{"id":24642,"date":"2021-06-16T13:34:48","date_gmt":"2021-06-16T17:34:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=24642"},"modified":"2021-06-16T13:34:50","modified_gmt":"2021-06-16T17:34:50","slug":"dhs-outsources-asylum-vetting-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2021\/06\/16\/dhs-outsources-asylum-vetting-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"DHS Dispatches Foxes to the Asylum Henhouse"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Biden administration has quietly tasked six private groups<\/a>\u00a0to recommend asylum<\/a> for migrants at the southern border. Beyond the questionable legality of the U.S. government delegating such duties to non-governmental organizations is the fact that four of the entities are foreign-based. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

How the groups were selected\nand the terms of their remuneration are just two of many unanswered questions\nswirling around this sketchy operation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the administration canceling the Remain in Mexico<\/a> policy, opening yet another floodgate for migrants, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has delegated asylee vetting responsibilities to six humanitarian groups: Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), Kids in Need of Defense, the International Rescue Committee, Save the Children, Asylum Access and the Institute for Women in Migration. Only HIAS and Kids in Need are headquartered in the U.S.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government reportedly\nplans to admit up to 250 asylum seekers a day via the groups\u2019 recommendations.\nA similar system run by the American Civil Liberties Union has been admitting\n35 families daily since March, and continues to operate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Vaguely, DHS says it is\nworking in \u201cclose coordination with international and non-governmental\norganizations in Mexico” to identify asylum prospects. Without providing\ndetails, the agency maintains it has the final say on who gets in. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jessica Bolter, an analyst at\nthe pro-immigration Migration Policy Institute, calls the program \u201cmurky\u201d and\npotentially counterproductive. \u201cSetting out clear and accurate information\nabout how and who might get in might lead to fewer migrants making the trip,\u201d\nshe suggested.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One thing is certain: Turning over screening duties to private groups that receive public funding for refugee and asylum services carries a built-in conflict of interest. The International Rescue Committee<\/a>, one of the six DHS-approved organizations, was, at last count, recipient of $493,570,089 in government grants (two-thirds of its funding) for refugee placements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Robert Law<\/a> of the Center for Immigration Studies said DHS\u2019 \u201cunusual agreement\u201d raises still more concerns, among them:\u00a0 What measures are in place to ensure these organizations are not accepting bribes (or subjected to coercion) in exchange for recommendations? How can foreign organizations be expected to act in America\u2019s best interests? Who is responsible for ensuring aliens leave the country if their asylum claims are denied?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The administration\u2019s lack of\ntransparency only heightens the many red flags fluttering over this program.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Biden administration has quietly tasked six private groups\u00a0to recommend asylum for migrants at the southern border. Beyond the questionable legality of the U.S. government delegating such duties to non-governmental organizations is the fact that four of the entities are foreign-based. How the groups were selected and the terms of their remuneration are just two<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":24560,"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":[511],"tags":[1713,10413,10960,1524],"yst_prominent_words":[2122,2530,2298,11632,11629,1983,2087,11631,10740,3208,11635,11634,6367,2188,2943,2001,5709,11633,2865,11630],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24642"}],"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\/11"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24642"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24642\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24643,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24642\/revisions\/24643"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/24560"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24642"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24642"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24642"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=24642"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}