Podcast appearances and mentions of jonathan blitzer

The Trump administration is deporting alleged violent gang members to a prison in El Salvador — often with little evidence. New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer joins host Krys Boyd to discuss cases of men mistaken for members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua and deported anyway, efforts to get them back, and how the U.S. court system seems one step behind the fast-moving orders from the White House. His article is “The Makeup Artist Donald Trump Deported Under the Alien Enemies Act.” Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Last month the Trump administration deported, without due process, 238 Venezuelan migrants to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador. The White House says that these people have ties to a Venezuelan gang but has provided little evidence to support this claim. Most of them do not have criminal histories. Apple News In Conversation host Shumita Basu sat down with New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer, who has covered immigration for more than a decade, to discuss the possible implications of these deportations and the muted resistance to the Trump administration’s immigration agenda.

 James Henson talks with Jonathan Blitzer about his profile of Texas Governor Greg Abbott for the March 17 issue of The New Yorker.

This past weekend marked a major escalation in the Trump administration's mass deportation efforts, with the dramatic detention of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist who played a prominent role in the protests against Israel on Columbia University's campus last year. Khalil, a Columbia graduate student, is a permanent legal resident in the US. The Trump administration says it detained Khalil for what it described, without evidence, as his support for Hamas, and President Donald Trump promised “this is the first arrest of many to come” in a Truth Social post. In the meantime, a federal court in New York prevented the federal government from deporting Khalil while it hears his case. He's currently being held at an immigration detention facility in Louisiana.Khalil's arrest—and the Trump administration's reimagining of immigration writ large—are in many ways a product of decades of dysfunction within the US immigration system itself. On this week's episode of More To The Story, Reveal's new weekly interview show, host Al Letson talks with The New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer about the 50-year history of the country's inability to deal with migrants at the southern border and why the Trump administration's approach to immigration is much more targeted—and extreme—than it was eight years ago. Support our journalism at Revealnews.org/donatenow Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to get the scoop on new episodes at Revealnews.org/weekly Instagram Producer: Josh Sanburn | Editor: Kara McGuirk-Allison | Theme music: Fernando Arruda and Jim Briggs | Digital producer: Nikki Frick | Interim executive producers: Brett Myers and Taki Telonidis | Host: Al LetsonDig Deeper/Related Stories:Did the US Cause Its Own Border Crisis? (Reveal)https://revealnews.org/podcast/did-the-us-cause-its-own-border-crisis/Immigrants on the Line (Reveal)https://revealnews.org/podcast/immigrants-on-the-line/The Forgotten Origins of a Migration Crisis (Mother Jones)https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2024/02/jonathan-blitzer-migration-crisis-everyone-who-is-gone-is-here-interview/ Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Stephen Miller är den inflytelserika arkitekten bakom Trumps migrationspolitik. Hör om den radikala ideologin och om människorna som berörs. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radio Play. Under Donald Trumps första veckor i Vita huset har han undertecknat en lång rad presidentdekret på migrationsområdet. Både kritiker och anhängare beskriver detta som en radikal omläggning av tidigare politik. Bakom den nya politiken står en av Trumps närmaste medarbetare i Vita huset – Stephen Miller. En person som utmärkte sig politiskt redan i skolan, som drivs av en extrem ideologi och som med åren byggt upp ett stort politiskt inflytande bakom kulisserna.Samtidigt gömmer sig nu migranter som är rädda för att bli deporterade från USA trots att dom har giltiga papper. Sveriges Radios Latinamerikakorrespondent Lotten Collin har mött migranter som berörs på båda sidor om gränsen de senaste veckorna. I södra Texas möter hon också invånare som känner medvind nu och som ser fram emot Trumps nya gränspolitik.Medverkande: Toni och Benito Trevino, lokala partiföreträdare för republikanerna i Starr County, Texas, Claudia, Trump-väljare i Starr County. Doris Meissner, senior fellow vid tankesmedjan Migration Policy Institute. Jonathan Blitzer, journalist på The New Yorker. Blake Barrow, från den kristna hjälporganisationen The Rescue Mission i Texas. Barbara, och Frangely, migranter från Venezuela. Dana, migrant från Colombia. Michael Vickers, ranchägare i Texas som koordinerar den privata milisgruppen Texas Border Volunteers.Konflikt har sökt Stephen Miller.Reporter: Lotten Collin, Latinamerikakorrespondent.lotten.collin@sverigesradio.seProgramledare: Fernando Ariasfernando.arias@sverigesradio.seProducent: Therese Rosenvingetherese.rosenvinge@sverigesradio.seTekniker: Lisa Abrahamsson

It's no surprise that immigration policy is an area that we've seen so much focus on recently. The Trump administration has moved with lightning speed to roll out its immigration agenda. With everything that's going on, we thought it would be good to have a conversation about some of the deep roots and complexities in history that have brought us to this moment. Jonathan Blitzer is a staff writer at The New Yorker and the author of “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis.” He joins WITHpod to discuss what he has called “misguided” policy, the real-life impacts and more.   

80 years ago today, Soviet troops liberated Auschwitz, the largest of the Nazi death camps, marking the beginning of the end of the Holocaust. Some of those who survived the Holocaust later survived the Hamas attack of October 7, 2023, including Zvi Solow, who fled Poland, Italy, and Greece during World War II. He speaks to Paula Newton from southern Israel. Also on today's show: Zahra Joya, Founder & Editor-in-Chief, Rukhshana Media; Jonathan Blitzer, Staff Writer, The New Yorker  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

OA1098/T3BE51 - We conclude our review of Trump's immigration enforcement team with the man behind Donald Trump's immigration policies.. Who is Steven Miller, and why? You'll want to listen to this one even if you think you know who this man is, because it's all a lot weirder--and, somehow, worse--than you might have ever imagined.  Then, it's time for the answer to last week's bar exam question, and Q51! Hatemonger: Stephen Miller, Donald Trump, and the White Nationalist Agenda, Jean Guerrero (2020)  “How Stephen Miller Manipulates Donald Trump to Further His Immigration Obsession,” Jonathan Blitzer, The New Yorker (2/20/2020) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! If you'd like to support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!

Immigration has been the cornerstone of Donald Trump's political career, and in his second successful Presidential campaign he promised to execute the largest deportation in history. Stephen Miller, Trump's key advisor on hard-line immigration policy, said that the incoming Administration would “unleash the vast arsenal of federal powers to implement the most spectacular migration crackdown,” possibly involving the use of the military. “I do think they're going to strain the outer limits of the law on that,” the staff writer Jonathan Blitzer tells David Remnick. “We're entering unprecedented territory.” Blitzer unpacks some of the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and explains measures that the new Administration is likely to take. “I.C.E. has a policy that discourages arrests at schools, hospitals, places of worship, courts,” he says. That policy can change and, he believes, will. “You're going to see arrest operations in very scary and upsetting places.” The aim, he thinks, will be “to create a sense of terror. That is going to be the modus operandi of the Administration.” Blitzer is the author of “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here,” a definitive account of the immigration crisis.  

In this episode of Words on a Wire, host Will Rose sits down with Jonathan Blitzer, New Yorker staff writer and author of the New York Times Top 10 Book of 2024, Everyone Who Was Gone Is Here. Blitzer delves into the intricate and often overlooked ties between U.S. foreign policy in Central America and the modern immigration crises at the southern border. Drawing on years of immersive reporting and personal interviews, Blitzer highlights the human stories behind the headlines, including the transformative narratives of individuals like Juan, whose life embodies the far-reaching consequences of Cold War-era policies.The conversation touches on key moments in immigration history, such as the evolution of deterrence strategies in El Paso, the humanitarian crisis fueled by asylum seekers, and the shifting demographics of border crossings. Blitzer also shares his concerns about the potential consequences of a second Trump administration, predicting aggressive policies that could reshape immigrant communities and asylum processes.

Immigration has been the cornerstone of Donald Trump's political career, and in his second successful Presidential campaign he promised to execute the largest deportation in history. Stephen Miller, Trump's key advisor on hard-line immigration policy, said that the incoming Administration would “unleash the vast arsenal of federal powers to implement the most spectacular migration crackdown,” possibly involving the use of the military. “I do think they're going to strain the outer limits of the law on that,” the staff writer Jonathan Blitzer tells David Remnick. “We're entering unprecedented territory.” Blitzer unpacks some of the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and explains measures that the new Administration is likely to take. “I.C.E. has a policy that discourages arrests at schools, hospitals, places of worship, courts,” he says. That policy can change and, he believes, will. “You're going to see arrest operations in very scary and upsetting places.” The aim, he thinks, will be “to create a sense of terror. That is going to be the modus operandi of the Administration.” Blitzer is the author of “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here,” a definitive account of the immigration crisis.

An interview with Jonathan Blitzer, author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here. The book is a vivid portrait of the people whose lives ebb and flow across the U.S. border, and how the immigration crisis shapes American politics and culture.

It's been decades since the United States has updated its immigration policies in any sort of comprehensive way, and the problems and suffering at the southern border have persisted. Meanwhile, worsening conflicts around the world push more and more people to leave their homes and try and make their way to America. Immigration is a top concern of U.S. voters, and almost everyone agrees that something needs to change. Why is immigration reform so difficult? Four experts with diverse perspectives meet for a frank and lively panel at the 2024 Aspen Ideas Festival, and point out the gaps and roadblocks in our current system. President and CEO of the International Rescue Committee, David Miliband, brings the aid organization outlook. New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer has reported on immigration for years. U.S. Representative Dan Crenshaw from Texas sees the political fight from inside Congress. And Marcela Escobari serves the public as coordinator for the Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection, and is also a special assistant to President Biden. NBC News journalist Rebecca Blumenstein moderates the conversation. aspenideas.org

It's been a cathartic week in Chicago for Democrats, who will wrap their convention tonight with the historic nomination of Vice President Kamala Harris. But well before the last balloon falls, Democrats are steeling themselves for a tough fight ahead, especially when it comes to the economy. Stephanie Flanders is the Head of Economics coverage at Bloomberg, and Leslie Vinjamuri is Director of the US and Americas program at the international affairs think tank Chatham House. They join Christiane to discuss what policy and messaging Harris needs in the next 75 days.  Also on today's show: Jonathan Blitzer, Author, "Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here"; tennis icons Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Immigration is one of the most important issues in this year's presidential election. This week, On the Media traces how root causes of mass migration from Central America to the United States over the past decade stem back to the Cold War. Plus, a deep dive on terms like “colonialism” and “decolonization,” and what they mean in the context of Israel-Palestine.[01:00] Host Brooke Gladstone speaks with Jonathan Blitzer, who covers immigration for The New Yorker and is author of the book, Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here, about how the root causes of mass migration from Central America to the United States over the past decade stem back to the Cold War. This interview originally aired on our February 2, 2024 show.[15:30] Brooke continues her conversation with Jonathan Blitzer about how the past and future of Central America and the United States are inextricable, and the far-reaching consequences of Congress' refusal to reform the immigration system since 1990. This interview originally aired on our February 2, 2024 show.[30:58] Brooke Gladstone speaks with Iyad el-Baghdadi, a Palestinian human rights activist, writer, and co-author of The Middle East Crisis Factory, about the value of historical parallels to describe the conflict in Palestine, and why the precise meanings behind words like “decolonization” and “colonialism” are crucial. This interview originally aired on our March 8, 2024 show.Further reading / listening:Everyone Who Is Gone Is HereThe Middle East Crisis Factory On the Media is supported by listeners like you. Support OTM by donating today (https://pledge.wnyc.org/support/otm). Follow our show on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook @onthemedia, and share your thoughts with us by emailing onthemedia@wnyc.org.

