Refugee Resettlement Watch

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 5,949 other followers

  • Reaching me by mail

    You can reach me by e-mail here:

    refugeewatcher@gmail.com

    (But my inbox is so overloaded most of the time, it is hard to keep up.)

    Or, since some of you have asked, I have a post office box and you can reach me there by snail mail!

    Ann Corcoran
    P.O. Box 55
    Fairplay, MD 21733

  • Social

  • Refugee Info Resource

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Blog Stats

    • 8,360,980 hits

Archive for the ‘Supreme Court’ Category

Playing the Catholic card at the Supreme Court last week

Posted by Ann Corcoran on April 29, 2018

Update April 30th: Jihad Watch: Bishops to Americans: Drop dead!

Did you know that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops filed an amicus brief against the Trump Administration in the travel ban case before the high court?

I didn’t, but it really isn’t a surprise.

trump, obama, pope

You know where this Pope stands!

Of course, they are free to file briefs, but I just wish they would for once admit that they receive millions of your dollars from the US Treasury every year for their Migration Fund (nearly $100 million to the Bishops alone, not including the other millions that go to Catholic Charities to ‘care’ for those migrants).

Just once I wish they would admit they have a pecuniary interest in how the travel ban is resolved.

See Catholics close 20 offices as government revenue dries up.

Do you, my Catholic friends, know that the Bishops want more migrants admitted to the US from terror-producing countries?

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Changing the way we live, Muslim refugees, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, Taxpayer goodies, The Opposition, Trump | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

Does America have a moral obligation to resettle refugees?

Posted by Ann Corcoran on April 27, 2018

That is the question a young opinion writer asks and answers (in the affirmative of course!) in the wake of Wednesday’s Supreme Court hearing on the President’s travel ban.

The long opinion piece in Deseret News by writer Gillian Friedman evoked a largely negative response by readers.  I especially got a chuckle out of this comment:

 

Screenshot (413)

 

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Muslim refugees, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, Taxpayer goodies, The Opposition, Trump, What you can do | Tagged: , | 7 Comments »

Ridiculous comments made on steps of Supreme Court yesterday

Posted by Ann Corcoran on April 26, 2018

Ridiculous and ungrateful I should say….

 

Supreme court props

Setting up their props at the Supreme Court yesterday. Don’t you wonder who pays for stunts like this!

 

(See my post yesterday about the Supreme Court hearing on the travel ban.)

Now, look at this headline from Talking Points Memo:

‘They Bomb Us, Then Ban Us:’ The Scene Outside SCOTUS Before The Travel Ban Case

And, then the reporter goes on to report from migrants to the US who would be better served putting their heads down and working hard to become good and grateful Americans.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Changing the way we live, Colonization, Other Immigration, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, Taxpayer goodies, Trump | Tagged: , | 17 Comments »

Supremes to hear Trump travel ban case today, fears Trump will win

Posted by Ann Corcoran on April 25, 2018

According the NPR people lined up as early as this past Sunday in order to get a coveted seat for the hearing on the President’s travel ban.

 

muslim ban signs

Photo from a 2017 demonstration:  https://www.timesheadline.com/world/us-supreme-court-cancels-trumps-muslim-ban-hearing-8776.html

 

National Public Radio‘s Nina Totenberg has a lengthy, pretty straightforward, story. Here is a bit of it:

The Supreme Court’s Grand Finale: Trump’s Travel Ban

The Trump administration’s travel ban finally reaches the U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday, posing enormous questions involving the structure of the American government and the values of the country.

At issue is the third version of the ban — which the president has complained is a “watered down” version. The court allowed it to go into effect while the case was litigated, but the lower courts have ruled all three versions either violate federal law or are unconstitutional.

Like the earlier two bans, version 3.0 bars almost all travelers from six mainly Muslim countries, and it adds a ban on travelers from North Korea and government officials from Venezuela.

supreme-court-2017

The questions in the case are the stuff of history:

~Can the courts even review a presidential order on immigration that invokes national security?

~Did the president violate the immigration law’s command against discrimination based on nationality?

~And does the executive order violate the Constitution’s ban on religious discrimination?

The travel-ban argument will be the last of the term. And the importance of the argument is not lost on the court. For the first time since the same-sex-marriage arguments in 2015, the court is allowing same-day distribution of the session’s audio. Nonetheless, people started lining up at 7 a.m. Sunday in hopes of snagging a seat Wednesday.

The court itself will be under extreme pressure. There are only about two months left in the term and an unusually large number of cases yet to be decided.

One key question is this one:

Can the court consider Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric?

See more of the NPR story here.  Legal beagles will find it interesting.

 

Then see that the Leftwing Slate predicts:

Trump’s Going to Win

Why the Supreme Court will probably uphold the president’s travel ban.

