Sunday, July 23, 2017


by -
Getting inspiration.

The Department of Homeland Security issued a report on Monday, indicating that nearly 740,000 of the foreigners who legally entered the US, overstayed their visas and continued to live in the country even at the end of 2016.

The number of people who overstayed their visas, a total of 739,478, amount to a meagre 1.47 percent of the 50 million who visited the US through airports and seaports, and were supposed to leave last year, according to the DHS report. The report does not include those who arrived in the US through a vehicular or ground point of entry.

According to the latest numbers, foreigners choosing to overstay their visas in the US, make up almost half of the country’s illegal population, which is estimated to be somewhere near 11 million people.

Senator Marco Rubi (R-Fla.), during his presidential campaign, raised the issue of visa overstays. He told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” back in 2015: “We have a porous border, meaning not just the border with Mexico, but 40 percent of people in this country, illegally, are overstaying visas.”

The DHS began collecting data on visa overstays in 2015, making yesterday’s release the department’s second report on the issue. The federal agency said in its latest report that it maintains a database of departure and arrival information for all visitors to the US, and sends an updated list of individuals who overstay their visas to the Customs and Border Protection agency, daily. The CBP is tasked with enforcing the US’ immigration laws.

“Identifying overstays is important for national security, public safety, immigration enforcement, and processing applications for immigration benefits,” the new report said. “[D]HS will continue to annually and publicly release this overstay data, and looks forward to providing updates to congressional members and their staff on its ongoing progress.”

Almost 416,500 of the estimated 45 million foreigners in the US whose visas expired in 2015, overstayed in the country illegally. However, because the DHS changed the visa categories it previously used to calculate the number of expired visa holders still in the country, the total number of overstays cannot be compared with the previous year.

by -

The Trump White House is planning a big immigration push that could start a war over immigration in the United States.

There are few topics that have fueled the anti-Trump protestors than immigration, and Trump’s new “big immigration launch” is going to infuriate them.

The White House is working with the Department of Homeland Security on a proposal that will dramatically add and empower thousands of new officers.

According to a senior administration official, Fox News is reporting that the proposal will hire new officers to fast-track deportations.

The new secretary of the DHS, John Kelly, is asking for 10,000 new ICE officers in the proposal as well as 5,000 additional U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers.

Kelly blames the rise in immigration as the need for the new recruits.

“The surge of immigration at the southern border has overwhelmed federal agencies and resources and has created a significant national security vulnerability to the United States.”

Although this proposal doesn’t focus on the border wall, the new DHS head thinks that is “necessary” to build the wall.

Trump isn’t looking to change any laws to get his way on immigration; he is looking just to enforce the laws that are currently in place.

The push for more immigration agents is another campaign promise that Trump has now kept.

Trump’s actions are solidifying him as the leader that many supporters hoped for, but to millions on the left, they see his actions as more evidence that Trump needs to be stopped.

There is no doubt the left is going to try and stop Trump regardless of what he does, but Trump’s new hires for DHS will go through with no issues.

Trump’s travel ban to countries that support terrorism is a different story. The executive order is having a hard time making it through the courts and CNN is reporting that Trump is “preparing a new travel ban”.

When Trump issued the original travel ban protesters almost shut down airports.

What will they do when Trump hires 15,000 new agents to crack down on illegal immigrants?

Thoughts? Comment below.

by -

Judicial Watch announced that a federal court judge ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to produce this week any “preservation requests” for emails sent to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Chief of Staff Christian Marrone, and General Counsel Stevan Bunnell. The order from U.S District Court Judge Randolph Moss came in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking agency records in the personal email accounts used by the four top Homeland Security officials (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:16-cv-00967)).   The court order, issued last week after a hearing, requires DHS to comply by January 12 (Thursday).

At last week’s January 5 hearing, Obama Justice Department lawyers confirmed that nothing had been done to retrieve government records from Jeh Johnson or the other officials’ accounts.  According to the hearing transcript:

THE COURT: But you say to me there’s no reason to doubt that the agency will pursue the records and that they’ll be returned, but it’s been six months. Is there any evidence that anything has been done to retrieve those documents or records?

[Justice Department Lawyer Bailey] HEAPS: I think that the six months though, your Honor, refers to the time in a FOIA request which is independent of any obligations under the Federal Records Act. And I don’t think we would be in this position with respect to the FOIA case had a valid request been filed or submitted.

THE COURT: But put that aside for a second. I mean, the government has been on notice at least since May though that there’s reason to believe that there are e-mails that are residing on individuals’ private servers that are government records, right?

HEAPS: Your Honor, the first thing I would point out — and I think it’s important because we’re going back and forth between FOIA and the Federal Records Act, is we don’t have reason to believe — or let me be clear, we don’t know that there are federal records that are in the personal e-mail accounts.

THE COURT: So has anyone checked to see if there are? Has anyone asked a question, anything to try and figure that out?

HEAPS: I can’t represent one way or the other to that, your Honor.

Judge Moss’s order, issued shortly after the hearing, reads in part:

On or before 1/12/2017, the Government is to produce, under seal, for in-camera submission, the preservation requests that it sent to all four of the individuals; The Government is also to file a notice on the public record, on or before 1/12/2017, regarding the in-camera filing, and to indicate the individuals intentions with respect to abiding by the preservation requests.

The January 5 hearing came in response to a Motion for Preservation Order filed by Judicial Watch . In that filing Judicial Watch asked the court to issue a “preservation order” for the emails of Johnson, Mayorkas and Bunnell because their departure from government service is anticipated upon the installation of the new administration and Homeland Security will no longer have any control over these individuals:

The records at issue are in the physical possession of three current agency officials and one former agency official. With the upcoming change in administrations on January 20, 2017, it is likely that the three officials currently in office (Secretary Jeh Johnson, Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and General Counsel Stevan Bunnell) will leave government service.

Counsel for DHS has informed [Judicial Watch’s] counsel that DHS has “asked” these officials to preserve the agency records in their possession. DHS’ counsel declined to provide any evidence supporting this assertion. Because [Judicial Watch] does not know specifically what DHS asked its employees to do and what, if any, other steps DHS has taken to ensure preservation, Plaintiff is concerned DHS’s mere requests to its employees are insufficient. This will be particularly concerning once the officials possessing the emails leave government employment, as the agency will have no control over the actions of these officials.


A court order requiring preservation of these emails is particularly necessary now as DHS has suggested that these officials may have been acting without authorization by sending emails from these accounts…. As such, there is no assurance that these officials will abide by a “request” by the agency to preserve these emails, particularly after their employment ends.

An order requiring DHS to take steps to preserve the agency records at issue is consistent with an agency’s recordkeeping responsibilities to retain and manage government records subject to the Federal Records Act….If the agency officials are permitted to leave their employment while retaining agency records in their personal email accounts, it risks creating a situation comparable to that of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In that instance, it is undisputed that only a portion of Secretary Clinton’s emails eventually were returned to the agency.

[Judicial Watch] respectfully requests expedited consideration of this motion in light of the likely imminent departure from government service of the three agency officials possessing agency records in their personal email accounts.

“The Obama gang is creating another email scandal with Jeh Johnson and the Department of Homeland Security,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “We know there are likely government records on Jeh Johnson’s and other top DHS officials’ personal email accounts. That the Obama administration hasn’t lifted a finger to retrieve these public records is criminal.”

In June, Judicial Watch in a related case obtained 693 pages of Homeland Security records revealing that Secretary Jeh Johnson and 28 other agency officials used government computers to access personal web-based email accounts despite an agency-wide ban due to heightened security concerns.  The documents also reveal that Homeland Security officials misled Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) when Perry specifically asked whether personal accounts were being used for official government business.

