Central American Countries

Bipartisan Letter from 84 Members of Congress Calls on Biden Administration to Designate TPS for Central American Countries

BY AMERICA’S VOICE

Washington, D.C.: On May 24, a bipartisan group of 84 Members of Congress sent a letter to President Biden, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken urging the administration to designate Guatemala and redesignate El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua for Temporary Protected Status (TPS). The letter, organized by Reps. Joaquin Castro (D-TX) and Adriano Espaillat (DNY), includes the following key excerpts: “The pressures of the November 2020 hurricanes compounded with the longterm effects of climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic have worsened food insecurity and violence in countries in Central America. Hurricanes Eta and Iota left over 9.3 million people, including 3.5 million children, affected and forced to leave their home communities. The hurricanes also left long-lasting damage by destroying key healthcare, education, and other infrastructure essential to everyday lives. Almost a year later, millions in Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador still lacked access to humanitarian assistance, housing, and basic services. […]” “We believe that conditions on the ground in Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Nicaragua constitute “extraordinary and temporary conditions” that prevent nationals from safely returning. These countries have been dealing with the aftermath of such events for years and as conditions continue to worsen and new challenges arise, the United States should provide temporary protection and refuge. Furthermore, these designations would provide the U.S. government with an important tool to address root causes of migration from Central American countries by helping increase the flow of remittances and supporting government efforts to address in-country conditions without the additional tax of a large influx of individuals forced to return home. The designation would likely protect nearly 1.5 million migrants currently in the United States, providing immediate relief to these individuals and their families. We ask that these TPS designations be paired with a robust and comprehensive messaging campaign that offers clear instructions regarding eligibility and application procedures, as to prevent confusion and mass migration that occurred after the May 2021 Haiti TPS designation.” According to Douglas Rivlin, Director of Communication for America’s Voice, “These Members of Congress are right: the White House should prioritize executive branch actions to deliver important progress and announce TPS designations and redesignations for countries such as Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. The President and his team should find ways to aggressively use existing law to protect immigrants already working and living in this country by designating TPS for other nations who qualify under the statute. TPS is an important tool to stabilize families and communities in the United States, but it also helps stabilize the countries from which immigrants continue to come. It helps reduce pressures that force people to migrate, which serves the interests of both the United States and immigrant families. We remain committed to working with and, when necessary, pushing the Biden administration to make meaningful progress on immigration by continuing to advance U.S. interests and values.”l

Rep Espaillat. Editorial credit: Ron Adar / Shutterstock.com

Felony Reentry Immigration Law Is Unconstitutional Due to Racist Origins, Judge Rules

BY AMERICA’S VOICE

Afederal judge ruled for the first time in U.S. history that a provision of U.S. immigration law which makes it a felony for someone to reenter the United States after having been deported is unconstitutional because of its racist origins. Since 1929, U.S. immigration law has made it a misdemeanor to “unlawfully enter” the country and a felony to “unlawfully reenter” the country after being deported. In recent years, these two “entry-related offenses” have made up the majority of all criminal prosecutions in federal court. In the August 18 [2021] ruling, Judge Miranda Du of the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada dismissed the federal government’s case against Gustavo Carrillo-Lopez, who was indicted in 2020 for being present in the United States in violation of a previous deportation order. Judge Du held that the reentry provision “was enacted with a discriminatory purpose and that the law has a disparate impact on Latinx persons.” As a result, she ruled that the provision violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. Judge Du’s ruling described the racist history of the reentry provision. At the time the provision was first enacted into law, the U.S. immigration system was based on an explicitly racist quota system intended to keep southern and eastern Europeans out of the United States. The lawmakers and so-called scientific experts who helped create this system were firm believers in eugenics: the idea that white people whose ancestors came from northern and western Europe are a distinct race that is genetically superior to people from other parts of the world. Judge Du’s ruling also points out that the law which made unlawful entry a felony—the Undesirable Aliens Act of 1929—was explicitly intended to keep Mexicans out of the country. And the lawmakers who drafted and supported the law were open about the fact that they wanted to keep Mexicans out because they believed Mexicans were racially inferior to white Americans. Even government prosecutors in the case decided by Judge Du conceded that the 1929 law was discriminatory in intent. The 1929 law was superseded by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. However, the 1952 law incorporated the reentry provision of the 1929 law without rejecting or even acknowledging its racist origin. In fact, Judge Du pointed out that supporters of the 1952 law were also openly racist and commonly referred to Mexicans using racial slurs like “wetbacks.” One of the expert witnesses called by the defense in the case decided by Judge Du emphasizes just how ingrained racism is in U.S. immigration policy. Benjamin Gonzalez O’Brien, a political scientist at San Diego State University, says that “it’s fundamentally impossible to separate race and racism from immigration policing.” In his opinion, U.S. immigration policy has always been guided by “the desire to shape the racial and cultural characteristics of this country.” The ruling by Judge Du is a stark reminder that immigration policy in this country is not, and never has been, color blind. In fact, many of the immigration policies that are still on the books were designed by policymakers whose primary goal was to keep America as white as possible. l