Immigration is a divisive issue in America, much as it is here in the UK. How did the debate become so toxic – and is there a way to fix it and remove the heat from the arguments? Jonathan Blitzer, author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis joins Jacob Jarvis to discuss the situation, how politicians have failed – and how the public could change the way it thinks about the issue. Buy Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis through our affiliate bookshop and you'll help fund The Bunker by earning us a small commission for every sale. Bookshop.org's fees help support independent bookshops too. There's a special offer for Bunker listeners – Go to Incogni.com/thebunker to get an exclusive 60% off your annual plan with Incogni. We are sponsored by Indeed. Go to Indeed.com/bunker for £100 sponsored credit. www.patreon.com/bunkercast Written and presented by Jacob Jarvis. Produced by Liam Tait. Audio production by Tom Taylor. Managing Editor Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor Andrew Harrison. Art by James Parrett. Music by Kenny Dickinson. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production. www.podmasters.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The New Yorker writers Stephania Taladrid and Jonathan Blitzer join Tyler Foggatt to unpack President Biden's stringent new executive order on asylum and the border. They discuss the strained diplomatic relations between the United States and Mexico and the political calculations underpinning Biden's decision, and imagine what negotiations between Donald Trump and Mexican President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum would look like. This week's reading: “Will Mexico Decide the U.S. Election?,” by Stephania Taladrid  “What's Behind Joe Biden's Harsh New Executive Order on Immigration?” by Jonathan Blitzer To discover more podcasts from The New Yorker, visit newyorker.com/podcasts. To send feedback on this episode, write to themail@newyorker.com.

American public opinion is increasingly intolerant of migrants, given the record numbers who have illegally crossed the southern border over the past several years. The U.S. immigration system is broken, as harsher enforcement in the name of deterrence has not magically fixed the root causes of human migration from Central and South America. Under election year pressure, President Joseph Biden signed an executive order to bar most asylum seekers, but comprehensive immigration reform remains out of reach. The asylum system, codified in 1980, was never designed to handle so many people. In this episode, New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer, the author of "Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here," explains the ins and outs of asylum and the human costs of failing to reform a broken system.

In his new book, "Everyone Who is Gone is Here," Jonathan Blitzer tells the history of the disastrous humanitarian crisis at the southern border. What will it take to passing humanitarian reforms?

Richard Haass, President Emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, joins to break down the newest ceasefire proposal in the Israel-Hamas war, and what will be necessary for lasting peace in Gaza.  Next, the New Yorker's Jonathan Blitzer discusses the Biden Administration's new border policy, its potential political effects, and how the new asylum cap fits into the American immigration system more broadly.  Then, Denise Dresser, professor at the Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico, tells Fareed about the recent election results in Mexico and explains why she thinks Claudia Sheinbaum's victory is actually a win for autocracy.  Finally, Fareed is joined by investor and author Ruchir Sharma to discuss his new book, “What Went Wrong with Capitalism”.  GUESTS: Richard Haass (@RichardHaass), Jonathan Blitzer (@JonathanBlitzer), Denise Dresser (@DeniseDresserG), Ruchir Sharma  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode of the Cornell Keynotes podcast, Marielena Hincapié, Distinguished Immigration Fellow and Visiting Scholar at Cornell Law School, interviews Jonathan Blitzer, staff writer at The New Yorker and immigration expert, on his recently published book Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis. They discuss how the politics and policy of immigration in the United States have been forged from the 1980s to the present, offering a look at living history, told through individuals from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras who've had to risk everything to save themselves and those around them.Co-sponsors:Cornell Law School Migration and Human Rights ProgramCornell Migrations InitiativeCornell Latino Studies ProgramNational Immigration Law Center (NILC)Migration Policy Center (MPI)FWD.us Follow eCornell on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, TikTok, and X.

In his new book "Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here," immigration expert Jonathan Blitzer highlights the U.S. foreign policy decisions that led to today's crisis at the southern border. Blitzer will be in Kansas City Tuesday for a Cockefair lecture at UMKC.

Jonathan Blitzer, staff writer at the New Yorker, joins Jon Stewart to discuss his book "Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here" and how varying political dynamics halt the progress of immigration reform in the United States. Then, Harvard University professor Steven Levitsky, co-author of the bestsellers “Tyranny of the Minority” and "How Democracies Die," joins Jon to talk about how the Founding Fathers shaped elected democracy through improvisation, the challenge of constitutional reform, and the importance of improving and evolving democratic institutions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On this edition of The Weekly Reader, our book critic Marion Winik recommends three books that just might help you make some sense of the crisis at our southern border and the increase in global migration:  The Prince of Los Cocuyos, by Richard Blanco, , Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here, by Jonathan Blitzer and A Map of Future Ruins, by Lauren Markham. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jon Stewart discusses Biden and Trump's recent visits to the Mexico border, how the GOP uses fear to advance their policy goals around immigration, and how the Democrats' struggle to deliver on their espoused values. Plus, as SCOTUS unanimously rules in favor of Donald Trump, preventing states from kicking him off their ballot this election, Jon Stewart and Desi Lydic help Democrats get creative to prevent another Trump term. And Jonathan Blitzer, New Yorker staff writer and author of “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here,” discusses with Jon Stewart the political dynamics at play that are preventing comprehensive immigration reform from getting passed in the U.S.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema announces her intention to become Former Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema. Also on the show, The New York Times' union says the paper is racially profiling its own MENA staffers over a leak, Mike provides analysis plus he explains the meaning of MENA, in case you are unfamiliar. And we're joined once more by Jonathan Blitzer, who profiled Alejandro Mayorkis for The New Yorker and is the author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis. Produced by Joel Patterson and Corey Wara Email us at thegist@mikepesca.com To advertise on the show, visit: https://advertisecast.com/TheGist Subscribe to The Gist Subscribe: https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ Follow Mikes Substack at: Pesca Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Jonathan Blitzer author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis, profiled DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for The New Yorker.  Plus, The Intercept's lengthy attempt to question widespread Hamas rapes. And Trump will be on the ballot. Produced by Joel Patterson and Corey Wara Email us at thegist@mikepesca.com To advertise on the show, visit: https://advertisecast.com/TheGist Subscribe to The Gist Subscribe: https://subscribe.mikepesca.com/ Follow Mikes Substack at: Pesca Profundities | Mike Pesca | Substack Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode, Xavier Bonilla has a dialogue with Jonathan Blitzer about Central American immigrants coming to the United States and the evolving relationship in the region. They talk about the emphasis on Central America and, more specifically, El Salvador, when discussing immigration. They discuss the many narrative accounts of immigrants from El Salvador and some of the background information on El Salvador. They provide some of the history of El Salvador and the many brutal aspects of the 12+ years civil war. They also talk about the cyclical nature of US involvement with Central America, future goals, and many more topics. Jonathan Blitzer is a journalist and writer who currently is a staff writer at The New Yorker. His work has appeared in The New York Times, The New Yorker, The Atlantic, and many other publications. He is the recipient of the 2018 Immigration Journalism Prize from French-American foundation and the Media Leadership Award from the American Immigration Lawyers Association. He is the author of the new book, Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of A Crisis.Twitter: @jonathanblitzer Get full access to Converging Dialogues at convergingdialogues.substack.com/subscribe

Written into the DNA of American immigration policy, which we tend to regard as a kind of domestic policy - and which in many ways it is - has to do with US foreign policy.Jonathan BlitzerThis episode was made in partnership with the Andrea Mitchell Center for the Study of Democracy.Proudly sponsored by the Kellogg Institute for International Studies. Learn more at https://kellogg.nd.eduAccess Episodes Ad-Free on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.Read Justin Kempf's essay "The Revolution Will Be Podcasted."A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Jonathan Blitzer is a staff writer at The New Yorker. He won a 2017 National Award for Education Reporting for “American Studies,” a story about an underground school for undocumented immigrants. His writing and reporting have also appeared in the New York Times, The Atlantic, The Atavist, Oxford American, and The Nation. He is an Emerson Fellow at New America. His most recent book is Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:20Personal Experiences - 3:12Immigration and Foreign Policy - 12:25Migration as a Crisis - 31:20Bukele and El Salvador Today - 46:26Key LinksEveryone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis by Jonathan Blitzer“Do I Have to Come Here Injured or Dead?” by Jonathan Blitzer in The New YorkerFollow Jonathan Blitzer on X @JonathanBlitzerDemocracy Paradox PodcastRachel Schwartz on How Guatemala Rose Up Against Democratic BackslidingJoseph Wright and Abel Escribà-Folch on Migration's Potential to Topple DictatorshipsMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show

JONATHAN BLITZER, staff writer at The New Yorker, discusses his recent book Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis. According to Blitzer, immigration policy happens at the intersection of international relations and domestic politics. In this episode, he uses personal stories to help explain his points. JUSTIN KEMPF, host of the Democracy Paradox, interviews Blitzer about immigration, Central America, and the many people affected. Episode in partnership with Democracy Paradox.

The Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson dismantles the idea of "swapping out" President Biden. The New Republic's Michael Tomasky critiques the media coverage of the 2024 election. The New Yorker's Jonathan Blitzer outlines his new book "Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis."See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's déjà vu for US lawmakers, who failed yet again this week to agree on a solution to the country's immigration crisis. But beyond the politics are countless human stories, as the number of unauthorized immigrants crossing the border keeps reaching record highs, and a backlog of cases in US immigration courts passes three million. If this week's deal had passed in Congress, it would have been one of the most significant changes to US immigration policy in decades, evidence of just how long the issue has remained a stubborn political challenge. Jonathan Blitzer has covered the issue for years, and he joins the program.  Also on today's show: Nina Khrushcheva, Professor of International Affairs; journalist/author Calvin Trillin  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On El Salvador and mass incarceration.    Nayib Bukele, El Salvador's president, has just been re-elected on a landslide. His trademark policy is a state of emergency and the locking-up of tens of thousands of suspected gang members. He also made Bitcoin legal tender. What is 'Bukelismo', will it last, and will it spread?    First, we talk to Nelson Rauda, an editor at investigative outlet El Faro about the mood in El Salvador, what the state of emergency has been like, who the main gangs are and whether Bukele has secretly been negotiating with them, and what opposition there is to Bukele's subversion of democracy and civil liberties.    Then, Juan Rojas, Latin America columnist at Compact Magazine, joins us to discuss why such 'mano dura' (iron fist) policies have failed elsewhere but why they continue to appeal across the region – including among the poor and working class.    For part two, subscribe at patreon.com/bungacast   Readings: El Salvador's Bitcoin Paradise Is a Mirage, Nelson Rauda, NYT Behind Bukele's Revolution, Juan Rojas & Geoff Shullenberger, Compact On Security, Bukele and Petro Have a Problem in Common, Juan Rojas, Americas Quarterly In response to killings, El Salvador's bitcoin president attacks civil liberties, Nelson Rauda, LA Times The Rise of Nayib Bukele, El Salvador's Authoritarian President, Jonathan Blitzer, New Yorker Chaos in Ecuador, Guillaume Long, Sidecar/NLR ¡Viva la ‘eficracia'!, Martin Caparrós, El País

As Texas Governor Greg Abbott challenges the U.S. government for control of the southern border claiming President Biden is refusing to enforce immigration laws, immigration has become one of the most divisive issues in the 2024 election cycle. New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer's new book is called "Everyone Who is Gone is Here."

Jonathan Blitzer, New Yorker staff writer and the author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis (Penguin Press, 2024), tells the larger story of the crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border through the stories of individuals making the journey from Central America -- and talks about the politics of the current crisis, including the bipartisan compromise just negotiated.

A bipartisan deal on immigration policy is working its way through Congress. On Today's Show:Jonathan Blitzer, New Yorker staff writer and the author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis (Penguin Press, 2024), tells the larger story of the crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border through the stories of individuals making the journey from Central America -- and talks about the politics of the current crisis, including the bipartisan compromise just negotiated.

The Washington Roundtable: Prospects for the passage of a long-negotiated aid package that includes funding for Ukraine and Israel, and policy changes for the U.S. southern border, rapidly shrank this week, after the deal met resistance from House Republicans and former President Donald Trump. Meanwhile, President Biden's approval rating on immigration has sunk to eighteen per cent. Why are Republicans simultaneously concerned about the crisis at the border while also stymying bi-partisan legislation to address it? The New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer, who is the author of “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis,” joins the hosts Susan B. Glasser, Jane Mayer, and Evan Osnos to weigh in on the implications that our knotted immigration politics have for the 2024 election. 

In the shadow of another election year, Democrats and Republicans are at a bitter crossroads over immigration, as the system becomes increasingly unmanageable. With as many as twelve thousand migrants arriving at the border per day, and resistance to asylum seekers growing—even among Democrats—the Biden Administration is in a political bind. “You have a global moment of mass migration converging on the border at a time when resources are down. Congress is refusing to give the president the money that he needs for basic operations—it's a perfect storm,” The New Yorker's Jonathan Blitzer tells David Remnick.  Blitzer has covered immigration for years, and his new book, “Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here,” takes a long and deep look at U.S. policy and the forces that drive migrants to undertake enormous risks. According to Blitzer, both sides are obscuring the actual problem. “There's always been an assumption that the case for immigration makes itself—that the moral high ground makes sense to everyone, that we should be welcoming, that people showing up in need obviously should seek protection,” Blitzer says. “I don't think defenders of immigration have squared the high ideals with some of the practical realities. And sadly the border, which is a tiny sliver of what the immigration system is as a whole, ends up dominating the conversation.”Plus, the pop singer and songwriter Olivia Rodrigo's rise to fame has been meteoric. She talks with David Remnick about her models for songwriting, dealing with social media as a young celebrity, and how it feels to be branded the voice of Generation Z.

Subscribe to The Realignment to access our exclusive Q&A episodes and support the show: https://realignment.supercast.com/REALIGNMENT NEWSLETTER: https://therealignment.substack.com/PURCHASE BOOKS AT OUR BOOKSHOP: https://bookshop.org/shop/therealignmentEmail Us: realignmentpod@gmail.comFoundation for American Innovation: https://www.thefai.org/posts/lincoln-becomes-faiJonathan Blitzer, author of Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis, joins The Realignment. Jonathan and Marshall discuss the Central American origins of the border crisis, the origins and state of the asylum system, why the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations have struggled to "solve" the U.S.-Mexico border, and why we can expect future border showdowns for the foreseeable future. 

New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer's new book is: Everyone Who Is Gone Is Here: The United States, Central America, and the Making of a Crisis. The book is a deeply reported history of the disastrous humanitarian crisis at the southern border told through the lives of the migrants forced to risk everything and the policymakers who determine their fate.

Hundreds of thousands of people, mostly from Central America, arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border every year. What to do with these migrants is one of the most divisive issues in Washington. New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer says the crisis is partially the result of decades of American policy. Blitzer's new book is called Everyone Who is Gone is Here. He also recounts the stories of those attempting to cross the border.

Hundreds of thousands of people, mostly from Central America, arrive at the U.S.-Mexico border every year. What to do with these migrants is one of the most divisive issues in Washington. New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer says the crisis is partially the result of decades of American policy. Blitzer's new book is called Everyone Who is Gone is Here. He also recounts the stories of those attempting to cross the border.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

New Yorker writer Jonathan Blitzer gives a deeper lens into Johnson, a conservative who refused to certify the 2020 election results. Blitzer also talks about the influence of Rep. Jim Jordan. Kevin Whitehead reviews a new album from big band composer Darcy James Argue.

New Yorker writer Jonathan Blitzer gives a deeper lens into Johnson, a conservative who refused to certify the 2020 election results. Blitzer also talks about the influence of Rep. Jim Jordan. Kevin Whitehead reviews a new album from big band composer Darcy James Argue.

Jim Jordan may have failed to become the Republican Speaker of the House, but he still remains the Party's most influential insurgent. The former wrestling champion and current Ohio congressman first took office in 2007. Since then, he has not sponsored a single bill that has become law. Instead, he has made it his mission to expose what he calls “big-tech censorship” against conservatives, and to undermine the institutions that are investigating Donald Trump. Jonathan Blitzer, who wrote a piece on Jordan's conspiratorial quest for power for this week's New Yorker, joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss why this man is still key to understanding the contemporary Republican Party. 

Jim Jordan may have failed to become the Republican Speaker of the House, but he still remains the Party's most influential insurgent. The former wrestling champion and current Ohio congressman first took office in 2007. Since then, he has not sponsored a single bill that has become law. Instead, he has made it his mission to expose what he calls “big-tech censorship” against conservatives, and to undermine the institutions that are investigating Donald Trump. Jonathan Blitzer, who wrote a piece on Jordan's conspiratorial quest for power for this week's New Yorker, joins Tyler Foggatt to discuss why this man is still key to understanding the contemporary Republican Party. 

Last week, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis flew roughly fifty migrants from San Antonio, Texas, to Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. Some of these migrants said that they were actively misled about where they were being sent and what would await them when they arrived. They have since filed a lawsuit, accusing DeSantis and other state officials of executing “a premeditated, fraudulent, and illegal scheme” in which vulnerable people were used as political props. The New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer has written extensively about the politics and policy of the southern border. He speaks with the guest host Tyler Foggatt about the rogue practices of Border Patrol, the surge of asylum seekers from Venezuela, and why Republican governors are “calling the shots” on the Biden immigration agenda.

This month, the C.D.C. announced plans to end Title 42, a public-health order, issued by the Trump Administration at the start of the pandemic, that gives the federal government broad authority to turn away migrants and asylum seekers at the southern border. Public-health experts and some Democrats have pressured President Biden to repeal the order, but others, including several of his own top advisers, argue that the repeal will substantially increase the number of migrants at the southern border, further straining a chaotic immigration system, and hand Republicans a campaign issue for the midterms: a “migrant surge” approved by the Administration. Jonathan Blitzer joins Dorothy Wickenden to talk about how immigration is becoming another political liability for the Biden Administration.

Jane Campion's “The Power of the Dog” opens like a classic Western: cattle are herded across the sweeping plains of Montana, with imposing mountains in the distance. But the plot of the film, based on a 1967 novel by Thomas Savage, isn't exactly a Western. It's a family drama about two brothers who share in the ranching business but couldn't be more different, and what happens when one of them brings his new wife and her teen-age son to live on the ranch. “The Power of the Dog” is nominated for twelve Academy Awards, the most of any film this year, including Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actor. Campion talks with David Remnick about Benedict Cumberbatch's starring performance; her experience working with Harvey Weinstein, and how #MeToo has changed the film industry; and why she'd really like to direct a comedy. Plus, Caetano Veloso, a living giant of Brazilian music, was recently profiled for The New Yorker by Jonathan Blitzer. The staff writer picks some key tracks from Veloso's vast catalogue that illuminate his long career.

This week, Samsung held its Galaxy Unpacked event, its annual product spectacle the company uses to announce new mobile devices. In addition to its new Galaxy S22 line of phones, Samsung also introduced three new (and very expensive) tablets. The gadgets are part of a push to solidify Android tablets as "the future of computing," which is what Google recently called them.  This week on Gadget Lab, WIRED reviews editor Julian Chokkattu joins us to dish about Samsung's new devices, and whether Android tablets are actually going to take off in a big way. Show Notes:  Read more about everything Samsung announced at its Galaxy Unpacked event this week. Watch Julian's explainer of all the models of Galaxy S22. He also has advice about how to preorder the Galaxy devices. Recommendations:  Julian recommends the Manfrotto Move Quick release system for your camera setup. Lauren recommends the show Euphoria. Mike recommends Jonathan Blitzer's New Yorker profile of the Brazilian musician Caetano Veloso. Julian Chokkattu can be found on Twitter @JulianChokkattu. Lauren Goode is @LaurenGoode. Michael Calore is @snackfight. Bling the main hotline at @GadgetLab. The show is produced by Boone Ashworth (@booneashworth). Our theme music is by Solar Keys. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

President Biden took the oath of office in a moment of deep crisis—the pandemic in full swing and just weeks after an unprecedented attempt to overturn the election by violence. Merely a return to normalcy would have been a tall order. But Biden was promising something more: a transformational agenda that would realign American economics and life on a scale rivalling Franklin Roosevelt's long Presidency. Yet Biden never commanded Roosevelt's indomitable popularity and electoral advantages. A year into the Administration, Evan Osnos takes stock of its successes, failures, and ongoing challenges, along with four New Yorker colleagues: Susan B. Glasser on legislation, Jonathan Blitzer on immigration, Elizabeth Kolbert on climate, and John Cassidy on the economy.