The waivers were granted to Johnson and other senior staffers after Homeland Security’s Sensitive Systems Policy Directive 4300A was promulgated on April 30, 2014.   The Directive was issued after hackers breached the Office of Personnel Management computer system.  Directive 4300A states, “The use of Internet Webmail (Gmail, Yahoo, AOL) or other personal email accounts is not authorized over DHS furnished equipment or network connections.”

by -

The government spent a breathtaking $26 million to provide dead people—who were poor when they were alive—with health insurance in one state alone, according to a new federal audit. The benefit was administered through Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program for the needy and the astonishing multi-million-dollar figure applies to just Florida but similar atrocities are likely occurring in other states.

American taxpayers may wonder how this could possibly happen, though fraud and corruption are rampant in government, especially in welfare programs. First let’s explain how Medicaid, jointly funded by federal and state governments, functions. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) administers the program at the federal level. States must create CMS-approved plans to run their Medicaid programs, which provide low-income residents with medical coverage. In some states, such as Florida, the government contracts with insurance companies and makes fixed monthly payments to provide coverage. In Florida 37 insurance companies have contracts to provide coverage.

In this case, the government continued making payments to the insurance companies long after the beneficiaries had passed away. In other words, the government doled out huge sums to provide dead people with medical insurance for years. The astounding figures were made public recently in a report issued by the Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General, which blamed the outrageous waste on lack of collaboration between various state agencies and outdated information in databases. In some of the overpayment cases, investigators found that the state was “not able to explain the reasons they occurred.”

The investigation covered a five-year period from 2009 to 2014 and reviewed a sample of 124 payments to Medicaid insurers for subjects that had died. Of the 124, the inspector general determined that 113 were overpaid at a cost to the government of $192,273. Using that formula, auditors estimated that the state paid $26,202,536 over the five-year period to provide dead people with taxpayer-funded health insurance. This occurred because Florida officials failed to update the death dates of beneficiaries in its Medicaid database, the probe found, so the payments kept rolling. “The State agency had inadequate policies and procedures to identify and correct inaccurate death information,” the report states. As is the case in other states, the feds cover about 60% of Florida’s Medicaid tab so in this instance Uncle Sam got fleeced out of $15,356,486.

The government spent an eye-popping $545.1 billion on Medicaid in 2015, according to National Health Expenditure Data made available by CMS. California’s annual Medicaid costs are top in the nation at $85.6 million followed by New York at $60 million and Texas at $36 million. It’s hardly surprising that states with large immigrant populations have the biggest Medicaid tabs. Though federal law prohibits illegal aliens from receiving Medicaid benefits, some states, like Massachusetts, openly provide illegal aliens with publicly-funded health coverage through its Medicaid agency known as MassHealth. Additionally, Medicaid has a multi-billion-dollar slush fund to offer illegal immigrants “emergency” coverage. Furthermore, the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens (anchor babies) automatically qualify for Medicaid.

Fraud in this colossal healthcare program has been pervasive for years and things only got worse with the implementation of President Obama’s disastrous healthcare overhaul. CMS was in charge of Obamacare’s tumultuous implementation and catastrophic health exchange website yet the government officials who screwed up quietly received tens of thousands of dollars in performance bonuses and other taxpayer-funded perks. Judicial Watch obtained records that show Medicaid officials who played a significant role in the healthcare law’s failures were handsomely rewarded with large sums of cash and generous amounts of paid time off on the public’s dime. Many have left their lucrative federal government jobs for the private sector.

by -
illegal aliens

The Homeland Security agency responsible for enforcing the nation’s immigration laws is honoring a renowned open-borders activist dedicated to defending illegal aliens in the U.S. with a prestigious award. Known as “Outstanding American by Choice,” it’s bestowed annually by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to recognize the “significant contributions and achievements of a naturalized” American citizen.

This year’s winner is being crowned today at a ceremony in Los Angeles, California where she runs a billion-dollar charity largely dedicated to assisting immigrants.

Her name is Antonia Hernández, a civil rights attorney who spent two decades litigating on behalf of illegal immigrants at the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the powerful open borders group that specializes in discrimination lawsuits on behalf of illegal aliens. Promoted as a “Latino advocacy” group, MALDEF also pushes for free college tuition for illegal immigrants and lowering educational standards to accommodate new migrants.

The group’s leadership says it’s racist to make English the country’s official national language and inhumane to protect the southern border with a fence. Hernández was president and general counsel at MALDEF before becoming president and CEO at a like-minded nonprofit with deep pockets called the California Community Foundation.

The charity ranks among the nation’s top100 foundations by size and giving with an endowment exceeding $1 billion. Among its focuses is “immigrant integration.”

Hernández is the oldest of seven children born to poor Mexican immigrants, according to a magazine profile that says before she could drive Hernández walked the picket lines in support of California’s farm workers.

During twenty years at MALDEF Hernández successfully defeated a California measure—passed by voters—that would have denied health and education benefits to illegal immigrants, worked to create voting districts that equitably represented Latinos and litigated on behalf of limited-English proficient students in the nation’s public school system.

A California congresswoman who honored Hernández with a public service award years ago described her as a “tenacious defender of immigration reform” and a “devoted advocate on behalf of fair and just immigration reform.”

Under Hernández’s leadership the California Community Foundation has dedicated large amounts of resources to assist illegal immigrants, especially in the last two years. In 2014, Hernández led an effort to form an emergency relief fund to help the influx of illegal alien minors—mostly from Central America— that the Obama administration allowed to enter the U.S. through Mexico.

The government calls them Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and many have ties to gang members in the U.S., specifically MS-13. In fact, earlier this year Judicial Watch reported that the execution-style murder of a Massachusetts man was committed by two Central American teens that came to the U.S. as UACs under the president’s open border free-for-all. Many of the UACs have also brought in dangerous diseases, including swine flu, dengue fever, Ebola virus and tuberculosis. Nevertheless, Hernández said this about the UACs when her nonprofit scrambled to help them: “They are our children.”

The award that Hernández is accepting today is supposed to go to a candidate that demonstrates “their commitment to this country and to the common civic values that unite us all as Americans,” according to a USCIS announcement. The agency purports to consider candidates’ civic participation, professional achievement and responsible citizenship.

The government’s goal is to recognize individuals who chose to become Americans and have made significant contributions to both their community and the United States. Deputy Security of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, shamefully ousted as a Clinton federal prosecutor after orchestrating the pardon of a big-time drug dealer, will give Hernández the award at today’s ceremony.

A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announcement of the event describes Hernández as a civil rights attorney who has demonstrated her commitment of social justice and civic engagement for over four decades.

What are your thoughts on illegal aliens? Should we welcome them or send them home?

by -

Days before the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history Obama’s Homeland Security secretary became the highest ranking government official—and first sitting cabinet member—to highlight a convention held annually by a radical Muslim group with extremist origins.

The Indiana-based nonprofit is called Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and it was founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of Hamas and Al Qaeda. ISNA was a co-conspirator in a huge case involving an Islamic charity (Holy Land Foundation) that provided support to a foreign terrorist organization, mainly Hamas.

ISNA conferences often feature contentious speakers, including renowned Islamists and advocates of terrorism. Among them is Imam Warth Deen Umar, who referred to the 9/11 hijackers as martyrs that were secretly admired by Muslims and has called for violent jihad.

At one ISNA convention Umar portrayed the Holocaust as punishment of Jews for being “serially disobedient to Allah,” according to a research conglomerate recognized as the world’s most comprehensive data center on radical Islamic terrorist groups.

The nonprofit, Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), published a disturbing report on ISNA that documents its radical ideology and conference speakers throughout the years that include “some of the world famous Islamists and advocates of Jihad.”

About a week before the 15th anniversary of 9/11, Obama deployed Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson to ISNA’s annual powwow in Chicago. The appearance likely amounted to a slap in the face to many Americans, especially survivors of the 2001 attacks.

Johnson’s speech lasted about 22 minutes and he basically said ISIS/ISIL isn’t Islamic, that Islam is a religion of peace and that Islamophobia is the same as McCarthyism. In a press release announcing the appearance, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) writes that Johnson will discuss the Obama administration’s “continued commitment to build bridges to Muslim American communities, and encourage Muslim Americans—particularly youth—to continue to fully participate in American society.”

Johnson didn’t exactly receive a warm reception and was booed repeatedly, especially as he exited the stage. He told the crowd that a group of terrorists is attempting to hijack their religion and that he and Obama “refuse to bend to the political pressure to call terrorism Islamic extremism.”

He went on to say that “we know that ISIL, though it claims the banner of Islam, occupies no part of your religion, a religion founded on peace.” Then Johnson proceeded to compare the discrimination and vilification suffered by Muslims to the plight of African Americans, in particular to “tar you with a broad brush of suspicion.”

Johnson proclaimed that the bullying and physical attacks experienced by Muslims nationwide are familiar to him as a black man. “I look out at this room of American Muslims and I see myself,” he said, adding that theirs is a similar struggle to the one his African American ancestors fought to win acceptance in the U.S.

by -

When Jeh Johnson was appointed the director of Homeland Security, we doubt he had any idea he would be taking over the elections.

Jeh Johnson, the man appointed by president Obama to be the director of the Department of Homeland Security is now being tasked with another job, securing the elections in November.

The first step is declaring the election a piece of “critical infrastructure” like the electric power grid and Wall Street. Both of which, the DHS is in charge of security.

Jeh made these comments when speaking to reporters about the takeover.

“We should carefully consider whether our election system, our election process, is critical infrastructure like the financial sector, like the power grid.

There’s a vital national interest in our election process, so I do think we need to consider whether it should be considered by my department and others critical infrastructure.”

The threat of a hack into our election system is very real.

Recent studies showed that some of the machines used in the primaries may have even been tampered with in a few of the Bernie and Hillary races.

Just this week a FBI agent came out and said that the election systems in Illinois and in Arizona have been hacked and could be susceptible to sabotage or rigged results.

Russia has been suspected of several hacks, but nothing has been proven yet.

Jeh Johnson is right about one thing; our election is part of our critical infrastructure.

Without the ability for our people to hold elections and vote for the candidates we believe will do the best then we do not have a democracy.

Cyber security is needed due to the tremendous amount of threats that are there, but does this give too much power to the party in control?

If the person in charge of the elections is an appointed person, in this case a Democrat appointed by Obama, does that give the party in power too much control?

One thing that we have heard over and over during this presidential race is that the elections are rigged. We heard if from Bernie Sanders for months and months, and he still lost.

It turned out that it was rigged against him, the DNC rigged the primary against his campaign and it was proven in the WikiLeaks release of DNC emails.

The DNC did go to great lengths to make sure that Hillary won despite the momentum of the party was with Bernie.

It is not crazy to think that a party might rig an election to maintain control. It is obvious that those around Hillary made sure she won the primary.

The DNC is not the DHS though, and the DHS should be held to a higher standard, but the possibility is there, and that possibility is what scares us.

What do you think about the DHS taking over the elections? Let us know in the comments below.

by -
Conduct Policy

Following shameful debacles involving Secret Service agents getting drunk and hiring prostitutes during foreign travel details a federal audit is recommending that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) develop a policy for off-duty conduct abroad.

The Secret Service inspired the probe but many other DHS agencies—including Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Coast Guard and Transportation Security Administration (TSA)—also have a substantial number of employees that travel and work in other countries. Apparently, the belief is that specific rules banning drunken sex scandals could help avoid more public embarrassments, though it’s difficult to imagine that members of an elite law enforcement agency don’t already know this.

“Off-duty misconduct can undermine the Department’s credibility and integrity and hinder its ability to achieve its mission,” the DHS Inspector General writes in a report issued a few days ago. “Our objective was to determine whether DHS has adequate policies and training governing off-duty conduct while abroad.” The answer is no, but you’d think common sense would kick in absent written rules. As we have seen in the last few years that hasn’t been the case.

In 2012 a dozen Secret Service agents deployed to Cartagena, Colombia for President Obama’s world leaders’ summit trip engaged in wild partying that included lots of booze and hookers. A few years later a drunken Secret Service agent preparing for Obama’s visit to Amsterdam was found passed out in a hotel hallway after a night of partying.