Immigrant Bail Bond/ continued from page 1 The companies post bail on the individual’s behalf — the median amount is $7,500 for cases in New York City and State — so they can be free as they await court dates. But the contracts are egregiously lopsided, state lawmakers and immigrant advocates assert, with the bond companies charging exorbitant fees and making clients wear invasive ankle monitors. Immigrants report paying as much $450 a month for the devices — for years. “Emotionally, it destroyed my life,” said one 25-year-old Salvadoran man who was previously trying to seek asylum in New Jersey, reflecting on his time in detention and the abuse he says he faced from an immigration bond company. The man, who preferred to remain anonymous, said he paid Libre by Nexus $420 a month for an ankle monitor over about three years while he was waiting for his case to proceed in the immigration court backlog. The process often takes years to complete. Assemblymember Harvey Epstein, who represents parts of Manhattan, and State Sen. Jamaal Bailey, who represents parts of The Bronx, said the immigration bond industry is overdue for oversight, so they want to establish a regulatory framework. “When I heard about the abusive system that we see that immigrants face when going to bail bonds people, I knew we had to do something about it,” Epstein said. The legislation they are sponsoring, called the Stop Immigration Bond Abuse Act, would put a sliding cap on the amount that bond companies could charge for their services, as well as prohibit the use of electronic monitoring devices and establish a new licensing system to provide bail and other services for detained immigrants. Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and subject to litigation, according to the bill. “We don’t see the oversight in other states as we’re trying to do here in New York, and I think this could be a model for the nation,” Epstein told THE CITY and Documented.

Threats and Misrepresentations Epstein noted that there are also good organizations providing immigration bail services, highlighting groups like Envision Freedom Fund, a Brooklynbased nonprofit. Envision, which advocates for the regulation of for-profit bond firms, uses charitable contributions to provide bonds for detained immigrants and doesn’t charge fees or ask to be paid back. But the lawmakers and immigrant advocates pointed to Libre by Nexus, a Virginia-based bond company, as an example of a bad actor in the sector. In 2021, New York Attorney General Letitia James, along with the attorneys general of Massachusetts and Virginia and the U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, sued Libre in federal court, alleging that the company preyed on immigrants in detention. The plaintiffs alleged that Libre deceived clients into signing misleading contracts not in their native language, mischaracterizing the services provided. Additionally, the AGs alleged Libre led customers to believe that their fees would be refunded once they paid their debt off, but in reality, no fees were returned. In New York, Libre told clients that they would receive free legal representation, but the company only gave referrals, the suit alleges. Libre also threatened its New York clients with re-arrest, detention and deportation if they failed to make monthly payments or removed the ankle monitor, according to James’ section of the complaint court documents. That case is ongoing. In a legal filing, Libre by Nexus denied threatening or deceiving clients. Libre by Nexus CEO Mike Donovan defended his company in a statement to THE CITY and Documented — and said he supported the pending legislation in Albany. “I’m sad that many people seem to misunderstand our business,” he wrote. “I will extend an invitation to any legislator or advocacy group to meet with our team or visit our facilities.” Despite being castigated by lawmakers who introduced the bills, Donovan said his company “will work to advance its passage.” He added: “Libre hasn’t used GPS tracking bracelets for years, and it isn’t a practice we intend to revisit in the future.”

