ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



Immigration Daily

Chinese Immig. Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
© 1995-
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM


  1. In Both Muslim and Transgender Bans, Some Federal Judges Don't Believe Trump. Misleading the Courts Hurts Americans, not Only Immigrants. Roger Algase

    In an indication that the Trump administration's attempt to mislead the federal courts over the real reasons for adopting discriminatory policies hurt American citizens as well as immigrants, a second federal district court judge, Marvin J. Garbis of Maryland, ruled in effect that Trump's claimed reason for banning transgender troops from serving in the military was not credible.

    As reported in the Washington Post on November 22, Trump had originally claimed that he had adopted that policy "after consultation with my Generals and military experts".

    Judge Garbis, a Republican, in effect, determined that this claim was a lie and that no such review had ever taken place. He wrote in his decision:

    "A capricious, arbitrary, and unqualified tweet of new policy does not trump the methodical and systematic review by military stakeholders qualified to understand the ramifications of policy changes."

    Does this just happen to remind any readers of the way that Trump's Muslim entry ban order was issued and then defended in court by the Trump administration?

    Just as an overwhelming Fourth Circuit en banc majority ruled, in effect, that Trump was not telling the truth to the Court when his DOJ lawyers claimed that his Muslim ban order was based on national security rather than religious bigotry, federal judges are also now ruling, in effect, that the administration is trying to mislead the courts about the reasons for Trump's transgender military ban.

    For the full story, see: Washington Post, November 22

    In transgender ruling, another judge finds Trump credibility gap

    (Sorry, I do not have a link. Please go to Google to access.)

    See also, Constitution Center:

    Judge issues new ruling against military transgender ban

    Since this is a blog about immigrant rights, not LBGT rights, how is this story relevant to immigration law issues? The answer is simple.

    When the government engages in an abuse of power affecting immigrants, such as presenting clearly false policy justifications (which, if done by a private litigant, might well amount to a fraud upon the court) in the Muslim entry ban litigation, then it may also be likely to do the same thing when the rights of American citizens belonging to a targeted group, in this case transgender US soldiers, are at stake.

    If, as Americans, we want to preserve our own rights and freedoms, we must also protect the rights of immigrants from abuse by government-sponsored policies of hatred and discrimination, including attempts to deceive the courts.

    With that thought, I wish all Immigration Daily readers a Happy Thanksgiving holiday.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 11-22-2017 at 12:33 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. TPS Ends for Haitians Who Didn't "Inherit Western Traditions" From "Ancestors". More Ethnic Cleansing of Non-White Immigrants by Trump. Roger Algase

    The president's white nationalist base supporters received a Thanksgiving gift from his administration on November 20, as Acting DHS Secretary Elaine Duke announced her decision to end TPS status for some 50,000 Haitians who have been living in the United States after the 2010 earthquake that devastated the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, and one that is ill-prepared to receive them back.

    At least Duke won't have to face the pressure and angry arm-twisting that she reportedly received from White House Chief of Staff (and former DHS chief under Trump) John Kelly when she postponed a decision which would have led to kicking 86,000 Honduran TPS holders out of the United States.

    According to newspaper reports, Kelly berated Duke for a postponing a decision on expelling the Hondurans because it "prevents our wider strategic goal."

    What "wider strategic goal" could Kelly possibly have been referring to? For that answer, we only need to look at Trump's recent speech in Poland.

    In a July 6 address "to the people of Poland" in Warsaw, Trump set forth, in a speech loaded with white nationalist dog-whistles, his vision of the kind of immigrants who will be allowed in America under his presidency, to the exclusion of all others, as follows:

    "We write symphonies...We celebrate our ancient heroes, embrace our timeless traditions and customs...

    What we have...what we've inherited from our ancestors...And if we fail to preserve it, it will never, ever exist again...

    The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive...Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders?

    Well, sorry about that, Nicaraguans, Haitians and, sooner or later, Hondurans whose TPS status has already been revoked or is awaiting inevitable revocation in the not so distant future, (after a temporary reprieve for Hondurans which reportedly infuriated the White House so much).

    It seems that Central American and Caribbean immigrants just don't seem to fit in with Trump's ideal of the "traditions", "customs" and "ancestors" that, in his view, (white) Europe shares with (white) America and which make it so important for the "civilization" of the "West" to maintain the "will to survive" and to "protect our borders".

    The DHS has given the 50,000 Haitian TPS holders 18 months to leave (and, no doubt, to take their US-born American citizen children with them). Chalk up one more step for this administration down Trump's road of ethnic cleansing of non-white immigrants from the United States.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 11-21-2017 at 06:08 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. Asylum-seeking children need alternative to dangerous border crossing. By Nolan Rappaport

    © Getty

    Asylum-seeking children need an alternative to the dangerous journey from Central America to the US

    The Department of State has stopped accepting applications for the Central American Minors (CAM) Refugee Program.

    President Barack Obama established this program to provideunaccompanied alien children (UAC) from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras (the Northern Triangle countries) with “a safe, legal, and orderly alternative to the dangerous journey” many of them were making to apply for asylum in the United States.

    A UNICEF Child Alert entitled, “Broken Dreams,” describes the dangers of that journey.

    The children are vulnerable to human traffickers. Many of the girls reportedly end up being forced into prostitution. Many are victims of sexual violence. Estimates of the number of kidnappings vary from hundreds to thousands a year. And hundreds of migrants die each when they reach the harsh environment along the Mexico-U.S. border.

    It is heart-rending to think of these children – most of them teenagers, but some even younger – making the grueling and extremely dangerous journey in search of safety and a better life,” said UNICEF’s Deputy Executive Director Justin Forsyth.


    Published originally on The Hill.

    About the author. Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.

    Updated 11-21-2017 at 12:08 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  4. A Distorted Argument Based on Fear Against Family Immigration and the Visa Lottery by the Head of a FAIR Affiliated Group, Part !. Roger Algase

    Dale Wilcox, the executive director and general counsel of the Immigration Law Reform Law Institute, has published an article in The Hill laying out arguments against both the diversity visa lottery and family immigration (which he calls by the pejorative term "chain migration"). The article is entitled:"The visa lottery and chain migration both give Americans the shaft."

    This article is worth examining in some detail, because it is a classic example of how the arguments against family immigration and the visa lottery, both of which benefit immigrants primarily from non-white parts of the world, are based on distortion and fear, rather than objective facts.

    While there is no evidence that Mr. Wilcox is himself a white nationalist, and I do not intend to make any such suggestion, the organization he heads, according to a note at the end of his article, is listed by as a supporting organization for FAIR, (Federation for Immigration Reform)

    According to an investigative report by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), FAIR was founded by an avowed white supremacist, John Tanton, and several of its officers or staff members have allegedly been connected with white supremacist advocates or groups over the years.

    With the above as background, let us look at the arguments which Mr. Wilcox advances against family immigration and the diversity visa lottery.

    First, Wilcox tries to tie both "chain migration" and the visa lottery to the New York City terror attack, even though tens of millions millions of peaceful, law abiding immigrants have come to the US through family visas and contributed to American society over the past 50 years, and the same can be said for more than a million immigrants, mostly from Asia, Africa and Latin America, who have come to the US through the DV lottery since it was established in 1994 (as the successor to the AA-1 lottery which was mainly limited to white Europeans and which FAIR never complained about, to the best of my knowledge).

    There is no evidence whatsoever that the DV lottery is a vehicle for terrorists or that it is used by terrorists. The NYC suspect had no terror connections when he entered with a DV visa as a child or young person, and he was evidently radicalized in the US, not overseas.

    Wilcox claims that the suspect brought 23 relatives with him to the United States. Aside from the fact that this is not the way the DV lottery works, since beneficiaries can only bring their spouses or children, Wilcox does not cite any alleged wrongdoing by any of the "23 relatives" that the NYC suspect allegedly brought with him.

    No one assumes that the relatives of the Las Vegas shooting massacre suspect are all mass murderers themselves, or that all white American-born males have violent criminal propensities just because the mass killer suspect did. Why should similar assumptions be made about DV or family visa immigrants?

    And yet Wilcox says that the charge that DV and family immigration are "irresponsible gateways for dangerous individuals to enter the country and harm Americans" is "legitimate"

    It is not legitimate.

    Wilcox, then, seizing on what he does not show to be anything more than isolated instances, claims that both the green card lottery and family immigration in general are subject to fraud and abuse. This is a time-worn argument against immigration in general that immigration opponents have been using for the past half century, ever since the 1965 reform that abolished the Europe-only immigration quotas of the 1924 "national origins" law was enacted.

    I will look at this argument in more detail in a forthcoming comment.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 11-20-2017 at 08:39 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  5. Trump's Border Wall is Racially Divisive and "Environmentally Catastrophic". But It Will Benefit Americans - Wall Street CEO's. Roger Algase

    The following comment has been revised and expanded as of November 18 at 9:26 pm.

    One of the main arguments in favor of Trump's anti immigrant agenda is that ramping up deportations (such as in the case of CBP guards who recently waited outside a hospital room to arrest an undocumented 10 year old Mexican girl with cerebral palsy); barring certain grandparents of Muslim US citizens from entering the US (as Trump's DOJ unsuccessfully argued in favor of doing in federal circuit courts); backing the RAISE Act (which would cut off most family and less skilled immigration from Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America); while at the same time Trump seeks to reduce or eliminate H-1B and other high skilled immigration (mainly from Asia) through his "Hire American" executive order, are all meant to benefit Americans.

    This is based on the false and demagogic propositions, which Trump has urged from the time that he began his candidacy with a vicious attack against Mexican immigrants as "criminals", "rapists" and drug dealers up to the present moment, that the interests of "immigrants" (by which he means primarily Latin American, Asian, Middle Eastern and African immigrants - see article below) and American citizens are inherently opposed to each other; and that immigrants are to blame for most, if not all, of America's problems.

    There is no greater sign of Trump's antagonism and contempt toward Latin American and other non-white immigrants than Trump's pet project, his Mexican border Wall. The Wall, even though as yet unfunded, has become a symbol of his policy of inflaming racial tensions and exploiting racial prejudices, just as the Berlin Wall was a symbol of Communist tyranny and the Warsaw Ghetto Wall was a symbol of Nazi genocide against the Jewish people.

    In addition to being a symbol of racial hatred and humiliation, Trump's Wall has also been labelled as "environmentally catastrophic" by, because it would cross through wildlife refuges and national parks, and require waiving dozens of environmental protection laws in the affected areas, including the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Air Act.

    But Trump claims that the Wall, like the rest of his anti-immigrant agenda, will benefit the American people.

    Which Americans might those be? Certainly not the landowners along the American side of the border who are suing the federal government to stop the Wall's destruction of their property.

    Certainly not ordinary working class and middle class Americans, whose minimum wage and union rights are being bitterly opposed by Trump and his GOP supporters, even as they push for legislation which would cause tens of millions of average Americans to lose their health insurance and pay higher income taxes.

    But surely there must be some Americans who are benefiting from Trump's Wall, which is the most prominent symbol of his attempt to move America back in the direction of the 1924 white Europeans only immigration regime which governed US immigration policy for the next forty years until it was finally abolished in 1965.

    But who are these lucky American citizens who will not only benefit from Trump's Mexican Border Wall, but may actually reap a huge bonanza from it? Where can we find them?

    The answer is not so mysterious. We can find the people who may stand to make millions off of the Border Wall - on Wall Street and in the boardrooms of other big companies which are investing heavily in a company which is engaged in build a prototype for Trump's Wall.

    According to a November 16 article in, this company is called Sterling Construction, and it is receiving financing not only from a company owned by far-right billionaire and Trump backer Robert Mercer, but also by BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo. The latter two companies are also, according to the same story, big financial supporters of the private prison industry, which incarcerates thousands of immigrants in what has been called "nightmarish conditions".

    For further details, see:

    Wall Street Stands to Make a Killing From Building Trump's Border Wall: Report: Hate is profitable for the Mercers, BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo

    The Alternet article also warns about "a growing alignment between the financial elite and the white nationalist right". readers may recall another country where a similar "alignment" took place - in 1930's Germany.

    Trump has often been accused of making untruthful statements about immigrants and immigration. But when he says that the American people will benefit from his Border Wall, no one can claim that he is misleading the public. Trump is absolutely right - as long as we are clear about which Americans will be benefiting the most.

    Just in case there are still any doubts about who these Americans are, Alternet quotes one immigration advocate, Ana Maria Archila of the Center for Popular Democracy, as follows:

    "It's always been clear that Trump's border wall had no real benefit or justification - and now it's clear that it could serve to further enrich his wealthy friends."

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 11-18-2017 at 10:38 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Page 1 of 265 1231151101 ... LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: