Immigration Watch International (2): Why Biden Hasn’t Scrapped Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy

Sunday, August 7, 2022

Why Biden Hasn’t Scrapped Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy

The Biden administration has yet to scrap a key Trump-era border policy; the Supreme Court said it could do so and the reason could be because of the president’s political future, experts told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

After months of attempts to stop the continuation of the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which is used to expel certain migrants to Mexico as they await immigration proceedings, the Supreme Court granted the Biden administration the authority to do so in a June decision.

The Biden administration has yet to end the program and the White House and the Department of Homeland Security are silent on next steps as they didn’t respond to The Daily Caller News Foundation’s requests for comment.

One reason President Joe Biden hasn’t delivered on his word is because his political future could be at risk by the potential for more chaos at the border, Allen Orr, American Immigration Lawyers Association immediate past president, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“I think the Biden administration is being overly cautious with regards to ending the program as they don’t want to have anything to happen at the southern border that would seem that things were out of control. Politically, that would not be a great thing with the midterms coming up and his approval ratings being so low,” Orr said.

“I also think that he has been working with private and public partnerships to sort of address the immigration issue as we’ve seen an agreement reached with Mexico just a few weeks ago, where they were going to put millions of dollars into helping ensure an orderly border between the United States and Mexico,” he added.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, whose district is along the southern border, agreed that the lack of change is political, he told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“I think they, especially the career people, not the political people, know that there are some things that will slow people down and [the Migrant Protection Protocols] is one of them. They probably don’t want to say that publicly,” Cuellar said.

“They unfortunately have to follow the instructions that come from the top, and I would say even [Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro] Mayorkas understands this and understands that we got to slow down the number of people, but you know, everybody gets instructions from higher up places at the White House. So, I think they probably are trying to slow this as much as possible,” he added.

The policy, however, hasn’t returned significant numbers of migrants to Mexico, making the Biden administration’s implementation of the policy “all for show,” Federation for American Immigration Reform press secretary Ron Kovach told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“MPP is already dead—the court-ordered relaunch was all for show. Only a few thousand migrants have been enrolled in the program, with most being either released into the country or expelled under Title 42. Border numbers are still through the roof,” Kovach said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection expelled 2,097 illegal aliens in June, 2,129 in May, and 1,725 in April. During the aforementioned months, migrant encounters at the southern border exceeded 200,000, respectively, according to CBP statistics.

“Nothing will change one way or another once the MPP facade officially ends,” Kovach said.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/08/03/why-biden-hasnt-scrapped-trumps-remain-in-mexico-policy/

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Sunday, August 7, 2022

Why Biden Hasn’t Scrapped Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors