Entre el jueves y el sábado de la semana pasada el presidente Donald Trump dio dos reversazos: canceló la orden de atacar militarmente a Irán por el derribo de un dron estadounidense que presuntamente voló en espacio aéreo iraní; y frenó la realización de redadas para detener a unos 2,000 indocumentados con órdenes finales de deportación que comenzarían ayer domingo a través del país.

Trump asegura que el retraso de dos semanas dará tiempo para que demócratas y republicanos del Congreso lleguen a un acuerdo sobre los 5,000 millones de dólares que el gobierno exige para manejar la crisis humanitaria en la frontera, con más camas en centros de detención, entre otras cosas. Trump también quiere cambios a las leyes de asilo que durante meses ha pisoteado en la frontera sur para impedir que migrantes centroamericanos que huyen de una brutal violencia puedan solicitar refugio en Estados Unidos.

De no haber acuerdo, afirmó Trump, las redadas procederán. El Congreso inicia a fines de esta semana un receso por el feriado del 4 de julio de manera que la posibilidad de tal acuerdo no queda clara.

A simple vista, cualquiera pensaría que Trump demostró sentido común en ambas instancias, evitando una guerra y las deportaciones, pero si se le rasca un poco al asunto queda expuesto cómo a Trump no le importa infligir terror echando mano de sus fuerzas militares y policiales con fines estrictamente políticos.

El cuento de que frenó el ataque contra Irán a escasos minutos de que se emprendiera porque se enteró de que 150 iraníes perderían la vida no se lo cree nadie. Lo insólito es que lo haya autorizado por el derribo de un dron y que tras 18 años de presencia militar estadounidense en Oriente Medio por una guerra, la de Irak, llevada a cabo por un presidente republicano, George W. Bush, con base en falsedades, de que el régimen de Sadam Husein poseía armas de destrucción masiva que nunca aparecieron, Trump le hiciera caso inicialmente a los mismos funcionarios que lideraron el fiasco de Irak. Trump parece guiado por lo que supone para su ego ordenar y cancelar operativos militares sin medir las consecuencias, como si se tratara de un juego de soldaditos.

Y el caso de las deportaciones es todavía más claro. Trump anunció las redadas nacionales que ni siquiera los encargados de conducirlas estaban convencidos de que se tratara de un buena idea. Una vez más, Trump quiso demostrar ante su base que su política de línea dura es real, sin importar el terror que pueda generar en la comunidad inmigrante y sin medir que las familias afectadas son, en gran parte, de situación migratoria mixta, donde hay ciudadanos y residentes permanentes y que, como siempre, los más vulnerables son los niños, muchos de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses que viven con la constante amenaza de que en cualquier momento sus padres pueden ser deportados.

Claro está, nadie espera que Trump demuestre un poco de humanidad con la población inmigrante y con ciudadanos al interior del país, porque ya hemos visto lo que pasa en la frontera.

Porque hay que ser despiadado para no estremecerse ante los reportes que han emergido sobre el trato inhumano a niños en centros de detención operados por autoridades estadounidenses. Cada día se revelan horribles detalles de niños sin atención médica adecuada; de niños cuidando de niños, en condiciones insalubres, sin poder bañarse por semanas, sin un cambio de ropa limpia, durmiendo en el suelo bajo temperaturas gélidas y sin cobijas, sin acceso a servicios sanitarios, ingiriendo alimentos expirados o sin cocinar. Al menos seis menores han muerto en custodia de las autoridades migratorias, y uno se pregunta cómo no han sido más las víctimas en estas precarias condiciones.

El video que circuló de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia, argumentando ante un panel de jueces del Noveno Circuito de San Francisco, que el gobierno no tiene por qué proveer jabón, pasta de dientes y cobijas a los niños para garantizar condiciones “sanitarias y seguras”, le hace hervir la sangre a cualquiera.

Es la intensificación de la crueldad como mecanismo de disuasión, del mismo modo que separaron a niños de sus padres en la frontera, lo que todavía sigue ocurriendo, según reportes.

Que el gobierno central de una nación poderosa, la cual se jacta de defender los derechos humanos en todas partes del mundo, se ensañe de este modo con niños es aberrante. Y queda perfectamente claro que ocurre porque se trata de niños mayormente de tez oscura y de países latinoamericanos. Quizá si fueran de Noruega, la situación sería diferente.

Con sus dos reversazos, Trump no demostró sentido común, algo que realmente habría demostrado de no haber tomado las dos decisiones iniciales: atacar a Irán por el derrribo de un dron y anunciar las redades como arma política y mecanismo de presión legislativa.

Lo que queda plasmado es que, para lograr sus objetivos politicos, a Trump no le importa infligir terror entre civiles al otro lado del planeta, o entre niños, en la frontera o al interior del país.

Es la politización de la crueldad en su máxima expresión.

Entre el jueves y el sábado de la semana pasada el presidente Donald Trump dio dos reversazos: canceló la orden de atacar militarmente a Irán por el derribo de un dron estadounidense que presuntamente voló en espacio aéreo iraní; y frenó la realización de redadas para detener a unos 2,000 indocumentados con órdenes finales de deportación que comenzarían ayer domingo a través del país.

Trump asegura que el retraso de dos semanas dará tiempo para que demócratas y republicanos del Congreso arriben a un acuerdo sobre los 5,000 millones de dólares que el gobierno exige para manejar la crisis humanitaria en la frontera, con más camas en centros de detención, entre otras cosas. Trump también quiere cambios a las leyes de asilo que durante meses ha pisoteado en la frontera sur para impedir que migrantes centroamericanos que huyen de una brutal violencia puedan solicitar refugio en Estados Unidos.

De no haber acuerdo, afirmó Trump, las redadas procederán. El Congreso inicia a fines de esta semana un receso por el feriado del 4 de julio de manera que la posibilidad de tal acuerdo no queda clara.

¿Sentido común o una estrategia de terror?
A simple vista, cualquiera pensaría que Trump demostró sentido común en ambas instancias, evitando una guerra y las deportaciones, pero si se le rasca un poco al asunto queda expuesto cómo a Trump no le importa infligir terror echando mano de sus fuerzas militares y policiales con fines estrictamente políticos.

El cuento de que frenó el ataque contra Irán a escasos minutos de que se emprendiera porque se enteró de que 150 iraníes perderían la vida no se lo cree nadie. Lo insólito es que lo haya autorizado por el derribo de un dron y que tras 18 años de presencia militar estadounidense en Oriente Medio por una guerra, la de Irak, llevada a cabo por un presidente republicano, George W. Bush, con base en falsedades, de que el régimen de Sadam Husein poseía armas de destrucción masiva que nunca aparecieron, Trump le hiciera caso inicialmente a los mismos funcionarios que lideraron el fiasco de Irak. Trump parece guiado por lo que supone para su ego ordenar y cancelar operativos militares sin medir las consecuencias, como si se tratara de un juego de soldaditos.

Y el caso de las deportaciones es todavía más claro. Trump anunció las redadas nacionales que ni siquiera los encargados de conducirlas estaban convencidos de que se tratara de un buena idea. Una vez más, Trump quiso demostrar ante su base que su política de línea dura es real, sin importar el terror que pueda generar en la comunidad inmigrante y sin medir que las familias afectadas son, en gran parte, de situación migratoria mixta, donde hay ciudadanos y residentes permanentes y que, como siempre, los más vulnerables son los niños, muchos de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses que viven con la constante amenaza de que en cualquier momento sus padres pueden ser deportados.

Trato inhumano de niños
Claro está, nadie espera que Trump demuestre un poco de humanidad con la población inmigrante y con ciudadanos al interior del país, porque ya hemos visto lo que pasa en la frontera.

Porque hay que ser despiadado para no estremecerse ante los reportes que han emergido sobre el trato inhumano a niños en centros de detención operados por autoridades estadounidenses. Cada día se revelan horribles detalles de niños sin atención médica adecuada; de niños cuidando de niños, en condiciones insalubres, sin poder bañarse por semanas, sin un cambio de ropa limpia, durmiendo en el suelo bajo temperaturas gélidas y sin cobijas, sin acceso a servicios sanitarios, ingiriendo alimentos expirados o sin cocinar. Al menos seis menores han muerto en custodia de las autoridades migratorias, y uno se pregunta cómo no han sido más las víctimas en estas precarias condiciones.

El video que circuló de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia, argumentando ante un panel de jueces del Noveno Circuito de San Francisco, que el gobierno no tiene por qué proveer jabón, pasta de dientes y cobijas a los niños para garantizar condiciones “sanitarias y seguras”, le hace hervir la sangre a cualquiera.

Es la intensificación de la crueldad como mecanismo de disuasión, del mismo modo que separaron a niños de sus padres en la frontera, lo que todavía sigue ocurriendo, según reportes.

Racismo
Que el gobierno central de una nación poderosa, la cual se jacta de defender los derechos humanos en todas partes del mundo, se ensañe de este modo con niños es aberrante. Y queda perfectamente claro que ocurre porque se trata de niños mayormente de tez oscura y de países latinoamericanos. Quizá si fueran de Noruega, la situación sería diferente.

Con sus dos reversazos, Trump no demostró sentido común, algo que realmente habría demostrado de no haber tomado las dos decisiones iniciales: atacar a Irán por el derrribo de un dron y anunciar las redades como arma política y mecanismo de presión legislativa.

Lo que queda plasmado es que, para lograr sus objetivos politicos, a Trump no le importa infligir terror entre civiles al otro lado del planeta, o entre niños, en la frontera o al interior del país.

Es la politización de la crueldad en su máxima expresión.

Sonia Hernández, alcaldesa de Suchiate en Chiapas, aseguró que desde que el presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador anunció el despliegue de los uniformados se ha reducido el cruce de inmigrantes en un 85% y que unos 20,000 migrantes centroamericanos se han quedado a trabajar y vivir en la zona al no poder continuar hacia el norte.

La líder demócrata de la Cámara de Representantes habló de la llamada telefónica que sostuvo con el presidente, quien horas después escribió en su cuenta de Twitter que postergaba las redadas a pedido de los demócratas. Sin embargo, reportes indican que el gobierno detuvo los operativos porque detalles se filtraron a la prensa y porque ICE no estaba preparado para detener a 2,000 inmigrantes.

Margarita Flores es una inmigrante salvadoreña cuyas tres hijas son ciudadanas de Estados Unidos. Ella cuenta que agentes de inmigración tocaron a su casa en California en la mañana, pero ella decidió no abrir porque no tenían una orden legal de deportación.

No hay otros datos. Las cifras a las que tiene acceso el presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador son exactamente las mismas que tengo yo y las que puede ver cualquier ciudadano mexicano. Y los números indican que el 2019 podría convertirse en el año más violento en la historia moderna de México.

Voy a los gravísimos datos en un momento. Pero quiero empezar con la triste historia del estudiante Norberto Ronquillo, quien hace poco fue secuestrado y asesinado tras salir de su universidad en la ciudad de México. La mamá de Norberto, Norelia Hernández, me contó en una entrevista que el día del secuestro ella estaba en el cine cuando recibió un texto de su hermana que decía “URGE”. Poco después recibiría los detalles del secuestro: “Tienen a Junior (Norberto)”.

Los secuestradores “hicieron muchas llamadas, no sé cuántas en total”, me contó Norelia. “Era como de espanto. ‘Aquí lo tenemos y junta dinero’ (le decían los plagiarios por teléfono). Era una palabra y le colgaban, y luego dos palabras y le colgaban”. Nada funcionó. El cuerpo de Norberto fue encontrado torturado y estrangulado.

“Yo no quiero que esto se haga político”, me dijo Norelia. “En verdad créeme que yo solo pedí encontrar a mi hijo… Yo le pedí mucho a Dios que no quería que mi hijo fuera una cifra más de desaparecidos”.

Y no lo fue. Pero la trágica muerte de Norberto sí terminará en las estadísticas oficiales de secuestros y asesinatos. Contrario a la versión gubernamental, los homicidios dolosos no van a la baja. Mayo es el mes más violento del sexenio López Obrador con 2,903 muertes.

Más de 30 millones de mexicanos votaron por un cambio hace casi un año. El cambio, claro, tiene que ver con la lucha frontal contra la corrupción y la imperiosa necesidad de combatir la desigualdad en México. Pero también con controlar los altísimos niveles de criminalidad. Y ese es uno de los grandes retos de López Obrador. Es, todavía, la asignatura pendiente.

Entiendo que la creación de la Guardia Nacional es la principal apuesta para reducir el crimen y que, para eso, se necesita más tiempo. Pero claramente lo que el gobierno de López Obrador ha hecho hasta el momento es insuficiente. En lugar de perseguir a inmigrantes inocentes, la Guardia Nacional debería ir tras verdaderos criminales. La Guardia Nacional es un experimento. Además, su plan original nunca incluyó evitar el paso de centroamericanos por la frontera sur de México. Ese es un despropósito, y un desperdicio de recursos y esfuerzos que se necesitan urgentemente en otras partes del país.

Las preguntas son: ¿A partir de cuándo se va a hacer responsable López Obrador de la violencia en México? ¿A los seis meses? ¿Al año?

Todas las regiones del país están sufriendo. La ciudad de México, que algunos creían blindada de la violencia de otras partes de la república, ha tenido seis meses terribles. De diciembre del 2018 a mayo del 2019 fueron asesinadas 923 personas. Esto es más que las 663 que murieron de junio a noviembre del 2018.

Urge hacer algo al respecto, tanto en la ciudad de México como en el resto del país. Pero, la verdad, nadie sabe cómo.

Aaron Ronquillo, hermano de Norberto, estaba acompañando a su mamá durante la entrevista. ¿Es peligroso ser joven en México? le pregunté. “Lamentablemente –hablo por mí y por todos los jóvenes– sí nos da un poco de inseguridad salir por salir a cualquier lado; a cines, a cafés, a bares”, me dijo Aaron. “Hay demasiados casos de violencia aquí en nuestros país y, lamentablemente, le tocó vivir uno de los peores a la persona que más quería”.

El gobierno de Estados Unidos comenzó a sacar a la mayoría de los menores no acompañados que se encontraban en un centro de procesamiento de la Patrulla Fronteriza (CBP) en Texas, luego de reportes de algunos abogados a la agencia AP sobre las malas condiciones de salubridad en el lugar y de adolescentes cuidando a bebés.

De los más de 300 menores que estaban recluidos en esa instalación, solo 30 quedaban este lunes, según informó en su cuenta de Twitter la representante Verónica Escobar, luego de que su oficina fuera actualizada por CBP sobre la situaci´on.

La semana pasada, un equipo de abogados visitó y entrevistó a 60 niños en este centro de CBP en Clint, un pueblo de El Paso, en Texas. Tres niñas, por ejemplo, contaron que intentaron cuidar a un niño de dos años que tenía los pantalones mojados pues andaba sin pañal.

” Un agente de la Patrulla Fronteriza entró a nuestra habitación con un niño de dos años y nos preguntó: ‘¿Quién quiere cuidar a este pequeño?’. Otra niña dijo que se haría cargo de él, pero perdió el interés luego de algunas horas y yo lo estoy cuidando desde ayer”, contó una joven a uno de los abogados que participó de la inspección acordada con las autoridades de la Patrulla Fronteriza.

También vieron a un niño de 4 años que no había tomado un baño en días, que estaba hambriento y lloraba sin parar. Algunos más tenían tres semanas encerrados en el lugar, junto a unos 15 niños enfermos con gripe.

El profesor de leyes Warren Binford dijo a AP que durante las entrevistas a los niños en una sala de conferencias había algunos menores tan cansados que se habían quedado dormidos en sillas o sobre la mesa del lugar.

Los niños explicaban que habían comido avena, una galleta y una bebida endulcorada en la mañana; que habían almorzado noodles y cenado un burrito y una galleta. No mencionaron ni frutas ni vegetales como parte de la dieta que consumían. Explicaron que podían pasar semanas sin bañarse o cambiarse la ropa.

CBP no respondió a las preguntas enviadas por la agencia AP para conocer detalles sobre las condiciones de este centro en Clint. En un comunicado, explicaron que las instalaciones para detenciones cortas “no están diseñadas para mantener recluída a poblaciones vulnerables y urgentemente necesitamos ayuda humanitaria adicional para manejar esta crisis”.

La congresista Escobar aseguró que, aunque no está claro a dónde fueron reubicados todos los menores, sabe que algunos fueron llevados a otro centro en el lado norte de El Paso y que es conocido como Estación 1 de la Patrulla Fronteriza. Explicó que es un lugar de reclusión temporal en el que hay colchonetas, baños, servicios médicos y aire acondicionado.

Pero Clara Long, una abogada de la organización Human Rights Watch que entrevistó a varios niños en ese centro, dijo a AP que las condiciones no necesariamente son mejores que en Clint. “Un niño con el que hablé me dijo que su familia no tuvo colchones o cobijas las primeras dos noches y que tanto él como su madre tuvieron fiebre”.

En los últimos meses, las autoridades migratorias han insistido en que existe una crisis humanitaria sin precedentes en la frontera sur de Estados Unidos. En mayo, CBP arrestó a 132,887 inmigrantes, en su mayoría centroamericanos, que llegaron para pedir asilo. El número supera en 32% las detenciones que se habían registrado en abril. Los voceros del gobierno han asegurado que los recursos son escasos para atender esta oleada de personas que llegan por la frontera sur y que bajo esas condiciones no pueden garantizar la seguridad de los detenidos.

Y las denuncias sobre las malas condiciones de los centros de detención no han cesado. El propio inspector general del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) publicó recientemente dos reportes en los que demuestran que en sus revisiones a centros de procesamiento de CBP hallaron una “peligrosa sobrepoblación” de inmigrantes recluidos en condiciones insalubres. El lugar tiene una capacidad máxima instalada para recibir 125 personas al mismo tiempo, pero encontraron más de 700; y el acceso a las duchas o a ropa limpia era restringido.

Y en cuatro espacios del Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) hallaron problemas de salubridad a todo nivel: comida expirada o podrida; baños con moho en las paredes, techos, en los sistemas de ventilación y en las duchas; a detenidos a quienes no se les daba ropa de su talla ni se les reponía el kit de higiene con jabón, desodorante y cepillo y pasta de dientes.

Loading

El gobierno estadounidense ha retirado a la mayoría de los niños migrantes que se encontraban bajo custodia en una estación de la Patrulla Fronteriza en Texas tras varias denuncias que aseguraban que más de 300 menores estaban cuidándose entre sí en condiciones inadecuadas.

Este lunes, solo 30 niños permanecían en la instalación cerca de El Paso, dijo la representante Verónica Escobar luego de que su oficina fuera informada sobre la situación por un funcionario de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza.

Los abogados que visitaron la estación de la Patrulla Fronteriza en Clint, Texas, señalaron la semana pasada que los niños mayores estaban tratando de cuidar a los bebés y a los pequeños, según informó por primera vez el jueves la agencia de prensa The Associated Press.

Los reportes describieron a un niño de cuatro años con el pelo enmarañado que había estado sin ducharse durante días, y a otros menores hambrientos e inconsolables que luchaban por tranquilizarse mutuamente. Algunos habían estado encerrados durante tres semanas dentro de las instalaciones, donde 15 niños estaban enfermos de gripe y otros 10 estaban en cuarentena médica.

“¿Cómo es posible que ambos ignoraran las condiciones inhumanas para los niños, especialmente los más pequeños, en la estación Clint?”, preguntó Escobar en una carta enviada el viernes al comisario interino de la Oficina de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza de los Estados Unidos, John Sanders, y al jefe de la Patrulla Fronteriza, Carla Provost.

Ella pidió que se le informara a fines de esta semana qué pasos se estaban tomando para poner fin a “esos abusos humanitarios”.

Los legisladores republicanos y demócratas criticaron la situación la semana pasada.

Los oficiales de la Patrulla Fronteriza no respondieron a las preguntas de AP sobre las condiciones en las instalaciones de Clint, pero en un comunicado enviado por correo electrónico el lunes dijeron: “Nuestras instalaciones de retención a corto plazo no fueron diseñadas para mantener a las poblaciones vulnerables y necesitamos urgentemente fondos humanitarios adicionales para gestionar esta crisis”.

Aunque no está claro a dónde se trasladó a todos los niños retenidos en Clint, Escobar expresó que algunos habían sido enviados a otra instalación en el lado norte de El Paso, llamada Estación de Patrulla Fronteriza 1. Escobar dijo que es un sitio temporal con colchones, duchas, médicos desplegables y aire acondicionado.

Pero Clara Long, una abogada que entrevistó a niños en la estación 1 de la Patrulla Fronteriza la semana pasada, confirmó que las condiciones no eran necesariamente mejores allí.

“Un niño con el que hablé dijo que su familia no obtuvo colchones o mantas durante las dos primeras noches y que él y su madre tuvieron fiebre”, dijo Long, investigadora principal de Human Rights Watch. “Dijo que no había cepillos de dientes, y hacía mucho frío”.

En tanto, el vicepresidente Mike Pence, expresó el domingo durante el programa Meet The Press que era “totalmente inaceptable” y agregó que esperaba que el Congreso asignara más recursos a la seguridad de la frontera.

Long y un grupo de abogados inspeccionaron las instalaciones porque están involucrados en el tratado Flores, un acuerdo legal de la era Clinton que rige las condiciones de detención para los niños y sus familias migrantes. Los abogados negociaron el acceso a las instalaciones con los funcionarios y dijeron que la Patrulla Fronteriza conocía las fechas de su visita con tres semanas de anticipación.

Las reglas gubernamentales exigen que los niños sean retenidos por la Patrulla Fronteriza en sus estaciones de corta duración por no más de 72 horas antes de ser transferidos a la custodia de Salud y Servicios Humanos, que alberga a jóvenes migrantes en instalaciones en todo el país a través de su Oficina de Reasentamiento de refugiados.

El exvicepresidente Joe Biden se expresó sobre algunas de sus ideas migratorias y acusó al presidente Donald Trump de “asustar a los inmigrantes” con un fin meramente político.

“La semana pasada tuvimos más pruebas de que la estrategia de reelección –moralmente en bancarrota– del presidente Trump se basa en la vilipendiación de los inmigrantes con fines políticos, al tiempo que implementa políticas que aseguran que los solicitantes de asilo y los refugiados sigan llegando a nuestra frontera”, comienza el texto publicado en The Miami Herald y The New Herald.

El aspirante –y puntero- a la candidatura del Partido Demócrata recordó la amenaza del presidente Trump de deportar a millones de indocumentados con una gran movilización, la cual fue pospuesta dos semanas por el propio mandatario el sábado.

“Trump amenazó con la deportación inminente de millones de inmigrantes indocumentados apenas unas horas después de que su Departamento de Estado confirmara que estaba cortando la ayuda a El Salvador, Guatemala y Honduras, los mismos países de donde huye la mayoría de los migrantes”, indica. “Está claro que Trump solo está interesado en usar sus políticas para atacar la dignidad de la comunidad hispana y asustar a los votantes”.

Agregó que los Estados Unidos es una ciudad de leyes y que fue construido por inmigrantes, además de fortalecerse de la relación con otros países latinoamericanos, además de promover una reforma migratoria basa en el respeto.

“No hay mejor ejemplo de la riqueza que es posible cuando los Estados Unidos están estrechamente unidos con nuestros vecinos en América Latina y el Caribe”, indicó. “El próximo presidente debe instituir una reforma migratoria efectiva mientras restaura las políticas regionales basadas en el respeto”.

Defendió a los “dreamers”, al considerar que son estadounidenses que el Congreso debería aprobar una reforma que los benefice, así como un cambio migratorio que ayude a millones de indocumentados.

“Eso comienza reconociendo que los DREAMers son estadounidenses y que el Congreso debe hacerlo oficial”, insistió. “Los millones de personas indocumentadas en los Estados Unidos sólo pueden ser sacados de las sombras a través de un trato justo, no de terribles amenazas”.

También defendió el Estatus de Protección Temporal (TPS) y cuestionó que el presidente Trump ha puesto “en el limbo” a los inmigrantes bajo ese programa.

Además consideró que debe atender el temor real de las personas que huyen de sus países por peligros y permitirles aplicar por asilo, por lo que criticó las actuales políticas que incluyen el muro fronterizo, el cual –afirmó– no funcionará para detener el flujo migratorio.

Reconoció la necesidad de un plan para resguardar la frontera, pero contemplando a México, aunado a que la solución a asuntos migratorios debe atenderse con países como El Salvador.

Criticó la política de separación de niños inmigrantes de sus padres y replegar a los extranjeros con gases lacrimógenos, además de consideró racista describir a cualquier persona como “animales”, en referencia a una expresión del presidente Trump.

MÉXICO – Ayudar con alimentos y medicamentos a los albergues y no criminalizar a los migrantes que llegan a Monterrey es el llamado que hicieron sacerdotes de casas de migrantes de la Ciudad.

La tendencia, señalaron, es que la migración no se detendrá con el despliegue de la Guardia Nacional en la frontera sur y el aumento de las deportaciones de centroamericanos para esperar en México el trámite de asilo en Estados Unidos.

“Los flujos (migratorios) van a buscar entrar por otros lados”, dijo el padre Luis Eduardo Villarreal, fundador de Casanicolás, en Guadalupe.

“Por Belice y Quintana Roo, o le pueden dar la vuelta a la península (de Yucatán) para ingresar por Tabasco o Veracruz. Se va a buscar el ingreso a México aun y cuando se selle la frontera sur y se pongan retenes a todo lo largo y ancho del Istmo de Tehuantepec”.

La migración continuará, dijo, y la Ciudad no está preparada para ello.

“Esto nos pone ante una tarea muy delicada, que es crear conciencia en la población para la acogida de los migrantes. No estamos preparados como sociedad para tal cosa”, comentó el padre Villarreal.

En Casanicolás, con una capacidad de 130 personas, más del 60 por ciento de los centroamericanos que ahí llegan señalan que buscan quedarse en la zona metropolitana para vivir o buscar una oportunidad laboral.

De ahí que la invitación a los regiomontanos sea a ayudar con alimentos y medicamentos, y a evitar la criminalización de las personas migrantes.

“Antes de pedir despensa, ropa, dinero, pedimos que toquen la puerta del albergue, para que puedan conocer de primera mano la condición en la que viven los migrantes, sus historias, cómo ha sido su travesía, cuáles son sus sueños, qué dolor traen en su corazón”, dijo el director de Casanicolás.

“Tenemos que entender que Nuevo León se ha formado también con personas migrantes, que más del 20 por ciento, una quinta parte de la población de Nuevo León no nació en el Estado.

En su rueda de prensa dominical en Catedral de Monterrey, el Arzobispo Rogelio Cabrera López pidió a los católicos seguir colaborando con los cuatro albergues que la Arquidiócesis de Monterrey tiene en Nuevo León para ayudar a quienes van de paso.

“Gracias a Dios la gente sigue colaborando para ayudar en ropa, comida, en calzado y, sobre todo, en medicamentos”, expresó

“Estamos tratando de que tengamos unos primeros auxilios muy bien dados, con mucho profesionalismo, para que no circulen (las personas) con enfermedades, sobre todo que tienen que ver con bronquios y con el estómago”.

AUMENTA ATENCIÓN JURÍDICA

En Casa Monarca, en Santa Catarina, las solicitudes de ayuda jurídica por migrantes han aumentado. Tan sólo a este mes van 740 solicitudes, el doble de lo que se dio en todo el 2018, dijo el padre Luis Eduardo Zavala, su director.

El sacerdote señaló que son las políticas recientes de contención y de retorno lo que está haciendo que se duplique la cifra de atenciones, específicamente las de tipo legal.

“Creemos que precisamente por eso los migrantes están buscando la asesoría legal. Los que ya tienen varias semanas o meses aquí, ante el temor del retorno asistido o de las políticas de contención, están solicitando la regularización de sus procesos”.

El pronóstico es que antes de que termine el año el número de estas solicitudes se cuadruplique.

Las estadísticas de Zavala también señalan que el 62 por ciento de los migrantes busca quedarse en Monterrey.

En su rueda de prensa, Cabrera López, presidente de la Conferencia del Episcopado Mexicano, también llamó a los integrantes de seguridad pública desplegados en la frontera a respetar los derechos de las personas.

“Hoy se requiere que México muestre ante el mundo una manera humanitaria de tratar a las personas”, expresó.

CASA NICOLÁS
Emiliano Zapata 4417, esq. con Serafín Peña, Col. Guadalupe Victoria, Gpe.
Teléfono: 2169-8232

CASA MONARCA
Privada Nicolás Bravo 510 entre Bravo y Abasolo, Col. Nueva Santa Catarina, Santa Catarina Teléfono: 8390-6305

CASA INDI
Av. Bernardo Reyes 2404, Col. Industrial Teléfono: 8374-7221

CASA DEL FORASTERO SANTA MARTHA
Calle José María Bocanegra, Col. Industrial Teléfonos: 8372-3355, 8372-1500, 8372-1555; y 1158-2247 al 49

Unos 15,000 soldados mexicanos patrullan la frontera con Estados Unidos con el objetivo de detener el flujo de migrantes hacia Estados Unidos.

El secretario mexicano de la Defensa Nacional, Luis Cresencio Sandoval, defendió este lunes la legalidad del uso de la nueva Guardia Nacional en tareas de control migratorio, y señaló que unos 21,500 efectivos de varias unidades ya apoyan al Instituto Nacional de Migración (Inami) en las fronteras.

Sandoval señaló que en la frontera norte hay “un despliegue total entre Guardia Nacional (que entrará formalmente en funciones el 30 de junio) y unidades del Ejército de 14,000, casi 15,000 hombres” desde Tijuana hasta Matamoros.

Estos se suman a los 6,500 efectivos desplegados en la frontera sur. El número de efectivos dedicados hasta ahora a tareas migratorias asciende a unos 21,500.

“Estamos haciendo toda una cobertura en la frontera sur y ahí estamos coadyuvando con el esfuerzo del Instituto Nacional de Migración, que es quien tiene ahora la facultad para estar haciendo el aseguramiento (detención) de personas”, expuso el general.

Argumentó que si se dejara esta labor en manos del Inami no sería posible realizarla porque ese organismo no tiene suficientes efectivos.

“Hacemos la misma tarea apoyándonos en el (artículo) transitorio que nos permite trabajar en el ámbito de la seguridad pública, y podemos hacer esta coadyuvancia, considerando que la migración no es un delito, es una falta administrativa”, abundó.

El ministro no especificó a qué disposición se refería, aunque la Ley de la Guardia Nacional, publicada en el Diario Oficial de la Federación el 27 de mayo, menciona entre las atribuciones de este cuerpo la de “apoyar el aseguramiento que realice el Instituto Nacional de Migración y, a petición del mismo, resguardar las estaciones migratorias y a los extranjeros” que allí se encuentren.

Sandoval precisó que cuando los militares realizan la detención de migrantes los ponen “a disposición de las autoridades (migratorias)”, las cuales “determinarán lo que se desarrolle en adelante para estos migrantes”.

El despliegue de la Guardia Nacional para el control migratorio forma parte de un acuerdo alcanzado con el 7 de junio con el Gobierno de Estados Unidos a cambio de que el presidente de ese país, Donald Trump, retirara por ahora su amenaza de imponer aranceles a los productos mexicanos si no se frenaba el flujo de migrantes hacia el norte.

Luego que se conociera que ICE tiene en la mira a cerca de 2,000 familias inmigrantes la sede de la agencia migratoria en Wisconsin recibió una dura protesta.

Líderes religiosos y activistas pro inmigrantes bloquearon este lunes un acceso al edificio de la Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) en Milwaukee (Wisconsin), para protestar contra las amenazas del presidente Donald Trump de deportar a millones de indocumentados.

Al mismo tiempo, medio millar de personas se manifestaron en las calles de los alrededores del edificio, bloqueando por algunos minutos el tránsito en el centro de la ciudad, sin que se registraran detenidos.

La desobediencia civil incluyó a rabinos judíos, ministros de la Iglesia Evangélica Luterana, presbiterianos y de la Iglesia Unida de Cristo, según la organización Voces de la Frontera, que lideró la protesta.

“Con este bloqueo queremos enviar un mensaje a ICE”, declaró la activista Christine Neumann-Ortiz.

“A medida de que (el presidente Donald) Trump aumente sus amenazas, nosotros haremos lo mismo con nuestra resistencia. Vamos a permanecer unidos para exigir que ICE abandone nuestras comunidades, y que cese la separación de familias”, señaló Neumann-Ortiz.

Entre quienes hablaron frente a las oficinas de ICE estuvo Paula Hincapié, a cuyos padres se les negó asilo y fueron deportados recientemente a Colombia.

“Quiero a mis padres de regreso”, dijo la joven, que tiene protección del programa de Acción Diferida para los Llegados en la Infancia (DACA, por sus siglas en inglés).

Hincapié vio cómo agentes federales se llevaron el mes pasado a su padre Carlos y a su madre Betty Rendón, que estudiaba para ser pastora de la Iglesia Luterana Emaús, en la ciudad de Racine.

“Todos conocían a mi madre en la comunidad, mi padre era un obrero de la construcción que trabajaba duro. Mi familia fue destruida y es por eso que quiero luchar para que no suceda lo mismo con otros”, expresó la joven.

El comienzo de las redadas de la Operación Familia anunciada por Trump fue aplazado dos semanas, de acuerdo con un mensaje en Twitter del propio presidente.

Según Neuman-Ortiz, esto habría sido una consecuencia de la reacción pública provocada por su anuncio, aunque el presidente señaló que estaba dando tiempo al Congreso para que apruebe una “legislación no especificada”.

Esta legislación presuntamente busca detener a familias que huyen de la violencia en sus países y piden asilo en Estados Unidos.

“Nosotros vamos a mantener la lucha, vamos a interponer nuestros cuerpos para tratar de detener la separación de familias”, expresó Neuman-Ortiz.

Voces de la Frontera dijo que trabaja con el Departamento de Policía de Milwaukee para evitar cualquier tipo de colaboración con ICE en las redadas, a menos que haya una orden judicial.

Además, la organización expuso que trabaja con la Asamblea Legislativa del propio estado que se restablezcan las licencias de conducir para migrantes indocumentados.

“Tenemos que organizarnos para aprovechar nuestro poder como votantes y lograr la aprobación de una verdadera reforma migratoria que trate a los inmigrantes con la humanidad que se merecen”, concluyó la activista.

El Congreso se alista para aprobar esta semana un paquete de fondos para la vigilancia fronteriza pero no registra avances en el plazo de dos semanas que dio el presidente Donald Trump para suspender las redadas a menos que se eliminen las “lagunas legales” que, según su Administración, alientan la inmigración ilegal.

Las redadas de la Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) debían comenzar la madrugada de ayer domingo, pero el sábado Trump afirmó que, a petición de los demócratas, las suspendió durante dos semanas para dar tiempo a que ambos partidos negocien una solución a “los problemas de asilo y lagunas legales en la frontera sur”.

Pero Trump renovó su amenaza de que, si ambos partidos no se ponen de acuerdo, entonces “las deportaciones comenzarán!”

La presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, la legisladora demócrata por California, Nancy Pelosi, dio la bienvenida a la suspensión de las redadas y explicó que el Congreso necesita tiempo para efectuar una reforma migratoria integral que permita mantener unidas a las familias inmigrantes.

El enfoque de Pelosi y su bancada es lograr la aprobación final de una medida que legalice a los “Dreamers” y los “tepesianos”. La medida fue aprobada en la Cámara Baja pero aguarda voto final en el Senado.

Así, una fuente legislativa demócrata, que pidió el anonimato, dijo hoy a Noticias Telemundo que no se han programado reuniones entre ambos partidos para atender las renovadas exigencias de Trump.

Sin acuerdo a la vista

La Administración Trump siempre ha exigido la anulación del llamado “Acuerdo Flores” de 1997, que prohíbe la detención de menores por más de 20 días, o su traslado a centros de detención para adultos.

También quiere una reforma del sistema de asilo, al insistir en que la mayoría de los inmigrantes indocumentados cometen fraude en sus solicitudes, o no se presentan a las audiencias ante un juez para evitar su eventual deportación.

Desde el sábado pasado, el Congreso no ha tenido más que recriminaciones mutuas por la falta de avance en el debate.

El legislador republicano por Florida, Greg Steube, dijo a la cadena Fox News que los demócratas están demorando deliberadamente cualquier acción para atender la crisis en la frontera sur porque, en su opinión, no les interesa resolverla.

“No han hecho nada respecto a cómo resolver este problema. Nosotros los republicanos estamos luchando para hacerlo, hemos presentado proyectos de ley, pero ellos no quieren avanzar en nada”, se quejó Steube, miembro del subcomité de Inmigración de la Cámara Baja.

Por ahora, el Congreso sólo tiene en el tapete esta semana la aprobación final de un paquete de fondos suplementarios por $4.500 millones para resguardar la vigilancia fronteriza y ampliar la capacidad en los albergues y la ayuda humanitaria para los menores indocumentados bajo custodia del gobierno federal.

La versión del Senado fue aprobada de forma preliminar por el Comité de Asignaciones el miércoles pasado, pero tiene que ser votada en el pleno.

Mientras, la de la Cámara de Representantes, presentada el viernes pasado, contiene más fondos para el cuidado médico en los centros de detención y para alternativas a la detención de migrantes, una mayor supervisión en esos centros, y el resguardo de la ayuda exterior a Centroamérica.

En el pasado, el Congreso no ha respondido bien a las presiones, amenazas o condiciones de Trump en el campo migratorio, y es poco probable que ahora logre la escurridiza reforma migratoria.

En 2013, el Senado aprobó por abrumadora mayoría una reforma migratoria integral que permitía una vía hacia la legalización y ciudadanía de toda la población indocumentada en EEUU, y aportaba millonarios recursos para la vigilancia fronteriza. Pero la Cámara de Representantes, entonces bajo control republicano, jamás sometió la medida a voto.

Los republicanos tampoco tuvieron avances en la reforma migratoria en 2016, cuando controlaban ambas cámaras del Congreso, y desde 2017 no han logrado aprobar una ley que financie por completo el prometido muro fronterizo de Trump.

Por ello, activistas de la comunidad inmigrante consideran que las nuevas condiciones de Trump no son más que una “trampa” y que, al final, su Administración sí mantendrá en marcha el plan de las redadas.

Trump “no necesita ninguna ley para parar la separación de las familias, no necesita ninguna ley para que los niños no estén metidos en calabozos… lo que él necesita es tomar una decisión como presidente, como un humano, y proteger a estas personas que son refugiadas”, dijo a Noticias Telemundo Gustavo Torres, director ejecutivo de “CASA de Maryland”.

“Desde mi punto de vista, es una trampa es un pretexto político simplemente para después justificar las redadas en contra de nuestra comunidad”, puntualizó.

Al igual que Torres, otros grupos defensores de los inmigrantes han señalado que la política migratoria de Trump forma parte de su estrategia para infundir “miedo” en la comunidad inmigrante, sin que eso necesariamente detenga el flujo de cruces ilegales.

Las redadas en cuestión, que se llevarían a cabo en al menos diez ciudades con alta concentración de inmigrantes -como Chicago (Illinois), Denver (Colorado), Baltimore (Maryland), Atlanta (Georgia), Los Angeles y San Francisco (California), Miami (Florida), Houston (Texas), Nueva York y Nueva Orleans (Luisiana)-, estarán dirigidas contra 2,000 individuos y familias que han hecho caso omiso a las órdenes de deportación finales emitidas por un juez de Inmigración.

El propio Trump había adelantado el aviso de las redadas en su cuenta en Twitter el lunes pasado, en víspera del lanzamiento oficial de su campaña de reelección, lo que le valió críticas de que, al igual que en 2016, utiliza el tema de inmigración con fines electoreros.

Una portavoz de ICE, Carol Danko, condenó la noche del sábado la filtración a la prensa de las inminentes redadas, al argumentar que eso ponía en riesgo la seguridad de los agentes policiales.

“La suspensión del presidente protege a los oficiales y provee una oportunidad para que el Congreso trabaje con celeridad y de forma bipartidista para eliminar los incentivos para el contrabando de niños, y asegurar que todos los extranjeros ilegales puedan ser regresados prontamente, una vez detenidos en la frontera sur”, precisó Danko.

“Si el Congreso no cambia las leyes… no hay más alternativa que continuar los arrestos de estos extranjeros fugitivos en el interior” del país, según Danko.

ICE insiste en que su misión es hacer cumplir las leyes de inmigración, pero ha prometido que actuará con “compasión y dignidad” hacia las familias.

Aunque las redadas y deportaciones de ICE no son un fenómeno nuevo, las operaciones policiales a gran escala y dirigidas contra menores de edad sentarían un precedente, advirtió Randy Capps, un analista del Instituto de Política Migratoria (MPI, por su sigla en inglés).

La agencia no ha precisado qué pasará con los hijos nacidos en EEUU de padres puestos en trámites de deportación.

Se espera que la Corte Suprema se pronuncie esta semana en torno a un planteo de la Oficina del Censo, que quiere autorización para preguntar a todo el mundo sobre su ciudadanía. La propuesta ha generado demandas, un intenso debate y numerosos interrogantes.

Lo que hay que saber del tema:

___

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
P: ¿Qué quiere concretamente la Oficina del Censo?

R: Quiere preguntar a cada persona si es ciudadana de Estados Unidos. Se ofrecen cinco posibles opciones para responder: Nacido en Estados Unidos o nacido en Guam, las Marianas del Norte, Puerto Rico o las Islas Virgen Estadounidenses; nacido en el exterior, de padre o padres que son ciudadanos estadounidenses; nacido en el exterior y naturalizado estadounidense, nacido en el exterior que no es ciudadano estadounidense. A quienes no son nacidos en Estados Unidos no se les pregunta acerca de su status inmigratorio.

P: ¿Se hará esa pregunta en el censo?

R: Depende de la Corte Suprema, que está decidiendo el caso luego de que varios estados acudieron a los tribunales para tratar de impedir que se incluya esa pregunta.

P: ¿Qué dice la constitución?

R: La 14ta Enmienda estipula que “los representantes deben ser repartidos entre los varios estados según sus respectivas cifras, tomando en cuenta a todas las personas de cada estado”.

P: ¿Cuáles son las disputas legales?

R: Tres jueces federales han dicho que el gobierno violó las leyes federales al actuar de forma “arbitraria y caprichosa” cuando trató de incorporar esta preguntas. Dos de ellos dijeron asimismo que la iniciativa viola el requisito constitucional de contar a toda la población cada diez años. El temor ese que muchos inmigrantes no participen si se incorpora la pregunta sobre la ciudadanía y que el censo no arroje las cifras correctas.

P: ¿Alguna vez se hizo esta pregunta en el censo?

R: No a todo el mundo. En varios consultas de 1950, cuando empleados del gobierno iban de puerta en puerta preguntando a la gente y no se hacía como ahora, en que las personas llenan formularios, se preguntaba por la ciudadanía a quienes voluntariamente dijesen que habían nacido afuera del país. La pregunta acerca de la ciudadanía aparece también en formularios largos y consultas complementarias enviadas a algunas viviendas.

P: ¿Por qué la Oficina del Censo quiere incluir esa pregunta?

R: El secretario de comercio Wilbur Ross, que supervisa la Oficina del Censo, dijo en un informe el año pasado que el Departamento de Justicia quiere esa pregunta para reunir información que ayude a identificar distritos en los que minorías raciales constituyen la mayoría, algo que pide la Ley de Derecho al Voto toda vez que sea posible.

P: ¿Hay otras razones?

R: Algunos sectores dicen que los republicanos quieren información sobre la ciudadanía para que los estados puedan usar cifras de ciudadanos y no la totalidad de los residentes al elaborar distritos legislativos. Esto daría ventaja a los republicanos, ya que los no ciudadanos tienden a vivir en zonas dominadas por los demócratas. Agregan que los republicanos están conscientes de que si no se cuentan los residentes extranjeros, ello podría restar fuerza y fondos federales a estados con muchos inmigrantes, como California. Jueces federales de California, Maryland y Nueva York dijeron que las razones dadas por Ross no son las reales, pero agregaron que no pueden determinar cuáles son los verdaderos motivos.

P: ¿Por qué hay oposición a la pregunta sobre la ciudadanía?

R: Defensores de las libertades civiles y de los inmigrantes dicen que la pregunta no ha sido puesta a prueba, es innecesaria y parte de un esfuerzo del gobierno de Donald Trump por no contar a los no ciudadanos y a otras personas nacidas en el extranjero. Existe asimismo el temor de que el gobierno pueda pasar la información a las autoridades de inmigración, lo que violaría las leyes federales. La Oficina del Censo asegura que eso no sucederá.

P: ¿Por qué se ha armado revuelo en torno a unos archivos encontrados en la casa de un consultor republicano que falleció el año pasado?

R: En la computadora de Thomas Hoffeller, experto republicano en redistribución de distritos electorales, se halló un informe que explicaba cómo los republicanos se podrían beneficiar en Texas si usaban la cantidad de votantes que son ciudadanos en lugar del total de la población para elaborar los distritos electorales. Organizaciones de derechos civiles dicen que Hofeller presionó para que se incorporase la pregunta sobre la ciudadanía. El Departamento de Justicia niega esta acusación y la tilda de “casi frívola”.

P: ¿Todos los hogares deben participar en el censo?

R: Teóricamente, sí, según una ley de 1954 que contempla multas para quienes se nieguen a hacerlo o suministren información falsa. La multa máxima es de 5.000 dólares. Históricamente, no obstante, no se aplican castigos a quienes no participan.

P: ¿Qué pasa si alguien completa el resto de las preguntas pero deja en blanco la de la ciudadanía?

R: No está claro. Hay quienes dicen que probablemente se les pida a esas personas que respondan a la pregunta, aunque nadie puede ser obligado.

P: ¿Es previsible que la pregunta de la ciudadanía haga que no se cuente a todo el mundo?

R: Sí. La propia Oficina del Censo calcula que la participación disminuiría en un 5,8% de incluirse esa pregunta. Hay quienes creen que ese estimado se queda corto o que la no participación involucraría mayormente a minorías.

P: ¿La información personal del censo se mantiene en privado?

R: La ley estipula que así debe ser. Un empleado del censo que revela información puede ser multado con 250.000 dólares y pasar cinco años en la cárcel. Compartir la información con otras dependencias del gobierno está específicamente prohibido.

P: ¿El gobierno compartió alguna vez información confidencial?

R: Los historiadores descubrieron que el gobierno lo hizo en el censo de 1940, antes de que se prohibiera hacerlo, para detener a personas de origen japonés durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.

La mayoría de los hispanos desaprueba el desempeño del presidente Trump y desea que un demócrata lo reemplace en la Casa Blanca, de acuerdo con una encuesta de Noticias Telemundo y Telemundo Station Group, realizada por la firma Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy, Inc.

El presidente, Donald Trump, aseguró el sábado a través de la red social Twitter que la redada masiva contra indocumentados que el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE, en inglés) planeaba lanzar este fin de semana había sido “retrasada por dos semanas” a petición del Partido Demócrata, para así poder “trabajar juntos una solución” a los “problemas” en el sistema de asilo.

Sin embargo, dos fuentes de la Administración han indicado a la web informativa BuzzFeed News que la operación fue frenada después de que, desde dentro del Gobierno, se filtrara información confidencial a la prensa.

“Filtrar los lugares [de los arrestos] y otros detalles para detener así la operación no sólo ha dañado su integridad operativa sino que también ha hecho peligrar la seguridad y bienestar de nuestros oficiales”, indicó un oficial a la citada web.

Según estas fuentes, esa filtración habría provenido del propio director en funciones del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, Kevin McAleenan, o de algún miembro de su equipo.

Cinco fuentes, también anónimas, han coincidido con este dictamen según el diario conservador Washinton Examiner. De acuerdo con esta explicación, McAleenan estaba en desacuerdo con la operación, y había tratado de frenarla durante meses presionando a los responsables de ICE (que dependen de él).

McAleenan, en cualquier caso, fue elegido por Trump para el cargo en abril, después de la destitución de Kirstjen Nielsen en una purga a gran escala de responsables migratorios supuestamente tutelada por el asesor de la Casa Blanca Stephen Miller, enemigo de cualquier tipo de inmigración.

El Departamento de Seguridad Nacional no ha comentado estas informaciones.
Algunos oficiales de ICE opinan además que el anuncio del propio presidente en Twitter la semana pasada también pudo destapar antes de tiempo la operación. Trump adelantó que pronto “empezaría el proceso para deportar a millones de extranjeros ilegales”, coincidiendo con el inicio de su campaña electoral para 2020.

La operación iba a comenzar el domingo y tenía por objeto detener a 2.000 miembros de familias de indocumentados en 10 ciudades (entre ellas, Los Ángeles, Houston, Chicago o Miami), según adelantó el viernes el diario The Washington Post.

Trump prometió que serían “millones” los afectados, pero el propio director interino de ICE, Mark Morgan, confirmó poco después que carecía de los recursos para una operación de ese calibre.

Pese a que la super-redada contra familias parece pues estar temporalmente paralizada, ICE no ha dejado de detener a inmigrantes. En el año fiscal de 2018 arrestó a 160.000 personas (440 al día), y deportó a 256.000 (700 al día).

Según las estadísticas oficiales de la agencia, hay más de 565.000 fugitivos, es decir, inmigrantes con una orden final de deportación que no se han ido.

Estas cifras son, en cualquier caso, inferiores a las del ex presidente demócrata Barack Obama en sus dos primeros años en la Casa Blanca: 298.000 arrestos y 390.000 deportaciones en 2009; y 272.000 arrestos y 393.000 deportaciones en 2010.

La firma de abogados Vorys Sater Seymour & Pease LLP lanzó una alerta de viaje para ciertos tipos de inmigrantes que salgan al extranjero.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
En su artículo “Alerta de inmigración: Asesoramiento de viajes de verano”, publicado en lexology.com, los abogados señalan que aquellos extranjeros con permiso laboral deben tener especial cuidado, además de recordarles los documentos básicos requeridos para salir y reingresar a los Estados Unidos.

Los documentos clave son:

– Un pasaporte válido por al menos seis meses después de las fechas de admisión aprobadas en los EEUU.

– Original o copia del Formulario I-797 o Aviso de aprobación (para extranjeros con estatus de no inmigrante).

– Un sello válido de visa de no inmigrante (NIV) de los EEUU o un documento válido de libertad condicional anticipada si se vuelve a ingresar en función de un ajuste pendiente de la solicitud de estado (por trámite de Residencia Permanente o renovación de otra visa).

– Una “green card” válida (tarjeta verde) para residentes permanentes legales de los EEUU, que en la mayoría de los casos sería suficiente con el pasaporte del país de origen.

Los expertos recuerdan que los oficiales de Protección de Aduanas y Fronteras (CBP) aplican ya el nuevo Formulario I-94 automatizado en los puertos de entrada aéreos y marítimos, por lo que los viajeros deberán ir al sitio web de la I-94 en https://i94.cbp.dhs.gov/ e ingresar su información para garantizar que su información de ingreso, en particular, la fecha de vencimiento de sus estancia y su clase de admisión, fueron ingresados ​​correctamente por el Oficial de CBP.

Las personas interesadas también pueden imprimir copias en papel del sitio web.

En caso de que un extranjero necesite solicitar una visa de no inmigrante desde su país antes de regresar a los EEUU se debe tomar en cuenta:

– Las citas de la VNI en varias oficinas consulares en todo el mundo están atrasadas durante la temporada de verano.

– La mayoría de los solicitantes entre las edades de 14 y 79 años deben tener una entrevista consular en persona.

– Pueden pedir mayor información y pedir citas en https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/visa-information-resources/wait-times.html

– Algunos países donde hay más retrasos son México, China e India.

Los cuerpos sin vida de tres niños y una mujer, posiblemente inmigrantes indocumentados, fueron encontrados cerca de la frontera entre México y Texas, informó el alguacil del condado de Hidalgo, Eddie Guerra.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
Se trata de una mujer de unos 20 años, dos bebés y otro niño pequeño, indicó el oficial texano por medio de un mensaje en la cuenta del departamento en Twitter.

Guerra indicó que los cuerpos fueron encontrados en un área con maleza cerca del Río Grande, al suroeste de Anzalduas Park, en el Área de Manejos de Vida Salvaje de Las Palomas.

Esta región que se ha convertido en un punto de cruce de inmigrantes indocumentados, especialmente de familias centroamericanas.

La causa de la muerte todavía no ha sido determinada, aunque se estima que quizás pudieran haber muerto víctimas de deshidratación.

El alguacil indicó que el FBI se encuentra investigando el caso, debido a que las muertes se registraron dentro de una propiedad federal.

La Oficina de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza (CBP) todavía no ha dado a conocer ningún tipo de información al respecto.

Ver imagen en Twitter
Ver imagen en Twitter

Sheriff Eddie Guerra
@SheriffGuerra
BREAKING NEWS: Deputies are on scene by the river SE of the Anzalduas Park in Las Paloma Wildlife Management Area where Border Patrol agents located 4 deceased bodies. Bodies appear to be 2 infants, a toddler and 20yoa female. Deputies are awaiting FBI agents who will be leading.

1.928
22:35 – 23 jun. 2019
3.540 personas están hablando de esto
Información y privacidad de Twitter Ads
El diario local The Monitor indicó que agentes de CBP descubrieron los cuerpos este domingo, aunque aparentemente la muerte se debió producir días antes, en una zona conocida localmente como El Rincón del Diablo, a menudo utilizada por los contrabandistas debido a su proximidad a México.

Durante el fin de semana se emitió en esta zona una alerta por altas temperaturas, las cuales en algunos puntos llegaron hasta los 113 grados Fahrenheit (45 grados Celsius).

A principios de este mes, la Patrulla Fronteriza en el Sector Tucson reportó la muerte de una niña migrante de 7 años proveniente de la India, cuyo cadáver apareció en el desierto de Arizona.

La madre y hermana de la víctima fueron rescatadas horas más tarde por las autoridades y llevadas a un hospital cercano, donde fueron atendidas con síntomas de deshidratación.

A las afueras de la alcaldía de Newark llegaron decenas de líderes comunitarios para expresar su crítica y rechazar los ataques del presidente en contra de los indocumentados que viven el país. La vicealcaldesa Jaqueline Quiles aseguró que la ciudad buscará “proteger” a los inmigrantes.

EL PASO, Texas— El gobierno de Estados Unidos trasladó a más de 300 niños de una la estación de la Patrulla Fronteriza de Texas luego de que un reportaje de Prensa Asociada (AP) informara sobre las de condiciones peligrosas.

PUBLICIDAD

De acuerdo con la publicación de la agencia periodística, los más de 300 niños que fueron detenidos allí, se cuidaban unos a otros con aguas y alimentos inadecuados.

La representante Veronica Escobar dijo que 30 niños estaban en las instalaciones cerca de El Paso hasta el lunes. Su oficina fue informada sobre la situación por un funcionario de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza.

La semana pasada, los abogados que visitaron la estación en Clint, Texas, dijeron que los niños mayores estaban tratando de cuidar a bebés y niños pequeños, según informó por primera vez The Associated Press el pasado jueves.
ADVERTISING

Algunos habían estado detenidos durante tres semanas y 15 niños estaban enfermos de gripe.

No está claro a dónde serán trasladados todos los niños. Pero Escobar dijo que algunos fueron enviados a otra instalación en El Paso.

La suspensión del programa de arrestos y deportaciones masivas anunciado el sábado por el presidente Donald Trump, unas 12 horas antes de que la Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) lo pusiera en marcha, las cifras oficiales indican que las autoridades están deportando a unos 660 indocumentados cada día en base al promedio de los dos últimos años.

“A solicitud de los demócratas, he demorado el proceso de deportación ilegal (deportación) durante dos semanas para ver si los demócratas y los republicanos pueden reunirse y encontrar una solución a los problemas de asilo y escapatoria en la frontera sur. Si no, ¡comienzan las deportaciones!”, escribió el presidente en su cuenta de la red social Twitter.

“Pero ICE sigue trabajando como lo ha venido haciendo hasta ahora”, advierte José Guerrero, un abogado de inmigración que ejerce en Miami, Florida. “Ellos siguen deportando y todo el que tiene orden final de deportación y no tiene recursos legales para permanecer aquí, les están dando un plan de acción: un plazo breve para que presenten un pasaje aéreo de salida con la hora y la hora en que se marcharán de Estados Unidos. Ellos siguen trabajando como de costumbre”, indicó.

PUBLICIDAD

Guerrero dijo además que “el tuit del presidente solo se refiere a la orden que el mismo dio el lunes pasado, cuando anunció, también en Twitter, que arrestaría y deportaría a millones de personas con orden de deportación final”.
ADVERTISING

“La próxima semana ICE comenzará el proceso de remover a los millones de extranjeros ilegales que ilícitamente han encontrado su camino hacia los Estados Unidos. Serán eliminados tan pronto como entren. México, usando sus fuertes leyes de inmigración, está haciendo un muy buen trabajo al detener a las personas…”, advirtió.

“Pero ojo, que los operativos, las redadas de todos los días, los arrestos y las deportaciones continúan”, indicó Guerrero.

Los números de ICE
En 2018 la agencia deportó 256,085 inmigrantes, equivalente a 701 inmigrantes diarios. En el año fiscal 2017 se llevaron a cabo 226,119 expulsiones, equivalentes a 619.5 deportados diarios. Esto da un promedio de 660 indocumentados diarios.

Respecto a los arrestos, en el año fiscal 2018 ICE registró 242,778, equivalente a 665 diarios. En el año fiscal 2017 fueron 153,679, un promedio de 421 diarios.

En el año fiscal 2013, durante el gobierno de Barack Obama, ICE deportó a 435,498 inmigrantes, un promedio 1,193 inmigrantes diarios.

“Aquí en Los Angeles se vive un nivel de preocupación extrema antes y después de los anuncios del presidente”, dice Francisco Moreno, director ejecutivo de la Federación de Confederaciones Mexicanas en California”. “Se nota en los comercios. El sábado pareció un día muerto, con calles casi desiertas. Y a pesar de que al medio día se anunció una moratoria de dos semanas, nuestra gente sigue asustada y los operativos regulares de las autoridades de la policía siguen, incluso acompañados por agentes de ICE”, agregó.

PUBLICIDAD

Moreno dijo además que “nosotros seguimos trabajando para que la gente conozca sus derechos y sepa defenderse, sobre todo aquellos que tienen una orden de deportación”.

Bajo tensión
“La gente está muy asustada por la orden del presidente. Y aunque la haya suspendido, seguimos alarmados. Pero pensamos que quienes no hemos hecho nada malo no vendrán por nosotros. Quién sabe, tal vez sí”, dice Orlando López, un inmigrante nicaragüense con más de 20 años en Estados Unidos amparado de la deportación por un Estatus de Protección Especial (TPS). “Ahora hay mucho miedo, no solo en las personas con una orden de deportación final, sino sus familias y también entre quienes han pedido ayuda pública. Habrá mucho daño en nuestra comunidad si activan las deportaciones masivas”, indicó.

López es uno de los 10.4 millones de indocumentados que viven en Estados Unidos y que el gobierno de Trump puso en el banquillo de las deportaciones, incluso antes de llegar a la Casa Blanca. Y cinco días después de instalado firmó una orden ejecutiva sobre las jurisdicciones santuario decretando que la presencia ilegal constituye una amenaza a la seguridad pública y nacional de Estados Unidos.

“Imagínese cómo estamos”, dice al otro lado del teléfono Ana, cuyo nombre es otro y no quiere revelar su identidad por miedo a ser detenida y deportada por el gobierno. “No nos quieren aquí. ahorita no podemos hacer mucho. Mi abogado me dice que mientras tenga un caso pendiente, no debo preocuparme. Eso dice él, pero nadie sabe hasta dónde es verdad, nadie lo sabe, nadie puede asegurarlo”, agrega.

PUBLICIDAD

En el 2016 Ana estuvo en el centro de detención de la Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) en Berks, Pennsylvania. La inmigrante estuvo a punto de ser deportada , “pero me negué a firmar los papeles. Después me pusieron un grillete en el tobillo y ahora espero que me den una cita y conocer qué pasará conmigo”, contó poco después de ser liberada. “Nunca firmé nada en Berks. Tampoco nadie me dijo mis derechos, ni cómo podía pedir protección. Hasta que unos abogados me contactaron y averiguaron mi caso”.

“Si tiene orden de deportación final, fue porque perdió su caso o no acudió a la cita con el juez”, dice Lilia Velásquez, profesora adjunta de la facultad de leyes de la Universidad de California en San Diego. “Y lo triste aquí es que las deportaciones en ausencia se dan porque el inmigrante, o bien no acudió a la corte por miedo y desconocimiento o porque llegó tarde y cuando el juez lo llamó no estaba”.

Una vez emitida la orden de deportación en ausencia “no hay nada que pueda hacer”, recalca Velásquez. “Excepto en casos excepcionales, En cuanto a los migrantes que no sean mexicanos, Velásquez dijo que serán procesados previamente y luego deportados a sus países de origen, pero todo ello requiere un proceso que puede demorar días. Los mexicanos, en cambio, serán llevados rápidamente a la frontera y entregados a las autoridades de ese país”.

RELACIONADOS
Así responden las ciudades en la mira de ICE en las que el domingo comenzarán las redadas masivas
COMPARTE
Así responden las ciudades en la mira de ICE en las que el domingo comenzarán las redadas masivas
Así responden las ciudades en la mira de ICE en las que el domingo comenzarán las redadas masivas

“No entren en pánico”
A pesar de la gravedad del panorama que se avecina, “las personas no deben entrar en pánico”, dice Alex Gálvez, un abogado de inmigración que ejerce en Los Angeles, California. “El pánico no nos lleva a ningún lugar. En vez de asustarnos, debemos armarnos con información, ver si tenemos opciones legales para no ser deportados y, sobre todo, proteger a la familia”.

PUBLICIDAD

Gálvez dijo además que las personas que registraron una dirección en la corte que emitió la orden de deportación, “el gobierno sabrá dónde ir a buscarlos. Pero si ya no está en ese lugar, pues será más difícil encontrarlos, ICE no tendrá acceso al lugar donde viven”.

El abogado precisó que es responsabilidad de todo inmigrante “informarse de sus derechos” y saber en todo momento que “si caen en las manos de ICE, no firme. Los van a empujar para que lo haga, les van a gritar, los van a amenazas e incluso escupir toda una sarta de insultos, pero tienen el derecho de no firmar. La pluma es el enemigo. Aléjela, no la use por nada en el mundo”.

Para la abogada de inmigración Rebeca Sánchez-Roig, quien ejerce en Miami, Florida, la principal recomendación para los inmigrantes con orden de deportación final es “no abra la puerta de su casa” cuando lleguen los agentes de ICE.

“Si los agentes llegan y no tienen una orden judicial de arresto o de investigación a las casas, no abra la puerta. No tienen que dar nombres a los agentes, tampoco tienen que decirles que son de un país extranjero. Y pueden pedir un abogado. Pero es mejor nunca contestar el llamado a la puerta, no la abra”, precisó.

“Si ICE sabe que hay alguien adentro, pídales que metan la orden judicial por debajo de la puerta y revise que tenga la firma de un juez y que vaya a su nombre. Y es poco probable que lleven la orden judicial. Por lo general solo llevan una orden administrativa y eso no les da el derecho a entrar en su propiedad”, agregó.

