Immigration Watch International (2): DHS Creates Yet Another Parole Program for Aliens to Cut in Line

Monday, July 17, 2023

DHS Creates Yet Another Parole Program for Aliens to Cut in Line

A Center for Immigration Studies analysis examines a new Biden administration “parole” program, that will allow nationals from four more countries to skip the line to enter the United States ahead of all other green card-eligible aliens, who must wait outside the country for an immigrant visa to become available.

This program, billed as promoting “family reunification” in the United States for aliens living in Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras with pending family-based green card applications, is inconsistent with the language and history of the parole statute.

These aliens, with no lawful mechanism to enter the United States, will be eligible to be paroled into the country and receive work authorization under this program. Annual green card issuances are subject to a numerical limit (cap) by statute, and therefore, many beneficiaries wait years to enter the United States as a green card holder. The annual limit for family-based categories depends on the previous year’s immigration levels and is set at a minimum of 226,000 visas.

Elizabeth Jacobs, the Center’s director of regulatory affairs and policy, writes, “Congress, not the Executive Branch, possesses plenary power over immigration under the Constitution. Entry under parole as an alternative to a visa for broad classes of aliens, such as aliens who have family in the United States and may one day be eligible for an immigrant visa, has expressly not been authorized by Congress.”

The parole statute provides DHS with limited authority to parole aliens into the United States, requiring entry to be a “case-by-case” basis for “urgent humanitarian or significant public benefit” reasons. The new program establishes specific eligibility requirements for participation, which may contradict the case-by-case approach envisioned by the statute. Historically, DHS has construed “urgent humanitarian reasons” as “urgent medical, family, and related needs” and “significant public benefit” as limited to situations as limited to “persons of law enforcement interest such as witnesses to judicial proceedings.”

Jacobs also discusses the Biden administration’s use of this new program to obscure data underlying the mass illegal immigration crisis in the United States. The new program allows the administration to further reduce the number of aliens apprehended between ports of entry reported by DHS each month, while still allowing large numbers of inadmissible aliens to enter, remain, and work in the United States without a visa. This will create a skewed representation of the true extent of the illegal immigration crisis.

https://cis.org/Jacobs/DHS-Creates-Yet-Another-Parole-Program-Aliens-Cut-Line

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

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://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More 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)

Monday, July 17, 2023

DHS Creates Yet Another Parole Program for Aliens to Cut in Line

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors