Martha’s Vineyard: Where are the unauthorized migrants? When did Mr. Abbott and his Republican gov. John H. Johnson decide to relocate?

She asked him to help her recruit other migrants like him from Venezuela. She never mentioned working on behalf of Florida’s government, so he felt betrayed. He said he was also lied to. “If I had known, I would not have gotten involved.” He was told that she wanted to help the people head up north.

The effort to fly migrants to Martha’s Vineyard appeared to have been far less organized than the more sweeping program created by Mr. Abbott in Texas that already had bused more than 11,000 migrants from the state to three northern, Democratic-run cities — Washington, New York and Chicago.

But the goal for both governors was the same: draw attention to the large number of unauthorized migrants arriving daily at the southern border and force Democrats to deal with the migrants whom they profess a desire to welcome.

The Immigrant Superpower: Why the Biden Administration is Frustrated by the Excess of Mexican Migrants at the Border

In the case of the flights to Martha’s Vineyard, Florida state records show that an airline charter company, Vertol Systems, was paid $615,000 on Sept. 8 and $950,000 less than two weeks later. The first payment was for the project, and the second was for the next two projects. So far, Florida officials have acknowledged only the initial flights and have not spoken of plans for others.

The program was conceived as a means for Florida to push back on the number of unauthorized migrants being flown into the state by the federal government. The additional large groups of migrants that had been expected did not come to fruition, so the funds have yet to be used.

Tim Kane, president of the American Lyceum, is also a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution. His newest book is called The Immigrant Superpower. His own views are expressed in this commentary. View more opinion on CNN.

When we ponder what Biden should do to address the immigration mess at the border, the honest answer is: something, anything. The status quo is missing a golden opportunity because it plays politics while seemingly ignoring policy.

The New York Times reported that most of the officials that Joe Biden appointed to work on immigration have quit in frustration. The White House has been divided by furious debates over how to deal with the surge of migrants crossing the southwest border.

Some wanted more openness to immigrants of all kinds. Others wanted a coherent set of rules to be applied to the millions of people at the border. Some wanted a compromise with the Republicans that would create a merit-based, green-card system. They all got nothing.

Too often, the White House plays politics instead of making a policy choice. Early on, last year, it engaged in a rhetorical word game whether a crisis existed. Cubans fleeing communism were blocked while just over 1 million people were allowed to cross the border illegally.

It blamed everything on the Trump administration, while pretending Barack Obama’s executive actions hadn’t led to an explosion of families and minors crossing the border. Worst of all, the Biden administration reflexively points to “root causes” of poverty and violence, even though those conditions have been dramatically improving for a decade across Central America.

Over the weekend, more than 16 thousand people were taken into custody by US border authorities. El Paso, which has previously grappled with a surge of migrants, is seeing an influx of migrants.

The Rise of Refugees in the U.S.: What President Barack Obama Did in His Moment in History? How President Biden could change the status of the United States

Legal immigrants add brains, brawn and bravery to America. First- and second-generation immigrants have been awarded 20% of the US military’s Medals of Honor. Immigrations tend to be more patriotic and passionate about the American dream than native-born people.

In contrast, open border chaos increases human trafficking and drug trafficking. It turns what should be a foreign policy strength into a national security weakness.

There is a partisan gap but it is not the center of attention. More American voters of all types – Democrats, Republicans and independents alike – support increased immigration than in past decades. The Gallup polls confirm this trend.

Biden should take advantage of his moment in history to boldly reform American refugee policy. He could, at the stroke of a pen, redefine how many refugees are allowed into the United States by taking advantage of the distinction our laws make between those granted temporary protection and those awarded permanent residency.

The latter group is the traditional way “refugees” are categorized: given green cards and a pathway to naturalized citizenship. According to Section 8 of the Constitution, naturalization is a congressional authority. Foreign policy and temporary welcome to foreign refugees is in the hands of the President. He should use that power now.