PUBLICIDAD

“Las órdenes administrativas parecen una orden de arresto pero no lo son. Así es que, si se encuentra en esta situación, llame inmediatamente a un abogado criminalista o de inmigración para que lo represente y le explique cuáles son sus derechos y opciones legales que tiene”, dijo.

RELACIONADOS
Urgen al gobierno usar “alternativas humanas” al encarcelamiento de inmigrantes
COMPARTE
Urgen al gobierno usar “alternativas humanas” al encarcelamiento de inmigrantes
Urgen al gobierno usar “alternativas humanas” al encarcelamiento de inmigrantes

Tenga listo un plan
Si tiene una orden de deportación, “haga un plan”, dice Víctor Nieblas, un expresidente de la Asociación Americana de Abogados de Inmigración (AILA). “Colecte todos los documentos de su caso, téngalos listos y asigne responsabilidades a su familia”, indicó.

“Decida quién va hacer qué, quién le va hablar a otros familiares, quién le va hablar a su abogado. Y no espere hasta el ultimo momento para consultar con organizaciones comunitarias o su abogado. Hágalo ahora, en este momento para revisar su situación particular y buscar posibles soluciones”, añadió.

Nieblas dijo además que “tenemos que tomar estos anuncios detallados del gobierno en serio. Por lo pronto, los anuncios se dirigen a personas con ordenes de deportaciones y que no han salido del país. Estas son las más afectadas por estos anuncios”.

A su vez, Nieblas dijo que “es posible que ICE hará su trabajo normal de arrestar personas con el proposito que los medios de comunicación les den amplia cubertura y así promover el miedo a la comunidad”.

“Será muy difícil arrestar y deportar a un million de personas sin más recursos para mas agentes, centros de detención o personal en las cortes de inmigración. A pesar de ello, el miedo va correr en la comunidad inmigrante”, dijo.

RELACIONADOS
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
COMPARTE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE

PUBLICIDAD

Qué sucederá con DACA y el TPS
A la pregunta respecto al futuro inmediato de los programas de Acción Diferida del 2012 (DACA) y Estatus de Protección Temporal (TPS), que amparan de la deportación a poco más de 1 millón de inmigrantes, muchos con orden de expulsión final del país, abogados y dreamers indicaron que “mientras sigan vigentes, los beneficiarios no deberían verse afectados”.

“Las personas con TPS o DACA están protegidas mientras mantengan sus permisos actualizados”; dijo Nieblas. “Pero cualquier persona sin estatus legal que encuentra ICE estará en peligro”.

Gálvez señala que “los dreamers y TPS están protegidos, amparados, absolutamente amparados. También las personas que están en corte y tienen casos pendientes en los tribunales de apelación. Todos ellos siguen estando amparados (Stay of Renoval)”.

Añadió que en caso que ICE detenga a un inmigrante cuyo proceso de inmigración está en curso, “cuando le tomen las huellas y las revisen, en ese momento saldrá la información y deberán ponerlo en libertad”.

Sánchez-Roig dijo que “no creo que ICE los busque porque políticamente no es correcto”.

Los dreamers tampoco creen que los persigan, pero se mantienen en alerta. “El programa DACA es acción diferida contra la deportación. Pero es claro que en muchos casos es probable que los agentes de ICE no respetan o no sepan del programa. Es necesario que estemos alerta, andar con cautela y también nuestros padres y familiares”, dijo Juan Manuel Guzmán, director de políticas de United We Dream (UWD), la principal organización de dreamers de Estados Unidos.

Entre el jueves y el sábado de la semana pasada el presidente Donald Trump dio dos reversazos: canceló la orden de atacar militarmente a Irán por el derribo de un dron estadunidense que presuntamente voló en espacio aéreo iraní; y frenó la realización de redadas para detener a unos 2 mil indocumentados con órdenes finales de deportación que comenzarían ayer domingo a través del país.

Trump asegura que el retraso de dos semanas dará tiempo para que demócratas y republicanos del Congreso arriben a un acuerdo sobre los 5 mil millones de dólares que el gobierno exige para manejar la crisis humanitaria en la frontera, con más camas en centros de detención, entre otras cosas. Trump también quiere cambios a las leyes de asilo que durante meses ha pisoteado en la frontera sur para impedir que migrantes centroamericanos que huyen de una brutal violencia puedan solicitar refugio en Estados Unidos.

De no haber acuerdo, afirmó Trump, las redadas procederán. El Congreso inicia a fines de esta semana un receso por el feriado del 4 de julio, de manera que la posibilidad de tal acuerdo no queda clara.

A simple vista, cualquiera pensaría que Trump demostró sentido común en ambas instancias, evitando una guerra y las deportaciones; pero si se le rasca un poco al asunto queda expuesto cómo a Trump no le importa infligir terror echando mano de sus fuerzas militares y policiales con fines estrictamente políticos.

El cuento de que frenó el ataque contra Irán a escasos minutos de que se emprendiera porque se enteró de que 150 iraníes perderían la vida no se lo cree nadie. Lo insólito es que lo haya autorizado por el derribo de un dron y que tras 18 años de presencia militar estadunidense en Oriente Medio por una guerra, la de Irak, llevada a cabo por un presidente republicano, George W. Bush con base en falsedades, de que el régimen de Sadam Husein poseía armas de destrucción masiva que nunca aparecieron, Trump le hiciera caso inicialmente a los mismos funcionarios que lideraron el fiasco de Irak. Trump parece guiado por lo que supone para su ego ordenar y cancelar operativos militares sin medir las consecuencias, como si se tratara de un juego de soldaditos.

Y el caso de las deportaciones es todavía más claro. Trump anunció las redadas nacionales que ni siquiera los encargados de conducirlas estaban convencidos de que se tratara de un buena idea. Una vez más, Trump quiso demostrar ante su base que su política de línea dura es real, sin importar el terror que pueda generar en la comunidad inmigrante y sin medir que las familias afectadas son, en gran parte, de situación migratoria mixta, donde hay ciudadanos y residentes permanentes y que, como siempre, los más vulnerables son los niños, muchos de ellos ciudadanos estadunidenses que viven con la constante amenaza de que en cualquier momento sus padres pueden ser deportados.

Claro está, nadie espera que Trump demuestre un poco de humanidad con la población inmigrante y con ciudadanos al interior del país, porque ya hemos visto lo que pasa en la frontera.

Porque hay que ser despiadado para no estremecerse ante los reportes que han emergido sobre el trato inhumano a niños en centros de detención operados por autoridades estadunidenses. Cada día se revelan horribles detalles de niños sin atención médica adecuada; de niños cuidando de niños, en condiciones insalubres, sin poder bañarse por semanas, sin un cambio de ropa limpia, durmiendo en el suelo bajo temperaturas gélidas y sin cobijas, sin acceso a servicios sanitarios, ingiriendo alimentos expirados o sin cocinar. Al menos seis menores han muerto en custodia de las autoridades migratorias, y uno se pregunta cómo no han sido más las víctimas en estas precarias condiciones.

El video que circuló de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia, argumentando ante un panel de jueces del Noveno Circuito de San Francisco, que el gobierno no tiene por qué proveer jabón, pasta de dientes y cobijas a los niños para garantizar condiciones “sanitarias y seguras”, le hace hervir la sangre a cualquiera.

Es la intensificación de la crueldad como mecanismo de disuasión, del mismo modo que separaron a niños de sus padres en la frontera, lo que todavía sigue ocurriendo, según reportes.

Que el gobierno central de una nación poderosa, la cual se jacta de defender los derechos humanos en todas partes del mundo, se ensañe de este modo con niños es aberrante. Y queda perfectamente claro que ocurre porque se trata de niños mayormente de tez oscura y de países latinoamericanos. Quizá si fueran de Noruega, la situación sería diferente.

Con sus dos reversazos, Trump no demostró sentido común, algo que realmente habría demostrado de no haber tomado las dos decisiones iniciales: atacar a Irán por el derribo de un dron y anunciar las redadas como arma política y mecanismo de presión legislativa.

Lo que queda plasmado es que, para lograr sus objetivos políticos, a Trump no le importa infligir terror entre civiles al otro lado del planeta, o entre niños, en la frontera o al interior del país.

Es la politización de la crueldad en su máxima expresión.

Pese a la decisión de Donald Trump de poner freno temporal a las redadas contra indocumentados, este fue un fin de semana ocupado para las organizaciones de defensa de derechos de los inmigrantes. Un grupo de estos activistas acudió al Centro de Inmigración en Los Ángeles para mostrar su rechazo a la política del mandatario y orientar a los posibles afectados de su nuevo plan de deportación masiva.

El abogado Víctor Nieblas analiza la suspensión de los operativos que anunció el presidente estadounidense la semana pasada. Nieblas asegura que el aviso se trata de una táctica política para su campaña presidencial, así como para obligar a los legisladores a cambiar los requisitos de asilo en la frontera, entre otras formas de endurecer las reglas de migración de EEUU.

Entre el jueves y el sábado de la semana pasada el presidente Donald Trump dio dos reversazos: canceló la orden de atacar militarmente a Irán por el derribo de un dron estadounidense que presuntamente voló en espacio aéreo iraní; y frenó la realización de redadas para detener a unos 2,000 indocumentados con órdenes finales de deportación que comenzarían ayer domingo a través del país.

PUBLICIDAD

Trump asegura que el retraso de dos semanas dará tiempo para que demócratas y republicanos del Congreso lleguen a un acuerdo sobre los 5,000 millones de dólares que el gobierno exige para manejar la crisis humanitaria en la frontera, con más camas en centros de detención, entre otras cosas. Trump también quiere cambios a las leyes de asilo que durante meses ha pisoteado en la frontera sur para impedir que migrantes centroamericanos que huyen de una brutal violencia puedan solicitar refugio en Estados Unidos.

De no haber acuerdo, afirmó Trump, las redadas procederán. El Congreso inicia a fines de esta semana un receso por el feriado del 4 de julio de manera que la posibilidad de tal acuerdo no queda clara.

A simple vista, cualquiera pensaría que Trump demostró sentido común en ambas instancias, evitando una guerra y las deportaciones, pero si se le rasca un poco al asunto queda expuesto cómo a Trump no le importa infligir terror echando mano de sus fuerzas militares y policiales con fines estrictamente políticos.
ADVERTISING

El cuento de que frenó el ataque contra Irán a escasos minutos de que se emprendiera porque se enteró de que 150 iraníes perderían la vida no se lo cree nadie. Lo insólito es que lo haya autorizado por el derribo de un dron y que tras 18 años de presencia militar estadounidense en Oriente Medio por una guerra, la de Irak, llevada a cabo por un presidente republicano, George W. Bush, con base en falsedades, de que el régimen de Sadam Husein poseía armas de destrucción masiva que nunca aparecieron, Trump les hiciera caso inicialmente a los mismos funcionarios que lideraron el fiasco de Irak. Trump parece guiado por lo que supone para su ego ordenar y cancelar operativos militares sin medir las consecuencias, como si se tratara de un juego de soldaditos.

PUBLICIDAD

Y el caso de las deportaciones es todavía más claro. Trump anunció las redadas nacionales que ni siquiera los encargados de conducirlas estaban convencidos de que se tratara de un buena idea. Una vez más, Trump quiso demostrar ante su base que su política de línea dura es real, sin importar el terror que pueda generar en la comunidad inmigrante y sin medir que las familias afectadas son, en gran parte, de situación migratoria mixta, donde hay ciudadanos y residentes permanentes y que, como siempre, los más vulnerables son los niños, muchos de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses que viven con la constante amenaza de que en cualquier momento sus padres pueden ser deportados.

Claro está, nadie espera que Trump demuestre un poco de humanidad con la población inmigrante y con ciudadanos al interior del país, porque ya hemos visto lo que pasa en la frontera.

Porque hay que ser despiadado para no estremecerse ante los reportes que han emergido sobre el trato inhumano a niños en centros de detención operados por autoridades estadounidenses. Cada día se revelan horribles detalles de niños sin atención médica adecuada; de niños cuidando de niños, en condiciones insalubres, sin poder bañarse por semanas, sin un cambio de ropa limpia, durmiendo en el suelo bajo temperaturas gélidas y sin cobijas, sin acceso a servicios sanitarios, ingiriendo alimentos expirados o sin cocinar. Al menos seis menores han muerto en custodia de las autoridades migratorias, y uno se pregunta cómo no han sido más las víctimas en estas precarias condiciones.

PUBLICIDAD

El video que circuló de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia, argumentando ante un panel de jueces del Noveno Circuito de San Francisco, que el gobierno no tiene por qué proveer jabón, pasta de dientes y cobijas a los niños para garantizar condiciones “sanitarias y seguras”, le hace hervir la sangre a cualquiera.

Es la intensificación de la crueldad como mecanismo de disuasión, del mismo modo que separaron a niños de sus padres en la frontera, lo que todavía sigue ocurriendo, según reportes.

Que el gobierno central de una nación poderosa, la cual se jacta de defender los derechos humanos en todas partes del mundo, se ensañe de este modo con niños es aberrante. Y queda perfectamente claro que ocurre porque se trata de niños mayormente de tez oscura y de países latinoamericanos. Quizá si fueran de Noruega, la situación sería diferente.

Con sus dos reversazos, Trump no demostró sentido común, algo que realmente habría demostrado de no haber tomado las dos decisiones iniciales: atacar a Irán por el derrribo de un dron y anunciar las redades como arma política y mecanismo de presión legislativa.

Lo que queda plasmado es que, para lograr sus objetivos politicos, a Trump no le importa infligir terror entre civiles al otro lado del planeta, o entre niños, en la frontera o al interior del país.

Es la politización de la crueldad en su máxima expresión.

SAN ANTONIO, Texas- La Patrulla Fronteriza encontró a cuatro cadáveres en el parque Anzalduas del condado de Hidalgo al sur de Texas.

PUBLICIDAD

El alguacil de Hidalgo, Eddie Guerra, informó en su cuenta de Twitter que el cuerpo de dos bebés, un niño pequeño y el de una mujer de 20 años fueron encontrados por los agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza en el Área de Manejo de Vida Silvestre Las Paloma de dicho parque el domingo en la noche.

“Los agentes están en escena junto al río del Parque Anzalduas en el Área de Manejo de Vida Silvestre Las Paloma, donde los agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza localizaron 4 cuerpos fallecidos. Los cuerpos parecen ser de dos bebés, un niño pequeño y una mujer de 20 años. Los diputados están esperando a los agentes del FBI (Buró Federal de Investigaciones), quienes estarán a cargo de la investigación”, detalló Guerra.

El exalcalde de San Antonio visitó Despierta América para desayunar con nosotros y hablar sobre su campaña política. ¿Cuáles son sus propuestas para terminar con la crisis migratoria que actualmente se vive en la frontera sur? El político dejó muy clara su postura sobre este tema.

Una encuesta exclusiva de Noticias Telemundo y Telemundo Station Group concluyó que la mayoría de los hispanos registrados para votar en Estados Unidos desaprueba la gestión del presidente Donald Trump y votaría para reemplazarlo durante las elecciones de 2020, aunque todavía no hay un claro preferido entre los candidatos demócratas.

Según el estudio realizado por Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy, 62% de los encuestados desaprueba el desempeño de Trump como presidente, mientras que 30% sí lo aprueba y 8% no está seguro.

Encuesta exclusiva: hispanos en EEUU revelan preferencias electorales[NAC]Encuesta exclusiva: hispanos en EEUU revelan preferencias electorales
Esta tendencia se mantiene entre votantes mayores y menores de 50 años. Sin embargo, hay un gran contraste según el partido político con el que se identifican los encuestados: 84% de los demócratas desaprueba de la labor de Trump, mientras que el 15% de los republicanos y 47% de los independientes lo hacen.

Un 59% de los encuestados dijo que creía que el país iba en el camino equivocado, mientras que 31% respondió que pensaban que iba por una buena vía, y 10% se mostró indeciso. En cuanto a la economía, 39% dijo que se sentía menos seguro desde que Trump tomó el poder, 29% expresó que estaba más seguro, 28% respondió que se sentía igual que en la presidencia anterior y 4% no estaba seguro.

Exclusiva: Donald Trump habla con Telemundo, entrevista completaExclusiva: Donald Trump habla con Telemundo, entrevista completa
El Presidente concede su primera entrevista exclusiva a un medio en español, mira aquí todo lo que le dijo a José Díaz-Balart. Para más historias de Noticias Telemundo, visita now.telemundo.com. (Publicado sábado 22 de junio de 2019)
Al ser consultados sobre si reelegirían a Trump o lo reemplazarían si las elecciones se realizaran hoy, 66% dijo que lo cambiaría por un demócrata, 25% aseguró que lo escogería para un siguiente mandato y 9% respondió no está seguro.

En cuanto a los precandidatos demócratas, 23% votaría por Joe Biden, 9% por Bernie Sanders, 8% por Elizabeth Warren, 5% por Beto O’Rourke, 4% por Kamala Harris, 3% por Pete Buttigieg, 2% por Julián Castro y 1% por Corey Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar y John Hickenlooper.

Trump y los demócratas ponen sus ojos en Florida
Sin embargo, 42% dijo que estaba indeciso entre los precandidatos.

Al preguntárseles sobre una posible destitución (impeachment) del presidente Trump, 50% de los encuestados dijo que apoya el proceso, 38% respondió que se opone y 12% está indeciso.

Trump lanza su campaña por la reelecciónTrump lanza su campaña por la reelección
El presidente convocó a un “terremoto en las urnas”.(Publicado martes 18 de junio de 2019)
Sobre el Censo 2020, 93% de los consultados respondió que sí participará, 4% dijo que no lo hará y 3% no está indeciso. En cuanto a la pregunta sobre la ciudadanía o estatus legal de las personas, 52% la apoya, 38% la rechaza y 10% no se ha decidido.

Según la encuesta, para los hispanos el tema más importante hoy en día en Estados Unidos es la inmigración (25%). Le siguen el cuidado de la salud (16%), la economía y trabajos (13%), la destitución de Trump (13%), derecho de armas o control de armas (8%), seguridad nacional o política exterior (6%), el clima (6%), impuestos, deuda nacional y gastos públicos (4%), y aborto (4%).

El voto hispano: por qué será crucial en las primarias
En cuanto a inmigración, 53% apoya un programa migratorio basado en méritos y que limite el número de visas dadas por lazos familiares, mientras que 36% se opone a esta idea y 11% está indeciso.

Sobre el muro planteado por Trump, 67% lo desaprueba, 29% lo acepta y 4% no está seguro.

Contienda por la Casa Blanca: ¿Quiénes son los demócratas que buscan derrotar a Trump? Contienda por la Casa Blanca: ¿Quiénes son los demócratas que buscan derrotar a Trump? Getty Images/EFE
Para esta encuesta se consultaron a 1,000 votantes seleccionados al azar, a través de llamadas telefónicas hechas entre el 6 y 14 de junio de 2019. El margen de error no es superior a 3.2 puntos de porcentaje, según los estándares habituales utilizados por estadísticos.

A continuación algunas preguntas y respuestas sobre cómo opera el ICE:
¿Qué puede hacer?
El ICE está a cargo de arrestar y deportar a los inmigrantes que carecen de permiso legal.

Un método común para hallar y arrestar a las personas que se sabe están en el país de manera ilegal es mediante acuerdos con cárceles locales para que mantengan detenidas a las personas más allá de la fecha programada para su liberación, de forma que el ICE pueda echar un vistazo a su estatus migratorio. Este método se ha vuelto cada vez más impopular entre los gobiernos locales, muchos de los cuales dicen que se arriesgan a sufrir consecuencias legales y que no deberían estar haciendo el trabajo de las autoridades federales.

La agencia también rastrea a la gente y se presenta en sus viviendas o sitios de trabajo. Pero sus pocos recursos y personal limitan su capacidad para efectuar múltiples arrestos a gran escala al mismo tiempo.

Lo que ha hecho
El año fiscal pasado, la Oficina de Detención y Deportación del ICE arrestó a más de 158.500 inmigrantes que estaban en el país sin permiso, un incremento del 11% con relación al año anterior y la cifra más elevada desde 2014. La agencia dice que el 66% de esos arrestados son delincuentes convictos.

El mes pasado, agentes del ICE arrestaron a 900 personas durante un operativo de tres semanas en California.

La agencia anunció la semana pasada que detuvo a 140 personas, incluidas 45 en Illinois, en redadas en la región centro-norte del país que se extendieron cinco días.

Aunque el ICE arresta a la gente de diversas formas, los operativos de mayor envergadura _como por ejemplo una redada en un sitio de trabajo_ son los que captan más la atención.

En Texas, la unidad de Investigaciones de Seguridad Nacional del ICE, que aplica las leyes de inmigración en sitios laborales, arrestó a 280 empleados en una compañía en Allen, Texas, en abril, y dijo que se trató de su mayor operativo en un lugar de trabajo en una década.

“Creo que lo que se le olvida a la gente es que estos operativos se efectúan regularmente”, dijo Art Acevedo, jefe de la policía en Houston, una de las ciudades que se cree serán blanco de las redadas que se tienen programadas.

¿Cómo se realiza?
Las autoridades suelen tener una lista de personas a las que buscan en cualquier operación dada. Visitan los domicilios conocidos del sospechoso, normalmente una vivienda o un sitio de trabajo, y tratan de arrestar a esa persona. Podrían preguntarle a familiares, vecinos, compañeros de trabajo o gerentes en torno al paradero del individuo al que desean detener.

Normalmente las autoridades obtienen una orden administrativa en las que se les concede el permiso para detener a una persona por violar las leyes de inmigración.

Los agentes del ICE pueden arrestar a personas que descubran están en el país ilegalmente mientras buscan a otros individuos anotados en su lista. En ocasiones, las personas que responden las preguntas de los agentes acerca de alguien más terminan siendo arrestadas. En un caso en Houston el año pasado, un padre joven de cinco hijos fue detenido en el estacionamiento de su edificio de apartamentos después de que agentes del ICE le preguntaron acerca de personas que vivían cerca de allí, y luego le pidieron su identificación y finalmente lo detuvieron.

Estos arrestos “colaterales” pueden representar una gran porción de las detenciones en cualquier operativo. En uno efectuado en diciembre de 2017 en el norte de Kentucky, sólo cinco de los 22 arrestos que realizó el ICE fueron de personas a las que buscaba de antemano, según documentos de la agencia difundidos bajo el amparo de la Ley de Acceso a la Información.

A pesar de las críticas vertidas contra la administración del presidente Donald Trump y al hecho de que postergó por dos semanas las presuntas redadas masivas que debían comenzar el domingo en 10 ciudades, algunos líderes defensores de los inmigrantes consideran que la presunta calma presagia una tormenta.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
“Es imposible que demócratas y republicanos se pongan de acuerdo sobre una reforma migratoria o como se debe manejar el problema de asilo político o de los refugiados”, consideró Juan José Gutiérrez, director de la Coalición Vamos Unidos USA de Los Ángeles. “La nueva advertencia solamente le da más tiempo al presidente para renovar su rabia para enviar a sus agentes de inmigración a deportarnos, dividirnos y separar a más familias”.

Una de las plegarias era no separar familias. (Jorge Macías)
Aunque no son millones las deportaciones previstas, autoridades del Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas dirigirían su operativo contra más de 2,000 indocumentados que han recibido una orden final de deportación, incluidas familias, según el anuncio del secretario interino del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, Kevin McAleenan.

Las redadas ocurrirían bajo la llamada “Family Op” (Operación Familia), en urbes como Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Miami, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco.

Trump, quien durante su administración ha vilipendiado por igual a musulmanes, mujeres, periodistas, políticos y líderes de otras naciones, ha hecho de los inmigrantes su tema favorito de campaña presidencial y de reelección para noviembre de 2020.

Menores que han fallecido bajo el cuidado de Inmigración (Jorge Macías)
El mandatario ha estado bajo fuego por su política de “tolerancia cero” porque provocó la separación masiva de familias y, en una entrevista con Telemundo, pretendió culpar a su antecesor, el llamado “deportador en jefe”, Barack Obama.

‘Yo soy el que unió a la gente”, dijo Trump. “Se separaron, pero yo los uní”.

Protesta en Los Ángeles
El domingo, durante una protesta frente al Centro Metropolitano de detención de ICE en Los Ángeles, decenas de manifestantes se congregaron para repudiar a Donald Trump, de quien preguntaron con gritos de furia “Trump, Trump ¿Dónde está tu corazón? y fustigaron su “crueldad” con los seres humanos.

“Aunque Trump ha inventado nuevas redadas, de todos modos, el miedo sigue ahí”, consideró Brenda Gutiérrez, integrante del llamado movimiento Occupy LA. “Nosotros denunciamos hace un año su política de cero-tolerancia, y lo que ahora nos corresponde es educar a la comunidad para que defienda sus derechos humanos frente a cualquier orden de deportación”.

La actual administración ha anunciado que durante el mes pasado detuvo a casi 144,000 migrantes -en su mayoría centroamericanos- que han huido de la pobreza extrema en países como El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras y otros como Cuba.

¡“Trump, Trump Dónde está tu corazón! Gritaban durante la manifestación. (Jorge Macías)
Miles de esos migrantes han sido hacinados en centros de detención gubernamentales y privados, donde han fallecido un total de 24 durante la presente administración, incluyendo seis menores de edad como Jakelin Caal Maquin, Carlos Hernández Vázquez, Felipe Gómez Alonzo y Juan de León Gutiérrez y dos no identificados.

“En abril pasado murió José Ibarra en la cárcel de Adelanto; se supone que lo llevaban a la corte de inmigración cuando se desmayó y la familia fue notificada un día después de que murió”, recordó Guillermo Torres, director de programas de organización en Clero y Laicos Unidos por la Justicia Económica (CLUE). “Hasta ahora el grupo GEO (entidad privada que administra la cárcel) no ha dado ninguna respuesta a la familia sobre lo que le provocó la muerte a José”.

Manifestantes también pidieron parar las redadas y la intimidación a la comunidad migrante. (Jorge Macías)
“El fascismo ya llegó con Trump”
Jorge Mario Cabrera, portavoz de la Coalición Pro-Derechos Humanos del Inmigrante en Los Ángeles (CHIRLA) dijo a La Opinión que hay una similitud entre la experiencia de sufrimiento, ataques y miedo de la comunidad inmigrante latina con la experiencia del pueblo judío durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial (1941-1945).

“Cuando se le criminaliza, cuando se le minimiza y se ataca verbal o físicamente a un pueblo solamente por ser miembro de ese pueblo, eso nos recuerda a [Adolfo] Hitler en la Alemania nazi contra los judíos”, dijo Cabrera. “Por eso le decimos a este presidente que pare su xenofobia, que ponga un alto a su racismo”.

Juan José Gutiérrez preciso que “sin duda, el de Trump es un régimen fascista, si no en contra de toda la ciudadanía, en definitiva y en general sí lo es contra el sector de los inmigrantes indocumentados que están siendo la fuente de su laboratorio fascista”.

“Sus ataques a los más desprotegidos de la clase trabajadora lo hace para luego asimilar esas lecciones y en su plan maestro afectar a todas las demás campañas de la ciudadanía americana”, añadió. “El fascismo ya llegó y se está recrudeciendo; la suspensión de las redadas es una versión moderna de la calma antes de que llegue el peor de los huracanes contra nuestra gente, de modo que tenemos que organizarnos, educarnos y actuar fuerte para rechazar el odio”.

La crueldad de las maras
Con el llanto a flor de piel, Liliana García, participante de la protesta frente al edificio federal de inmigración de Los Ángeles narró la experiencia por enterarse de la trágica muerte de su primo Wilder Cruz, en Morazán, El Salvador.

Liliana García. A su primo lo balacearon, torturaron y quemaron en El Salvador. (Jorge M.)
“En el verano de 2013, a él los líderes de la mara [pandilla] lo obligaron a cobrar renta a los habitantes del pueblo”, dijo. “Pero, un día que se presentó a la casa de alguien le dieron un balazo en la pierna y el señor que lo agredió llamó a otros dos; lo torturaron, lo quemaron en el campo y arrojaron su cuerpo a un barranco”.

Liliana dijo que, a pesar de los intentos de la familia de su primo por alejarlo de los grupos delincuenciales, al final no le quedó más opción que obedecer las ordenes de los pandilleros, a menos que quisiera morir.

“Lo que les cuento es real y duele mucho”, dijo. “Allá [en El Salvador] no hay oportunidades de nada y por eso la gente emigra”.

Jair Solís. Su padre fue arrestado por autoridades de ICE, pero fue liberado al final. (Jorge M.)
En la protesta, también el joven Jair Solís contó la odisea que vivió su padre, Jair Solís Hernández, de 44 años de edad, quien recuperó la libertad en marzo pasado, luego de permanecer 22 días en custodia de las autoridades de inmigración, quienes querían deportarlo.

“Mi papá quiso arreglar sus papeles porque mi hermano Brandon está en el ejército”, dijo Jair, de 15 años. “ICE lo detuvo cuando iba a su trabajo”. El problema fue que los trámites los hicieron con un notario, no con un abogado.

En efecto, el 22 de febrero, a la entrada de la autopista 110 en Highland Park, dos camionetas de la “migra” le bloquearon el paso. Del Centro Metropolitano de Detención de ICE fue transportado a la cárcel Theo Lacy, en el condado de Orange.

“Yo soy parte de Wise Up en CHIRLA, y un abogado [Richard lucero] nos ayudó a sacar de la cárcel a mi papa”, dijo Jair.

Algunas declaraciones:

“Gracias a Pete Wilson [exgobernador republicano de California] porque con la Proposición 187 no nos hizo retroceder hace 25 años, y 25 años después, nos tendremos que mantener más y mejor organizados para pelear. Aun no ha llegado el tiempo de completar el trabajo, así que vota para botar a Trump”

María Elena Durazo

Senadora estatal demócrata de Los Ángeles

“Trump cree que con su miedo espanta a la gente, pero todos ya identificamos su táctica y esta vez su juego no funcionará. No solamente no tiene el voto de los latinos ni los números para reelección; si trabajamos ahora podemos recuperar la Casa Blanca, así como lo hicimos con la Cámara de Representantes, y también tenemos que responsabilizar a los demócratas que no nos apoyen. Esta administración nos ha atacado a los inmigrantes como ninguna otra, y eso debemos recordarlo el día de las elecciones”

Miguel Santiago

Asambleísta demócrata de Los Ángeles

El Presidente anunció su decisión en un tuit. «A solicitud de los demócratas, he suspendido el proceso de deportación de inmigrantes ilegales por dos semanas para ver si los demócratas y los republicanos pueden reunirse y encontrar una solución a los problemas de asilo y lagunas en la frontera sur». . Si no, comienzan las deportaciones «.

Lo que produjo una respuesta de Nancy Pelosi . “Deje de jugar a la política porque están jugando con la vida. Están jugando con seres humanos ”, dijo la mujer.

El sábado anterior, antes del anuncio sobre la suspensión de las redadas, el presidente defendió la medida. «Todos los que ingresaron ilegalmente al país serán expulsados ​​del país de manera muy legal», dijo Trump.

Inmigrantes ilegales de Miami en la mira
Las ciudades en las que se cree que van a llevarse a cabo las redadas son Miami, Denver, Los Ángeles, Chicago, Nueva York, Nueva Orleans, Atlanta, Baltimore, Houston, San Francisco, Washington D.C. y Newark.

Estarían en la búsqueda de personas que ya hayan recibido los documentos finales de deportación y no hayan obedecido. Mediante las redadas se especa capturar a unas 2.000 personas en diez ciudades, incluída Miami.

Las redadas están dirigidas a inmigrantes indocumentados, un grupo que abarca individuos que llegaron al país siendo menores de edad y ya cumplieron los 18 años, otros que no se han presentado a sus audiencias, y también a personas que ya recibieron la orden de deportación.

El alcalde de Miami-Dade, Carlos Giménez, adelantó que los oficiales del condado no van a participar en ninguna redada de inmigración planeada por los federales.

Alivio temporal
La organización proinmigrante “Families Belong Together” publicó un comunicado, mostrando su desacuerdo con estas acciones. “Estas potenciales redadas de Trump son una horrorosa táctica política para provocar miedo y motivar a la base de Trump para las elecciones de 2020”, dice el comunicado.

La declaración sigue alertando sobre la situación crítica en la que podrían quedar muchos menores. “Cuando lo intentaron en el pasado, dejaron a niños solos y aterrados en hogares vacíos, rezando que no los dejaran abandonados con la responsabilidad de cuidar por sus hermanos y hermanas menores”, continúa el comunicado, firmado por Sandra Cordero, directora de la organización.

“Es solo un alivio por dos semanas. Todavía va a suceder. Todavía va a suceder «, dijo una nicaragüense con orden de deportación a CBS.

A pesar de la demora, esta madre nicaragüense sigue advirtiendo a sus amigos que eviten abrir la puerta y se aseguren de que tengan el número para un abogado de inmigración.“Tenemos derechos. Traten de protegerse mutuamente y de mantenerse en contacto con los mensajes «, dijo.

Pida la orden judicial
La noticia sobre posibles redadas por parte del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de Estados Unidos (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) tiene a muchas personas en vilo, preguntándose qué va a ser de ellos, o qué suerte les depara el destino.
Por esto, diversas organizaciones de ayuda para el inmigrante y especialistas en inmigración han salido a recordarle a estas personas que no están desprotegidos, y que, sin importar su estatus migratorio, este es un país de leyes, reporta Univision.

El abogado de inmigración de Miami, Víctor Badell tiene varias recomendaciones para los inmigrantes que puedan ser objeto de estas redadas. “Si la policía llegara a tocar la puerta de la casa o del negocio de un inmigrante éste no lo debe dejar pasar, a menos que el funcionario tenga una orden judicial, debidamente firmada por un juez”, es el primer consejo de este especialista.

La Unión Estadounidense por las Libertades Civiles (ACLU, por sus siglas en inglés) también publicó una serie de consejos y recomendaciones en su sitio web.

Laura Muñoz, de la Coalición de Inmigrantes de la Florida, también se refirió al tema. “En este momento estamos muy preocupados, ya que sabemos que hay redadas que vienen a nuestra comunidad, que traen miedo y preocupación. Pero queremos que sepan que hay esperanza, que hay una habilidad de protegerse como comunidad, porque tenemos derechos que nos otorga la Constitución de los Estados Unidos”, dijo Muñoz.

Algunas recomendaciones
De verse en medio de una redada, grabe con los teléfonos móviles lo que está sucediendo. En esa grabación, el inmigrante podría tener evidencia de que un oficial o funcionario policial no tenía una orden judicial, o de que fueron obligados a hacer algún tipo de confesión. Estas evidencias podrían servirle como defensa ante un juez de inmigración.
Usted tiene el derecho a permanecer en silencio. Si desea ejercer ese derecho, dígalo en voz alta.
Usted tiene el derecho de negar permiso a un registro a su persona, vehículo o casa.
Si no está bajo arresto, tiene el derecho a irse con calma.
Guarde la calma y sea amable. No interfiera con la policía ni los obstruya.
No diga mentiras ni entregue documentos falsos.
Prepárese a sí mismo y a su familia en caso de que lo arresten.
Toda persona que esté dentro de los Estados Unidos tiene derechos, así esa persona haya cruzado de manera ilegal o esté fuera de estatus.
De ninguna manera tiene por qué decir cuál es su estatus migratorio, dónde nació y mucho menos admitir si cruzó de alguna manera ilegal la frontera o si está aquí de manera ilegal.

La Unión Estadounidense por las Libertades Civiles (ACLU, por sus siglas en inglés) también publicó una serie de consejos y recomendaciones en su sitio web.

Laura Muñoz, de la Coalición de Inmigrantes de la Florida, también se refirió al tema. “En este momento estamos muy preocupados, ya que sabemos que hay redadas que vienen a nuestra comunidad, que traen miedo y preocupación. Pero queremos que sepan que hay esperanza, que hay una habilidad de protegerse como comunidad, porque tenemos derechos que nos otorga la Constitución de los Estados Unidos”, dijo Muñoz.

¿Qué se puede hacer si caigo víctima de la redada?

Respuesta

El caos que creó el presidente Trump al anunciar el mega operativo de deportar a millones ha tenido un efecto escalofriante entre la comunidad. Aunque el golpe del funcionario ha puesto en duda el futuro de muchos inmigrantes, estamos recomendando preparación sobre el miedo, solidaridad sobre desesperación, esperanza sobre el fracaso. No les tengo que recordar que en el corazón del inmigrante solo existe la lucha y el amor por la familia.

La derrota no es opción: por eso somos inmigrantes. Por siglos, la inmigración ha hecho mejor a los países y para EEUU, el resultado ha sido incuestionable: el mejor país en la historia del mundo. No es cierto que el presidente ha lanzado una guerra contra nosotros, pero como dice el dicho, “el que nada debe, nada teme.” Después de esta última semana, la incertidumbre del futuro debería recalcar la necesidad de estar preparados. Ahora que sabemos las intenciones del Presidente y los que están en la mira deberían de saber lo siguiente:

(1) No corren riesgo de ser detenidos si tienen casos pendientes en la corte de inmigración, corte de apelación, o de residencia permanente o ciudadanía; (2) si tienen órdenes finales de deportación y no tienen nada pendiente en la corte de apelación o un amparo, por favor hablen con un abogado sobre una “moción de reabrir” que, legalmente, es lo único que puede quitar la deportación; (3) si tienes una deportación pero estás amparado por el TPS o DACA, usted no va correr riesgo; (4) si tienes una deportación y un carro registrado bajo tu nombre o tienes una licencia de manejar, quiero que sepan que inmigración tiene acceso a tu dirección.

Recuerden que la meta es empoderarlos con la información necesaria para que puedan tomar las medidas de proteger a sus familias, mientras que pasa una reforma. No es un misterio que inmigración está usando nuevas tácticas para efectuar detenciones de gente buena. Cuidado con la estafa y por favor recuerden que el saber es poder. Estamos con ustedes y recuerden que con la oscuridad siempre llegará la luz. Fuerza!!

La mayoría de los hispanos desaprueba el desempeño del presidente, Donald Trump, y desea que un demócrata lo reemplace en la Casa Blanca, de acuerdo con una encuesta de Noticias Telemundo realizada por la firma Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy.

En general, el 62% de los hispanos entrevistados desaprueba la gestión de Trump, frente a un 30% que la aprueba y un 8% que dijo estar indeciso sobre el tema. Una cifra aún mayor, el 66%, dijo que si las elecciones fueran hoy votaría para reemplazar a Trump por un demócrata, frente a un 25% que lo mantendría en el cargo y un 9% que está inseguro.

En ambas preguntas hay una clara división partidista: los hispanos registrados como republicanos aprueban la gestión de Trump (82%) y desean reelegirlo (80%) frente a los registrados como demócratas, que lo desaprueban (84%) y desean que sea reemplazado (89%).

Entre los aspirantes demócratas a la presidencia, los hispanos están divididos. Sólo el ex vicepresidente Joe Biden alcanzó dos dígitos en la preferencia de los encuestados, un 23%. Le siguieron Bernie Sanders con un 9% y Elizabeth Warren con un 8%.

El principal tema de preocupación para los hispanos en Estados Unidos es inmigración (25%), seguido de los servicios médicos (16%). Economía y empleo, y un juicio político y sacar a Trump de la Casa Blanca ocuparon el tercer lugar, con un 13%.

En cuanto a la inmigración, el 64% desaprueba el manejo del tema por parte de Trump, frente a un 28% que lo aprueba y un 8% que no está seguro al respecto. Una mayoría abrumadora, el 86% apoya extender el programa de Acción Diferida para los Llegados en la Infancia (DACA), frente a un 8% que se opone y un 6% que está indeciso sobre el tema. El 67% está en contra de construir un muro en la frontera con México, frente al 29% que lo respalda y un 4% que está inseguro.

Las opiniones están un poco más divididas en torno a la creación de las ciudades santuario: un 59% lo respalda, un 32% lo rechaza y un 9% está indeciso.

También están sesgadas en cuanto a limitar el número de visas basado en vínculos familiares y entregarlas sobre la base del mérito profesional y los conocimientos de inglés. Un 53% apoya esta opción, un 36% la rechaza y un 11% está indeciso.

En relación con el Censo 2020, el 93% planea participar, frente a un 4% que no y un 3% que está inseguro. Sin embargo, el 52% respalda la inclusión de una pregunta de ciudadanía en el censo, frente al 38% que se opone y un 10% que está indeciso sobre el tema.

La encuesta se aplicó por teléfono nacionalmente del 6 al 14 de junio a 1000 votantes hispanos registrados y tiene un margen de error de + – 3,2 puntos porcentuales.

Reflexionando sobre la inmigración antes de los primeros debates demócratas, Joe Biden propone que el Congreso conceda la ciudadanía inmediata a más de 800.000 residentes que llegaron al país ilegalmente cuando eran niños.

El ex vicepresidente estadounidense y líder de las encuestas entre los aspirantes demócratas a la Casa Blanca presentó algunas de sus prioridades de inmigración el lunes en un artículo de opinión publicado en The Miami Herald y El Nuevo Herald donde critica al presidente Donald Trump por un “asalto a la dignidad” cometido contra la comunidad hispana a través de políticas y retóricas diseñadas para “asustar a los votantes” en 2020.

“Trump invoca repetidamente el discurso racista para describir a cualquiera al sur del río Grande”, escribe Biden, y critica al mandatario por “acciones que subvierten nuestros valores estadounidenses y nuestra capacidad de liderar en el escenario global”.

Biden, quien en abril lanzó su campaña para las elecciones del año entrante, pide que se agilice el sistema de asilo para los migrantes y que se gaste más en seguridad electrónica en las fronteras en lugar de construir el muro fronterizo propuesto por Trump entre Estados Unidos y México. Además, arremete contra las últimas amenazas de deportación masiva de Trump y su decisión de recortar la ayuda a El Salvador, Guatemala y Honduras, las tres naciones centroamericanas que más migrantes envían a la frontera estadounidense.

Trump, un republicano, sostiene que sus políticas de inmigración son necesarias para mantener al país seguro. También ha dejado en claro que su estrategia de reelección está centrada de lleno en su base, que desde su primera campaña en 2015, abarca su nacionalismo intransigente y su proteccionismo económico.

El artículo de opinión de Biden usa las versiones en inglés y español para elogiar la diversidad de la ciudad circundante, donde 20 candidatos demócratas pasarán a la etapa de debate el miércoles y jueves.

El ex vicepresidente aún no ha ofrecido propuestas detalladas de políticas de inmigración más allá del esquema.

No obstante, el artículo de opinión es parte de una serie de pronunciamientos sobre políticas de diferentes niveles de detalle, mientras Biden intenta mantener su liderazgo en las encuestas estatales y nacionales de votantes primarios demócratas. En su artículo, Biden promete una revisión de la política exterior de Estados Unidos en el continente.

Entre el jueves y el sábado de la semana pasada el presidente Donald Trump dio dos reversazos: canceló la orden de atacar militarmente a Irán por el derribo de un dron estadounidense que presuntamente voló en espacio aéreo iraní; y frenó la realización de redadas para detener a unos 2,000 indocumentados con órdenes finales de deportación que comenzarían ayer domingo a través del país.

Trump asegura que el retraso de dos semanas dará tiempo para que demócratas y republicanos del Congreso arriben a un acuerdo sobre los 5,000 millones de dólares que el gobierno exige para manejar la crisis humanitaria en la frontera, con más camas en centros de detención, entre otras cosas. Trump también quiere cambios a las leyes de asilo que durante meses ha pisoteado en la frontera sur para impedir que migrantes centroamericanos que huyen de una brutal violencia puedan solicitar refugio en Estados Unidos.

De no haber acuerdo, afirmó Trump, las redadas procederán. El Congreso inicia a fines de esta semana un receso por el feriado del 4 de julio de manera que la posibilidad de tal acuerdo no queda clara.

A simple vista, cualquiera pensaría que Trump demostró sentido común en ambas instancias, evitando una guerra y las deportaciones, pero si se le rasca un poco al asunto queda expuesto cómo a Trump no le importa infligir terror echando mano de sus fuerzas militares y policiales con fines estrictamente políticos.

El cuento de que frenó el ataque contra Irán a escasos minutos de que se emprendiera porque se enteró de que 150 iraníes perderían la vida no se lo cree nadie. Lo insólito es que lo haya autorizado por el derribo de un dron y que tras 18 años de presencia militar estadounidense en Oriente Medio por una guerra, la de Irak, llevada a cabo por un presidente republicano, George W. Bush, con base en falsedades, de que el régimen de Sadam Husein poseía armas de destrucción masiva que nunca aparecieron, Trump le hiciera caso inicialmente a los mismos funcionarios que lideraron el fiasco de Irak. Trump parece guiado por lo que supone para su ego ordenar y cancelar operativos militares sin medir las consecuencias, como si se tratara de un juego de soldaditos.

Y el caso de las deportaciones es todavía más claro. Trump anunció las redadas nacionales que ni siquiera los encargados de conducirlas estaban convencidos de que se tratara de un buena idea. Una vez más, Trump quiso demostrar ante su base que su política de línea dura es real, sin importar el terror que pueda generar en la comunidad inmigrante y sin medir que las familias afectadas son, en gran parte, de situación migratoria mixta, donde hay ciudadanos y residentes permanentes y que, como siempre, los más vulnerables son los niños, muchos de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses que viven con la constante amenaza de que en cualquier momento sus padres pueden ser deportados.

Claro está, nadie espera que Trump demuestre un poco de humanidad con la población inmigrante y con ciudadanos al interior del país, porque ya hemos visto lo que pasa en la frontera.

Porque hay que ser despiadado para no estremecerse ante los reportes que han emergido sobre el trato inhumano a niños en centros de detención operados por autoridades estadounidenses. Cada día se revelan horribles detalles de niños sin atención médica adecuada; de niños cuidando de niños, en condiciones insalubres, sin poder bañarse por semanas, sin un cambio de ropa limpia, durmiendo en el suelo bajo temperaturas gélidas y sin cobijas, sin acceso a servicios sanitarios, ingiriendo alimentos expirados o sin cocinar. Al menos seis menores han muerto en custodia de las autoridades migratorias, y uno se pregunta cómo no han sido más las víctimas en estas precarias condiciones.

El video que circuló de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia, argumentando ante un panel de jueces del Noveno Circuito de San Francisco, que el gobierno no tiene por qué proveer jabón, pasta de dientes y cobijas a los niños para garantizar condiciones “sanitarias y seguras”, le hace hervir la sangre a cualquiera.

Es la intensificación de la crueldad como mecanismo de disuasión, del mismo modo que separaron a niños de sus padres en la frontera, lo que todavía sigue ocurriendo, según reportes.

Que el gobierno central de una nación poderosa, la cual se jacta de defender los derechos humanos en todas partes del mundo, se ensañe de este modo con niños es aberrante. Y queda perfectamente claro que ocurre porque se trata de niños mayormente de tez oscura y de países latinoamericanos. Quizá si fueran de Noruega, la situación sería diferente.

Con sus dos reversazos, Trump no demostró sentido común, algo que realmente habría demostrado de no haber tomado las dos decisiones iniciales: atacar a Irán por el derrribo de un dron y anunciar las redades como arma política y mecanismo de presión legislativa.

Lo que queda plasmado es que, para lograr sus objetivos politicos, a Trump no le importa infligir terror entre civiles al otro lado del planeta, o entre niños, en la frontera o al interior del país.

Es la politización de la crueldad en su máxima expresión.

Entre el jueves y el sábado de la semana pasada el presidente Donald Trump dio dos reversazos: canceló la orden de atacar militarmente a Irán por el derribo de un dron estadounidense que presuntamente voló en espacio aéreo iraní; y frenó la realización de redadas para detener a unos 2,000 indocumentados con órdenes finales de deportación que comenzarían ayer domingo a través del país.

Trump asegura que el retraso de dos semanas dará tiempo para que demócratas y republicanos del Congreso arriben a un acuerdo sobre los 5,000 millones de dólares que el gobierno exige para manejar la crisis humanitaria en la frontera, con más camas en centros de detención, entre otras cosas. Trump también quiere cambios a las leyes de asilo que durante meses ha pisoteado en la frontera sur para impedir que migrantes centroamericanos que huyen de una brutal violencia puedan solicitar refugio en Estados Unidos.

De no haber acuerdo, afirmó Trump, las redadas procederán. El Congreso inicia a fines de esta semana un receso por el feriado del 4 de julio de manera que la posibilidad de tal acuerdo no queda clara.

A simple vista, cualquiera pensaría que Trump demostró sentido común en ambas instancias, evitando una guerra y las deportaciones, pero si se le rasca un poco al asunto queda expuesto cómo a Trump no le importa infligir terror echando mano de sus fuerzas militares y policiales con fines estrictamente políticos.

El cuento de que frenó el ataque contra Irán a escasos minutos de que se emprendiera porque se enteró de que 150 iraníes perderían la vida no se lo cree nadie. Lo insólito es que lo haya autorizado por el derribo de un dron y que tras 18 años de presencia militar estadounidense en Oriente Medio por una guerra, la de Irak, llevada a cabo por un presidente republicano, George W. Bush, con base en falsedades, de que el régimen de Sadam Husein poseía armas de destrucción masiva que nunca aparecieron, Trump le hiciera caso inicialmente a los mismos funcionarios que lideraron el fiasco de Irak. Trump parece guiado por lo que supone para su ego ordenar y cancelar operativos militares sin medir las consecuencias, como si se tratara de un juego de soldaditos.

Y el caso de las deportaciones es todavía más claro. Trump anunció las redadas nacionales que ni siquiera los encargados de conducirlas estaban convencidos de que se tratara de un buena idea. Una vez más, Trump quiso demostrar ante su base que su política de línea dura es real, sin importar el terror que pueda generar en la comunidad inmigrante y sin medir que las familias afectadas son, en gran parte, de situación migratoria mixta, donde hay ciudadanos y residentes permanentes y que, como siempre, los más vulnerables son los niños, muchos de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses que viven con la constante amenaza de que en cualquier momento sus padres pueden ser deportados.

Claro está, nadie espera que Trump demuestre un poco de humanidad con la población inmigrante y con ciudadanos al interior del país, porque ya hemos visto lo que pasa en la frontera.

Porque hay que ser despiadado para no estremecerse ante los reportes que han emergido sobre el trato inhumano a niños en centros de detención operados por autoridades estadounidenses. Cada día se revelan horribles detalles de niños sin atención médica adecuada; de niños cuidando de niños, en condiciones insalubres, sin poder bañarse por semanas, sin un cambio de ropa limpia, durmiendo en el suelo bajo temperaturas gélidas y sin cobijas, sin acceso a servicios sanitarios, ingiriendo alimentos expirados o sin cocinar. Al menos seis menores han muerto en custodia de las autoridades migratorias, y uno se pregunta cómo no han sido más las víctimas en estas precarias condiciones.

El video que circuló de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia, argumentando ante un panel de jueces del Noveno Circuito de San Francisco, que el gobierno no tiene por qué proveer jabón, pasta de dientes y cobijas a los niños para garantizar condiciones “sanitarias y seguras”, le hace hervir la sangre a cualquiera.

Es la intensificación de la crueldad como mecanismo de disuasión, del mismo modo que separaron a niños de sus padres en la frontera, lo que todavía sigue ocurriendo, según reportes.

Que el gobierno central de una nación poderosa, la cual se jacta de defender los derechos humanos en todas partes del mundo, se ensañe de este modo con niños es aberrante. Y queda perfectamente claro que ocurre porque se trata de niños mayormente de tez oscura y de países latinoamericanos. Quizá si fueran de Noruega, la situación sería diferente.

Con sus dos reversazos, Trump no demostró sentido común, algo que realmente habría demostrado de no haber tomado las dos decisiones iniciales: atacar a Irán por el derrribo de un dron y anunciar las redades como arma política y mecanismo de presión legislativa.

Lo que queda plasmado es que, para lograr sus objetivos politicos, a Trump no le importa infligir terror entre civiles al otro lado del planeta, o entre niños, en la frontera o al interior del país.

Es la politización de la crueldad en su máxima expresión.

Una mujer y tres menores fueron encontrados muertos cerca de la frontera México-Texas, informó el sheriff Eddie Guerra del Condado de Hidalgo, Texas.

Guerra dijo en un tuit que dos infantes, un niño pequeño y una mujer de 20 años fueron encontrados muertos por agentes de la patrulla fronteriza cerca del Río Grande, al sureste del Parque Anzalduas, el domingo por la noche.

Los cuerpos fueron hallados en el Área de Manejo de Vida Silvestre Las Paloma en la esquina sureste del estado, dijo el alguacil.

Patrocinado por Wells Fargo
Chef Jessica Sánchez conquista con los sabores latinos en “Loba”
Jessica Sánchez es chef y emprendedora. Gracias al éxito de su restaurante fue la primera presentadora del programa digital de Zagat.
El FBI tomará la iniciativa en la investigación porque los cuerpos fueron encontrados en tierras federales.

Los agentes del FBI están en la escena investigando con la ayuda de las autoridades locales.

La agente especial Michelle Lee del FBI de San Antonio le dijo a CNN que “es una situación increíblemente dolorosa, que parece ocurrir con demasiada frecuencia”.

Una mujer que se desempeñó hasta hace unos meses como cónsul de Nicaragua fue detenida este domingo y presentada ante la fiscalía por trasladar en su vehículo a tres cubanos indocumentados por el sureño estado de Oaxaca, informaron los gobiernos de México y Nicaragua.

El Instituto Nacional de Migración (INM) informó que la mujer, identificada por la embajada de Nicaragua como Socorro Fuentes, fue retenida por autoridades luego de que al pasar por un puesto de control agentes federales y guardias nacionales se percataron de que trasladaba a dos hombres y una mujer de nacionalidad cubana.

“Se le informó que las personas de origen cubano que trasladaba estaban en condición irregular, por lo que no podrían continuar el tránsito al destino previsto”, explica un comunicado del INM.

La mujer, añade, mostró una visa diplomática con vigencia al 11 de marzo de 2017 y dijo ser cónsul de Nicaragua en Tapachula, en el estado de Chiapas y fronteriza con Guatemala.

Pero un comunicado del gobierno nicaragüense difundido por su embajada en Ciudad de México informó que Fuentes fue separada del cargo de cónsul el 6 de febrero pasado por incurrir en “irregularidades”.

El gobierno nicaragüense señala a Fuentes de haberse negado a entregar los documentos que la acreditan como diplomática y aseguró que ya no goza de la inmunidad que le daba su cargo. “Corresponde a las autoridades mexicanas aplicar sus leyes pertinentes”, añade.

La mujer dijo que trasladaba a los cubanos a un albergue en el estado de Oaxaca.

México ha reforzado la vigilancia en la zona sur para frenar a los migrantes, en su mayoría centroamericanos, que ingresan al país sin papeles con la esperanza de llegar a Estados Unidos.

El gobierno ha desplegado en estados del sur a 7,000 elementos de la Guardia Nacional luego de que el presidente estadounidense Donald Trump amenazara con imponer aranceles a los productos mexicanos si continuaba el flujo de migrantes sin papeles.

Estados Unidos ha registrado cifras récord de capturas de migrantes sin papeles, a los que Trump considera una “amenaza” a la seguridad de su país.

Los continuos operativos de captura de migrantes, tanto en el sur como en la frontera con Estados Unidos, han desatado duras críticas entre defensores de derechos humanos.

Una cónsul de Nicaragua con visado vencido fue detenida este domingo por trasladar a tres cubanos sin documentos migratorios en el sureño estado mexicano de Oaxaca, según informó el Instituto Nacional de Migración (INM) de México.

La cónsul, Socorro “N”, que se identificó con una visa diplomática vencida el 11 de marzo del 2017, llevaba en un automóvil a tres cubanos, dos hombres y una mujer, cuando fue detenida en un punto de revisión migratoria en la localidad de San Pedro Tapanatepec, Oaxaca.

Ver imagen en Twitter
Ver imagen en Twitter

INM
✔
@INAMI_mx
#Comunicado
El @INAMI_mx informa 👇🏻

18
17:38 – 23 jun. 2019
29 personas están hablando de esto
Información y privacidad de Twitter Ads

La nicaragüense declaró a las autoridades que llevaba a los cubanos a un albergue en Ciudad Ixtepec, Oaxaca, pero las autoridades les impidieron continuar su viaje por las irregularidades. La cónsul fue presentada ante la Fiscalía General de la República (FGR) y los cubanos ante la autoridad respectiva para que se inicio el trámite de retorno a su país.

El Instituto explicó que según la documentación que tiene la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Socorro “N” sigue acreditada como funcionaria consular de Nicaragua en Tapachula, estado mexicano de Chiapas, desde el 2013, pero no ha renovado su visa.

Sostuvo que al ser una funcionaria acreditada ante el Gobierno de México, tiene ella la responsabilidad de mantener una visa vigente para permanecer en el país y así poder cumplir con sus funciones diplomáticas.

El Instituto reconoció que esta cónsul de Nicaragua tiene inmunidad en lo que corresponde al ejercicio de sus funciones pero que no la tendría en caso de comprobarse su participación en actos al margen de la ley.

Desde los últimos meses del 2018, se ha incrementado la entrada a México de migrantes de varias nacionalidades por la frontera sur con Guatemala, principalmente de países de Centroamérica, así como de los caribeños Haití y Cuba.

Presionado por Estados Unidos, México ha desplegado este mes a unos 6.000 agentes de la nueva fuerza policial militarizada de la Guardia Nacional a lo largo de sus fronteras sur y norte para ayudar a disuadir a los migrantes.

Agentes de la Patrulla Fronteriza han encontrado este domingo cuatro muertos, tres de ellos menores, cerca del Río Bravo en el sur de Texas, según ha informado el sheriff del Condado de Hidalgo, Eddie Guerra. Dos de los menores eran bebés y el otro un niño pequeño. El cuarto cuerpo pertenece a una mujer de 20 años. Por ahora se desconocen las causas de la muerte.

Los cuerpos fueron localizados al sureste del Parque Anzalduas en el Área de Manejo de Vida Silvestre Las Palomas, justo al norte de Reynosa, México, y al sur de McAllen, Texas. Guerra ha informado de que los agentes esperan al FBI para dirigir la investigación.

Ver imagen en Twitter
Ver imagen en Twitter

Sheriff Eddie Guerra
@SheriffGuerra
BREAKING NEWS: Deputies are on scene by the river SE of the Anzalduas Park in Las Paloma Wildlife Management Area where Border Patrol agents located 4 deceased bodies. Bodies appear to be 2 infants, a toddler and 20yoa female. Deputies are awaiting FBI agents who will be leading.

1.572
22:35 – 23 jun. 2019
3.023 personas están hablando de esto
Información y privacidad de Twitter Ads

Más de 132,000 personas fueron detenidas mientras cruzaban la frontera ilegalmente o se presentaron en puertos de entrada legales el pasado mayo, el mayor número en 13 años, dijeron funcionarios de Aduanas y Protecciones Fronterizas de EE. UU.

En imágenes | El rescate de un menor migrante que casi se ahoga en Río Grande

Al menos seis menores han muerto tras cruzar la frontera desde el año pasado, aunque se encontraban bajo la custodia de las autoridades estadounidenses. La muerte más reciente fue la de Carlos Gregorio Hernández Vásquez, de siete años, el mes pasado después de que al niño se le diagnosticara gripe.

Luis Miranda analizó los operativos que el presidente decidió posponer por dos semanas y dijo que su intención es simplemente política.

La congresista Sheila Jackson Lee y el alcalde Sylvester Turner se pronunciaron en contra de las tácticas del presidente, quien anunció que pospuso por dos semanas las deportaciones, y brindaron recursos a las familias que se encuentran alarmadas por estos anuncios.

El director legal de la organización ACLU de Texas, Andre Segura, señala que es muy importante conocer la diferencia entre una orden judicial, la cual permite ingresar a una vivienda, y una orden administrativa de inmigración.

Este domingo se llevó a cabo en el centro de la ciudad una manifestación en contra de las amenazas de deportación de Trump. Asimismo, en este lugar se realizó un evento en el que se encendieron velas de colores por estas personas. A lo largo de la semana se estarán realizando otros actos de protesta y de información a la comunidad.

CHICAGO, Illinois. – Algunos hispanos dicen que los mensajes contra inmigrantes de Donald Trump tienen una intención política para empezar a mover a su base. Esto después de una semana de que el Presidente amenazara con hacer deportaciones masivas en varias ciudades de Estados Unidos, acción que después se aplazó por dos semanas, antes de que iniciara el operativo.

“Lo que está sucediendo con Donald Trump en este momento realmente es simplemente algo político, para su base política, para tratar de ganar la reelección, para motivarlos, para asustar a las familias inmigrantes, para poner a los demócratas en una mala posición, pero de justo no tiene nada”, dijo Luis Miranda, el exasesor del expresidente Barack Obama.

PUBLICIDAD

El mensaje de Miranda concide con lo que dijo el Congresista “Chuy” García la semana pasada, de que hay una intención electoral detrás de las amenazas de deportar a inmigrantes que residen en ciudades en los Estados Unidos. Sin embargo, lo peligroso de lo que dice Trump acaba teniendo un impacto en la comunidad.

El presidente de la Cámara de Comercio Hispana de Illinois, Jaime Di Paulo expresó que los mensajes de Trump son “algo mediático para acaparar los medios, para tener atención. Y ahora ya anunció que se está postulando para un segundo término, entonces son estrategias que usan para espantar a la gente y para unir a su base, que no son muy amigables con los migrantes”. El líder de comercio dijo también que esto termina afectando la economía local.

Independientemente de cuál sea la intención del Presidente de los Estados Unidos, es importante que los inmigrantes estén al pendiente y conozcan cuáles son sus derechos y qué es lo que pueden hacer y a quién llamar en caso de tener un encuentro con autoridades migratorias.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Saturday delayed a nationwide immigration sweep to deport people living the United States illegally, including families, saying he would give lawmakers two weeks to work out solutions for the southern border.

The move came after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Trump on Friday asking him to call off the raids. But three administration officials said scrapping the operation was not just about politics. They said Immigration and Customs Enforcement leaders had expressed serious concerns that officers’ safety would be in jeopardy because too many details about the raids had been made public.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to speak about private discussions.

“At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “If not, Deportations start!”

The operation, which sparked outrage and concern among immigrant advocates, had been expected to begin Sunday and would target people with final orders of removal, including families whose immigration cases had been fast-tracked by judges.

A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

The cancellation was another sign of the Trump administration’s difficulty managing the border crisis. The number of people crossing the U.S.-Mexico border has risen dramatically under Trump, despite his tough rhetoric and hard-line policies. Balancing a White House eager to push major operational changes with the reality on the ground is a constant challenge for the Department of Homeland Security.

Trump gave the first public word of the planned sweep earlier this week, saying in a tweet that an operation was coming up and the agency would begin to remove “millions” of people who were in the United States illegally. Later, leaks to the media included sensitive law enforcement details, such as the day it was to begin, Sunday, plus specific cities and other operational details.

On Saturday, ICE spokeswoman Carol Danko criticized the leaks in context of their potential impact on ICE personnel, saying in a statement that “any leaks telegraphing sensitive law enforcement operations is egregious and puts our officers’ safety in danger.”

Pelosi called Trump on Friday night and the two spoke for about 12 minutes, according to a person familiar with the situation and not authorized to discuss it publicly. She asked him to call off the raids and he said he would consider the request, the person said.

It’s unclear what else was said during the call. But in a statement Saturday before the president’s decision was announced, Pelosi appealed to the same compassion Trump expressed in declining to strike Iran because of the potential for lost lives.

“The President spoke about the importance of avoiding the collateral damage of 150 lives in Iran. I would hope he would apply that same value to avoiding the collateral damage to tens of thousands of children who are frightened by his actions,” she said.

She called the raids “heartless.”

Pelosi responded to Trump’s announcement with her own tweet, saying: “Mr. President, delay is welcome. Time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform. Families belong together.”

Halting the flow of illegal immigration has been Trump’s signature campaign issue, but Congress has been unable to push his proposals into law with resistance from both Democrats and Republicans. Bipartisan talks over the immigration system have started and stalled but are again underway among some in the Senate.

Lawmakers are considering whether to give $4.6 billion in emergency funding to help border agencies struggling to manage a growing number of migrants crossing the border. The measure passed a Senate committee on a 30-1 vote. But the House is considering its own measure. Funding is running out and Congress is trying to approve legislation before the House and Senate recess next week.

Earlier Saturday, Trump hinted the operation was still on, saying the people ICE was looking for “have already been ordered to be deported.”

“This means that they have run from the law and run from the courts,” Trump said.

Coordinated enforcement operations take months to plan . Surprise is also an important element. ICE officers don’t have a search warrant and are working from files with addresses and must go to people’s home and ask to be let inside. Immigrants are not required to open their doors, and increasingly they don’t. Officers generally capture about 30% to 40% of targets.

The planned operation was heavily criticized by Democratic lawmakers as cruel, and many local mayors said they would refuse to cooperate with ICE. Immigrant advocates stepped up know-your-rights campaigns.

Another complication is that ICE needs travel paperwork from a home country to deport someone, so immigrants often end up detained at least temporarily waiting for a flight. ICE was reserving hotel rooms for families in the event the operation went off as planned Sunday.

The adult population of detainees was 53,141 as of June 8, though the agency is only budgeted for 45,000. There were 1,662 in family detention, also at capacity, and one of the family detention centers is currently housing single adults.

Immigrant advocates and sympathizers are warning about arrests around the country as early as Sunday.

The anticipated sweep is expected to be similar to operations that authorities have regularly done since 2003. They often produce hundreds of arrests.

This one is different because President Donald Trump announced Monday on Twitter that it would be the start of an effort to deport millions of people in the country illegally, a near-impossibility given limited resources of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which makes the arrests and carries out deportation orders.

It’s also slightly unusual to target families — as opposed to immigrants with criminal histories — but not unprecedented. The Obama and Trump administrations have targeted families in previous operations.

Here are some questions and answers about how ICE operates:

WHAT THEY CAN DO

Immigration and Customs Enforcement is in charge of arresting and deporting immigrants who lack legal status.

One common method of finding and arresting people who are known to be in the country illegally is agreements between ICE and local jails around the country to hold people arrested on crimes past their release date so that ICE can look into their status. These are known as “detainers,” but they’ve become increasingly unpopular among local governments, many who say they risk legal action and that they shouldn’t be doing the work of federal authorities.

The agency also arrests people the old-fashioned way, by tracking people down and showing up at their homes or workplaces.

But the amount of resources and staff limit their ability to make multiple large-scale arrests at a time.

WHAT HAVE THEY DONE

Last fiscal year, ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations unit arrested over 158,500 immigrants in the country illegally, an 11% increase over the prior year and the highest number since 2014. The agency says 66% of those arrested are convicted criminals.

Last month, ICE officers arrested 900 people during a three-week sting in California.

The agency announced last week that it arrested 140 people, including 45 in Illinois, during a sting in the Midwest that lasted five days.

Although ICE arrests people a variety of ways, it’s the larger enforcement operations such as a workplace sting that draw the most attention.

In Texas, ICE’S Homeland Security Investigations unit, which enforces immigration laws at workplaces, arrested 280 employees at a company in Allen, Texas, in April, saying it was their biggest worksite operation in a decade.

“I think what people forget is these operations go on on a regular basis,” said Art Acevedo, the police chief in Houston, one of the cities believed to be targeted in an upcoming sweep.

WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE

Authorities typically have a list of people they are targeting in any operation. They visit a targeted person’s known addresses, usually a home or workplace, and seek to detain that person. They may ask family members, neighbors, co-workers, or managers about the whereabouts of the person they want to arrest.

Authorities typically obtain an administrative warrant giving them permission to detain a person for violating immigration law.

ICE agents can arrest people they discover to be in the U.S. illegally while searching for people on their target list. People who answer ICE agents’ questions about someone else sometimes end up arrested themselves. In one case in Houston last year, a young father of five was arrested in the parking lot of his apartment building after ICE agents asked him about people who lived nearby, then demanded his identification and eventually detained him.

These “collateral” arrests can comprise a large portion of the arrests in any operation. In one December 2017 operation in northern Kentucky, just five of the 22 arrests ICE made were of people it originally targeted, according to agency documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

WHAT WE’RE EXPECTING NEXT

The Washington Post and Miami Herald reported that 10 cities are expected to be targeted in raids starting Sunday. The Herald reported those cities are Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, New York, and San Francisco.

ICE officials said this week that they had sent about 2,000 letters in February to people in “family units” who had already received final orders to leave the country. The people who received those letters may be the targets of the enforcement operation.

Acevedo, the Houston chief, said ICE officials this week declined to provide him with any information about the expected weekend operation besides saying they had ongoing enforcement operations. He criticized President Donald Trump’s tweets Monday saying that agents would begin removing “millions of illegal aliens.”

“It instills fear,” Acevedo said. “We rely on the cooperation of that population to keep all Americans safe, all residents safe, and all members of society safe. … When you say you’re going to go arrest millions of people, that has a chilling effect on the cooperation.”

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said he will delay mass deportation raids scheduled for Sunday as he seeks compromise with Democratic leaders on immigration issues.

In a Twitter message Saturday afternoon, Trump said at “the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems.”

Trump warned that if no compromise is reached, “Deportations start!”

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Saturday delayed plans for nationwide raids to deport undocumented families, but he threatened to unleash Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in two weeks if Democrats do not submit to changes in asylum law they have long opposed.

The announcement, made on Twitter as Mr. Trump was meeting with aides at Camp David, was the president’s latest attempt to pressure his adversaries into making immigration changes. Last month, he threatened to levy tariffs on Mexico unless it did more to stop the flow of migrants into the United States.

Immigration agents had been planning to sweep into several immigrant communities in 10 major cities — including Miami, Los Angeles, Baltimore and Chicago — beginning on Sunday. Officials said on Friday that they had targeted about 2,000 families in a show of force intended to demonstrate their strict enforcement of immigration laws. Children of immigrants — some of whom were born in the United States — had faced the prospect of being forcibly separated from their undocumented parents.

Mark Morgan, the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, had announced this month that his agency would begin the raids at some point in the future. But on Monday, Mr. Trump revealed on Twitter that they would start the following week, claiming that officials would deport millions of people and sending panic through cities across the country.

A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

[Read more on the dire conditions that migrant children are facing in the United States’ detention facilities.]

The president’s abrupt reversal on Saturday came as lawmakers were considering a measure to send $4.5 billion in humanitarian aid to the border, money the Trump administration has said is desperately needed to handle a huge influx of migrants.

Some Democrats, including members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, had threatened to withhold their support for the funding package when it comes to a vote in the House this upcoming week, in protest of Mr. Trump’s immigration policies. The specter of high-profile immigration raids had risked imperiling its chances of passage.

The Senate has reached a bipartisan deal on a similar measure, though Democrats have conditioned their support on assurances that none of the money would go toward Mr. Trump’s threatened raids.

Democratic lawmakers and immigration activists had demanded in recent days that the raids be prevented, calling them a cruel attack on minority communities whose only crime was illegally entering the country.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Mr. Trump on Friday evening to persuade him to cancel the raids, according to a person familiar with the conversation who was not authorized to speak about it. During the 12-minute call, the president said he would consider doing so but made no commitments, the person said.

On Saturday, Ms. Pelosi put out a strongly worded statement, calling the raids “heartless” and saying they would rip families apart and terrorize communities. She publicly urged Mr. Trump to “stop this brutal action.”

The president did that a few hours later, announcing that “at the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks.”

But Mr. Trump made clear he planned to use the threat of family deportations to extract concessions from Democratic lawmakers. He said he had delayed the raids “to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border.”

“If not, Deportations start!” he tweeted.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, has said he wants to work with Senator Dick Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, on a possible solution to asylum and other immigration issues. Mr. Graham introduced a bill that would radically revamp immigration policy, blocking many migrants from seeking asylum and loosening rules around detention. But the odds that a negotiation between the two senators will bear fruit are exceedingly slim.

Shortly after Mr. Trump’s tweet, Ms. Pelosi responded on Twitter, saying: “Mr. President, delay is welcome. Time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform. Families belong together.”

The president was not specific in his tweet about what changes he was demanding, but Mr. Trump has angrily denounced the country’s asylum laws as “stupid” and the “worst in the world.” He has claimed that releasing migrants and their families into the United States while they wait for their asylum cases to proceed amounts to the “catch and release” of dangerous criminals.

The coordinated deportation operation, scheduled to begin in the predawn hours of Sunday, would have targeted immigrants who crossed the border in recent years and either received deportation orders from a judge or failed to appear for a court appearance. They were among thousands of migrants who had their immigration cases expedited by the Trump administration last fall.

Deportation raids are not uncommon. ICE will often approach undocumented immigrants in their home, workplace or even in court to detain and deport them. But the scale of the raids that were expected to begin on Sunday was much greater, spanning several states over multiple days.

The raids also drew condemnation because ICE agents planned to specifically target adults with children, raising again the possibility that families would be separated. The Trump administration abandoned its policy of separating migrant families at the border after it incited global outrage.

On Friday night, the Guatemalan-Maya Center in Lake Worth, Fla., held an information session about immigration. Lake Worth, part of Palm Beach County, has for decades attracted Guatemalans who work in construction and agriculture as well as at resorts nearby. By Saturday, some undocumented immigrants had already gone underground to avoid arrest, having left their homes to stay with relatives or friends in other places. Others said they had prepared to hunker down and hope for the best.

“My family was shopping for the whole week today. We didn’t plan to go out all week,” said Jessi Zavala, 23, the American child of an undocumented Nicaraguan mother, who was working the cash register at World Thrift Store.

Candi Vasquez, 13, who was born in Florida to undocumented parents, said that she and her brother, Rudolfo, 8, were still frightened after hearing about the postponement.

“I am kind of happy,” Candi said. “But if it happens in two weeks I am still scared. I don’t want to lose my mom.”

The surge of Central American families crossing the border has infuriated Mr. Trump. Last month, more than 144,200 migrants were taken into custody at the border, the highest monthly total in 13 years. Border patrol facilities, built to house adults who would quickly be deported, are now packed with migrants, including children, who would usually be housed in shelters managed by the Health and Human Services Department. Those shelters have also been pushed beyond capacity.

Mr. Morgan, who won his job at ICE in part by pushing for aggressive deportations in appearances on Fox News, has said the new family raids were needed as a deterrent.

But in recent days officials within the Department of Homeland Security have fiercely debated whether to begin the operation, according to government authorities. Officials within the agency have been hesitant about the effort because of limited space in family detention facilities and the bad optics of separating undocumented parents from their children.

Mr. Trump’s tweet of the operation frustrated high-ranking ICE officials, including the deputy director, Matthew Albence, who expressed concern that the disclosure put agents’ safety at risk, a government official said.

One homeland security official said the operation could lead to “collateral deportations,” in which agents looking for certain individuals detain other undocumented immigrants who happened to be present nearby.

In a meeting with White House officials on Friday, Kevin McAleenan, the acting secretary of homeland security, pushed back against the planned raids, arguing that they would lead to family separations. He said he could achieve similar numbers over a measured deportation plan spanning four weeks.

Mayors of several cities, including Denver, Baltimore and San Francisco, vowed not to cooperate with immigration authorities.

On Saturday morning, Thomas Homan, the former acting director of ICE, went on Fox News to advocate the operations and criticize officials who were arguing against Sunday’s raid, including Mr. McAleenan.

“These mayors aren’t the only ones resisting ICE,” said Mr. Homan, whom Mr. Trump has chosen as border czar. (Mr. Homan has not yet accepted the position.) “You’ve got the acting secretary of homeland security resisting what ICE is trying to do.”

News of the delay spread quickly in immigrant communities on Saturday, as acute dread turned to confusion. In Lake Worth, the Rev. Frank O’Loughlin, who runs the Guatemalan-Maya Center, had tried to soothe anxieties that morning. “A lot of people are scared today,” Father O’Loughlin told immigrants who had gathered for an event. “Let everything else go. You and your children are here.”

Hours later, the priest heard that the raids had been postponed. “Wow. We are at the end of a yo-yo string,” he said. “It’s incomprehensible.”

When President Trump announced his travel ban a week into his presidency, it was up to the Department of Homeland Security to implement it immediately. The result was chaos at our nation’s airports.

When Trump’s Justice Department announced a “zero tolerance” policy on illegal immigration, it was again up to DHS to make it workable. The result was the controversial — and since rescinded — separation of families.

Now Trump is trying to quickly implement another controversial immigration plan, by launching Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids to quickly deport undocumented families, starting Sunday.

And the head of DHS appears understandably wary.

The Washington Post’s Nick Miroff, who has been breaking news like crazy when it comes to the situation on the U.S.-Mexico border, reported Friday that the raids would begin this weekend. The scale is large, with as many as 2,000 families targeted in 10 major U.S. cities.

But this time, Trump’s acting Homeland Security secretary is apparently conveying that he’s not on board with the plan for the “family op.” Kevin McAleenan, who has crafted a solid bipartisan reputation since taking over for Kirstjen Nielsen, has advised against such a quick implementation.

Here are few key passages from Miroff’s latest story:

Acting DHS secretary Kevin McAleenan has been urging ICE, an agency within his department, to conduct a narrower, more targeted operation that would seek to detain a group of about 150 families that were provided with attorneys but dropped out of the legal process and absconded.

McAleenan has warned that an indiscriminate operation to arrest migrants in their homes and at work sites risks separating children from their parents in cases where the children are at day care, summer camp or friend’s houses. He also has maintained that ICE should not devote major resources to carrying out a mass interior sweep while telling lawmakers it needs emergency funding to address the crisis at the U.S. border.

…

The White House has been in direct communication with acting ICE director Mark Morgan and other ICE officials, circumventing McAleenan, three officials said.

…

McAleenan has said that the crisis at the border — where more than 144,000 were taken into custody last month — remains the most urgent problem for DHS. Following Trump’s threats to slap tariffs on Mexico, McAleenan led negotiations with Mexican officials that resulted in commitments to dramatically toughen enforcement and begin work on a regional asylum overhaul that would allow the United States to send asylum seekers back to Central America.

Officials say McAleenan does not oppose ICE interior enforcement against families with deportation orders, but he wants a more limited approach that averts a repeat of “zero tolerance.”

The message from McAleenan seems rather simple: This risks distracting from some very real progress that we’re making and also diverts resources to a less pressing issue. It’s an entirely logical stance. The situation on the southern border, after all, has reached crisis levels, according to Trump and his administration. McAleenan has argued the recently struck deal to get Mexico to halt the flow of migrants to the border will be a far more effective way to get the border surge under control. This operation deals with a separate but related issue of undocumented immigrants already within the country’s interior.

The lessons of the travel ban and “zero tolerance” loom large. The former suffered from the haste of its implementation, while the latter suffered from a perceived lack of humanity. The new operation risks problems on both fronts.

It seeks to round up families who have already received deportation orders, which would seem like an easier political sell. Are Democrats and other Trump opponents really going to say the administration can’t deport people who are due for deportation?

But the speed of the operation’s implementation harks back to the travel ban, and the possibility of unhelpful images looms large. Children behind chain-link fences without their parents was one thing. What happens when ICE officials are recorded showing up to deport a family — or, as McAleenan reportedly warned, it results in families being separated yet again? The potential pitfalls of such a large and fast operation are numerous.

Like McAleenan, Nielsen was occasionally reported to have expressed reservations about some of Trump’s initiatives, including the family separation policy. Despite that, the program is likely to be prominent when it comes to history’s evaluation of her tenure. Even John Kelly, Nielsen’s predecessor as DHS secretary who went on to become White House chief of staff, has sought distance from some of Trump’s immigration policies.

McAleenan has stepped into the void and, by the accounts of even Democrats, has been a breath of fresh air. The fact that he apparently wants no part of this new approach seems telling.

President Trump’s decision to postpone the mass arrests of immigrant families with deportation orders offered a two-week reprieve to shaken cities and towns Sunday, but faith and immigration leaders said they will continue to mobilize for roundups in case talks between the White House and congressional Democrats break down.

After Trump threatened raids a week ago, immigrant rights groups in Chicago, Washington, New York and nationwide publicized emergency hotlines, alerted volunteers and hastily arranged gatherings to teach immigrants what to do if an agent knocks on their door — efforts that are ongoing since the president called off the raids Saturday. The arrests were set to begin Sunday.

“We’re ready. We’re going to be vigilant,” said Richard Morales, director of the immigrant rights campaign for Faith in Action, a national faith-based network in more than 20 states. “Whether it happens today or it happens in two weeks, our congregation, our clergy, they’re ready to respond.”

Trump said Democrats pushed him to postpone the raids as they work toward a possible deal on overhauling the nation’s asylum laws and emergency spending legislation to provide an additional $4.5 billion, mostly for the Departments of Health and Human Services and Homeland Security to deal with a record surge of Central American families and unaccompanied minors at the southern border.

But the president also is seeking greater power to detain and deport migrant families and unaccompanied minors who cross the border illegally and seek asylum, because most are quickly released in the United States to await a court hearing and are rarely deported.

Advocates say families and children are fleeing violence, hunger and poverty, but Trump has said that “loopholes” in asylum laws are fueling the surge and that he is willing to wield his leverage to pry concessions from Democrats. He secured tougher enforcement measures from Mexico this month after threatening to impose tariffs on their exports.

“I want to give the Democrats every last chance to quickly negotiate simple changes to Asylum and Loopholes,” Trump tweeted Sunday. “This will fix the Southern Border, together with the help that Mexico is now giving us. Probably won’t happen, but worth a try. Two weeks and big Deportation begins!”

Trump promised to deport millions of undocumented immigrants from the United States during his 2016 campaign, but since then, he has largely fixated on the soaring crossings at the border. Interior arrests are down, but border apprehensions have been on track to hit 1 million this year, the highest numbers in more than a decade.

Trump’s threats jarred immigrant communities nationwide in recent days.

In the Washington area, five church congregations readied to offer sanctuary to immigrants facing deportation, and advocates lined up volunteers to take their children to doctors’ appointments or summer school.

In Chicago, workers canvassed immigrant neighborhoods handing out informational cards, accompanied by the new mayor, Lori Lightfoot, who told local media she had a message for Trump: “Back off.”

In downtown Los Angeles on Sunday, about 125 immigrant rights protesters gathered for a rally outside of a hulking six-story immigrant detention center holding signs that said “stop separating families.”

Speaking through a microphone, Melody Klingenfuss of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) broadcast tips on what to do if Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents knock on their doors. Record the raids with their phones. Don’t offer false documents.

Fifteen-year-old Jair Solis, who spoke at the rally, said ICE agents had knocked on their door four months ago, and the family had refused to answer. But they soon found Solis’s 43-year-old father as he left in his car for his job as a supervisor of a cleaning company. They took him to a detention center. CHIRLA paid his $5,000 bail, but Solis said his father lost his job.

Now, the Mexican national is trying to get his citizenship through the court process. Solis said he is optimistic.

“It’s just a long process,” he said. “My mom has been in the process for 20 years.”

As the raids loomed over the weekend, unconfirmed reports of immigration arrests from Arizona to Washington ricocheted across social media.

In Washington, immigrant advocates spent the day trying to confirm details of possible arrests in Adams Morgan and Columbia Heights.

Community members called hotlines set up to receive reports of raids by ICE and dispatch volunteers into the communities to record and observe the arrests. But nobody could confirm the names of anyone who has been arrested.

Immigration officials declined to say whether they arrested anyone over the weekend.

A DHS official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to discuss the operation, said another routine ICE operation known as “Cross Check,” which targets migrants with criminal convictions, has been ongoing for several weeks. However, they have only netted a few hundred arrests so far, because immigrants are rarely found at the addresses they provide to authorities.

“People know we’re coming,” the DHS official said.

Trump’s decision to telegraph the family raids in a tweet one week ago exacerbated fissures among DHS leaders over the scope and timing of the plan.

On Saturday, as state and local officials in several jurisdictions denounced the plan — and their police departments eschewed cooperation — former ICE director Tom Homan and anonymous senior officials accused acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan of leaking details of the operation to get the White House to call it off.

But officials at several Homeland Security agencies had privately expressed concern all week that the operation had been fatally compromised by Trump’s announcement that the roundups would begin “next week.”

His announcement followed weeks of public statements by newly installed acting ICE chief Mark Morgan that his agency was preparing to arrest thousands of families in major U.S. cities who have failed to comply with deportation orders that were fast-tracked through an expedited Justice Department court docket.

Up to 1,000 detention beds had been set aside at a federal family detention center in Dilley, Tex., for the raids, according to the DHS official.

The Washington Post began receiving anonymous tips with details of the operation two days after the president’s tweet, and by the end of the week, those plans were circulating among officials at multiple agencies, as well as legislative staffers and legal-aid organizations for immigrants.

Homan, whom Trump has courted to serve as a “border czar,” said Sunday that the president should move forward with the raids in two weeks if they do not reach a deal with Democrats.

“I think if the president, if he doesn’t get something meaningful, I think ICE is going to do it and they should do it,” Homan said.

President Donald Trump on Saturday delayed for two weeks the administration’s plans to begin deporting thousands of undocumented families — reversing himself just hours after defending the controversial proposal.

“At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border. If not, Deportations start!” Trump tweeted Saturday afternoon.

The confusion surrounding the proposed raids, which were due to begin Sunday in more than a dozen cities, was the latest episode in which Trump threatened tough action, only to pull back. Last week, he said he had authorized limited strikes against Iran before canceling them shortly before they were due to launch.

The plan by Immigration and Customs Enforcement to deport up to 2,000 families who have missed a court date or have been served deportation orders prompted an outcry from Democrats and law enforcement officials in several U.S. cities.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Trump on Friday evening asking him to call off the raids, according to a source familiar with the conversation, which lasted about 12 minutes.

But Saturday morning, Trump defended the proposed action on Twitter, saying, “The people that Ice will apprehend have already been ordered to be deported.”

“This means that they have run from the law and run from the courts,” he wrote. “These are people that are supposed to go back to their home country. They broke the law by coming into the country, & now by staying.”

During a press gaggle later in the morning, he again gave no indication of the impending delay. Trump acknowledged cities “are going to fight” federal immigration policies but added that they are “high-crime” cities, without offering further justification.

But Saturday afternoon, he changed course, citing Democrats’ requests.

It was not clear what exactly spurred him to back off. ICE was officially notified of the president’s decision only hours before Trump announced the delay, according to one administration official.

A former DHS official told POLITICO that some ICE officers had pushed back on the planned raids after they were made public because of officer safety concerns and child welfare issues. It was not immediately clear, however, whether those concerns reached the White House.

The officer safety concerns were related to the level of publicity around the actions, the former official said.

An ICE spokeswoman also appeared to link the president’s decision to the safety of immigration enforcement authorities, suggesting that leaked details preceding removal operations could jeopardize their safety. The spokeswoman did not address Trump’s own tweets from earlier this week, however, when he broadcast a forthcoming ICE operation.

The tweet on Monday appeared to reference a long-planned operation targeting families and unaccompanied minors who turned 18. POLITICO reported Friday that ICE planned to begin raids Sunday and target major cities.

The specific welfare concerns were encountering U.S. citizen children, who may need to be transferred into someone else’s custody if their parents are detained. Other concerns were children hiding in closets and not being found and parents fighting back, the former DHS official said.

Operations targeting families can be difficult to execute, according to Leon Fresco, a former Obama Justice Department official.

“There could be a newborn baby, who knows,” he said.

Following Trump’s announcement of the delay, Pelosi tweeted: “Mr. President, delay is welcome. Time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform. Families belong together.”

In a statement released earlier Saturday before Trump’s delay announcement, Pelosi had called the raids “heartless.”

“Families belong together. These families are hard-working members of our communities and our country. The President’s action makes no distinction between a status violation and committing a serious crime. It is important that the President and our immigrant communities know that they have rights in America,” Pelosi said.

Cities had also pushed back against the plans. Chicago is refusing to share law enforcement records with ICE agents, while Chicago Police Department Superintendent Eddie Johnson has ordered the CPD to not participate in the deportation raids.

Baltimore Mayor Jack Young issued a statement on Friday denouncing the move and reminding residents of their legal rights.

“I am deeply disturbed by the President’s recent comments around immigration and even more troubled at the reports of increased immigration enforcement,” Young said in a statement.

Los Angeles Sheriff Alex Villanueva also issued a statement opposing the raids.

“I strongly oppose President Trump’s threats of mass deportations on Twitter and television. His actions are irresponsible and unnecessary if in fact the President is truly concerned with removing violent undocumented felons to ensure your public safety,” Villanueva said in a statement.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus Center condemned the planned raids in a statement Saturday, saying a delay “is not enough” while calling on the administration to “abandon this cruel and reckless approach.”

“Mass raids will only terrorize immigrant communities and separate families. These raids will do nothing to solve the humanitarian crisis the Trump Administration created at our border and they will waste millions in taxpayer dollars.”

Kerri Talbot, the director of federal advocacy for the D.C.-based Immigration Hub, said in a statement: “First Trump holds Dreamers hostage to try to force Congress to erect new barriers to refugee status. Then he tried to use family separation to get these changes. And now he’s going to threaten people for two weeks with raids. This president is sick and inhumane.”

Trump announced the deportation plans Monday on Twitter, the night before his re-election campaign kickoff in Florida.

“Next week ICE will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States. They will be removed as fast as they come in. Mexico, using their strong immigration laws, is doing a very good job of stopping people,” Trump wrote.

Acting director of ICE, Mark Morgan, subsequently said there were no plans to deport “millions” of undocumented migrants, a number that alarmed many agents.

President Trump is delaying immigration raids that were set to begin this weekend, saying he will give Congress two weeks to make changes to asylum law before dispatching Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents around the country to deport undocumented immigrants.

Immigration rights advocates had been preparing for the planned sweep of recently arrived migrants, which, according to sources familiar with the planned raids, were set to begin as soon as Sunday in 10 cities around the country.

A source familiar with the president’s decision told NPR that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called Trump on Friday night and urged him to back off the raids. Pelosi had been sharply critical of the planned raids. She called them heartless and said the president needed “to stop this brutal action which will tear families apart and inject terror into our communities.”

On Saturday, the president announced on Twitter that ICE would hold off on the roundup for two weeks “at the request of Democrats,” writing that if lawmakers in Washington cannot approve changes to asylum law in that time, he will again direct ICE agents to resume the raids.

Sources close to the White House say Democrats are unlikely to accept Trump’s pitch that asylum rules should be tightened.

Both parties are working to pass a border aid package to help deal with the influx of migrants arriving illegally at the border, and a Democratic aide on Capitol Hill noted that the raids could have endangered the deal had they not been put on pause.

The $4.5 billion border and humanitarian supplemental assistance package has been moving along with bipartisan support. Much of the money supports humanitarian assistance and immigration enforcement.

But by asking Congress to address asylum and “loophole problems,” Trump is upping the ante. There is no funding for changes to asylum laws, so Trump’s request faces significant hurdles.

Pelosi on Saturday welcomed the president’s announcement delaying the planned raids. She called for a comprehensive immigration package that includes a path to citizenship for the roughly 11 million people who are in the country illegally.

ICE sent letters in February to more than 2,000 migrants whose cases the Justice Department fast-tracked as a way of sending a deterrent message to families considering crossing the U.S. border illegally.

“If Congress does not change the laws to ensure illegal aliens can be promptly removed at the southern border, there is no alternative but to continuously arrest these fugitive aliens in the interior,” a spokeswoman for ICE said in a statement on Saturday.

In an interview with NPR, Acting ICE Director Mark Morgan said many immigrant families are ignoring requests to turn themselves in.

“So what are our options?” Morgan said. “They’ve had due process, they’ve had access to attorneys, they’ve had access to interpreters. Majority of them don’t even show up. And then when they didn’t show up, they received ordered removal in absentia,” he said. “We have no choice.”

Immigration activists have condemned the raids and implored the Trump administration to call them off.

President Donald Trump suddenly canceled on Saturday a planned US Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation targeting undocumented immigrant families from across the country that was set to begin in the pre-dawn hours on Sunday.

The operation details, which had been reported by multiple outlets, including BuzzFeed News, had set off an unprecedented level of preparation among immigrant advocates this week.

But in a tweet Saturday, Trump said that he had “delayed” the plan at the request of Democrats to work on a plan to solve issues at the border, including what he believes are inherent loopholes to the system.

“At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border,” Trump tweeted. “If not, Deportations start!”

However, two senior administration officials told BuzzFeed News that those within the administration believe acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan, or his staff, leaked operational details and that is what ultimately put the ICE operation in jeopardy.

“Leaking the locations and details to stop the operation from happening not only harmed operational integrity, but it put the safety and well-being of his own officers in jeopardy,” said one senior administration official. “The ICE mission is enforcing the nation’s laws and ensuring those who are unlawfully present in the country are removed if ordered by a judge; this will leave an un-erasable mark on his tenure.”

DHS officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the matter.

The roundup had been expected to begin Sunday in several cities across the country, including Los Angeles, targeting families who have been issued final removal orders after not appearing in court, according to sources close to the administration. The enforcement action was set come during a period in which the administration has called for additional funding to help add resources to handle the record number of immigrant families crossing the border this year.

Earlier this week, Mark Morgan, the acting ICE director, signaled that the agency would conduct a raid on immigrants who are in the country without authorization. In a call with reporters, Morgan focused on a group of around 2,000 individuals who were part of an expedited docket at immigration courts reserved for family units who have recently arrived. Across the country, 10 immigration courts, in cities like San Francisco, Miami, Houston, Baltimore, and Los Angeles, have quick dockets for immigrant families.

The 2,000 individuals, Morgan said, had been ordered removed “in absentia” — without appearing in court — and had been notified to present themselves at ICE offices to facilitate a compassionate removal. These individuals, Morgan argued, had been given an adequate level of due process and a chance to make their case in court. Without officers targeting and removing them, immigrant families from Central America would continue to come without any fear of consequences.

Within the agency, some ICE officials were concerned Trump’s tweet last week, which warned ICE would soon “begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States,” had tipped off the operation, one source with knowledge of internal agency discussions said.

Theresa Brown, a former DHS official who now heads immigration policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, said that the cancellation would allow ICE officers to continue their normal, ongoing operations across the country. In recent weeks, the agency has conducted sweeps, not specifically targeting families, that have resulted in dozens of arrests at once.

Brown noted, however, that any discussion of the operation being used as a ploy by the Trump administration to secure changes to immigration laws in ongoing conversations with Democrats could be an issue. “The idea that this is a negotiating tactic with the Hill might not sit very well with the agents,” she said.

For her part, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, appreciated Trump’s decision to call off the raid for now. “Mr. President, delay is welcome,” she tweeted. “Time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform. Families belong together.”

Alexandra Morales, policy manager at CARECEN-LA, the largest Central American immigrant rights organization in the US, said that despite the fear and anxiety the raids produced it was an opportunity for communities to organize, remain vigilant, and informed.

“The rhetoric aims to criminalize immigrants for ‘missing their day in court’ because they are not bona fide asylum seekers,” Morales said in a statement. “In reality, the US immigration system is extremely complex and difficult to navigate particularly for recent arrivals fleeing harm. Yet, the administration has engaged in tactics to deprive asylum seekers of access to counsel and due process.”

Trump officials have maintained that most asylum-seeking families fail to show up to court. Morales pointed to an analysis of nearly 47,000 immigration cases for newly arrived families that found that six out of every seven families released from custody showed up for their initial court hearing.

The report from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University also found that in cases where the families had an attorney, more than 99 percent had appeared at every hearing held.

Trump’s threat of raids has also had the unintended effect of giving undocumented people a renewed chance to prepare for future operations, said Alfredo Salazar, a member of the Congress of Day Laborers, an immigrant rights organization. The group, he said, has been fielding calls from concerned undocumented people seeking information and US citizens inquiring about how they can help.

“ICE is going to keep arresting people on a daily basis like they always have,” Salazar told BuzzFeed News. “So we’re going to keep preparing just like we always have.”

Rachel Taber an organizer with the Congress of Day Laborers, said Trump’s public announcement of the raids, and subsequent delay, is another example of the president playing with people’s lives for his reelection campaign.

“The community will keep organizing, living their lives, staying with their families because it is their right and they shouldn’t let fear change that,” she said.

President Donald Trump has postponed a massive ICE operation that would have targeted 2,000 families with members who have received deportation orders. The raids were set to begin Sunday, nearly a week after Trump tweeted that “ICE will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States.”

Saturday, only roughly 12 hours before the predawn raids were set to begin, the president tweeted the operation will not begin for at least two weeks — if it is carried out at all — in order to give Congress time to “get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border.” Should he not be satisfied with lawmakers’ progress in that time, Trump wrote, “Deportations start!”

Trump claimed he decided to pause the operation “at the request of Democrats,” and CNN reports a call House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made to Trump on Friday may have influenced his thinking on the matter. The president and speaker reportedly spoke for more than ten minutes, and Pelosi is said to have directly asked the president to hold off on the raids.

In a Saturday statement, the speaker called the raids “heartless” and said they would be a “brutal action which will tear families apart and inject terror into our communities.” After the president announced the postponement Saturday afternoon, Pelosi thanked him on Twitter, calling the delay “welcome,” but seemed to caution that his timeline for an immigration deal might be too tight, writing, “time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform.”

As the Washington Post reported, the raid were to be conducted as as part of a “family op” across 10 cities. In his first tweet, Trump called for a far greater number of people to be detained, promising “millions of illegal aliens” would be deported; the ICE action nevertheless would have been incredibly large in scope, and not without risk for communities where immigrants live and places where they work.

In an interview with ABC, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Mark Morgan said the raids are about maintaining the “rule of law.” And though a ramped-up enforcement effort had been in the works, Trump’s decision to publicly telegraph a major law enforcement operation was an unusual one for a president to make. Coming as it did the evening before his 2020 reelection kickoff, his announcement appeared to be motivated by politics more than necessity. And as I detailed on Tuesday, ICE was blindsided by his tweet.

The Post reports that law enforcement officials felt comfortable talking to the publication on background about the raids because of Trump’s tweet, and expressed concerns both about Trump’s motivations and the raids themselves:

Some within DHS and ICE say the president appears to be using the operation for political purposes as he begins his reelection bid. Law enforcement officials worry that by publicly discussing the plan, Trump has undermined the chances of capturing those on the target list, as it likely pushed migrants with deportation orders underground.

ICE didn’t revealed much about the operational logistics of the forthcoming raids, but here’s some of what we knew about them.

Families targeted for deportation have received final orders of deportation, but haven’t necessarily been accused of crimes beyond that
CNN reports that raids would have occurred in 10 large cities that are “immigration court locations:” Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, New Orleans, New York, and San Francisco, and were intended to detain people from up to 2,000 families.

Morgan told reporters earlier this month that ICE would be targeting “individuals who have gone through due process and who have received final orders of deportation.”

Last year, the Trump administration developed an expedited legal process for migrant families, which, according to the Post, fast-tracked “the cases of thousands of families in major cities, obtaining ‘in absentia’ deportation orders for thousands of families that did not show up for their court hearings.”

But just because one or more members of a family have deportation orders doesn’t mean they are the hardened criminals that Trump often portrays them as being. (In a departure from Obama administration policy, Trump hasn’t made distinctions between undocumented immigrants who have criminal records and those that don’t.)

After news of the raids broke, and ACLU and RAICES — or the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services — posted tweets aimed at educating immigrants about their rights if they or someone they know is swept up in one of the raids.

ICE officials planned for the raids be conducted over the course of several days; they would have begun early Sunday morning. As the Wall Street Journal reports, carrying out raids in the early morning is standard as it increases the chances those ICE are looking for will be at home.

ICE agents would have worked from a “target list” that contains the last known addresses of people with deportation orders. Agents also planned to make “collateral arrests,” arrests both of undocumented immigrants they encounter that they weren’t looking for, as well as of people they want to monitor but can’t immediately begin the deportation process for. Those collateral arrests may have included the family members of those with deportation orders, as well as neighbors of people on the target list. Those detained in collateral arrests that weren’t able to be immediately deported would have been fitted with ankle monitors and released.

ICE planned to temporarily house detained families in hotel rooms and family residential detention centers. Parents and children that were not arrested as a unit would have been reunited so that they could be deported as a family.

Should the raid have captured parents slated for deportation who have children who are US citizens, as was likely, CNN reports immediate caregivers (be they parents or other relatives) might have been fitted with ankle monitors and released in order to coordinate care for their children; other detained family members would not have be released. According to The New York Times, ICE agents might have also kept citizen children in hotel rooms with their parents until a relative came to pick them up.

Despite these measures, officials and advocacy groups feared children who have lived in the US for years could return home to find their parents have been taken by ICE agents. Acting DHS secretary Kevin McAleenan reportedly argued for reducing the scope of the upcoming operation in part due to concerns children who are away from home due to summer activities, such as visiting relatives, would have been left without primary caregivers.

And Sandra Cordero, director of the immigrant advocacy group Families Belong Together, told the Wall Street Journal, “Past raids have left children alone and afraid in empty homes, praying they won’t be left to care for younger siblings by themselves, with no idea if they’ll see their parents again,” and called the operation “another flagrant disregard for the welfare of children.”

The raid was vehemently opposed by many of the mayors of the cities it was set to be conducted in. Many, like Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, told ICE not to expect any support from local police, and all advised undocumented immigrants to know their rights before the raid.

Saturday morning, President Trump reiterated his support for the operation. He again portrayed the immigrants slated for deportation as hardened criminals, tweeting the raid would see the detention of people who have “run from the law and run from the courts” and proclaimed, “When people come into our Country illegally, they will be DEPORTED!”

Despite this, by Saturday afternoon, the president had changed his mind. He now says he hopes the threat of raids will push Congress to act, and that he expects lawmakers to have settled on an immigration solution in two weeks, something the House and the Senate have been unable to do for years.

And even when Congresspeople have made progress on the issue, Trump has destroyed those potential deals a number of times, sometimes after seeming to agree to them. While he has made it somewhat clear what he would like a new deal to address, the president has not yet made it publicly known if there are concessions he isn’t willing to accept — for instance, in the past, he has refused to consider proposals based on their protections for DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) recipients or because they sought to expand protections for people with Temporary Protected Status.

For a deal to be successful, Congress will not only have to work in a bipartisan manner while navigating the executive branch’s red lines; it will also have to get Trump to sign on and to remain committed to the proposal.

These raids were controversial even within the Trump administration, in part because they’re risky
The Washington Post reported last month that former Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and former ICE Acting Director Ronald Vitiello were ousted from the administration in April in part because they were concerned that raids like the ones ICE is now planning to go forward with would be “bad policy and that the proposal was less than half-baked.”

Indeed, there are indications that the raids would have been somewhat indiscriminate, in part because of intelligence shortcomings. From the Post:

ICE agents have limited intelligence on the locations of the families with court-ordered deportations beyond their last known addresses. But White House and ICE officials believe agents will be able to make many “collateral arrests” by finding foreigners living in the country illegally at or near the target locations.

The publicity Trump has given to the operations will likely cause some undocumented immigrants who have received deportation orders and are living in affected cities to go underground. But ICE believed agents would have been able to arrest others who weren’t necessarily targets that were happened upon during the operation.

Acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan has also reportedly pushed back on the large-scale “family op,” advocating a much more limited plan that would target approximately 150 families, per the Post.

It could well be that the president is buying time to gather more intelligence; he could also truly hope the pressure will create a success on immigration that has long eluded him. And both could have factored into the president’s calculus. More will become clear in two weeks’ time, after the president’s deadline for a border and asylum deal.

President Donald Trump announced Saturday that “at the request of Democrats” a planned roundup of undocumented immigrants will be delayed.

In a tweet from Camp David, Trump said he ordered the delay for two weeks “to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the asylum and loophole problems at the southern border.”

But he warned that if the two sides cannot reach a deal — which he must bless before signing into law — “deportations start!”

Both the House and Senate are set to take up bills next week to spend at least $4 billion more to deal with the influx of migrants at the southern border, but the measures do not include changes to immigration or asylum policy.

It was unclear Friday how the House and Senate would reconcile differences between the measures, which leaders of both chambers say are needed to address humanitarian issues.

Trump’s two-week offer could be aimed at affecting those talks. But Democrats have not been moved by his threats in the past, and Congress is only scheduled to be in session Monday through Thursday before going on recess through the remainder of Trump’s deadline.

Speaker Nancy Pelsoi welcomed the delay in a tweet Saturday, but she did not mention Trump’s deadline. She also suggested that Democrats would not be willing to change asylum laws without addressing other broken parts of the immigration system.

“Time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform. Families belong together,” the California Democrat tweeted.

In 2017, Trump — following the lead of hard-liners on his staff — helped torpedo a bipartisan Senate immigration bill. And on Saturday, he did not specify what kind of asylum overhaul measure he might support nor did he lay out a single demand.

The raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement were scheduled to begin Sunday in 10 major American cities, and had drawn sharp objections from congressional Democrats.

The tweet, posted around 3 p.m., brought the latest policy reversal — this one, potentially temporary — from a president who has kept Washington guessing with his frequent changes of heart.

Earlier Saturday, at 8:30 a.m., Trump had fired off a tweet doubling down on the planned raids.

“The people that ICE will apprehend have already been ordered to be deported,” he said. “This means that they have run from the law and run from the courts. These are people that are supposed to go back to their home country. They broke the law by coming into the country, & now by staying.”

Trump is at Camp David amid tensions with Iran after it shot down an American military drone aircraft, and he canceled a planned retaliation mission. He is meeting with aides about how to deal with the Islamic republic, and other matters.

The White House’s immigrant roundup plan drew howls from Democrats such as freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of Trump’s native New York.

“Reminder this admin is CHOOSING to round up refugees seeking asylum, fighting to not give children toothpaste or soap & making people sleep on dirt floors,” she tweeted Saturday. “They say it’s bc of a lack of [money]. You know what saves money? Not putting masses of people in internment in the first place.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Democrats in the House of Representatives on Friday proposed reinstating hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras that was cut off by the Trump administration because thousands of their citizens sought asylum at the U.S. border with Mexico.

The proposal was tucked into a bill to provide $4.5 billion in humanitarian assistance to address the surge of migrants at the southern U.S. border. Republican President Donald Trump has sought that funding for U.S. programs that house, feed, transport and oversee the record numbers of Central American families seeking asylum and straining capacity at migrant shelters in U.S. border cities.

But the Trump administration cut aid to the three Central American countries earlier this week after Trump expressed unhappiness with their immigration policies. Congressional aides said the administration told them some $550 million in aid would be reallocated or suspended.

Democratic lawmakers have said it was cruel to slash aid to countries that are grappling with hunger and crime, and that the move would be counterproductive because it would more likely increase the number of migrants than decrease it. The House bill would require the administration to spend the money, which Congress has already approved.

The number of migrants apprehended crossing the U.S.-Mexico border surged in May to the highest level since 2006.

“This legislation would address the humanitarian crisis in a way that balances the needs at the border with the imperative to hold the administration accountable,” House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey, a Democrat, said in a statement.

Earlier this week a Senate panel approved, on a bipartisan basis, $4.6 billion in humanitarian aid to confront the migrant surge at the border. The House bill unveiled Friday is similar, but includes some restrictions on how border aid can be used, and requires facilities caring for unaccompanied children to allow oversight visits by lawmakers without prior notice.

The House bill left out money the Senate included for the Defense Department and to pay overtime for Immigration and Customs Enforcement employees. House aides said they expected a floor vote Tuesday in the Democratic-majority House; the Republican-majority Senate is also expected to take up its version soon.

The chambers will have to work out their differences before sending a bill to the president for signing into law. Neither the House nor the Senate version include any money for construction of Trump’s border wall.

House spending leaders released a $4.5 billion emergency funding measure Friday to fulfill some of President Donald Trump’s request for additional aid to handle the influx of immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The 27-page bill differs from the version the Senate approved in committee this week by including extra oversight demands and giving hundreds of millions of dollars less to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But Democratic spending leaders contend the broad elements of the bills are similar, improving prospects for a bipartisan compromise before the Department of Homeland Security and Health and Human Services completely deplete resources in the coming weeks.

House Democratic leaders are eyeing a Tuesday vote on the bill, eager to have it signed into law before they depart for a 10-day July Fourth recess, according to lawmakers and aides.

But the funding package will be a tough sell for many in the Democratic caucus who are still seething over the president’s defiance of Congress on immigration policy and on construction of a border wall, even as he seeks a $4.5 billion infusion to support the very agencies carrying out those directives.

Top Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee made an aggressive final pitch for the bill on Thursday, with lengthy presentations to both the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Within the Progressive Caucus, there are still doubts about whether a majority of the group’s more than 90 members will support the bill. Many are concerned that the safeguards in the House version will not be enough to rein in an administration that has bucked nearly every congressional attempt to constrain its immigration and border security policies.

Still, key members from both groups suggested they will ultimately back the bill — support they see as crucial to increasing their leverage in negotiations with the Senate on a final product.

Quelling some concerns among Democrats, the bill includes language requiring temporary detention facilities to meet the same standards as longer-term facilities within 12 months, rather than the 14-month deadline stated in the Senate bill. Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus have increasingly criticized those so-called influx facilities, which are often unlicensed and fall short of basic standards of care.

Within a summary and fact sheet comparing the House and Senate versions, House spending leaders highlighted the fact that the House bill also contains an additional $30 million that lawmakers who represent communities near the U.S.-Mexico border requested to reimburse local governments and groups that provide humanitarian support for incoming immigrants.

The House bill provides $50 million less for the Executive Office of Immigration Review than the Senate measure, S. 1900 (116), and it leaves out $61 million that the Senate approved to remedy a pay shortfall at ICE; $3.7 million for ICE deportation costs; and $21.3 million for ICE investigations work.

The House measure includes an extra $5.2 million that the Senate bill does not contain for ICE to use for background investigations and facility inspections.

Among its extra oversight demands, the House bill would require the Trump administration to use the money Congress already provided for aid to the Central American countries from which many U.S.-bound immigrants have been fleeing.

Under the bill, HHS would be allowed to provide the same scope of legal services to unaccompanied immigrant children that it was able to deliver during the Obama administration.

[Excerpt]

The House and Senate are set to take up competing bills this week that would provide President Trump more than $4.5 billion in new funding tied to the U.S.-Mexico border.

The looming clash comes as Congress is expected to leave town at the end of the week for the July 4th recess, making it unlikely they’ll resolve the standoff over the bills before the break absent an 11th hour agreement.

The House and Senate bills both provide the administration with more than $4.5 billion, including new money to help shore up a Health and Human Services (HHS) unaccompanied children program set to run out of money. But they split over the details, including money for the Pentagon, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Lawmakers had hoped to get a bill to Trump’s desk before leaving for the break, after the funding was yanked out of the disaster aid package because of a disagreement over immigration-related provisions.

But Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) said late last week that he had not started negotiating with House Democrats about a way to quickly reconcile their competing bills and painted a conference committee, which would delay the funding until at least mid-July, as likely.

“They’ve got their own version. We’ll work our will … and obviously we’ll go to conference, and we’ll either hash it or not,” Shelby said.

Trump has requested a total of $4.5 billion in emergency border funding. Roughly $3.3 billion would have gone toward increasing shelters and care for unaccompanied minors in addition to processing arrivals, while $1.1 billion was for other border operations such as expanding the number of detention beds and providing more investigation resources.

Though both sides say they support additional humanitarian aid, Trump’s immigration policies have emerged as a lightning rod among the base in both parties.

Democrats have been wary of supporting anything that could, directly or indirectly, help enforce Trump’s immigration and border policies.

The House bill does not include any Defense Department funding. It also doesn’t include $61 million to address a pay shortfall or $3.7 million in overtime costs for ICE. It also includes myriad restrictions on how funds can and cannot be used, and reinstates hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras after the administration slashed funding last week.

The House bill was rolled out Friday only by Democrats, raising questions about what kind of support it will muster from House Republicans. Without significant GOP support it’s likely doomed in the GOP-controlled Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is expected to force a vote this week on the deal crafted by Shelby and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) touted the House measure on Sunday, saying it provides “strong border legislation” while also protecting “vulnerable children.”

“The legislation protects families. It does not fund the Administration’s failed mass detention policy, but, instead, funds effective, humane alternatives to detention with a proven track record of success,” Pelosi said.

She added that the House bill “places strict limits on influx shelters, protects sponsors from DHS immigration enforcement based on information collected by HHS during the vetting process and creates strong oversight by Congress including to protect unaccompanied children.”

GUTHRIE, Okla. — A man who has been a spokesman for a small group of armed civilians patrolling the U.S.-Mexico border was charged with impersonating a U.S. officer or employee.

An indictment returned Wednesday by a grand jury in New Mexico charged James Christopher Benvie, 44, of Albany, Minnesota, with two counts of false personation of a U.S. officer or employee, federal prosecutors said in a news release Friday. He faces up to three years in prison if convicted.

The news release from prosecutors does not provide details on the allegations, including what kind of officer or employee Benvie is accused of impersonating. It does say that the alleged offenses were committed in Dona Ana County, New Mexico, on April 15 and April 17. The county is along the U.S-Mexico border.

Benvie posted Facebook live videos on both April 15 and April 17 of encounters with people crossing the border.

Benvie made an initial appearance in federal court Friday in Oklahoma, after the FBI arrested him in Guthrie, Oklahoma, prosecutors said. Prosecutors said he would remain jailed until a detention hearing set for Tuesday in Oklahoma. It was unclear if he had an attorney.

Prosecutors said he’ll be transported to New Mexico for prosecution.

Benvie was a spokesman for a group called the United Constitutional Patriots before becoming a spokesman for a splinter group called the Guardian Patriots.

Armed civilian groups have been an intermittent presence on the border for years, portraying themselves as auxiliaries to the Border Patrol and operating in areas where agents are not stationed. As the videos show, U.S. authorities keep them at arm’s length while also responding to reports of people entering the country illegally.

Other videos he posted include one in March under the heading “Detained a man with a baby!” As an agent arrived, Benvie said, “The border is overrun. We’re being invaded.”

In Oklahoma, Benvie was charged with possession of a stolen vehicle and attempting to obtain money by false pretenses. Benvie’s defense attorney in that case, David Bedford of Oklahoma City, said Sunday that he could not discuss the matter.

The leader of the United Constitutional Patriots, Larry Hopkins, was arrested in April on federal weapons charges.

AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott announced on Friday that he will send another 1,000 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border while accusing Congress of failing to take action on the growing humanitarian crisis.

The governor said at an afternoon press conference among Republican leaders and Maj. Gen. Tracy Norris that additional Guard members will assist at new detention facilities in the Rio Grande Valley and El Paso and at ports of entry.

It brings the total number of Guard members on the Texas border to more than 2,000, Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said. There are also 1,400 active-duty soldiers who remain on the border, according to an Army spokesman.

“My message to them is Congress is a group of reprobates for not addressing a crisis on our border and we’re not going to stand idly by and endanger the lives and safety of the state of Texas because Congress is refusing to do its job,” Abbott said.

Those troops will help facilitate commercial traffic coming across the border and work in collaboration with Border Patrol, Abbott added. He said the federal government will fully fund the additional Guard Deployment.

Texas’ top GOP leaders renewed their attacks on Congress after reports that a Texas border facility is neglecting migrant kids. Government facilities are overcrowded, and five immigrant children have died since late last year after being detained by Customs and Border Protection. A teenage mother with a premature baby was found last week in a Texas Border Patrol processing center after being held for nine days by the government.

Abbott’s announcement came after House Democrats unveiled a $4.5 billion border measure Friday.

Democrats in Texas criticized the new deployment as reckless and unnecessary while harming the United States’ relationship with allies in Mexico and Central America.

“Deploying more National Guard to the border is a fool’s errand and a waste of millions of taxpayer dollars. … This latest action will not help to alleviate the humanitarian crisis at our southern border,” Senate Democratic Leader Jose Rodriguez of El Paso said in a statement.

Texas has used National Guard members on the border since 2014, when then-Gov. Rick Perry also deployed 1,000 guardsman. Texas has also spent billions of dollars in border security over the last decade, including assigning more state troopers to the southern region.

AJO, Ariz. — Authorities say another military service member assigned to help secure the U.S.-Mexico border has died in southern Arizona.

Officials at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colorado, said in a statement that the military service member with the Southwest Border Support Mission was found dead Sunday near Ajo, Arizona.

They say the incident is under investigation, but foul play isn’t suspected.

The name of the military service member wasn’t released.

It’s the second such death this month.

The base previously announced the June 1 death of another military service member near Nogales, Arizona, who also was assigned to the Southwest Border Support Mission.

Base officials said foul play wasn’t suspected in that death either.

President Donald Trump assigned several thousand troops to the southwest border in recent months to support the U.S. Border Patrol.

U.S. Border Patrol agents on Sunday found four bodies near the Rio Grande in southern Texas, including three small children. The dead included one toddler, two infants and an approximately 20-year-old woman, said Hidalgo County Sheriff Eddie Guerra in a late-night tweet.

The woman and children were found in an area notorious for illegal border crossings and drug trafficking, authorities said. Their cause of death is still under investigation, as are their identities.

“It is an area very well known for immigrants crossing the river,” Sgt. Frank Medrano, a spokesman for the Hidalgo County Sheriff’s Office, told The Washington Post.

The bodies were found in the Las Palomas Wildlife Management Area southeast of Anzalduas Park, a 96-acre green space dotted with Spanish moss-draped trees and picnic tables along the river in Mission, Tex.

The Monitor newspaper in McAllen reported that the bodies were located in a remote patch of land nicknamed El Rincón del Diablo, or “the Devil’s Corner.” Located on a spit where the Rio Grande loops from south to north, the area is thick with vegetation, closed to civilians and mostly owned by the federal government, Texas Monthly reported. It’s so dark at night that headlights from U.S. agents and police are often the only lights “for miles,” according to the Monitor.

“There’s a lot of brush. It’s like ranchland; there’s no difference,” Hidalgo County Constable Larry Gallardo told the Monitor.

Anzalduas Park has been a favorite spot for illegal river crossings, especially on weekends when recreational boats fill the river and it’s relatively easy to skip the short distance across from Mexico unnoticed, the Associated Press reported in 2014.

During a January visit to the area to promote his border wall project, President Trump visited the park. Flanked by GOP Texas Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, Trump examined piles of narcotics seized by Border Patrol agents. The first phase of construction on Trump’s wall project has focused on nearby areas in Hidalgo County.

Much like the rest of the Rio Grande Valley, the area has been hit by a surge of undocumented immigrants in recent months, including many Central American families seeking asylum. The waves of arrivals have overwhelmed Border Patrol facilities and led to an outcry about conditions for migrants held in detention centers.

The FBI will lead an investigation into the four bodies discovered on Sunday, Guerra said. The federal agency didn’t return a message about the case late on Sunday.

The recent cyberattack on a U.S. Customs and Border Protection subcontractor didn’t expose just the faces and license plates of thousands of U.S. travelers. It also revealed the inner workings of a complex surveillance network that border authorities have long sought to keep secret.

CBP officials have downplayed the significance of the material taken in the hack, saying only that fewer than 100,000 photos of travelers had been compromised and that none of those had been posted to the “dark Web,” the corner of the Internet where stolen documents are often traded and displayed.

That assessment, however, woefully understates the number of sensitive documents that are now freely available on the Web — so much material, totaling hundreds of gigabytes, that The Washington Post required several days of computer time to capture it all.

The documents offer an unusually intimate glimpse of the machinery that U.S. officials depend on for the constant monitoring of legal immigration through the border. They also illuminate the government’s plans for expanding its use of license plate readers and facial-recognition cameras, including such details as how many cameras are focused on which traffic lanes at some of the busiest border crossings in the world.

The hoard of hacked documents includes detailed schematics, confidential agreements, equipment lists, budget spreadsheets, internal photos and hardware blueprints for security systems.

Among potentially sensitive government material are internal Department of Homeland Security handbooks, border surveillance diagrams and dozens of signed nondisclosure agreements between the subcontractor and government authorities, as well as companies such as Microsoft and the defense-contracting giant Northrop Grumman. Microsoft and Northrop Grumman did not respond to requests for comment.

The files also offer extensive detail on — and, in some cases, a literal road map to — equipment that has been installed at U.S. military bases and the United States’ most highly trafficked border gateways.

“This is red meat for their competitors . . . [and] a whole set of domestic and foreign terrorists and criminals who might want to use that information,” said Joseph Lorenzo Hall, chief technologist at the Center for Democracy & Technology, a Washington think tank.

“This is a pretty stark view into one of the cogs of the U.S. surveillance state,” he said, adding that federal authorities “may have to change some of that operational stuff pretty quickly before people take advantage.”

Taken as a whole, the documents provide a rare look into the U.S. government’s dependence on a cluster of little-known private contractors to marshal its efforts to monitor who enters and leaves the United States.

The firm whose computer systems appear to have been breached, Perceptics, is an obscure presence in the world of federal contracting: a 40-year-old company based in a strip mall in Farragut, Tenn., a Knoxville suburb, that many privacy advocates say they had never heard of until recently. But its technology, the documents show, helps form the core of a security engine that has photographed virtually every car and truck crossing the border over the past decade in a process for which there is little public oversight.

Hackers posted the cache of documents onto the dark Web, where files are hidden from search engines and accessible only through special software, such as the Tor browser, that allow for enhanced encryption and user anonymity.

The Post obtained a link to the dark Web directory that hackers first sent to the Register, a British tech news site. Some of the documents have since been posted to the broader Internet by the group Distributed Denial of Secrets, making them more easily accessible for a mainstream audience.

The Post provided a detailed outline of the contents of this story to CBP and Perceptics officials before publication, but neither entity provided a comment. None of the documents The Post reviewed was marked classified.

The documents include detailed records about multiyear CBP contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars covering technology upgrades at all ports of entry. The records include the exact names, costs and quantities of hardware components for a number of ports, including San Ysidro, the largest port of entry between the United States and Mexico and one of the busiest border crossings in the world.

One PowerPoint presentation, dated in April, appears to outline a recent visit from CBP officials, who were offered a facility tour and hands-on experience with the license plate scanners. The presentation outlined systems that Perceptics was testing for “face capture for biometrics,” including examples of drivers’ faces being photographed and analyzed. “We overcome blocked faces,” the presentation said, a reference to faces obscured by sunglasses or car visors.

The records also include an exhaustive array of photos captured by fixed, handheld and mobile license plate readers made by Perceptics, which has said its scanners capture more than 200 million license plates a year. Many of the reports include photos taken from multiple angles of a single car, truck or motorcycle, showing the license plate, the vehicle and the driver’s unobscured face.

Contract documents from the past decade show that the role of Perceptics in federal security efforts goes beyond license plate readers to providing other equipment, such as bomb-detecting “under-vehicle surveillance systems,” to U.S. border crossings, Drug Enforcement Administration checkpoints, military bases and air stations. Funding documents suggest the company has also worked with officials in the United Arab Emirates as well as with a special-forces unit in Saudi Arabia.

Also available are internal company documents including financial statements, project budgets, internal passwords, sales and marketing material, and information about employees’ performance reviews, insurance coverage and pay.

Few specifics are known about the hack itself. The CBP acknowledged the intrusion in a statement June 10, saying it learned of the cyberattack on May 31. That statement said that no CBP networks or databases were breached and that it had “not yet verified” that the stolen data was from CBP holdings. It blamed an unnamed contractor for leaving confidential material vulnerable to attack, saying it had violated agency rules by moving copies of license plate and travel images onto its private network.

But that account leaves many questions unanswered, including how CBP first learned of the breach. Journalists with the Register published a report on the breach on May 23, eight days before CBP says it became aware of the attack. The Register report detailed the cache of documents and said it appeared to include many license plate images.

CBP officials have declined to comment further, citing an ongoing forensic investigation that “will determine the original sources of the data, and provide the details needed to ensure the appropriate response actions are taken.”

Perceptics officials also decline to comment. While CBP hasn’t confirmed that Perceptics was the company involved in the breach, the company’s name appears on many of the files, and the CBP statement sent to The Post last week included “Perceptics” in the title of the document.

A number of other questions remain. CBP said it has “removed from service all equipment related to the breach” but has offered no details, and the agency has declined to say how the hackers broke into the subcontractors’ systems, how long they had access to confidential material and whether other companies had been targeted.

In a letter last week to Department of Homeland Security leaders, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) asked what CBP had done to prevent future breaches and whether affected travelers had been notified, adding, “Anything other than full transparency is unacceptable.” In a separate letter, Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) asked whether the FBI was responding and whether travelers’ other personal information could be at risk. The agency has yet to officially respond to either letter, the senators’ representatives said. The FBI referred comment to CBP.

The breach also raises questions about how aggressively federal authorities monitor the private subcontractors they depend on to fulfill their mandate. The Trump administration has directed intense attention toward the U.S.-Mexico border, with mass arrests and border-security measures such as the “extreme vetting” initiative touted as key to enhancing national security.

But those tactics have also drawn scorn from some lawmakers, who have said the push from federal officials to gather an ever-increasing amount of data in the name of greater security is tantamount to an eternal dragnet that can put people in harm’s way.

“It is outrageous that DHS allowed individuals’ sensitive data to be compromised, but this case also highlights the risks of collecting this information in the first place,” Markey said in a statement this week. “This personal, sensitive [data] becomes a gold mine for bad actors, and the effects could be devastating for the victims of a breach.”

More than a million people cross through points of entry on the American border every day, according to CBP, including roughly 300,000 by car, truck and other passenger vehicles. To surveil them, the government relies on companies such as Perceptics, which in 2015 said it was the sole provider of license plate scanners for passenger vehicle inspections “at all land border ports of entry in the United States, Canada and at the most critical lanes in Mexico.”

DHS officials say license plate readers are an important tool for “identifying, apprehending and removing” people crossing the border illegally. But information on all vehicles crossing the border is recorded into a database made accessible to more than a dozen federal agencies, including for drivers not accused of a crime.

Vehicle information, location and time of crossing can be stored on DHS servers for up to two years, or longer if “linked to an active law enforcement investigation,” DHS officials said in 2017. License plate readers are also hidden near “known smuggling routes” and installed on CBP vehicles, allowing them to record the license plates of every vehicle that passes by.

Dave Maass, a senior investigative researcher at the digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation who has studied police surveillance, said Perceptics is “virtually unknown” and often overshadowed by Vigilant Solutions, whose license plate reader technology is used by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and local police agencies.

Both companies, he said, have benefited from an increasingly close relationship between surveillance technology vendors and the government.

“There’s this imbalance of power in making decisions, where the discussions are between law enforcement and salespeople, and policymakers and the public aren’t involved,” Maass said. “The reasons for surveillance end up being driven by profit, as opposed to the needs for public safety,” he added. “These agencies shouldn’t be collecting more data than they absolutely need . . . or can absolutely protect.”

It remains unclear who spearheaded the attack. A hacker using the pseudonym “Boris Bullet-Dodger” first contacted journalists last month and offered a list of the stolen files, and a site on the dark Web attributes the attack to Team Snatch, a cybercrime group that has also taken credit for other corporate hacks and ransom attempts.

A site on the dark Web listing Perceptics files also includes large troves of data purportedly taken from other companies, including a New York corporate consulting agency, a German computer system company and a Texas accounting firm.

The Perceptics breach, some experts said, could serve as a milestone for the potential hazards of expanded government monitoring. Rachel Levinson-Waldman, senior counsel at the think tank Brennan Center for Justice, pointed to new State Department rules that require everyone who applies for a U.S. visa to provide details of the social media accounts they used over the past five years.

“This kind of breach highlights the dangers of mass collection of sensitive data. And it should not come as a surprise,” Levinson-Waldman said. “Large-scale collection of personal information is not costless. Congress must exercise vigorous oversight and demand that agencies limit the sensitive information they collect and safeguard the data in their possession.”

CLINT, Texas — Lawmakers on Friday were calling for swift change after reports this week of more than 250 infants, children and teens being held inside a windowless Border Patrol station, struggling to care for each other with inadequate food, water and sanitation.

It’s a scene that is being repeated at other immigration facilities overwhelmed with too many migrant children and nowhere to put them.

“This facility wasn’t even on our radar before we came down here,” said law professor Warren Binford, a member of the team that interviewed dozens of children this week detained in Clint, about a half-hour drive from El Paso. Fifteen children had the flu, another 10 were quarantined.

At another Border Patrol station in McAllen, Texas, attorney Toby Gialluca said all the children she talked to last week were very sick with high fevers, coughing and wearing soiled clothes crusted with mucus and dirt after their long trip north.

“Everyone is sick. Everyone. They’re using their clothes to wipe mucus off the children, wipe vomit off the children. Most of the little children are not fully clothed,” she said.

Gialluca said migrant teens in McAllen told her they were offered frozen ham sandwiches and rotten food.

At both detention facilities, the children told attorneys that guards instructed girls as young as 8 to care for the babies and toddlers.

State and federal elected officials Friday demanded change about conditions at Clint, McAllen and other Border Patrol stations. There was plenty of angry fingerpointing as well.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott slammed Congress as “a group of reprobates” for failing to provide adequate border security funding.

“Every child who is not being taken care of adequately at the border, Congress is an accomplice to any harm they suffer,” he said.

Oregon’s Sen. Jeff Merkley pushed the Department of Homeland Security to publish a remediation plan “to immediately end these abuses.” He gave them a deadline of July 12, tweeting: “Children are being held in appalling and unacceptable conditions. Detained children are being left to care for each other – including, in one case, a two-year-old who was left with no diapers. @DHSgov needs to tell us what their plan is to fix this, NOW.”

Republican Congressman Will Hurd, whose district includes Clint, said the tragic conditions “further demonstrates the immediate need to reform asylum laws and provide supplemental funding to address the humanitarian crisis at our border.”

His Democratic counterpart, Congresswoman Veronica Escobar of El Paso, said she has already asked the Customs and Border Protection commissioner for a “full accounting” of the situation.

And Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand blamed the Trump administration’s mismanagement of the nation’s immigration system.

“This is a dark moment for our country, and history will not be kind to the perpetrators of this cruelty,” Gillibrand said. “All Americans should be alarmed and demand an end to this immediately.”

Border Patrol stations are designed to hold people for less than three days, but some children held in Clint and McAllen have been in there for weeks. Legally, migrants under 18 should be moved into Office of Refugee Resettlement care within 72 hours.

But federal officials have said they have hit a breaking point. That’s in part because over the last year, migrant children have been staying longer in federal custody than in the past, leading to a shortage of beds in facilities designed for longer-term stays.

The lawyers inspected the Border Patrol facilities as part of a Clinton-era legal agreement known as the Flores settlement that governs detention conditions for migrant children and families.

In an emailed statement Friday, Customs and Border Protection said the agency leverages its limited resources to provide “the best care possible to those in our custody, especially children.”

The statement said “our short-term holding facilities were not designed to hold vulnerable populations and we urgently need additional humanitarian funding to manage this crisis.”

In addition, the agency said all allegations of civil rights abuses or mistreatment are taken seriously and investigated.

Earlier this week, acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner John Sanders urged Congress to pass a $4.6 billion emergency funding package that includes nearly $3 billion to care for unaccompanied migrant children.

He said Customs and Border Protection stations are holding 15,000 people — more than three times their maximum capacity of 4,000.

A chaotic scene of sickness and filth is unfolding in an overcrowded border station in Clint, Tex., where hundreds of young people who have recently crossed the border are being held, according to lawyers who visited the facility this week. Some of the children have been there for nearly a month.

Children as young as 7 and 8, many of them wearing clothes caked with snot and tears, are caring for infants they’ve just met, the lawyers said. Toddlers without diapers are relieving themselves in their pants. Teenage mothers are wearing clothes stained with breast milk.

Most of the young detainees have not been able to shower or wash their clothes since they arrived at the facility, those who visited said. They have no access to toothbrushes, toothpaste or soap.

“There is a stench,” said Elora Mukherjee, director of the Immigrants’ Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, one of the lawyers who visited the facility. “The overwhelming majority of children have not bathed since they crossed the border.”

Every Friday, get an exclusive look at how one of the week’s biggest news stories on “The Daily” podcast came together.

Conditions at Customs and Border Protection facilities along the border have been an issue of increasing concern as officials warn that the recent large influx of migrant families has driven many of the facilities well past their capacities. The border station in Clint is only one of those with problems.

In May, the inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security warned of “dangerous overcrowding” among adult migrants housed at the border processing center in El Paso, with up to 900 migrants being held at a facility designed for 125. In some cases, cells designed for 35 people were holding 155 people.

“Border Patrol agents told us some of the detainees had been held in standing-room-only conditions for days or weeks,” the inspector general’s office said in its report, which noted that some detainees were observed standing on toilets in the cells “to make room and gain breathing space, thus limiting access to the toilets.”

Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas on Friday announced the deployment of 1,000 new National Guard troops to the border to help respond to the continuing new arrivals, which the governor said have amounted to more than 45,000 people from 52 countries over the past three weeks.

“The crisis at our southern border is unlike anything we’ve witnessed before and has put an enormous strain on the existing resources we have in place,” Mr. Abbott said, adding, “Congress is a group of reprobates for not addressing the crisis on our border.”

The number of border crossings appears to have slowed in recent weeks, possibly as a result of a crackdown by the Mexican government under pressure from President Trump, but the numbers remain high compared to recent years. The overcrowding crisis has been unfolding invisibly, with journalists and lawyers offered little access to fenced-off border facilities.

The reports of unsafe and unsanitary conditions at Clint and elsewhere came days after government lawyers in court argued that they should not have to provide soap or toothbrushes to children under the legal settlement that gave Ms. Mukherjee and her colleagues access to the facility in Clint. The result of a lawsuit that was first settled in 1997, the settlement set the standards for the detention, treatment and release of migrant minors taken into federal immigration custody.

Ms. Mukherjee is part of a team of lawyers who has for years under the settlement been allowed to inspect government facilities where migrant children are detained. She and her colleagues traveled to Clint this week after learning that border officials had begun detaining minors who had recently crossed the border there.

She said the conditions in Clint were the worst she had seen in any facility in her 12-year career. “So many children are sick, they have the flu, and they’re not being properly treated,” she said. The Associated Press, which first reported on conditions at the facility earlier this week, found that it was housing three infants, all with teen mothers, along with a 1-year-old, two 2-year-olds and a 3-year-old. It said there were dozens more children under the age of 12.

Ms. Mukherjee said children were being overseen by guards for Customs and Border Protection, which declined to comment for this story. She and her colleagues observed the guards wearing full uniforms — including weapons — as well as face masks to protect themselves from the unsanitary conditions.

Together, the group of six lawyers met with 60 children in Clint this week who ranged from 5 months to 17 years old. The infants were either children of minor parents, who were also detained, or had been separated from adult family members with whom they had crossed the border. The separated children were now alone, being cared for by other young detainees.

“The children are locked in their cells and cages nearly all day long,” Ms. Mukherjee said. “A few of the kids said they had some opportunities to go outside and play, but they said they can’t bring themselves to play because they are trying to stay alive in there.”

When the lawyers arrived, federal officials said that more than 350 children were detained at the facility. The officials did not disclose the facility’s capacity but said the population had exceeded it. By the time the lawyers left on Wednesday night, border officials told them that about 200 of the children had been transferred elsewhere but did not say where they had been sent.

“That’s what’s keeping me up at night,” Ms. Mukherjee said.

Some sick children were being quarantined in the facility. The lawyers were allowed to speak to the children by phone, but their requests to meet with them in person and observe the conditions they were being held in were denied.

The children told the lawyers they were given the same meals every day — instant oats for breakfast, instant noodles for lunch, a frozen burrito for dinner, along with a few cookies and juice packets — which many said was not enough. “Nearly every child I spoke with said that they were hungry,” Ms. Mukherjee said.

Another group of lawyers conducting inspections under the same federal court settlement said they discovered similar conditions earlier this month at six other facilities in Texas. At the Border Patrol’s Central Processing Center in McAllen, Tex. — often known as “Ursula” — the lawyers encountered a 17-year-old mother from Guatemala who couldn’t stand because of complications from an emergency C-section, and who was caring for a sick and dirty premature baby.

“When we encountered the baby and her mom, the baby was filthy. They wouldn’t give her any water to wash her. And I took a Kleenex and I washed around her neck black dirt,” said Hope Frye, who was leading the group, adding, “Not a little stuff — dirt.”

After government lawyers argued in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco this week that amenities such as soap and toothbrushes should not be mandated under the legal settlement originally agreed to between the government and migrant families in 1997 and amended several times since then, all three judges voiced dismay.

Among the guidelines set under the legal settlement are that facilities for children must be “safe and sanitary.”

The Justice Department’s lawyer, Sarah Fabian, argued that the settlement agreement did not specify the need to supply hygienic items and that, therefore, the government did not need to do so.

“Are you arguing seriously that you do not read the agreement as requiring you to do anything other than what I just described: cold all night long, lights on all night long, sleeping on concrete and you’ve got an aluminum foil blanket?” Judge William Fletcher asked Ms. Fabian. “I find that inconceivable that the government would say that is safe and sanitary.”

FORT SILL, Okla. — For Satsuki Ina, who was born in a Japanese-American internment camp during World War II, the news that the United States would detain undocumented migrant children at this Army base in Oklahoma felt like an unwelcome wallop from the past.

The base, Fort Sill, Okla., once held 700 Japanese-Americans who lived in tents in desertlike heat, surrounded by barbed wire and guards. They were among the more than 100,000 residents of Japanese ancestry who were rounded up by the government during the war and placed in detention camps around the country.

Ms. Ina and more than 200 demonstrators arrived at Fort Sill on Saturday to protest the government’s latest plan for the base: to house 1,400 undocumented children who arrived in the United States without a parent or a legal guardian. The protesters called the plan, which was announced this month, a return to one of the nation’s great shames.

“We are here to say, ‘Stop repeating history,’” Ms. Ina, 75, said at a news conference on Saturday, standing in front of a howitzer display outside the base.

Every Friday, get an exclusive look at how one of the week’s biggest news stories on “The Daily” podcast came together.

It will not be the first time in recent history that the base will house migrants. The Obama administration held several thousand immigrant children at Fort Sill in 2014. Ms. Ina protested then, too.

But the announcement this month came amid sharply escalating rhetoric over the country’s immigration policies, and as the country’s network of detention facilities struggles to keep up with an influx of new arrivals. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, ignited a furor and took criticism from some members in her own party this past week when she referred to migrant detention centers as concentration camps.

Regardless of how they are characterized, the facilities have been stretched thin. Many are operating well past their capacities and reports of grim and dangerous conditions have roiled an already tense debate. The Trump administration has tried a number of measures to respond to the migrant surge, from building tent cities in Texas to enacting family separation policies and rules meant to deter new asylum seekers.

Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma argued that the protesters were misreading the government’s intentions.

“The whole focus on ‘these are concentration camps’ or ‘these are like internment camps’ — they are clearly not,” Mr. Lankford, a Republican, said. “They are trying to manage a humanitarian issue.”

He said he had visited Fort Sill when the Obama administration had detained migrant children there. “It was extremely well done, and they were extremely well cared for,” he said.

The Health and Human Services Department, which manages the Office of Refugee Resettlement, said that the plan for Fort Sill was only temporary, and that it would relieve pressure on an overcrowded system.

Still, turning to this particular base — which is home to the Army’s main artillery school, but is perhaps more famous for the people it once imprisoned — has touched a nerve.

In the 19th century, the Army held hundreds of Chiricahua Apache warriors who surrendered in the conflicts between Native Americans and the United States; Geronimo was one of them and is buried at the base. During World War II, a distraught Japanese detainee, Kanesaburo Oshima, was fatally shot there as he tried to climb the barb-wire fence, becoming a symbol of a mass exclusion program that the United States has formally apologized for in 1988.

For descendants of the Japanese-Americans and the Native Americans who knew Fort Sill as a prison, not the verdant military training ground and national landmark it is today, the government’s new plan raised bitter questions about whether the nation had truly reckoned with its darker past. After the news conference on Saturday, the protesters moved to a nearby park when the police ordered them to leave the base.

“My grandfather was imprisoned on Fort Sill for 20 years with Geronimo,” said Jeff Haozous, 57, a spokesman for the Fort Sill Apache tribe who stood in the sweltering heat at the protest. The one condition Geronimo demanded for surrender, he added, “was to keep the families together. The one promise they kept was they kept the families together.”

A spokesman for the Defense Department said that the Health and Human Services Department, not the Army, would manage the detention facility, which would be designed to be appropriate for children. The active military units on site would only provide security, he added.

But for Ms. Ina and others at the protest — where they shouted “No more concentration camps!” and “Reunification, not separation!” — there were still far too many unsettling parallels between past and present.

“There are many similarities that resonate through our own experiences,” Ms. Ina said. “Imprisoning children without meeting certain standards of care. We had family separation and indefinite detention. We suffered long-term health problems and mental health problems long afterward.”

[Video

The government went to federal court this week to argue that it shouldn’t be required to give detained migrant children toothbrushes, soap, towels, showers or even half a night’s sleep inside Border Patrol detention facilities.

The position bewildered a panel of three judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Tuesday, who questioned whether government lawyers sincerely believed they could describe the temporary detention facilities as “safe and sanitary” if children weren’t provided adequate toiletries and sleeping conditions. One circuit judge said it struck him as “inconceivable.”

“To me it’s more like it’s within everybody’s common understanding: If you don’t have a toothbrush, if you don’t have soap, if you don’t have a blanket, it’s not safe and sanitary,” Senior U.S. Circuit Judge A. Wallace Tashima told Justice Department lawyer Sarah Fabian. “Wouldn’t everybody agree to that? Would you agree to that?”

Fabian said she thought it was fair to say “those things may be” part of the definition of safe and sanitary.

“What are you saying, ‘may be?’” Tashima shot back. “You mean, there’s circumstances when a person doesn’t need to have a toothbrush, toothpaste and soap? For days?”

The government was in court to appeal a 2017 ruling finding that child migrants and their parents were detained in dirty, crowded, bitingly cold conditions inside U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities along the southern border. Migrants are first taken to those facilities after they are apprehended at the border.

But although the conditions that were the subject of the 2017 ruling date back to the Obama administration, the testy court exchange comes as the Trump administration confronts an unprecedented migrant surge that has overwhelmed facilities and caused serious health and safety risks within them. At least six child migrants have died since September, mostly after falling ill at detention facilities in the Rio Grande Valley. In this case, the Trump administration has continued to fight the 2017 ruling that sought to remedy deplorable conditions within these same facilities, at times blaming Congress for not providing enough resources to address the crisis.

U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee had found that migrants in Rio Grande Valley facilities were hungry, with some eating only “sandwiches of two pieces of dry bread and one slice of ham.” They were thirsty, with up to 20 migrants sharing the same cup to drink from the water cooler. They were embarrassed to use a toilet in front of 50 other people and they couldn’t take a shower or brush their teeth or even wash their hands with soap and dry them with a towel, the judge found. At night, they couldn’t sleep. The lights were left on, as they shivered beneath an aluminum blanket on the concrete floor, the judge found.

Gee ruled in June 2017 that these Obama-era conditions violated a 1997 settlement agreement requiring that immigrant children in the government’s custody be housed in “safe and sanitary” conditions, and that the government maintain “concern for the particular vulnerability of minors.”

But the Trump administration protested. The 1997 consent decree, known as the Flores Settlement Agreement, didn’t say anything about providing a “toothbrush,” “towels,” “dry clothing,” “soap,” or even “sleep,” the administration has argued.

Therefore, the government now reasons, they shouldn’t be found in violation of the “safe and sanitary” requirement for not providing those necessities.

Fabian did not get the first word as she prepared to make this portion of her argument on Tuesday. Before she began, U.S. Circuit Judge Marsha Berzon appeared concerned that Fabian may be wasting the judges’ time.

“Are you really going to stand up and tell us that being able to sleep isn’t a question of safe and sanitary conditions?” Berzon asked.

Fabian said she wanted to focus on the “language” in the settlement agreement, arguing that the judge was wrong to order the government to provide items not specifically named in the binding law. The worry was that “any number of things” might fall within the category of “safe and sanitary,” Fabian said. Essentially, how was the government supposed to know when it was in violation of such vague terms?

Perhaps it is “relatively obvious,” offered U.S. Circuit Judge William Fletcher.

“And [it’s] at least obvious enough so that if you’re putting people into a crowded room to sleep on a concrete floor with an aluminum foil blanket on top of them, that doesn’t comply with the agreement,” he said. “I mean, it may be that they don’t get super-thread-count Egyptian linens. I get that. But the testimony that the district court believed was, it’s really cold — in fact, it gets colder when we complain about it being cold. We’re forced to sleep crowded with the lights on all night long.”

“No one would argue that this is safe and sanitary,” he said. “Or at least I don’t think that you’re arguing that. Are you?”

Fabian conceded that arguing about proper sleeping conditions was the most complex side of her argument. So Berzon asked, “What is your strongest argument then?”

Fabian turned to the problem of “enumerating certain hygiene items.”

“Again,” Fletcher said. “It wasn’t perfume soap. It was soap. It wasn’t high-class mild soap. It was soap. And that sounds like it [falls in the category] of safe and sanitary. Are you disagreeing with that?”

On it went, before Fletcher agreed with Tashima’s interpretation of her argument that the government thinks “safe and sanitary” is “so vague that it’s almost unenforceable.”

Neither Fabian nor the judges addressed whether the government thinks conditions have improved at its Rio Grande Valley detention facilities since the 2017 ruling. But recent reports, as well as admissions by administration officials, suggest conditions haven’t improved as the immigration system is stretched at its seams.

Acting Homeland Security secretary Kevin McAleenan testified at a Senate Judiciary Hearing last week, described conditions as “inappropriate,” and said the vast majority of migrants apprehended at the border are children and families.

Last month, in the largest temporary detention center in McAllen, Tex., CBP had to quarantine 32 migrants who were diagnosed with the flu, soon after a 16-year-old boy from Guatemala died. He had been diagnosed with the flu at the same overcrowded facility, where dozens of migrants are held behind chain-link fences in pens, sleeping on the concrete floor with aluminum-foil blankets.

Elsewhere, conditions are still bad. A recent internal DHS report found “egregious violations of detention standards” at facilities in Adelanto, Calif., and Essex County, N.J. The violations included expired food, nooses found in cells and bathrooms that were “dilapidated and moldy.”

“At one facility, detainees were not provided appropriate clothing and hygiene items to ensure they could properly care for themselves,” DHS’s Office of the Inspector General wrote in the inspection report.

At Tuesday’s hearing, the plaintiffs’ attorney, Peter Schey, offered definitions from Webster’s dictionary to aid judges in assessing the government’s arguments about whether certain hygiene products fell under “safe and sanitary.”

Schey said, “Certainly the Border Patrol facilities are secure. But they’re not safe, and they’re not sanitary.”

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) said Sunday that conditions in migrant detention facilities in the Lone Star State were the “worst” he’s ever seen.

“I’ve been down there throughout my 15 years in Congress and before that, as a federal prosecutor. This is the worst I’ve ever seen it, and it has to be taken care of,” McCaul said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

McCaul also expressed agreement with Vice President Mike Pence, who, during an earlier appearance on the show, said dangerous, unsanitary conditions in detention facilities were the fault of congressional inaction.

“I think at a minimum … we have to pass humanitarian aid to take care of these children,” McCaul told CBS’s Margaret Brennan.

He added that while he would prefer to tie humanitarian aid to other border security measures, “if my choice on the minority side is to vote up or down on a compassionate, humanitarian package, that’s what I’m going to do because it’s the right thing to do.”

McCaul’s comments came in the wake of reports that four toddlers were sent to the hospital last week after being held at a detention facility.

House Armed Services Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.), who appeared on the CBS program before McCaul, said resolving immigration issues would require a “humane” approach that Democrats do not trust President Trump to implement.

“There is a crisis on the border, no question. The president’s policies have contributed to that crisis,” Smith said.

From sleeping on concrete floors with the lights on 24 hours a day to no access to soap or basic hygiene, migrant children in at least two U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities face conditions one doctor described as comparable to “torture facilities.”

The disturbing, first-hand account of the conditions were observed by lawyers and a board-certified physician in visits last week to border patrol holding facilities in Clint, Texas, and McAllen, a city in the southern part of the state.

The descriptions paint a bleak image of horrific conditions for children, the youngest of whom is 2 1/2 months old.

“The conditions within which they are held could be compared to torture facilities,” the physician, Dolly Lucio Sevier, wrote in a medical declaration obtained exclusively by ABC News.

Lucio Sevier, who works in private practice in the area, was granted access to the Ursula facility in McAllen, which is the largest CBP detention center in the country, after lawyers found out about a flu outbreak there that sent five infants to the neonatal intensive care unit.

After assessing 39 children under the age of 18, she described conditions for unaccompanied minors at the McAllen facility as including “extreme cold temperatures, lights on 24 hours a day, no adequate access to medical care, basic sanitation, water, or adequate food.”

All the children who were seen showed evidence of trauma, Lucio Sevier reported, and the teens spoke of having no access to hand washing during their entire time in custody. She compared it to being “tantamount to intentionally causing the spread of disease.”

In an interview with ABC News, Lucio Sevier said the facility “felt worse than jail.”

“It just felt, you know, lawless,” she said. “I mean, imagine your own children there. I can’t imagine my child being there and not being broken.”

Conditions for infants were even more appalling, according to the medical declaration. Many teen mothers in custody described not having the ability to wash their children’s bottle.

And children who were older than 6 months were not provided age-appropriate meal options, including no pureed foods necessary for a child’s development, Lucio Sevier reported.

“To deny parents the ability to wash their infant’s bottles is unconscionable and could be considered intentional mental and emotional abuse,” she wrote.

The attorneys who represent the children threatened to sue the government if it denied a visit from a physician. They are part of a team working under the Flores settlement agreement, a 1997 ruling that stipulated detention standards for unaccompanied minors, including being held for less than 72 hours and in the “least restrictive setting appropriate to the child’s age and special needs.”

As part of that ruling, the lawyers, who are part of a class action lawsuit, represent all children in custody and, as such, are allowed to visit and interview them.

Lucio Sevier has no connection to the lawyers aside from their request for a physician to be granted access. The legal team, also from the Flores settlement agreement group, had negotiated access to the Clint facility in advance and officials from CBP knew of their pending arrival for weeks.

The alleged conditions documented at the facilities follow a Homeland Security inspector general report that found “dangerous overcrowding” and unsanitary conditions at a different CBP facility in El Paso, Texas, where hundreds more migrants were being housed than the center was designed to hold.

The El Paso Del Norte Processing Center housed as many as 900 migrant detainees earlier this month despite only having a recommended capacity for 125.

The reports come as President Donald Trump continues to make immigration a staple of his administration and a key issue in his re-election bid. After threatening to deport more than 2,000 undocumented immigrants, and then extending the deadline by two weeks, the president on Sunday tweeted his intention to “fix the Southern Border.”

Later in the day, the president blamed his predecessor for implementing the policy of separating migrant. Trump said he ended the policy, too.

“You know, under President Obama you had separation. I was the one that ended it,” he told reporters.

The Obama administration’s policy only separated families in rare circumstances when the child’s safety might be at risk.

Last April, the Trump administration and his attorney general at the time, Jeff Sessions, enacted a “zero-tolerance” approach that called for stepped-up prosecutions of any adult crossing the border illegally. As a result, 2,700 children were separated from their families in a matter of weeks.

More than a year later, though, documents from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services — obtained by immigration rights groups and the Houston Chronicle through a Freedom of Information Act request — show family separations are still happening, even after a court ordered children to be reunited with their parents.

The documents showed more than 700 children were separated from parents between last June and May, often with questionable legal justification.

The CBP, however, said in a statement it has limited resources and is leveraging all of them to “provide the best care possible to those in our custody, especially children.”

“As [Department of Homeland Security] and CBP leadership have noted numerous times, our short-term holding facilities were not designed to hold vulnerable populations and we urgently need additional humanitarian funding to manage this crisis,” the statement read. “CBP works closely with our partners at the Department of Health and Human Services to transfer unaccompanied children to their custody as soon as placement is identified, and as quickly and expeditiously as possible to ensure proper care.

“All allegations of civil rights abuses or mistreatment in CBP detention are taken seriously and investigated to the fullest extent possible,” the statement continued.

A U.S. government official added that the immigration system is “clearly broken,” but CBP is doing everything it can to “provide appropriate care for children in custody, even though they were never meant to.”

“The acting secretary and acting commissioner have been warning about these dire circumstances for months,” the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, added. “More must be done to confront this humanitarian crisis and the requested supplemental funding is critical to mitigating it.”

The source added that transferring the children to the custody of the Health and Human Services department is a “top CBP priority.”

“Without a specific allegation of separating family members that can be looked into, CBP wouldn’t and shouldn’t provide additional details without knowing the facts and circumstances of individual cases,” the official added.

As for the conditions at detention facilities, lawyers for the Trump administration last week argued that providing basic necessities, like soap, was not a requirement of the Flores agreement. Three judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals repeatedly asked if the lawyers if they were arguing that “safe and sanitary” did not include the ability to sleep soundly or use soap.

In Congress, the Senate Appropriations Committee last week passed, almost unanimously, a $4.6 billion spending bill that included $2.9 billion for HHS programs for unaccompanied children, and it is expected to pass the full Senate this week.

That bill also includes strict regulations that the funds may not used for Trump’s proposed border wall.

But House Democrats have crafted their own version of the legislation, which includes enhanced standards at detention facilities.

Leadership in each chamber must then decide on a path forward to reconcile the differences, with lawmakers preparing to leave for a week-long July Fourth recess by Friday.

Trump said despite Democrats not “even approving giving us money,” his administration is doing a “fantastic job under the circumstances.”

“Where is the money?” he asked. “You know what? The Democrats are holding up the humanitarian aid.”

Wherever the blame lies, the lawyers with the Flores agreement team said present-day conditions at the facilities need urgent attention. At the Clint facility, the environment was just as bad as they were at the McAllen site, the lawyers said.

The Associated Press first reported on the alleged neglect at the Clint facility, reporting ABC News later confirmed.

All of the detainees had been in custody longer than the 72 hours permitted for unaccompanied minors under the Flores agreement. The lengths of stay ranged from four days to 24 days.

“We wanted to try and find out what was happening down there and why these children were dying at a rate that we’ve never seen before,” said Warren Binford, a law professor at Willamette University who helped interview the children at the Clint border patrol facility.

On the day they arrived, they witnessed the Clint facility was home to 351 children — most from the Northern Triangle countries of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador. More than 100 were under the age of 13, while 18 children were 4 years old or younger, including the youngest, a 4 1/2-month-old, the lawyers found.

Like the McAllen facility, many were held for three weeks or longer, the lawyers learned from the children. Binford added the children who were old enough explained they arrived with a family member or planned to join a parent in the U.S. and all were lawfully entering and claiming asylum.

A lawyer who works with the Flores team told ABC News many children had parents living in the U.S. with whom they wanted to be reunited; others said they had been separated from their parents at the border.

The administration has maintained that separation only occurs in situations in which a family member is dangerous or cannot be confirmed to be the legal guardian.

At the Clint facility, Binford described conditions that included infants and toddlers sleeping on concrete floors, a lice outbreak that led to guards providing two lice combs to 20 children to “work it out,” guards punishing the children by taking away sleeping mats and blankets, and guards creating a “child boss” to help keep the other kids in line by rewarding them with extra food.

She said one of the most striking examples was a 2-year-old brought to her with no diaper and being cared for by “several other little girls.”

“When I asked where his diapers were and she looked down and said, ‘He doesn’t need them,’ and then he immediately peed in his pants right there on the conference chair and started crying,” Binford said. “So children are being required to care for other very young children and they are simply not prepared to do that.”

The 4-year-old sat in the defendant’s chair in front of a Michigan immigration judge last month, her chubby legs dangling inches from the floor. She chatted with the jurist through an interpreter about Rapunzel. Then, as she had practiced with her lawyer, she said she wanted to be with her father, who was 1,600 miles away in a Laredo federal detention center and about to be deported to El Salvador.

Father and daughter had not seen each other since March, when federal immigration agents took Briana after detaining them together for about eight days in an overcrowded Border Patrol processing center in McAllen. The agents told 23-year-old Wilber Castillo that his child would go to a cousin in California, but when he desperately called the relative, Briana wasn’t there. No one could tell him where she was.

It wasn’t until weeks later that Castillo discovered his daughter was with foster parents in Michigan — a state he had never heard of — and could arrange to speak to her by phone. By then, the young father had been imprisoned for about 25 days in a Border Patrol facility without any formal charges, according to testimony in federal court. The facts of the case enraged the McAllen district judge overseeing Castillo’s punishment for crossing illegally into Texas after having been deported five years ago, when he was 18.

“Have we forgotten something about parents’ rights?” Judge Ricardo Hinojosa asked the court. “If this was an American in some other country, we would be quite shocked.”

A year has passed since President Donald Trump signed an executive order ostensibly ending his controversial policy of broadly separating immigrant families at the southern border and a federal judge ordered the government to reunify more than 2,800 children it had removed from their parents. The judge allowed the government to continue separating families if the parent posed a danger to the child or had a serious criminal record or gang affiliation. But no guidelines were imposed.

As a result, hundreds continue to be removed from their parents — often, advocates say, for unclear reasons or with little apparent justification.

More than 700 children were taken from their parents or, in a few cases, from other relatives between June 2018 and May 2019, according to the most recent data the government provided to the American Civil Liberties Union in the ongoing federal court case overseeing family separations. They are placed in federal shelters or with foster parents until they can be reunified or resettled with relatives or sponsors. Sometimes they languish for months in federal care.

“In the last few months these types of separations have risen drastically,” said Lee Gelernt, lead lawyer for the ACLU case. “The government is trying to drive a truck through what was supposed to be a very narrow exception.”

He said many cases involve children as young as toddlers whose parents are accused of criminal history as minor as a traffic violation.

“The government is unilaterally deciding parents are a danger and then separating them without informing the children’s facilities that the child has been separated, without telling the parent the basis of the separation, and without affording any due process to the family to contest the separation,” Gelernt said.

If the government doesn’t agree to change that practice, he said the ACLU would challenge it in court this summer.

A Customs and Border Protection spokesman declined to comment, citing the pending ACLU litigation. The Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond for this story.

Under the administration’s original policy, most children were removed because their parents were prosecuted under “zero tolerance” for crossing the border illegally, usually a misdemeanor with little or no jail time. Children cannot be kept in prison, but once families were separated, it was difficult to reunite them as the government at the time had no tracking system in place. Nearly 500 parents were deported without their children, and court-mandated reunification efforts are ongoing a year later.

The judge has also asked the government to locate potentially thousands more children who may have been separated after a pilot program in the El Paso area and before the policy officially went into effect last spring.

Since the court ordered that the government reunite parents and children immediately after adults served any criminal sentence, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has appeared to prosecute far fewer parents traveling with their children for entering illegally. Instead the government has ramped up separations by alleging the child could be at risk or the parent is a criminal.

According to federal data released to the Houston Chronicle by the Office of Refugee Resettlement, officials listed a parent’s gang membership or criminal history as the reason for separating 65 percent of about 400 children between the June 20 executive order and March 2019. In only 3 percent of cases, according to that data, were children described as separated because of questions about the parent’s relationship to the child or issues of child safety. The remainder were mostly removed after parents were prosecuted for entering illegally or returning after being deported.

ORR declined to comment on its data, citing the ACLU litigation.

Attorneys and advocates handling such cases said the government often uses claims that would not be permitted to remove American children from their parents — relying on minor crimes, questionable accusations of gang membership, and unverified safety concerns. They say the process needs far more oversight, and that there is no systematic way to inform advocates and attorneys that a separation has taken place.

“When it happened under prior administrations there were usually strong indicators of real and legitimate child welfare concerns,” said Lisa Koop, associate director of legal services for the National Immigrant Justice Center, which is representing several separated parents. “What we’re seeing right now is of an entirely different character. These are gratuitous separations.”

Golden McCarthy, an attorney with the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project in Arizona, said the number of separated children in shelters has been rising steadily since January.

“They are carving out the judge’s exceptions to separate more children,” she said.

MEXICO CITY — U.S.-bound asylum seekers will be sent back to at least two additional Mexican border cities later this week to wait for their claims to be processed, officials said, with one of the cities in a region that is among Mexico’s most chaotic and violent.

The policy known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), or Remain in Mexico, will be implemented later this week in Nuevo Laredo in the northern state of Tamaulipas, which borders Texas, said two Mexican officials with knowledge of the matter, who declined to be identified.

Tamaulipas is home to the Gulf and Zeta cartels that include people-smuggling and kidnapping among their criminal activities.

One of the Mexican officials said the policy would also be expanded to San Luis Rio Colorado in the northern state of Sonora, which borders Arizona. Mexican newspaper Reforma reported immigration official Julio César Navarro Contreras as saying San Luis Rio Colorado was on the list.

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

The latest expansion follows high-stakes negotiations to fend off trade tariffs.

U.S. President Donald Trump had threatened the tariffs to push Mexico to do more to stop migrants from Central America and beyond from reaching U.S. soil, after a sharp spike in numbers this year.

As part of the deal struck earlier this month to remove the tariff threat, Mexico agreed for MPP to apply to the whole length of the border, but capacity issues on both sides have slowed implementation.

Under the deal, Mexico has also deployed a new militarized National Guard police force to detain migrants near the country’s northern and southern borders.

MPP started in January and is already functioning in Mexicali and Tijuana in Baja California, which borders California, and Ciudad Juarez in Chihuahua, which borders New Mexico and Texas.

Since the tariff deal, MPP has been applied to more nationalities, including Cubans, and the number of people being returned has been increased to 500 from 100 a day in Juarez.

A representative for Mexico’s national institute for migration said it had received no official confirmation for when and how the policy would be further expanded.

A U.S. Department of Homeland Security official said the department “was not in a position to confirm new locations.”

Rights groups have sued the Trump administration over the policy, which they argue leaves vulnerable people facing dangers in Mexican border towns similar to those they fled in their home countries.

In April, a federal judge in California ruled MPP likely violated U.S. immigration law. In May, however, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the program to continue while the legal challenge proceeds.

VIOLENCE

Tamaulipas suffers from high levels of killings and kidnapping, as powerful gangs battle over drug and people-smuggling routes.

The eastern part of the state, bordering the Texas cities of McAllen and Brownsville, is the busiest crossing for families and individuals from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador and is also considered the most dangerous.

Nuevo Laredo, however, sees relatively low traffic of families seeking asylum, U.S. Customs and Border Protection figures show.

Other officials with knowledge of the talks between Mexico and the United States say the towns of Nogales and Brownsville-Matamoros have been mentioned in discussions.

Remain in Mexico is aimed at dissuading asylum seekers from applying for refuge in the United States. The Trump administration says many claims are false, and that claimants will desist once they realize they must stay in Mexico for extended periods.

Since it was implemented, nearly 14,000 asylum seekers have been sent to Mexico under the program.

EL PASO, TEXAS/TAOS, N.M. — The United States is more than doubling the number of asylum seekers it returns to Mexico in one city and adding groups like Cubans as it rapidly expands a policy to make migrants wait out claims south of the border, Mexican and U.S. officials said.

The policy, known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), is being applied to all Spanish-speaking asylum seekers, other than Mexicans, at three U.S.-Mexico border crossings, said a U.S. government official familiar with the program, who asked not to be named.

The Trump administration plans to expand the program, which faces court challenges, across the border to act as a deterrent to frivolous asylum claims during a surge in Central American migrant families.

A U.S. Department of Homeland Security official said the administration was considering building temporary immigration courts along the border to process MPP returnees.

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

The MPP expansion follows Mexico’s agreement earlier this month to receive thousands more migrants under the program.

As of June 19, according to Mexican officials, 13,987 people had been returned to Mexico under MPP.

In its first months, the policy primarily applied to Central American migrants, but as of Monday the United States began applying it to Spanish speakers more broadly, including Cubans, said Rogelio Pinal, a municipal official in Juarez, Mexico.

Cubans, a political force in U.S. election swing state Florida, have a history of being welcomed in the United States.

Pinal said his office was told returns from El Paso to Juarez would increase to 500 per day from around 200.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the government was “actively pursuing expansion plans across the board to include all individuals, unless specifically exempted,” in MPP returns.

The U.S. official said MPP would be expanded to cities in Arizona and south Texas, which could include Brownsville. A Mexican official confirmed new locations would include Brownsville.

Migrant advocates have raised concerns that asylum seekers have little access to legal counsel and are vulnerable in Mexican border cities, which have some of the highest homicide rates in the world.

Ruben Garcia, who runs El Paso’s largest migrant shelter, said there had been a sharp fall in the number of migrants released into the United States by U.S. authorities.

Garcia said reduced migration during summer heat played a role, but tighter immigration enforcement in Mexico and the MPP program were driving forces in the drop to around 125 releases per day from up to 700 three weeks ago.

ARRIAGA, Mexico — Authorities reinforced efforts over the weekend to deter Central Americans and others from crossing Mexico to reach the United States, detaining migrants in the south and stationing National Guardsmen along the Rio Grande in the north.

In Arriaga, a town in the southern state of Chiapas, The Associated Press saw about 100 migrants bused to detention Sunday, while Milenio TV reported that 146 more were pulled from a private home in the central state of Queretaro and more than 100 were taken away from a hotel in the Gulf state of Veracruz.

Pressured by the U.S., Mexico’s government has deployed some 6,000 agents of the National Guard, its new militarized policing force, along its southern and northern borders this month.

In Ciudad Juarez, just south of El Paso, Texas, National Guardsmen turned back migrants trying to cross the border over the weekend. The guardsmen patrolled along the Rio Grande with assault rifles.

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

“The function of these brigades is to try to educate and inhibit people who are at risk,” said Luis Mario Dena Torres, representative of the Chihuahua state governor in Ciudad Juarez.

Many of the National Guardsmen are soldiers and police officers who now wear black armbands indicating they are part of the National Guard.

Some Mexicans worry that the increased enforcement is an overreach.

“The National Guard, in theory, shouldn’t be repressing those who want to cross to the United States,” said Isabel Sanchez, coordinator for a Ciudad Juarez civic group concerned with security and justice.

More broadly, however, stiffer immigration enforcement has popular support in Mexico. More than half the Mexicans surveyed by the newspaper El Universal earlier in June said that authorities should not allow migrants to enter the country and that those found traveling through Mexico without visas should be deported.

Residents of Arriaga expressed a mixture of concern for the migrants they have grown accustomed to hosting and relief that officials are looking to get a better handle on migrant flows.

“As a resident, sometimes you have distrust because with the necessity that they have, they could try to rob or do something to you,” said Rogelio Perez, an accountant. “They’re human beings and they need help, but Mexico can barely employ Mexicans.”

Migrants have long congregated in Arriaga to hop on a freight train known as “The Beast.” Migrants would pile onto train cars, sometimes being maimed or killed when they fell off. Authorities started pulling migrants off the train in mid-2014, under pressure to reduce flows to the U.S.

Still, Arriaga remains a strategic point on the migrant trail. Over the weekend, there were no migrants riding atop the trains that pulled in and out of town.

Since January, Mexico has detained more than 74,000 migrants and deported over 53,000, according to the latest figures available. Those numbers are expected to rise when June figures are released.

Luis Arbey Perez, a civil rights advocate, corroborated that five immigration vans carried about 100 migrants from Arriaga to the southern border with Guatemala early Sunday. He worries that the National Guard deployment, together with heightened inspections of passenger vehicles, will push migrants into more dangerous modes of travel.

“There is more persecution, more detentions, but the people keep coming,” he said. “What rises is the risk.”

Dozens of families have been found packed tight into semi-trailers in recent weeks, while travel in secret compartments of vehicles is also common. Mexican authorities have also broken up recent caravans of more than 100 migrants traveling in packs for greater safety.

Last week, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador instructed private bus companies to begin checking identifications of those buying bus tickets, in an effort to crackdown on human smuggling.

Significant numbers of migrants appear to still be crossing into Mexico, but they are traveling in smaller groups and under the radar.

Elias Camacho, coordinator of the 84-bed Hogar de la Misericordia migrant shelter in Arriaga, said that on average at least 15 migrants show up each day at his shelter. He said private homes in the town also take in migrants.

Honduran migrant Edwin Cruz, 22, said conditions in his country will continue to propel Hondurans north.

At least three people were killed in protests across Honduras last week that demanded the resignation of Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández. Violence, gang threats and poverty plague the country.

Cruz said he spotted at least nine checkpoints on his way north from Mexico’s border with Guatemala. To avoid detection, he crossed through mountains and swamp rather than more visible highways. He also said he traveled by taxi and train.

“It has become more complicated, but the necessities of the countries are increasing as well. So we prefer to take the risk than to stay there,” said Cruz, who hoped to make it to Tennessee.

TAPACHULA, Mexico — Mexico has completed its deployment of 6,000 National Guard agents to help control the flow of migrants headed toward the U.S. and filled 650 immigration agency posts to regulate border crossings, the government said Friday.

The announcement by foreign minister Marcelo Ebrard comes as Mexico puts into effect a deal on irregular immigration reached with Washington to head off stiff tariffs that President Donald Trump threatened to slap on all imports from Mexico.

A Mexican official who was not authorized to speak about the deployment and requested anonymity said the National Guard agents have not been visible in large contingents because they are spread along the southern border that stretches more than 600 miles (1,000 kilometers) and as well as up Mexico’s southern isthmus. They were also deployed to remote areas to target human smugglers, the official said.

The Associated Press witnessed an operation near the town of Comitán last weekend, when members of the new militarized policing force patrolled dirt roads through jungle in the dark.

The National Guard has not reappeared on the banks of the Suchiate river across from Guatemala in Ciudad Hidalgo since early in the week. Migrants continued crossing on rafts early Friday morning. National Guard agents have been spotted intermittently in southern states supporting immigration officials at highway checkpoints.

On Friday, checkpoints near Tapachula on the main highway connecting Mexico to Guatemala operated as they have been in recent weeks. Immigration officials stopped public transport vans and taxis to ask passengers for their documents while the National Guard or military police looked on.

While the bulk of the migrant traffic has been Central Americans, authorities find people from all over the world.

At a checkpoint on the outskirts of Tapachula on Friday, more than 20 migrants from Pakistan, India and Bangladesh were detained.

Last weekend, authorities found nearly 800 migrants inside four semi-trailers traveling through the Gulf coast state of Veracruz. Officials have said they want to focus efforts on disrupting migrant smuggling operations.

Since January, Mexico has detained more than 74,000 migrants and deported over 53,000, according to the latest figures available. That is expected to rise when June numbers are released.

UNICEF executive director Henrietta Fore said in a statement following a three-day visit to Mexico that 15,500 migrant minors were registered by Mexican migration authorities between January and April, mostly from Central America’s Northern Triangle countries. That was a 50% increase over the same period last year.

“Unless the root causes of these migration flows are addressed, the situation is unlikely to change,” she said, citing poverty, violence, gang extortion and death threats.

TAPACHULA, Mexico — Mexico’s immigration centers are becoming increasingly squalid and overcrowded as authorities step up the detention of migrants headed for the United States, with inmates languishing for weeks amid medical neglect, according to detainees, lawyers and rights groups.

Reuters spoke to more than a dozen recent detainees at the Siglo XXI detention center, the country’s largest. They described being held in the facility in Chiapas state on Mexico’s southern border for long periods without information about their cases.

The detainees reported severe overcrowding, sparse water and food, and limited healthcare.

Their accounts were supported by two lawyers representing 26 other inmates, as well as the migration ombudsman at Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission and reports from two migrant rights groups: Fray Matias de Cordova and the Human Rights Observation Mission for the Refugee and Humanitarian Crisis in Southeast Mexico, a collective of 24 aid groups.

Twelve of the detainees told Reuters they were held for at least three weeks in the center, meant to hold people for a maximum of 15 days until their cases are processed.

Subscribe for original insights, commentary and discussions on the major news stories of the week, from columnists Max Fisher and Amanda Taub.

Mexico’s National Immigration Institute (INM), which runs Siglo XXI, did not respond to repeated requests for comment on conditions at the center.

Asked about the extended detentions, an INM official, who asked not to be identified, said migrant cases were complex and needed to be analyzed on an individual basis.

Guards at the gates of the center declined to answer questions or to allow a Reuters reporter to speak with its director.

DETENTION NUMBERS TRIPLE

U.S. President Donald Trump made a crackdown on illegal migration the flagship policy of his 2016 election campaign. Struggling to get the funds from Congress to build a border wall, and with a significant uptick in Central Americans seeking asylum, he threatened trade tariffs unless Mexico plugged leaks south of the U.S. border.

In response, Mexico has increased detentions. During the first five months of this year, it has tripled the number of migrants it detained monthly to reach 23,679 in May, according to unpublished government data seen by Reuters.

That has strained its underfunded network of centers, which already had a reputation for poor conditions.

Foreigners stopped by Mexican authorities without valid documents can be held in detention while they await transit visas or regularization of their situation. Edgar Corzo, the migration ombudsman, said that process is meant to take no more than 15 days.

Thousands have passed this year through the gates of Siglo XXI, which Corzo and the migrant rights groups said had been at or near double its 970-person capacity for months.

All the people spoken to for this story said detainees slept on thin mattresses or none at all in corridors and bathrooms because of lack of space in cells.

Corzo said that INM had failed to alleviate the overcrowding despite repeated requests from the human rights commission, which he attributed partly to a lack of resources.

Inmates said children older than 13 years were separated from parents and lights were kept on all night, disrupting sleep – claims supported by a May 31 report from the migrant aid collective and the migration rights ombudsman.

They also told Reuters about unsanitary conditions that led to mass outbreaks of diarrhea among child detainees.

OVERFLOWING TOILETS

Hundreds of detainees have broken out of Siglo XXI in recent weeks after disturbances that inmates told Reuters were triggered by squalid conditions. INM acknowledged one breakout.

Photographs and videos shared with Reuters by one inmate at Siglo XXI purported to show lavatories blocked and overflowing with filth as well as dozens of semi-naked men sprawled on black mattresses in a corridor.

Reuters was not able to confirm their accuracy.

Mavi Cruz Reyes, spokeswoman for Fray Matias de Cordova, said the group has documented multiple cases of detention lasting weeks at Siglo XXI. Detainees frequently are given no access to information about why they are detained, the group said.

The rights ombudsman told Reuters that some smaller centers among Mexico’s 58 immigrant detention facilities were even more overcrowded than Siglo XXI, holding up to four times capacity.

Lisdybi Garcia Aguilar, 26, from Cuba, was four months pregnant when migration officials pulled her out of a taxi on April 5 to check her papers, she said. Garcia was on her way to the immigration office in Tapachula to seek a visa as instructed by migration officials at the border, she added.

Instead, they took her to Siglo XXI, where her phone and other belongings were confiscated, she said.

“They told me it was to ‘regularize’ my status, that all would be well and that this wasn’t a prison, it was a lodging area,” Garcia told Reuters after she was freed. “It was a prison: a prison in every sense of the term.”

Garcia said her pregnancy is high risk due to endometriosis – a uterine condition – but she was ignored when she pleaded for help during an episode of fainting and acute abdominal pains. When detainees took her to the clinic, she said the nurse gave her a pill without explaining what it contained.

Reuters was not able to independently confirm Garcia’s account. Four other inmates told Reuters they did not receive treatment for episodes that ran from fever to abdominal pains.

Garcia said she was held at the center for three weeks. On April 13, she filed for asylum in Mexico with an official from the United Nations Refugee Agency, UNHCR. She showed Reuters an asylum application with that date.

UNHCR declined to comment on her case but confirmed it had assisted some Siglo XXI detainees with asylum applications. It said in a statement to Reuters it was concerned about conditions at the site and that detention of asylum seekers should be an exceptional practice as it could lead to their deportation, in violation of international law.

Cuban asylum applicant Yildiz Gomez, 22, attempted suicide by swallowing a bottle of pills used to treat ear infections after she was hauled back into Siglo XXI, having been about to be freed after three weeks in detention, according to her husband and two inmates. Detainees forced her to throw up.

On May 8 – after 47 days in detention – Gomez gave up on a legal solution. Along with dozens of other detainees, she escaped, becoming a fugitive in Mexico.

Former Vice President Joe Biden criticized President Trump’s “racist invective” and called for a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and a new foreign policy direction in Latin America and the Caribbean as part of his presidential campaign’s first glimpse of his immigration policy.

Biden’s announcement, which appeared Monday in a Miami Herald op-ed, was as much a broad outline of his immigration and foreign policy ideas as it was a critique of Trump administration policies.

“Under Trump, there have been horrifying scenes at the border of kids being kept in cages, tear gassing asylum seekers, ripping children from their mothers’ arms — actions that subvert our American values and erode our ability to lead on the global stage,” according to Biden’s op-ed, which ran in the Miami Herald’s Spanish-language publication, El Nuevo Herald, as well.

“At a time when the challenges we face demand a united, regional response, Trump repeatedly invokes racist invective to describe anyone south of the Rio Grande, including calling migrants ‘animals’,” Biden wrote.

The op-ed comes just days after Hispanic leaders and grassroots groups criticized Biden for skipping a National Association of Latino Elected Officials conference in Miami and for saying relatively little about issues of specific importance to Latino voters. The op-ed drops just two days before the Democratic presidential candidates square off in Miami for their first debate.

In a nod to South Florida’s politically active Latin American and Caribbean communities, Biden also took Trump to task for ending Temporary Protective Status of immigrants, many of whom hail from Nicaragua, Haiti and El Salvador and who have large communities in Florida. While Trump has made a push in the Venezuelan-American community, Biden said it’s just lip service.

“To date, the Administration has made every effort to capitalize politically on the Venezuelan crisis, but its refusal to grant TPS to the thousands of Venezuelans fleeing persecution shows it cares little about the Venezuelan people’s suffering,” Biden wrote.

“Add to that Trump’s badgering Mexico with the threat of tariffs, flinging insults at vital partners like Colombia, and callously limiting the ability of Cuban-Americans to reunite with and support their families in Cuba,” Biden wrote, “and the Administration’s Latin America policy is at best a Cold War-era retread, and at worst an ineffective mess.”

Biden veered briefly into foreign policy by faulting Trump for the deteriorating conditions in the so-called Northern Triangle countries of Nicaragua, Guatemala and El Salvador, though the Trump administration blames domestic problems in those countries for the flood of immigrants who have shown at the U.S.-Mexico border. The administration also has cut aid to those countries, which Biden says is a mistake.

And the former vice president took aim at Trump’s diplomacy in Venezuela, saying that “President Trump has badly misjudged what it will take to bring democracy back to Venezuela, and his increasing belligerence threatens the international coalition of more than 50 countries that recognize Juan Guaido as the interim President of Venezuela.”

However, Biden failed to mention that Trump’s administration was the first to recognize Guaido as the legitimate interim leader of Venezuela and had assembled the coalition of nations that oppose the Maduro regime.

Trump and his supporters have accused the Obama Administration of mismanaging Venezuela policy by failing to impose enough sanctions on Maduro’s regime and for Obama’s rapprochement with Cuba, which is an ally of Venezuela’s. Trump reversed many of Obama’s Cuba policies.

Republicans have also faulted the Obama administration for failing to pass immigration reform when Democrats controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress. But House Republicans killed a bipartisan immigration reform bill in 2013 that Biden largely still supports. During Trump’s first two years in office, a Republican-held Congress did nothing about immigration, failed to build a border wall and did not get Mexico to pay for it.

Biden called for the legalization of Dreamers and indicated he supported it for others: “The millions of undocumented people in the United States can only be brought out of the shadows through fair treatment, not ugly threats.”

Over the years, Biden has softened his rhetoric about immigration, as CNN documented in a story that pointed out Biden had spoken out about “sanctuary cities,” called Mexico “corrupt,” and labeled undocumented immigrants “illegals.” That language is gone from Biden’s op-ed, which instead uses the term “Latinx” to refer to Latinos.

Biden had also bragged about voting for 700 miles of border fencing, and called for smarter uses of technology at the border.

“It’s imperative that we secure our borders, but ‘build the wall‘ is a slogan divorced from reality. It won’t stop the flow of illegal narcotics or human trafficking, both of which come primarily through legal ports of entry,” Biden wrote. “Nor will it stop asylum seekers fleeing the most desperate conditions imaginable, and who have the right to have their cases heard. Nor will it stem the numbers of undocumented, most of whom over-stay legal visas.”

Democrats are looking to make inroads with Florida Latinos as President Trump prepares to launch an aggressive effort to court the state’s fastest-growing voter bloc.

Eager to avoid a repeat of 2018, when two Trump allies edged out Democrats in the state’s Senate and gubernatorial contests, Democrats are wading into Florida’s Hispanic communities earlier this time around, mobilizing dozens of organizers in the Sunshine State and fine tuning Spanish-language outreach.

And on Friday, more than half a dozen Democratic presidential hopefuls gathered at the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials’ (NALEO) annual conference in Miami, where they pitched themselves to Latino leaders in voter-heavy South Florida.

“For us, we have to seize opportunities like the one that several of our candidates did today,” said Christian Ulvert, a Democratic consultant who ran Spanish-language media for Andrew Gillum’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign.

“Part of it is, as a Democratic party, we can’t just be there in the fall every two years,” he added. “We need to be there everyday, 365 days a year.”

Speaking to Latino leaders and voters in Miami, eight presidential hopefuls weighed in broadly on immigration reform and the Trump administration’s proposal to add a question about citizenship status to the 2020 census, a controversial move that many Democrats have argued would lead to inaccurate population counts by deterring certain people, especially many Latinos, from responding.

But the conversations also went far beyond the issue of immigration, touching on health care, the economy and gun violence.

“It is policies like not just immigration reform,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) said. “It is making sure that we’ve got an increase in the minimum wage. It is making sure that we’ve got childcare available to people, that we have paid family leave, that we do something to make people understand that we need workers right now in our fields and in our hospitals and starting small businesses.”

Among the other candidates at the conference on Friday: Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) and former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper.

For Democrats, the outreach efforts in Florida come with a sense of urgency.

Even as Democrats scored a slew of wins nationally in the 2108 midterms, Florida’s longtime senator and elder statesman, Bill Nelson, was ousted by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), the state’s former Republican governor. And Gillum, the Democratic former mayor of Tallahassee, ultimately fell to Republican Ron DeSantis in the gubernatorial race.

While both Nelson and Gillum won more than half of the Latino vote – about 54 percent each, according to exit polls – their margins fell short of other past candidates running statewide in Florida. Hillary Clinton, for instance, won about 62 percent of Florida’s Latino vote in 2016. Former President Barack Obama won 60 percent in 2012.

Meanwhile, Scott took 45 percent of the Latino vote, outperforming Trump among those core voters by 10 points. DeSantis nearly tied Scott’s margin, winning 44 percent.

For Democrats, losses in Florida in 2018 prompted months of soul searching, as party leaders sought to identify where they had fallen short with Hispanic voters.

“We’re well aware that we lacked in Hispanic outreach in 2018 and we’re looking to improve that heavily,” Steve Simeonidis, the chair of the Miami-Dade Democratic Party, said. “We’re well aware of the gains we need to make, which is why we’re starting early.”

Heading into 2020, Trump is poised to make Florida a central part of his campaign.

He launched his reelection bid at a rally in Orlando on Tuesday, and his campaign is planning to use the state as a testing ground for a national Hispanic outreach program. Vice President Pence is set to travel to Miami on Tuesday to launch that initiative, dubbed “Latinos for Trump.”

Republicans acknowledge that Trump is unlikely to win the Hispanic vote overall in Florida, a state he won in 2016 by little more than 1 point. But in a state where roughly one in six voters is Latino, even a marginal swing in Trump’s direction could have major repercussions for Democrats.

“The Trump campaign is not making any secret of what their strategy is – making Florida the end-all be-all for them,” Ulvert, the former Gillum adviser, said. “And they’re also making very clear that Hispanic voters are their path.”

Last month, the Florida Democratic Party launched a Spanish-language radio show in Miami, with hopes of eventually expanding the program into Latino-heavy Orlando and Tampa.

At the same time, the Democratic National Committee has already deployed 90 members of its newly minted Organizing Corps to Florida, including more than 20 people in Miami-Dade County alone, many of whom are bilingual.

And next week, 20 of the 24 Democratic presidential candidates will flock to Miami for the first of the party’s primary debates.

The NALEO conference on Friday gave several Democratic presidential hopefuls not only a chance to introduce themselves to Latino voters and leaders, Ulvert said, but to scoop up valuable airtime on Spanish-language media, a particularly valuable tool in a state where television appearances often resonate more than small town hall events.

Among the top-tier Democratic candidates absent from the NALEO forum were Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and former Vice President Joe Biden, the primary contest’s early frontrunner, all of whom were scheduled to travel to South Carolina for House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn’s (D-S.C) “World Famous Fish Fry” on Friday.

Also absent from the stage on Friday: Trump.

“For those that didn’t show up today, it’s a missed opportunity,” Ulvert said. “Not just to speak to a respected organization, but a missed opportunity to get the earned media that comes with it.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule this week on a request from the Census Bureau to ask everyone in the country about citizenship status. The plan has set off litigation and debate and raised some important questions. Among them:

_____

Q: What is the proposed question?

A: The Census Bureau would ask for each member of each household, “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” It comes with five options for answering: born in the U.S.; born in Guam, Northern Marianas, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. Virgin Islands; born abroad to a parent or parents who are U.S. citizens; born abroad and naturalized in the U.S., born abroad and not a citizen. There’s no option for non-citizens to say whether they’re in the U.S legally.

Q: Will it definitely be on the census?

A: That’s up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is deciding whether it should be allowed after several states sued calling for the question to be removed.

Q: What does the Constitution say about the census?

A: The 14th Amendment, which reworked the original constitutional words on the census, says, “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State.”

Q: What are the legal issues?

A: Three federal judges have found the administration violated federal law by acting in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner in attempting to add the question. Two of the three also found that the effort would violate the constitutional provision requiring a count of the entire population once a decade. The fear is that many immigrants won’t take part if they must address their citizenship status, yielding a census with inaccurate numbers.

Every Friday, get an exclusive look at how one of the week’s biggest news stories on “The Daily” podcast came together.

Q: Has the census asked this before?

A: Not of everyone in the country. For several counts through 1950, when the Census Bureau’s once-a-decade headcount was conducted by having employees go door-to-door rather than ask people to fill out their own surveys, only those who volunteered that they were born outside the U.S. were asked their citizenship status. Citizenship questions have also appeared regularly on long forms or supplemental surveys sent to some households.

Q: Why does the Census Bureau want to include the question?

A: Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the Census Bureau, said in a memo last year that the Justice Department wants to ask the question to gather data to help identify majority-minority congressional districts, which the Voting Rights Act calls for when possible.

Q: Are there other reasons?

A: Critics of including the question allege Republicans want citizenship data so states can try to use numbers of citizens rather than total populations to draw state legislative districts, potentially giving the GOP an advantage because noncitizens are more common in Democratic-leaning areas. They also say Republicans are aware than an undercount of people with foreigners in their households could cost immigrant-heavy states such as California clout in Congress and federal money. Federal judges in California, Maryland and New York all found that Ross’s stated rationale for the question concealed his real reasons, which the judges said they could not determine.

Q: Why is there opposition to the citizenship question?

A: Advocates for civil liberties and immigrants say the question is untested, unnecessary and part of an effort by President Donald Trump’s administration to suppress the count of noncitizens and other foreign-born people. There are also fears that the administration could give the answers to immigration authorities. That would violate federal law and the Census Bureau says it would not do it.

Q: Why does the debate touch on computer files found in the home of a Republican consultant who died last year?

A: The files of North Carolina-based GOP redistricting expert Thomas Hofeller, found on his hard drive, contained a previously private report detailing how Republicans could benefit in Texas by using the number of voting-age citizens rather than the total population as the basis for drawing state legislative districts there. Civil rights groups said Hofeller pushed for the census citizenship question toward that end. Justice Department lawyers denied the claim and said it “borders on frivolous.” Lawyers have asked the Supreme Court to consider this element, which came to light after arguments on the case.

Q: Was the process for adding this question different from the usual protocol for the Census Bureau?

A: Yes. It’s rare for the Census Bureau to add a question, but even changes in wording are usually run by focus groups and tested extensively in a search for the best way to ask them, where to put them on the forms and other questions. The Census Bureau is testing whether the response rate would be hurt by having a citizenship question, but it has not completed the normal yearslong process to explore the impact of the question.

Q: Does every household have to complete the census?

A: Legally, yes, under a 1954 law that can fine people for refusing to do it, “willfully” neglecting it or providing false information for it. The maximum fine is $5,000.

Q: Is this law regularly enforced?

A: Historically, no. Perhaps the last conviction for refusing to answer census questions was for William F. Rickenbacker of Briarcliff Manor, New York. He was convicted of failing to complete a supplemental questionnaire on housing and income in 1960. He was fined $100 and sentenced to one day of probation. A higher court upheld his conviction.

Q: What other questions are asked of everybody?

A: It’s a short list, concerning age, sex, race and Hispanic origin, relationship to the person completing the form and whether the person owns or rents the home.

Q: What could happen if someone leaves the citizenship question blank but fills out the rest of the form?

A: That’s not clear. Some advocates say people who don’t answer it are likely to be asked again in follow-ups from census workers, who have no enforcement powers.

Q: Would a citizenship question cause an undercount?

A: It’s expected to. The Census Bureau itself estimates that the response rate for households that include at least one noncitizen would be 5.8 percent lower because of the question. Some advocates and independent analysts think it could be worse or that it would disproportionately affect minorities. At the same time, advocacy groups are pushing hard for people to be counted, even if there’s a citizenship question.