President Biden took the oath of office in a moment of deep crisis—the pandemic in full swing and just weeks after an unprecedented attempt to overturn the election by violence. Merely a return to normalcy would have been a tall order. But Biden was promising something more: a transformational agenda that would realign American economics and life on a scale rivalling Franklin Roosevelt's long Presidency. Yet Biden never commanded Roosevelt's indomitable popularity and electoral advantages. A year into the Administration, Evan Osnos takes stock of its successes, failures, and ongoing challenges, along with four New Yorker colleagues: Susan B. Glasser on legislation, Jonathan Blitzer on immigration, Elizabeth Kolbert on climate, and John Cassidy on the economy.

Nearly a century ago, during the Spanish Civil War, a group of parents put five hundred of their children on a boat and sent them across the ocean to find safety in Mexico. Few of the refugees ever saw their parents again. The youngest of the children was Rosita Daroca Martinez, who was just three. On this week’s show, her granddaughter, the writer and radio producer Destry Maria Sibley, traces the impact of her grandmother’s trauma down through the generations. Plus, the immigration reporter Jonathan Blitzer ties the story to today’s refugee crisis at the U.S. southern border, where a surge in arrivals has put the Biden Administration on its heels. 

Donald Trump’s controversial “zero tolerance” policy, and the resulting images of migrant children being wrenched from their parents arms, were defining moments of his administration. On Biden’s first day in office, he proposed a raft of changes to America’s immigration policy, including an eight-year path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and a plan for an orderly resettlement of refugees. But over 4,200 migrant children are currently being held in custody, and the process to deal with them has fallen into chaos.Jonathan Blitzer joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss the surge in border crossings, and Biden’s options for addressing the migrants’ plight.

Donald Trump launched his Presidential campaign on the issue of immigration, and after his Inauguration, arrests by Immigration and Customs Enforcement increased sharply. David Remnick talks with the staff writer Jonathan Blitzer, who has been covering Trump’s immigration policy all along. “The Trump Administration got smarter over the last four years,” he tells David Remnick. Rather than the “high drama” of executive orders, they began implementing rules and regulation changes across multiple departments that are much harder to undo. Blitzer explains that the cumulative impact fundamentally alters how the government thinks about immigration.

The Presidency of Donald Trump has been unlike any other in America’s history. While many of his core promises remain unfulfilled, he managed to reshape our politics in just four years. On the cusp of the 2020 election, David Remnick assesses the Trump Administration’s impact on immigration policy, the climate, white identity politics, and the judiciary. He’s joined by Jeannie Suk Gersen, Jonathan Blitzer, Bill McKibben, Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, and Andrew Marantz.

Around 70% of all immigration detention centers are run by private companies, including the one at the heart of a new whistleblower complaint that alleges systemic medical neglect and malpractice. Dan digs into the business of immigrant detention, including oversight and profit incentives, with New Yorker staff writer Jonathan Blitzer. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement has been given a broad mandate to round up undocumented immigrants. The agency is infamously unwelcoming to journalists, but two filmmakers managed to get unprecedented access to its employees and detention facilities. Christina Clusiau and Shaul Schwarz discuss how they got this closeup look at the agency as it developed ever-harsher policies designed to deter immigrants. Schwarz tells Jonathan Blitzer, who covers immigration for the magazine, that “if [ICE] can make life difficult enough, if [it] can send these messages . . . that this is the hell you’re going to get, then [they’ll] make these people leave.”     The documentary, “Immigration Nation,” is available on Netflix.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement has been given a broad mandate to round up undocumented immigrants. The agency is infamously unwelcoming to journalists, but two filmmakers managed to get unprecedented access to its employees and detention facilities. Christina Clusiau and Shaul Schwarz discuss how they got this closeup look at the agency as it developed ever-harsher policies designed to deter immigrants. Schwarz tells Jonathan Blitzer, who covers immigration for the magazine, that “if [ICE] can make life difficult enough, if [it] can send these messages . . . that this is the hell you’re going to get, then [they’ll] make these people leave.”     The documentary, “Immigration Nation,” is available on Netflix.

The New Yorker's Jonathan Blitzer describes the avalanche of policies the Trump Administration has adopted to stem the flow of Central American asylum seekers to the US. Gaspar Cobo and Franciso Chavez, two Guatemalan asylum-seekers stopped at the border for more than a year, describe their reasons for coming and the difficulties they face in getting their claims heard.

This week, in a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled unlawful the Trump Administration’s decision to cancel the DACA program. DACA protects from deportation some seven hundred thousand undocumented immigrants who were brought to the United States as children. Though DACA and the “Dreamers” that it protects have widespread public support, the Trump Administration remains hostile to the program. Jonathan Blitzer joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss DACA’s big day in court, and the Trump Administration’s next moves on immigration policy.

This month, the Supreme Court is expected to decide a case with enormous repercussions: the Trump Administration’s cancellation of DACA, a policy that protects young immigrants commonly known as Dreamers. In November, Jonathan Blitzer spoke with two attorneys who argued the case, just before they went before the Court. Ted Olson, a noted litigator, is generally a champion of conservative issues, but he is fighting the Trump Administration here. Luis Cortes is a thirty-one-year-old from Seattle arguing his first Supreme Court case. He is himself an undocumented immigrant protected by DACA; if he loses, his own legal residency would be immediately threatened. Plus, the writer Bryan Washington, a native of Houston, remembers the social life of gay bars before the pandemic.

Donald Trump began his Presidential bid, in 2015, with an infamous speech, at Trump Tower, in which he said of Mexican immigrants, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” But it was not until a former aide to Jeff Sessions joined Trump’s campaign that the nativist rhetoric coalesced into a policy platform—including the separation of children from their families at the border. Jonathan Blitzer, who writes about immigration for The New Yorker, has been reporting on Stephen Miller’s sway in the Trump Administration and his remarkable success in advancing an extremist agenda. “There has never been an American President who built his campaign around the issue of immigration and later won on that campaign on immigration. Trump was the first and only President really ever to do it,” Blitzer tells David Remnick. Despite this influence, Miller remains largely behind the scenes. Blitzer explains why: “He knows that the kiss of death in this Administration is to be identified as the brains behind the man. He can’t let on that he’s the one who effectively is manipulating Trump on these issues.” 

Donald Trump began his Presidential bid, in 2015, with an infamous speech, at Trump Tower, in which he said of Mexican immigrants, “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” But it was not until a former aide to Jeff Sessions joined Trump’s campaign that the nativist rhetoric coalesced into a policy platform—including the separation of children from their families at the border. Jonathan Blitzer, who writes about immigration for The New Yorker, has been reporting on Stephen Miller’s sway in the Trump Administration and his remarkable success in advancing an extremist agenda. “There has never been an American President who built his campaign around the issue of immigration and later won on that campaign on immigration. Trump was the first and only President really ever to do it,” Blitzer tells David Remnick. Despite this influence, Miller remains largely behind the scenes. Blitzer explains why: “He knows that the kiss of death in this Administration is to be identified as the brains behind the man. He can’t let on that he’s the one who effectively is manipulating Trump on these issues.” 

Jeff Sessions, then the Attorney General, announced in 2017 the cancellation of the Obama-era policy known as DACA—Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. A number of plaintiffs sued, and their case goes to the Supreme Court next week. The New Yorker’s Jonathan Blitzer spoke with two of the attorneys who will argue for it. The noted litigator Ted Olson is generally a champion of conservative issues, but he is fighting the Trump Administration on this case. He told Blitzer, “It’s a rule-of-law case—not a liberal or conversative case—involving hundreds of thousands of individuals who will be hurt by an abrupt and unexplained and unjustified change in policy.” And Blitzer also spoke with Luis Cortez, a thirty-one-year-old from Seattle who is arguing his first Supreme Court case. Cortez is an immigration lawyer who is himself an undocumented immigrant protected by DACA status; if he loses his case, he will be at risk of deportation. 

Jeff Sessions, then the Attorney General, announced in 2017 the cancellation of the Obama-era policy known as DACA—Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. A number of plaintiffs sued, and their case goes to the Supreme Court next week. The New Yorker’s Jonathan Blitzer spoke with two of the attorneys who will argue for it. The noted litigator Ted Olson is generally a champion of conservative issues, but he is fighting the Trump Administration on this case. He told Blitzer, “It’s a rule-of-law case—not a liberal or conversative case—involving hundreds of thousands of individuals who will be hurt by an abrupt and unexplained and unjustified change in policy.” And Blitzer also spoke with Luis Cortes, a thirty-one-year-old from Seattle who is arguing his first Supreme Court case. Cortes is an immigration lawyer who is himself an undocumented immigrant protected by DACA status; if he loses his case, he will be at risk of deportation. Plus, while reporting on wildfire in Los Angeles, the writer Dana Goodyear was evacuated from her home. She sees the increasing frequency of intense fires as a wake-up call from the California dream.

The New Yorker’s immigration reporter Jonathan Blitzer joins host Alex Aleinikoff and journalist Ladane Nasseri to discuss U.S. border policy, the resignation of Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan and the Democrats’ difficult balancing act on immigration.

León Krauze talks to the New Yorker’s Jonathan Blitzer about how climate change deepens the U.S. border crisis, stories of Central American migration, and the tremendous spiraling debt that is taken on to embark on this dangerous journey.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

León Krauze talks to the New Yorker’s Jonathan Blitzer about how climate change deepens the U.S. border crisis, stories of Central American migration, and the tremendous spiraling debt that is taken on to embark on this dangerous journey.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last week, President Trump announced that he would stop sending financial aid to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, the countries of origin of many of the migrants attempting to cross the U.S.-Mexico border. Trump’s announcement contradicts accepted wisdom that foreign aid decreases migration, and comes as Trump is threatening to close the southern border as a matter of national security. Jonathan Blitzer, who recently reported on migration from Guatemala, joins Dorothy Wickenden to discuss Trump’s immigration policies and how climate change is giving his Administration even more to worry about.

