal establishment media in Atlanta for several years. With thanks to Georgia Senator David Perdue, King led the successful effort that concluded in January 2016 to keep GALEO’s Dax Lopez off the federal bench. D.A. advises politicians to heed congressional testimony of the late Barbara Jordan on immigration and enforcement.

King is a supporter of English as the official language of the United States, the federal 287(g) enforcement tool and the E-Verify system and  has assisted legislators with the creation of illegal immigration-related state bills including SB529 in 2006 and HB87 in 2011. He is currently active in an effort to see actual enforcement of state laws passed to protect Georgian’s jobs benefits and services from the crimes of illegal employment and illegal immigration.

King advocates for the abolition of Georgia’s Immigration Enforcement Review Board (IERB), which he says is a “travesty of a mockery of a sham of a Kangaroo Court.”

ImmigrationPoliticsGA.com was created in late 2018 with personal funds in an effort to provide news and opinion now mostly muffled and hidden by the MSM in Georgia. Married to the love of his life, Sue, since 1982, D.A. King has operated on personal savings and donations from patriotic Americans since 2003. He is not a member of any political party and also describes himself as a proud American Nationalist.

One of three D.A. King- organized rallies against amnesty at the White House. Pictured here: April, 2007. Image: Dustin Inman Society