{"id":25115,"date":"2021-10-13T09:55:45","date_gmt":"2021-10-13T13:55:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/?p=25115"},"modified":"2021-10-13T09:55:46","modified_gmt":"2021-10-13T13:55:46","slug":"mayorkas-moves-abolish-ice-immigrationreform-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2021\/10\/13\/mayorkas-moves-abolish-ice-immigrationreform-com\/","title":{"rendered":"Mayorkas\u2019 New Policies Effectively Abolish ICE"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

During the Trump administration, progressive politicians and activists made abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) a top campaign issue. Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) all<\/a> called on Congress to support legislation abolishing or otherwise reorganizing the responsibilities of ICE. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That was all before Joe Biden became president in January\n2021. It turns out that the progressives did not need Congress to act at all. Through\nthe use of two memoranda, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary\nAlejandro Mayorkas used his power to abolish ICE.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The memos do not abolish ICE in the literal sense \u2013 the\nagency is still an existing component of DHS. But the memos are a broadside\nagainst ICE\u2019s purpose, and mark a total abandonment of immigration enforcement.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mayorkas released the first memorandum on September 30. Titled \u201cGuidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law<\/a><\/strong>,\u201d the document outlines new guidance to ICE officers for the apprehension and removal of illegal aliens. Relying on the doctrine of prosecutorial discretion, Mayorkas lays out the case for refusing to prosecute and remove most illegal aliens present in the United States. Mayorkas writes that \u201cWe do not have the resources to apprehend and seek the removal of every one of these noncitizens\u2026 In\u00a0 exercising\u00a0 our\u00a0 discretion,\u00a0 we\u00a0 are guided\u00a0 by the\u00a0 fact\u00a0 that\u00a0 the\u00a0 majority\u00a0 of undocumented noncitizens who could be subject to removal have been contributing members of our communities for years.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mayorkas declares that ICE will prioritize for removal only\naliens who are a threat to national security, public safety, and border security.\nThreats to national security include those suspected of terrorism and\nespionage. The second category addresses threats to public safety, but includes\nexceptions if these violent criminals are of \u201cadvanced or tender age,\u201d have\nlived in the United States for a \u201clengthy\u201d period of time, have a mental\nillness that led to their criminal conduct, or whose removal would leave\ndependents behind. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is remarkable. This policy will shield criminal aliens\nif they are elderly, have lived here for a long time, or who have children.\nAnyone who can claim some form of mental illness can remain, regardless of the\nlives their crimes shattered. Ignoring any sense that criminal aliens pose\nthreats to U.S. citizens, Mayorkas ends by defending his actions by saying\nthat: \u201cThe gravity of an apprehension and removal on a noncitizen’s life, and\npotentially the life of family members and the community, warrants the\ndedication of investigative and evaluative effort.\u201d This much is clear: Secretary\nMayorkas is very concerned about the well-being of criminal aliens and their\nfamilies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The final catch-all, \u201cthreats to border security,\u201d include\nany illegal aliens apprehended in the U.S. who entered after November 1, 2020. This\nrenders safe any illegal alien who happened to arrive before November 1, 2020.\nThis is the equivalent of Mayorkas ordering DHS and its immigration enforcement\ncomponents to throw in the towel. It is difficult to prove time-of-entry and\nthe Biden administration already made it clear they intend to remove as few\nillegal aliens as possible. This third point is nothing more than a paper\ntiger. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mayorkas released the second memorandum on October 12. The document, \u201cWorksite Enforcement: The Strategy to Protect the American Labor Market, the Conditions of the American Worksite, and the Dignity of the Individual<\/a><\/strong>\u201d bars ICE from conducting worksite enforcement. This is a crucial aspect of ICE\u2019s work, and reverses gains made under the Trump administration. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Worksite enforcement is a crucial tool that ICE used to\ndetain large numbers of illegal aliens at once while also holding accountable\nthe unscrupulous employers who choose to hire them instead of Americans.\nIllegal aliens come to the U.S. for one reason \u2013 to work and make money. In an\nideal world, worksite enforcement would be the preferred way to identify and\nremove illegal aliens while cracking down on the employers who hire them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Addressing the memorandum, FAIR\u2019s president Dan Stein stated<\/a> that: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\n1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which then-Senator Joe Biden\nvoted for, explicitly prohibits the employment of illegal aliens. The stated\nintent of the law was to cut off the magnet of jobs that draws illegal aliens\nto the U.S., and protect the jobs and wages of American workers. As president,\nJoe Biden\u2019s policy is precisely the opposite: to draw as many illegal aliens as\npossible to the United States, no matter the cost to national security, public\nhealth, burdens to taxpayers, or the jobs and wages of American workers. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This policy does just that. It encourages additional illegal\nimmigration by promising that ICE will not investigate or prosecute the\nemployment of illegal aliens. Instead of allowing ICE to do its job and\nprosecute employers and illegal aliens, this memo empowers employers who run\nafoul of existing law and shields illegal aliens from deportation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Taken together, these two memos destroy ICE\u2019s capability to\nenforce our immigration laws in the interior of the country. Ask yourself \u2013\nwhat can ICE do with these policies in place? They cannot prosecute employers\nwho hire illegal aliens. They cannot conduct worksite enforcement\ninvestigations to detain illegal aliens working in the U.S. without\nauthorization. They can detain only the most extreme of criminal aliens, and\neven then there are carve-outs. Are there any illegal aliens in the United\nStates not <\/em>shielded by these two\npolicies, aside from terrorists? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the stroke of a pen, President Biden\u2019s DHS secretary –\nAlejandro Mayorkas \u2013 all but abolished the effectiveness of ICE. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

During the Trump administration, progressive politicians and activists made abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) a top campaign issue. Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) all called on Congress to support legislation abolishing or otherwise reorganizing the responsibilities of<\/p>\n

Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":78,"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":[10412],"tags":[1894,261,10960,1524],"yst_prominent_words":[2019,12343,2691,12344,12339,1995,1918,2013,2008,12345,12338,10467,2743,12341,12342,1991,1933,12346,12340,6352],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25115"}],"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\/78"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25115"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25115\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25116,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25115\/revisions\/25116"}],"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=25115"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25115"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25115"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=25115"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}