In the run-up to the 2016 midterm elections, President Trump spoke frequently about the threat posed by the “migrant caravan,” a group of Central and South American migrants travelling through Mexico toward the U.S. border. In the past two weeks, the caravan has arrived in the Mexican border city of Tijuana. On Sunday, U.S. border agents deployed tear gas on a group of migrants attempting to cross the border, including a number of children. Reporting from Tijuana, Jonathan Blitzer speaks to David Rohde about the situation at the border and about how the Trump Administration is reshaping American immigration law.

A new policy change by the Trump administration on May 7th has resulted in thousands of children being separated from their want-to-be-immigrant parents who crossed the U.S. southern border in the wrong location. In this episode, hear from officials in every branch of government involved to learn why this is happening, why it's proving to be so difficult to return the children to their parents, and what we can do to help this situation. Please Support Congressional Dish - Quick Links Click here to contribute a lump sum or set up a monthly contribution via PayPal Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Use your bank’s online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North Number 4576 Crestview, FL 32536 Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Letter to Representative/Senators Jen's letter that she sent to her members of Congress. You are welcome to use this as you wish!  Additional Reading Report: Trump administration: Migrant families can be detained for more than 20 days by Tanya Ballard Brown, NPR, June 29, 2018. Article: Federal judge enjoins separation of migrant children, orders family reunification by Devlin Barrett, Mike DeBonis, Nick Miroff and Isaac Stanley-Becker, The Washington Post, June 27, 2018. Article: Trump aims to dismantle protections for immigrant kids and radically expand the family detention system by Ryan Devereaux, The Intercept, June 26, 2018. Article: With prosecutions of parents suspended the status quo returns at the border, The Washington Post, June 25, 2018. Article: Separated immigrant children are all over the U.S. now, far from parents who don't know where they are by Maria Sacchetti, Kevin Sieff and Marc Fisher, The Washington Post, June 24, 2018. Article: U.S. officials separated him from his child then he was deported to El Salvador, The Washington Post, June 23, 2018. Article: Yes, Obama separated families at the border, too by Franco Ordonez and Anita Kumar, McClatchy, Jue 21, 2018. Report: Governor orders probe of abuse claims by immigrant children by Michael Bisecker, Jake Pearson and Garance Burke, AP News, June 21, 2018. Report: Migrant children at the border - the facts by Graham Kates, CBS News, June 20, 2018. Report: The facilities that are housing children separated from their parents by Andy Uhler and David Brancaccio, Marketplace, June 20, 2018. Article: How private contractors enable Trump's cruelties at the border by David Dayen, The Nation, June 20, 2018. Article: Separating migrant families is barbaric. It's also what the U.S. has been doing to people of color for hundreds of years. by Shaun King, The Intercept, June 20, 2018. Report: Trump's executive order on family separation: What it does and doesn't do by Richard Gonzales, NPR, June 20, 2018. Report: U.S. announces its withdrawal from U.N. Human Rights Council by Colin Dwyer, NPR, June 19, 2018. Article: Detainees in Oregon say they followed asylum process and were arrested by Conrad Wilson, OPB, June 19, 2018. Report: Fact-checking family separation by Amrit Cheng, ACLU, June 19, 2018. Article: The U.S. has taken more than 3,700 children from their parents - and has no plan for returning them by Ryan Devereaux, The Intercept, June 19, 2018. Article: Exclusive: US officials lost track of nearly 6,000 unaccompanied migrant kids by Franco Ordonez and Anita Kumar, McClatchy, June 19, 2018. Article: The government has no plan for reuniting the immigrant families it is tearing apart by Jonathan Blitzer, The New Yorker, June 18, 2018. Report: U.N. rights chief tells U.S. to stop taking migrant children from parents by Nick Cumming-Bruce, The New York Times, June 18, 2018. Article: Taking migrant children from parents is illegal, U.N. tells U.S. by Nick Cumming-Bruce, The New York Times, June 5, 2018. Article: Parents, children ensnared in 'zero-tolerance' border prosecutions by Curt Prendergast and Perla Trevizo, Arizona Daily Star, May 28, 2018. Statement: By HHS Deputy Secretary on unaccompanied alien children program, HHS Deputy Secretary Eric Hargan, HHS, May 28, 2018. Report: Trump administration using contractors accused of abuse to detain undocumented children by TYT Investigates, TYT Network, May 28, 2018. Testimony: Ronald D. Vitiello on Stopping the daily border caravan: Time to build a policy wall, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, May 22, 2018. Report: ICE has already missed two detention reporting deadlines set by Congress in March, National Immigrant Justice Center, May 17, 2018. Article: As Gaza death toll rises, Israeli tactics face scrutiny by Josef Federman, The Seattle Times, May 15, 2018. News Report: Attorney General Sessions delivers remarks discussing the immigration enforcement actions of the Trump administration, Department of Justice, May 7, 2018. Statement: Steven Wagner of Administration for Children and Families U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, April 26, 2018. Article: Hundreds of immigrant children have been taken from parents at U.S. border by Caitlin Dickerson, The New York Times, April 20, 2018. Article: Trump's first year has been the private prison industry's best by Lauren-Brooke "L.B" Eisen, Brennan Center for Justice, January 15, 2018. Article: Private-prison giant, resurgent in Trump era, gathers at president's resort by Amy Brittain and Drew Harwell, The Washington Post, October 25, 2017. Report: Trump administration warns that U.S. may pull out of U.N. Human Rights Council by Merrit Kennedy, NPR, June 6, 2017. Article: Private prisons were thriving even before Trump was elected by Alice Speri, The Intercept, November 28, 2016. Article: Mexican migrant kids swiftly sent back by Sandra Dibble, San Diego Union Tribune, July 12, 2014. Article: Immigrant surge rooted in law to curb child trafficking by Carl Hulse, The New York Times, July 7, 2014. Resources Agency Details: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services GovTrack: H.R. 4760: Securing America's Future Act of 2018 GovTrack: H.R. 7311 (110th): William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 Human Rights First: The Flores Settlement Publication: Betraying Family Values: How Immigration Policy at the United States Border is Separating Families Snopes.com: Did the U.S. government lose track of 1,475 migrant children? U.S. Department of Homeland Security: Organizational Chart U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Southwest Border Migration FY2018 Sound Clip Sources Hearing: Prescription Drug Supply and Cost, Senate Finance Committee, C-SPAN, June 26, 2018. Witness: - Alex Azar - Health and Human Services Secretary 27:50 Senator Ron Wyden (OR): How many kids who were in your custody because of the zero-tolerance policy have been reunified with a parent or a relative? Alex Azar: So, I believe we have had a high of over 2,300 children that were separated from their parents as a result of the enforcement policy. We now have 2,047. Sen. Wyden: How many have been reunified? Azar: So, they would be unified with either parents or other relatives under our policy, so, of course if the parent remains in detention, unfortunately under rules that are set by Congress and the courts, they can’t be reunified while they’re in detention. Sen. Wyden: So is the answer zero? I mean, you have— Azar: No, no. No, we’ve had hundreds of children who had been separated who are now with—for instance, if there was a parent— Sen. Wyden: I want an— Azar: —parent who’s here in the country, they’d be with that parent. Sen. Wyden: I want to know about the children in your department’s custody. Azar: Yeah. Sen. Wyden: How many of them have been reunified? Azar: Well, that’s exactly what I’m saying. They had been placed with a parent or other relative who’s— Sen. Wyden: How many? Azar: —here in the United States. Sen. Wyden: How many? Azar: Several hundred. Sen. Wyden: Of the 2— Azar: Of the 2,300-plus that— Sen. Wyden: Okay. Azar: —came into our care. Sen. Wyden: How many— Azar: Probably of 2,047. 49:20 Senator Ben Nelson (FL): So, what is the plan to reunite 2,300 children? Alex Azar: Absolutely. So, the first thing we need to do is, for any of the parents, we have to confirm parentage. So that’s part of the process. With any child in our care, we have to ensure—there are traffickers; there are smugglers; there’re, frankly, just some bad people occasionally—we have to ensure that the parentage is confirmed. We have to vet those parents to ensure there’s no criminality or violent history on them. That’s part of the regular process for any placement with an individual. At that point, they’ll be ready to be reconnected to their parents. This is where our very broken immigration laws come into play. We’re not allowed to have a child be with the parent who is in custody of the Department of Homeland Security for more than 20 days, and so until we can get Congress to change that law to—the forcible separation there of the family units—we’ll hold them or place them with another family relative in the United States. But we are working to get all these kids ready to be placed back with their parents, get that all cleared up, as soon as—if Congress passes a change or if those parents complete their immigration proceedings, we can then reunify. 1:11:52 Alex Azar: If Congress doesn’t change the 20-day limit on family unification, then it depends on—the process for any individual parent going through their immigration proceedings, as long as they’re in detention, they can’t be together for more than 20 days—absurdly, but it is the case. 2:03:31 Senator Ron Wyden (OR): You told me a little bit ago that the Department has 2,047 kids in its custody, so— Alex Azar: That are separated. We’ve got about 12,000 unaccompanied minors in our program. Hearing: EB-5 Immigrant Investor Visa Program, C-SPAN, June 19, 2018. Witnesses: Lee Francis Cissna - Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security   17:17 Senator Dianne Feinstein (CA): Citizenship should not be for sale like a commodity on the stock exchange. There are millions—in fact, 4 million—of individuals who are waiting in line to immigrate lawfully to the United States. They have paid their required fees, they are in line, they wait patiently for a day that a visa becomes available, so they can be reunited with their families here in this country. However, because they don’t have a half a million dollars to buy their way in, they will continue to wait, some as long as 24 years. Yet, under the EB-5 system, the wealthy can cut to the front of the line. 49:45 Lee Francis Cissna: I did not play any role in deciding whether there was going to be a zero-tolerance initiative. What I recommended was, since there is one, what we need to do is decide which cases to refer in fulfillment of the zero-tolerance initiative directed by the attorney general, and I suggested that—I and the other officials who were involved in these discussions suggested that we refer all cases. Senator Dick Durbin: All cases. Cissna: Yes. Anybody who violates 8 U.S.C. 1325(a) will be prosecuted. Sen. Durbin: Which is—simply presenting themselves illegally at the border, without legal authorization at our border. Is that what you’re saying? Cissna: Between ports of entry, yes. Sen. Durbin: And you’re not just limiting this to those who may have committed some other crime, involved in some activity dangerous to the United States, but merely presenting themselves at these places is enough for you to believe this administration should treat them as criminals and remove their children. Cissna: I believe anyone crossing the border illegally who is apprehended doing so, whether they’re presenting themselves or not presenting themselves or trying to evade capture, if they are apprehended, they’re violating the law and should be prosecuted. Sen. Durbin: But if a person came to this border, seeking asylum— Cissna: Mm-hmm. Sen. Durbin: —is that person per se a criminal? Cissna: If they cross illegally, yes. Sen. Durbin: The premise was they presented themselves. Cissna: If they present themselves at the port of entry, no. 57:58 Senator Mazie Hirono (HI): So there are two ways that 1325 violations can proceed: either as a civil matter, which is what was happening with the Obama administration, that did not require separating children from their parents; or you can go the criminal route, and this administration have chosen the criminal route. Isn’t that correct? Lee Francis Cissna: Well, I would have to defer to DOJ on the appropriate interpretation of 1325, but as I read it, it looks like a misdemeanor to me, and, therefore, would be a criminal— Sen. Hirono: Well, I’m reading the statute right here, and it says that it can be considered as a civil penalty’s provision; under civil, not criminal. That’s what the plain meaning of that section says to me that I’m reading right now. So, this administration has chosen to follow the criminal route, and that is the excuse, or that is the rationale, being given for why children have to be separated at the border. Now, you did not have to go that route, and in fact, from your testimony, you sound really proud that this administration has a zero-tolerance policy that is resulting in children being separated from their parents. Am I reading you wrong? You think that this is a perfectly—humane route to go to implement Section 1325? Cissna: It’s the law. I’m proud of it, yeah. Sen. Hirono: No, the law, this law allows for a civil process, and you are attributing _____(01:27). Cissna: I’m not sure that interpretation is correct, and I would, again, defer to DOJ for the final answer. 1:10:30 Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: So, asylum seekers. They’re often refugees, correct? Lee Francis Cissna: Asylum seekers fall into the same definition of refugee at 101(a) (42), yeah. Sen. Whitehouse: Yep. And they often have very little in the way of resources, they’re often frightened, correct? Cissna: Yes. Sen. Whitehouse: Very few have legal degrees or are familiar with the United States’ immigration law, correct? Cissna: Yes. Sen. Whitehouse: And so if you’re a lost and frightened refugee and you see the U.S. border and you think, ah, this is my chance to get across to safety—which has long been something that our country’s been associated with—there could be a perfectly innocent reason for crossing the border in that location. And in that circumstance, would it not be perfectly reasonable for immigration officials who intercept them to say, “Ah, you seem to be a legitimate asylum seeker; you’re just in the wrong place. We’ll take you to the port of entry, and you can join the other asylum seekers at the port of entry”? But to arrest them and separate them from their children is a different choice, correct? Cissna: Well, I think if the person is already at that point where they’re apprehended and making their asylum case known, they’ve already crossed into the country illegally. If they’ve already crossed the border and made their asylum claim, they’ve already violated the law. They violated 1325. They’re here illegally. Sen. Whitehouse: Because they crossed in the wrong place. Cissna: Correct. Sen. Whitehouse: And they may not know that it’s illegal to cross in the wrong place, correct? They may simply be coming here because they’re poor and frightened and seeking safety, and for a long time, that’s what the United States has been a symbol of, has it not? Cissna: I cannot get into the minds of the people that are crossing the border illegally, but it seems to be— Sen. Whitehouse: But it is a clear possibility that there could be an innocent explanation for crossing the border as an asylum seeker at a place other than an established port of entry. Cissna: There might be. *Sen. Whitehouse: Okay. There you go. Cissna: Maybe. 