That’s why redefining refugees as exclusively temporary noncitizens would be a game changer. Some 200 million foreigners came to America every year before Covid-19 as business, education and tourism travelers.

But millions of people are being admitted into the United States outside the traditional refugee program, diverting resources from those who have been waiting for years.

At the same time, Honduras is receiving “$164.7 million per year” in foreign aid from the United States, according to the State Department. This is wrong. Hondurans can either be given refuge or aid.

Real tyranny is alive and well, and we shouldn’t confuse it with poverty. The communist government in Beijing is creating a state of surveillance, replete with reeducation camps. Over 6 million citizens of Venezuela have fled the dictatorship of President Nicols marauder. Twelve million or more Ukrainians have been displaced by the Russians. It’s not as if genuine refugees are hard to find.

Why not call a dictatorship a dictatorship? The President should put the world on notice by ordering the State Department to designate “oppressive” nations – and only their people could qualify for asylum. Such a bold move would resolve the border crisis and align with Biden’s stated values. It’s too simple? No, the world needs moral clarity more than ever.

Increasing the number of immigration visas from Venezuela since the 2014 Venezuelan crisis: Implications for the border-crossing pandemic and the United States

The US will accept Venezuela’s successful online applications, like it did with Ukrainians who fled war for stays in the United States for up to two years. More than 60,000 Ukrainians have been admitted to the US since then.

Almost 6 million people have left Venezuela since the economy tanked in 2014, mainly in Latin America and the Caribbean. The strength of the U.S. economy has caused people from Venezuela to look to the north. More incentive was given by the inability of the Biden administration to apply Title 42.

The moves are a response to a dramatic increase in migration from Venezuela, which leapfrogged over Guatemala and Honduras in August to become the second largest nationality arriving at the U.S. border after Mexico.

Mexico’s Foreign Affairs Secretary said in a statement that “those who seek to enter the United States will be able to do so in a more orderly, safe, regular and humane manner. The program discourages undocumented crossings that put migrants’ safety at risk.”

In a related announcement, Homeland Security said it will make available nearly 65,000 temporary work visas for lower-skilled industries, roughly double the current annual allotment. At least 20,000 of those temporary visas will be reserved for Haiti and northern Central American countries.

Title 42 has allowed the officials to quickly expel migrants who crossed the border illegally in the name of Covid-19 prevention. Most of the 2.5 million expulsions have been done by the Biden administration.

“From a legal perspective, the president and his administration is taking actions saying there’s a pandemic, and they’re literally taking actions to try to mitigate and control it,” Brnovich said. If they want to exclude people from China, then they should argue that there are still things that the government needs to be doing because of this epidemic, because it would be a waste of time.

The Trump-era Latin American immigration crisis confronts the U.S. presidency in the wake of COVID-19 and the midterm elections

In August, Venezuelans were stopped 25,349 times, up 43% from 17,652 in July and four times the 6,301 encounters in August 2021, signaling a remarkably sudden demographic shift.

The Supreme Court this week blocked the White House from lifting Title 42 — the public health order put in place by the Trump administration in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic on public health grounds. Title 42 gives Customs and Border Protection the authority to turn migrants away from the border in an attempt to prevent the spread of the disease.

Mexico, under pressure from the U.S. administration, introduced restrictions on air travel to limit Venezuelan migration to the United States in January, but many then shifted to a dangerous route over land that includes Panama’s notorious Darien Gap.

Washington. The Secretary of State met with the foreign minister of Mexico for another time on Thursday as the Biden administration focused on Latin America.

But immigration was inevitably a key theme of the meeting, at a moment of vast migration across Central and South America — a subject with explosive political resonance less than a month before the midterm elections.

Biden officials chose their words carefully on the sensitive topic of immigration, avoiding phrases like “border crisis” and emphasizing that the effects of social and economic upheaval in the region, thanks in part to the pandemic, are not unique to the United States.

Once they are resettled, the refugees can petition for their immediate relatives to join them in the United States by providing DNA or other evidence of their relationship. The relative will be interviewed at an embassy by a U.S. official before being approved for travel.