Q: Is personal census information kept private?

A: Legally, it must be. The law calls for up to five years in prison and fines of up to $250,000 for census employees who disclose personal information. Sharing with other government agencies is specifically prohibited.

Q: Has the Census Bureau ever shared confidential information?

A: Historians have found that the government used information from the 1940 census — before the current law forbidding sharing — to help round up Japanese Americans and place them in internment camps during World War II.

Q: Do individual census responses ever become public?

A: Yes, but only 72 years after the census is conducted. They’re often used by genealogists and other researchers.

Immigration attorneys said four toddlers, all under the age of 3, were hospitalized last week after spending time at a U.S. Border Patrol facility in McAllen, Texas.

Toby Gialluca, a Florida-based attorney, told HuffPost on Friday that the children, who have teenage parents or guardians, were coughing and vomiting and had fevers and diarrhea.

One 2-year-old’s eyes reportedly rolled to the back of her head, according to Gialluca, and she was “completely unresponsive.”

Their immediate condition is unknown.

“It’s just a cold, fearful look that you should never see in a child of that age,” Gialluca said. “You look at them and you think, ‘What have you seen?’”

The lawyers told the outlet that they forced the government to hospitalize the children and feared that the children would have not received medical attention had they not toured the facility.

“It’s intentional disregard for the well-being of children,” Gialluca said. “The guards continue to dehumanize these people and treat them worse than we would treat animals.”

The Hill reached out to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for comment.

The HuffPost report comes after a Justice Department lawyer suggested at a recent hearing that a toothbrush and soap were not necessarily required to fulfill sanitary conditions for detained migrant children laid out in a years-old agreement.

The Associated Press reported that Sarah Fabian, a senior litigation counsel for the Justice Department, made the suggestion while discussing a 1997 settlement agreement that requires certain sanitary and safety standards be met for detained persons during a recent hearing at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

U.S. lawmakers on Sunday expressed doubts that they could advance legislation to toughen the asylum process for migrants in the next two weeks, as sought by President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence after the administration delayed a planned weekend round of deportations.

Democrats signaled they would rather focus on a comprehensive immigration overhaul or measures to fund the asylum process at the border. Republicans, meanwhile, favored legislation to limit asylum options and build Mr. Trump’s proposed border wall.

The president underscored the tight timetable he imposed on Congress to accomplish something it hasn’t been able to do over many years. “I want to give the Democrats every last chance to quickly negotiate simple changes to Asylum and Loopholes,” he wrote Sunday morning on Twitter. “This will fix the Southern Border, together with the help that Mexico is now giving us. Probably won’t happen, but worth a try. Two weeks and big Deportation begins!”

The standoff is the latest clash among the Trump administration, Mexico and Congress as Mr. Trump seeks to address a wave of migration at the border. Lawmakers also noted that Mr. Trump is launching his 2020 re-election campaign, and many expect that effort to echo the immigration focus of his 2016 campaign.

At the end of May, Mr. Trump said he would impose tariffs of up to 25% on all imports from Mexico if it didn’t slow the flow of migrants across its border with the U.S. The administration says Mexico has since taken steps to stem migration from Central American countries and agreed to host more migrants awaiting asylum decision in the U.S.

“It’s amazing to think that Mexico has done more to secure our southern border in the last 10 days than Democrats in Congress have done in the last 10 years,” Mr. Pence said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

In two interviews Sunday, Mr. Pence said poor treatment of migrants in detention centers is “totally unacceptable,” but he declined to take responsibility on behalf of the administration for reports of such inhumane treatment and pointed toward action by Congress as the only way to improve conditions. “If Democrats in Congress will simply step up and agree to close the loopholes that we know human traffickers are using to exploit vulnerable families…we can solve the crisis,” he said on CBS.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), speaking on CNN, accused the administration of using tough tactics to deter asylum seekers, including families with children. “Frankly, the cruelty is part of their policy—it’s part of what they think will deter migrants from coming here,” Mr. Schiff said. “It’s part of what they think will motivate the Congress to build a wall, and to use these children that way is, I just think, immoral.”

Mr. Schiff disputed the claims of inaction by Democrats. “In fact we have been negotiating, and there is a bipartisan package in the Senate of some emergency supplemental relief to try to provide assistance,” he said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said Sunday that the House this week “will advance strong border legislation, which protects vulnerable children and keeps America safe as it honors our values.”

Democrats and Republicans disagree on whether to prioritize legislation to buttress the processing of asylum seekers and immigrants at the border or instead to make changes to asylum law.

“If we could get a genuine law passed through Congress that would address the asylum reforms that we need to stop the crisis at the border, that would be a good thing,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), said on “Fox News Sunday.” “Healthy skepticism is warranted for dealing with Democrats when it comes to immigration,” he added.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, said on CBS that “we need a lot more judges down there and administrative staff as well.”

“This is his political game. It’s not an accident that [Mr. Trump] announced this the same time he went through his announcement that he was seeking re-election,” Mr. Sanders said.

Republicans also saw a 2020 political dynamic at work. “Want to know what happens politically if Dems work w POTUS to reach bipartisan progress on immigration, infrastructure, health care, drug pricing, etc.? It guarantees the Pres’ reelection,” Rep. Lee Zeldin (R., N.Y.) said on Twitter late Saturday.

Several immigration bills are being floated, including a Republican measure from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) that seeks to deter Central American families from coming to the U.S. border in pursuit of asylum by making it easier to turn them back. Democrats indicated they think the approach is inhumane.

Both the House and Senate are expected to vote on dueling funding measures this week providing food and shelter, among other resources, to address concerns about the large number of people entering the U.S. at the southern border.

The $4.6 billion legislation in the GOP-controlled Senate and $4.5 billion bill in the Democratic House differ in how they prescribe the money can be used. Neither bill addresses the broader immigration-policy questions Mr. Trump referenced on Saturday. The Trump administration has requested roughly $5 billion to address the influx of migrants.

Both parties are divided, and at odds with each other, over broader issues, including legal-immigration programs that Mr. Trump has proposed changing, and over thornier questions about what to do with millions of people currently in the U.S. without authorization.

The Trump administration has faced a record number of migrant families crossing the border illegally. Since the start of the fiscal year in October, more than 332,000 people traveling as families entered the U.S. illegally, according to U.S. government data. Authorities have started releasing people directly from Border Patrol stations into the U.S. with notices to report back to immigration authorities at a later date.

Most of the migrants are from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. They have said they are fleeing pervasive violence, corruption, poverty and hunger, and seek asylum in the U.S.

Arrests at the border have been on the decline this month and are expected to fall by at least 20% compared with May, when more than 129,000 people were arrested, according to a person briefed on Border Patrol data. As of the middle of June, about 59,900 people had been taken into custody by the Border Patrol, according to another person familiar with the data.

Mr. Trump is eager to step up deportations. But plans to deport large numbers of immigrants have presented legal and logistical challenges, and stirred controversy in Washington and the targeted cities.

Hours before he stalled raids set to begin this past weekend, Mr. Trump defended them on Twitter, saying: “The people that Ice will apprehend have already been ordered to be deported.”

Congress has struggled for years to pass any significant overhaul of the immigration system. In 2013, a sweeping, bipartisan rewrite of immigration laws passed the Senate but fizzled in the House, then controlled by Republicans.

Congressional efforts were reignited when Mr. Trump in 2017 ended an Obama-era program that shielded from deportation undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as children. But various proposals from Mr. Trump and groups of senators, including a bipartisan plan, all came up short in the winter of 2018.

In the House, Republicans last summer were unable to secure enough support to pass any immigration plan. More recently, Democrats now in control of the chamber passed legislation that would provide permanent legal status and a path to citizenship for hundreds of thousands of young immigrants who came to the country illegally as children. But that bill is unlikely to be brought up for a vote in the GOP-led Senate.

MCALLEN, Tex. — The chain-link fence holding pens of the Border Patrol’s largest processing center was stuffed with more than 2,000 people when the first ladies of the Northern Triangle arrived here Thursday for a visit.

The converted former warehouse that migrants and some U.S. agents deride as the “dog pound” for its “cages” had been set up as an overflow holding site during the Obama administration, and it is far beyond its capacity now. At the entrance, the delegation of Central American officials and U.S. Homeland Security leaders were warned about respiratory illnesses inside, but they turned down offers for masks and entered.

Patricia Marroquín, the wife of Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales, approached a group of female detainees crowded into one cell. Guatemalan Interior Minister Enrique Degenhart joined her.

“Are you the president?” a tearful young woman asked Degenhart through the fencing. He said no and introduced Marroquín. “I’ve never seen you before,” another woman said to her country’s first lady, asking for her help.

The visit was meant to signal a new, more concerted regional approach to the migration crisis at the U.S. border. The United States has been pressing other countries in the region — not just Mexico — to do more to stem migration, and by bringing the Central American first ladies to see how dire things were, Homeland Security officials were hoping for a firmer commitment to act.

Degenhart confirmed what President Trump had tweeted earlier in the week: that Guatemala is preparing to sign a “Safe Third” country agreement with the United States. Such an agreement potentially would allow U.S. authorities to deport Honduran and Salvadoran asylum seekers to Guatemala, instead of processing their claims in the United States, under the theory that they should seek asylum in the first safe country they reach after fleeing their own.

“We are very close,” Degenhart said in an interview here. “We will do what we have to do to support the United States, and that will be good for our national security, too.”

Asked what steps his country would take to provide safe refuge to those fleeing violence from neighboring countries, Degenhart sounded less sure. “That is something we’ll do, if a case comes up,” he said.

The delegations from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras were hosted by Kevin McAleenan, the acting secretary of the Homeland Security Department, as well as the acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, John Sanders, and other senior U.S. border officials.

Arrests at the U.S. southern border surpassed 144,000 last month, the highest level in 13 years, and Trump, lashing out, has started severing or freezing aid to the Northern Triangle countries as punishment.

McAleenan has been pushing more, not less, cooperation with Central America, and the delegations discussed plans to combat child smuggling and immigration fraud with the deployment of rapid DNA tests at Central American border crossings to confirm familial relationships between adults and the children with whom they are migrating. There were talks to expand vaccination efforts, interdict smugglers and amplify warnings to families considering a risky journey north.

But the sight of so many children in U.S. custody was jarring. Diapers, juice boxes and cookies were stockpiled throughout the facility, and in one area of the warehouse, outside the chain-link fence, a uniformed Coast Guard officer and a team of child care contractors knelt on a carpet with toddlers who had arrived lacking parents. “Despicable Me” was playing in Spanish on a television.

Few such comforts were available for the older children, including teenage boys jammed into a holding pen with barely enough room to lie down. “We’ve been here four, five days,” said members of a group from El Salvador, pointing to others who had been waiting longer.

One 17-year-old asked U.S. officials to deport him to El Salvador, and then he began to cry: “I just want to see my mother.”

McAleenan has ordered the chain-link fence replaced with see-though plastic dividers.

A temporary overflow site several miles away, Camp Donna, was less grim. Another 750 migrants were held there in capacious, air-conditioned tents, and despite the criticism that such facilities are akin to “concentration camps,” the families in custody there had far more space and better conditions. Children played cornhole and chased balls across a squishy linoleum floor in a fake flagstone pattern. Mothers with babies lounged on mattresses watching movies.

Rodolfo Karisch, the Border Patrol chief for the Rio Grande Valley, said the facility costs more than $20 million per month to operate — more than $240 million a year. “This is not sustainable,” he said.

There were some signs that a U.S. pact reached with Mexico this month to dramatically increase its enforcement efforts appeared to be having an impact here in the lower Rio Grande Valley, the busiest stretch of the border for illegal crossings.

At a makeshift processing tent near the border set up beneath the Anzalduas International Bridge, the delegation was supposed to get a look at the way migrants are booked into custody in the moments after they cross the Rio Grande.

A group of 70 migrants came over earlier in the day, but when the buses and SUVs bringing the first ladies arrived, there were no migrants to greet. Border arrests have been falling this month, a decline consistent with historic seasonal patterns. U.S. officials say that it is too early to tell how much of that change is the result of the 100-degree heat or tightening enforcement by Mexico that includes a national guard surge and working with the United States to keep asylum seekers south of the U.S. border while they await court hearings.

The humanitarian crisis here in South Texas is far from over. Inside the Central Processing Center, teenagers and families said they had been waiting days without access to showers, hoping to be released.

Maria Yaxón had left Guatemala 18 days earlier with her son, 7, and daughter, 5. The family was en route to New York City, where her husband had already found a job. The boy was eating an apple, and his sister had peeled the sticker off the fruit to stick it to her face.

“There are no jobs in our town,” Yaxón said. “My parents drink a lot. My uncle, too. There’s no way for me to give my children a better life there.”

Ana García de Hernández, the wife of Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, said the United States and Central American countries need to work closer together to generate more opportunities in the region.

“But the other factor that is driving this is that everyone has a family member in the United States they’re trying to reunite with,” she said. “We can never lose sight of the humanitarian element of this. All of these migrants are people with hopes for a better life.”

McAleenan told the Central American delegation that he is urging U.S. lawmakers to approve a $4.6 billion supplemental funding package, most of which would go to caring for underage migrants who arrive alone at the U.S. border.

When he noted that the United States is likely to spend $8 billion during the current fiscal year on care for minors at the border, Degenhart, the Guatemalan interior minister, said his government’s entire 2019 budget — for a country of 17 million people — is about $12 billion.

Three policy turnarounds by President Trump this month have underscored his freewheeling governing style, an approach that some experts warn sends mixed messages and puts U.S. national security at risk.

Trump’s approach on three issues — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids, Mexican tariffs and Iran — is politically risky for the president, who is increasingly employing brinkmanship in an effort to achieve key policy goals.

On Sunday, Trump’s defenders, including Vice President Pence, argued that the president showed admirable caution in refusing to move forward with a military strike on Iran in light of the potential casualties.

“The president demonstrated the restraint that the American people, I know, admire and are grateful for,” Pence said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

He added: “Iran should not mistake restraint for a lack of resolve. All options remain on the table.”

But the president’s critics are trying to turn his often erratic approach into an issue for voters.

With the first Democratic debates of the 2020 presidential race days away, several White House contenders seized on Trump’s calling off of the Iran strike as the latest in a pattern of reversals.

On CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) described Trump’s actions as similar to “somebody setting afire a basket full of paper and then putting it out.”

Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) struck a similar note, telling CBS’s Ed O’Keefe, “I don’t believe that anyone should receive credit for a crisis of their own making.”

And Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) argued that Trump’s handling of Iran has meant that “even when there are strikes on tankers, we see again our allies very skeptical to even believe us right now.”

“This has been folly,” Booker said on ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” “There is no strategy here. We have a president that seems to be doing this like a reality TV show and trying to build more drama and trying to make foreign policy by tweet.”

Larry Jacobs, a political science professor at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs, said that Trump’s behavior has generated confusion about what the country’s positions are.

“Ronald Reagan was very clear, there’s no ambiguity about his views about the world and his willingness to pursue them. None,” he said. “Sometimes he was criticized . . . but there was a clarity and a consistency and a pattern that was established.”

With Trump, in contrast, “both our allies and our enemies are at a loss to understand what the president means,” he said.

The results of Trump’s strategy on policy have been mixed at best — and few issues offer as complete a picture of the president’s habitual brinkmanship as his effort to overhaul U.S. trade policy.

Last month, he abruptly threatened to impose tariffs on all Mexican goods entering the country to force Mexico to tighten its southern border against migrants fleeing Central America. He gave Mexican authorities 10 days to show progress or face a 5 percent tariff on the roughly $346 billion in goods Mexico ships each year to the United States.

Trump drew criticism for using trade to address an unrelated issue and for contradicting the spirit of the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada-Agreement, designed to facilitate trade among the North American neighbors.

But the threat prompted Mexican officials to race to Washington to negotiate tougher border security measures, ultimately including deployment of about 6,000 Mexican national guardsmen to the country’s border with Guatemala.

It wasn’t the first time Mexico had felt the sting of the president’s negotiating style. In late March, Trump threatened to close the border with Mexico in an earlier move to spur action against migrants. He backed down following an outcry from American business leaders who feared massive disruption to industrial supply chains.

Trump also came to the precipice of withdrawing the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement on his 100th day in office, but pulled back after pleas from Mexican and Canadian leaders. He held the threat of quitting the deal over subsequent negotiations aimed at the new UCMCA, which awaits congressional action.

Trump’s threats spurred Mexico and Canada to accept provisions they had resisted in negotiations that resulted in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation agreement negotiated by the Obama administration that Trump quit on his fourth day in the White House, according to Dan Ujczo, a trade attorney at Dickinson Wright.

“Whether one wants to admit it or not, the president is driving hard bargains and getting results,” Ujczo said. “The question will be at what cost in the mid- to long-term. That is, what happens when other countries start using the same tactics against the U.S.?”

Trump has also engaged in serial rounds of tariff-heavy diplomacy with China. He threatened last year to increase tariffs to 25 percent from 10 percent on $200 billion in Chinese goods starting Jan. 1. But one month before the deadline expired, over dinner with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Buenos Aires, Trump agreed instead to give negotiators 90 days to reach a deal.

Days before that deadline, Trump again delayed, citing “substantial progress” in the talks. He set no new deadline, but in early May after talks collapsed, he implemented the tariff hike.

He also began the process of imposing tariffs on an additional $300 billion in Chinese imports, potentially creating a fresh obstacle to reaching a trade deal with Beijing. Chinese officials have insisted that all tariffs be removed as part of any deal that addresses the president’s complaints about China’s trade practices.

“Now it’s more complex,” said one executive familiar with the trade talks, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss confidential discussions.

“Trump’s threats work to some extent against weak targets, but not against stronger ones. Canada and Mexico, which are so dependent on exports to the U.S., have been willing to make tough concessions rather than risk serious harm to their own economies. Korea, which is so dependent on the U.S. security umbrella, was also willing to do a quick deal,” said Edward Alden, an economics professor at Western Washington University. “But bigger trading partners — China, the E.U., even Japan — have proved far less compliant.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s announcement that he had directed ICE agents to conduct mass arrests of migrant families that have received deportation orders — and subsequent two-week delay of the operation — appears to have fallen flat so far. Democrats have responded not by scrambling to the negotiating table but rather by accusing him of government by hostage-taking.

Some Democrats on Sunday pointed out that Trump’s advance declaration of the raids appeared to inadvertently violate his administration’s guidance. They noted that in a statement Saturday night, ICE spokeswoman Carol Danko said in part, “Any leak telegraphing sensitive law enforcement operations is egregious and puts our officers’ safety in danger.”

Others, such as Senate Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), balked at Trump’s demand.

“President Trump gives millions facing deportation two weeks before his next tweet attack,” Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, said in a Sunday tweet. “Their fate depends on whether Congress will allow him to indefinitely jail children. This is America?”

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A federal judge says authorities can’t transfer immigrants from two Southern California detention centers to far-flung facilities if they have lawyers in the area.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California says U.S. District Judge Jesus Bernal in Riverside ruled Thursday in response to a lawsuit.

The suit sought to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement from moving several hundred immigrants at two Orange County facilities away from attorneys and relatives.

The sheriff’s department in March said it would stop housing detainees and ICE said they would be moved farther away.

Bernal said detainees with attorneys can’t be transferred beyond the greater Los Angeles area but didn’t block transfers for those without lawyers.

ICE has a privately-run facility in Adelanto.

A message was left for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

New York farmers say they are straining under increased costs as a worker shortage has forced them to use a federal visa program to bring in temporary agricultural workers from other countries.

While farmers are grateful for the H-2A visas, which lets them import workers, some say their costs have ballooned while their revenue is mostly stagnant.

“For us, there is no non-H-2A labor,” said Dennis Brawdy, partner with Amos Zittel and Sons in Erie County, which employs 72 workers this year. “Three to five years ago, we were 100% non-H-2A because there was an adequate amount of workers around,” Mr. Brawdy said of the vegetable-growing and greenhouse operation.

As the U.S. has tightened border security in recent years, many agricultural companies that had relied on illegal immigrant laborers are turning to H-2A visas. More than 196,000 H-2A visas were granted in 2018, compared to about 89,200 in 2014, according to the U.S. Labor Department.

But getting H-2A workers is expensive. Farmers incur additional costs such as transportation, food and legal aid to bring them into the country, as well as guaranteeing them at least 75% of their pay. And once those workers arrive, the farmers also must provide housing and other amenities, unlike non-H-2A labor.

In addition, H-2A workers in New York are paid $13.25 per hour, more than the current minimum wage rates for areas outside of New York City, according to the Labor Department.

It costs farmers an average of about $1,000 per H-2A worker—just to get them to the farm, said Dulce Demay, of Demay Labor, which helps match potential workers with farmers, including apple farms. She has helped 40-plus New York farms switch to the H-2A program over the last couple of years, mostly hiring workers from Mexico, she said.

“You cannot even get the domestic help to even help in the off-season of apples,” Ms. Demay said. “People aren’t moving around, people in Florida aren’t traveling all the way to New York anymore” for farm work.

Mr. Brawdy said his farm’s annual cost rose about $160,000 now that it relies on the visa program, not including the cost of housing.

Jeanette Delgado—a longtime resident of Dunkirk in western New York who has been working in grape fields and helping place and train workers for decades—said those who typically worked on the farms have been moving away due to immigration concerns.

“The H-2A program for us is critical,” said Chip Bailey, owner of KC Bailey Orchards Inc., an apple grower in Wayne County.

Another issue affecting farmers is a major expansion of labor rights to farm laborers approved last week by state lawmakers. The legislation, which Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said he would sign, would require farmers to pay their workers overtime if they work more than 60 hours a week, and guarantee them a day of rest each week. A special board will consider whether to reduce the 60-hour threshold that requires overtime.

The New York State Farm Bureau, a farmers advocacy group, negotiated with the Democratic lawmakers who wrote the bill, but said several provisions in the final legislation made it unworkable. It represents “an economic blow for our farmers and an economic blow for our farmworkers as well,” Farm Bureau spokesman Steve Ammerman said.

Several Republican legislators who voted against the measure said it would hurt H-2A workers, because they have a limited window to work want to cram in as many hours as possible.

Mr. Brawdy said farms in the state are already struggling, so the new overtime requirement in the farm bill could be a breaking point. And if farms can’t pay the overtime, he worried that some H-2A workers might choose to go to other states.

“We have obviously run the numbers to see what it would look like, and it is not manageable,” Mr. Brawdy said of the bill’s new overtime rules.

PORTLAND, Me. — Through the winter, the families streamed into Portland, bringing stories of violence and persecution in their home countries in central Africa. Portland’s shelter for homeless families soon filled to capacity, so the city put mats on the floor of a Salvation Army gym for 80 more people.

Then that, too, wasn’t enough. This month, 250 migrants from Africa arrived in this northeastern city of roughly 67,000 residents in the span of just a week, overflowing the overflow space and forcing Portland to hastily convert a basketball arena into an emergency shelter. Urgent calls went out for interpreters who could speak French, Portuguese and Lingala, a language spoken in the Democratic Republic of Congo. City Council meetings were given over to grappling with how Portland would pay for all of this — and the possibility that still more migrants might be coming.

It is a bit of a mystery in Maine, one of the oldest and whitest states in the country, how Portland has become a focal point for a sudden surge of migrants, mostly from Angola and Congo, who are seeking asylum.

Maine has long wrestled with an aging work force, and some leaders view immigrants as a welcome answer to the state’s struggles to lure younger people to live and work here. Still, the sheer numbers — and the suddenness of the latest arrivals — have opened up a debate about how much Portland should be doing to help immigrants and whether it should entice more of them to come.

Every Friday, get an exclusive look at how one of the week’s biggest news stories on “The Daily” podcast came together.

“I love the fact that these folks are coming here, and they want a better life, and they’ve chosen Portland,” Jon Jennings, the city manager, said. “But at the same time, I’ve got to figure out how to pay to pave streets and fix sidewalks and all of the things that are uniquely responsible to a municipal government.”

There is friction over the issue, even inside City Hall.

“If we have discovered the magic wand that will bring young families to Portland to help us build the next generation, why would we want to stop that, especially when it costs us so little money?” Ethan Strimling, Portland’s mayor, said.

The migrants arriving in this city have undergone a grueling journey, traveling by air or sea to South America, and then north on foot and by bus to the southern border of the United States, where most of them were arrested by border officials and released with notices to appear in immigration court after they declared their intention to seek asylum.

Nearly 800 migrants from Africa have been apprehended on one stretch of the Texas border and released by authorities since the beginning of October; the surge surprised and puzzled immigration officials, who are more accustomed to seeing Central American families crossing the border. Hundreds of African migrants arrived just this month and were taken to San Antonio, where Catholic Charities provided bus tickets to Portland and other cities that the migrants named as their destinations.

Among Portland’s residents and even some of the families arriving from Africa, it is uncertain how this place became such a draw.

Mr. Strimling, the mayor, has been an outspoken advocate for welcoming immigrants. In April, when President Trump wrote on Twitter that his administration was considering sending detained immigrants to so-called sanctuary cities, Mr. Strimling responded: “If he wants to send more immigrants our way, bring them on.”

But Mr. Jennings, who runs the day-to-day operations of Portland, expressed concern about the costs of aiding everyone, and criticized the mayor for having essentially invited asylum seekers to come here.

Immigrants who are seeking asylum are not permitted to work until at least six months after they file their asylum applications, so Portland has scrambled to provide support. Helped by $400,000 in donations, the city has given emergency assistance to roughly 300 people in recent weeks.

“If you started to see double that or more, I’m not sure how we would be able to handle that,” Mr. Jennings said. “That’s why I think we’ve got to be careful with the messaging and everything that we say publicly.”

Inside the Expo, the basketball arena now filled with 200 cots, families gave varying reasons for choosing Portland, a city that is 81 percent white but that already has a sizable community of immigrants from Africa, including from Congo and Angola. About 13 percent of the city’s population is foreign born, according to census data, many of those residents from Somalia.

Gloire Kikweta, 24, who came from Congo with his wife and two children — the younger of whom was born in Brazil on their way here — said he had left his home because he was being pursued by law enforcement for participating in protests against the former president, Joseph Kabila. He said he did not have a plan of where to go in the United States, but when he was in San Antonio, African immigrants there advised him to go to Portland, telling him that it was an aging city that needed more people, and that it was safe.

Vincent Mbala, 32, who is also from Congo, and came with his wife and three children, said that he learned through internet research that Maine provided financial support for asylum seekers. Maine is unusual in providing general assistance, for up to two years, to immigrants who have valid visas or who have applied for asylum. In most states, asylum seekers rely on local nonprofit groups for aid until they can work, and in many cases struggle to afford housing and food.

Portland also has what local officials believe is the only municipal fund in the country that provides support to asylum seekers before they submit their applications. Called the Community Support Fund, the program was created in 2015 when the Republican former governor, Paul R. LePage, was trying to cut off asylum seekers from the state’s general assistance program. Maine’s new governor, Janet Mills, a Democrat, visited Portland’s shelter in recent weeks and has pledged to help the city financially.

Around Portland, many residents have greeted the migrants enthusiastically. More than 1,200 people have volunteered to help at the Expo. Leaders in the city’s African immigrant community have mobilized people to serve as interpreters and to cook meals for the migrants.

Complaints, too, have come. Some Portland residents said that the city needed to focus more on local needs. The views reflected strains caused by Portland’s recent success in attracting another group — young professionals from other states — whose presence has driven up rents even as it has fueled the local economy.

This year, Mr. Jennings, the city manager, proposed that Portland phase out the municipal fund for asylum seekers. In a recent interview, he said he believed it was one reason migrants were coming here.

The $200,000 fund was already overspent this year by April. The City Council is currently debating whether the fund should be available to anyone who arrives, no matter when, or if it should be limited, given the sudden surge of people.

The city has estimated that it would cost roughly $1.4 million to provide housing vouchers and other support to all the families currently staying at the Expo for a year.

Mr. Strimling, who recently announced he is seeking re-election as mayor, said he wanted to keep the fund open to anyone who needed it. He said that he doubted many migrants were coming to Portland because they had heard about the fund, but that, if they were, it was all the more reason to keep it going.

In East Bayside, a Portland neighborhood where some immigrants have settled in recent years, Roderic Morgan, 74, said the city had enough to deal with in taking care of the homeless population without extending help to asylum seekers. He also expressed concern that there were not enough jobs to go around.

In fact, many businesses in Maine say they struggle to find workers to fill jobs. The unemployment rate in Maine is 3.3 percent, and in the Portland metropolitan region, 2.6 percent. Both are lower than the national rate of 3.6 percent.

Asked how he thought immigrants had changed Portland, Mr. Morgan, a retired newspaper deliveryman, raised a different issue.

“It’s not just the immigrants that have invaded Portland,” he said. Well-off people from other places were moving to Portland and making the city unaffordable, he said.

In Parkside, not far from the Expo, Timothy Goldkin, 29, called it a “beautiful thing” to have more diversity in Maine. Mr. Goldkin, who has a housemate who is an asylum seeker, said he would rather have more immigrants in Portland than wealthy people migrating from other states and changing the city’s landscape and culture.

“I’m much more worried about the people with lots of money who want to just completely make it their town, with zero regard to what it was,” he said, “than the folks who are fleeing persecution and in fear of their life and who are coming here to try to understand our culture and integrate into it, while still holding onto and bringing some of their own loveliness.”

For now, a major challenge for the city is to find permanent housing for the scores of families staying at the Expo and another shelter. Neighboring cities have agreed to help identify vacancies, and Mr. Jennings said that a lumber company in Jackman, three hours north of Portland, had reached out with an offer to house some of the families in Jackman if they were interested in working for the company.

“I’ve had people all over the state inquire about whether some of these folks could come to other parts of the state, because they need qualified workers,” Mr. Jennings said. “They need new people.”

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D) signed a bill Friday that bans private immigration detention centers in the state shortly before an expected Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operation seeks to round up thousands of migrant families for deportation.

The bill’s signing makes Illinois the first state to forbid such detention centers. Pritzker also signed legislation that bars local law enforcement agencies from engaging in federal immigration enforcement with ICE and allows undocumented students to receive certain grants and other aid at public institutions.

The federal government has increasingly turned to private detention centers to house immigrants, particularly close to the southern border, as it struggles to deal with a rise in migrants entering the country.

The Illinois Democrat cast the pieces of legislation as efforts to “protect Illinois’ immigrant community amid growing attacks from the federal government.”

“Illinois is and always will be a welcoming state,” Pritzker said in a statement. “Let me be perfectly clear: the state of Illinois stands as a firewall against Donald Trump’s attacks on our immigrant communities. In the face of attempts to stoke fear, exploit division, and force families into the shadows, we are taking action.”

The ICE operation set to begin Sunday is reportedly expected to target up to 2,000 families facing deportation orders in up to 10 cities with large immigrant communities, including Houston, Chicago, Miami and Los Angeles.

President Trump defended the plan Saturday, tweeting “The people that Ice will apprehend have already been ordered to be deported. This means that they have run from the law and run from the courts. These are people that are supposed to go back to their home country. They broke the law by coming into the country, & now by staying.”

“When people come into our Country illegally, they will be DEPORTED!” he added in a subsequent tweet.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot (D) has already vowed to take “concrete steps” against the plan, directing Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson to terminate ICE’s access to the Chicago Police Department’s databases related to immigration enforcement activities and speaking directly with ICE leadership in opposition to the operation.

“Chicago will always be a welcoming city and a champion for the rights of our immigrant and refugee communities, and I encourage any resident in need of legal aid to contact the National Immigrant Justice Center,” she said Friday.

Yes, we do have concentration camps.

They are not work camps. They are not death camps. At least, not on purpose. Our government is not building massive gas chambers and industrial crematoria. It is not conducting sick medical experiments on members of an unfavored class.

But that does not mean that the places into which we are herding tens of thousands of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers are not properly called concentration camps. Because that is precisely what they are.

When some in the public eye dare to tell that truth, as the media-savvy Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did the other day, enablers of the administration’s cruel policies cry foul. They say that using correct terms such as “concentration camps” — or, worse, invoking the term “Never again” — unfairly equates what is going on now at our southern border with the Nazis’ “Final Solution” — the deliberate murder of millions of people.

It is true that we are not doing that. We are doing this. The two are not morally equivalent. And we probably don’t have reason to fear that this is necessarily going to become that.

But, then, we never do.

Because that starts as this. Some of the people who study, and some of the people who survived or are descended from survivors of the Holocaust, are pointing out that that crime against humanity did not arrive overnight.

It worked its way up, from nasty political speeches (check) to politicians seeking and gaining power with promises to protect the purity of the nation from foreign invasion (check) to denying basic human rights and decency to people of an unfavored class (check).

The same warning is being raised by past residents of the internment camps — concentration camps — in which we confined Americans of Japanese origin or descent during the dark days of World War II.

The places where these tempest-tossed humans are being held are kept deliberately uncomfortable and largely out of view of the public, the press, members of Congress and even the courts. The whole point is to keep them beyond the reach of the rights and protections that, by our Constitution and international treaties, are afforded to all persons, not just citizens.

The people being held there are cold, hungry, dirty and often sick. Children are separated from parents. Children are caring for children. Medical care is not to be found. A few — not millions, but a few — have died.

There may be no more divisive issue in America than immigration. But beyond the media glare and the 2020 presidential campaign, there is hope that the two political parties can make progress on this issue.

Witness the legislation introduced earlier this year by Sens. Kamala Harris and Mike Lee.

Lee, a conservative Republican from Utah, and Harris, a California Democrat, introduced a bill that would remove per-country caps on employment-based visas. The measure also would lift from 7 percent to 15 percent the per-country caps on family based visas, though it would not raise the overall level. (Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, is a co-sponsor of this legislation.)

Currently, no more than 7 percent of either type of visa can come from any individual country.

This has created a huge backlog in places like India.

The legislation’s authors say lifting and eliminating the caps would go a long way toward clearing that backlog. Business interests, meanwhile, believe it would help with the nation’s skilled-worker shortage.

The week before last, the president of the Ames Chamber of Commerce wrote in the Des Moines Register that a “starling number” of Iowa State University graduates won’t be able to work in this state — not because they can’t find jobs, but because they were born in a foreign country.

It’s no secret Iowa, as well as the Quad-Cities, has trouble retaining young people.

In a place like Ames, where the jobless rate is one of the lowest in the country at less than 1.5 percent, filling the workforce pipeline is a huge issue. And while the jobless rate is higher in the Quad-Cities, a lot of employers have told us they, too, are experiencing difficulty finding the right talent.

There is opposition to lifting the caps, out of concern that some countries will dominate the flow of visas. However, a bi-partisan group of 33 senators appears to believe the proposal has enough worth to sign on as co-sponsors.

This isn’t the only under-the-radar immigration proposal out there. Recently, the Economic Innovation Group, a public-policy organization, published a report touting what it called “Heartland Visas.”

The voluntary program would be aimed at Rust Belt communities that have seen their populations stagnate, especially those who are of prime working age.

We know this problem all too well here in the Quad-Cities, where we grow very little in some years, if at all.

And it’s not just slow or non-existent growth in so-called Rust Belt communities. There also tends to be an exodus of highly-skilled and educated people who move to bigger cities, leaving lower-skilled workers behind.

Rural communities in Iowa and Illinois have it far worse than their urban cousins, but the challenges of a dwindling, skilled workforce are a challenge here, too.

Fresh news of that sad fact was delivered by new Census estimates last week. The data showed minimal growth in Scott County and continued population decline in Rock Island County.

More to the point of this subject, the population of prime working-age adults (ages 25 to 54) is falling in the Quad-Cities, according to the new data. In Scott County, the prime working-age population fell from 67,347 in 2010 to 66,682 last year.

In Rock Island County, the numbers are even more startling. In 2010, there were 57,217 people of prime working age; last year, that had fallen to 51,664.

Think about that. In just eight years, the county lost nearly 6,000 people in the prime of their working life. Imagine what that does to companies looking to expand.

Mind you, these losses come in the midst of an economic recovery, too.

This area, like much of the Midwest, needs innovation to grow.

Boosting the number of Iowans with higher levels of education and investing in advanced job training are good steps. However, immigration must be considered a vital part of fixing this problem, too. And it’s not just needed to fill existing workforce gaps. As the Economic Innovation Group report points out, skilled immigrants are also highly entrepreneurial and could create new opportunities.

Policies that leverage much-coveted visas to direct a skilled workforce to areas of the United States that are in need, along with legislation like that offered by Lee and Harris, won’t resolve all of our immigration problems. Far from it. But at a time when much of our national conversation about this topic is ugly and angry, there are solutions out there.

Our leaders just need to put politics aside and take advantage of them.

Florida is ground zero for President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign as well as his immigration policies, despite our state’s diversity and the damage caused by those policies.

Last week, Trump officially launched his 2020 campaign in Orlando. Trump’s speech there contained his usual blend of harsh attacks, questionable claims and outright lies, including saying that Democrats seek to “strip Americans of their constitutional rights while flooding the country with illegal immigrants.”

Trump has long demonized immigrants as being a major source of crime despite research establishing that the opposite is true. He has used dehumanizing language to justify policies that break up families, lock up children and otherwise cruelly treat migrants fleeing poverty and violence in search of a better life.

Before his speech, Trump announced on Twitter that federal immigration agents would start conducting mass arrests this week of people living in the country illegally. If true, the operation would present a particular concern in Florida given our large immigrant population and a new state law that follows the president’s approach to immigration.

Earlier this month, Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law a measure banning so-called sanctuary cities in Florida — even though no such cities exist here. What the bill would do, however, is to force local law enforcement to do the job of federal immigration authorities at a cost to the resources, safety and well-being of local communities.

Jailing and deporting immigrants who commit nonviolent crimes or otherwise minor infractions risks hurting rather than improving public safety. The approach only serves to discourage immigrants and their friends and neighbors from reporting more serious crimes and cooperating with authorities.

These policies and mass arrests, if they come to pass, will break up families without regard to the consequences for children. Many of the people living in the country illegally have been productive contributors to their communities, in some cases for decades. Deporting them would damage local economies and strain the social services left to care for their kids.

Mass arrests will also cause more overcrowding and worsen conditions at migrant detention centers. Rather than addressing a growing humanitarian crisis at the border, Trump has fixated on diverting billions of dollars to a border wall.

The wall does little to address illegal drugs and contraband that largely comes through ports of entry and refugees seeking asylum through legal channels. Instead of trying to help Central American countries improve conditions that cause migrants to leave, Trump seeks to strip aid from them.

Trump doesn’t seem to care if his immigration policies work, as long as they motivate his supporters to vote for him again. More should be expected from DeSantis, who used his outspoken support for Trump to help get elected governor but has taken a more moderate approach while in office.

Florida voters gave Trump a narrow victory here in 2016, helping him earn enough electoral votes to win the presidency. Floridians should reject his hateful rhetoric and policies this time around, showing that our state values its diversity as a strength.

I have often wondered why good people of good conscience don’t respond to things like slavery or the Holocaust or human rights abuse.

Maybe they simply became numb to the horrific way we now rarely think about or discuss the men still being held at Guantánamo Bay without charge or trial, and who may as well die there.

Maybe people grow weary of wrestling with their anger and helplessness, and shunt the thought to the back of their minds and try to simply go on with life, dealing with spouses and children, making dinner and making beds.

Maybe there is simply this giant, silent, cold thing drifting through the culture like an iceberg that barely pierces the surface.

I believe that we will one day reflect on this period in American history where migrant children are being separated from their parents, some having been kept in cages, and think to ourselves: How did this happen?

Why were we not in the streets every day demanding an end to this atrocity? How did we just go on with our lives, disgusted but not distracted?

Thousands of migrant children have now been separated from their parents.

As NBC News reported in May:

“At least seven children are known to have died in immigration custody since last year, after almost a decade in which no child reportedly died while in the custody of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.”

Homeland Security’s own inspector general has described egregious conditions at detention facilities.

And, last week, an attorney for the Trump administration argued before an incredulous panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit that toothbrushes, soap and appropriate sleeping arrangements were not necessary for the government to meet its requirement to keep migrant children in “safe and sanitary” conditions.

As one of the judges asked the attorney:

“Are you arguing seriously that you do not read the agreement as requiring you do something other than what I described: Cold all night long. Lights on all night long. Sleep on the concrete floor and you get an aluminum blanket?”

Stop and think about that. Not only do these children in question not have beds, they are not even turning off the lights so that they can go to sleep. Sleep deprivation is a form of torture, plain and simple.

How is this happening? Why is this happening?

An Associated Press report last week discussed the descriptions by lawyers of “inadequate food, water and sanitation for the 250 infants, children and teens” at a Texas border patrol station.

According to the report:

“A 2-year-old boy locked in detention wants to be held all the time. A few girls, ages 10 to 15, say they’ve been doing their best to feed and soothe the clingy toddler who was handed to them by a guard days ago.”

The report explained at another point:

“Three girls told attorneys they were trying to take care of the 2-year-old boy, who had wet his pants and had no diaper and was wearing a mucus-smeared shirt when the legal team encountered him.”

The report described at another point:

“A 14-year-old girl from Guatemala said she had been holding two little girls in her lap. ‘I need comfort, too. I am bigger than they are, but I am a child, too,’ she said.”

Anyone whose heart doesn’t break upon reading that is a monster. And yet, too many Americans seem perfectly O.K. with these conditions. Last year, Fox News’s Laura Ingraham compared child detention centers to “summer camps.” These are not summer camps. They are closer to what Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called them: concentration camps.

She received quite a bit of blowback for that description, her critics complaining that the term was too closely tied to the ghastly horrors of the Holocaust.

No one wants to be accused of invoking Godwin’s law: “As an online discussion continues, the probability of a reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis approaches 1.” In other words, 100 percent.

However, last week MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes wrote on Twitter:

“Last comment on this: ‘concentration camp’ is an extremely charged term and I get why many people are, in good faith, uncomfortable with its application for Godwin’s Law purposes among others. So let’s just call them “detention camps” and focus on what’s happening in them.”

The creator of the law himself, Mike Godwin, responded:

“Chris, I think they’re concentration camps. Keep in mind that one of their functions by design is to punish those individuals and families who are detained. So even the “charged” term is appropriate.”

Folks, we can use any form of fuzzy language we want, but the United States under Donald Trump is currently engaged in an unconscionable act. He promised to crack down on immigrants and yet under him immigrants seeking asylum have surged. And he is meeting the surge with indescribable cruelty.

Donald Trump is running concentration camps at the border. The question remains: what are we going to do about it?

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) drew ire from some quarters this past week when she said the Trump administration was operating “concentration camps” along the country’s southern border. Each day brings more reports of horrifying conditions in migrant detention facilities. One visitor described the camp he visited as “a human dog pound.” Another described lice outbreaks, a lack of proper bathing facilities and “a whole cell full of kids . . . who were forced to sleep on the cement.”

Faced with this suffering, Vice President Pence wants Americans to know he is troubled. But the vice president of the United States also wants us to know he is simply powerless to do anything besides blame somebody else.

On CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday, host Margaret Brennan confronted Pence about the conditions in the detention centers. Brennan quoted summaries from lawyers who have recently visited the facilities — “’Children sleeping on cold floors,’ ‘filthy,’ ‘lice outbreaks,’ ‘flu outbreaks,’ ‘not in any way safe and sanitary conditions’” — and asked, “What are you going to do?”

For four words, Pence showed sympathy: “Margaret, it’s totally unacceptable.” But he then immediately pivoted back to border crossings and “overwhelmed” Customs and Border Protection agents. Brennan pressed again: “So how is the executive totally powerless to do anything about these unsafe, unsanitary conditions?”

“Well,” stammered Pence, “we’re doing a lot with what the Congress has given us. But again, Congress refused to increase the bed space in the last appropriations bill.” So we’re stuck with these horrors, then? “No, absolutely not,” said the vice president, before pivoting again: “It’s one of the reasons why the president’s taken the strong stand that he’s taken on the crisis on our southern border. . . . We’re going to continue to demand that Democrats in Congress step up.”

But the Trump administration is not powerless, and Pence knows it. On CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, host Jake Tapper pointed out to Pence: “This is the wealthiest nation in the world. We have money to give toothpaste and soap and blankets to these kids.”

“Of course we do,” Pence agreed, but “Congress needs to provide additional support.” Fine, but what about the support now? The government could find the money to alleviate these conditions today. And in the longer term, as Ocasio-Cortez put it, “You know what saves money? Not putting masses of people in internment in the first place.”

Trump makes immigration his top priority for his 2020 bid, vowing mass deportations

Of course, the administration is facing a massive spike in illegal border crossings and asylum claims as migrants flee a crisis in Central America. But Trump, Pence and the rest of the administration have made increased detention of migrants a centerpiece of their record both policy-wise and politically. Why? Well, it may not be polite to speculate that the current administration is affected by xenophobia and prejudice. Yet if these victims were white, I suspect the vice president and the entire Trump administration would find the problem a whole lot more urgent.

Earlier this week, President Trump made a dramatic claim, saying that “next week ICE will begin the process of removing the millions of illegal aliens who have illicitly found their way into the United States.”

The idea was immediately greeted with a combination of outrage and derision. After all, it isn’t as though Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were just sitting around on their hands up until now and had the extra capacity to round up, house, then deport millions of people. Indeed, at the time, even some administration officials suggested that this was going to be logistically very challenging.

Now we’re learning that the mass arrests are, indeed, set to begin, but only of thousands, not of millions. The Post reports:

President Trump has directed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to conduct a mass roundup of migrant families that have received deportation orders, an operation that is likely to begin with predawn raids in major U.S. cities on Sunday, according to three U.S. officials with knowledge of the plans.

The “family op,” as it is referred to at ICE and the Department of Homeland Security, is slated to target up to 2,000 families facing deportation orders in as many as 10 U.S. cities, including Houston, Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles and other major immigration destinations, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the law enforcement operation.

Here’s the thing: There is already a pile of evidence that this is really all about Trump’s reelection campaign.

For instance, by miraculous coincidence, Trump initially announced the mass arrests just before his campaign kickoff rally. Not only that, but the act of announcing it was itself suspect: As Nick Miroff and Maria Sacchetti reported when word of the planned arrests first surfaced, “publicizing a future law enforcement operation is unheard of at ICE.”

So, Trump’s announcement of the operation could actually undermine efforts to round up migrants, yet he did it anyway, just before his reelection rally. Indeed, as the new Post report indicates, even some inside the enforcement agencies think this is political:

Some within DHS and ICE say the president appears to be using the operation for political purposes as he begins his reelection bid.

And there are still more indications that this is a political operation. The Post report also includes this:

ICE agents have limited intelligence on the locations of the families with court-ordered deportations beyond their last known addresses. But White House and ICE officials believe agents will be able to make many “collateral arrests” by finding foreigners living in the country illegally at or near the target locations.

This means that agents are going to have a tough time finding some of the people they’re hoping to arrest — but that’s okay, because they’ll be able to pick up other undocumented immigrants they come across along the way.

Meanwhile, acting DHS chief Kevin McAleenan has privately argued for a much smaller operation that would “detain a group of about 150 families that were provided with attorneys but dropped out of the legal process and absconded,” as The Post reports. That’s because he fears the following:

McAleenan has warned that an indiscriminate operation to arrest migrants in their homes and at work sites risks separating children from their parents in cases where the children are at day care, summer camp or friend’s houses.

It’s plainly obvious what’s going on here. Some inside the administration (McAleenan) fear that this operation could result in horrific imagery of more child separations, and want it scaled back.

But someone else inside the administration wants it to go forward — as long as lots of undocumented immigrants are picked up, whoever they are, the boss will be happy. And this someone else knows the boss will be happy, because he sees things very much the way the boss does.

If you guessed that this person’s initials are S.M., you win a free Plum Line T-shirt.

We don’t mean to make light of this. The humanitarian consequences could be awful. But at the same time, the absurdities here are really glaring. It’s as if nobody is even trying to disguise the degree to which this is all a show for Trump’s benefit.

John Sandweg, who was acting director of ICE under President Barack Obama, told us that it’s impossible to say right now whose vision of the raids is going to prevail — whether it will be McAleenan’s more limited targeting, or the much broader one that Trump seems to want.

If it’s the more limited operation, Sandweg said, it might have some law enforcement justification, since it involves families who were given access to attorneys but didn’t turn up at hearings anyway.

“But if its the second, broader Trump version, it has very limited operational value,” Sandweg told us. “You’re draining tremendous resources away from the apprehension of dangerous criminals, and from the current humanitarian crisis at the border.”

“This is a very time- and labor-intensive operation,” Sandweg continued. “You have to send a lot of agents, and that requires a lot of planning. You’re pulling from something in order to do this. The way they are talking about this publicly strongly suggests that it’s of a political nature.”

Of course, this all raises another question entirely: Why does Trump think this will politically benefit him in the first place?

Trump himself recently provided the answer to that question. Asked if he planned to reach out to swing voters to win reelection, he said: “I think my base is so strong, I’m not sure that I have to do that.”

Clearly, he meant it.

President Donald Trump and the Mexican government have reached an agreement on dealing with the dramatic increase in migrants moving from Central America through Mexico to the United States, a migration that has created a humanitarian and security crisis at our border.

Mexico probably won’t be able to provide as much help as Trump is expecting, and their agreement will face serious legal challenges. But Democratic opposition to meaningful border security measures hasn’t left the president with any good alternatives.

Agreement

Mexico will use its National Guard to curb irregular migration throughout Mexico, giving priority to its southern border with Guatemala.

The United States will expand the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) program across its entire border with Mexico. Undocumented migrants crossing our southern border to seek asylum will be returned to Mexico to wait for a hearing on their asylum claims.

The United States and Mexico also agreed to work on establishing safe third country agreements.

National Guard

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador recently created a 60,000-man National Guard to confront organized crime and curb soaring violence in Mexico. Six-thousand of them have been deployed to secure its southern border with Guatemala.

Todd Bensman has first-hand knowledge of this border from when he was reporting on the human smuggling industry in Guatemala.

Bensman is skeptical about whether the National Guard will be able to secure this 541-mile border: “Smuggling works much like rain water; it will find every leak in your roof and get in.”

The smugglers will be able to move migrants across the border in areas that are not heavily patrolled — such as mountainous jungle areas — and they will use ships to carry migrants along the shoreline of the Pacific Ocean to the largely uninhabited Mexican coastline.

Migrant Protection Protocols

On Dec. 20, 2018, DHS announced that asylum-seeking aliens arriving in or entering the United States from Mexico — illegally or without proper documentation — may be returned to Mexico for the duration of their immigration proceedings.

Too many migrants have been gaming the system with meritless asylum claims to get into the United States. Nine out of ten of their asylum applications are denied.

Authority to return migrants to Mexico comes from section 235(b)(2)(C) of the INA, which provides that aliens who arrive by land from a foreign territory contiguous to the United States, and are put in removal proceedings, may be returned to that territory to wait for their hearings.

Organizations that provide asylum-related legal services have challenged the MPP in a Ninth Circuit federal district court. They claim that MPP does not apply to applicants for admission who can be put in expedited removal proceedings (possibly most of them), and that DHS has violated the Administrative Procedure Act by implementing the MPP program without promulgating regulations.

It’s too soon to predict the outcome of this case, but Trump has not had much luck in the Ninth Circuit.

MPP may have to be abandoned even if the legal challenges fail because the average wait for a hearing is too long. It was 922 days as of the end of May.

Safe Third Country

Section 208(a)(1) of the INA provides that any alien who is physically present in the United States may apply for asylum. The next paragraph, however, provides a safe third country exception.

The right to apply for asylum does not apply to an alien who may be removed from the United States pursuant to a bilateral or multilateral agreement to a country where:

(1) His life or freedom will not be threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and

(2) He will have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection.

If the United States enters into such an agreement with Mexico, aliens who can be sent there will be ineligible for asylum in the United States.

According to Human Rights First (HRF), Mexico does not meet “safe third country” legal requirements. Refugees are not safe in Mexico. This is a problem with the MPP program too.

HRF’s safety concern is supported by the fact that President Obrador created a 60,000-member National Guard to confront organized crime and curb soaring violence in Mexico, and by the State Department’s Mexico Travel Advisory. Depending on location, the warnings range from Level 2 (Exercise Increased Caution) to Level 4 (Do Not Travel). Five states have Level 4 ratings.

The “safety” requirement for safe third country eligibility refers to safety from threats on account of one of the enumerated grounds, but I will be surprised if Ninth Circuit courts approve of safe third country agreements with “dangerous” countries.

HRF claims that Mexico can’t meet the second requirement either. Deficiencies, barriers, and flaws in Mexico’s asylum system would prevent asylum-seekers from receiving a full and fair asylum proceeding. The Ninth Circuit courts are likely to accept this argument as well.

Although it is apparent that this deal won’t end the crisis at our southern border, it is the most Trump can do at this point.

Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution provides that, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives…”

The Democrats control the House of Representatives, and they won’t give Trump the funds he needs for effective border security measures, or make needed changes in the INA.

This month’s damning report from the agency’s own inspector general, which rebuked ICE’s detention practices, including placing immigrants in solitary confinement, is an accountability decoy. In fact, the report only scratches the surface of their unlawful actions.

Our organization, Government Accountability Project, represents numerous whistleblowers within the DHS who have made multiple disclosures to the agency’s inspector general.

These whistleblowers saw egregious violations of laws, rules and regulations in practices that substantially threaten immigrants’ health and safety and reported those wrongdoings inside the system — to the people with the authority to investigate and address misconduct.

One whistleblower we represent, Ellen Gallagher, was a senior policy analyst at the Department’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL). After reading dozens of ICE segregation reports, she discovered that ICE regularly used solitary confinement practices against mentally ill and medically vulnerable detainees in violation of federal detention standards.

The abuses she discovered were graphic — detainees were denied proper medical care and attention; others were stripped bare and placed in “suicide smocks” in complete isolation, with some detainees choosing to not disclose suicidal ideation out of fear that they would be subjected to such treatment; and mentally-ill detainees were put in solitary confinement and de-scheduled from appearing before immigration judges despite having been determined to have a credible fear of returning to their home country. These abuses were systemic, not just one-time occurrences, with examples spanning from over 200 adult detention sites.

Gallagher first alerted her own colleagues of these abuses, since she understood the civil rights office’s mandate included both reviewing individual cases of misconduct as well as recommending policy changes to protect the rights and interests of immigrants in detention. When they declined to investigate, Gallagher brought the evidence of the misuse of solitary confinement at ICE detention facilities to the inspector general.

The inspector general promised to investigate whether ICE facilities use segregation properly and follow applicable detention standards. However, in two reports prior to the one issued last week, the watchdog failed to release any meaningful, site-wide data or conclusions regarding the use and impact of segregation for civil detainees in immigration custody. Even in this most recent report, the Inspector General only spot-checked four detention centers, none of which were mentioned in Gallagher’s whistleblowing disclosures. The report barely looked at mentally ill detainees. The recommendations suggested that the field offices that oversee the specific detention centers they investigated “ensure compliance” with existing federal detention standards, completely failing to address these same problems that exist across the entire ICE detention system.

Two other clients of ours, Drs. Scott Allen and Pamela McPherson, are medical and mental health subject matter experts working for the Department’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. They too tried to raise concerns about risks of harm to immigrants, especially children, to both CRCL and the Inspector General’s investigative team. Their concerns have also fallen on deaf ears.

Their disclosures detailed systemic weakness at Family Residential Centers that would exponentiate with expanded detention implemented under the zero-tolerance immigration policy and create imminent harm to migrant children. Last summer, we sent these disclosures to the Inspector General via fax and email.

We followed up with the watchdog throughout the fall by peppering them with emails. But the doctors’ disclosures went unanswered. As they wrote in the Washington Post last December, “We warned DHS that a migrant child could die in custody. Now one has.”

One watchdog’s non-response was echoed by the civil rights office, which, despite heightened outcry about harms posed by detention and the warnings of their own medical experts, has not conducted a single onsite investigation at family detention centers since September 2017. And perhaps even worse than non-action, DHS recently released a controversial new report in April 2019 that recommends confinement and detention of migrant children and overturning the Flores standards to allow for indefinite, prolonged detention.

This position is completely at odds with these whistleblowers’ disclosures, as well as the overwhelming medical research and consensus that detention of children, even with families, poses harm and indefinite detention exponentiates that harm.

Meanwhile, the abuses reported by these whistleblowers continue unabated, with no oversight or accountability by the agency watchdogs charged with promoting legal compliance and protecting the health, welfare and rights of immigrants held in civil detention. Because of the futility of internal oversight mechanisms, Gallagher and Drs. Allen and McPherson felt duty-bound to go to Congress and the press to raise the alarm and prevent foreseeable, ongoing risk of harm.

Twenty-four immigrants have died in ICE custody during the Trump administration.

Something is broken when the internal accountability mechanisms in the executive branch refuse to listen to whistleblowers, yet still claim to have held their agency accountable.

Yes, the recent Inspector General’s report did identify problems at four spot-checked sites exposed and recommend reforms for serious ICE abuses. But the striking contrast between the scope of the report and the scope of the problems we know have been raised by whistleblowers demonstrates that the OIG is not able, or willing, to meaningfully address ongoing and prevent future harms.

DHS’s watchdog mechanisms are broken and have consistently failed to prevent egregious harm to the thousands of vulnerable immigrants in DHS care. The concerns exposed by whistleblowers and reported in the press must not only be acknowledged, but fully investigated and addressed without any further delay. Congress must assert its oversight authority and exercise its oversight duty, immediately. The consequences of Congress failing to act are literally life and death.

The State Department recently announced a new policy requiring visa applicants to provide social media details on their petitions to obtain a U.S. visa. This dramatic expansion of the government’s collection of social media information comes while opportunities for legal immigration, including asylum claims, are being tightly restricted. Though intended to strengthen national security, the policy has serious implications for free expression and privacy, two fundamental pillars of internet freedom.

The policy poses a serious threat to freedom of expression. Collecting and monitoring the social media accounts of visa applicants will have a chilling effect on the ability to speak freely online for millions of people seeking to visit, work, study or reside in the United States. With no clear guidelines about what sort of content authorities might flag as concerning or disqualifying, users might err on the side of caution and self-censorship to ensure their online speech does not impact their applications.

This could disproportionately impact marginalized communities, particularly racial and religious minorities. For many, social media is more than just a form of connecting with friends and family — it is a primary source of news and information.

Collecting this data puts privacy at risk by creating a government database with a trove of some of the most intimate details about people’s lives. In addition to demographic identifiers, personal information such as family photos, life milestones, food and entertainment preferences, and everyday opinions will be swept up. It’s not clear how this data will be stored and used, or whether it will be transferred to other agencies for purposes beyond that of visa applications. As shown by a newly released report from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, the Department of Homeland Security, specifically Customs and Border Protection, can share social media data with federal, state and local government agencies, along with law enforcement and even multilateral governmental organizations and foreign states.

With no domestic data protection framework ensuring that the content gathered from millions of applicants is stored securely, this information could be vulnerable to domestic and foreign data breaches.

Publicly available reports offer little proof that social media monitoring benefits national security. Instead, this sort of data-gathering is susceptible to misinterpretation, especially if social media content is in languages other than English and if agencies are employing automated tools to review millions of posts. This monitoring inevitably will lead to false positives arbitrarily targeting thousands of individuals who will have little recourse for appeal.

Beyond the personal impacts on individual users lies a broader threat to global internet freedom. The “Freedom on the Net” report consistently has found that authorities learn from each other, copying restrictive policies and actions from foreign governments to implement at home. Specifically, less-free governments often cite actions of democratic states to justify their repressive policies. Take the Singaporean government, which recently pointed to Germany’s Network Enforcement Act when crafting its newly passed censorial Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation. Similarly, the European Union’s “right to be forgotten” — which allows online content that is false or outdated about an individual to be delisted from search results — has been co-opted by Russia to remove disreputable articles about local politicians.

Many governments around the world have signaled their interest in ramping up monitoring of social media content. In light of these patterns, governments likely will point to this new U.S. policy to justify similar speech-restricting and privacy-invading policies that can be used to limit immigration, refuse public services, or as a pretext to track journalists, human rights defenders, and other users critical of the state.

Already, people living in many of the world’s more repressive online environments have resorted to using aliases on social media in fear of reprisals for their speech. Meanwhile, to protect their identity and ensure their safety, many human rights defenders, journalists and other civil society actors must use anonymous and encrypted tools to conduct their work. U.S. authorities must not play into the hands of less democratic governments looking for justification to increase their own control over personal data. If other countries follow suit and adopt a similar policy, U.S. citizens could be forced to provide such personal information to visit foreign countries, including to less-free spaces such as the leading abuser of internet freedom, China.

The State Department should revoke its policy, and Congress should conduct rigorous oversight until it is overturned. It is clear that many democracies are struggling in the digital age, and this policy invades privacy and hinders free expression. To combat the rise of digital authoritarianism, the U.S. must be a leader in advancing internet freedom, not instituting policies that undermine it.

We could pay for every idiotic boondoggle proposed by the 300 Democratic presidential candidates if the current president would simply keep his central campaign promise to build a border wall and deport illegal aliens. (Back off — “illegal alien” is the term used in federal law.)

A 2017 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) found that illegal aliens cost the American taxpayer — on net — $116 billion a year.

That’s pretty high, but the actual number is more likely triple that.

Straight out of the chute, FAIR assumes that there are only 12.5 million illegal immigrants in the country, approximately the same number we’ve been told for the last 15 years as we impotently watched hundreds of thousands more stream across our border, year after year after year.

The 12 million figure is based on the self-reports of illegal aliens to U.S. census questionnaires. (Hello! I’m from the federal government. Did you break the law to enter our country? Now tell the truth! We have no way of knowing the answer, and if you say yes, you could be subjecting yourself to immediate deportation.)

More serious studies put the number considerably higher. At the low end, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Yale study last year put the number of illegals at 22 million. Yet Bear Stearns investment bank had it at 20 million back in 2005, and Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporters Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele reported in 2004 that 3 million illegals were crossing each year — so simple math would put it at well over 60 million today.

So, right there, the FAIR study underestimates the tab for illegal immigration by at least a factor of three, meaning the real cost is about $350 billion a year. That’s triple what Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) free college tuition plan will cost in a decade.

I don’t mean to bash FAIR. It’s sweet how immigration restrictionists always bend over backward to be impartial. But their circumspection doesn’t mean the rest of us have to ignore reality.

Journalists’ usual method of determining the cost of “unauthorized entries” — as they say — is to phone some fanatically pro-illegal immigration group, such as Cato or CASA, and get a quote sneering at anyone else’s estimate of the costs.

In a deeply investigated 2017 Washington Post article, for example, the Post cited the “belief” that illegal aliens “drain government resources.” Without looking at any facts or figures, the reporter disputed that “belief” with a quote from Cathryn Ann Paul of CASA: “It’s a myth that people who are undocumented don’t pay taxes.”

So there you have it! Cathryn Ann Paul says it’s a “myth.” Now let’s move on to the vibrant diversity being gifted to us by illegal aliens.

Earlier this year, The New York Times mocked President Trump’s tweet saying illegal immigration costs “250 Billion Dollars a year” by quoting big-business shill Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute: “There’s no basis to any of those numbers about the fiscal cost.” Am I doing OK, Mr. Koch?

The Times further explained that Trump’s figure “did not take into account the economic benefits of undocumented immigrants” — for example, the surprisingly affordable maids of some reporters.

Randy Capps of the Migration Policy Institute told the Times that studies of the cost of illegal immigration count only the costs or only the benefits. “They tend to talk past each other, unfortunately,” he said.

Well, the FAIR study counted both. For every dollar illegal immigrants pay in taxes — fees, Social Security withholding taxes, fuel surcharges, sales and property taxes — they collect $7 in government benefits: schooling, English as a second language classes, hospital costs, school lunch programs, Medicaid births, police resources and so on.

A few years ago, the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector looked at the winners and losers under our government redistribution system and found that in 2010, households headed by illegal immigrants received $14,387 more in government services than they paid in taxes.

Legal immigrant households also were big winners, receiving $4,344 more in government services than they paid in taxes. (Our government does a fantastic job deciding who can immigrate here.)

Only with nonimmigrant households does the government almost break even, doling out a mere $310 more in benefits than those households pay in taxes. (Surprise! The deficit is on track to hit $1 trillion next year.)

Like FAIR estimates, Rector’s study accepted the U.S. Census Bureau’s allegation that we’ve had the same number of illegal aliens in this country since the beginning of the Bush administration. Also like the FAIR study, Rector’s examination counted only the obvious costs imposed on us by illegal immigrants — things such as health care, education, fire and police protection, parks, roads, and bridges.

But there are all sorts of costs that no one ever counts. What about Americans’ lost wages to illegal immigrants who are willing to work for $7 an hour? Even if they don’t apply for unemployment insurance, how do we count the cost of suicide, opioid addiction or other anti-social behavior?

Why not count the lost wages themselves? We want to know the cost-benefit ratio to those already here, not to the new total that includes the illegal immigrants. If it’s a net negative to those already here — well, that’s the point.

And what was the tab of illegal immigration to the family of Kate Steinle, the young woman shot dead by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco in 2015? There were obvious, tragic costs, of course — but there also are hidden costs, such as the lost productivity of the people close to Kate for years to come, the additional police presence around the San Francisco pier where she was killed and the reduction in tourist dollars.

We hear about the great largesse bestowed upon us by illegal immigrants all day long. The only hidden benefits are the warm feelings of self-righteousness that the CASA spokesman gets when bleating about illegals and the happiness that cheap servants bring to the top 10 percent.

In Maine, overdose deaths from opioids, mostly Mexican heroin, have skyrocketed in the last decade, up from an already catastrophic 100 to 200 deaths per year to more than double that — 418 in 2018. What is the cost of the state legislature spending weeks debating a bill to provide heroin addicts with Narcan? The cost of more crime and more police?

This isn’t to gratuitously mention the fact that completely unvetted, self-chosen illegal immigrants can, in fact, be rapists, drug dealers and cop-killers. It is to say that no analysis of illegal immigration’s cost can ever capture the full price.

Ante las dificultades para seguir su camino hacia Estados Unidos debido al despliegue de 6,000 efectivos de la Guardia Nacional de México en la frontera sur, decenas de migrantes centroamericanos han decidido quedarse a trabajar en Tapachula, estado de Chiapas.

El presidente insistió este domingo en que los demócratas tienen ese límite de tiempo para negociar rápidamente cambios simples en el sistema de asilo y los vacíos legales de las leyes migratorias o de lo contrario comenzará lo que llamó “la gran deportación”.

El Secretario del Departmento de Seguridad Nacional, Kevin McAleenan, habría saboteado las redadas que anunció Donald Trump antes de que estuvieran programadas, según tres funcionarios actuales y dos ex altos funcionarios del gobierno.

McAleenan habría filtrado la información a la prensa sobre la operación nacional de ICE que empezaría el domingo, con el fin obstaculizar el plan de la Casa Blanca del cual no era entusiasta, dijeron las fuestes conocedoras del proceso en entrevista con The Washington Examiner.

El presidente Trump anunció el sábado que la operación planeada para comenzar el domingo, dirigida a las familias inmigrantes que permanecen ilegalmente en el país a pesar de que se les ordenó su expulsión, fue suspendida para dar a los legisladores dos semanas para negociar un paquete de medidas migratorias.

Las redadas planeadas en ciudades como Los Ángeles, Miami , Nueva York y Houston fueron reportadas por primera vez por el Washington Post el viernes.

Las fuentes dijeron que solo un pequeño número de personas en la Casa Blanca, ICE y DHS estaban al tanto de los detalles del plan, incluidas las ciudades, la fecha y la hora, y quiénes serían los objetivos.

Dos funcionarios dijeron que el secretario interino, que fue promovido internamente en abril, había luchado durante meses en conversaciones a puerta cerrada con funcionarios de la Casa Blanca, el ex director interino de ICE Ronald Vitiello y el nuevo director interino de ICE Mark Morgan contra el plan.

“Sé que no ha aprobado esta operación durante meses”, dijo una persona familiarizada con esas conversaciones privadas durante una llamada telefónica el sábado por la noche. “El presidente no perdería eso. ICE no perdería eso. Solo hay unas pocas personas involucradas en estas discusiones … La única que pudo haber compartido los detalles de esas operaciones fue Kevin”.

“Esa es nuestra creencia”, dijo un segundo funcionario cuando se le preguntó si McAleenan estaba detrás de la filtración. “La secretaría no me apoyó desde el primer día”.

“La filtración de ubicaciones y detalles para evitar que la operación sucediera no solo dañó la integridad operacional, sino que puso en peligro la seguridad y el bienestar de sus propios oficiales”, concluyó el tercer funcionario.

Los inmigrantes que intentan cruzar la frontera de México hacia Estados Unidos se enfrentan a un nuevo enemigo: la Guardia Nacional impulsada por el Gobierno de Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

En imágenes de agencias internacionales y medios mexicanos, como La Jornada, se muestra a elementos desplegados en la frontera que separan a una familia de inmigrantes, al impedir el cruce de algunos de sus miembros.

Los hombres y los niños lograron cruzar, a diferencia de las mujeres, lo que dejó separadas a estas familias, por ahora, ya que quienes lograron cruzar a EEUU deberán ser procesados por la Patrulla Fronteriza, en caso de detenerlos, mientras que las personas en el lado mexicano enfrentarán la norma de ese país, que podría derivar en la deportación.

El Gobierno mexicano intensificó sus acciones contra inmigrantes centroamericanos, luego de un acuerdo con la Administración del presidente Donald Trump para detener su cruce a los Estados Unidos.

Aunque el presidente López Obrador inició su Plan Integral de Desarrollo en Centroamérica, el cual recibe apoyo de varios países, su Gobierno endureció medidas contra los indocumentados, luego de las amenazas del mandatario estadounidense de imponer aranceles a productos mexicanos de entre un 5 y un 25%.

Defensores de los derechos de inmigrantes y sus simpatizantes advirtieron sobre arrestos alrededor del país a partir del domingo.

Se prevé que la medida será similar a los operativos que las autoridades han realizado de forma regular desde 2003 y que con frecuencia resultan en cientos de arrestos.

Aunque en esta ocasión es diferente porque el presidente Donald Trump anunció el lunes en Twitter que sería el comienzo de un esfuerzo para deportar a millones de personas que están en el país sin autorización, algo casi imposible dado los recursos limitados del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de Estados Unidos (ICE), que suele hacer los arrestos y lidiar con las órdenes de deportación.

Así opera ICE:

LO QUE PUEDEN HACER

ICE está a cargo de arrestar y deportar a inmigrantes que carecen de estatus legal para estar en el país.

Una forma de hacerlo es a través de acuerdos entre ICE y las cárceles locales que mantienen arrestadas a personas por crímenes pasadas sus fechas de liberación para que ICE pueda revisar su estatus.

La agencia también hace arrestos de la manera tradicional, al aparecerse en sus casas o lugares de trabajo.

Sin embargo, la cantidad de recursos y empleados limita su capacidad para hacer arrestos a gran escala simultáneamente.

QUÉ HAN HECHO

El año fiscal pasado, la Oficina de Detención y Deportación de ICE arrestó a más de 158,500 inmigrantes sin autorización en el país, un aumento del 11% comparado con el año previo y la mayor cantidad desde 2014. La agencia dijo que 66% de los arrestados son criminales condenados.

Aunque ICE arresta a personas de diferentes formas, son los operativos más grandes, como las redadas en lugares de trabajo, los que atraen más atención.

CÓMO LO HACEN

Las autoridades suelen tener una lista de personas buscadas. Visitan el domicilio que tienen de la persona, ya sea su casa o su lugar de trabajo, e intentan detenerla. Pueden preguntar a familiares, vecinos, colegas o jefes sobre el paradero de la persona que quieren arrestar.

Los agentes de ICE pueden arrestar a personas que descubren que están en el país sin autorización mientras buscan a alguien más. A veces terminan arrestados quienes responden las preguntas de los agentes sobre alguien más.

Estos arrestos “colaterales” pueden representar una gran porción de los arrestos en cualquier operativo.

QUÉ SE ESPERA

Son 10 las ciudades en las que se efectuarían las redadas masivas: Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Miami, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco.

Las autoridades de ICE dijeron esta semana que enviaron unas 2,000 cartas en febrero a personas en “unidades familiares” que ya habían recibido órdenes definitivas para dejar el país. Las personas que recibieron esas cartas podrían estar en las listas de los operativos.

Una vez más el presidente Donald Trump recurre a la guerra psicológica para tratar de lograr sendas victorias polílticas, esta vez contra los demócratas usando las amenazas de redadas nacionales de ICE para deportar a “millones de indocumentdados”.

Luego que Trump suspendiera las redadas por dos semanas mientras negocia con los demócratas , Julián Castro, aspirante a la candidatura demócrata para las elecciones de 2020, criticó este domingo el “circo” que crea el presidente con sus supuestas crisis, como la de las anunciadas redadas contra familias indocumentadas, para después ir de “héroe” cuando las pospone.

“Este presidente crea crisis y después intentar ir del héroe que las soluciona. Lo único que crea es un circo y no una solución. Yo quiero encontrar soluciones, no quiero circos”, dijo en una conferencia de prensa en Miami.

Trump anunció este sábado que, a petición de los demócratas, aplazaba dos semanas unas redadas en las que desde este domingo se quería detener y deportar a unos 2.000 inmigrantes, horas después de que defendiera públicamente la necesidad de realizar estas operaciones.

Castro dijo que no descarta que finalmente se vayan a producir estas redadas porque las palabras del presidente no son de fiar y no dejan de ser una “amenaza” en su negociación con el Congreso.

En este sentido, y cuestionado por Efe, dijo que la política de asilo sobre la que Trump quiere un acuerdo en las próximas dos semanas debe formar parte de una reforma migratoria integral y no ahora con las posibles redadas como “medida de presión”.

Sobre la polémica que hay en Estados Unidos sobre si los centros donde el Gobierno mantiene a indocumentados menores de edad son albergues o campos de concentración, Castro dijo que más allá de la palabras que los definen hay que centrarse en lo que sucede en estas instalaciones.

Destacó reportes de prensa de que los menores no tienen acceso a jabón o pasta de dientes y no tienen ropa limpia con la que cambiarse y criticó que no haya dinero para estos elementos de higiene mínima cuando el Gobierno Trump pide miles de millones para construir un muro en la frontera con México.

Cuestionado sobre el hecho de que el anterior gobierno, liderado por el demócrata Barack Obama, ya había tenido detenidos a cientos de menores migrantes cuando llegaron miles de ellos desde Centroamérica, el exalcalde de San Antonio (Texas) fue rotundo.

“No me importa el partido (demócrata) me importan los seres humanos, que se trate a estos niños de manera adecuada y los tratemos con compasión y sentido común y no con la crueldad que demuestra esta Administración”, dijo.

El texano está en Miami para participar en el primer debate de aspirantes demócratas a la Casa Blanca que se celebrará entre miércoles y jueves próximo, con diez aspirantes en cada uno de ellos.

Para Castro, será una oportunidad de “presentarse” ante millones de votantes y así subir en las encuestas en intención de voto, donde aparece con cerca del 1 % en varios sondeos.

Los hispanos juegan un papel en esta posibilidad, donde, según sondeos sobre este grupo de votantes, aparece como tercero, aunque alejado del expresidente Joe Biden y el senador Bernie Sanders.

Este electorado latino, dijo, tiene un “enorme potencial” para influir en el resultado en regiones como Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Colorado y su estado natal de Texas en las presidenciales de 2020.

“Confío en que mi candidatura, si soy el nominado, va a ayudar a galvanizar el voto latino como nunca antes”, dijo en una campaña ante un Trump que, en su opinión, está siendo un “desastre” para los hispanos.

El presidente Donald Trump anunció este sábado que retrasará por dos semanas las deportaciones masivas que estaban planeadas para este fin de semana en diez ciudades, una de ellas Miami.

Las fuentes la Policía de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) del Herald no pudieron confirmar el sábado en la tarde que los anuncios del Presidente fueran verídicos y dijeron que los agentes no han sido informados sobre los cambios en el calendario.

Las autoridades federales de inmigración estaban listas paraactuar tan pronto como este domingo en Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco.

La Policía de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) tenía planeado buscar específicamente a un millón de personas para deportarlos, quienes pese a tener órdenes definitivas de deportación emitidas por jueces federales siguen en el país.

El presidente colgó un tuit con el mensaje a las 2:56 p.m. y explicó que espera que los republicanos y los demócratas busquen soluciones para el problema de inmigración en la frontera con México en ese tiempo.

“A solicitud de los demócratas, he demorado el Proceso de Retiro de la Inmigración Ilegal (Deportación) por dos semanas para ver si los demócratas y los republicanos pueden ponerse de acuerdo y hallar una solución a los problemas de asilo y resquicios legales en la frontera sur”, escribió Trump en Twitter. “Si no, ¡las deportaciones empezarán!”

La Casa Blanca no respondió de inmediato a una solicitud de comentario el sábado con respecto a la publicación en la red social de Trump. No está claro a qué se refería el Presidente cuando dijo que la demora se dio “a solicitud de los demócratas”.

Tres funcionarios del gobierno dijeron a la Associated Press que se canceló la operación porque se habían filtrado detalles a la prensa y la seguridad de los agentes podía correr peligro. Las fuentes hablaron bajo la condición de anonimato por no estar autorizadas a informar al público.

El sábado por la mañana, la presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, la demócrata Nancy Pelosi, emitió un comunicado en el que pedía a la administración que suspendiera las redadas de inmigración.

“Mañana es domingo, y como muchas personas de fe asisten a los servicios religiosos, el Presidente ha ordenado redadas sin corazón”, manifestó Pelosi. “Espero que antes del domingo, los líderes de la comunidad religiosa y otras organizaciones que respetan la dignidad y el valor de las personas insten al Presidente a detener esta acción brutal que destruirá a las familias e inyectará el terror en nuestras comunidades”.

El sábado, Pelosi respondió al anuncio de Trump con su propio tuit, en el que afirmó: “Señor presidente, la postergación es bienvenida. Se requiere tiempo para una reforma migratoria amplia. Las familias deben mantenerse juntas”.

Abogados de inmigración del sur de Florida le dijeron al Herald que tienen dudas sobre el anuncio del Presidente y que creen que sus clientes aún podrían estar en riesgo inmediato este fin de semana.

“Todavía tienen órdenes de expulsión. Tienen su información o su última dirección conocida. Tienen la financiación y los oficiales”, dijo Sandy Pineda, que trabaja en el área del sur de Florida. “Esta puede ser una manera para que las autoridades los atrapen con la guardia baja”.

Añadió: “Los domingos son ideales. No hay muchos bufetes de abogados abiertos y disponibles. Florida ya no es un estado santuario. Las personas no pueden ir a una iglesia o un lugar donde no pueden ser arrestados. No estoy segura si es algún tipo de estrategia política; es jugar con la vida de la gente”.

La presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes de Estados Unidos, Nancy Pelosi, llamó por teléfono al presidente Donald Trump y le pidió que pospusiera sus redadas planeadas para deportar a los inmigrantes que se encuentran en el país de manera ilegal.

La demócrata por California llamó a Trump el viernes por la noche, según una persona familiarizada con la situación y que no estaba autorizada a hablar de ella públicamente. La persona habló con la condición de que no fuera identificada.

Estaba previsto que las redadas, que suscitaron la ira y preocupación entre los defensores de los inmigrantes, comenzaran el domingo contra personas sobre las que pesan órdenes definitivas de deportación, incluidas familias cuyos casos de inmigración fueron resueltos sumariamente por los jueces.

Trump anunció una postergación de dos semanas con un tuit el sábado por la tarde. Pelosi respondió con su propio tuit: “Señor Presidente, se agradece la postergación. Se necesita tiempo para una reforma migratoria integral. Las familias deben estar juntas”.

El presidente le había dicho a Pelosi que estudiaría la solicitud, dijo la persona familiarizada con la situación.

Se desconoce de qué más conversaron. Sin embargo, en un comunicado emitido el sábado antes de que Trump anunciara su decisión, Pelosi apeló a la misma compasión manifestada por el mandatario cuando canceló un ataque contra Irán debido al posible costo de vidas.

Trump suspendió temporalmente la planeada operación nacional para deportar a quienes viven ilegalmente en Estados Unidos, incluidas familias, diciendo que dará a los legisladores dos semanas a fin de que encuentren soluciones a la problemática de la frontera sur.

Trump adoptó la decisión después de que Pelosi le telefoneara el viernes para solicitarle que cancelara las redadas. Sin embargo, tres funcionarios del gobierno dijeron que la cancelación del operativo no era sólo un asunto político.

Dijeron que altos funcionarios del Servicio de Control de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) manifestaron su seria preocupación de que la seguridad de los agentes estaría en peligro porque muchos pormenores de las redadas se hicieron públicos.

Las fuentes solicitaron el anonimato para hacer declaraciones sobre conversaciones privadas.

“A solicitud de los demócratas, he aplazado dos semanas el Proceso de Retiro de la Inmigración Ilegal (las deportaciónes) para ver si los demócratas y los republicanos pueden ponerse de acuerdo y hallar una solución a los problemas de asilo y resquicios legales en la frontera sur”, escribió Trump en Twitter. “Si no, ¡las deportaciones empezarán!”.

La cancelación es otro indicio de las dificultades del gobierno para controlar la crisis fronteriza. El número de personas que cruzan hacia Estados Unidos desde México se ha elevado marcadamente en el gobierno de Trump, a pesar de la severidad de su discurso y sus políticas enérgicas. Compaginar los grandes cambios operativos que pretende la Casa Blanca con la realidad en el terreno es un desafío constante para el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional.

Trump avisó inicialmente de las redadas cuando anunció la operación en un tuit a principios de la semana, diciendo que se avecinaba un operativo y la agencia comenzaría a deportar a “millones” de personas que están ilegalmente en Estados Unidos.

Después, las filtraciones a la prensa incluyeron pormenores delicados sobre el accionar policial, como el día en que empezarían las redadas _el domingo_, así como los nombres de las ciudades donde se efectuarían y otros detalles operacionales.

Carol Danko, portavoz del ICE, censuró en un comunicado el sábado las filtraciones debido a sus posibles consecuencias para el personal de la agencia y dijo que “cualquier filtración que exponga operaciones policiales delicadas es atroz y pone en peligro la seguridad de nuestros agentes”.

“El presidente mencionó la importancia de evitar el daño colateral de 150 vidas en Irán. Yo esperaría que aplique el mismo criterio para evitar el daño colateral a decenas de miles de niños atemorizados por las acciones de él”, afirmó Pelosi.

La legisladora dijo que las redadas son “despiadadas”.

Detener el flujo de inmigrantes ilegales ha sido un asunto distintivo de la campaña de Trump, pero el Congreso no ha podido convertir en ley las propuestas del mandatario debido a la oposición tanto de republicanos como de demócratas. Las conversaciones bipartidistas sobre el sistema de manejo de la inmigración comenzaron y se estancaron, pero se han reanudado entre algunos senadores.

Los legisladores están sopesando si conceden 4.600 millones de dólares en recursos de emergencia para ayudar a las agencias fronterizas que pasan apuros para manejar el creciente número de migrantes que cruzan la frontera. La medida fue aprobada en una comisión del Senado por 30 votos y uno en contra. Sin embargo, la Cámara de Representantes está sopesando tomar su propia iniciativa. Los fondos se están agotando y el Congreso intenta aprobar una medida en antelación al receso de ambas cámaras de la semana entrante.

Requiere meses coordinar redadas de inmigración. El factor sorpresa también es un elemento importante. Los agentes del ICE no tienen órdenes de allanamiento y trabajan a partir de expedientes en los que aparecen direcciones y deben acudir a los domicilios de las personas y pedir que les permitan la entrada. Los inmigrantes no están obligados a abrir sus puertas y cada vez más no lo hacen. Por lo general los agentes capturan a entre 30 y 40% de las personas sobre las que iban.

Legisladores demócratas criticaron enérgicamente la operación prevista como algo cruel y muchos alcaldes dijeron que SE rehusarían A cooperar con el ICE. Los defensores de los inmigrantes han intensificado sus campañas para que esas personas conozcan sus derechos.

Otra complicación es que el ICE necesita tramitar documentos de viaje con el país adonde será deportada una persona, así que a menudo los inmigrantes terminan detenidos temporalmente, por lo menos mientras esperan un vuelo. El ICE había reservado habitaciones de hotel para las familias en caso de que las redadas comenzaran el domingo como estaba previsto.

La población de adultos detenidos era de 53.141 hasta el 8 de junio, aunque la agencia sólo tenía presupuesto para 45.000. Había 1.662 personas de familias detenidas, cuyos centros de detención están a su máxima capacidad y uno de los cuales tiene recluidos a adultos solos.

El presidente Donald Trump anunció este sábado que a pedido de los demócratas pospone por dos semanas las redadas masivas con las que el Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) comenzaría el domingo a arrestar a inmigrantes con órdenes de deportaci´on en 10 ciudades del país.

“He retrasado el proceso de remoción de inmigración ilegal (deportación) por dos semanas para ver si los demócratas y los republicanos pueden reunirse y buscar una solución al asilo y a los problemas en la frontera sur. ¡Si no, comienzan las deportaciones!”, escribió en su cuenta de Twitter. El mandatario revirtió temporalmente la medida luego de que a inicios de semana amenazara con que “millones” de personas serían expulsadas de Estados Unidos.

Este viernes, fuentes del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional confirmaron que el operativo para arrestar a unas 2,000 familias de inmigrantes —conocido como ‘Operación Familia’— comenzaría en ciudades como Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Miami, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco. Habían dicho que duraría varios días.

En ellas, la mayoría ciudades santuario, algunas de sus autoridades habían condenado la decisión desde el mismo día del anuncio y habían asegurado que sus policías no cooperarían con ICE ni llevarían a cabo tareas que son responsabilidad de las autoridades federales, como mantener detenidos en las cárceles a inmigrantes que el gobierno considera “deportables” a pedido de ICE.

En el caso de Chicago, por ejemplo, su alcaldesa Lori Lightfoot ordenó incluso a la policía que bloqueara el acceso de la agencia federal a sus bases de datos. Otros pidieron a la comunidad no entrar en pánico e informarse sobre sus derechos.

Desde inicios de la semana, el director en funciones de ICE, Mark Morgan, informó que en febrero la agencia federal había enviado cartas a unas 2,000 familias de indocumentados que llegaron recientemente al país en busca de asilo, indicándoles que quedaron sujetas a deportación tras concluir sus procesos y recibir por parte de la corte una orden de expulsión.

Este sábado, Trump dijo a reporteros desde la Casa Blanca que el foco de las operaciones serían pandilleros de la MS-13, aunque otras autoridades habían hablado de familias. Ya en ese momento, el mandatario aseguraba que sabía que algunas de las ciudades en la mira de ICE se opondrían a la decisión.

Pero no fueron solo los alcaldes de las ciudades target de ICE los que reaccionaron con el anuncio. Organizaciones como la Unión Americana de Libertades Civiles (ACLU) también le reclamaron al gobierno de Trump su estrategia de “seguir golpeando con miedo el corazón de nuestras comunidades”, como escribió en Twitter Cecilia Wang, la subdirectora legal. ACLU —igual que hicieron la mayoría de los alcaldes— también informó de herramientas para que la comunidad indocumentada pudiera estar preparada ante las inminentes redadas anunciadas.

Organización y presupuesto
Fuentes del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) al tanto de los planes de la Casa Blanca y que pidieron anonimato dijeron a Univision Noticias el viernes que la organización de un plan de arrestos para deportar a miles de personas requiere un nivel de organización “enorme” que hasta ahora no se ha implementado.

Señalaron además que las agencias involucradas en este tipo de actividades cuentan con un presupuesto mínimo que se refleja en el pedido de fondos de emergencia al Congreso que hasta ahora no ha sido aprobado.

A comienzos de mayo, el presidente Donald Trump le pidió al Congreso otros $4,500 millones en fondos de emergencia para lidiar con la crisis en la frontera sur, donde la Patrulla Fronteriza registró en mayo la llegada de una cifra récord de inmigrantes en busca de asilo: fueron más de 130,000 en ese mes.

De acuerdo con datos de la ICE, la agencia tiene en sus manos poco más de un millón de órdenes finales de deportación. “ Pero conocer sus paraderos requiere un complejo trabajo de inteligencia”, indicaron las fuentes.

El presidente Donald Trump anunció el sábado que postergará por dos semanas las redadas del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas d Estados Unidos (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) que estaban planeadas a tener lugar el domingo en 10 de las principales ciudades de EE.UU., pero que las deportaciones continuarán a menos que el Congreso encuentre una solución en la frontera entre México y Estados Unidos.

La decisión del presidente se produce tras las críticas de los alcaldes de las ciudades y de la presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, Nancy Pelosi, entre otros.

Trump escribió que decidió el aplazamiento para ver ” si los demócratas y republicanos pueden trabajar juntos en una solución al tema del asilo y los problemas en la frontera sur”.

“Si no lo hacen, “¡empezarán las deportaciones!”, concluyó.

Un alto funcionario de inmigración le dijo a CNN el viernes que ICE planeaba arrestar y deportar a unas 2.000 familias migrantes con deportaciones ordenadas por el tribunal en 10 ciudades a partir del domingo.

Se habían planeado redadas en Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Miami, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco.

La presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, Nancy Pelosi, llamó al presidente Trump el viernes por la noche y le pidió que suspendiera las redadas de deportación de ICE, según comentó una fuente familiarizada con la llamada a CNN. Los dos hablaron a las 7:20 pm hora del Este el viernes durante unos 12 minutos.

El subsecretario de prensa de la Casa Blanca, Judd Deere, confirmó que el viernes hubo una llamada telefónica entre Trump y Pelosi.

El sábado, Pelosi presionó para que Trump detuviera las redadas, que calificó de “desalmadas” y de una “acción brutal que destruirá a las familias e inyectará terror en nuestras comunidades”.

“Estas familias son miembros trabajadores de nuestras comunidades y nuestro país. La acción del presidente no hace distinción entre una violación de estado y cometer un delito grave”, dijo Pelosi en una declaración.

Un asesor democrático de alto nivel dice que el presidente Trump está “tratando de crear influencia en una situación en la que no tiene ninguno”, y agrega que “no funcionará”. “Los demócratas no van a negociar sus valores. Se ha alejado de varios acuerdos sobre inmigración. Aquí no nos hacemos ilusiones”, dijo el asesor.

El contexto
El viernes se supo que Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de Estados Unidos (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) estaba presionando para arrestar y deportar a familias con orden de expulsión por parte de la corte en 10 ciudades a partir del domingo, según un alto funcionario de inmigración, después de que un tuit del presidente Donald Trump revelara que una operación era inminente.

Trump tuiteó el sábado en la mañana:

“Las personas que ICE detendrá ya han sido ordenadas para ser deportadas. Esto significa que han huido de la ley y han huido de los tribunales. Estas son personas que se supone que deben regresar a su país de origen. Rompieron la ley al entrar al país, y ahora al quedarse”.

“Cuando la gente entra a nuestro país ilegalmente, ¡será DEPORTADA!”.

ICE dijo que estaba considerando opciones para arrestar y deportar a las familias que han pasado por sus procedimientos legales, pero se ha abstenido de proporcionar públicamente el alcance y calendario de la operación, lo que, según los funcionarios, podría conducir a una situación en la que una familia es separada y podría causar una reacción violenta en contra el departamento.

Según escribió el mandatario, con este paso atrás le da una oportunidad a demócratas y republicanos para que se pongan de acuerdo en política migratoria

WASHINGTON.— Activistas comunitarios en estados como Illinois y Maryland han reforzado sus campañas para educar a los inmigrantes indocumentados sobre sus derechos legales y constitucionales, ante inminentes redadas nacionales que la Administración Trump prevé comenzar tan pronto como el próximo domingo.

La Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) no quiso negar ni confirmar informes del diario “The Washington Post” de que las redadas, parte de la denominada “operación familiar”, se llevarán a cabo a partir del próximo domingo en hasta diez ciudades principales del país, incluyendo Chicago (Illinois), Miami (Florida), Los Angeles (California) y otros destinos de inmigrantes indocumentados.

Sin embargo, una funcionaria de ICE, que pidió el anonimato, dijo a Noticias Telemundo que la misión de la agencia es hacer cumplir el imperio de la ley, y que sus operaciones están dirigidas a quienes “violan las leyes de inmigración”.

Pero ICE no precisó qué pasaría con niños nacidos en EEUU de padres indocumentados sometidos a trámites de deportación.

El año pasado, más de 2,700 niños fueron separados de sus padres en la frontera sur bajo la política de “tolerancia cero” que la Administración tuvo que suspender por orden judicial.

Quiénes están en la mira de ICE
Tal como lo adelantó en Twitter el presidente Donald Trump el lunes pasado, y lo confirmó después a Noticias Telemundo una fuente de la Administración, que pidió el anonimato, las operaciones policiales estarán dirigidas a individuos y familias que han recibido órdenes de deportación finales de un juez de Inmigración, tras agotar sus recursos legales.

En esa ocasión, el funcionario de alto rango de la Administración, que pidió el anonimato, explicó que hay “más de un millón” de inmigrantes indocumentados con órdenes de deportación finales, y se quejó de que la mayoría no acude a las audiencias judiciales para evadir su deportación.

Estas redadas iniciales de ICE tendrán como principal blanco a hasta 2,000 familias, que aparentemente recibieron órdenes de deportación de un juez pero permanecen ocultos en el país.

En ese sentido, el director interino de ICE, Mark Morgan, dijo en conferencia telefónica con periodistas esta semana que el DHS envió cartas en febrero pasado a los individuos advirtiéndoles de las órdenes de deportación pendientes y, a estas alturas, “no tenemos más opción que utilizar nuestra autoridad… para identificarlos y deportarlos”.

ICE responde a las noticias sobre inminentes redadas
Por medio de un comunicado, un portavoz de ICE dijo que la agencia no ofrecerá detalles sobre las operaciones que lleva a cabo o planea llevar a cabo, citando preocupación por la seguridad de los agentes y su deber para hacer cumplir la ley.

“Como siempre, ICE prioriza el arresto y la remoción de extranjeros presentes ilegalmente que representan una amenaza para la seguridad nacional, la seguridad pública y la seguridad fronteriza“, escribió la agencia.

“De hecho, el 90 por ciento de los extranjeros arrestados por el componente de Operaciones de Ejecución y Remoción de ICE en el año fiscal 2018 tenían una(s) condena(s) criminal(es) pendiente(s), eran fugitivos de ICE, o ingresaron ilegalmente al país después de haber sido retirados previamente”, añadió la agencia.

Según Morgan, las familias no quedarán exentas de las redadas, aunque ICE aplicará las leyes “con compasión y dignidad”.

En declaraciones a Noticias Telemundo, tanto líderes de la oposición demócrata como activistas comunitarios denunciaron hoy las redadas como una táctica de la Administración para infundir el “terror” entre los inmigrantes y sumar votos entre la base republicana para la reelección de Trump en 2020.

El congresista demócrata de Chicago (Illinois), Jesús “Chuy” García, dijo que las redadas son “una movida electorera… la xenofobia fue clave para la elección del presidente, y sin duda alguna están repitiendo esta fórmula” para mantener la Casa Blanca por otros cuatro años en 2020.

“Es importante que nuestra gente defienda y proteja sus derechos”, recalcó García, cuya oficina está coordinando talleres comunitarios en Chicago al respecto.

Por su parte, el congresista demócrata por California, Raúl Ruiz, dijo que las redadas tienen el objetivo de “crear terror, por razones políticas”, y aconsejó a los inmigrantes a evitar hacer cosas que los pongan en el radar de las autoridades federales.

Ya antes del anuncio de Trump el lunes pasado, hace unas semanas agentes de ICE hicieron una visita a Canton Carwash, un negocio de lavado de carros en Baltimore (Maryland), para comprobar el estatus migratorio de sus empleados. Alrededor de 40 empleados fueron posteriormente despedidos.

El alcalde demócrata de Baltimore, Jack Young, y los ejecutivos demócratas de los cinco principales condados de Maryland, emitieron ayer un comunicado conjunto en el que reafirmaron su compromiso con acoger a los inmigrantes y sus contribuciones.

“Nos mantenemos unidos al abrazar la diversidad, y nuestros departamentos policiales y empleados de las agencias seguirán trabajando para proteger el respeto a los derechos civiles de todos”, dijeron en el comunicado.

La comunidad se moviliza
Grupos defensores de los inmigrantes han movilizado recursos y voluntarios para educar a los inmigrantes indocumentados sobre sus derechos, al precisar que toda persona en EEUU, sin importar su estatus migratorio, tiene protecciones garantizadas bajo la Constitución.

Jorge Escobar, activista de “CASA de Maryland”, explicó que, en la mayoría de los casos, los agentes de ICE no tienen una orden firmada por un juez para allanar una vivienda, y eso es una clara violación de las leyes.

“Tienen derecho a guardar silencio, tienen derecho a un abogado, a hablar con un consulado de su país de origen, etc. Cada individuo, independientemente de su estatus migratorio en este país, tiene derechos constitucionales, y cuando se violan, uno los puede llevar, incluso al gobierno federal, a las cortes”, explicó Escobar.

Por ello, “CASA de Maryland” llevará a cabo mañana, sábado, un taller de información en el área de Fairmount Heights (Maryland), para que la comunidad inmigrante “no tenga miedo” y, sobre todo, conozca sus derechos cuando agentes de ICE toquen a su puerta.

En Chicago, organizaciones como el Centro Nacional de Justicia para Inmigrantes (NIJC), y la Coalición de Illinois para los Derechos de los Inmigrantes y Refugiados (ICIRR), entre otros, también han difundido una serie de consejos y protección a los migrantes si son detenidos o contactados por ICE.

Aunque está claro que el DHS no ha tenido nunca los recursos necesarios para arrestar y deportar a los once millones de inmigrantes indocumentados en EEUU, las redadas policiales, a menor o mayor escala, sí tienen un efecto inmediato en la comunidad inmigrante.

A través de redes sociales y mensajes internos, los activistas dan cuenta de padres indocumentados que están retirando a sus hijos de programas de verano, y evitan salidas a sitios públicos, incluso no van a misa.

El Gobierno del presidente Donald Trump y el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE) que llevan, prácticamente, una semana anunciando una supuesta redada masiva en el país contra indocumentados a partir de este domingo enfrentan un impedimento que podría arruinar sus planes: las autoridades locales.

Varios funcionarios municipales en estados como California, Nueva York, Florida, Illinois y Texas han expresado en las últimas horas su negativa a colaborar con las entidades federales.

Funcionarios de varias de las ciudades señaladas como posibles focos de las acciones de “La Migra” han tildado como estrategia de miedo el anuncio de Trump y reiteraron que no están dispuestos a extenderle la mano a ICE.

La administración del presidente ha amenazado con intervenir en al menos 10 ciudades, tales como Nueva York , Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles, Houston y Baltimore, con hasta 2,000 familias que ya tienen casos abiertos de deportación.

Chicago

La alcaldesa de Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, dijo que la Policía no va a cooperar con ICE.

“Yo personalmente hablé con los jefes de ICE en Chicago y expresé mi fuerte objeción a estas redadas. Más allá, yo he reiterado que el CPD no va a cooperar o facilitar ninguna acción por parte de ICE”.

Adicional, el superintendente de ese organismo Eddie T. Johnson dijo que retiró el acceso de oficiales federales migratorios a su base de datos.

Baltimore

El alcalde Bernard C. “Jack” Young fue otro funcionario municipal que se unió a la cadena en contra de los planes de Trump.

“Estoy orgulloso que Baltimore está comprometido en mantener los valores estadounidenses de respeto a los derechos y a la dignidad de todos los residentes. Independientemente, de la posición del Gobierno federal, nosotros continuaremos con nuestra decisión de ser inclusivos, justos y acogedores”, indicó.

Denver

El alcalde Michael B. Hancock expresó, por su parte, que están del lado de los inmigrantes.

“Queremos reiterar que Denver está con los inmigrantes y familias de refugiados, que nosotros no apoyamos la separación de las familias migrantes y las redadas para propagar el miedo en nuestra comunidad”, sostuvo Hancock, quien -sin embargo- dijo no haber recibido notificación de potenciales movidas de La Migra en la ciudad.

Houston

El alcalde de esta demarcación texana Sylvester Turner también se pronunció contra las intenciones de las autoridades federales al también destacar que no habían recibido ninguna comunicación sobre los planes de ICE.

“La Ciudad no intenta hacer el trabajo de ICE, aunque no obstruye la labor de ICE. Nosotros vamos a seguir siendo una Ciudad que construye relaciones, no muros”, dijo Turner.

Los Angeles

En el caso de esta ciudad californiana, el alcalde Eric Garcetti fue claro en que departamentos como LAPD no va a asistir en las supuestas redadas migratorias.

“Los Angeles siempre estará del lado de nuestras hermanas y hermanos inmigrantes, y nuestros oficiales de ley y de orden nunca participarán de estas acciones”, planteó. “Ningún Angelino debe tener miedo de ser arrebatado de su hogar o separado de sus seres queridos- y nosotros estamos haciendo todo lo que podemos para proveerles a las familias inmigrantes la información y el apoyo que necesitan”.

En el caso de San Francisco, el alcalde London Breed insistió en la política de ciudad santuario que cobija la entidad y recomendó a los residentes utilizar la línea especial SF Rapid Response Hotline (415) 200-1548) para reportar algún operativo migratorio en la zona o solicitor asistencia legal.

En este Estado, incluso el gobernador Gavin Newsom, también se manifestó contra los supuestos planes a nivel federal catalogándolos de “cruel” y “equivocadas” para crear un clima de miedo y ansiedad.

Miami

El alcalde Francis Suarez no se quedó atrás en su rechazo al plan del gobierno central.

“Nosotros somos una ciudad de inmigrantes. Nosotros estamos de acuerdo que criminales como pandilleros peligrosos que llegaron ilegalmente al país deben ser deportados inmediatamente. Como alcalde, yo confío en que solo esos individuos que representan un peligro claro y presente a nuestras comunidades serán afectados por la política del DHS (Departamento de Seguridad Nacional)”.

La presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, la demócrata Nancy Pelosi, llamó al presidente Donald Trump el viernes por la noche para pedirle cancelar la gran redada de agentes de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE) programada para comenzar este.

Una fuente reveló a CNN que la demócrata habló con el mandatario durante 12 minutos, algo que luego fue confirmado por el subsecretario de prensa de la Casa Blanca, Judd Deere.

El presidente Trump suspendió la gran movilización que iniciaría este domingo en 10 ciudades, incluidas Nueva York, Los Ángeles y Chicago.

Trump y Pelosi hablaron a las 7:20 p.m. el viernes por la noche, afirmó CNN, pero el mandatario no tomó la decisión de inmediato.

El sábado, Pelosi presionó para que Trump detuviera las acciones que impactarían a por lo menos 2,000 familias de inmigrantes.

Ella calificó las redadas “sin corazón” y una “acción brutal” que separaría a las familias, además de generar en las comunidades donde residen.

“Estas familias son miembros trabajadores de nuestras comunidades y nuestro país. La acción del presidente no hace distinción entre una violación de estado y cometer un delito grave”, dijo Pelosi en una declaración.

Un asesor demócrata de alto nivel dijo que Trump está “tratando de crear un punto de negociación en una situación en la que no tiene ninguna”, y agregó que “no funcionará”.

Los demócratas no han dicho cómo atenderán las demandas del presidente Trump, pero fuentes dijeron a The Hill que será difícil que el Congreso llegue a un acuerdo sobre los $4,500 millones de dólares que el mandatario exige para la frontera y procesar a inmigrantes.

Pelosi dio la bienvenida a la suspensión anunciada por el mandatario.

El presidente Donald Trump insistió este domingo en que los demócratas tienen dos semanas para negociar “cambios simples” en el proceso de asilo y los vacíos legales de la migración e indicó que de lo contrario comenzará “la gran deportación”.

“Quiero darles a los demócratas todas las oportunidades para negociar rápidamente cambios simples en asilos y vacíos legales”, escribió el mandatario en su cuenta de Twitter.

“Esto arreglará la frontera sur, junto con la ayuda que México nos está brindando ahora”, agregó en su mensaje, aunque admitió que aunque “probablemente no suceda, vale la pena intentarlo”.

De lo contrario, señaló: “Dos semanas y la gran deportación comienza”.

Este sábado, un día antes de las redadas masivas anticipadas por medios locales, Trump estableció un compás de espera a las deportaciones para que demócratas y republicanos planteen soluciones a la situación en la frontera con México.

“A solicitud de los demócratas, he retrasado el Proceso de Remoción de Inmigración Ilegal (Deportación) por dos semanas para ver si demócratas y republicanos pueden reunirse y encontrar una solución a los problemas de asilo y los vacíos legales en la frontera sur”, escribió Trump en Twitter.

El gobernante hizo el anuncio después de que la presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, la demócrata Nancy Pelosi, llamara a suspender las redadas “sin corazón” y advirtiera que “inyectarán el terror” en el país.

Pelosi recordó a Trump que así como “habló sobre la importancia de evitar el daño colateral de 150 vidas en Irán” cuando desistió de un ataque en ese país en respuesta al derribo el jueves de un dron estadounidense, hiciera lo mismo para evitar “el daño colateral a decenas de miles de niños que están asustados por sus acciones”.

La jefa de la Cámara Baja se sumó a numerosas voces que rechazaron el anuncio de las redadas, que desataron temor en distintas comunidades inmigrantes.

Medios locales informaron el viernes que el Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) planeaba iniciar este domingo redadas masivas en las ciudades de Nueva York, Miami (Florida), Houston (Texas), Los Ángeles y San Francisco (California), Chicago (Illinois), Atlanta (Georgia), Baltimore (Maryland), Nueva Orleans (Luisiana) y Denver (Colorado).

La operación del ICE podría afectar a hasta 2,000 familias de indocumentados.

No obstante, Trump mencionó el sábado que los agentes de ICE estaban concentrados en sacar de Estados Unidos a los integrantes de la pandilla Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13).

Esa pandilla nació en Los Ángeles en la década de 1980, cuando miles de salvadoreños emigraron a EE.UU. para huir de la guerra civil en su país.

Desde entonces, el grupo criminal se ha expandido y ha provocado estragos en Centroamérica, especialmente en El Salvador.

Migrantes centroamericanos en México que quieran volver a su país podrán volar por US$ 1. Gabriela Frías conversa sobre la iniciativa con Enrique Beltranena, presidente ejecutivo de Volaris.

Varios legisladores exigieron el viernes cambios inmediatos ante informes esta semana de que más de 250 bebés, niños y adolescentes detenidos en una estación sin ventanas de la Patrulla Fronteriza carecen de alimentación, agua e higiene adecuadas.

Esta escena se repite en otras instalaciones de inmigración rebasadas por la enorme cantidad de menores migrantes y las dificultades para darles acomodo.

“Ni siquiera sabíamos que existía esta instalación antes de venir aquí”, dijo el profesor de derecho Warren Binford, miembro del equipo que entrevistó esta semana a docenas de menores detenidos en la localidad de Clint, a una media hora en automóvil desde El Paso. Quince menores tenían gripe y 10 más estaban en cuarentena.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
En otra estación de la Patrulla Fronteriza en McAllen, Texas, la abogada Toby Gialluca dijo que todos los menores con los que había conversado hasta la semana pasada estaban muy enfermos con fiebre elevada, tos y ropa sucia con costras de moco y mugre tras su larga travesía en dirección al norte.

“Todos están enfermos. Todos. Están utilizando sus ropas para limpiar el moco y el vómito a los niños. La mayoría de los niños chiquitos no están completamente vestidos”, agregó.

Gialluca señaló que migrantes adolescentes en McAllen le dijeron que les han ofrecido emparedados congelados de jamón y comida descompuesta.

En ambas instalaciones de detención, los menores dijeron a los abogados que los guardias les pidieron a niñas incluso de 8 años cuidar a los bebés y a los niños que empiezan a caminar.

Autoridades estatales y federales elegidas exigieron el viernes que se modifiquen las condiciones en Clint, McAllen y otras estaciones de la Patrulla Fronteriza. Una lluvia de señalamientos furiosos no se hizo esperar.

El gobernador de Texas, Greg Abbott, arremetió contra el Congreso al describirlo como “un grupo de réprobos” por no proveer un financiamiento adecuado para la seguridad fronteriza.

“Por cada menor que no esté recibiendo atención adecuada en la frontera, el Congreso es cómplice de cualquier daño que sufran”, apuntó.

El senador Jeff Merkley solicitó al Departamento de Seguridad Nacional que presente un plan correctivo “que ponga fin inmediato a estos abusos”. En un tuit, le dio de plazo hasta el 12 de julio y afirmó: “Los menores están siendo retenidos en condiciones deplorables e inaceptables. Se deja a los menores detenidos que se cuiden unos a otros, incluido un caso de un niño de dos años que estaba sin pañales. @DHSgov (Seguridad Nacional) necesita decirnos cuál es su plan para corregir esto, ahora”.

El representante republicano Will Hurd, cuyo distrito abarca Clint, dijo que las condiciones trágicas “demuestran una vez más la necesidad inmediata de reformar las leyes de asilo y proveer la financiación suplementaria a fin de enfrentar la crisis humanitaria en nuestra frontera”.

La representante demócrata Veronica Escobar dijo que ha solicitado al comisionado de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza “un informe completo” de la situación.

Y la senadora demócrata Kirsten Gillibrand responsabilizó al gobierno del presidente Donald Trump de la mala gestión del sistema de inmigración del país.

“Este es un momento oscuro para nuestro país, y la historia no será amable con los perpetradores de esta crueldad”, declaró Gillibrand. “Todos los estadounidenses deberían estar alarmados y exigir un fin a esto de inmediato”.

Las estaciones de la Patrulla Fronteriza están diseñadas para retener a las personas menos de tres días, pero algunos menores han permanecido semanas en Clint y McAllen. Por ley, los migrantes menores de 18 años deberían ser transferidos a la Oficina de Reubicación de Refugiados en un plazo de 72 horas.

Sin embargo, las autoridades federales aseguran que ya se encuentran al límite, debido en parte a que en el último año los menores migrantes han permanecido en custodia federal más tiempo que antes, lo que ha resultado en una escasez de camas en instalaciones diseñadas para detenciones más largas.

Los abogados inspeccionaron las instalaciones de la Patrulla Fronteriza en conformidad con el acuerdo Flores, un convenio jurídico de la era del presidente Bill Clinton que rige las condiciones de detención para menores y familias migrantes.

En un comunicado difundido el viernes por correo electrónico, Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza dijo que la agencia aprovecha sus limitados recursos para brindar “el mejor cuidado posible a quienes están en nuestra custodia, en especial los niños”.

En el comunicado señala que “nuestras instalaciones de detención de corto plazo no fueron diseñadas para mantener a poblaciones vulnerables y necesitamos con urgencia financiación humanitaria adicional para enfrentar esta crisis”.

Además, la agencia dijo que todas las acusaciones sobre abusos de derechos civiles o maltrato son consideradas con seriedad e investigadas.

A principios de la semana, el comisionado interino de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza, John Sanders, solicitó al Congreso que apruebe un paquete de financiación de emergencia por 4.600 millones de dólares que incluya casi 3.000 millones de dólares para atender a menores migrantes no acompañados.

Sanders dijo que las estaciones de Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza tienen detenidas a unas 15.000 personas, más de tres veces su capacidad máxima de 4.000.

Miami enfrentará deportaciones masivas a partir de este domingo, según le dijeron varias fuentes al Herald.

Los esfuerzos del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de Estados Unidos (ICE), también conocido como la Policía de Inmigración y Aduanas, se enfocarán en aquellas personas “a cuyo nombre se emitieron órdenes definitivas de deportación por jueces federales y que todavía siguen fugitivos en el país”, confirmó un funcionario del gobierno de Trump.

A continuación, algunas preguntas que con frecuencia se hacen sobre las detenciones del ICE:

QUE PASA SI INMIGRACION TOCA A SU PUERTA
La Coalición de Inmigrantes de la Florida dio a conocer las siguientes recomendaciones si un agente de inmigración toca a su puerta.

No abra la puerta.

Pida ver el documento judicial, que se puede meter por debajo de la puerta. Debe tener su nombre y dirección correcto y estar firmado por un juez. Si el documento no tiene esta información, diga que no autoriza la entrada del agente y que va a llamar a su abogado.

No diga nada hasta que hable con su abogado.

De ninguna información sobre sus antecedentes, lugar de nacimiento ni cuándo ni cómo llegó a Estados Unidos.

No firme ningún documento que no comprenda lo que dice.
Los expertos recomiendan que no mienta sobre su lugar de nacimiento, cómo llegó a Estados Unidos ni sobre si es o no ciudadano norteamericano.

¿QUE PASA SI SOY UN IMMIGRANTE NATURALIZADO? ¿O SI SOY RESIDENTE PERMANENTE?
Los inmigrantes naturalizados o residentes permanentes le pueden decir al ICE cuál es su estatus legal, pero si de inmediato no pueden presentar los documentos para probarlo, podrían ser detenidos. Los expertos recomiendan conservar consigo los documentos más importantes, como la tarjeta de residente permanente. Si no la lleva encima, permanezca tranquilo y en silencio.

COMO ENCONTRAR A ALGUIEN DETENIDO POR ICE
Los inmigrantes llevados a un centro de detención de ICE pueden ser localizados usando el Sistema de Localización de Detenidos de la agencia. Amigos, familiares y abogados pueden también llamar por teléfono a cualquier oficina del ICE.

Las búsquedas por Internet pueden hacerse usando la letra A más un número, el número de nueve dígitos que comienza con la letra A que se asigna a cada extranjero durante cualquier procedimiento de inmigración. También mediante una información y biográfica, que exige el nombre y el apellido del inmigrante detenido, así como su país de origen y su fecha de nacimiento.

El gobernador del estado de Texas, Greg Abbott, ha anunciado el envío de 1.000 efectivos de la Guardia Nacional a la frontera con México para controlar el flujo migratorio.

Según Abbott, la medida se ha debido a la “creciente crisis fronteriza”.

La decisión ha sido tomada luego de que varios reportes indicaran que un sitio de detención de inmigrantes en Texas había sido acusado de descuidar a menores de edad.

El último incidente fue reportado la semana pasada cuando un bebé prematuro murió en un centro de procesamiento de la Patrulla Fronteriza luego de haber estado bajo custodia de las autoridades por nueve días.

“Todo esto es necesario porque el Congreso se rehúsa a hacer su trabajo”, ha declarado Abbott.

De acuerdo con el anuncio, los miembros de la Guardia Nacional proveerán asistencia en cruces fronterizos y en las unidades de detención de inmigrantes localizadas en la región conocida como Rio Grande Valley así como en El Paso.

Dan Patrick, vicegobernador de Texas, ha indicado que la decisión va a aumentar el número total de miembros de la Guardia Nacional en la frontera a más de 2.000.

Las autoridades de Texas han afirmado que también hay 1.400 soldados en servicio activo en la zona fronteriza.

Abbott ha dicho que los efectivos estarán bajo sus órdenes, pero los costos del despliegue de seguridad, ha agregado, serán pagados por el gobierno federal.

El gobernador Abbott ha afirmado que el uso de la Guardia Nacional es necesario para controlar las 45,000 personas que han intentado cruzar la frontera de manera ilegal en las últimas tres semanas.

La Guardia Nacional también va a trabajar en cooperación con la Patrulla Fronteriza, ha afirmado Abbott.

El Gobierno del presidente Donald Trump y el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE) que llevan, prácticamente, una semana anunciando una supuesta redada masiva en el país contra indocumentados a partir de este domingo enfrentan un impedimento que podría arruinar sus planes: las autoridades locales.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
Varios funcionarios municipales en estados como California, Nueva York, Florida, Illinois y Texas han expresado en las últimas horas su negativa a colaborar con las entidades federales.

Funcionarios de varias de las ciudades señaladas como posibles focos de las acciones de “La Migra” han tildado como estrategia de miedo el anuncio de Trump y reiteraron que no están dispuestos a extenderle la mano a ICE.

La administración del presidente ha amenazado con intervenir en al menos 10 ciudades, tales como Nueva York , Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles, Houston y Baltimore, con hasta 2,000 familias que ya tienen casos abiertos de deportación.

Chicago

La alcaldesa de Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, dijo que la Policía no va a cooperar con ICE.

“Yo personalmente hablé con los jefes de ICE en Chicago y expresé mi fuerte objeción a estas redadas. Más allá, yo he reiterado que el CPD no va a cooperar o facilitar ninguna acción por parte de ICE”.

Adicional, el superintendente de ese organismo Eddie T. Johnson dijo que retiró el acceso de oficiales federales migratorios a su base de datos.

Baltimore

El alcalde Bernard C. “Jack” Young fue otro funcionario municipal que se unió a la cadena en contra de los planes de Trump.

“Estoy orgulloso que Baltimore está comprometido en mantener los valores estadounidenses de respeto a los derechos y a la dignidad de todos los residentes. Independientemente, de la posición del Gobierno federal, nosotros continuaremos con nuestra decisión de ser inclusivos, justos y acogedores”, indicó.

Denver

El alcalde Michael B. Hancock expresó, por su parte, que están del lado de los inmigrantes.

“Queremos reiterar que Denver está con los inmigrantes y familias de refugiados, que nosotros no apoyamos la separación de las familias migrantes y las redadas para propagar el miedo en nuestra comunidad”, sostuvo Hancock, quien -sin embargo- dijo no haber recibido notificación de potenciales movidas de La Migra en la ciudad.

Houston

El alcalde de esta demarcación texana Sylvester Turner también se pronunció contra las intenciones de las autoridades federales al también destacar que no habían recibido ninguna comunicación sobre los planes de ICE.

“La Ciudad no intenta hacer el trabajo de ICE, aunque no obstruye la labor de ICE. Nosotros vamos a seguir siendo una Ciudad que construye relaciones, no muros”, dijo Turner.

Los Angeles

En el caso de esta ciudad californiana, el alcalde Eric Garcetti fue claro en que departamentos como LAPD no va a asistir en las supuestas redadas migratorias.

“Los Angeles siempre estará del lado de nuestras hermanas y hermanos inmigrantes, y nuestros oficiales de ley y de orden nunca participarán de estas acciones”, planteó. “Ningún Angelino debe tener miedo de ser arrebatado de su hogar o separado de sus seres queridos- y nosotros estamos haciendo todo lo que podemos para proveerles a las familias inmigrantes la información y el apoyo que necesitan”.

En el caso de San Francisco, el alcalde London Breed insistió en la política de ciudad santuario que cobija la entidad y recomendó a los residentes utilizar la línea especial SF Rapid Response Hotline (415) 200-1548) para reportar algún operativo migratorio en la zona o solicitor asistencia legal.

En este Estado, incluso el gobernador Gavin Newsom, también se manifestó contra los supuestos planes a nivel federal catalogándolos de “cruel” y “equivocadas” para crear un clima de miedo y ansiedad.

Miami

El alcalde Francis Suarez no se quedó atrás en su rechazo al plan del gobierno central.

“Nosotros somos una ciudad de inmigrantes. Nosotros estamos de acuerdo que criminales como pandilleros peligrosos que llegaron ilegalmente al país deben ser deportados inmediatamente. Como alcalde, yo confío en que solo esos individuos que representan un peligro claro y presente a nuestras comunidades serán afectados por la política del DHS (Departamento de Seguridad Nacional)”.

Un juez en California bloqueó el traslado de casi mil inmigrantes detenidos en cárceles del Condado de Orange a centros en los que permanecerían lejos de sus abogados defensores, informó este viernes la Unión Americana de Libertades Civiles (ACLU).

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
El fallo del juez Jesús G. Bernal es en respuesta a una demanda interpuesta en mayo pasado por una decena de inmigrantes detenidos, que iban a pasar en las próximas semanas a manos de la Agencia de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE).

El inminente traslado de casi 1,000 inmigrantes se ordenó después de que el Departamento del Sheriff del condado de Orange rescindiera el contrato con autoridades federales para el alojamiento de extranjeros en las cárceles locales James A. Musick y Theo Lacy.

“La decisión de la corte refuerza el argumento de que ICE no puede simplemente trasladar a los inmigrantes encarcelados a todo el país, sin tener en cuenta sus derechos constitucionales”, dijo en un comunicado la abogada de ACLU Eva Bitrán.

“El juez reconoció con razón el daño inmediato e irreparable que sufren los inmigrantes cuando son transferidos lejos de sus abogados”, agregó.

Entre los demandantes se encuentra Ubaldo Arroyo, que llegó al país siendo niño y vivía en el condado de Orange con su madre y sus seis hermanos, cinco de ellos ciudadanos estadounidenses.

La querella asegura que el caso del joven envuelve detalles sensibles de su vida personal, y que él no se siente cómodo discutiendo estos hechos por teléfono o correo.

En una situación parecida está la inmigrante africana Atemnkeng Becky Njualem, quién solicitó asilo político en el puerto de entrada de San Ysidro (California) el pasado 3 de febrero.

Njualem permanece detenida peleando su caso, y alejarla se sus abogados pone en riesgo una representación legal que es gratuita, alegaron los demandantes.

“Este requerimiento preliminar permitirá a nuestros clientes continuar trabajando estrechamente con los abogados en los que han depositado su confianza”, explicó en un comunicado Judy London, directora de the Immigrants’ Rights Project at Public Counsel.

De cara a los operativos de ICE para detener a indocumentados, que empezarán en una decena de ciudades este domingo según fuentes oficiales, Pedro Trujillo, de la organización CHIRLA, aconseja que los inmigrantes cuenten con un plan familiar para actuar ante esta situación. Agrega que las personas pueden optar por no abrir la puerta de sus casas a los agentes y verificar que las órdenes estén firmadas por un juez. Grabar los hechos o la detención también puede ser una medida de prevención.

La abogada Noemi Ramírez explica que, tras la posible redada de deportaciones por parte del Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas de los Estados Unidos contra los inmigrantes indocumentados en varias ciudades del país, es necesario conocer que existen garantías de la ley que cualquier persona puede hacer valer como: el derecho a guardar silencio, a no dar ningún tipo de información, a hablar con un abogado y a no permitir el acceso de la policía a las viviendas o negocios a menos de que el funcionario cuente con una orden judicial firmada por un juez.

Ante el alto número de arrestos de inmigrantes y la amenaza del lanzamiento de una campaña nacional para detener y deportar a millones de indocumentados, un grupo de organizaciones de ayuda a los inmigrantes le sugirió al gobierno de Donald Trump que considere el uso de “alternativas humanas” que reemplacen el encarcelamiento y respeten el debido proceso.

La detención de inmigrantes crece a un ritmo sin precedentes a pesar de un amplio campo de alternativas que garantizan procesarlos por una fracción del costo que implica mantenerlos en los centros de detención de la Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE), según plantea un estudio elaborado por abogados e investigadores de la Asociación Americana de Abogados de Inmigración (AILA), el Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, el National Immigrant Justice Center, la Women’s Refugee Commission y el Migration and refugee Services.

PUBLICIDAD

“En 2019 el Congreso autorizó a ICE detener aproximadamente 45,000 personas cada día, sin embargo, la agencia federal, en un patrón continuo de gasto excesivo, ahora detiene a más de 52,000 migrantes diariamente”, se lee en el reporte.

En caso de que el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) comience a ejecutar el plan de redadas y deportaciones masivas anunciado por Trump el lunes, muchos se preguntan si hay espacio suficiente para procesarlos o si existen “alternativas humanas” (Programas de Alternativa de Detención –ATD-) para que los migrantes que no tienen orden de deportación y carezcan de antecedentes criminales, esperen en libertad hasta que los jueces de inmigración resuelvan sus futuros en el país.
ADVERTISING

RELACIONADOS
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
COMPARTE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
¿Cuáles son las alternativas? ¿Son seguras? ¿Garantizan que el inmigrante se presentará ante el juez? ¿Cuánto cuestan? ¿Son efectivas?

Estas son las respuestas obtenidas en base al informe:

Chicago, Los Ángeles, Nueva York, San Francisco, Denver, Houston, Nueva Orleans, Atlanta, Baltimore. Todas estas ciudades están preparando a sus comunidades para que sepan cómo responder a las redadas masivas que el Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) comenzará este domingo en sus territorios y que estimaron afectará a unas 2,000 familias.

Al conocer de la llamada ‘Family Op’ (‘Operación Familia’), los alcaldes de estas entidades reiteraron que sus espacios son santuarios de inmigrantes, lugares diversos, y que sus policías no colaborarán con las redadas. Algunos más extremos pidieron bloquear el acceso de ICE a sus bases de datos.

RELACIONADOS
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
COMPARTE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE

El mega operativo había sido anunciado inicialmente por el presidente Donald Trump a inicios de la semana, pero como una amenaza: la de deportar a “millones” de inmigrantes. Poco después, el director en funciones de ICE, Mark Morgan, dijo que la agencia había enviado cartas a unas 2,000 familias de indocumentados que habían llegado recientemente al país y habían solicitado asilo. Morgan explicó que en las misivas les indicaban que serían deportados tras concluir sus procesos y recibir la orden final de expulsión de parte de un juez.

PUBLICIDAD

Este sábado, el mandatario insistió sobre el tema: “Algunas ciudades lo van a desafiar”, dijo a reporteros desde la Casa Blanca al asegurar que ciudades como Chicago se niegan a estos procesos a pesar de sus tasas de criminalidad. Y aunque en principio había hablado en tono genérico, ahora precisó que la operación que inicia este domingo está enfocada en retirar a miembros de la pandilla MS-13 de Estados Unidos, algo que se contradice con el hecho de que el primer objetivo son esas cientos de familias con órdenes finales de deportación.
ADVERTISING

A pesar de este anuncio, los alcaldes ya adelantan el miedo que se ha instaurado en sus comunidades de indocumentados tras el anuncio del viernes. Hasta ahora, la única ciudad cuyas autoridades no han reaccionado es Miami, que no se autodenomina ciudad santuario.

Te dejamos a continuación la reacción de cada una de las ciudades en la mira de ICE:

Las redadas masivas con las que amenazó el presidente Donald Trump comenzarán este domingo en diez de las principales ciudades estadounidenses, según adelantó el diario The Washington Post citando a tres funcionarios.

Los funcionarios se refieren a las redadas como ‘ family op’ (‘operación familia’) e indican que probablemente comenzarán en la madrugada del domingo en una decena de ciudades y afectarán hasta a 2,000 familias a las que ya se les han emitido órdenes de deportación final.

