The Wall Street Journal reports that immigrant advocacy groups hailed a federal judge in Hawaii’s ruling on Wednesday that blocked President Trump’s revised travel ban from taking effect. However, they noted that the continuing legal battle over the ban casts an air of uncertainty over the immigration system and has already disrupted refugee resettlement and long-planned trips to the United States.
Leaked DHS Intelligence Report: Citizenship Likely an Unreliable Indicator of Terrorist Threat to the United States
The Associated Press published a leaked draft of a DHS intelligence report that found that country of citizenship is “unlikely to be a reliable indicator of potential terrorist activity,” and that few people from the seven Muslim-majority countries President Trump listed in his January 27, 2017, travel ban have been involved in terrorism-related activities in the United States since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011. DHS did not dispute the report’s authenticity, but said that the report was “incomplete” and was not a final comprehensive review of the government’s intelligence. As reported in the Immigration Politics Ticker, President Trump is expected to sign a new travel ban on Wednesday—a day after his first address to a joint session of Congress.
No more excluding any classes from prosecutorial discretion. Thus, it seems wide open to try to get as many foreign nationals as possible.
Be prepared to fight in Court.
The memo goes on to State that local and State enforcement officers need to enforce U.S. Immigration Laws
There will certainly be a wide variety of lawsuits on this memo because it is vague, ambiguous and far too broad and puts persons who are not removable under the law into its net.
No longer are certain foreign nationals exempted from enforcement.
The memo seems to now prioritize removability actions against those persons with crimes and fraud
The new priorities (which may be able to be fought in Court) are 1. those convicted of ANY criminal offense, 2. charged but not convicted, 3. committed acts which constitute a criminal offense, but no arrest or conviction, 4. committed fraud against the government, 5) abused any program to receive public benefits, 6) subject to final order of removal or 7) are deemed by an immigration officer to be a risk to public safety
Essentially – it leaves WIDE OPEN interpretation and attempts to remove foreign nationals who do not have removable offenses under the law.
The Department of Justice indicated in a February 16, 2017 court filing that President Trump intends to rescind the January 27, 2017 Executive Order and issue a new order in its place. DOJ urged the court to “hold its consideration of the case until the President issues the new Order,” and the Ninth Circuit subsequently issued an order staying en banc proceedings, pending further order of the court. In a February 16, 2017 news conference, President Trump also stated that he plans to issue a new Executive Order on immigration next week to “protect our country.”
In response to Trump’s January 27, 2017, Executive Order (EO), attorneys and advocacy groups across the country filed lawsuits in federal court this weekend on behalf of petitioners who were denied entry to the United States pursuant to the EO. First, a court in New York issued a nationwide, emergency stay of removal preventing deportation for individuals with valid visas and approved refugee applications affected by the EO. Going a bit further, a court in Massachusetts barred federal officials from detaining or removing individuals subject to the EO. Also, a court in Virginia ordered federal officials to provide lawyers access to “all legal permanent residents being detained at Dulles International Airport,” and barred officials from deporting covered individuals for the next seven days. Finally, a court in Washington State barred the government from deporting two unnamed individuals from the United States.