Those migrants can secure asylum if they can prove they would be persecuted at home; otherwise they face deportation. More than a million have been turned away on the basis of a Trump-era public health measure called Title 42, which allows the United States to expel people who would have otherwise been admitted for an evaluation of their asylum claims or placed into deportation proceedings.

Parole, a legal tool the US government can grant to people from other countries, allows them to enter the country but does not grant them a green card or citizenship. That is what Mr. Biden’s administration has done in the cases of many refugees from Afghanistan, Ukraine and now Venezuela.

Los Alamos y Estudiantes: Estudio de los Agendas de El Paso en la Proceder’o del Medio

The shelters in El Paso are at capacity despite the drop in daily arrivals. The mayor has declared a state of emergency after hundreds of migrants ended up on the streets.

What we consider before using anonymous sources. The sources know what’s going on. What motivates them to tell us? In the past, have they proved to be reliable? Is it possible to corroborate the information? Even with these questions satisfied, The Times uses anonymous sources as a last resort. The reporter and at least one editor know the identity of the source.

The Rule of the Day: The Arrival of a Cargo Leaving Juarez, Mexico, on Sunday, January 21, 2020 (Revisited Note by Jose M. Biden)

The rule was being questioned by public health officials. During the summer of 2021, C.D.C. officials had to tell Mr. Biden’s top aides there was no reason to keep the border shut to most migrants. Title 42 is needed to prevent the spread of diseases in detainement facilities, argued White House officials. Mr. Biden and his top aides were concerned that lifting the rule would lead to a surge of migrants and more partisan attacks on the Biden administration.

However, the United States is limited in its ability to expel Nicaraguans under the public health authority for diplomatic reasons. Mexico will not accept them, and the Biden administration cannot send repatriation flights. As a result, most of the Nicaraguans apprehended are released on a short-term parole with a tracking device or sent briefly to Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention, where they are typically released after a few days.

Eventually, they will face removal proceedings in immigration court. Border officials could also issue a warrant and a date to appear in immigration court, but that is a process that can take about two hours for each person and lead to significant backups, contributing to overcrowding.

The group that arrived on Sunday included people from several Central and South America countries, and Haiti, all of whom were granted temporary legal status in Mexico so they could travel freely in that country for 180 days.

The government in the Mexican state of Chihuahua had bused a caravan of about 1,100 migrants into Juarez on Sunday afternoon, Mr. González said. The buses, about 19 of them, were paid for by the Mexican government, he said, which had reasoned that the migrants would have walked north anyway and provided a police escort to keep them safe.

The group was in Jurez for less than a day. Around 4 p.m., the migrants decided to cross the border en masse, he said, and hundreds more joined them. “They left on foot and crossed the river,” Mr. González said.

The Six-pillar Border Policy Plan: State and Local Resilience in the Era of a Comprehensive Border Security Strategy, as Revised by Schumer and Klain

The Department of Homeland Security has put together a plan to end the authority that includes resources to the border, targeting smugglers and collaborating with international partners.

There is a surge in resources to the southern border which includes the hiring of roughly 1,000 Border Patrol processing coordinators as well as the addition of 2,500 government contractors and personnel.

The plan shows that the federal government has built 10 soft-sided facilities to increase Customs and Border Protection holding capacity. The agency says it has more than doubled transportation capacity for detained migrants, as well.

We will continue to scale up our ground and air transportation capabilities in light of potential increases, and this includes hundreds of flights and bus routes per week to transport detaining non-citizens to less crowded Border Patrol sectors for processing and to return them to their home or third countries.

According to the six-pillar plan, CBP spends 30% less time processing migrants now compared to early last year – which will help mitigate overcrowding of CBP facilities.

A plan stated that we are increasing referrals for prosecutions for people trying to evade apprehension.

DHS will be targeting organizations that smuggle migrants and working with international partners on the border.