PUBLICIDAD

Según la cadena CNN, las ciudades donde se llevarán a cabo las redadas son: Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Miami, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco.

RELACIONADOS
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
COMPARTE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE
Qué hacer y qué no ante la nueva amenaza de arrestos y deportaciones masivas de ICE

Las fuentes de The Washington Post aseguran que la Oficina de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE) ha preparado a sus agentes y sus equipos para esta operación que esperan empezar el domingo y desarrollar durante varios días. Sin embargo, aseguran que los detalles del operativo aún están siendo discutidos entre esa agencia, la Casa Blanca y el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS).
ADVERTISING

La agencia está planeando usar habitaciones de hotel para detener temporalmente a los niños y sus padres hasta que todos los miembros de las familias estén reunidos y listos para ser deportados, según el artículo. Además, las autoridades reconocen que habrá personas a las que detengan y que no puedan deportar de manera inmediata a quienes se refieren como “arrestos colaterales”, según The Washington Post, y a las que probablemente dejarán en libertad con grilletes electrónicos.

Tanto ese diario como la cadena CNN aseguran que el director interino del DHS, Kevin McAleenan, tenía dudas sobre ciertos elementos de la operación y que era partidario de llevar a cabo una operación menos masiva y enfocada solo en 150 familias a las que ya se tiene bien identificadas y localizadas.

La noticia surge después de que el lunes Donald Trump adelantara la operación en un mensaje en su cuenta de Twitter: “La próxima semana, ICE comenzará el proceso de remover a millones de extranjeros ilegales que ilícitamente han encontrado su camino hacia Estados Unidos. Serán expulsados tan pronto como entren”, escribió el presidente.

PUBLICIDAD

ICE ha dicho que tiene en sus manos poco más de 1 millón de órdenes de deportación. Abogados y organizaciones que defienden los derechos de los inmigrantes recomiendan a los afectados que tengan listo un Plan B para defender sus derechos en EEUU.

Nivel de organización “enorme”
Fuentes del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) enteradas de los planes de la Casa Blanca y que pidieron anonimato porque no están autorizadas para hablar con la prensa dijeron a Univision Noticias que la organización de un plan de arrestos para deportar a cientos (tal vez miles) de personas requiere un nivel de organización “enorme” que hasta ahora no se ha implementado.

Señalaron además que las agencias involucradas en este tipo de actividades cuentan con un presupuesto mínimo que se refleja en el pedido de fondos de emergencia al Congreso que hasta ahora no ha sido aprobado.

¿Qué tan real puede llegar a ser la amenaza de Trump de deportar a millones de i…

00:00 / 03:50
¿Qué tan real puede llegar a ser la amenaza de Trump de deportar a millones de indocumentados?
A comienzos de mayo, el presidente Donald Trump le pidió al Congreso otros $4,500 millones en fondos de emergencia para lidiar con la crisis en la frontera, donde en los últimos meses miles de migrantes que huyen de sus países llegan en busca de asilo.

De acuerdo con datos de la ICE, la agencia tiene en sus manos poco más de 1 millón de órdenes finales de deportación. “ Pero conocer sus paraderos requiere un complejo trabajo de inteligencia”, indicaron las fuentes.

Para ello, explican, “hay que ubicarlos, planificar sus arrestos, ir a buscarlos, detenerlos, procesar sus deportaciones, preparar sus embarques, hablar con los respectivos consulados si no hay documentos de viaje y, por último, saber en qué tipo de vehículo se cumplirá la orden de deportación”.

PUBLICIDAD

Abogados también indicaron que, en muchos casos, cuando exista una razón legal, los afectados por esta orden podrán solicitar la reapertura de sus casos, situación que demorará la ejecución de las órdenes de deportación.

Las fuentes del DHS también señalaron que la captura de individuos con orden de deportación también dependerá de la capacidad de camas disponibles en los centros de detención de ICE, donde la cuota está llena en estos momentos.

“En 2019,el Congreso autorizó a ICE detener aproximadamente 45,000 personas cada día. Sin embargo, la agencia federal, en un patrón continuo de gasto excesivo, ahora detiene a más de 52,000 migrantes diariamente”, se lee en un reporte publicado por la Asociación Americana de Abogados de Inmigración (AILA).

“No hay lugar disponible por ahora”, indicaron las fuentes. La amenaza de arrestar a millones de inmigrantes y deportarlos fue lanzada el lunes por Trump, dos días antes del lanzamiento de su campaña a la reelección en Orlando, Florida.

En la campaña de 2016, el mandatario prometió a sus electores que crearía una fuerza nacional de deportaciones y que expulsaría a los 11 millones de indocumentados en un plazo de 18 meses.“Si no tenemos capacidad para deportar a 1 millón, menos contamos con los recursos para ubicar, detener y deportar a los 11 millones”, coincidieron las fuentes.

El gobierno de México anunció este viernes que el despliegue de la Guardia Nacional a la frontera sur está terminado y todos los elementos están instalados como se tenía previsto.

MIRA: López Obrador asegura que México trabaja para dar buenas condiciones a migrantes

El secretario de Relaciones Exteriores, Marcelo Ebrard, ofreció un balance del alcance, hasta ahora, del plan migratorio que el gobierno mexicano puso en marcha como parte de su compromiso con Estados Unidos para intentar reducir el flujo migratorio y evitar así los aranceles a los productos mexicanos, como amenazó el gobierno de Donald Trump, si no se controla la migración en la región.

Ebrard también detalló que el Instituto Nacional de Migración contrató a 650 personas para poder, en corto plazo, atender a migrantes centroamericanos que lleguen a México y que se están recibiendo solo por tres puntos fronterizos. Desde enero, 14.000 personas han ingresado a México en espera de recibir asilo.

LEE: México ratifica el USMCA, el primero de los tres países en aprobar el acuerdo

Parte integral del plan es invertir 100 millones de dólares en El Salvador, Guatemala y Honduras. “Necesitamos dar alternativas en sus países de origen a quienes quieren migrar”, dijo Ebrard.

El plan para Centroamérica denominado “Sembrando Vida” pretende invertir en sistemas agroforestales para producir alimentos y generar empleo. En el caso de El Salvador, se invertirán 30 millones de dólares en 50.000 hectáreas y beneficiará a 20.000 familias, según autoridades. “Este plan ofrece oportunidades inmediatas, no a largo plazo”, resaltó Ebrard y agregó que también “ataca el corredor seco causado por sequías y revierte los efectos del cambio climático”.

Los fondos para El Salvador estarán disponibles la próxima semana. Ebrard dijo que “después” estarán disponibles para Guatemala y Honduras. En el caso de Guatemala, el secretario dijo que lo más sensato es esperar los resultado de las elecciones y que en el caso de Honduras espera que “los próximos días” puedan tener una reunión de trabajo.

MIRA: Ebrard asegura que México dará recursos para combatir las raíces de la migración

El Secretario de Relaciones Exteriores explicó que los 100 millones de dólares para invertir en Centroamérica saldrán del “Fondo de Yucatán”, aprobado por las fuerzas políticas en el país, cuyo propósito es la inversión en la región.

El Fondo de Yucatán también es conocido como el Fondo de Infraestructura para Países de Mesoamérica y el Caribe y permite canalizar apoyos financieros a proyectos de infraestructura en Centroamérica y el Caribe. Entre 2012 y 2016 el fondo aprobó $129.7 millones de dólares en 16 proyectos destinados a 11 países de la región.

LEE: La Policía Federal de México rescata a 791 migrantes en camiones con destino EE.UU.

Ebrard también reveló que 19 países, entre ellos Chile y Uruguay, apoyarán las actividades de México en Centroamérica. “No es que van a invertir 100 millones de dólares pero veremos de qué manera nos pueden apoyar, les interesa lo que estamos haciendo” dijo Ebrard y detalló que espera reunirse con autoridades de esos países en las próximas semanas.

Al ser consultado sobre una posible reunión con el presidente Trump, el presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador dijo que primero esperarán evaluar los logros del plan en el plazo de 90 días y adelantó que el próximo 1 de julio informará a la ciudadanía en el Zócalo de la Ciudad de México.

WASHINGTON
Los legisladores demócratas anunciaron una asignación de 4.500 millones de dólares para responder a la creciente crisis humanitaria en la frontera sur y para cumplir con la responsabilidad del gobierno de atender a decenas de miles de personas que buscan un amparo bajo las leyes de asilo de Estados Unidos.

La medida se llevará a votación la próxima semana al pleno del Congreso mientras la Cámara de Representantes y el Senado batallan para aprobar una medida antes de que las agencias que atienden el influjo de migrantes _ ya presionadas al máximo _ se queden sin dinero.

La medida fue develada en un momento en que aumenta el nerviosismo entre los legisladores y el gobierno, y se reportan las malas condiciones de vida en los albergues financiados por el estado.

En la Casa Blanca, el encargado del gobierno de lidiar con la crisis enfatizó la necesidad de actuar y dijo que se acaba el tiempo.

“Nos quedaremos sin dinero en julio porque los números simplemente son muy elevados”, dijo el viernes en la Casa Blanca Alex Azar, secretario de Salud y Servicios Sociales (HHS).

“Esto no es un juego”, dijo. “No se trata de política. No se trata de política de inmigración. Es un paquete de alivio humanitario y tiene que aprobarse. Tiene que aprobarse de inmediato. Nos quedamos sin dinero y estamos al cupo máximo”.

La medida proporciona 2.900 millones de dólares para el cuidado y asistencia de refugiados y migrantes proporcionado por HHS y otros 1.300 millones de dólares para la atención proporcionada por las agencias del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, y dinero para reembolsar a los gobiernos locales y los organismos sin fines de lucro que albergan a los migrantes.

“Hay graves necesidades humanitarias en la frontera y todos reconocemos el claro momento de actuar”, dijo la presidenta del Comité de Asignaciones Presupuestarias de la Cámara de Representantes, Nita Lowey, demócrata de Nueva York.

Migrantes centroamericanos cruzan la frontera hacia Estados Unidos el martes 1 de mayo de 2018, en el cruce fronterizo El Chaparral, en la ciudad de Tijuana, Baja California (México). JOEBETH TERRIQUEZ EFE

Miami será una de las primeras ciudades del país donde las autoridades federales de inmigración lancen una ofensiva de deportación tan pronto como este domingo, según fuentes al tanto de la medida.

Los agentes de inmigración actuarán en Miami, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Denver, Houston, Los Ángeles, Nueva Orleans, Nueva York y San Francisco este fin de semana, dijeron al Miami Herald fuentes legislativas y de la Policía de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE).

Hace unos días, un alto funcionario del gobierno del presidente Donald Trump confirmó que el ICE se centrará en la deportación de un millón de personas “que tienen una orden definitiva de deportación de un juez federal pero que siguen en el país”.

Las fuentes dijeron que entre las personas contra quienes se planea actuar primero están menores que vinieron a Estados Unidos sin sus padres y que desde entonces han cumplido 18 años; personas que recibieron una orden de deportación y audiencia y personas que no asistieron a una audiencia judicial y no respondieron a cartas enviadas a sus viviendas por el Departamento de Justicia.

El ICE realizó dos sesiones de información esta semana, una el miércoles, liderada por el subdirector Matthew T. Albence, y la otra el jueves, dirigida por Henry Lucero, director de las Operaciones de Cumplimiento y Deportación de la agencia en Phoenix, Arizona.

En la reunión dirigida por Albence se mencionaron las ciudades donde se realizaría el operativo, aunque no se indicó en qué momento sería. El plan también puede centrarse personas que han llegado recientemente de la frontera con una orden definitiva de deportación. En ciertas comunidades, como el sur de la Florida, estas familias han recibido servicios de “de manejo de casos” de un contratista del ICE, o quizás todavía están detenidos. En cualquier caso, el ICE tendría acceso a la información entregada al gerente de caso, como la dirección y la información de contacto de esos clientes.

Las personas detenidas para su deportación serán colocadas en centros de detención para familias. Durante la sesión de información de Lucero., el funcionario dijo que si en algún caso hay menores ciudadanos estadounidenses, se entregará un localizador electrónico a un padre o guardián mientras se hacen los arreglos necesarios para determinar dónde se quedará el menor ante la deportación de alguno de sus padres.

Lucero dijo que en marzo de 2019 unas 2,100 personas recibieron cartas por correo en que se les pidió que se presentaran a un tribunal de inmigración, pero solamente 65 se presentaron. El resto recibió órdenes definitivas de deportación.

El canciller mexicano Marcelo Ebrard dijo el viernes que se ha completado el apostamiento de unos 6.000 efectivos de la Guardia Nacional para controlar el flujo de migrantes centroamericanos hacia Estados Unidos.

Añadió que la agencia de inmigración ha llenado 650 puestos para ayudar a regular los cruces en el sur.

México prometió a Estados Unidos este mes que reduciría el número de migrantes que llegan a la frontera para evitar la aplicación de aranceles sobre las exportaciones según la amenaza del presidente Donald Trump.

Se ha visto a efectivos de la Guardia Nacional en los estados sureños, donde ayudan a las autoridades de inmigración en los retenes, pero no en grandes contingentes.

Las autoridades dicen que han apostado a la guardia en una amplia franja del territorio, pero sin entrar en detalles.

ACUERDO MIGRATORIO ENTRE MÉXICO Y EEUU

Las declaraciones de hoy del canciller se producen después de hace más de una semana anunciara que en el acuerdo al que llegó con Estados Unidos, este país se comprometió a invertir 7.800 millones de dólares en Centroamérica y México.

“El acuerdo que se hizo con los americanos es el siguiente: ellos se comprometen a invertir en Centroamérica” 5.800 millones de dólares, y “se comprometen a invertir en el sur de México” otros 2.000 millones de dólares, dijo Ebrard a la prensa mexicana.

Ebrard aseguró que la primera inversión de este acuerdo comenzó en El Salvador hace apenas unos 15 días, sin dar más detalles sobre el destino ni el monto.

El canciller mexicano destacó que a cambio de esta inversión México ayudará a aplicar un plan en Centroamérica para el que ya ha sido invitado Alemania y España y ambos países han expresado su apoyo para la aplicación del mismo.

PLAN DE DESARROLLO PARA CENTROAMÉRICA

El pasado 20 de mayo, México y la Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (Cepal) presentaron un plan de desarrollo en colaboración con los Gobiernos de Guatemala, Honduras y El Salvador para combatir las causas de la migración en la región.

A cambio de que no se le aplicaran aranceles a sus productos, México firmó un acuerdo con Estados Unidos para reducir en un plazo de 45 días el flujo migratorio.

Ebrard defendió también que se haga un registro de migrantes al señalar que México no quiere que solo crucen el territorio para ir a EE.UU.

“No queremos que atravieses nuestro territorio si vas de paso, si tu objetivo es llegar a otro país” porque ocasionarían “un problema a nuestro país”, aseguró Ebrard a la prensa en la ciudad mexicana de Veracruz, a donde asistió para conmemorar los 80 años del exilio español.

El canciller apuntó que el problema con Estados Unidos se debe a que el flujo migratorio de centroamericanos creció mucho, tres veces en menos de un año.

Además, señaló Ebrard, de la mayoría de las personas que cruzan el país “no sabemos ni siquiera cómo se llaman” por lo que México ha decidido comenzar un proceso en el que los que entren a este país deben registrarse y tienen que decir a qué vienen.

“Y si quieres atravesar nuestro territorio para llegar a otro país pues probablemente lo que te vas a encontrar es que te vamos a decir ‘no queremos que atravieses nuestro territorio’ si vas de paso”, detalló.

En medio del gran flujo de inmigrantes centroamericanos a México en su paso a EEUU, la aerolínea mexicana Volaris anunció un novedoso programa de reunificación familiar.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
Se trata de un programa de vuelos aéreos a $1 dólar para facilitar que los migrantes centroamericanos en situación irregular puedan retornar a sus países de origen.

“La aerolínea mexicana de ultra bajo costo que opera en México, Estados Unidos y Centroamérica lanza el programa Reuniendo Familias”, informó la compañía aérea en un comunicado.

Este programa “invita a los migrantes centroamericanos en situación migratoria irregular, que se encuentren en México y quieran regresar voluntariamente a su país de origen” a viajar por 1 dólar más impuestos.

Los vuelos se podrán tomar hasta el 30 de junio desde distintas ciudades de México tales como Tijuana, Ciudad Juárez, Guadalajara y Ciudad de México, con asientos disponibles rumbo a Costa Rica, El Salvador y Guatemala.

“Los migrantes mayores de edad solo deberán presentar su Documento Único de Identidad (DUI) y los menores de edad deberán presentarse con partida de nacimiento o pasaporte”, indicó.

Para la compañía, esta es una “alternativa a la solución del fenómeno migratorio” acontecida en los últimos meses.

Desde mediados de octubre de 2018 se registró un aumento inusitado en el número de migrantes, principalmente centroamericanos, que ingresan rutinariamente a México con el objetivo de llegar a Estados Unidos, lo que desató una crisis entre los dos países.

Ante el aumento del número de migrantes irregulares y de solicitantes de asilo que llegan a Estados Unidos, el presidente de ese país, Donald Trump, amenazó el 30 de mayo pasado con imponer aranceles a todos los productos mexicanos.

Tras unas arduas negociaciones en Washington, el 7 de junio se anunció un acuerdo que prevé el envío de 6.000 agentes de la Guardia Nacional de México a la frontera sur, entre otras medidas para contener la migración.

El acuerdo prevé un periodo de 45 días para evaluar los resultados de las medidas y, si Estados Unidos estima que son insatisfactorios, se podría reactivar la imposición de aranceles.

Además, México y El Salvador pusieron en marcha este jueves un Plan de Desarrollo Integral que llevará al país centroamericano un programa de reforestación mexicano con una inversión de 30 millones de dólares para generar 20,000 empleos para frenar la migración en la región.

JB Pritzker, desde la Universidad de Illinois en Chicago, anunció la aprobación de un paquete legislativo con el que busca que los estudiantes indocumentados y transgénero puedan obtener ayuda financiera para su educación, así como prohibir la apertura de centros de detención privados en el estado y eliminar la colaboración de la policía con ICE.

Durante una entrevista con Enrique Acevedo el aspirante a la presidencia de EEUU también habló del trabajo que pasaron su abuela y su mamá para criar a sus hijos siendo inmigrantes solteras en este país.

El presidente Donald Trump volvió a negar que su gobierno haya implantado una política de separación de familias en la frontera con México y culpó de ello a su antecesor, el demócrata Barack Obama (2009-2017).

PUBLICIDAD

El mandatario hizo la afirmación durante una entrevista a la cadena de televisión Telemundo con el periodista José Díaz-Balart.

Trump aseguró además que fue él quien juntó a las decenas de familias separadas en la frontera cuando intentaban pedir asilo después de huir de sus países en busca de asilo en Estados Unidos.

Te presentamos una lista de las afirmaciones e inexactitudes hechas por el presidente durante la entrevista:
ADVERTISING

El presidente Donald Trump negó el jueves que México esté haciendo el trabajo sucio de Estados Unidos al controlar de manera más enérgica la inmigración no autorizada proveniente desde América Central.

En la primera entrevista que concede a una televisora en español desde su llegada a la Casa Blanca en 2017, Trump dijo a Telemundo que va “a arreglar la situación en Cuba” y admitió que el líder opositor Juan Guaidó no ha desplazado del poder a Nicolás Maduro desde que se declaró en enero presidente interino de Venezuela porque se trata de “un proceso” que lleva tiempo.

Trump expresó satisfacción por los esfuerzos de su homólogo mexicano Andrés López Obrador para reducir el flujo migratorio desde América Central desde que ambos gobiernos alcanzaran un acuerdo hace semana y media.

Trump había amenazado con imponer a México un arancel del 5%, pero desistió una vez que se alcanzó el acuerdo.

The power grid is evolving—here’s what you need to knowCONTENIDO PATROCINADO: NRG The power grid is evolving—here’s what you need to know

Unmute
“Hasta ahora, lo han hecho muy bien. Y por eso no estoy imponiendo aranceles. De lo contrario, impondría aranceles. Y no quiero imponer aranceles a México”, indicó, de acuerdo a una transcripción compartida con antelación por la televisora. “Pero sería tremendamente costoso para m (en alusión a México). Ni siquiera sé si pueden soportarlo”.

El presidente Donald Trump sorprendió en una entrevista con la cadena hispana Telemundo este jueves al asegurar que los latinos apoyan su dura política de inmigración.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
El magnate, en su primera entrevista a una cadena hispana, dijo que los latinos apoyan su mano dura y sus planes para deportar a millones de inmigrantes indocumentados de EEUU, como lo anunció Trump esta semana.

El periodista José Díaz-Balart presionó al presidente sobre sus esfuerzos para frenar la inmigración en la frontera sur, incluido su promesa en Twitter de una operación nacional de ICE para deportar a ” Millones de extranjeros ilegales ” tan pronto como la próxima semana.

“Los hispanos quieren dureza en la frontera, no quieren que la gente venga a tomar sus trabajos”, dijo Trump. “No quieren que vengan criminales porque entienden la frontera mejor que nadie”.

El periodista de Telemundo le preguntó a Trump si fue un error implementar su política de cero tolerancia, la que ha provocado que miles de niños sean separados de sus padres en la frontera sur. Trump dijo que no se arrepentía.

“No es un error”, dijo Trump. “Queremos tener fronteras fuertes. No es un error “.

Trump ha tomado una línea dura con respecto a la inmigración desde que asumió la presidencia y parece estar convirtiéndolo en un tema central de su campaña de reelección.

Recientemente el mandatario reemplazó a muchos de los principales funcionarios encargados de su política migratoria promocionando una postura más dura a lo largo de la frontera sur.

Trump también dijo que no estaba preocupado por su elegibilidad en 2020 ni por ninguno de los muchos demócratas con la esperanza de destituirlo.

Para respaldar esto, el presidente promocionó los números de las encuestas que, según dijo, le mostraron que estaba bien con los votantes hispanos asegurando que su apoyo a aumentado en un 50%, cifra completamente alejada de la realidad.

“Hay quienes temen, temen su retórica, temen lo que está pasando en la frontera, temen que usted haya dicho que deportará a millones de personas”, dijo Díaz-Balart.

“¡Quieren que lo haga!” Trump le respondió. “Están aquí ilegalmente”.

La senadora de los Estados Unidos y aspirante a la presidencia por el Partido Demócrata, Elizabeth Warren, condenó el uso de la reclusión en régimen de aislamiento contra los inmigrantes detenidos como “cruel e innecesario”, y afirmó que la agencia a cargo de la inmigración probablemente esté violando sus propias directivas de detención.

En una carta detallada y redactada con firmeza dirigida al director interino de la Oficina de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) de los Estados Unidos, Mark Morgan, Warren exigió respuestas a una lista de preguntas sobre el uso de la segregación.

PUBLICIDAD

La solicitud de Warren está motivada en gran parte por Solitary Voices (Voces solitarias), una investigación realizada por el Consorcio Internacional de Periodistas de Investigación (ICIJ) en la que participó Univision Noticias y cinco medios de comunicación más, sobre el uso indebido y excesivo de la reclusión en las instalaciones de inmigración de ICE.

RELACIONADOS
“Esto es tortura”: Así hablan los inmigrantes que han sido aislados por tiempo prolongado en celdas de castigo
COMPARTE
“Esto es tortura”: Así hablan los inmigrantes que han sido aislados por tiempo prolongado en celdas de castigo
“Esto es tortura”: Así hablan los inmigrantes que han sido aislados por tiempo prolongado en celdas de castigo

Al citar el análisis de ICIJ de más de 8,000 registros de casos agencias de ICE (desde 2012 hasta 2017) que describen las colocaciones de detenidos inmigrantes en régimen de aislamiento, Warren destacó los que tienen que ver con personas con discapacidades físicas, intentos de suicidio, huelgas de hambre e infracciones menores a las reglas. Según los informes de ICIJ, muchos de estos detenidos corren mayor riesgo de sufrir los daños bien documentados de la reclusión en régimen de aislamiento.
ADVERTISING

Warren también señaló casos específicos que ICIJ y sus socios habían revelado, entre ellos un detenido que fue aislado por tener una prótesis en la pierna y otro por la posesión “no autorizada de un pimiento verde”.

Entre los casos denunciados por Univision Noticias, está el de Dulce Rivera, una chica transgénero que dice haber estado años y medio de sus dos años de detención, en cuartos de confinamiento solitario. En uno de ellos intentó suicidarse.

También está el caso de Jesús Lorenzo Ávila, quien permanece detenido, y el de Luis Lovo, quien mostró signos de ezquizofrenia mientras estuvo encerrado. Aquí puedes ver sus historias:

“Estoy en el SHU”: la voz de un detenido dentro de su celda de confinamiento sol…

00:00 / 06:07
“Estoy en el SHU”: la voz de un detenido dentro de su celda de confinamiento solitario

Junto con los recientes informes de vigilancia del gobierno que criticaron a ICE por la documentación inadecuada que justificaba el uso de aislamiento disciplinario, Warren dijo que los hallazgos de ICIJ “plantean serias preocupaciones” sobre el proceso de toma de decisiones de ICE en torno al aislamiento.

PUBLICIDAD

Al citar la propia directiva de detención de ICE, que califica al aislamiento como “un paso serio que requiere la consideración cuidadosa de las alternativas”, Warren cuestionó si la agencia está operando dentro de los límites de sus propias reglas.

“El volumen y la severidad con que ICE parece estar violando sus propias reglas es extremadamente perturbador”, escribió Warren, “especialmente teniendo en cuenta la gravedad con la que está comprometiendo la salud y la seguridad de los detenidos a su cargo”.

La carta llega inmediatamente después de que el senador Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) exigiera audiencias en el Congreso sobre los hallazgos de Solitary Voices. Blumenthal pidió el testimonio de la denunciante Ellen Gallagher, quien actualmente es supervisora del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional de los Estados Unidos, al que pertence ICE.

Gallagher le dijo a ICIJ que había revisado informes internos durante años que describían prácticas abusivas, y que había intentado y fracasado en hacer que su agencia realizara reformas significativas para el aislamiento. “La gente estaba siendo brutalizada”, dijo Gallagher a ICIJ.

RELACIONADOS
“Fue negligencia de ICE”: las denuncias de abusos y discriminación de mujeres transgénero tras dos muertes en un año
COMPARTE
“Fue negligencia de ICE”: las denuncias de abusos y discriminación de mujeres transgénero tras dos muertes en un año
“Fue negligencia de ICE”: las denuncias de abusos y discriminación de mujeres transgénero tras dos muertes en un año

La investigación de ICIJ abarcó cuatro países y siete salas de redacción, incluido el Grupo SIN en la República Dominicana, Plaza Pública en Guatemala; Mexicanos contra la Corrupción en México; y NBC News, The Intercept and Univision en los Estados Unidos.

La carta que Warren envió el viernes concluyó con una solicitud para que ICE respondiera una serie de preguntas sobre el uso de la reclusión en régimen de aislamiento, incluida una serie de preguntas que indagaban a la agencia por el número de detenidos que habían muerto después de haber sido aislados.

PUBLICIDAD

Warren le dio a la agencia una fecha límite del 5 de julio para dar respuestas.

CIUDAD DE MÉXICO (AP) — El canciller mexicano Marcelo Ebrard dijo el viernes que se ha completado el apostamiento de unos 6.000 efectivos de la Guardia Nacional para controlar el flujo de migrantes centroamericanos hacia Estados Unidos.

Añadió que la agencia de inmigración ha llenado 650 puestos para ayudar a regular los cruces en el sur.

RECOMMENDED VIDEO
México prometió a Estados Unidos este mes que reduciría el número de migrantes que llegan a la frontera para evitar la aplicación de aranceles sobre las exportaciones según la amenaza del presidente Donald Trump.

Se ha visto a efectivos de la Guardia Nacional en los estados sureños, donde ayudan a las autoridades de inmigración en los retenes, pero no en grandes contingentes.

El canciller mexicano Marcelo Ebrard dijo el viernes que se ha completado el apostamiento de unos 6.000 efectivos de la Guardia Nacional para controlar el flujo de migrantes centroamericanos hacia Estados Unidos.

Añadió que la agencia de inmigración ha llenado 650 puestos para ayudar a regular los cruces en el sur.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
México prometió a Estados Unidos este mes que reduciría el número de migrantes que llegan a la frontera para evitar la aplicación de aranceles sobre las exportaciones según la amenaza del presidente Donald Trump.

Se ha visto a efectivos de la Guardia Nacional en los estados sureños, donde ayudan a las autoridades de inmigración en los retenes, pero no en grandes contingentes.

Las autoridades dicen que han apostado a la guardia en una amplia franja del territorio, pero sin entrar en detalles.

Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Una jueza prohibió el jueves que ICE arreste en los tribunales de Massachusetts a inmigrantes sospechosos de vivir en el país sin autorización mientras se dirime una demanda que impugna dicha práctica.

El fallo de la jueza federal Indira Talwani le prohíbe al Servicio de Control de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE, por sus siglas en inglés) arrestar personas por violaciones de leyes migratorias civiles al llegar, salir o mientras permanecen dentro de los tribunales, reportó Efe.

ICE Massachusetts
Prohíben a ICE arrestar a migrantes en cortes de Massachusetts
El fallo fue por un caso presentado por defensores públicos y fiscales, que dijeron que estos arrestos alteran el sistema de justicia penal porque ahuyenta a acusados y testigos de presentarse a la corte por temor a ser arrestados.

“Esta es una victoria realmente significativa”, dijo Oren Nimini, de Abogados por Derechos Civiles, uno de los juristas que presentó la denuncia.

¿Cuáles son las características más notables del Mazda CX-5 2019?CONTENIDO PATROCINADO: Mazda Latino ¿Cuáles son las características más notables del Mazda CX-5 2019?
Unmute
“Es una buena protección para las comunidades inmigrantes en Massachusetts, pero también es un buen mensaje para las autoridades migratorias que han estado pisoteando los derechos civiles de la gente en los últimos dos años”, agregó.

John Mohan, portavoz del ICE, dijo en un correo electrónico que la agencia está revisando el fallo en Massachusetts y que no tiene más comentarios.

Jueza de Massachusetts prohíbe que ICE realice arrestos civiles de inmigrantes dentro de las cortes del estado

Washington (CNN) — Un juez federal en Massachusetts prohibió el jueves que las autoridades federales realicen arrestos civiles por inmigración dentro de los tribunales del estado.

La Jueza de Distrito de Estados Unidos, Indira Talwani, emitió un recurso judicial preliminar que impide a la Oficina de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas y al Departamento de Seguridad Nacional “los arrestos civiles de partes, testigos y otros que asisten a los juzgados de Massachusetts en asuntos oficiales mientras van, asisten o salen de la Palacio de Justicia”, según la orden judicial.

La orden sigue una demanda de la Fiscal de Distrito del Condado de Middlesex, Marian Ryan, y de la Fiscal de Distrito del Condado de Suffolk, Rachael Rollins; del Comité de Servicios de Asesoría Pública, la agencia de defensa pública de Massachusetts, y del grupo de defensa Chelsea Collaborative. También ocurre después de que un juez de Massachusetts y un exfuncionario de la corte fueran acusados en abril de ayudar a un indocumentado dos veces deportado a eludir a las autoridades de inmigración al salir por la puerta trasera de un tribunal.

Los fiscales de distrito “afirman que los arrestos civiles de ICE en los juzgados estatales, el único foro en el que pueden procesar los casos, están obstaculizando la capacidad de los fiscales para llevar a cabo sus funciones principales”, según la orden judicial, y Chelsea Collaborative afirma que tales arrestos “perjudican la capacidad de sus miembros para protegerse a sí mismos a través de los tribunales estatales de acciones ilegales de otros individuos”.

El aumento de los arrestos hechos por ICE en los juzgados durante el gobierno de Donald Trump ha causado tensiones entre las principales ciudades y los funcionarios federales. Las jurisdicciones locales y los abogados se han quejado de que arrestar a inmigrantes indocumentados en los tribunales disminuye su participación en el procesamiento de criminales, así como los testigos y las víctimas.

En el caso de Massachusetts, los demandantes argumentaron que “los defensores ya no pueden advertir a las víctimas que su temor a ser arrestados durante el proceso judicial es infundado”, según el expediente judicial.

El 62,8 % de hispanos planea votar por el candidato demócrata en las elecciones de noviembre de 2020, mientras que el 18,6 % señala que lo hará por el presidente Donald Trump, según una encuesta publicada este jueves por la cadena Univisión.

El estudio, el primero hecho a nivel nacional entre votantes hispanos con miras a los próximos comicios presidenciales, refleja que el 18,7 % de hispanos aun no tiene decidido su voto, un cifra entendible habida cuenta de los más de 20 aspirantes demócratas a la nominación de su partido.

Precisamente, una semana antes del primer debate entre los precandidatos presidenciales demócratas, que se celebrará en Miami los próximos 26 y 27 de junio, los votantes hispanos se decantan por las dos figuras de este partido que encabezan los sondeos de opinión: Joe Biden, que cuenta con el 20 % de intención de voto, y Bernie Sanders, que suma el 20 %.

Más atrás se sitúan Julian Castro (9%), Beto O’Rourke (8%), Elizabeth Warren (7%) y Kamala Harris (6%), mientras que el 12,5 % aún no sabe a quién apoyará en el proceso de primarias demócratas, según este sondeo realizado por las encuestadoras Latino Decisions y North Star Opinion Research entre el 11 y el 17 de junio.

El estudio, cuya versión completa será publicada el próximo 25 de junio, fue hecho a 1.007 ciudadanos estadounidenses de origen hispano, con derecho al voto, en los 50 estados, por medio de una entrevistas telefónicas e internet y con un margen de error de +/- 3.1%, de acuerdo con un comunicado de la cadena.

La encuesta muestra que los nombres del resto de aspirantes demócratas apenas rozan el 2 % de intención de voto entre los votantes hispanos, lo que refleja que si bien precandidatos como el alcalde de South Bend (Indiana) Pete Buttigieg tiene una cierta presencia a nivel nacional dentro de este grupo de votantes, donde logra el 2,3 % de intención de voto, su reconocimiento es escaso.

En términos generales, el estudio no refleja “evidencia alguna de que los latinos sean receptivos a la más reciente retórica antiinmigrante de Trump”, según dijo en declaraciones que recoge el comunicado Matt Barreto, cofundador de Latino Decisions.

Por su parte, Whit Ayres, fundador y presidente de North Star Opinion Research, opinó que los resultados sugieren que “ninguno de los dos partidos debe dar por hecho el voto hispano”, el cual se inclinará según el “mensaje y compromiso” de los candidatos finales.

Los resultados completos, que serán divulgados un día antes de la primera ronda del debate entre los precandidatos, incluirá un apartado dedicado el estado clave de Florida.

Un reciente estudio, publicado por Telemundo, revela que el 56 % de los hispanos de este estado, que tiene un 20 % de población inmigrante, rechaza un nuevo mandato presidencial del republicano de 73 años, que este martes anunció oficialmente precisamente en Orlando (Florida) su intención de ser candidato en las elecciones del 3 de noviembre de 2020.

Según otra encuesta, esta de ámbito general y divulgada el pasado martes, Trump está en el llamado “estado del sol” por detrás de seis posibles rivales demócratas en las elecciones de 2020.

El sondeo efectuado entre votantes de Florida por la Universidad de Quinnipiac refleja que en una eventual carrera entre Trump y el ex vicepresidente Joe Biden, el republicano se sitúa 9 puntos porcentuales por debajo (41 % frente a 50 %).

El otro gran favorito entre los demócratas, el senador Bernie Sanders, recibe en Florida el 48 % de intención de voto, frente a un un 42 % de Trump.

WASHINGTON.— Activistas de la comunidad inmigrante y la oposición demócrata condenaron hoy el “fallido liderazgo” de la administración Trump por sus restricciones migratorias y una baja en la admisión de refugiados, al conmemorar el “Día Mundial del Refugiado”.

Aunque Estados Unidos había liderado el reasentamiento de refugiados en el mundo, desde que el presidente Donald Trump asumió el poder en 2017, la situación ha cambiado. Trump emitió una orden ejecutiva que redujo por más de la mitad la cuota de refugiados admitidos en EEUU, y otra que impuso una veda a inmigrantes de ciertos países musulmanes.

Entre octubre de 2018 y el pasado 14 de junio, EEUU admitió a 19,318 refugiados de Africa, el este de Asia, Europa, América Latina y el Caribe, y el sur de Asia, en ese orden, según cifras del Departamento de Estado.

EEUU admitió a cerca de 22,500 refugiados en el año fiscal 2018, y dio asilo a 26,568 en el año fiscal 2017, indicó Instituto de Política Migratoria (MPI).

Para ser admitido como refugiado en EEUU, el extranjero debe llenar la solicitud desde el exterior; demostrar que fue víctima de persecución o que teme la persecución debido a su raza, religión, nacionalidad, inclinación política, o afiliación a un grupo social, y no puede estar reasentado formalmente en otro país, entre otros requisitos.

Ni la Casa Blanca ni el mandatario han emitido declaraciones sobre el “Día Mundial del Refugiado”.

¿Un liderazgo fallido?

La reducción en el número de refugiados y la serie de medidas represivas contra los inmigrantes suscitaron hoy nuevas condenas de la oposición demócrata y activistas comunitarios.

La presidenta de la Cámara de Representantes, Nancy Pelosi, hizo un llamado para que EEUU reafirme su “compromiso inquebrantable para respaldar y defender” a quienes “escapan de una violencia inimaginable, la persecución y desastres naturales”.

Ver imagen en Twitter
Ver imagen en Twitter

Nancy Pelosi
✔
@SpeakerPelosi
America has long stood as a beacon of hope for refugees from around the world who are “yearning to breathe free.” The Trump Admin’s cruel anti-immigrant, anti-refugee agenda dishonors our heritage & threatens the lives & well-being of countless people. https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/62019/

1.934
14:40 – 20 jun. 2019
2.609 personas están hablando de esto
Información y privacidad de Twitter Ads
“Desde la separación de familias hasta el encarcelamiento de niños y la eliminación de protecciones de asilo, la cruel agenda anti-inmigrante y anti-refugiados de la Administración Trump han deshonrado nuestra herencia y amenazado las vidas y bienestar de incontables hombres, mujeres y niños que persiguen el Sueño Americano”, se quejó Pelosi.

“La más reciente amenaza de la Administración de hacer deportaciones masivas es un pasmoso acto de crueldad, diseñado únicamente a inyectar miedo e incertidumbre en nuestras comunidades”, afirmó Pelosi, legisladora demócrata de California.

Pelosi pidió combatir “estas políticas discriminatorias y crueles ataques contra nuestras orgullosas comunidades de inmigrantes y refugiados”, y prometió continuar promoviendo una reforma migratoria que proteja a refugiados y solicitantes de asilo y evite la separación familiar.

En declaraciones a Noticias Telemundo, Eric Schwartz, presidente del grupo “Refugees International”, afirmó, sin rodeos, que la Administración Trump ha demostrado un “liderazgo fallido” respecto a la protección de migrantes y refugiados.

“No está ejerciendo liderazgo en muchas áreas, la baja en la admisión de refugiados es tan solo una. Antes de Trump, la cifra propuesta de admisión de refugiados estaba en 110,000, ahora el techo está en 30,000 y tal vez con suerte lleguemos a eso”, dijo Schwartz.

Aún si EEUU volviera a la cifra anterior no resolvería la situación de 25 millones de desplazados, pero otros gobiernos como los de Uganda, Jordania, y Turquía, están absorbiendo a “millones” de refugiados, subrayó.

Schwartz, quien fue subsecretario de Estado para asuntos de refugiados bajo la Administración Obama, entre 2009 y 2011, dijo que el abandono de liderazgo de Trump se manifiesta también en su “escandalosa retórica contra los inmigrantes y refugiados, sin fundamentos”.

Schwartz lamentó que Trump haya roto con la tradición bipartidista de apoyar a los refugiados al insistir en su discurso de “cerrar la frontera”, en clara violación de la Convención sobre Refugiados.

Aunque EEUU ha justificado su política migratoria en aras de la seguridad nacional, Schwartz enfatizó que desde el 9/11, “no ha habido un solo caso de un refugiado vinculado con actos terroristas mortales en EEUU”, mientras que un gran número de actos de violencia con armas han sido a manos de grupos extremistas y nacionalistas blancos.

“¿Qué si alguna vez pueda entrar alguien y cometa crímenes? Claro, pero para prevenirlo tendrías que sellar por completo la frontera y eso causaría la pobreza económica y moral de EEUU, que se fortalece y revitaliza por los migrantes y refugiados”, puntualizó.

Por su parte, en entrevista telefónica, la mexicana Jeanette Vizguerra, quien lucha desde hace seis años por obtener una visa “U”, condenó que Trump “está usando a los inmigrantes vulnerables como señuelo para ganar la reelección”.

“Esto es inhumano, es cruel, y cobarde, porque las autoridades no hablan de los abusos y las muertes en los centros de detención, de los niños enjaulados”, dijo.

“En el Día Mundial del Refugiado, esto me preocupa mucho, porque hay ciertos alivios que se han honrado por décadas y este presidente abusa de su poder al hacer cambios radicales que perjudican a la gente. Por eso vemos tantas demandas judiciales”, enfatizó.

Vizguerra, quien fue víctima de un crimen violento y eso la cualifica para la visa “U”, cumplió 97 días bajo “santuario” en la iglesia “First Unitarian” en Denver (Colorado) -la segunda vez que lo hace-, y rechazó los argumentos de la Administración para negársela.

La mexicana Jeanette Vizguerra lucha por conseguir una visa “U” en EEUU

“Probablemente voy a tener que seguir en santuario pero voy a seguir luchando, con cada herramienta y recurso legal, y pelear hasta el final, porque no se la voy a poner fácil a este gobierno”, prometió.

Vizguerra, quien no descartó una demanda contra la Administración, se ha convertido en una activista y fundó la Coalición de Santuario del Area Metropolitana de Denver.

Más restricciones este año

Según un análisis del grupo “Law 360”, la Administración Trump ha adoptado este año al menos cinco medidas que han restringido el acceso al asilo, a las visas “H-1B” para trabajadores altamente calificados, y han aumentado la persecución de inmigrantes que permanecen en EEUU con visas vencidas.

En enero, EEUU anunció el programa “Quédate en México”, obligando a solicitantes de asilo centroamericanos a esperar allí la resolución de sus casos, y lo ampliará bajo un acuerdo suscrito el pasado 7 de junio con México. Se calcula que, bajo esta medida, más de 13,000 solicitantes de asilo han sido desplazados a ciudades al lado mexicano de la frontera.

En febrero, Trump declaró una “emergencia nacional” para obtener 8.100 millones en fondos federales para su prometido muro fronterizo, que se suman a los 1.375 millones que el Congreso le aprobó para la vigilancia fronteriza. Esa cifra no incluye los 2.500 millones desviados de programas del Pentágono entre marzo y mayo.

La Administración también cambió las reglas para la emisión de visas “H-1B”, una vez que se ha superado el límite anual de 65,000, lo que afectará principalmente a empresas que reclutan a trabajadores extranjeros.

En abril, el Departamento de Justicia prohibió que solicitantes de asilo con casos denegados y en proceso de deportación puedan quedar en libertad bajo fianza, aún si han pasado la prueba de “miedo creíble”. Así revirtió una decisión de 2005 de la Junta de Apelaciones Migratorias (BIA, en inglés), que permitía a los jueces programar audiencias de fianzas para inmigrantes detenidos.

Ese mismo mes, la Administración instó a las agencias federales a perseguir a extranjeros que permanecen en EEUU con visas de turismo o negocios vencidas, pero por el momento no ha habido redadas para su eventual deportación.

Más desplazados en el mundo

Mientras, un informe de la Oficina del Alto Comisionado para Refugiados de Naciones Unidas (UNHCR, en inglés), divulgado la víspera de la fecha conmemorativa, reveló que 70,8 millones de personas han abandonado sus hogares para huir de la violencia o persecución en sus países, una cifra que representa el doble de hace apenas una década.

En 2009, el número de desplazados fue 43.3 millones, y el mayor incremento ahora se produjo entre 2012 y 2015 por el conflicto civil en Siria y conflictos en Irak y el Yemen, el África subsahariana, el Congo y Sudán del Sur, entre otros.

En 2018, la crisis migratoria sumó a 13.6 millones de personas que huyeron por primera vez en busca de protección, incluyendo a 2.8 millones que solicitaron refugio o asilo en el exterior.

La cifra de nuevos desplazados equivale a un promedio diario de 37.000 personas y, de forma global, una de cada 108 personas ha sufrido un desplazamiento forzoso, indicó el informe.

El número de 70.8 millones es “conservador” porque no refleja por completo la crisis política y social en Venezuela, que ha generado la mayor crisis de desplazamiento más reciente en el mundo. Cuatro millones de venezolanos han huido a países vecinos, y aunque la mayoría necesita protección como refugiados internacionales, solo alrededor de medio millón han solicitado asilo formalmente, según Naciones Unidas.

En un centro de detención de menores migrantes en Texas, tres niñas de entre 10 y 15 años se turnaban para cuidar a un bebé de dos años.

El niño estaba enfermo, su diminuta playera estaba cubierta de mucosidades, no traía pañal y sus pantalones estaban mojados. Aparte de las niñas, no había nadie que lo cuidara, denunciaron abogados que visitaron el centro, según ha reportado la agencia de noticias The Associated Press.

“En mis 22 años de visitar a niños en centros de detención nunca había escuchado de este nivel de inhumanidad”, dijo Holly Cooper a la agencia citada, un abogado que representa a menores detenidos. “Ver a nuestro país en este crisol donde hemos abandonado a los niños y hemos fallado en reconocer su humanidad ojalá y sea una llamada de atención para que cambie”.

En este centro, localizado en Clint, cerca de la ciudad fronteriza de El Paso, un grupo de abogados involucrados en el caso Flores, acerca de las condiciones en las que los niños y familias migrantes son detenidos, entrevistaron a 60 menores. El centro alberga unos 250 niños, adolescentes e infantes.

Los abogados habían negociado el encuentro con la Patrulla Fronteriza, quienes desde hace tres semanas sabían que habría una visita.

Muchos de los niños que entrevistaron habían llegado solos a la frontera entre México y Estados Unidos, pero algunos habían sido separados de sus guardianes adultos como tíos y tías, dijeron los abogados según The Associated Press.

La ley exige que los niños no sean retenidos por la Patrulla Fronteriza por más de 72 horas, tras lo cual deben ser transferidos a la custodia del Departamento de Servicios Humanos y Salud, pero los abogados dijeron que habían encontrado algunos que habían pasado hasta 27 días detenidos.

Muchos dijeron que habían sido retenidos en las instalaciones cercanas a El Paso por más de 72 horas.

Aduanas y Protección Fronteriza no respondió de inmediato a las acusaciones sobre las condiciones, pero en los últimos meses ha repetido que sus recursos se encuentran agotados y sus capacidades al borde del colapso.

Las acusaciones sobre las condiciones dentro de las instalaciones de Clint son las últimas quejas sobre maltrato a inmigrantes en un momento en el que la llegada de familias y niños migrantes ha sobrepasado los registros de la última década

Las instalaciones del gobierno están superpobladas y siete niños inmigrantes han muerto desde fines del año pasado luego de ser detenidos por la administración Trump.

Una madre adolescente con un bebé prematuro fue encontrada la semana pasada en un centro de procesamiento de la Patrulla Fronteriza en Texas, después de haber sido retenida durante nueve días.

La administración Trump ha estado batallando para encontrar sitios donde detener a los migrantes, a medida que se agudizan las críticas de los defensores de migrantes y el Partido Demócrata.

Recientemente, el Servicio de Inmigración y Aduanas (ICE, en inglés) anunció que comenzaría a utilizar una polémica cárcel privada denunciada por sus condiciones inhumanas para detener a solicitantes de asilo.

Al mismo tiempo, el Departamento de Salud anunció su plan para albergar a niños migrantes no acompañados en una base militar que sirvió como centro de concentración de prisioneros de guerra en la Segunda Guerra Mundial.

Representantes de la administración Trump argumentaron esta semana en una corte federal que los niños migrantes recluidos en centros de detención no necesitan artículos de aseo personal como cepillos de dientes, dentífrico y jabón, reportó la web informativa Court House News.

También negaron que tener a los migrantes durmiendo sobre el suelo de concreto en cobijas de aluminio fuese violatorio del acuerdo Flores, una resolución judicial de 1997 que dicta qué se considera un trato humano mientras se está bajo custodia de la autoridades migratorias.

El panel de tres jueces del Noveno Circuito de Apelaciones de California quedó atónito al escuchar el alegato de la abogada del Departamento de Justicia.

“¿De verdad se va a poner de pie y nos va a decir que poder dormir no es un asunto de condiciones seguras e higiénicas?”, preguntó la jueza de circuito Marsha Berzon a la abogada Sarah Fabian.

El acuerdo Flores establece que el Gobierno está obligado a retener a las personas bajo custodia en instalaciones “seguras e higiénicas”.

Una demanda contra la administración Obama en 2015 conllevó a que una corte de California nombrara un supervisor independiente para asegurarse de que el Gobierno cumpliera con los requisitos del acuerdo Flores.

Tras analizar el reporte independiente, la juez Dolly Gee concluyó que el Gobierno estaba violando los términos del acuerdo. Los migrantes detenidos, notó, no estaban recibiendo una alimentación adecuada, agua limpia, ni utensilios de limpieza personal como jabones, cepillos y pasta dental.

Gee también dijo que la práctica de mantener a los niños en temperaturas heladas y con las luces encendidas en todo momento era violatorio del acuerdo, reportó Court House News.

Este martes, la abogada Fabian pidió a la Corte de Apelaciones del Noveno Circuito que fallara en contra del dictamen de la juez Gee.

¿Su argumento? Flores no decía explícitamente que los detenidos necesitasen cepillos y jabones.

“Uno tiene que suponer que fue dejado de ese modo y no enumerado por las partes porque las partes no pudieron alcanzar un acuerdo en cómo enumerar eso o fue dejado para que las agencias lo determinaran”, dijo Fabian.

Pero el juez William Fletcher no lo aceptó.

“¿O era relativamente obvio?”, reviró Fletcher.

-“Es del entendimiento común de todos que, si no tienes un cepillo de dientes, si no tienes jabón, si no tienes una manta, no es seguro ni higiénico”, dijo la juez A. Wallace Tashima. “¿No estarían todos de acuerdo con eso? ¿Estás de acuerdo con eso?”

-“Bueno, creo que es … creo que esas son … hay una razón justa para descubrir que esas cosas … pueden ser parte de una situación segura e higiénica…”, dijo Fabian.

“¡Tal vez, no! Son. ¿Qué quieres decir con tal vez? ¿Quiere decir que hay circunstancias en que una persona no necesita tener un cepillo de dientes, pasta de dientes y jabón? ¿Por días? ”, exclamó Tashima.

Mayra Todd llegó a Estados Unidos hace 33 años. La inmigrante guatemalteca tiene una orden de deportación que recibió décadas atrás, pero esto no la disuade de alzar su voz en defensa de otros inmigrantes que corren su misma suerte.

ADVERTISING

inRead invented by Teads
El jueves por la mañana, Todd, junto a decenas de activistas y representantes de organizaciones angelinas a favor de los derechos de los inmigrantes, se dieron cita frente al edificio federal de inmigración de la calle Los Ángeles, en Downtown, para anunciar el comienzo de una larga campaña a favor de una reforma migratoria, y el alto de las deportaciones y de las separaciones de familia.

“El miedo es lo único que nos detiene y no debemos permitirlo. Por eso no me da miedo estar hablando frente al edificio de inmigración”, indicó Todd.

Una larga campaña
“Hoy es el primer día de una larga campaña organizada por una coalición de organizaciones y activistas a favor de los inmigrantes”, anunció Juan José Gutierrez, director ejecutivo de Vamos Unidos USA, el jueves por la mañana.

En rueda de prensa, Gutierrez explicó que la iniciativa es una respuesta de las amenazas de deportación del presidente Donald Trump y sus ataques a la comunidad inmigrante.

“Este es el presidente más peligroso de la nación. Ya no sólo nos insulta, sino que nos amenaza con una ‘cacería de inmigrantes’”, expresó Gutierrez. “Hay que tomarse sus amenazas seriamente. Desde la época de las deportaciones masivas que no nos enfrentábamos a una amenaza de esta índole”, advirtió.

“Podemos ser mujeres, podemos ser chiquitas, pero no tenemos miedo. No vamos a permitir que nos sigan humillando”, declaró Gloria Saucedo, de El Centro México. “Tenemos que demostrarle al presidente que somos gente trabajadora y honrada. Tenemos que salir con la frente en alto”.

La activista anunció que el próximo evento tendrá lugar el 4 de julio, pero hasta el momento no se han dado más detalles.
También están planeadas acciones y manifestaciones en conmemoración del 25 aniversario de la histórica marcha del 19 de octubre de 1994, en contra de la proposición 187, y del aniversario del movimiento nacional chicano del 29 de agosto de 1970.

Las marchas, protestas y otras acciones se irán anunciado en las próximas semanas.

Ya Basta
“Ya basta de amenazas. Ya basta de las humillaciones de Trump. Este es un país de inmigrantes. Aquí viven nuestros hijos y ahora Trump nos amenaza para reelegirse”, opinó Francisco Moreno, director de comunidades de COFEM (Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas). Moreno destacó la importancia de unirse y participar.

“Necesitamos despertarnos y movilizarnos. Ya basta de no hacer nada”, arengó Moreno.

Juan Venancio, coordinador de la Federación poblana coincidió con el director de comunidades de COFEM.
“Hoy tenemos que estar más unidos que nunca. Ya es hora de dejar la apatía y las distracciones y salir a hacer oír nuestra voz”, agregó Venancio.

Mayra Todd no teme hacer oir su voz, y luchar por los derechos de los inmigrantes. Virginia Gaglianone/ La Opinion
El miedo no se va
Después de 30 años de haber recibido una carta de deportación, Mayra Todd sigue luchando por sus derechos y los derechos de millones de inmigrantes.

“El miedo no se va”, confesó la inmigrante. “Pero una se acostumbra a vivir con ese miedo. No podemos manifestarnos desde nuestra casa, tenemos que salir a luchar por nuestros derechos”, indicó.

Al dejar su país en busca de un futuro mejor, Todd tuvo que separarse de su hijito que en ese entonces era un bebé y ya nunca pudo volverlo a ver. Treinta años después, Todd recibió la mejor noticia que una madre o padre puede recibir: su hijo pudo cruzar la frontera con la primera caravana que llegó de Centroamérica y logró llegar a Texas

Su hijo, ahora un hombre de 30 años llegó a su vez con sus dos hijitas – nietas de Todd-, pero aún no han logrado encontrarse y conocerse con su mamá. Durante la entrevista con La Opinión, Todd mostró orgullosa las fotos de sus nietitas y explicó que ambos están haciendo planes para el gran encuentro.

“Mi hija me dice, ‘¿Para qué sigues yendo a marchas y manifestaciones? Tu hijo ya está aquí, ya no te arriesgues’. Pero no se puede vivir con miedo, tenemos que salir con la frente en alto y seguir luchando por los derechos que nos corresponden”, afirmó.

Los presidentes se encontraron en la sureña entidad mexicana de Chiapas, en medio de un despliegue militar sin precedentes. En estos momentos México no tiene 30 millones de dólares, por lo que los fondos podrían ser una inversión conjunta con EEUU, pues este plan fue previamente llevado a la Casa Blanca.

Una de las tres leyes, que rubricará este viernes el gobernador JB Pritzker en la Universidad de Illinois en Chicago (UIC), facilitará el acceso a ayuda financiera para estudiantes indocumentados y otra prohibirá la apertura de centros de detención privados en el estado. La última de ellas limitará la colaboración de la policía con autoridades migratorias.

A Salvadoran widower who came to this country as a child no longer visits the post office or other government buildings. A Guatemalan mother of two hasn’t left her home in suburban Maryland, except to buy necessities, since hearing about President Trump’s tweet late Monday.

The president’s proclamation — that federal agents soon will start rounding up families in the country illegally and deporting them by the thousands — has accelerated the fear that has built for more than two years among the nation’s estimated 10.5 million undocumented residents, according to immigrants, advocates and public officials.

Parents are vowing to keep their children out of summer programs. Shopping trips are consolidated to limit driving. Migrants without papers are avoiding large crowds and minimizing going out at night and even attending church.

“It terrorizes me very much to hear that they’re going to do mass raids,” said Yadira, the Guatemalan mother in Prince George’s. Like other undocumented immigrants interviewed, she declined to give her full name.

“If I drive, the police can stop me for any small reason, and they’ll see I don’t have documents and they’ll arrest me,” she said. “Thank God the school year is over for my oldest son, because now I don’t have to go out so much.”

For months, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials had been planning large-scale raids targeting families but were taken aback when Trump announced that the action was imminent.

Despite limited detention space and federal personnel, the government says men, women and children with final orders of deportation will be swept up in major metropolitan areas across the country — a highly visible attempt to stanch an unprecedented flow of families across the southern border and discourage would-be migrants from traveling north.

In the Washington area, where most local governments are protective of undocumented residents, many public officials are vowing not to cooperate with federal raids.

“We welcome immigrants and the vibrancy they bring to our jurisdictions,” said a joint statement issued Thursday by Baltimore Mayor Jack Young (D) and the Democratic county executives of Maryland’s five largest counties, including Marc Elrich of Montgomery County and Angela D. Alsobrooks of Prince George’s. “We stand together in embracing diversity, and our police departments and agency employees will continue to work to ensure that everyone’s civil rights are respected.”

Advocates are expanding “Know Your Rights” seminars and visiting homes in heavily immigrant neighborhoods, passing out fliers in Spanish and other foreign languages that explain what to do if immigration agents approach.

“People are really frightened,” said Hallie Ryan, the managing attorney at the Legal Aid Justice Center in Northern Virginia, which joined other groups this week to urge local officials not to cooperate with ICE.

“An operation like the one President Trump tweeted about is not done without local cooperation,” Ryan said. “And local governments have the power to not cooperate with something that serves only to terrorize their local communities.”

The group visited a heavily immigrant apartment complex in Annandale on Thursday, advising about two dozen residents not to let strangers inside their building or share any personal details.

“It would be easier if you don’t even answer their questions and just say: ‘I’m sorry, I’m busy,’ ” said Nicholas Marritz, an attorney also with the Legal Aid Justice Center. “The best protection we have when we’re confronted by immigration agents is silence.”

A Honduran woman who spoke on the condition of anonymity said she had been hunkered down in her stuffy apartment since hearing about Trump’s announcement. “It feels like we’re prisoners,” she said.

After seeing Trump’s tweet, Maryland Del. Joseline Peña-Melnyk (D-Prince George’s) texted other Latino officials in the county asking: “What can we do to get in front of it?” They immediately knew what she meant.

Officials in the Washington suburb, where the foreign-born population has nearly doubled since 2000, are working on legislation to limit the participation of local police in immigration matters and prevent discrimination against undocumented immigrants or the denial of services by county agencies.

“We are trying to walk a fine line that helps people prepare but not cause a panic,” said Brandon Wu, an organizer with the D.C.-based group Sanctuary DMV, which vocally denounced ICE operations last summer that resulted in the arrest and deportation of 12 District residents.

“The mere threat of these raids can really wreak havoc in immigrant families,” Wu said. “Because all of a sudden they are afraid to do things they have to do to live their everyday lives.”

Immigration lawyer Hassan M. Ahmad said one client of his awaiting approval of a U visa, which is reserved for victims of domestic violence, contacted him in a panic Tuesday, worried that Trump’s tweet about the raids meant the application would be revoked.

“Nobody knows what to expect,” said Ahmad, who works in Loudoun County, Va. “We still have a legal system, we still have a system of laws. But it’s been hard to give them any sense of peace.”

Julia Toro, a lawyer in the District, said she worries that people will start leaving the country voluntarily, even when they have strong claims for asylum.

“That’s what happened with TPS,” said Toro, referring to the Trump administration’s unsuccessful attempt to terminate temporary protected status for immigrants from El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua and Sudan. “We don’t know what’s going to happen. So people need to be well-informed.”

A weekly legal clinic in Langley Park, Md., offered by the Maryland-based immigrant advocacy group CASA was relatively quiet Tuesday, but advocates expect that to change. In the lobby of the refurbished mansion that serves as CASA’s headquarters, three women waited for their turn with a lawyer.

“My prevailing fear is being separated from my children,” said a young mother from Peru who was breast-feeding her infant son. She entered the United States illegally two years ago and said she rethinks that decision each time she watches the news. She doesn’t take her children to the park anymore and rarely ventures out.

Sitting across from her was Carmen, a 31-year-old Salvadoran who crossed the southern U.S. border on June 1. Trump’s threats regularly make news in her home country, she said. But they didn’t deter her from coming, and she said she would make the same decision again if given the chance.

“We are suffering so much that we weigh the risk against his words, but the choice is always the same,” she said. “There is still hope that things are better here.”

Advocates are helping families delegate authority to others to care for their children if they are arrested, CASA attorney Nick Katz said, and identifying safe places to which they can go if they feel threatened. Immigrants are memorizing the telephone numbers of advocates and attorneys.

“Versus what has been a floating anxiety during the past few years, there is now an acute fear,” said Austin Almaguer, co-chair of Virginians Organized for Interfaith Community Engagement and pastor of the Vienna Baptist Church in Fairfax County, where 1 in 3 residents are foreign-born. He said some of the group’s undocumented members have told him they would not allow their children to attend summer camp or even go to the local library.

Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Chairwoman Sharon Bulova (D) called Trump’s tweet “cruel” and said that officials will make sure people are aware of a new $200,000 legal-aid program and that local police officers have nothing to do with ICE.

“Whether people are here legally, not legally or somewhere in between, it’s important that people trust Fairfax County law enforcement to keep the community safe,” she said.

But in neighboring Prince William County, Board of Supervisors Chairman Corey A. Stewart (R), an ardent Trump supporter, said his county will do all it can to help ICE make arrests.

At the same time, Stewart, who lost races for Virginia governor and U.S. senator in the past two years, said Trump should focus on deporting undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes unrelated to their immigration status.

At a center for day laborers in Langley Park, Jesús, 37, the widower from Silver Spring, Md.,said he’s been “reading everything” about Trump’s plans “and paying attention to every story.”

He has developed a plan for his U.S.-born children in case he is arrested, and he avoids government buildings, large crowds and law enforcement at all costs. “I get sad and sick from thinking about this all the time and anticipating ‘la migra,’ ” he said, using a Spanish term for U.S. immigration officials.

Aime Tchemeni, a journalist from West Africa who is seeking asylum, watched news of Trump’s tweet early Tuesday and said he was overwhelmed with grief.

“The president needs to understand that he’s not hurting just one person,” said Tchemeni, who was also at the day laborers’ site and asked that the name of his country not be published because he feared retribution from its government. “He is hurting entire families and entire communities around the world.”

TAPACHULA, Mexico — Mexico and El Salvador signed a cooperation agreement Thursday that includes a $30 million Mexican donation for reforestation in the Central American nation, amid increased pressure from the United States to slow a surge of migrants toward the U.S. border.

The project to reforest some 124,000 acres (50,000 hectares), with the expected creation of 20,000 jobs, was presented as Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele met his counterpart Andrés Manuel López Obrador in southern Mexico, where tens of thousands of mostly Central American migrants have crossed into the country this year fleeing poverty and violence.

The meeting on addressing the surge came as Mexico is putting into effect a deal on irregular immigration reached with Washington to head off stiff tariffs President Donald Trump threatened to slap on all imports from Mexico.

López Obrador said plans similar to the El Salvador agreement are in the works for Guatemala and Honduras, the other two countries that make up Central America’s Northern Triangle. He believes creating more opportunities there is the key to avoiding more migration.

“A region that is going to set an example for the world,” López Obrador said, adding that migration control cannot come only through “the use of force, only coercive measures, closing borders, but through understanding the root of the problem and seeking solutions.”

His government, however, has begun deploying some 6,000 National Guard agents to support police and soldiers on immigration enforcement as stipulated in the agreement with Washington.

Shortly after he spoke, and just a couple of miles (kilometers) away, Associated Press journalists witnessed immigration agents take three groups of immigrants, about two-dozen in all, into custody and load them into vans in the presence of uniformed National Guard.

While the arrival of migrants to Mexico’s southern border appears to have slowed somewhat in recent days with the anticipated arrival of National Guard forces, some continued to trickle in.

Development plans could take a long time to have an effect, and migrants from Bukele’s own country interviewed by The Associated Press expressed skepticism that things will get better any time soon.

Less than 12 miles (20 kilometers) from where the presidents spoke, a Salvadoran man who asked to be identified as just Brilo because of safety concerns boarded a rudimentary raft and crossed the Suchiate River that makes up the frontier between Guatemala and Mexico.

“I have heard that the president was going to come and sign an agreement so that we can all work,” he said upon reaching the Mexican side. “That is not the problem. It is the gangs, the crime, that is the only thing there is in El Salvador.”

Luis Antonio Vázquez, a 23-year-old Salvadoran, agreed.

“It’s not only about finding work there,” he said. “It’s also because they extort you if you have a job.”

In his eyes, the Guard deployment “may give us all security, but it also may not let through many of those who flee to avoid being killed.”

Bukele took office June 1 and shares López Obrador’s view on the need to create opportunities in Central America.

He said the agreement with Mexico will be “a light that will illuminate many parts of the world.”

“Brothers working united, we can do so much more,” Bukele continued.

He has also promised a crackdown on gangs in El Salvador following a spate of police and military killings, and on Thursday officers and soldiers began a deployment in commercial areas of the Salvadoran capital’s historic center and 11 other municipalities with a gang presence. Some 80% of gangs’ revenues are said to come from extortion, and Justice Minister Rogelio Rivas said the offensive seeks to strangle financially “the terrorist groups.”

Carlos Vindel a 24-year-old driver from El Salvador who was waiting to request asylum in the southern Mexican city of Tapachula, worried that could only make things worse.

“Now that President Nayib Bukele is hitting them hard, things are going to become more critical,” said Vindel said. “There will be more violence because the gangs always respond.”

Vindel, traveling with two adults and two minors, crossed the border on Tuesday, a day later than expected, because the group saw five uniformed agents on the banks of the Suchiate at Talisman, across from Guatemala. The group had to turn around and wait for the agents to leave.

“Even if there are (development) projects, people are going to keep leaving,” said Vindel, who fled El Salvador after gangs tried to recruit him. Saying no to the likes of the notorious MS-13 and 18th Street gangs is often a death sentence.

So far this year, more than 24,000 people have requested asylum in Mexico, almost the same number as all of 2018.

Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Marcelo Ebrard said Wednesday that there are 14 U.N. agencies prepared to help with the Central America plan. The U.S. has also committed to support it, though there are no concrete details at least publicly available, as well as the European Union.

Those who decide to return to their countries received an offer of help from Mexican discount airline Volaris on Thursday.

The carrier said its “Reuniting Families” program will offer Central American migrants who are in Mexico without legal status flights to El Salvador, Guatemala and Costa Rica for $1 plus taxes through June 30. Migrants who show up at airports in Mexico City, Guadalajara or the border cities of Tijuana and Ciudad Juarez receive the next available seats.

Many migrants who have registered for refuge in Mexico are hopeful and view positively its programs letting them normalize their migratory status and get temporary employment.

“For the time being I’m going to stay here, as long as there is work,” said María del Carmen Ramírez, a 23-year-old who fled Honduras with her 3-year-old son, sister-in-law and after her brother was murdered. For the last month she has been earning money sweeping streets and cleaning plants.

MEXICO CITY — Before María Senaida Escobar Cerritos left her small town in El Salvador, carrying a small green backpack and wearing new purple running shoes, she called her dad in Santa Cruz, Calif.

“We’re leaving now,” the 19-year-old told Darios Escobar Lainez on June 12. “We’ll finally be together again soon.”

Her plan was to travel to the U.S. border and apply for asylum.

Two days later, Escobar Lainez received another call — not from his daughter, but from another migrant who was traveling with her. Their truck had sped through a checkpoint in the southern state of Veracruz, the woman told him. María had been shot and killed by Mexican police.

“We knew the journey came with risks,” Escobar Lainez, 58, said this week. “But we never thought there was a chance that the Mexican police would kill my daughter.”

María’s death last Friday, and the police’s alleged use of overwhelming force against the migrants, is now the subject of two government investigations. It comes as Mexico, under President Trump’s threat to impose tariffs, is working to stop the flow of migrants to the U.S. border.

For many here, it’s proof that the Mexican security agencies tasked with that job are ill-equipped to stem the surge of Central Americans trying to reach the United States.

The attorney general of Veracruz, Jorge Winckler Ortiz, said a preliminary investigation, based on interviews with survivors and other eyewitnesses, suggests a police vehicle overtook a truck full of migrants beyond a checkpoint in the town of Agua Dulce, and men in police uniforms “opened fire.”

Roberto de Paz, one of the two Salvadoran migrants wounded in the shooting, echoed that account. Recovering in a Veracruz hospital, he said a patrol car pursued the migrants’ truck in a high-speed chase, first shooting from behind and then passing the truck and taking several shots through the windshield.

One of those bullets, he said, killed María. De Paz was shot in one hand.

He said he counted three police officers, each brandishing guns.

“After they saw her body, and they saw that we had been shot, they drove away and left us there,” de Paz said in a phone interview.

On Wednesday, Mexico’s secretary of public security, said his ministry’s investigation indicated that the migrants shot at police first. But on Thursday, the ministry reversed course, saying the migrants did not shoot at all.

“The most recent and up-to-date information available at this time suggests that there are no indications that shots were fired from the vehicle in question,” the Ministry of Public Security said in a statement.

The agency, of which the Federal Police is a part, continues to investigate.

“The secretariat of security and citizen protection will not tolerate any violation of human rights and disapproves of any conduct that is remote from the observance of the law,” the ministry said.

De Paz said the migrants were not armed.

“We were a group of migrants crammed in a truck,” he said. “There were no weapons.”

The checkpoint that the migrants passed in southern Veracruz state is part of the expanding enforcement infrastructure staffed largely by police and military personnel, some of them members of Mexico’s newly formed national guard. Six thousand members of the guard are being sent to southern Mexico, their deployment accelerated as part of the agreement this month between Mexico and the Trump administration.

That mission has worried human rights advocates since it was announced. Mexico’s security personnel had not been trained in immigration enforcement and now were being sent to the front lines of the country’s high-stakes effort to stop migration.

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has tried to reconcile his promise to respect the rights of migrants with the country’s U.S.-backed crackdown. But multiple incidents in recent weeks, including María’s death, have made it clear how difficult it will be to strike that balance.

On June 10, a migrant woman from Honduras was allegedly kidnapped by federal agents. This week, Doctors Without Borders said Mexican immigration officers raided one of their mobile hospitals and detained migrants who had gone there for medical treatment.

“We are already seeing the consequences of criminalizing migrants and asylum seekers and forcing them underground,” said Sergio Martín, the head of mission for Doctors Without Borders in Mexico.

María was killed five days after the United States and Mexico signed the pact to stop migration.

“The killing of a Salvadoran migrant woman by Mexican police is a tragic yet predictable consequence of Mexican security forces’ new role in immigration enforcement,” said Maureen Meyer, the director of the Mexico program at the Washington Office on Latin America.

The government of El Salvador said it is awaiting the results of the investigations. The Salvadoran ambassador to Mexico, Carlos Enrique Cáceres Chávez, told The Washington Post that he remains concerned about the rights of migrants traveling through Mexico to the United States.

“There are processes to enforce the laws against irregular migrants, and the authorities need to protect the rights of those migrants,” he said.

María decided to leave her home in the Salvadoran department of Cabañas for a long list of reasons, her father said. She was tired of being extorted by local criminal groups, who badgered her for money and threatened their family with violence. She was sick of trying to find a job in a place where none existed. And she missed her father.

Escobar Lainez has lived in Santa Cruz off and on for more than a decade.

“We decided together that she would come to California,” he said. “I told her, ‘There is work here.’ ”

Through friends, Escobar Lainez helped his daughter find a smuggler that could take her to the U.S. border. He paid $4,000 for the journey.

On the day she left, she posed for a picture in a nearby plaza. She wore blue jeans and a black sweater. She looked younger than 19.

Escobar Lainez had heard that Mexico and the United States had agreed to stem the flow of migration, but it didn’t change their plans.

“We thought the worst that could happen is that she would be deported,” Escobar Lainez said.

María picked out a new outfit for her trip.

“She was nervous, but excited,” said her sister, Doris Escobar, 35. “She wanted to be with her father.”

María met up with 16 other migrants in San Salvador, the capital. They took a bus through Guatemala and crossed the border illegally into the Mexican state of Tabasco and called a telephone number provided by the smuggler.

They were directed to a large white pickup truck, a Chevrolet Avalanche, with a Mexican man in the driver’s seat.

De Paz was also on his way to reunite with family. His grandfather, Saul Antonio Gomez, is a U.S. citizen living in California.

“We crammed in,” de Paz said. “I was in the bed of the truck, under the cover. María Senaida was in the passenger seat.”

They drove for about an hour and a half, de Paz said, passing a checkpoint between the states of Tabasco and Veracruz.

“The driver didn’t stop at the checkpoint,” de Paz said. “Then I heard sirens.”

“A few minutes later, there were three gunshots,” he said. “The first one hit me in the hand.”

The truck stopped and de Paz got out. He saw María’s lifeless body. The police got back in their patrol car, he said, and drove away.

“We found a woman selling things on the side of the road and she called an ambulance,” he said.

When the municipal police arrived with the ambulance, there was no sign of the federal police officials accused of the shooting.

The other migrants fled the scene. One called Escobar Lainez to tell him about his daughter.

“I started crying and crying,” he said. “I don’t understand how this happened. If they wanted to stop the truck, why didn’t they just shoot at the tires?”

Escobar Lainez has flown from Santa Cruz to El Salvador to receive his daughter’s body. He was living illegally in California, he said, and he knows returning to El Salvador probably means the end of his life in America, because crossing back would be difficult.

When he arrived in Cabañas, the Salvadoran consulate told him he would need to pay $3,800 to repatriate his daughter’s body.

“The Mexican police killed her, and now they are asking me to pay to get her body back,” he said.

“They could have arrested her. They could have detained her, but instead they shot her.”

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is claiming that his policies to stop illegal immigration are helping his standing with Latino voters, and he is taking undue credit for uniting families who were separated at the border.

Trump made the statements in a sometimes combative interview airing Thursday on the Spanish-language network Telemundo.

Trump said Hispanics want toughness at the border and his poll numbers with the increasingly important voting bloc have “gone way up” because he’s delivered.

“They don’t want people coming and taking their jobs,” Trump said. “They don’t want criminals to come because they understand the border.”

The most recent AP-NORC poll conducted in mid-June showed Trump with 26 percent support among Hispanics. The White House did not provide supporting polls for Trump’s claim.

The president also said his administration inherited a practice of separating families from the Obama administration. “They separated. I put ’em together,” Trump said.

“You did not,” replied Telemundo anchor Jose Diaz-Balart. Diaz-Balart then said 2,800 children were united with their families after the administration instituted a zero-tolerance policy, prompting Trump to interrupt and state, “because I put ’em together.”

Trump began separating families on a large scale in 2017 and made it general practice under a “zero tolerance” policy that was announced in May 2018 to criminally prosecute every adult who crossed the border illegally. More than 2,700 children had been separated from families when a federal judge halted the practice the following month. Nearly all have been reunited, but a government watchdog said in January that thousands more families were believed to have split earlier in the administration, which is currently trying to find them under court order. It has no precise count due to inadequate tracking systems at the time.

Obama separated families under limited circumstances, but Trump took it to an entirely new level by making it standard practice, sparking a massive international backlash. U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego forced Trump to revert to Obama’s policy to separate families only in limited circumstances, like doubt about parentage, a parent’s criminal record and concerns for a child’s safety.

Trump also indicated Thursday he was “looking at” the $15 minimum wage that some Democratic presidential candidates are calling for on the campaign trail. But Trump said, “much more importantly,” wages have gone up “tremendously” since he became president.

With the unemployment rate at 3.6%, the lowest since December 1969, employers are struggling to fill jobs and offering higher wages. That has pushed up pay for the lowest-paid one-quarter of workers more quickly than for everyone else since 2015. In April, the poorest 25% saw their paychecks increase 4.4% from a year earlier. Hourly pay for retail workers has risen 4.1% in the past year and 3.8% for hotel and restaurant employees. Manufacturing workers have seen pay rise 2.2% and construction workers, 3.2%.

ORLANDO—President Trump beat expectations with Hispanic voters in 2016 and now his re-election campaign is launching a national effort to win over more, beginning in Florida.

The “Latinos for Trump” rollout will take place in Miami on Tuesday—a day before the city hosts the first Democratic presidential primary debate—with Vice President Mike Pence appearing with party members, including Florida Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nunez.

The campaign believes Hispanics will be drawn to Mr. Trump by record low unemployment, a tough stance on China’s trade practices and demands for curbing illegal immigration. Mr. Trump is trying to exploit a shift among Democrats, casting it as the party of socialism in the hopes of appealing to voters—like Venezuelans—with ties to countries that have leftist governments.

Republican leaders will act as surrogates in TV and other news interviews while making appearances in their home states, the campaign said. Activists will be trained to conduct outreach, including neighborhood canvassing, phone banks and voter registration. Mr. Trump’s 2016 effort started late and faced defections over a particularly incendiary speech on immigration that he gave in Arizona.

Mr. Trump, who launched his 2016 campaign with fiery talk about illegal immigration, received 28% of the Hispanic vote in 2016, beating some projections and roughly achieving what Mitt Romney did in 2012.

Still, that is dismal compared with the 44% achieved by George W. Bush in 2004 and Mr. Trump’s base remains overwhelmingly reliant on white voters. But if he can boost his numbers, it could be decisive in states like Florida.

The makeup of Latinos for Mr. Trump shows the importance of other states with growing Hispanic populations, including Nevada, a state Mr. Trump narrowly lost in 2016; New Mexico, which the campaign has eyed as a potential pickup; and Texas, where fading Republican dominance among the electorate concerns GOP leaders. Mr. Trump won Arizona but it too is a battleground with a rising Hispanic vote.

“The Trump campaign knows they have reached their peak with white voters,” said Christian Ulvert, a Democratic strategist in Florida. “Where do you make up that deficit? It’s clear they have turned to Hispanic voters and that’s where we have to double down on our efforts and be strong and clear on our message.”

In particular, he said Democrats need to better respond to Mr. Trump’s attempts to brand the party a group of socialists and should press a message of economic opportunity and broadening access to health care

The fear in Florida is acute because of a strong community of Cuban voters and small but growing numbers from Venezuela, Nicaragua and Colombia. In Orlando, where Mr. Trump on Tuesday held his re-election kickoff rally, a sizable Puerto Rican population will be heavily courted by both parties.

Democrats contend that the economic prosperity seen under Mr. Trump has favored the rich and that he has tried to kill the Affordable Care Act. They are also counting on his divisive language and policies on immigration, including ending a program that protected young immigrants from deportation. Mr. Trump has also sought to block billions of dollars in additional aid to hurricane-torn Puerto Rico.

TALLAHASSEE — Donald Trump will make Miami the jumping off point for his 2020 outreach to Hispanic voters, a prized portion of the electorate in a prized state, Florida, which is key to his reelection effort.

Vice President Mike Pence will roll out “Latinos for Trump” in Miami on Tuesday, a day before Democrats land in the city for their first debates and a week after the president kicked off his 2020 reelection campaign in Orlando. The activity has underscored what’s already apparent: Florida and its 2.2 million Hispanics voters are key to Trump’s bid to remain in the White House.

Trump’s first-term policies have drawn heavy backlash from Hispanic communities, but his campaign hopes a healthy economy and branding Democrats as socialists can move some of those critics into his column. For Trump, next week’s launch is less about winning Florida’s Hispanic-heavy communities, but making sure Democrats don’t run up the margins too much.

The Latino effort will be co-chaired by Florida Lt. Gov. Jeanette Núñez, a Cuban American and former member of the Florida House, said a person familiar with the decision who confirmed the Tuesday event but was not authorized to speak to the press. The event was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

The Trump campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Trump won Florida in 2016 with 35 percent of the Hispanic vote, a number bolstered by the support of more than half of the state’s more-conservative Cuban vote. More than two-thirds of non-Hispanic Cubans in Florida voted for Hillary Clinton.

Democrats had to retool their outreach to Hispanic voters after a much-criticized 2018 effort that some in the party believe cost U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson his seat and doomed the campaign of Democratic gubernatorial nominee Andrew Gillum.

Exit polling in those races, both of which went to recounts, showed Nelson and Gillum each getting 54 percent of the Hispanic vote, a lower figure than Democrats had hoped for.

“We had a message, but there was a delay in getting it out,” said state Sen. José Javier Rodríguez (D-Miami). “The general election was only 11 weeks long. There were some operational problems that I don’t think will be there in 2020.”

Florida Democratic Party Executive Director Juan Peñalosa said the party has 90 field organizers, half of which are Spanish speaking, already on the ground in Orlando and Miami.

“We are going back to the program that won Florida in2012,” he said. “Organize and register early.”

Outreach to Florida’s Hispanic voters will be an exercise in contrasts next year.

Team Trump hopes a message highlighting record-low unemployment, branding Democrats as socialists and taking a hard line against Cuba and Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro will energize Florida’s sizable exile community.

The state is home to more than two-thirds of the nation’s Cuban population and has a growing number of Venezuelans who have fled to Florida to escape the political and economic crisis at home.

Sen. Rick Scott, a former two-term Florida governor, made the state’s exile population key to his reelection bid, taking similar hardline approaches to Cuba and Venezuela. He has made nine trips to Puerto Rico since Hurricane Maria hammered the island.

Democrats are focusing their registration efforts on expanding the Hispanic share of Florida’s electorate, while pointing to policies they hope will hobble Trump efforts to pull in Hispanic support.

They’ll point to Trump’s opposition to federal disaster relief for Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria. And the president’s crackdown on undocumented immigrants crossing the southern border sends a toxic message that will help them hold their large overall advantage with Hispanic voters.

Democrats, like the Trump campaign, also are focusing on Venezuelan voters, noting Trump has not granted temporary asylum to Venezuelans fleeing the violence and food shortages that now plague the country.

“This is the same administration that has refused to give Venezuelans asylum,” said Jose Parra, a Miami Democratic consultant and onetime aide to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “They have really saber-rattled on Venezuela, but there is little to show for it.”

Parra called Trump’s hardline immigration policies — which include removing children from their families — a “deportation machine.” Republicans have framed the president’s policies as a needed step to secure the border.

Trump’s Hispanic outreach rollout will be announced roughly 40 miles from the Homestead Temporary Shelter for Unaccompanied Children, a federal facility that has become a flashpoint in the immigration debate.

The facility’s population has swelled as the administration moves to slow southern border crossings. The increased numbers have drawn scrutiny from advocacy groups who hold regular protests calling for the facility to be shuttered.

Trump and his allies, though, haven’t shied away from policies unpopular with large swaths of Hispanic voters. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, last week signed legislation into law banning cities from adopting policies to discourage cooperation with federal immigration officials.

As lawmakers were debating the bill during the spring legislative session, protesters flooded the Capitol, joining Democrats who said the bill would fill the state’s undocumented population with fear and uncertainty. Republicans said the measure wasn’t anti-immigrant, but simply an effort to ensure Florida cities comply with federal law.

Trump gave DeSantis a shout-out for signing the bill during his Orlando campaign rally.

“Democrats support sanctuary cities,” Trump said Tuesday to a raucous crowd in Orlando’s Amway Center. “Thank you Governor Ron for ending that whole disaster.”

Vice President Mike Pence will attend a kickoff event next Tuesday in Miami for “Latinos for Trump,” a campaign effort to engage Latino voters ahead of the 2020 election.

The event will take place at a Miami hotel one day before the first of two Democratic debates are held in the same city. Florida will serve as a crucial swing state in the 2020 presidential race, but the Trump campaign said “Latinos for Trump” will be a nationwide project.

“The strong Latino support for President Trump and his policies will be instrumental in re-electing the president for a second term,” Hannah Castillo, director of coalitions for the Trump campaign, said in a statement.

Collins echoed some of Trump’s common arguments of why minority groups should support his reelection, pointing to low unemployment rates among Hispanics and the president’s support for Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó over embattled President Nicolás Maduro.

But Trump has also drawn criticism for some of his comments and policies toward Latinos dating back to his 2016 campaign launch, when he asserted Mexico was sending “rapists” and bringing crime across the border.

He has maintained that hardline rhetoric on immigration since taking office, referring to Central American migrants as “criminals” and “thugs.” He has threatened to shutter the border with Mexico and cut aid to Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras in an effort to curb the flow of migrants.

In an interview with Telemundo set to air Thursday night, Trump asserted that Latino voters supported his rhetoric and threats to deport scores of immigrants in the country illegally.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. State Department’s annual human trafficking report released on Thursday demoted Saudi Arabia and Cuba to countries that failed to meet minimum U.S. anti-trafficking standards.

The report https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-trafficking-in-persons-report also dropped a warning from the 2018 issue that traffickers prey on children separated from their parents. Policies implemented by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump resulted in the separation of thousands of migrant children from their families.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Ivanka Trump, a top adviser to her father, released the 2019 Trafficking in Persons report at a State Department ceremony at which Pompeo called human trafficking “a stain … on all of humanity.”

Saudi Arabia and Cuba were downgraded to countries that have failed to make significant anti-trafficking efforts after both were kept on a watchlist for four years, said the report.

In his remarks, Pompeo pointed to Cuba’s demotion to Tier 3 – the worst ranking the report can give a country – and noted that it joined Iran, China, North Korea, Venezuela, Syria and Russia.

He did not mention, however, the demotion of oil-rich Saudi Arabia, a major U.S. ally and arms buyer.

Some lawmakers and human rights advocates have already questioned the report’s objectivity after Reuters disclosed on Tuesday that Pompeo declined to place Saudi Arabia on a list of countries that recruit child soldiers, dismissing his own experts’ findings that a Saudi-led coalition uses under-aged fighters in Yemen.

John Cotton Richmond, the ambassador-at-large who oversaw the writing of the report and whose office recommended the kingdom be placed on the child soldiers list, told reporters on Thursday afternoon that Pompeo determined that Saudi Arabia “did not rise to the level to warrant a listing.”

Yet the trafficking report’s section on Saudi Arabia cited numerous reports of the Saudi-led coalition recruiting Sudanese and Yemeni children to fight Houthi rebels. The coalition denies using child soldiers.

Inclusion on Tier 3 can bring restrictions on U.S. non-humanitarian, non-trade-related assistance, a decision made by the president, who limited aid to 22 countries listed in that category last year. But it is unlikely that Trump will act against Saudi Arabia amid rising tensions between the United States and the kingdom’s regional rival, Iran.

The United States provides no aid to Cuba’s Communist government. Its placement in Tier 3 comes as the Trump administration rolls back the detente that occurred under former President Barack Obama.

The 2019 report also dropped a section included in last year’s document that warned against removing children from their families because they can become vulnerable to trafficking.

“The physical and psychological effects of staying in residential institutions, combined with societal isolation and often subpar regulatory oversight by governments, place these children in situations of heightened vulnerability to human trafficking,” the 2018 report said.

The U.S. section of this year’s report made no mention of the separation of more than 2,700 children from migrant families who illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border, and the children’s placement in government custody.

The separations, which occurred during the period covered by the report, were implemented under a “zero tolerance” policy on illegal immigration that subjected parents to criminal charges.

Trump rescinded the separation policy in June 2018 amid international outcry.

Judith Kelley, dean of Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and author of a book on the trafficking report’s impact, said Trump’s child separation policy should have been cited.

But its exclusion should not diminish the extent of U.S. anti-trafficking efforts or the impetus the report gives other countries to improve their ratings, she added.

House Democrats will soon vote on a move that some of its members once considered unthinkable: Delivering billions of dollars to the Trump administration to confront the migrant crisis at the southern border.

Democrats appear likely to pass a border funding bill next week that its own members describe as a compromise, with most of the money going toward humanitarian efforts — and none for enforcement — at the border.

Key groups, including the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, now suggest they will support the effort on the floor, lining up a victory for Democratic leaders after some members initially revolted at the idea of sending more money to Trump’s handpicked border officials.

“What was presented to me seemed like a very good compromise,” Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), a leader of the Hispanic Caucus, said Thursday. “That’s why I think you’re going to see more members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus voting for it.”

“Much of the exact language is things we really like — there’s no money for ICE agents, or ICE roundups, or anything like that,” added Rep. Mark Pocan, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. “But I think the devil’s always in the details.”

Top Democratic spending leaders made an aggressive final sales pitch to the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Hispanic Caucus on Thursday, one day before they plan to release the text of the final bill. The formal whip effort is expected to begin after the text drops Friday, with a vote planned for Tuesday.

Few details of the Democrats’ plan have been released, but the money would go toward both the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services — the latter of which has raised alarms with progressives.

Thursday’s presentations are the latest of several outreach meetings led by House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), as well as Reps. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.) and Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) as the caucus has crafted its response to the border crisis.

During the lengthy presentations, Lowey and others made the case for passing their own Democratic bill before the Senate’s own floor vote next week to maximize their leverage with the White House, according to multiple lawmakers in the room.

The spending leaders also fielded a barrage of questions of how exactly Democrats could block the White House from using the funds for other purposes, especially after Trump defied Congress by declaring a national emergency to secure border funding for a wall. The spending leaders responded that they had strong “guardrails.”

“The reaction was very positive. We all want the same thing. We understand the extent of the humanitarian crisis,” DeLauro said after presenting at both meetings.

Democratic leaders are under pressure to lock down near-unanimous support for the funding bill within their caucus, after earlier attempts to craft a bipartisan bill in the House faltered. Now, most lawmakers and aides doubt that House Republicans will help deliver votes on the floor.

But Democratic leaders say they have drafted careful restrictions to constrain the White House. They say the bill restricts Trump’s ability to move any of the humanitarian aid toward his other border priorities. Nothing would go toward enforcement, according to lawmakers and aides.

Still, winning that kind of support on a border measure will pose a tough test for House Democrats, who can spare just 18 votes on the floor out of their 235 members.

Asked whether Democrats have the votes to ultimately pass the bill, Lowey told POLITICO: “I would hope because of the urgency of it, and the understanding of what’s happening on the border, that we do.”

Congressional Democrats have struggled for months to come up with a unified response to address the influx of migrants attempting to cross into the U.S., with some in their party demanding a hard line against Trump at all costs. Others, particularly those from border states, have called for urgent action.

Meanwhile, House Republicans have seized on the divide, using their procedural powers to demand roll call votes on the floor in a form of protest against what they’ve called Democratic inaction.

GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney would not say whether Republicans would support the Democrats’ proposal.

“They spend a lot of time talking about how concerned they are with conditions at the border but have not been willing to actually vote on bills that we’ve provided that could actually improve the situation,” Cheney said in an interview Thursday.

EL PASO, Texas — A 2-year-old boy locked in detention wants to be held all the time. A few girls, ages 10 to 15, say they’ve been doing their best to feed and soothe the clingy toddler who was handed to them by a guard days ago. Lawyers warn that kids are taking care of kids, and there’s inadequate food, water and sanitation for the 250 infants, children and teens at the Border Patrol station.

The bleak portrait emerged Thursday after a legal team interviewed 60 children at the facility near El Paso that has become the latest place where attorneys say young migrants are describing neglect and mistreatment at the hands of the U.S. government.

Data obtained by The Associated Press showed that on Wednesday there were three infants in the station, all with their teen mothers, along with a 1-year-old, two 2-year-olds and a 3-year-old. There are dozens more under 12. Fifteen have the flu, and 10 more are quarantined.

Three girls told attorneys they were trying to take care of the 2-year-old boy, who had wet his pants and no diaper and was wearing a mucus-smeared shirt when the legal team encountered him.

“A Border Patrol agent came in our room with a 2-year-old boy and asked us, ‘Who wants to take care of this little boy?’ Another girl said she would take care of him, but she lost interest after a few hours and so I started taking care of him yesterday,” one of the girls said in an interview with attorneys.

Law professor Warren Binford, who is helping interview the children, said she couldn’t learn anything about the toddler, not even where he’s from or who his family is. He is not speaking.

Binford described that during interviews with children in a conference room at the facility, “little kids are so tired they have been falling asleep on chairs and at the conference table.”

She said an 8-year-old taking care of a very small 4-year-old with matted hair couldn’t convince the little one to take a shower.

“In my 22 years of doing visits with children in detention I have never heard of this level of inhumanity,” said Holly Cooper, who co-directs University of California, Davis’ Immigration Law Clinic and represents detained youth.

The lawyers inspected the facilities because they are involved in the Flores settlement, a Clinton-era legal agreement that governs detention conditions for migrant children and families. The lawyers negotiated access to the facility with officials, and say Border Patrol knew the dates of their visit three weeks in advance.

Many children interviewed had arrived alone at the U.S.-Mexico border, but some had been separated from their parents or other adult caregivers including aunts and uncles, the attorneys said.

Government rules call for the children to be held by the Border Patrol for no longer than 72 hours before they are transferred to the custody of Health and Human Services, which houses migrant youth in facilities around the country.

Government facilities are overcrowded and five immigrant children have died since late last year after being detained by Customs and Border Protection. A teenage mother with a premature baby was found last week in a Texas Border Patrol processing center after being held for nine days by the government.

In an interview this week with the AP, acting Customs and Border Protection Commissioner John Sanders acknowledged that children need better medical care and a place to recover from their illnesses. He urged Congress to pass a $4.6 billion emergency funding package includes nearly $3 billion to care for unaccompanied migrant children.

He said that the Border Patrol is holding 15,000 people, and the agency considers 4,000 to be at capacity.

“The death of a child is always a terrible thing, but here is a situation where, because there is not enough funding … they can’t move the people out of our custody,” Sanders said.

The arrival of thousands of families and children at the border each month has not only strained resources but thrust Border Patrol agents into the role of caregivers, especially for the many migrant youth who are coming without parents.

But children at the facility in Clint, which sits amid the desert scrubland some 25 miles (40 kilometers) southeast of El Paso, say they have had to pick up some of the duties in watching over the younger kids.

A 14-year-old girl from Guatemala said she had been holding two little girls in her lap.

“I need comfort, too. I am bigger than they are, but I am a child, too,” she said.

Children told lawyers that they were fed oatmeal, a cookie and a sweetened drink in the morning, instant noodles for lunch and a burrito and cookie for dinner. There are no fruits or vegetables. They said they’d gone weeks without bathing or a clean change of clothes.

A migrant father, speaking on condition of anonymity because of his immigration status, told AP Thursday that authorities separated his daughter from her aunt when they entered the country. The girl would be a second grader in a U.S. school.

He had no idea where she was until Monday, when one of the attorney team members visiting Clint found his phone number written in permanent marker on a bracelet she was wearing. It said “U.S. parent.”

“She’s suffering very much because she’s never been alone. She doesn’t know these other children,” said her father.

Republican Congressman Will Hurd, whose district includes Clint, said “tragic conditions” playing out on the southern border were pushing government agencies, nonprofits and Texas communities to the limit.

“This latest development just further demonstrates the immediate need to reform asylum laws and provide supplemental funding to address the humanitarian crisis at our border,” he said.

Dr. Julie Linton, who co-chairs the American Academy of Pediatrics Immigrant Health Special Interest Group, said CBP stations are not an appropriate place to hold children.

“Those facilities are anything but child friendly,” said Dr. Julie Linton. “That type of environment is not only unhealthy for children but also unsafe.”

The Trump administration has been scrambling to find new space to hold immigrants as it faces criticism that it’s violating the human rights of migrant children by keeping so many of them detained.

San Francisco psychoanalyst Gilbert Kliman, who has evaluated about 50 children and parents seeking asylum, says the trauma is causing lasting damage.

“The care of children by children constitutes a betrayal of adult responsibility, governmental responsibility,” he said.

A slew of Democratic presidential contenders are scheduled to talk Friday to the nation’s largest association of Latino officials, but there’s one notable absence: Joe Biden.

Biden’s decision to skip the Miami forum has unleashed new criticism that the former vice president and front-runner is taking a pivotal constituency for granted in a primary where the Latino vote could swing the outcome in several key early contests.

“This is one of the first real national platforms for candidates to speak to Latino voters and its leadership, and to be a no-show is a significant risk,” said Arturo Vargas, CEO of the group, known as NALEO.

Biden’s absence at NALEO isn’t an isolated incident, according to operatives and organizers focused on mobilizing Latinos on the ground in key states. His campaign has offered almost no direct outreach or verbal acknowledgment of the rapidly growing Latino electorate, they say, and has made little if any inroads with the Latino community in critical swing states like Nevada or Florida.

The former vice president has not used the terms “Latinos,” or “Hispanics,” in any of his remarks in 20 fundraisers and speeches since the campaign’s launch, according to pool reports and speech transcripts from the events. In the few instances where he made inexplicit references to the Latino community, his remarks were exclusively about immigration or border security.

The approach is indicative of a campaign that’s employing general election messaging to win the Democratic nomination — and refraining from overt appeals to the racial and ethnic groups that make up the diverse Democratic coalition and who could be difference makers in the general. Latinos are on pace to be the largest nonwhite eligible voting bloc — 32 million — in 2020.

Leo Murrieta, political director of Make the Road Action in Nevada, said it’s “disheartening” that eight months away from the Nevada caucuses — in which Latinos will make up nearly 1 in 5 voters — Biden’s campaign has not sat down with grassroots organizations or spent more time on the ground.

“The fact that he leaves us out of speeches is a really sorely missed opportunity,” Murrieta said. “And it’s unacceptable.”

“That’s the wrong formula,” Murrieta added. “But I’ll tell you what formula that is — that’s the Democratic establishment, political white elites’ playbook to how to win elections.”

Biden’s campaign defended its Latino outreach efforts by pointing to its Spanish-language website, bilingual ads and Biden’s talk of immigration reform in tweets and speeches — including at the recent Poor People’s Forum in Washington, D.C., earlier this week.

They also cited Biden’s stop in Nevada with the Dreamer Astrid Silva — a connection that has become a preliminary signal for candidates to say they are making inroads with the community. His campaign posted a video clip of the meeting on Twitter and on Wednesday he tweeted his opposition to President Trump’s announcement that he wanted mass deportations of undocumented immigrants.

One of the Biden campaign’s top Latino surrogates, Florida state Rep. Amy Mercado, said the candidate “has engaged the Latino community early like myself. He has made Latinos some of his earliest hires,” including Cristóbal Alex, former president of the influential Latino Victory Fund and Vanessa Cárdenas, former national outreach director of EMILY’s List.

The campaign, like most of its rivals, also has a Hispanic media press secretary, Isabel Aldunate.

Mercado said that she understands the concerns about Latino outreach considering low Hispanic turnout in Florida cost Hillary Clinton in 2016, as well as gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum and Sen. Bill Nelson in 2018.

“But I don’t think we should be running around with our hair on fire,” Mercado said.

The campaign plans to ramp up its operations in Florida and its Latino outreach in Nevada and other states as well, according to a source involved with the campaign’s Latino strategy. Biden is also expected to release a policy platform on immigration and roll out the endorsement of one of the Florida Democratic Party’s rising stars, state Sen. José Javier Rodriguez, on Thursday, when the campaign plans to hold an event with Latino officials tied to the NALEO conference in Miami.

Biden has four staffers on the ground in Nevada as of earlier this month and, his campaign notes, nine of its 14 senior officials are nonwhite.

Still, Latinos from Florida to Nevada to Arizona are questioning whether Biden’s campaign understands that talking about immigration isn’t enough. Not all Latinos are immigrants — and most care more about seeing themselves reflected in health care, education and economic policies, according to strategists.

“Biden’s not courting Latinos. He doesn’t see us,” said Natalia Salgado, national political director for the Center for Popular Democracy Action, a progressive activist group. “We’re more complicated than just immigration, we’re not a one-trick pony. Our community is having issues around police brutality and access to health care.”

Biden’s inability to talk about the Latino electorate in his speeches, Salgado said, “is a denial of the unique experience of being Latino in this country and the complexities and struggles that go with that identity.”

Biden isn’t the only Democratic hopeful who is bypassing NALEO — California Sen. Kamala Harris and New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker aren’t attending either. Instead, all three are heading to South Carolina, the first-in-the-South primary state, for House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn’s “World Famous Fish Fry.”

Harris and Booker, however, are getting more of a pass by Latino officials and activists, who point out that the two senators are running “inclusive” campaigns and have consistently been outspoken about hardships incurred by minorities and immigration reform. And because both are African American, they are perceived as better-equipped to speak to the needs of nonwhite communities than Biden is.

“The nomination will be decided far more by people of color than white liberals,” said Paul Begala, a former adviser to Bill Clinton. “I wasn’t in that scheduling meeting, but if you’re running in Democratic primary in 2020 and anything is focused on people of color, you’re going to want to make it a priority.”

For Biden, the criticism comes at an especially inopportune time — one day after he drew fire from Booker, Harris and other candidates for what they said were insensitively worded remarks concerning his long-ago working relationship with Dixiecrat segregationists when he served in the U.S. Senate.

And the frustration over Biden’s absence from NALEO is surfacing as President Donald Trump prepares to launch his own Latino outreach campaign Tuesday in Miami led, in part, by Florida Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nuñez.

Though Trump’s approval rating with Hispanic voters is abysmal, a survey of Florida Hispanics showed he’s getting about the same amount of support, 35 percent, that he received in 2016 when he carried the state.

The Trump campaign believes the president has room to grow with Hispanic voters in the state, by increasing the margins with Republican-leaning Cuban-Americans and reaching out to voters with family roots in Venezuela, Nicaragua and Colombia who opposed leftist governments in those countries.

By contrast, when Biden came to Miami in May for two fundraising trips, he said nothing beyond his standard stump speech.

“When he was in Miami, he seemed out of touch with South Florida Latino communities, not mentioning Cuba or Venezuela,” said Andrea Mercado, executive director of New Florida Majority, a progressive grassroots group that is registering black and brown voters earlier than ever.

“On the heels of former Vice President Biden making insensitive remarks about segregationists around Juneteenth, him not attending NALEO when almost all the other presidential hopefuls are making a point to stop by and show their support of the Latino community is disappointing and concerning, while not shocking,” she said.

Biden’s campaign notes he did tweet about Venezuela on April 30 when he condemned the Maduro regime and discussed the country’s dire situation when reporters asked about it at the time.

But tweets, web ads and a smattering of talk about immigration isn’t going to pass as effective outreach in the Latino community, according to community leaders. Vargas, the chief executive of NALEO, said it’s about talking about issues in depth that affect the community — and showing up early and often.

“The fact he’s not coming suggests he’s taking the Latino vote for granted or the Latino electorate for granted,” Vargas said. “We have more than 1,000 people in the room. But we represent millions and millions of Latinos across the nation.”

As the Trump administration aggressively expands its effort to force migrants to remain in Mexico while they await U.S. immigration court hearings, lawyers for those seeking asylum are urging a federal appeals court to halt the government program.

Known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, the program has been under court challenge since its limited rollout in January, but a federal appeals court has allowed it to continue while considering its legality. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is not expected to issue a decision for weeks — possibly months — giving federal immigration officials time to return thousands of migrants from Central America, Cuba and other countries to Mexico in a bid to keep the migrants from residing in the United States.

Federal officials have returned 12,000 migrants to Mexico so far this year, according to data reviewed by The Washington Post. The U.S. government hopes to transfer thousands more under a June 7 agreement with Mexico that calls for that country to help facilitate the program south of the U.S. border.

“This policy is being implemented and being expanded and that’s not going to stop until the 9th Circuit rules,” said Judy Rabinovitz, a deputy director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the lawsuit together with 11 Central American migrants and other groups. Plaintiffs filed a 74-page brief Wednesday urging the appeals court to immediately halt the program, “given the life-or-death stakes in this case.”

The MPP is one of the Trump administration’s last remaining levers to stem the historic surge of Central American families to the southern U.S. border, and the legal battle centers on one fundamental aspect of U.S. immigration law: the right to seek refuge in the United States.

Justice Department lawyers say in court papers that record numbers of migrant families are crossing the border illegally and filing largely meritless asylum claims because of the likelihood that they will be released into the United States with their children. Smugglers are advertising cut-rate trips to the border because the U.S. government cannot process the migrants’ cases quickly or detain children for very long. More than 144,000 migrants were taken into custody last month after crossing the southern border, the largest monthly total in more than a decade.

Ending the MPP “would impose immediate, substantial harm on the government’s ability to manage the crisis on our southern border,” government lawyers wrote.

The influx has swamped the immigration system. The U.S. Border Patrol has holding space for 4,000 people, and it had nearly 15,000 in custody this week. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has released more than 207,000 family members into the United States since December, ICE acting director Mark Morgan said this week.

While many migrants are fleeing violence and persecution in their homelands, others say they are escaping poverty and a lack of job opportunities, which are not grounds for obtaining U.S. asylum.

The 9th Circuit has blocked a number of the Trump administration’s initiatives, including its attempt to ban asylum for all immigrants who enter the country illegally. But a three-judge panel allowed the MPP to continue in May while the court considers the legality of the policy. Two of the three appeals court judges expressed concern about the program, and a lower-court ruling found that federal law does not authorize the program.

One judge on the panel worried that U.S. border agents were sending migrants back to Mexico without asking them whether they feared being there, a step the judge said seemed “irrational.” Another said that existing law does not provide for the MPP and said the government is “clearly and flagrantly wrong.”
The ACLU and other plaintiffs said in court filings that U.S. officials are fundamentally reshaping the asylum system and sending migrants back to Mexican cities that have some of the highest murder rates in the world.

They said one plaintiff was kidnapped by a Mexican cartel, which “threatened to kill him and burn his body so no one could find him.” Mexican officials deported the pregnant wife of a Honduran minister who fled death threats. Another plaintiff reported repeated robberies by Mexican police.

“Every day that this program is allowed to remain in place, countless people are subjected to what amounts to one of the most abusive policies perpetrated on the U.S.-Mexico border,” said Shaw Drake, policy counsel for the ACLU Border Rights Center in El Paso. “Migrants have been kidnapped literally within minutes of return to Ciudad Juarez,” the Mexican city opposite El Paso on the Rio Grande.

Under MPP, asylum seekers who enter the United States are booked into custody and returned to Mexico with a court date weeks or months in the future, and officials issue migrants a list of pro-bono lawyers in the United States.

U.S. Border Patrol agents do not ask migrants whether they fear returning to Mexico. Those who proactively declare that they are afraid are referred to trained asylum officers for interviews to determine whether they can stay in the United States.

Out of 12,000 people returned to Mexico under MPP, just 747 people expressed fear of returning to Mexico, said a U.S. asylum officer who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the government program. Asylum officers sent most of those — 629 migrants — back to Mexico because the applicants must clear a high bar to prove that they are “more likely than not” to face a specific threat in Mexico.

“We’re making a good-faith effort to offer protection to people in danger, but it is so hard for them to meet the standard,” said Michael Knowles, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1924, which includes asylum officers in Arlington, Va., the office that until now has handled most of the MPP cases. “Our officers fear that they’re going to be sending somebody back to danger. . . . We have officers who say, ‘I feel morally and ethically compromised.’ ”

The asylum officer said the main problem applicants encounter is that they can’t identify specific threats to them in Mexico.

The MPP is operational in the San Diego and El Centro sectors in California and the El Paso Border Patrol sector, which covers West Texas and the entire state of New Mexico. Arizona is likely to see MPP activity soon.

Asylum officers across the country will conduct remote interviews of applicants: Officers in San Francisco will handle Arizona cases, Los Angeles-based asylum officers will take California cases, and the Arlington, Va., office will cover Texas and New Mexico. Some asylum officers are now dedicated to MPP full time.

Officials are attempting to extend the program along the nearly 2,000-mile border but are giving Mexico time to expand its shelter capacity, a top official at U.S. Customs and Border Protection said.

The Trump administration’s policies are wearing on asylum officers, who are being required to train CBP officers to handle asylum screenings. The acting director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Ken Cuccinelli, caused an uproar this week by sending a pointed email to asylum officers scolding them for approving 80 percent of initial asylum applications when most cases are rejected in court.

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to deny a request to send a case on a census citizenship question back to a lower court.

In a filing to the court, Solicitor General Noel Francisco said new evidence suggesting links between a deceased Republican redistricting strategist and the government’s decision to add the question to the 2020 Census amounted to a “conspiracy theory” that was “implausible on its face,” and accused plaintiffs of trying to derail the court’s processes at the last minute.

Lawyers for civil rights organizations challenging the decision to add the question had asked the high court this month to put off a ruling on the issue.

They said that if justices were not prepared to affirm lower-court rulings against the question, they should send the issue back to a U.S. district court in New York to consider new allegations that the question was added with the input of the strategist, Thomas Hofeller.

Hofeller wrote a 2015 study showing that adding the question would give an electoral advantage to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites. Documents suggest Hofeller was communicating with the Trump administration over the question in 2017 and earlier with a census official.

But the government filing said the Hofeller study did not show an expression of intent to harm Democrats or minorities and that Hofeller did not, as plaintiffs have claimed, provide the rationale for a 2017 Justice Department request to add the question or influence Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s 2018 memo announcing the question would be added.

The government also questioned why plaintiffs waited until recent weeks to ask a New York judge to issue sanctions over the Hofeller material and to ask the Supreme Court to delay its ruling. Plaintiffs’ lawyers have said they didn’t have the material until May.

In late May, they tried to get the issue before U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman of New York, who ruled against the administration in the case now before the Supreme Court, but he said he would not do anything before the high court rules.

The justices heard oral arguments in the case in April and are scheduled to issue a ruling by the end of June. The issue was rushed to the Supreme Court because the Commerce Department said it needs an answer this summer to print census forms.

Presidential contender Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation to block the Department of Housing and Urban Development from implementing a rule barring undocumented immigrants from subsidized housing.

“This proposed HUD rule is another example of the Trump administration’s clear and relentless attacks against immigrant families across this country,” Gillibrand said in a statement to POLITICO.

“Undocumented immigrants are already ineligible from receiving federal housing assistance,” she added. “However, this new rule would punish their entire families and would deliberately put tens of thousands of individuals, including children, at risk of eviction, homelessness, or family separation.”

Unlawful residents are prohibited from receiving financial assistance under a law enacted in 1980. Under current rules, though, a mixed-status family can receive pro-rated housing aid as long as one member of the family is a citizen or legal resident.

The Trump administration says the rule would eliminate that regulatory “loophole” while trimming housing waitlists for American citizens. About 25,000 families now living in federally subsidized housing have an ineligible member, according to HUD.

“How do you pro-rate a roof over someone’s head?” HUD Secretary Ben Carson said in a congressional hearing last month.

“It’s not that we’re cruel, mean-hearted — it’s that we are logical,” he said. “This is common sense: You take care of your own first.”

The proposed rule would displace more than 55,000 children who are U.S. citizens or legal residents, according to a HUD staff analysis.

“HUD should be doing everything in its power to end homelessness, but this rule would do the opposite,” Gillibrand said. “It’s Congress’s responsibility to step in and protect vulnerable families, and I urge my colleagues to support my legislation and prevent this HUD proposal from being implemented.”

Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas) has introduced a similar bill in the House.

Democratic lawmakers gathered with activists and faith leaders on Thursday at the Capitol to mark World Refugee Day.

Participants praised the achievements of refugees in the U.S. and criticized the Trump administration for cutting the number of refugees allowed to resettle in the country, at an event organized by Church World Service, Oxfam, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service and Refugee Council USA.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) spoke about how the issue is a personal one for him, sharing the story of his Jewish grandparents, who fled persecution in Europe and found safety in Canada.

“On both sides of my family people gave up their homes and belongings, their friends and family for a better life,” he said.

Schatz said all refugees have the right to security and prosperity.

“This is the dream of tens of millions of mothers and fathers, women and men, teenagers and children today,” he said.

Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), co-chair of the Congressional Refugee Caucus, criticized the Trump administration efforts to drastically cut the number of refugees admitted to the United States.

“Efforts and rhetoric from this administration continue to undermine the American legacy of providing safe harbor from those around the world,” he said.

Since taking office, President Trump has overseen a major cut in the number of refugees accepted for resettlement. The administration reduced the “cap” on refugees the fiscal 2018 to 45,000, but only resettled 22,491 refugees.

In the past, presidents have set the cap within a range of 70,000. Last year, the administration announced it was lowering the cap to 30,000 refugees for fiscal 2019.

“This is a complete rejection of our country’s values,” said Margaret Huang, the executive director of Amnesty International USA, at the event.

Democrats are pushing to undo Trump’s policies. On Thursday, House Democrats introduced legislation to increase the number of refugees allowed into the country. But the bill is unlikely to pass the Republican-controlled Senate.

The cuts also come amid a dramatic increase in the number of refugees.

On Wednesday, the United Nations Refugee Agency released their annual “Global Trends” report, which found that 70.8 million people were forcibly displaced at the end of 2018. The figures are the highest ever recorded. The number of people fleeing violence increased by more than two million from 2017.

Refugees also spoke at the event Thursday. Nasser Alsaadun worked as an interpreter with both the U.S. and U.K. militaries during the Iraq War. He fled violence in Iraq, resettled in Harrisonburg, Va., in 2006 and has become an advocate for refugees.

“They can enrich the U.S.,” he said.

Crossing the border without authorization should no longer be a crime, a group of nearly 250 immigrant defense and civil rights wrote in a letter to congressional leaders Wednesday, highlighting growing discontent with a nearly century-old law that President Donald Trump used to carry out his seven-week experiment with systematic family separations at the border.

The letter demands a broad rollback to immigration enforcement measures signed into law by Bill Clinton back in 1996, which critics view as the beginning of a major buildup of the detention and deportation systems.

In addition to repealing the law criminalizing unauthorized border crossings, the groups demanded an end to immigrant detention without bail, halting automatic deportations of people based on criminal convictions, and disentangling immigration enforcement from local policing.

“An entire generation of people in this country have never experienced immigration apart from criminalization, as law enforcement and immigration enforcement functions have merged to arrest, detain, surveill, punish, and exile people of color,” the letter reads. “The abuses of these criminal legal and immigration systems have devastated our communities.”

The law making illegal entry a misdemeanor and subsequent violations a felony was authored by segregationist Sen. Coleman Blease of South Carolina in 1929. But the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act signed by Clinton in 1996 both made the law more severe by expanding the list of crimes that could be used as enhancements to push up jail sentences.

Prosecutions for those immigration violations steadily increased after the two laws passed, more than tripling in number to 15,424 by 2003, according to data compiled by the Transactional Record Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.

Under current law, the crime is typically punished by a maximum of two years in prison, but sentences can run as high as 20 years, depending on the convict’s criminal record. The vast majority of those prosecuted are Latin American.

In practice, judges usually hand down shorter sentences. In 2017, illegal reentry sentences averaged one year, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

The George W. Bush administration greatly expanded petty immigration prosecutions in 2005, as a way to funnel migrants into federal jails run by the U.S. Marshals Service in parts of the border where detention bed space had run low.

Border-crossing violations swallowed up half the federal criminal docket in 2008, despite the fact that illegal crossings began to decline precipitously around that time. Under the Trump administration’s “Zero Tolerance” policy, those numbers continued to rise to 57 percent of all federal criminal cases last year.

Those efforts have created a parallel criminal enforcement system for immigration. Living in the United States without authorization is a civil offense adjudicated by immigration courts, not criminal courts.

The law criminalizing illegal entry gained wider attention last year, as Trump used it to enact his widely reviled experiment with systematic family separations at the border. When prosecuting parents for the crime of illegal entry, which parents had not typically faced in the past when traveling with their children, federal officials sent adults into the criminal immigration system and their kids into the civil one.

“People have seen the mind-boggling ways in which the federal government has been prosecuting people under these statutes,” Benita Jain, supervising attorney with the Immigrant Defense Project, told HuffPost. “There are issues that are fueling the deportation and incarceration crisis that we haven’t been talking about. It’s time to talk about them.”

In response to Trump’s family separation policy, Reps. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) and Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said last year that immigration should be decriminalized. Former Housing and Urban Development Sec. Julián Castro made the repeal of the law criminalizing migration a centerpiece of his platform for his Democratic presidential nomination run.

“Little by little, folks are understanding that the policy solution to family separation isn’t just making family reunification easier, but also addressing the underlying problem, which is the prosecution itself,” Jacinta González, senior campaign organizer with Mijente, said. “Folks want Congress to pass something that will get to the root of these problems. Decriminalizing migration isn’t an abstract thought ― it’s a concrete demand that legislators can act on.”

(Reuters) – A federal judge on Thursday ruled that U.S. immigration authorities cannot arrest illegal immigrants at Massachusetts courthouses, the first order of its kind barring courthouse arrests.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston issued an injunction preventing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, from carrying out a directive authorizing arrests of illegal immigrants in the state’s courts.

Talwani enjoined the directive until the case proceeds to a trial, noting in the opinion that as long as the threat of arrests hangs over the state’s courts “some state criminal and civil cases may well go unprosecuted for lack of victim or witness participation.”

The judge’s order did not apply to criminal arrests by ICE, although most of the agency’s arrests are civil arrests for violating immigration laws.

ICE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This is definitely the first injunction of its kind,” said Oren Nimni, of Lawyers for Civil Rights, one of the attorneys who brought the case.

President Donald Trump has been focused on removing immigrants in the country illegally, and said on Tuesday officials would soon begin large-scale arrests.

Local governments dubbed “sanctuary cities” have resisted cooperating with the Trump administration’s efforts to round up illegal immigrants.

The January 2018 ICE directive to patrol courthouses was adopted partly in response to local governments refusing to transfer illegal immigrants to ICE upon their release from custody. Courthouses were one of the few reliable places to find people.

The plaintiffs in the case – prosecutors, a group that represents indigent defendants and a rights group – said people who feared being arrested by ICE agents were also unable to go to court to seek protection from a violent partner or make a complaint for unpaid wages.

In April, U.S. prosecutors charged a Massachusetts judge and a court officer with conspiracy and obstruction, saying they blocked an ICE officer from arresting an illegal immigrant at a 2018 court proceeding.

Exactly one year ago on Thursday, after a national uproar, Donald Trump signed an executive order ending his administration’s policy of separating migrant children from their parents. Six days later, a federal judge ordered the reunification of thousands of parents and children whom the American government had torn apart. Even though the separation policy had already been officially halted, the court issued a preliminary injunction against it. At the time, it seemed that one of the ugliest chapters of this vicious administration had ended.

But if there’s one thing this administration rarely backs down on, it’s cruelty. Family separation, it turns out, never really stopped. According to Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the A.C.L.U.’s National Immigrants’ Rights Project, just over 700 families were separated between last June and late May. Without legal or political intervention, he fears that the number could reach 1,000 by the end of this summer.

In New York alone, Anthony Enriquez, director of the unaccompanied minors program for Catholic Charities, estimated that his office has seen more than 100 separated kids in the last year. “As the time between the injunction and the present increases, more and more separated youth are in fact arriving in New York shelters,” he said.

To continue separating families, immigration agents appear to be taking advantage of a loophole in the court decision. The injunction doesn’t apply when parents have criminal histories or communicable diseases, which might require them to be quarantined away from their children. Nor does it explicitly apply when children are accompanied by relatives like siblings or grandparents rather than parents, unless those relatives are their legal guardians. And it permits family separation when a parent is deemed a danger to the child.

On the surface, these exceptions seem perfectly reasonable, particularly given the threat of human trafficking. But Enriquez, a lawyer, said they “left a big gaping hole that the government is driving a truck straight through.”

As part of the case the court ruled on, the A.C.L.U. receives lists approximately every month of separated families, with brief notations about the government’s justifications. Some of the misdeeds that are listed, said Gelernt, are extremely minor. For example, a 6-month-old was taken from his father because the father had a conviction for marijuana possession. Another dad lost his kid because he admitted to a conviction for driving with an expired license.

In some cases, the parents hadn’t been convicted of anything at all, but border agents claimed that they had gang affiliations. In other instances, agents stretched the definition of “communicable diseases” to apply to situations that don’t involve quarantine.

Gelernt described a case in which a Honduran man was separated from his three daughters because he was H.I.V. positive. (Their mother had died of AIDS.) Enriquez represented a child who was sent to New York after her mother was hospitalized for a leg injury in California. Even after the mother was discharged and released from immigration custody, Enriquez said, the government balked at returning her daughter to her until he threatened to sue.

That family was lucky; they were able to find each other. A year after the injunction, the Trump administration still has not created a system to help separated families reconnect.

“There is no tracking system,” said Enriquez. “No comprehensive information-sharing system, and no reliable method by which we can have real-time data on the actual location of a parent so that family members can be brought back together.”

When he goes to court on behalf of a child, he’ll ask the government’s lawyers where the parent is. They’ll often tell him they have no idea.

There’s a familiar pattern to the administration’s handling of family separation, one that recalls the Muslim ban. First, Trump’s team shocks the country with its callousness, causing chaos and terror. People rise up, and the administration backs down or a court intervenes. But once the storm passes, Trump’s people try again. Eventually, having worn out the country’s capacity to resist, they quietly institute some previously inconceivable new policy.

Just after his inauguration, when Trump made a first stab at barring people from some Muslim-majority countries from the United States, horrified Americans rushed to the airports to protest. His second attempt at a ban generated outrage, just not quite as much. His third one — which included people from two non-Muslim countries, North Korea and Venezuela, so as to appear less overtly bigoted — was upheld by the Supreme Court last year and is now the law of the land.

This summer, barring a change in government practice, Gelernt expects to be back in court over this new wave of family separations. It remains to be seen, however, if Americans will once again erupt in protest over what their government is doing to desperate families, or if they surrender to weary acclimatization.

After all, it’s hard to remain focused on all the terrible things Trump is doing in our name. Just this week, a government lawyer argued in court that migrant children needn’t be given luxuries like soap and toothbrushes. The administration is planning to house migrant children at a military base once used as a Japanese internment camp. On Thursday, The Associated Press reported on a Texas detention facility where about 250 children, some separated from relatives, have been locked up for as many as 27 days “without adequate food, water and sanitation.” Some are babies. At least six migrant children have died in immigration custody since last September.

There are kids in this country being systematically brutalized by the American government, and it’s hard to keep that in the forefront of your mind all the time without going mad. I understand why, bombarded with stories about the Trump administration’s sadism, people can just shut down. One some level, I think Trump understands this as well.

“I do think there’s some emotional burnout,” Gelernt said. “People just don’t want to hear anymore about another baby who’s sitting in a shelter all by himself without his parents, crying: ‘Where’s my mommy? Where’s my daddy?’ But we need the kind of public outcry that we had last summer. Otherwise we could be looking at thousands more children separated.”

The question is whether, over the course of this numbing year, we’ve learned to tolerate what just last June seemed intolerable.

We’ve gotten used to the fact that Donald Trump barely bothers to pretend that as president of the United States he’s supposed to serve the entire American public, not just that portion of the public that supports him. Nevertheless, it’s shocking to hear a president come out and say something like this about his reelection campaign:

Despite the trappings of convention, however, Trump has for the most part thrown out the playbook for incumbency. The last three two-term Presidents were lifted in important ways by a bipartisan message. Bill Clinton ran on the 1994 crime bill and tax reform. George W. Bush ran on keeping America safe in the wake of 9/11. Barack Obama reminded voters that Osama bin Laden was dead and General Motors was alive.

Trump, who lost the popular vote in 2016 and is the only President in the history of Gallup polling never to crack 50% approval, says he’s ready to defy that legacy.

“I think my base is so strong, I’m not sure that I have to do that,” he tells TIME, after being asked whether he should reach out to swing voters.

The story describes a reelection campaign that is “responsive to Trump’s impulses,” using whatever outrage he has ginned up on a given day to get his most outraged supporters even more outraged. If it were possible for a MAGA hat-wearing Trumpkin to vote 10 or 20 times if he or she gets mad enough, that might be a brilliant strategy.

But of course, it isn’t. The Trump campaign believes that it can duplicate what happened in 2016, but what it’s really putting in place is a repeat of the 2018 election.

If you’ve forgotten how that one went, here’s the basic story. In response to the Trump presidency, a wave of liberal activism and organizing swept the country. While a few Democratic candidates ran on their opposition to Trump, most spent the bulk of their time talking about issues such as health care; the anger at Trump was so baked into the dynamic of the election that they didn’t have to promote it.

Then Trump himself took over the election with what he believed was a brilliant strategy to motivate his base of supporters with two messages: This election is about me, and also immigrants are coming to kill you.

“I’m not on the ticket, but I am on the ticket, because this is also a referendum about me,” Trump told voters that October. “I want you to vote. Pretend I’m on the ballot.”

And he warned of caravans of Central Americans coming to invade the country, saying that Americans’ very lives were at stake in the election. Days before the vote, then-speaker Paul Ryan pleaded with Trump to stop talking about the issue, but Trump “boasted to Ryan that his focus on immigration has fired up the base.”

In the end, turnout was enormous, at more than 50 percent, compared with just 37 percent in the last midterm election. Democrats took back the House and made huge gains at the state level.

And now, Trump seems to be putting in place exactly the same strategy for 2020. With the Democratic candidates set to hold their first debates next week, Politico reports, “the president and his political team are angling to dominate the news cycle with carefully released tidbits meant to keep the public hooked on the machinations of the commander in chief.”

So what will we see? Democrats will have two debates that will surely include criticisms of the president, but will probably focus mostly on the issues their voters find important, such as health care, climate change, and economic inequality.

Meanwhile, Trump will be shouting, “Everybody look at me!” as he tweets out insults.

Which will certainly grab some attention. But by now we should all have learned that when Trump grabs attention, that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s helping himself politically. The result is often just the opposite.

The 2020 election will obviously be distinct in all kinds of ways we can’t yet anticipate. For instance, who knows what sort of aid Russia and North Korea will give to the Trump campaign, now that he has invited them to offer their assistance?

But in some ways it’s going to look a lot like 2018: Most of the discussion centered on Trump’s antics, a Democratic nominee talking much more about issues than the president does, a whole lot of demagoguery and fear-mongering on immigration, massive turnout that benefits the Democrat, and the president convinced that if he just gets his supporters a little angrier, his victory will be assured.

He’s probably wrong, but anything could happen. We can say for sure that it isn’t going to be pretty.