{"id":22132,"date":"2019-11-04T15:42:29","date_gmt":"2019-11-04T20:42:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=22132"},"modified":"2019-11-04T15:42:31","modified_gmt":"2019-11-04T20:42:31","slug":"pro-publica-bias-reporting-fake-news-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2019\/11\/04\/pro-publica-bias-reporting-fake-news-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"ProPublica\u2019s \u201cBig Story\u201d Is More Than a Little Wrong"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Radical news outlet ProPublica<\/a><\/em> is currently running a scare piece claiming, \u201cBorder agents can now get classified intelligence information. Experts call that dangerous.\u201d According to ProPublica<\/em>, \u201c\u2026the Trump administration is creating a new center in suburban Virginia that will allow immigration agents to access, for the first time, the sprawling array of information scooped up by America\u2019s intelligence agencies\u2026.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The article, part of the organization\u2019s \u201cBig Story\u201d\nnewsletter, further claims, \u201cMigrants and others denied entry will be unable to\nsee the evidence against them because it is classified.\u201d It also asserts that,\n\u201cIt could also be nearly impossible for those denied entry to challenge faulty\ninformation if wrongly accused, they say, since most of it is classified.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, there are so many factual errors<\/a> in ProPublica<\/em>\u2019s overwrought monument to pointless, fake news<\/a> hyperbole that it is difficult to know where to begin debunking it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Immigration officers throughout DHS already<\/a><\/em> have access to classified information. They have, for decades. In Jay v. Boyd<\/em>, decided in 1956, the Supreme Court explicitly held that, when determining an alien\u2019s admissibility to the United States, the government may rely on \u201cconfidential information not disclosed to the alien.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In fact, over 20 years ago, in 1998, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) General Counsel Paul Virtue<\/a> appeared before Congress to discuss the government\u2019s need to consider classified information in connection with immigration applications in order to protect America\u2019s national security. And that was under the Democrat, left-leaning Clinton administration. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And the Trump administration isn\u2019t setting up any shadowy new intelligence center in the capital city\u2019s suburbs. There are already a number of information-collection-and-sharing facilities all around the Washington, D.C., area. They range from the National Counterterrorism Center<\/a>, operated by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, to U.S. Customs and Border Protection\u2019s (CBP) National Targeting Center<\/a> (whose motto is \u201cCatching smugglers, terrorists and lawbreakers works better through partnership.\u201d). Many other agencies also run information-sharing centers in the area. Their collective purpose is to protect the United States from foreign national security threats, particularly terrorism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The suburban Virginia facility referenced by ProPublica<\/em> is called the National Vetting Center (NVC). And it serves one simple purpose<\/a> that its parent agency, CBP, has loudly and publicly proclaimed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Over time, the U.S. Government has\ndeveloped multiple, unconnected processes to bring together threat information\nalready lawfully held by the government about individuals seeking to enter the\nUnited States or obtain benefits under our immigration laws.  The NVC is centralizing and improving these\nprocesses to more efficiently and effectively inform department and agency\nvetting.  Relevant, appropriate information\nwill be accessible in a consolidated and timely manner to the departments and\nagencies leveraging the NVC\u2019s process and technology.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for those \u201ccivil rights concerns<\/a>\u201d that ProPublica <\/em>is crowing about: There aren\u2019t any. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly pointed out, requests by foreign nationals for admission to the United States don\u2019t give rise to constitutional civil rights claims, because \u201cthe admission of aliens to this country is not a right, but a privilege, which is granted only upon such terms as the United States prescribes\u201d \u2013 Ekiu v. United States<\/a> (1892), Fong Yue Ting v. United States<\/a><\/em> (1893), Knauff v. Shaughnessy<\/a><\/em> (1950), Kliendienst v. Mandel<\/a><\/em> (1972).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, ProPublica<\/em>\u2019s claim that individuals denied entry to the United States on the basis of classified information will be denied an opportunity to review and contest such information is utterly specious. Foreign nationals can\u2019t even challenge a denial of admission made on the basis of unclassified information. Under existing statutes and case precedent, the Department of State<\/a> can summarily deny a visa to a foreign national and CBP personnel at the border may deny admission<\/a> to anyone who fails to establish his\/her admissibility \u2013 and the law provides absolutely no legal mechanism\u00a0 for challenging a denial of admission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In reality, it turns out that this \u201cBig Story\u201d is actually\nmuch ado about nothing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Radical news outlet ProPublica is currently running a scare piece claiming, \u201cBorder agents can now get classified intelligence information. Experts call that dangerous.\u201d According to ProPublica, \u201c\u2026the Trump administration is creating a new center in suburban Virginia that will allow immigration agents to access, for the first time, the sprawling array of information scooped up<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":52,"featured_media":22049,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[5079],"tags":[1755,1524,7033,7034],"yst_prominent_words":[7032,5468,3245,7031,7029,7026,5189,6288,2474,2813,2016,2743,7030,7028,1945,7027,2242,1991,1977,1933],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22132"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/52"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22132"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22132\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":22133,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22132\/revisions\/22133"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/22049"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22132"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22132"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22132"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=22132"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}