According to three people with knowledge of the call, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called President Joe Biden’s chief of staff for concerns about the border proposal the administration was considering.

The call – one of many that have come in from lawmakers to the White House – was indicative of the politically precarious position for Biden as officials try to fend off Republicans pounding the administration over its handling of the border and appease Democrats concerned about barring asylum seekers from the US.

“The government recognizes that the end of the Title 42 orders will likely lead to disruption and a temporary increase in unlawful border crossings,” Prelogar wrote.

The year-end legislative sprint is currently underway, and Schumer and Klain speak frequently in critical moments. But the border issue’s emergence in discussion provides a window into a complex policy and political moment.

The attorneys general from 19 Republican-led states petitioned to keep the rule in place because of a surge of migrants entering the country. The attorney general of Arizona talked to the host about why he believes Title 42 should remain in place.

The Biden Administration on the Status of the 21st White House: Progress, Perspectives, and Efforts in Managing Border Security

It has played out as the Biden administration prepares for a moment in which officials have been struggling with how to navigate. The latest phase of the effort has been going on for a long time, with officials aware since the opening of the office that at some point the policy would end. The infrastructure and personnel have been directed to certain entry points, with the resources expected to be announced in the coming days.

Asked about concerns inside the administration about the potential for a surge at the border once Title 42 goes away, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre listed off a series of personnel, processing and infrastructure efforts that have been put into place.

Jean-Pierre told reporters at the White House that he and his team were going to do the work, be prepared, and make sure the process was humane.

The diplomatic component involved in managing a rapid shift in the countries of origin of migrants that are caught at the border has added a new layer of difficulty for the administration.

Throughout, administration officials have stressed that the only viable long-term solution will come from congressional action, noting encouragement with a bipartisan framework released in the Senate last week.

According to sources familiar with the discussions, however, the long-shot bipartisan immigration deal led by Sens. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican, and Kyrsten Sinema, who recently announced that she is leaving the Democratic party and registering as an independent, is essentially dead this Congress.

The framework which would have extended protections for Dreamers and Title 42, was not likely to build traction in the waning moments of the session.

White House officials have been talking with DHS officials daily, sources told CNN. Sources said that the National Security Council has had a lot to do with migration management.

Already this week El Paso had seen a significant increase in border crossings that overwhelmed shelters, sparking concern that the US government would be unprepared for the additional surge in migration that’s expected if the policy ends.

In it, DHS also stressed the need for congressional action to update outdated statutes and help create a functioning asylum system, as the current one is under immense strain.

“The 21st (is) going to be a disaster. There are so many things in the pipeline, but nothing is ready (to) go,” one official said, referring to December 21 when Title 42 is set to end.

Immigration and Asymmetries: How Do We Need to Shut Down the Borders? Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas Revisited

The mass movement of people around the globe has posed a challenge, according to Alejandro Mayorkas, who is the Secretary of Homeland Security.

Our outdated immigration system is under strain, as well as for state, local and community partners. In the absence of congressional action to reform the immigration and asylum systems, a significant increase in migrant encounters will strain our system even further,” he said.

He said that the partnership of Congress, state and local officials, NGOs, and communities was needed to address the challenge.

People will be relocated if there is a surge in the valley. If more people cross, they’ll move agents over to Eagle Pass. They are moving agents to El Paso. This is not the way to secure the border,” Cuellar said Wednesday on “CNN This Morning,” adding a call for Biden to visit the border and see the situation for himself.

CNN previously reported that DHS is preparing for multiple scenarios, including projections of between 9,000 to 14,000 migrants a day, more than double the current number of people crossing.

Officials in El Paso said they are watching the situation, are talking to federal, state and local partners. Mayorkas met with the Customs and Border Protection workforce and local officials while in El Paso on Tuesday.

The Response of the Biden White House to the Covid-19 Suspense: “We Can’t Get Along” with the Border Security Reform

The Biden administration is also asking Congress for more than $3 billion as it prepares for the end of Title 42, according to a source familiar with the ask.

“Today’s order gives Republicans in Congress plenty of time to move past political finger-pointing and join their Democratic colleagues in solving the challenge at our border by passing the comprehensive reform measures and delivering the additional funds for border security that President Biden has requested,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.

If nonprofits can’t handle the influx of arrivals, the city may bus migrants to other locations as they’ve done in the past, according to Texas Representative Henry “Hank” Cuellar.

The DC Circuit US Court of Appeals refused to intervene in the case and dismissed the request by the states to put the lower court ruling on hold.

They wrote that the “inordinate and unexplained untimeliness” of the states’ request to get involved in the case “weighs decisively against intervention.”

The case is a lawsuit the American Civil Liberties Union, representing several migrants brought In January 2021 challenging the program. The appeals court acknowledged on Friday that Republican-led states were aware that their approach to keeping the policy in force would differ from the Biden administration’s.

The president blamed uncertainty over Title 42’s future for the delay, adding that he felt he had to make the trip and take further action once it became clear that the Supreme Court wouldn’t rule on the policy until later this year.

Last month, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan struck down the program. The Biden administration had time to prepare for the policy’s end since Sullivan put his ruling on hold. The administration is also appealing the ruling, arguing that the program was lawful, even if the federal public health authorities have determined it is no longer necessary.

There has been preparation for a surge of migrants as the December 21 deadline approaches. The rule is a public health authority that the Trump administration began using at the start of the Covid-19 epidemic to expel migrants before they were granted asylum.

The Supreme Court’s order blocking the lower court’s opinion ordering the authority to be terminated was a triumph for Republican-led states. The Biden administration has said it was prepared for the authority to end and had put in place precautions to guard against confusion at the border and any potential surge of migrants.

They argue that the number of migrants will rise because of a decision to end their lives.

A Brief History of the Biden Administration and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision to Immediately End the Title 42 Immigration Policy in El Paso

The Biden administration opposed the states’ attempt to intervene and their request to keep the policy in place, calling the requests untimely and unjustified.

EL PASO, Texas – The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling Tuesday, granted a GOP request to prevent the winding down of the Title 42 immigration policy – and agreed to decide in its February argument session whether 19 states that oppose the policy should be allowed to intervene in defense of it in the lower courts.

The December 21 deadline for lifting public health restrictions is still in place, and federal officials continue to prepare for an expected increase in migrant arrivals.

Here’s a look at some of the key questions and answers about the appeals court’s ruling, Title 42’s history, what’s happening on the ground and what could happen next.

The Biden administration is also appealing Sullivan’s ruling, but has said it’s continuing with its preparations to end Title 42 expulsions as ordered on December 21.

The introduction of migrant populations crossing the border used to be gradual and a series of months. This time, he said, it has been rapid and over a few days.

The use of the public health authority along the US southern border was denounced by Immigrant advocates and public health experts who argued that it was not an appropriate reason for denying entry to migrants. In nearly three years, the authority has been used over 2 million times to turn migrants away, according to US Customs and Border Protection.

After Sullivan’s November ruling, the debate was renewed, and then again several weeks later when word got around that more people were crossing the border in El Paso.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich – who took the lead for the states – said Monday that “getting rid of Title 42 will recklessly and needlessly endanger more Americans and migrants by exacerbating the catastrophe that is occurring at our southern border,” adding: “Unlawful crossings are estimated to surge from 7,000 per day to as many as 18,000.”

Earlier this year, the policy drew attention when authorities at first were using it to turn away Ukrainians at the border, then largely started granting exceptions that allowed thousands of Ukrainians seeking refuge to cross.

Advocates argued a racist double standard was at play as many migrants from Central America and Haiti continued to be turned back under the policy. The exemption is granted on a case-by-case basis according to federal officials.

Since Biden took office, Human Rights First says it’s identified more than 13,000 incidents of kidnapping, torture, rape or other violent attacks on people blocked or expelled to Mexico under Title 42.

Even if President Joe Biden thinks it is past time to reverse the immigration restriction, his administration will enforce it.

Republican attorneys general asked the court to keep the restrictions in place because removing them would cause a surge of illegal immigration, which is not a public health emergency.

The Title 42 restrictions were abolished by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in April of this year.

But that effort was blocked by a federal judge in Louisiana, in a separate case brought by a group of Republican attorneys general. They argued that the CDC didn’t go through the proper procedures to end Title 42 and should have considered state health care systems and other costs.

The High Court’s Benchmark on the Issue of Immigration and Health: A Comment on Prelogar’s Comments on the Case of Title 42 Expulsions

Since then immigration authorities have deported more than two million migrants, and most of them have been single adults and some families.

But it also asked for the court to delay the ending of Title 42 until at least December 27, citing ongoing preparations for an influx of migrants and the upcoming holiday weekend.

The administration says the states don’t have the legal right to challenge the district court opinion, which was used to throw out the program.

The Justice Department and the American Civil Liberties Union were asked to weigh in on the matter, which was temporarily frozen by the Chief Justice.

The last-minute legal wrangling comes as federal officials and border communities have been bracing for an expected increase in migrant arrivals as early as this week as the issue of immigration continues to ignite both sides of the political divide. The Department of Homeland Security is planning to end the program with more resources to the border, and working with international partners.

In court papers Tuesday, Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar stressed that it would be highly unusual for the court to allow the states to step in at the last minute when they had not been an official party in the dispute at hand.

“The government in no way seeks to minimize the seriousness of that problem. According to a filing made with the Supreme Court, the solution to that immigration problem cannot be to extend a public-health measure that has outlived its usefulness.

“The record in this case documents the truly extraordinary horrors being visited on noncitizens every day by Title 42 expulsions,” Lee Gelernt, a lawyer for the families, wrote.

The border crisis is not COVID-19, but a court of law: Commentary on a U.S. Customs and Border Protection official

“We’re going on as if nothing’s changed,” a senior US Customs and Border Protection official told CNN, adding that policy discussions are still underway to provide other legal pathways to Nicaraguans, Haitians and Cubans who make up a large number of encounters.

CNN reporter David Culver is in Ciudad Juarez, which is close to the border, where he is talking with migrants who spent weeks traveling hundreds of miles, often on foot, and are now confused as they try to get asylum in the US.

The official thought that there were some that hadn’t gotten the message and wouldn’t cross until they did. “There are some already committed who will cross.”

The lower court ruling should be put on hold, according to the papers that he wrote for the justices. He proposed that the justices grant an interim injunction to keep the status quo, and consider whether to skip over the appeals court in order to hear arguments on the merits of the issue.

Failure to grant a stay here will cause massive irreparable harms on the States, as they have many of the consequences of illegal immigration.

In the case at hand, six families that unlawfully crossed the US-Mexico border and were subject to the Title 42 process brought the original challenge.

In court papers, the ACLU previously argued that Covid-19 was always a thinly veiled pretense to increase immigration control. There is no legal basis to use the immigration law as a substitute for public health.

In a dissenting opinion, conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the “current border crisis is not a COVID crisis. And courts should not be in the business of perpetuating administrative edicts designed for one emergency only because elected officials have failed to address a different emergency. We are a court of law, not policymakers of last resort.”

The Supreme Court’s Decision to Appeals for a Border Asymptotic Plan for Asymmetries: The Case of the Biden Administration

The Biden administration hasn’t come up with a long-term plan for asylum, while migrants continue to arrive in large numbers at the southern border.

The court decided to take the states’ appeal this term. The court said it would hear arguments on the case during its argument session that begins in February 2023.

Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor denied the application, but did not explain their thinking. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch also dissented and explained his thinking in an order joined by liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

“In the meantime, my administration will continue to use that authority as the Supreme Court has required,” he said. “And until Congress passes the funds, a comprehensive immigration plan to fix the system completely, my administration is going to work to make the situation at the border better using the tools that we have available to us now.”

