Here's @immcouncil's fact sheet on the bars: https://t.co/HgQRO49UOX
There is a LOT to like about this bill. I want to highlight some of the proposed changes beyond just legalization, including:
- Ending the 3 & 10 year bars
- Curbing the "Muslim ban" authority
- Preventing "aging out" of children on nonimmigrant
Here's @immcouncil's fact sheet on the bars: https://t.co/HgQRO49UOX
Under current laws, they have to leave the US when they turn 21 (if they can't get another visa).
Under current law, a 5-year-old can legally face an immigration judge without a lawyer.
Under the new bill, that wouldn't be allowed. It's a welcome change!
Congress got rid of a version of that authority in 1996 and it did enormous damage.
I wish it did more on substantive asylum law, though.
Under Trump, the focus was almost entirely on hardening the border to stop people from getting in. This bill (which mirrors legislation previously introduced in the House) focuses on push factors.
Personally, not a fan of any "tough on crime."
A lot of this is what has been deemed "smart enforcement," though privacy advocates have raised serious concerns about surveillance.
For example, the bill would block ICE from deporting someone while DOL was investigating abuses.
This is a bold plan to provide a path to status to ALL undocumented immigrants, not just a favored few.
An earned path to citizenship is overwhelmingly popular. I hope we get it.
Now it's up to Congress.
Read our statement on the bill here:
https://t.co/DJ16zkFbXp
More from Aaron Reichlin-Melnick
Thread:
The immigration bill text is out!
— Nicole Narea (@nicolenarea) February 18, 2021
Senate version: https://t.co/aJUmtVW6Ir
House version: https://t.co/JMKjQaDi04
Excuse me while I go at this with a highlighter.
First the Bill makes a series of promises changes to the way we talk about immigrants and immigration law.
Gone would be the term "alien" and in its place is "noncitizen."
Also gone would be the term "alienage," replaced with "noncitizenship."
Now we get to the "earned path to citizenship" for all undocumented immigrants present in the United States on January 1, 2021.
Under this bill, anyone who satisfies the eligibility criteria for a new "lawful prospective immigrant status" can come out of the shadows.
So, what are the eligibility criteria for becoming a "lawful prospective immigrant status"? Those are in a new INA 245G and include:
- Payment of the appropriate fees
- Continuous presence after January 1, 2021
- Not having certain criminal record (but there's a waiver)
After a person has been in "lawful prospective immigrant status" for at least 5 years, they can apply for a green card, so long as they still pass background checks and have paid back any taxes they are required to do so by law.
However! Some groups don't have to wait 5 years.
So much happened yesterday. I'm going to collect my threads here on yesterday's big immigration news.
First, we got key details of Biden's big immigration
There is a LOT to like about this bill. I want to highlight some of the proposed changes beyond just legalization, including:
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) January 20, 2021
- Ending the 3 & 10 year bars
- Curbing the "Muslim ban" authority
- Preventing "aging out" of children on nonimmigrant visas.https://t.co/jkFBIcNJEb
Once Biden had officially taken office, we got the first major action. As part of a standard transition process, the Biden White House froze all regulations which Trump had been trying to finalize at the last hour. I did a thread on what we
This is a standard order issued following every transition, but today it feels so important because of how many horrific things were in the pipeline.
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) January 20, 2021
Here's a brief thread about some of the terrible anti-immigration regulations that didn't make it across the finish line.
1/ https://t.co/q0QpfVxPXm
Last night we started getting more changes. One of the first was an order telling CBP to stop putting people into the so-called "Migrant Protection Protocols," a cruel program that's left thousands in a dangerous limbo. But there's still more to do!
Incredible.\U0001f38a I am overwhelmed with joy that we are finally seeing the end to one of the most cruel and heartless policies of the last four years\u2014one that caused horrific damage to peoples' lives.
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) January 21, 2021
The first part of the promise was kept. Now #LetThemIn!https://t.co/PZGrbvagaa https://t.co/PMeOxrKJvm
After that, we began getting the text of immigration executive orders. The first one put onto the White House's website was the order ending the Muslim Ban/Africa Ban and ordering the State Department to come up with a plan for reconsidering
\U0001f38aWe have our first immigration EO and it's the order ending the Muslim Ban/Africa Ban!
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) January 21, 2021
The Bans "are a stain on our national conscience and are inconsistent with our long history of welcoming people of all faiths and no faith at all."https://t.co/4lh20OCCAY pic.twitter.com/8mW9wuPyzc
The next immigration executive order put on the White House's website revoked a Trump executive order from January 26, 2017 which made all undocumented immigrants a priority for deportation and directed a DHS-wide review of immigration
\U0001f38aSecond immigration EO! It is short. It establishes that Biden believes that immigration enforcement "requires setting priorities to best serve the national interest."
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) January 21, 2021
It then revokes Trump's original EO that made all undocumented immigrants a priority.https://t.co/MvaeqPbiyK pic.twitter.com/dpkVZAKOT2
One damning new revelation? Former CBP head Kevin McAleenan tried to keep separations going after a court ordered them to stop. https://t.co/ORVnsA6fKi
READ @HouseJudiciary new report on The Trump Administration's Family Separation Policy: Trauma, Destruction, and Chaos"
— Philip Wolgin (@pwolgin) October 29, 2020
551 pages (!) https://t.co/7MDT0e9wPX#FamiliesBelongTogether
More from Government
The tl;dr is that for years right-wing media have been excusing Trump's violent rhetoric by going, "Yes, but THE DEMOCRATS..." and then bending themselves into knots to pretend that Dems were calling for violence when they very, very clearly weren't.
And in fact, this predates Trump.
In 2008, Obama was talking about not backing down in the face of an ugly campaign. He said "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."
https://t.co/i5YaQJsKop
That quote was from the movie The Untouchables. And there's no way anybody reading that quote in good faith could conclude that he was talking about actual guns and knives. But it became a big talking point on the
In 2018, Obama-era Attorney General Eric Holder was speaking to a group of Georgia Democrats about GOP voter suppression. He riffed on Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high" line from the 2016 DNC.
You May Also Like
The question is:
Is this an official account for Bahcesehir Uni (Bau)?
Bahcesehir Uni, BAU has an official website https://t.co/ztzX6uj34V which links to their social media, leading to their Twitter account @Bahcesehir
BAU’s official Twitter account
BAU has many departments, which all have separate accounts. Nowhere among them did I find @BAUDEGS
@BAUOrganization @ApplyBAU @adayBAU @BAUAlumniCenter @bahcesehirfbe @baufens @CyprusBau @bauiisbf @bauglobal @bahcesehirebe @BAUintBatumi @BAUiletisim @BAUSaglik @bauebf @TIPBAU
Nowhere among them was @BAUDEGS to find
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x