What Do Trump’s Executive Orders Really Mean? Part 2/3

woman behind fenceThis series looks at the recent executive orders on immigration the Trump administration signed. Many, however have been left wondering what the actual impact of the new executive actions will be in practice. We hope this three-part executive order series of what we know so far will be helpful in finding answers. Click here to read parts one and three.

Trump’s executive orders massively expand the definition of “criminal alien,” effectively making it a crime just to be undocumented.

As described in our first blog in this series, Trump’s new executive orders make plain that the administration considers any undocumented immigrant a suitable target for deportation. After green-lighting this broad deportation push, however, the order also calls for the prioritization of immigrants who have been caught up in the criminal justice system. At first glance, this mirrors the Obama administration’s “Priority Enforcement Program” (PEP). PEP already applied an extremely broad definition of criminality that often swept in immigrants who had committed only minor offenses and innocuous immigration violations. However, Trump’s priority categories are vastly expanded even beyond the PEP. These “criminal” categories will now include:

  • Immigrants who have been charged with a criminal offense but whose cases have “not been resolved”— meaning that the administration will effectively assume automatic guilt for any undocumented person who lands in a court room or is charged by the police;
  • Immigrants who have “committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.” This could include virtually every undocumented immigrant who crossed the border without permission at some point in the past, as “illegal entry” and “illegal reentry” are technically chargeable as federal crimes.
  • Immigrants who have given false social security numbers to an employer or have driven without a license, both of which could be charged as crimes, but which are a daily necessity for people who live here without documentation and who must work and transport themselves in order to survive.

The executive orders also direct the Justice Department to devote more resources to “the prosecution of criminal immigration offenses,” which include such harmless immigration violations as “entry at an improper time and place” and “reentry of a deported alien.” Such non-violent immigration violations already make up the majority of all federal criminal prosecutions nationwide, but senior Trump administration officials, including Jeff Sessions, have long signaled a desire to prosecute these offenses even more extensively.

In these ways and others, Trump’s executive orders effectively criminalize undocumented people purely for their immigration status. Furthermore, the focus on deporting immigrants who encounter the criminal justice system—even those who are not ultimately convicted of any crime— will particularly harm Black, Brown, and Muslim immigrants who are most vulnerable to racial profiling, false arrest, and any overbroad deployment of police powers.

Read the first and final posts in our series on how Trump’s executive orders on the completion of a border wall will gravely impact asylum-seekers.

What Do Trump’s Executive Orders Really Mean? Part 1/3

Trump and administration at press conferenceThis series looks at the recent executive orders on immigration the Trump administration signed. Many, however have been left wondering what the actual impact of the new executive actions will be in practice. We hope this three-part executive order series of what we know so far will be helpful in finding answers. Click here to read parts two and three.

President Trump climbed the rostrum at the Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday, January 25 to a 19th century abolitionist anthem, “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” which includes the lyric, “let us die to make men free.” Far from promising freedom, however, the new President pledged only detention, deportation, and family separation on an unprecedented scale. The orders issued on Wednesday in the name of public safety and border security—the first of several anticipated executive actions targeting refugee and immigrant communities —threaten to fulfill the worst expectations for Trump’s presidency and to bring his horrifying campaign proposals into reality.

There was no mistaking the intent behind the President’s toxic rhetoric Wednesday, which cast undocumented people as violent criminals and implied collective guilt on their part purely on the basis of race and national origin.

Trump’s executive orders will separate families and sow terror among immigrant communities through mass deportation.

The orders call for the hiring of 10,000 additional Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, empowered to:

  • Conduct mass deportations with the broad mandate to “execute […] the immigration laws of the United States against all removable aliens.”
  • Enable federal officers to deputize state and local law enforcement to act as federal immigration agents, effectively creating an even more extensive deportation force.
  • Call for federal grants to be stripped from “sanctuary” jurisdictions that refuse to comply with or assist federal enforcement efforts.

The orders will likewise reinstate the notorious Obama-era “Secure Communities” program, under which state and local police held undocumented people in county jails on ICE detainers, to be later picked up by federal authorities and deported. “Secure Communities” was eventually retired in 2014 due to public outcry, as it effectively exposed any undocumented person who encountered local police—even for a minor offense, such as a broken taillight—to detention, deportation, and separation from their loved ones. The program not only tore families apart, but ironically, it also made communities less secure, by eviscerating trust of law enforcement agencies among the undocumented.

UUSC stands in solidarity and partnership with immigrants and refugees regardless of what comes next, so that the lyrics that accompanied the President’s speech Wednesday may be something other than a cruel irony… Let us strive to make all people free!

Read parts two and three in our series on Trump’s executive orders and their effect on criminalizing undocumented immigrants.

Rights Reading

Our weekly roundup of what we’re reading: a few select articles from the front lines of human rights that we don’t want you to miss.

1. “Refugees share personal stories with members of Congress” Samantha-Jo Roth, KCRG-TV9, Cedar Rapids, IA, September 29, 2016

A group of refugees from all 50 states met with members of Congress in Washington, D.C., this week, sharing their stories in an effort to change opinions and encourage Congress to support increased refugee resettlement in the United States. They represent the Refugee Congress, an organization supported by the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees, Church World Service, the Refugee Council USA, and other nonprofits and NGOs.

Roth’s video and print coverage of the event includes stories from individual refugees such as Kalisa Ndikumwimana and Fidel Nshombo of the Congo, who now live in North Dakota and Idaho, respectively. Using his personal story to advocate for continued admission of refugees and asylum-seekers into the United States, Fidel says, “We cannot stop something to fix it. We fix it as we go, because that’s how you learn, and that’s what I want the senator to do.”

You can add your voice to those of Fidel, Kalisa, and others by writing your own senators and representative to urge them to defy hate speech, fully fund programs to admit refugees as authorized for FY 2017, and ensure that the United States makes us proud by standing up for human rights.

2. “New Report: Poor Americans of Color Drink Filthy Water and Breathe Poisonous Air All the Damn Time,” Julian Lurie, Mother Jones Magazine, September 29, 2016

The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, a government watchdog group, issued a report detailing multiple failures by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to enforce its own anti-discrimination policies in communities of color from Richmond, California to Flint, Michigan, and Uniontown, Alabama. These anti-discrimination policies are based on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prevents the spending of federal dollars from being used in a discriminatory fashion.

“EPA does not take action when faced with environmental justice concerns until forced to do so,” the report reads. “When they do act, they make easy choices and outsource any environmental justice responsibilities onto others.”

Lurie’s reporting shows that while the EPA has received 300 discrimination complaints since 1993, it has “never made a formal finding of discrimination and has never denied or withdrawn financial assistance from a recipient in its entire history.”

The report documents a case in which toxic coal ash was removed from a spill in a predominantly white community in Tennessee and dumped in a landfill less than a mile away from Uniontown, Alabama, a town that is 90% black. Uniontown residents soon reported breathing problems, rashes, nausea, nosebleeds, and other symptoms. They filed a complaint with the EPA three years ago, and have not received a response despite regulations requiring action within six months.

UUSC has been advocating for the human right to clean and affordable drinking water and sanitation for years, including publication of its 2016 research report, “The Invisible Crisis: Water Unaffordability in the United States,” and other efforts to advocate for the human right to water. Watch for additional UUSC research and advocacy efforts regarding the human right to water in the coming months.

3. “Myanmar Refugees, Including Muslim Rohingya, Outpace Syrian Arrivals in US,” VOA News, September 20, 2016

The startling news that more refugees are admitted to the United States from Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, than from Syria is both an indictment of U.S. policies on refugees from the Middle East and an eye-opening insight into the suffering of the Rohingya people at the hands of their government.

The VOA News article reports that from October 2015 through September 15, 2016, 11,902 Myanmar nationals were resettled in the United States, compared with 11,598 from Syria. It also notes that the Rohingya are persecuted because they are viewed as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, despite the fact that many have lived in Myanmar for generations. Ironically, ncreased freedom of speech since the end of military rule in 2011 has permitted the expression of long-held anti-Muslim sentiment.

Aung San Suu Kyi, the current State Counsellor of Myanmar, is widely respected for her stance in favor of human rights, for which she was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. However, 125,000 Rohingya residents are currently detained in internal camps in Myanmar, and there are continued reports of demolitions of their mosques, residences, and other buildings.

UUSC has worked in Myanmar on behalf of human rights since providing humanitarian relief in the wake of Cyclone Nargis in 2002, and again following the earthquake of 2011. Since that time, UUSC has supported longer-term efforts with several peace-oriented projects after the country’s transition to civilian rule. More recently, UUSC has been working with partners focused on promoting religious harmony and cultural tolerance. Relief efforts aimed at the Rohingya people in 2015 included health education and child nutrition programs along with mental health care, language training, and advocacy for women’s empowerment.

UUSC partners in Myanmar have identified the need for additional national and international awareness of Rohingya issues, and engagement of international NGOs concerning stateless Rohingya people. A delegation of UUSC staff and volunteers plans to visit Myanmar in the coming months to assess the situation first-hand.