‘Jesus, I Can’t Do This Anymore’ The young man from El Salvador was one of Libre’s many clients nationwide. He first entered the United States on his own in 2015, fleeing gang persecution back home, he said. But almost immediately upon arrival in the United States, he was swept up into the immigration detention system, spending more than a year at centers in New Jersey while he unsuccessfully tried to get asylum. “I cried night and day, laying in my bed,” he said in Spanish. At one point, an immigration judge set his bond at $20,000, he said. “That was really hard for me — the hardest thing I’ve experienced in life,” he said. He eventually heard about Libre — meaning “free” in Spanish — through a local New Jersey and New York-based organization that supported him to find legal help and other aid during his time in detention. “I couldn’t find any way out, so I had to accept it,” he said of the bail bond contract. He said he had to give Libre a downpayment between $5,000 to $7,000 to get released, for which he had help fundraising through a local advocacy group, and then pay $420 a month for an ankle monitor that would be attached to his foot for about three years. He was also required to pay back the rest of his bail over time. “I wasn’t able to see the contract because I didn’t have the option to actually view it [in the detention center] — only over the phone. Obviously with my anxiety I just told my friend, ‘OK, sign the contract.’” He was released in 2017— but the elation at being out of the facility was short lived. The man, who lives in the Jersey City area now, said he was constantly bombarded with calls from Libre — sometimes at 2 or 3 in the morning — telling him that he was late on payments, and that he had to charge his ankle monitor. “They harass you,” he said. “I couldn’t even sleep peacefully.” To charge the ankle monitor, he would sometimes have to stand next to the wall for about an hour so that it could connect to an electrical outlet. He stopped wearing shorts out of embarrassment. He had trouble finding work because of how the ankle monitor looked, he said. The monitor also scarred and bruised his ankle and foot, he said. “I was suffering,” the man said. “I was saying, ‘Jesus, I can’t do this anymore.’” He felt the immense financial burden, too. The man was only able to pay back about an additional $1,000 on top of the down payment he gave with the contract, he said — and continued paying $420 a month for the ankle bracelet. He struggled to make ends meet, constantly worried about whether or not he would make rent or have enough food. “I would think — I’m going to be left without anything to eat. Where am I going to live?” he said. “It was so, so difficult.” Libre employees told the man that his bills would be sent to collections, but he is unclear if that ever happened or where his status with Libre stands now. He stopped paying for the bond years ago, and hasn’t paid for his ankle bracelet since he cut it off himself in 2020 when an attorney told him it wasn’t necessary to wear one. The man is so much happier today without any ties to Libre or the ankle monitor, he said. “It’s such a relief,” the man said. “After I cut it off, I felt like a new person.”

‘Profiteering of Human Suffering’ Carl Hamad-Lipscombe, executive director of Envision Freedom Fund, said he’s been advocating for baseline regulations for the industry for years, speaking with lawmakers about the need. But he said many didn’t realize that there was a problem. “Many of them assume that these companies were already regulated,” he said. “Then when they find out that they’re [largely] unregulated … most of them are super supportive.” A diverse coalition of organizations, led by Envision Freedom Fund and African Communities Together, a nonprofit that works for the civil and human rights in New York and elsewhere, has been organizing a campaign called Break the Shackles. Their goal is to end profiteering by immigration bond companies with the passage of the Stop Immigration Bond Abuse Act. “The person accepting the contract doesn’t fully understand all the details of the contract,” said Robert Agyemang, New York director of the nonprofit African Communities Together. His organization works mainly with immigrants from western African nations, including Ghana and Nigeria, caught in a bind with these bond companies. Agyemang said most of them have contracts with Libre. And recently, he said, many have had their ankle monitors swapped out for cell phone tracking apps — another form of invasive surveillance. Albert Fox Cahn, director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, a nonprofit advocacy group focused on law enforcement monitoring tools, said the use of smartphone tracking apps has been growing in the public and private sector for years, as both see them as more cost effective ways of surveilling people. “The smartphone stuff, while it’s marketed as somehow being cutting edge, remains just as traumatizing for the people who are forced to use it,” said Fox Cahn. Fox Cahn said it’s about time this immigration bond industry gets regulated. “These private bond providers, they’re profiteering off human suffering,” he said. “And it’s really the Wild West out there for how this technology is used.” The Senate majority leader and Assembly speaker’s offices did not return calls for comment.l

The city’s elected officials in Albany want to establish a regulatory framework that would prevent detained immigrants from having to pay exorbitant fees, including upwards of $400 a month for the privilege of wearing an ankle monitor.

This piece was reported and published in a partnership between Documented and THE CITY. This story was published by on May 24, 2022 by THE CITY.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION

15 Federal Judge Blocks Termination of Title 42: What You Need to Know

BY AARON REICHLIN-MELNICK

Just three days before Title 42 was set to end on May 23, a federal judge in Louisiana blocked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) from ending the controversial policy. With the court order in place, Title 42 is unlikely to be lifted for months, possibly years. As a result, the border remains in a state of constant confusion, with a patchwork of different policies that affect migrants in inconsistent ways, driving up repeat border encounters and fueling human suffering. Under Title 42, a CDC policy put in place in March 2020, border officials have carried out over 1.8 million “expulsions” of people after the crossed the U.S.-Mexico border. Many of these expulsions were of the same people crossing the border more than once. In total, nearly one out of every three border apprehensions over the last two years was a person caught on their second or higher failed attempt to cross the border. The policy has been primarily applied to single adults, who have made up the majority of people crossing the border since Title 42 went into effect. It has also been used to a lesser extent on asylum seekers, with Central American families and Haitian nationals being the most vulnerable to expulsion. The ports of entry remain largely shut to people seeking asylum, forcing many to cross between ports instead if they want a chance at accessing the asylum process. CDC officials declared in April that there was no longer any public health rationale to continue turning away asylum seekers. The CDC cited the widespread availability of vaccines and testing as among the reasons why there was no longer any “serious danger” posed by processing migrants under normal immigration laws. In response, a coalition of republican state attorneys general brought a lawsuit in Louisiana seeking to block the Biden administration from ending Title 42. A separate lawsuit was filed in Texas but has largely taken a backseat to the Louisiana lawsuit. The states argued in their lawsuit that the Biden administration was not permitted to end the emergency Title 42 authority through the same means the order was put into place. Instead, the states argued that the Biden administration had to go through “notice and comment” rulemaking and was required to give the public the opportunity to weigh in on the attempted termination before restoring normal immigration law at the border. They made this argument even though the Trump-era CDC order putting Title 42 into place said it could be ended at any time. The attorneys general also argued that the Biden administration’s decision to lift Title 42 was arbitrary and capricious and would unleash a surge of new migrants to the border, who would harm their states. Despite clear evidence that Title 42 has itself been responsible for a major increase in border crossings, the states said the Biden administration’s choice not to lift Title 42 without an alternate plan to turn away migrants was a recipe for disaster. In his decision agreeing with the states, Judge Robert Summerhays of the Western District of Louisiana found that the states were likely to succeed on their claim that ending Title 42 is “rulemaking” and therefore requires the use of notice and comment. Under this rationale, the CDC can suspend all normal immigration laws in an emergency without any notice, but once the emergency has passed, the CDC is required to ask the public whether it should allow the Department of Homeland Security continued on page 16

Speeding ruins lives. Slow down.

Cap Reached for Additional Returning Worker H-2B Visas

Under the recently announced H2B supplemental cap temporary final rule increasing the cap by up to 35,000 additional H-2B nonimmigrant visas through the end of fiscal year (FY) 2022, USCIS has received enough petitions to reach the cap for the additional 23,500 visas made available for returning workers only. We continue to accept petitions for H-2B nonimmigrant workers for the additional 11,500 visas allotted for nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Haiti, regardless of whether they are returning workers. Because no properly filed petitions were received on the date of the temporary final rule’s publication, we began accepting H-2B petitions on May 19. In the first five business days of filing, we received petitions for more beneficiaries than the additional 23,500 visas made available for H-2B returning workers. In accordance with DHS regulations, we used a computer-generated process to conduct a random selection of petitions to meet, but not exceed, the 23,500 returning worker allotment for FY 2022. The random selection, completed on May 27, included all H-2B cap-subject petitions filed under the H-2B returning worker allotment that were received between May 19 and May 25. We will reject and return any cap-subject petitions for H-2B returning workers (not including petitions for nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Haiti) received after May 25, together with any accompanying filing fees. Petitions accepted for processing will have a receipt date of May 31, 2022. Premium processing service for these petitions begins on that receipt date. Petitioners whose workers were not selected for the 23,500 returning worker allotment are encouraged to refile for workers from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Haiti while visas for that allotment remain available. The final date for filing petitions for nationals of El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Haiti who are exempt from the returning worker requirement is Sept. 15, 2022, or when the cap is reached, whichever occurs first. We will continue to accept H2B petitions for workers filing under the El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Haiti allotment, as well as those that are exempt from the congressionally mandated cap. This includes petitions for: •Current H-2B workers in the United States petitioning to extend their stay and, if applicable, change the terms of their employment or change their employers; •Fish roe processors, fish roe technicians, and/or supervisors of fish roe processing; and •Workers performing labor or services in the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands and/or Guam from Nov. 28, 2009, until Dec. 31, 2029.l