“The court is not going to decide until June apparently, and in the meantime we have to enforce it – but I think it’s overdue,” Biden told reporters on the White House South Lawn.

Last week, Prelogar appeared before the Supreme Court and acknowledged that returning to traditional protocols would be a challenge, however she said there was no need to keep the Covid-era rules in place.

The dangers faced by asylum seekers and their families who are subject to the authority had been underscored in arguments made by lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Gelernt said that they will fight to end the policy and that they were disappointed with the plight of the desperate asylum seekers.

Mr. Miller tried several times to use Title 42 before and after the flu ravaged the nation, including an outbreak of mumps at detaining facilities in six states. He was often talked down by cabinet secretaries and lawyers.

The Arizona Attorney General Immigration Asylum Law: Does it Matter if the United States Can Respond to the State’s Opposal?

The idea that immigrants carry infections into the country echoes a racist notion with a long history in the United States that associates minorities with disease.

It is not a permanent policy. It was never meant to be. But it is one of the few tools we have left in our toolbox that is stopping even more people from illegally reentering.”

The law requires notice to and comments from those affected by actions, which President joe Biden didn’t follow in removing Title 42.

“We as the states tried to intervene to protect our interest, and the Biden administration disagreed, saying the states didn’t have an interest,” he said. “I think the events of the last two years, whether it’s on a cost in health care, whether it’s the costs of incarceration or whether it’s the costs in lost lives — Every state in the United States now is a border state, and we all have an interest in making sure we have a secure border.”

I think the answer to that from a constitutional legal perspective is, yes, the states are impacted, Brnovich said. “And yes, the states should be allowed to intervene when the federal government won’t do its job.”

Source: https://www.npr.org/2022/12/30/1146060901/title-42-mark-brnovich-arizona-attorney-general-immigration-asylum

The migrant flow at the southern border: A case study of the late-President Obama, who had to shut down the asylum system in Australia

People from all over the world cross the southern border and are told that they can stay here, if they choose to, because no one prosecuted Joe Biden. The reality is that is exactly what’s happening.

Canada and Australia have immigration systems that are based on merits and points, meaning that this is not like rocket science. If they need more people to take those jobs in Australia, they will allow them to come in and become citizens.

“The very first thing you have to do is aggressively enforce existing law. You have to take control of the southern border. “And then once you do that, you can start having a discussion.”

He pointed to then-President Obama’s surge to deal with a migrant influx at the southern border in 2014. “They aggressively sent judges and federal prosecutors to our southern border to aggressively prosecute entry and reentry cases. During the Obama administration, they were able to halt the flow of immigration.

His comment came just moments after his administration announced a program that expands the controversial public health restrictions yet again.

Border Control, Title 42, and the American Dream: Addressing a Problem of the Biden Administration during his Visit to El Paso, Mexico

Biden’s assertion Thursday that he doesn’t like Title 42 came in response to a reporter’s question about why it’s taken him so long to visit the border (His scheduled visit to El Paso Sunday will be the first of his presidency).

President Biden is on his way to Mexico to be in office for the first time. The visit comes after two years of arguments between the Biden administration and Republicans over the immigration policy.

Biden said that people come to America for a lot of different reasons. The world’s strongest economy makes it a good place to look for new opportunities. Can’t blame them wanting to do it. They flee oppression, you know, to the — to the freest nation in the world. They chase their own American Dream in the greatest nation in the world.”

For months, Republican governors have been sending buses filled with migrants to Washington, D.C., and other so-called sanctuary cities, as part of their campaign to call for tighter borders.

The governor of Texas hand-delivered a letter to Biden during his visit. The governor has been vocal about his opinion of the Biden administration’s immigration policy.

“Your open-border policies have emboldened the cartels, who grow wealthy by trafficking deadly fentanyl and even human beings,” Abbott wrote in the letter. Local leaders in your own party will tell you if given the chance, as Texans are paying an especially high price for your failure.