“Neither DHS nor the six DHS components with the largest international presence have comprehensive policies and training to govern employees’ off-duty conduct while abroad,” the agency watchdog reveals. “DHS has some limited, department-wide policies for off-duty conduct in general, but they do not specifically address employee conduct abroad; the six components’ policies do not cover some aspects of conduct, such as drinking excessive amounts of alcohol and using drugs.

DHS as a whole does not offer training in off-duty conduct for employees traveling and working abroad. One component offers training to those working abroad, but only one of the six offers training to both travelers and those working abroad.” In 2015, the agency had nearly 1,500 employees working in 80 countries, according to the audit.

There have been a number of domestic incidents as well. Agents crashed a car in the Florida Keys during an Obama family vacation and top-ranking Secret Service officials—including a member of the president’s personal detail—crashed their government vehicle into a White House security gate after a night of drinking. Could this be why in its official response to the report, DHS “disagreed with the underlying premise that any conduct policy covering DHS employees must specifically state it applies to off-duty conduct while traveling or working abroad.” It’s not clear if the agency wants to broaden the rules to apply domestically as well or if it simply doesn’t want to deal with the disgraceful off-duty conduct of its employees. Regardless, it’s a work in progress that is not expected to be completed for another year, the agency reveals in its response.

In a letter to the IG, the DHS liaison tries to be more diplomatic, though he doesn’t commit to actually issuing rules. He does however, promise that the Office of the Human Capital Officer will at least “provide information regarding drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, using illegal drugs, solicitation of commercial sex, and engaging in notoriously disgraceful conduct to employees who travel outside the United States.” Now the agency created after 9/11 to protect the nation from anther terrorist attack will gather and brainstorm. “The exact manner in which this will be done has not yet been determined,” DHS liaison Jim Crumpacker writes in his letter to DHS IG John Roth. He also warns that “it is important to recognize though that it is not possible to entirely eliminate the potential risk of employee wrongdoing.”

by -

A year after freeing tens of thousands of illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is distorting annual deportation figures by falsely claiming the number of criminal aliens removed from the U.S. keeps increasing when in fact it’s shrinking drastically.

In fiscal year 2015 deportation figures released this week, DHS celebrates that its enforcement efforts prioritize criminals and threats to public safety as well as national security.

The agency created after 9/11 to keep the country safe claims the latest stats show “the number of convicted criminals removed from the interior continued to increase.” The reality is that deportations of criminal aliens declined 27% from last year—from 86,923 in 2014 to 63,127 in 2015.

This serious discrepancy was exposed by the Washington D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), which further reveals that the number of criminal deportations in fiscal year 2015 is less than half of what it was in 2011.

Not surprisingly, the total number of deportations has also dropped thanks to President Obama’s policies—including broad amnesty—limiting federal immigration authorities from initiating removal proceedings.

The latest DHS figures analyzed by CIS show total deportations in 2015 were one-third less than in 2011, before the Obama administration implemented its various initiatives to protect illegal aliens in the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deported 25% less illegal immigrants last year than the previous year—from 315,943 in 2014 to 235,413 in 2015. Those figures include both border and interior cases. CIS also broke the numbers down by interior deportations and that number declined even more—31% from last year, from 100,114 in 2014 to 69,478 in 2015.

The figures are sure to drop further in the coming year, according to CIS Director of Policy Studies Jessica Vaughan, who recently testified at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing along with ICE Director Sarah Saldana. While Saldana expressed pride in her agency’s deportation numbers, Vaughan testified that they are abysmal.

“This willful neglect has imposed enormous costs on American communities,” Vaughan told lawmakers. “In addition to the distorted labor markets and higher tax bills for social welfare benefits that result from uncontrolled illegal immigration, the Obama administration’s anti-enforcement policies represent a threat to public safety from criminal aliens that ICE officers are told to release instead of detain and remove. The administration’s mandate that ICE focus only on the ‘worst of the worst’ convicted criminal aliens means that too many of ‘the worst’ deportable criminal aliens are still at large in our communities.”