Editorial credit: Joseph Sorrentino / Shutterstock.com Judge Blocks Termination of Title 42/ continued from page 15 (DHS) to resume processing migrants under normal immigration laws. Because he had found that the CDC went through the wrong procedure to end Title 42, Judge Summerhays did not rule on whether the decision was arbitrary and capricious. Notice and comment rulemaking can be a lengthy process that will likely take the CDC months to carry out if it seeks to end Title 42 again. It requires the preparation of a formal “notice of proposed rulemaking,” a comment period of 30-60 days, agency review of all comments, the preparation of a final rule, review by the Office of Management and Budget, and then usually the final rule is delayed at least 30 days before going into effect. And even if the CDC were to go through this process, states in opposition to the policy change could simply sue again to block that new rule. The Biden administration has already filed a notice of appeal, meaning it intends to seek review by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. That court has been almost universally hostile to the Biden administration on a wide variety of topics, including immigration. As a result, the fate of Title 42 will likely go to the Supreme Court at some point next year. Until then, the CDC will likely attempt to follow the court order and revoke Title 42 through notice and comment rulemaking. But unless something drastic happens, Title 42 is likely to remain in place well into 2023, blocking any real change at the border and keeping the dead hand of the Trump administration at the wheel. l

Tips for Caregivers and Families of People With Dementia

Acaregiver, sometimes referred to as a caretaker, refers to anyone who provides care for another person. Millions of people living in the United States take care of a friend or family member with Alzheimer’s disease or a related dementia. Sometimes caregivers live with the person or nearby, other times they live far away. For many families, caring for a person with dementia isn’t just one person’s job, but the role of many people who share tasks and responsibilities. No matter what kind of caregiver you are, taking care of another person can be overwhelming at times. These tips and suggestions may help with everyday care and tasks.

Tips for Everyday Care for People With Dementia Early on in Alzheimer’s and related dementias, people experience changes in thinking, remembering, and reasoning in a way that affects daily life and activities. Eventually, people with these diseases will need more help with simple, everyday tasks. This may include bathing, grooming, and dressing. It may be upsetting to the person to need help with such personal activities. Here are a few tips to consider early on and as the disease progresses: •Try to keep a routine, such as bathing, dressing, and eating at the same time each day. •Help the person write down to-do lists, appointments, and events in a notebook or calendar. •Plan activities that the person enjoys and try to do them at the same time each day. •Consider a system or reminders for helping those who must take medications regularly. •When dressing or bathing, allow the person to do as much as possible. •Buy loose-fitting, comfortable, easy-touse clothing, such as clothes with elastic waistbands, fabric fasteners, or large zipper pulls instead of shoelaces, buttons, or buckles. •Use a sturdy shower chair to support a person who is unsteady and to prevent falls. You can buy shower chairs at drug stores and medical supply stores. •Be gentle and respectful. Tell the person what you are going to do, step by step while you help them bathe or get dressed. •Serve meals in a consistent, familiar place and give the person enough time to eat. Tips for Changes in Communication and Behavior for People With Dementia Communication can be hard for people with Alzheimer’s and related dementias because they have trouble remembering things. They also can become agitated and anxious, even angry. In some forms of dementia, language abilities are affected such that people have trouble finding the right words or have difficulty speaking. You may feel frustrated or impatient, but it is important to understand that the disease is causing the change in communication skills. To help make communication easier, you can: •Reassure the person. Speak calmly. •Listen to his or her concerns and frustrations. Try to show that you understand if the person is angry or fearful. •Allow the person to keep as much control in his or her life as possible. •Respect the person’s personal space. •Build quiet times into the day, along with activities. •Keep well-loved objects and photographs around the house to help the person feel more secure. •Remind the person who you are if he or she doesn’t remember, but try not to say, “Don’t you remember?” •Encourage a two-way conversation for as long as possible. •Try distracting the person with an activity, such as a familiar book or photo album, if you are having trouble communicating with words.l —www.alzheimers.gov