1:36:13 Senator Chuck Grassley (IA): Do you think the administration would support repeal of Flores? Lee Francis Cissna: That is indeed one of the things that Secretary Nielsen spoke about yesterday, repeal Flores, but also you need to give ICE enough funds to be able to hold the family units once you’ve repealed Flores. Briefing: White House Daily Briefing, Immigration Official on Border Security and Migrant Family Separation, C-SPAN, June 18, 2018. Hearing: Central American Immigrants and Border Security, House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, C-SPAN, May 22, 2018. Witnesses: Ronald Vitiello - Acting Deputy Commissioner of US Customs and Border Protection Lee Francis Cissna - Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services Thomas Homan - Acting Director of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement   15:10 Ronald Vitiello: In accordance with the Department of Justice zero-tolerance policy, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen has directed CBP to refer all illegal border crossers for criminal prosecution. CBP will enforce immigration laws set forth by Congress. No classes or categories of aliens are exempt from enforcement. 15:48 Ronald Vitiello: The effort and hours used to detain, process, care for, hold UACs and family units distracts our law-enforcement-officer deployments, shrinks our capability to control the border, and make the arrest of smugglers and drug traffickers and criminals much more difficult. 37:40 Ronald Vitiello: Between the ports, we’re now referring anybody that crosses the border illegally—so, Border Patrol’s referring 100% of the people that cross the border illegally—to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. At the ports, that’s not an illegal act if they come under the same conditions, but the verification of family relationships is essentially the same in both instances. Representative Filemon Vela (TX): So, with this new policy in place, at the point that you’re in a situation where you decide to separate the families, where do the minors go? Vitiello: The decision is to prosecute 100%. If that happens to be a family member, then HHS would then take care of the minor as an unaccompanied child. 39:58 Thomas Homan: As far as the detention capacity, we’re well aware of that. We’re working with U.S. marshals and DOJ on identifying available detention space. I got my staff working on that, along with the department and DOJ, so I think it’ll be addressed. We want to make sure we don’t get back to catch and release, so we’re identifying available beds throughout the country that we can use. As far as the question on HHS, under the Homeland Security Act 2002, we’re required, both the Border Patrol and ICE, to release unaccompanied children to HHS within 72 hours. So, we simply—once they identify within that 72 hours a bed someplace in the country, our job is to get that child to that bed. Then HHS, their responsibility is to reunite that child sometime with a parent and make sure that child gets released to a sponsor that’s being vetted. 41:33 Thomas Homan: If they show up at a port of entry made through asylum claims, they won’t be prosecuted, and they won’t be separated. The department has no policy just to separate families for a deterrence issue. I mean, they’re separating families for two reasons. Number one, they can’t prove the relationship—and we’ve had many cases where children had been trafficked by people that weren’t their parents, and we’re concerned about the child. The other issues are when they’re prosecuted, then they’re separated. 1:39:44 Representative Martha McSally (AZ): To summarize, some of those loopholes that we have been working together with you to close, the first is to raise the standard of the initial asylum interview that happens at the border, which is so low that nearly everybody can make it through. The second is to hold individuals as long as it takes for them to have due process in order to process their claim. The third is to make it inadmissible in our country if you are a serious criminal or gang or a gang member or a terrorist, which I cannot believe isn’t a part of the law, but we actually have to change that law. The fourth is to have a swift removal of you if you are denied in your claim. The fifth is to terminate your asylum, if you were to get it, if you return back to your country without any material change in the conditions there. Clearly, if you’re afraid for your life but you go back to visit, then something’s not right there, so your asylum should be considered for termination. The sixth is that there could be an expeditious return of unaccompanied minors to non-contiguous countries so that we can swiftly return them just like we can to Mexico. And the last is to increase the penalties for false asylum claims in order to deter and hold people accountable if they file for those. Is that a good summary of many of the loopholes we’re talking about today? Ronald Vitiello: Agree. Yes. Rep. McSally: Thank you. These all are in our bill, the Secure America’s Future Act. These are common-sense reforms that will keep our country safe and keep our communities safe, and I just want to encourage—don’t have any members left here—all members on both sides of the aisle, look at our bill, read our bill, study our bill. Hearing: Stopping the Daily Border Caravan: Time to Build a Policy Wall, Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee, Homeland Security Committee, May 22, 2018. Hearing: Homeland Security and Immigration, C-SPAN, May 15, 2018. Witness: Kirstjen Nielsen - Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security   14:00 Kirstjen Nielsen: If you try to enter our country without authorization, you’ve broken the law. The attorney general has declared that we will have zero tolerance for all illegal border crossings, and I stand by that. Anyone crossing the border illegally or filing a fraudulent asylum claim will be detained, referred for criminal prosecution, and removed from the United States, as appropriate. 36:45 Senator John Hoeven (ND): You know, when you do detain, apprehend, unaccompanied children coming across the border, as well as others, what are you doing to try to address the adjudication process, which is such a bottleneck in terms of trying to address this issue? You know, I know you’re short there. What can you do and what are you doing to try to adjudicate these individuals? Kirstjen Nielsen: So, as I continue to find out every day, our immigration process is very complex, as you well know, and involves many, many departments. What we’ve tried to do is look at it from an end-to-end approach. So in the example you just gave, there’s actually about three or four different processes that those groups would undertake. So in some cases we need additional immigration judges—DOJ’s working on that. In some cases we need additional processes and agreements with other parts of the interagency family—we’ve done that, for example, with HHS to make sure that we’re appropriately taking care of UACs in their custody. And then there’s other parts who, depending on if they’re referred for prosecution, we hand them over to the marshals—we want to make sure that that’s a process that works. And then in some cases we use alternates to detention. As you know, rather than detaining them, we will have check-ins; in some cases, ankle bracelets; but other ways to make sure that we have them detained while they’re awaiting their removal proceedings. Sen. Hoeven: Is that working? Nielsen: It does work. It does work. It’s a good combination. We do it on a case-by-case basis. There’s lots of criteria that we look at to determine when that’s appropriate and when that’s not appropriate. But, again, I think it’s some of the opening remarks perhaps the chairman made, if you look at UACs, 66% of those who receive final orders, receive the final orders purely because they never showed up for court. And we find that we’re only able to remove 3.5% of those who should be removed, who a judge has said has a final. So, if we can track them, it’s a much more efficient process while we wait for the final adjudication. 55:58 Senator Kamala Harris (CA): I also asked that I be provided with what training and procedures are being given to CBP officers as it relates to how they are instructed to carry out family separation. I’ve not received that information. Do you have that today? Kirstjen Nielsen: No. You have not asked me for it, so I do not have it, but— Sen. Harris: No, I asked you for it. Nielsen: —I’m happy to give it to you. Sen. Harris: Okay. So, again, by the end of next week, please. Nielsen: Can you explain a little more what you’re looking for? Sen. Harris: Sure. So, your agency will be separating children from their parents, and I would assume— Nielsen: No. What we’ll be doing is prosecuting parents who’ve broken the law, just as we do every day in the United States of America. Sen. Harris: I can appreciate that, but if that parent has a four-year-old child, what do you plan on doing with that child? Nielsen: The child, under law, goes to HHS for care and custody. Sen. Harris: They will be separated from their parent. Answer my question. Nielsen: Just like we do in the United States every day. Sen. Harris: So, they will be separated from their parent. And my question, then, is, when you are separating children from their parents, do you have a protocol in place about how that should be done? And are you training the people who will actually remove a child from their parent on how to do that in the least-traumatic way? I would hope you do train on how to do that. And so the question is, and the request has been, to give us the information about how you are training and what the protocols are for separating a child from their parent. Nielsen: I’m happy to provide you with the training information. Sen. Harris: Thank you. 57:25 Senator Kamala Harris (CA): And what steps are being taken, if you can tell me, to ensure that once separated, parent and child, that there will be an opportunity to at least sustain communication between the parent and their child? Kirstjen Nielsen: The children are at HHS, but I’m happy to work with HHS to get you an answer for that. 1:57:50 Senator Kamala Harris (CA): Regarding detention conditions. Secretary, are you aware that multiple federal oversight bodies, such as the OIG and the GAO, have documented medical negligence of immigrants in the detention system, in particular that ICE has reported 170 deaths in their custody since 2003? Are you familiar with that? Kirstjen Nielsen: No, ma’am. Sen. Harris: Are you aware that they also found that pregnant women in particular receive insufficient medical attention while in custody, resulting in dehydration and even miscarriages? Nielsen: I do not believe that is a current assessment of our detention facilities. Sen. Harris: Okay. Can you please submit to this committee a current assessment? Nielsen: Yeah, I’m happy to. Sen. Harris: On that point? Nielsen: So, we provide neonatal care. We do pregnancy screening from ages 15 to 56. We provide outside specialists should you seek it. We do not detain any women past their third trimester. Once they enter their third trimester, we provide them separate housing. So, yes, we’re happy to detail all of the things we do to take good care of them. Sen. Harris: And did you submit that to the OIG in response to their findings? Nielsen: We have been in—yes, of course—working in conjunction with the OIG. I’m not sure exactly what the date is of the OIG report that you’re referencing, but I will look into it after this. Sen. Harris: Okay. And then also, between fiscal year ’12 and March of 2018, it’s our understanding—before I go on—the OIG report is from December of this past year, 2017. So it’s very recent. Five months ago? Also between FY ’12 and March 2018, ICE received, according to these reports, 1,448 allegations of sexual abuse in detention facilities, and only a small percent of these claims have been investigated by DHS, OIG. Are you familiar with that? Nielsen: I’m not familiar with that number, no. News Report: Raw Video: Sessions Says 'Zero Tolerance' for Illegal Border Crossings, CBS Local San Francisco, May 7, 2018. Attorney General Jeff Sessions Today we are here to send a message to the world: we are not going to let this country be overwhelmed. People are not going to caravan or otherwise stampede our border. We need legality and integrity in the system. That’s why the Department of Homeland Security is now referring 100 percent of illegal Southwest Border crossings to the Department of Justice for prosecution. And the Department of Justice will take up those cases. I have put in place a “zero tolerance” policy for illegal entry on our Southwest border. If you cross this border unlawfully, then we will prosecute you. It’s that simple. Attorney General Jeff Sessions - In order to carry out these important new enforcement policies, I have sent 35 prosecutors to the Southwest and moved 18 immigration judges to the border. These are supervisory judges that don’t have existing caseloads and will be able to function full time on moving these cases. That will be about a 50 percent increase in the number of immigration judges who will be handling the asylum claims." Hearing: Oversight of HHS and DHS Efforts to Protect Unaccompanied Alien Children from Human Trafficking and Abuse, U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, April 26, 2018. Witnesses:  James McCament - Deputy Under Secretary of the Office of Strategy, Policy, and Plans at the Dept. of Homeland Security Steven Wagner - Acting Assistant Secratary for Administration for Children and Facilities at the Dept. of Health and Human Services Kathryn Larin - Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security Team at the U.S. Government Accountability Office   15:47 Senator Rob Portman (OH): In 2015, I learned the story of eight unaccompanied minors from Guatemala who crossed our southern border. A ring of human traffickers had lured them to the United States. They’d actually gone to Guatemala and told their parents that they would provide them education in America and to pay for the children’s smuggling debt. The parents actually gave the traffickers the deeds to their homes. And the traffickers retained those until the children could work off that debt, because they weren’t interested in giving them education, it turned out; they were interested in trafficking them. When the children crossed our border, their status, as defined by federal immigration law, was that of an unaccompanied alien child, or a UAC, so you hear the term UAC used today. The Department of Homeland Security picked them up, and following protocol, transferred them to Department of Health and Human Services. HHS was then supposed to place these children with sponsors who would keep them safe until they could go through the appropriate immigration legal proceedings. That’s practice. That didn’t happen. What did happen is that HHS released these children back into the custody of those human traffickers without vetting them. Let me repeat. HHS actually placed these children back in the hands the traffickers. The traffickers then took them to an egg farm in Marion, Ohio, where these children lived in squalid conditions and were forced to work 12 hours a day, six, seven days a week, for more than a year. The traffickers threatened the children and their families with physical harm and even death if the children didn’t perform these long hours. This subcommittee investigated. We found HHS didn’t do background checks on the sponsors. HHS didn’t respond to red flags that should have alerted them to problems with the sponsors. For example, HHS missed that a group of sponsors were collecting multiple UACs, not just one child but multiple children. HHS didn’t do anything when a social worker provided help for one of those children, or tried to at least, and the sponsor turned the social worker away. During the investigation, we held a hearing in January 2016—so this goes back a couple years—where HHS committed to do better, understanding that this was a major problem. 2016, of course that was during the Obama administration, so this has gone on through two administrations now. HHS committed to clarifying the Department of Homeland Security and HHS responsibilities for protecting these children. HHS and DHS entered into a three-page memorandum of agreement, which said that the agencies recognized they should ensure that these unaccompanied alien children weren’t abused or trafficked. The agreement said the agencies would enter into a detailed joint concept of operations—so an agreement that’d actually lay out their responsibilities—that would spell out what the agencies would do to fix the problems. HHS and DHS gave themselves a deadline of February 2017 to have this joint concept of operations pulled together. That seemed like plenty of time to do it, but it wasn’t done, and that was over a year ago, February 2017. It’s now April 2018. We don’t have that joint concept of operations—so-called JCO—and despite repeated questions from Senator Carper and from me as well as our staffs over the past year, we don’t have any answers about why we don’t have the joint concept of operations. In fact, at a recent meeting a DHS official asked our investigators why we even cared about a JCO, why. And let me be clear: we care about the JCO because we care that we have a plan in place to protect these kids when they are in government custody. We care because the Government Accountability Office has said that DHS has sent children to the wrong facility because of miscommunications with HHS, and because of other concerns. We care because the agencies themselves thought it was important enough to set a deadline for the JCO but then blew past that date. We care because these kids, regardless of immigration status, deserve to be properly treated, not abused or trafficked. We learned at 4 p.m. yesterday that 13 days ago there was an additional memorandum of agreement reached between the two agencies. We requested and finally received a copy of that new agreement at midnight last night. It’s not the JCO that we’ve been waiting for, but it is a more general statement of how information will be shared between the two agencies. Frankly, we had assumed this information was already being shared and maybe it was, and it’s positive that we have this additional memorandum—that’s great. It’s nice that this hearing motivated that to happen, but it’s not the JCO we’ve all been waiting for. 45:05 Kathryn Larin: In 2015, we reported that the interagency process to refer unaccompanied children from DHS to ORR shelters was inefficient and vulnerable to error. We recommended that DHS and HHS develop a joint collaborative process for the referral and placement of unaccompanied children. In response, the agencies recently developed a memorandum of agreement that provides a framework for coordinating responsibilities. However, it is still under review and has not yet been implemented. 1:27:34 Senator Heidi Heitkamp (ND): It’s HHS. This is not a new problem. We’ve been at this a long time. Where are these kids, why don’t we know where they are, and how come after months of investigation by this committee we don’t seem to be getting any better answers, Mr. Wagner? Steven Wagner: The answer to your question depends on what sort of timeframe you’re talking about. If you’re talking about the 30 days after release to a sponsor that we have determined to be qualified to provide for the care and safety and wellbeing of the kid, I think in the vast majority, I think we’re getting pretty close to 100% of those cases we know where they are. When you’re talking about as time goes on, things change. Yes, kids run away. No, we do not have a capacity for tracking down runaway UACs who leave their sponsors. Sen. Heitkamp: What do you think would happen in the IV-E program—the IV-E program is a federally sponsored funding for foster care that the states access to pay for foster-care kids. That’s IV-E. In order to get that money, you have to be a responsible state and know. What would happen, do you think, with IV-E dollars in a state that said, you know, we know where they are. We turned them over to a foster parent. We didn’t do any—I mean, as we know, not a lot of home visits, not a lot of followup. And if they ran away, we don’t know. What do you think you guys would do with the IV-E program in a state that had that kind of response? Wagner: Senator, you’re constructing an additional legal responsibility, which, in our view, does not currently exist with the UAC program. Our legal responsibility is to place these children in suitable households. In the IV-E program— Sen. Heitkamp: And then forget about. Wagner: —it would be a crisis. And there is—every state has a child-protective service agency to deal with those situations. We don’t have that apparatus. Sen. Heitkamp: And so if they—and you have no intention of creating that apparatus. You have no intention of having a database—I do need to understand where you think your lines of jurisdiction are. So you have no intention of ever trying to solve the problem of, here we gave the kid to the guy who said he was her uncle. We gave them to the uncle, and we found that was okay. And now we told the state maybe, or we didn’t tell the state, and good luck to that 15-year-old who went to her uncle. Wagner: I don’t agree with your characterization of the decision-making process. However, you know, this is an expensive program. Our duty is to execute the will of Congress and the president, which we will do faithfully. Sen. Heitkamp: Well, I think our duty is— Wagner: If you tell us you want us to track down— Sen. Heitkamp: I think our duty is a little more humanitarian than that, but can you tell me that in every case you notify the state agency that you have placed a minor in the custody of a suitable sponsor? Wagner: No, Senator. Sen. Heitkamp: Yeah. Wagner: It’s not our procedure to place state— Sen. Heitkamp: But you’re telling me that the backdrop—you’re telling me that the backdrop, the protection for that kid now falls on the state, even though you don’t even give the state the courtesy of telling them where they are. 1:51:28 Senator Rob Portman (OH): Let me back up for a second if I could and talk about what I said at the outset which is this hearing is an opportunity for us to try to get more accountability in the system and to tighten up the loose ends, and we’ve heard so many today, the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. And, of course, the focus has been on this joint concept of operations. Because of that, we’ve been working on this with you all for 26 months, over two years. And, again, you promised in your own memorandum of agreement that you would have that completed over a year ago, and still, as of today, it’s not completed. I appreciate that Mr. Wagner said that—and true, at midnight last night we received this additional memorandum of agreement, and I do think information sharing is a good thing, but what we’re looking for is what I thought you were looking for, which is an understanding of how this is actually going to operate and who’s accountable. Because we don’t know who’s responsible and accountable and what the plans are, it’s impossible for us to do our oversight and for us in the end of the day to be sure that this system is working properly for the kids but also for immigration system. So I would ask you today, it’s been 14 months since you promised it, do you have it with you today? Yes or no. Mr. McCament? James McCament: I do not have it with me, ______(01:11). Sen. Portman: Mr. Wagner. Steven Wagner: No, sir. Sen. Portman: Okay. What’s your commitment to getting this done now? So we’re 26 months into it. We’ve over a year past your previous commitment. What’s your commitment you’re going to make to us today as to when this joint concept of operations agreement will be completed? Mr. McCament. McCament: Mr. Chairman, when—being apprised and learning about the significant amount of time, we will be ready as partnership with HHS. As soon as we look at, receive the draft back, we’ll work as expeditiously as possible. I know that that is not to the extent of a time line, but I will tell you that we are ready, and we want to partner actively. You are correct that the MOA is part of that commitment—it is not all. The JCO memorializes our procedures that we already do, but it does not have them collated in one place. Work as expeditiously as possible _____(02:07). Sen. Portman: You make it sound so simple, and you’re also pointing the finger at your colleague here, which has been our problem. McCament: _____(02:15) Sen. Portman: Mr. Wagner, give me a timeframe. Wagner: Sir, we have to incorporate the new MOA in the draft JCO. Honestly, we are months away, but I promise to work diligently to bring it to a conclusion. 1:57:15 Senator Rob Portman (OH): Okay, we learned this morning that about half, maybe up to 58%, of these kids who are being placed with sponsors don’t show up at the immigration hearings. I mean, they just aren’t showing up. So when a sponsor signs the sponsorship agreement, my understanding is they commit to getting these children to their court proceedings. Is that accurate, Mr. Wagner? Steven Wagner: That is accurate. And in addition, they go through the orientation on responsibilities of custodians. Sen. Portman: So, when a child does not show up, HHS has an agreement with the sponsor that has been violated, and HHS, my understanding, is not even notified if the child fails to show up to the proceedings. Is that accurate? Wagner: That is accurate, Senator. Sen. Portman: So you have an agreement with the sponsor. They have to provide this agreement with you, HHS. The child doesn’t show up, and you’re not even notified. So I would ask you, how could you possibly enforce the commitment that you have, the agreement that you have, with the sponsor if you don’t have that information? Wagner: I think you’re right. We have no mechanism for enforcing the agreement if they fail to show up for the hearing. Hearing: Immigration Court System, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Border Security, C-SPAN, April 18, 2018. Hearing: Strengthening and Reforming America's Immigration Court System, Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration, April 18, 2018. Witnesses: James McHenry - Director of the Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review   2:42 Senator John Cornyn (TX): Earlier administrations, both Republican and Democrat, have struggled with how to reduce the case backlogs in the immigration courts. And, unfortunately, Congress has never provided the full extent of immigration judges and support staff truly needed to eliminate the backlogs. As a result, backlogs continue to grow, from 129,000 cases in fiscal 1998 to a staggering 684,000 as of February 2018. 3:27 Senator John Cornyn (TX): Aliens in removal proceedings sometimes wait for years before they ever appear before an immigration judge. For example, as of February 2018 courts in Colorado have the longest time for cases sitting on their docket more than 1,000 days—almost three years. In my home state of Texas, the current wait is 884 days—almost two and a half years. 7:06 Senator Dick Durbin (IL): The Fifth Amendment to the Bill of Rights contains the Constitution’s due-process clause. Let me quote it. “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” This language about due process actually dates its lineage to the Magna Carta. Please note: the due-process clause extends these critical protections to a “person,” not to a citizen. And the Supreme Court has consistently held that its protection—due-process protection—extends to all persons in the United States. The Court said expressly in Plyler v. Doe, “Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as ‘persons’ guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.” 9:23 Senator Dick Durbin (IL): Today, 334 immigration judges face 680,000 pending cases. This backlog has grown by 145,000 cases just since President Trump was sworn into office. 28:45 James McHenry: A typical immigration court proceeding has two stages, or two parts. The first is the determination of removability. The Department of Homeland Security brings charges and allegations that an alien has violated the immigration laws. The judge—the immigration judge—first has to determine whether that charge is sustained, and that will be based on the factual allegations that are brought, so the judge will make determinations on that. If there is a finding that the alien is removable, then the case proceeds to a second phase. If the judge finds the alien is not removable, then the case is terminated. At the second phase, the immigration judge gives the alien an opportunity to apply for any protection or relief from removal that he or she may be eligible for under the Immigration and Nationality Act. This will involve the setting of a separate hearing at which the respondent may present evidence, they may present witnesses, they have the right to cross-examine witnesses brought by the department, and they will bring up whatever factual bases there is for their claim of relief or protection. At the end of that hearing, the immigration judge will assess the evidence, will asses the testimony, will look at the law, and will render a decision. The judge may either grant the application, in which case the respondent will get to remain in the United States. The judge may deny the application but give the respondent an opportunity to voluntarily depart at their own expense and sometimes after paying a bond, or the immigration judge may order the alien removed. 41:50 Senator Mike Lee (UT): I believe you recently testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee that it would take about 700 immigration judges in order to be able to address the backlog and address the current case load. Is that correct? James McHenry: Yeah, last fall the president proposed adding additional immigration judges, up to a number of 700. If we can get 700 on board, especially with our performance measures, we could complete over 450,000 cases a year. That would eviscerate the backlog. Sen. Lee: So, 700 would do it. McHenry: Based on the current numbers, it would certainly go a very long way toward eliminating it, yes. Sen. Lee: How many do you have right now? McHenry: We have 334 on board. Currently, we’re authorized, based on the recent omnibus spending bill, for up to 484. Even getting to that number would allow us to begin completing more cases than new receipts that we have in. Sen. Lee: How long does that normally take? My understanding is that between 2011 and 2016 it was taking about two years to hire a typical immigration judge. Is that still the case? McHenry: No. We have reduced that average. The attorney general issued a new hiring process memo to streamline the process last April. In using that process, we’ve put out five advertisements since the end of June for up to 84 positions in total. The first of those advertisements closed at the end of June last year. We expect to bring on the first judges from that advertisement in May, which will be right at approximately 10 months, and we anticipate bringing on the rest of them in July, which will be right at one year. And we think we can get to a stage where we are bringing on judges in eight months, 10 months, 12 months—a year at the most. Community Suggestions See more Community Suggestions HERE. Cover Art Design by Only Child Imaginations Music Presented in This Episode Intro & Exit: Tired of Being Lied To by David Ippolito (found on Music Alley by mevio)  

What does it mean to have someone in charge of the third largest government agency (with over 240,000 employees and a roster that includes the Secret Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Coast Guard) whose main qualification is her unfettered loyalty to President Trump? On this week's TrumpWatch on WBAI, Jesse considers this question with Jonathan Blitzer of The New Yorker. Jonathan spoke to seven current and former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) staff members for his March 1 article “How the DHS Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, Became One of President Trump's Fiercest Loyalists.”

What does it mean to have someone in charge of the third largest government agency (with over 240,000 employees and a roster that includes the Secret Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Coast Guard) whose main qualification is her unfettered loyalty to President Trump? On this week's TrumpWatch on WBAI, Jesse considers this question with Jonathan Blitzer of The New Yorker. Jonathan spoke to seven current and former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) staff members for his March 1 article “How the DHS Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, Became One of President Trump's Fiercest Loyalists.”

When Kirstjen Nielsen was hired as John Kelly’s chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in January of 2017, after the four-star general’s original pick for the position, Air Force Col. Alan Metzler, was rejected by the Trump administration for being a so-called Obama-era holdover, her lack of any major management experience baffled agency staff. 11 months later, she was running the agency, installed in Kelly’s former position after he was tapped to become White House chief of staff. What does it mean to have someone in charge of the third largest government agency with over 240,000 employees and a roster that includes the Secret Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Coast Guard, just to name a few, whose main qualification is her unfettered loyalty to the President and his agenda? In this week’s “TrumpWatch” on WBAI, host Jesse Lent examines this question in depth with Jonathan Blitzer of The New Yorker. Jonathan spoke to seven current and former DHS staff members for his March 1 article “How the D.H.S. Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, Became One of President Trump’s Fiercest Loyalists.”

In this 12 minute bonus segment Arizbeth and Rafael respond to The New Yorker article by Jonathan Blitzer from May 22, 2017: “An Underground College for Undocumented Immigrants.” Rafael ends the segment with his poem, “The Monarch Martyr.” In this photo you see Freedom U. students at a University of Georgia class right before their arrest. The … Continue reading "The New Yorker Article: A Conversation with Freedom U. GA Students" The post The New Yorker Article: A Conversation with Freedom U. GA Students appeared first on Nothing Never Happens.

In this week's "TrumpWatch: Countdown To Inauguration Day," host Jesse Lent examines what the new administration will mean for undocumented immigrants. Our guest, New Yorker reporter Jonathan Blitzer, spoke to illegal aliens living in New York City for his article "Undocumented Immigrants Brace For The Trump Administration."

(12/21/16) In this week's TrumpWatch, host Jesse Lent examines what the new administration will mean for undocumented immigrants. Our guest, New Yorker reporter Jonathan Blitzer, spoke to illegal aliens living in New York City for his recent article "Undocumented Immigrants Brace For The Trump Administration."

(12/21/16) In this week's TrumpWatch, host Jesse Lent examines what the new administration will mean for undocumented immigrants. Our guest, New Yorker reporter Jonathan Blitzer, spoke to illegal aliens living in New York City for his recent article "Undocumented Immigrants Brace For The Trump Administration."