Last year the Obama administration released 36,007 aliens convicted of 88,000 crimes from detention centers throughout the United States, according to breathtaking DHS records obtained by CIS. The crimes committed by illegal aliens released from federal custody include homicide, sexual assault, theft, kidnapping and alcohol-related driving convictions.

It’s unlikely that these undocumented convicts will ever get deported, at least not during the remainder of the Obama presidency. In the statement announcing the latest deportation figures DHS lays the foundation for even lower numbers in the future by warning of “changing migrant demographics” that impact removal operations.

This is a reference to the significant increase in Central Americans apprehended at the southwest border in recent years. “Higher numbers of Central Americans crossing our border require greater resources, as the removal process for this population takes more time, personnel resources, and funding to complete compared to the removal process for Mexican nationals,” DHS states.

“Additionally, many of these Central American nationals are asserting claims of credible or reasonable fear of persecution. Such cases require careful adjudication, and therefore, take longer to process. Early data indicates that some individuals have successfully obtained asylum in the removal proceedings process.”

by -

Two disturbing cases highlight the serious problems with the nation’s immigration laws under the Obama administration; In one, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) accused a local police department of racial profiling for arresting two previously deported illegal immigrants and turning them over to federal authorities for removal. In the other, the Department of Justice (DOJ) charged a public school district with discrimination for verifying the immigration status of its employees.

The first case comes out of New Llano, a Louisiana town of about 2,500 near the Texas border. In the course of doing their job, a pair of police officers approached two men standing outside a motel and requested identification. The men—Jose Adan Fugon-Cano and Gustavo Barahona-Sanchez—could not produce valid ID and the officers detained them. It turns out that both are illegal immigrants who had been previously deported. Llano police turned them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and both were eventually sent back to their native Honduras.

A local immigrant advocacy group filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of the men prior to their removal and DHS, the umbrella agency that oversees ICE, launched an investigation. The director of DHS’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL), Megan Mack, determined that the illegal aliens had been ethnically profiled by police and should not be removed from the country. In an electronic mail to ICE Director Sarah Saldaña, Mack writes that “CRCL has significant concerns with the actions of local law enforcement in this matter.” She also writes that “it seems clear that the arrest was based on their ethnicity and the way they were awaiting pickup for a job” and orders ICE to release both men from custody and seek “closure of their removal actions.”

The second case involves a large public school district in south Florida. Before hiring employees to work in the taxpayer-funded enterprise, the district of about 350,000 mostly Hispanic students likes to verify that candidates are in the country legally. According to the Obama administration this is illegal and discriminates against employees in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). So, the DOJ’s bloated Civil Rights Division went after Miami Dade County Public Schools (MDCPS) for discrimination and essentially forced it to stop checking if employees are authorized to work in the U.S.

The department’s investigation, conducted by the Civil Rights Division’s Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC), found that MDCPS required non-U.S. citizens, but not similarly-situated U.S. citizens, to present specific documents to prove their employment eligibility, a DOJ announcement states. “The INA’s anti-discrimination provision prohibits employers from making specific documentary demands based on citizenship or national origin when verifying an employee’s authorization to work,” according to the DOJ.

As part of a settlement with the feds, MDCPS will pay a $90,000 civil penalty and establish a $125,000 fund to compensate individuals who lost wages because the district checked their immigration status. The agreement also forces the district to undergo “compliance monitoring” for three years and allow the DOJ’s Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices to train students on “worker rights.”

The Obama DOJ has also gone after private businesses for verifying workers’ immigration status. Last month Judicial Watch reported on a case involving a Nebraska meat packing company accused by the agency of discrimination for requiring employees to furnish proof that they are eligible to work legally in the U.S. The business, Nebraska Beef Ltd, was forced to pay a $200,000 civil penalty and provide uncapped back pay for individuals who lost wages because they couldn’t prove they are in the country legally. The company also had to agree to long term “compliance monitoring” by the feds.


Environmental Disaster

The feds believe that spending $200,000 on a video game that focuses on the importance of clean water can be a total game changer...