A decision isn’t expected until June.

For more background visit my ‘Supreme Court’ category by clicking here.  Don’t miss my post of two days ago, here.

Posted in 2016 Presidential campaign, Muslim refugees, Other Immigration, Supreme Court, Trump | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »

Muslim Advocates want DOJ and DHS to withdraw report on immigrant terrorism

Posted by Ann Corcoran on April 23, 2018

This case filed in a California court (where else!) comes on the eve of the US Supreme Court hearing on the so-called Trump Muslim ban case scheduled to be heard this Wednesday.

See Reuters here for: Trump’s travel ban faces U.S. Supreme Court showdown.

Following is the news about the DHS/DOJ report that accompanied the ban and the case filed in California attempting to force the feds to withdraw the report.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Crimes, diversity's dark side, Muslim refugees, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, The Opposition, Trump | 7 Comments »

Trump Justice Dept. counters rogue judge in latest refugee ruling

Posted by Ann Corcoran on December 30, 2017

Judge Robart

The Judge who is deciding national security issues for the benefit of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society which is paid by the head for every refugee it places in American towns and cities.

Since so many of you have sent me links about U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle who temporarily halted the refugee travel ‘ban,’ I thought I better mention the latest.

Although, I must say I hate writing about this subject (maddening that these unelected judges are deciding national security issues!), I have to mention that the Justice Department is saying once again that resettlement contractors have no “bona fide relationship” with refugees before they are admitted to the US.

And, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (of course) disagrees.

LOL! I guess this is going to be pick-on-HIAS week after all, see my post yesterday where we learned HIAS was placing refugees in dangerous housing in Pittsburgh. And, don’t miss the latest on their funding here.

You know who could settle this issue once and for all, if they had any guts—-Congress!

There was never any “bona fide relationship” mentioned, let alone defined, in the original Refugee Act of 1980.  The term, and now the wrangling over the definition, was created out of whole cloth by the US Supreme Court foolishly attempting to write refugee law. (See my Supreme Court category, here.)

So where is Congress?

Here is the latest on the latest lawsuit (within days it will all change again!) from the Washington Post:

SEATTLE — Lawyers with the Department of Justice have asked a federal judge to change his order that partially lifted a Trump administration refugee ban.

Just before Christmas, U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle imposed a nationwide injunction that blocks restrictions on reuniting refugee families and partially lifted a ban on refugees from 11 mostly Muslim countries. Robart limited that part of the injunction to refugees who have a bona fide relationship with people or entities in the United States. He also said that refugees who have formal agreements with refugee resettlement agencies were covered under his order.

The government does not want to include resettlement agencies.

hetfield at NY anti-Trump rally

Mark Hetfield speaking at HIAS anti-Trump rally in New York last February.  Rep. Keith Ellison was also a featured speaker.  More than half of HIAS’s funding comes from US taxpayer dollars. Not only do they sue President Trump, but they organize anti-Trump rallies like this one.  http://lilith.org/blog/2017/02/upstanders/

Government lawyers filed a motion Wednesday saying that although the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has interpreted the “bona fide relationship” to include connections to resettlement agencies, the U.S. Supreme Court has stayed that ruling. That means the highest court indicates it disagrees with the appeals court on that point, the lawyers say.

Attorneys for refugee support organization HIAS and Jewish Family Service say the government’s claims are wrong.

[…..]

In the motion filed Wednesday, government lawyers cited the Supreme Court’s three stay orders on previous Trump travel bans as evidence the high court disagrees with letting the bona fide relationship include refugee resettlement agencies or humanitarian organizations.

“For individuals, a close familial relationship is required,” the lawyers wrote. “’As for entities, the relationship must be formal, documented and formed in the ordinary course,’ such as a relationship between a foreign student and an American university or between a foreign worker and an American employer.

“Unlike these types of relationships, refugees do not have a freestanding connection to resettlement agencies, apart from the refugee admissions process itself, by virtue of the agency’s assurance agreement with the federal government.”

Continue reading the WaPo story by clicking here.

Bottomline for me is that this all points to one more reason to get rid of the nine federal contractors that monopolize all resettlement in America.  They are litigious. They are Leftist community organizers. And, we pay them with our tax dollars to work against the interests of America First!

I repeat: Where is Congress?

Here are the nine (go here to see how much you involuntarily pay them!). HIAS seems to have become their litigation arm!

Posted in Changing the way we live, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, Taxpayer goodies, The Opposition, Trump | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Supreme Court says Trump travel ban can be enforced for now

Posted by Ann Corcoran on December 5, 2017

Truth be told, I never fully immersed myself in the travel ban issue as I saw it as separate from what I’ve been concentrating on. I’ve thought from the beginning that the President should never have mixed the two issues (US Refugee program and a travel restriction) in that first Executive Order and thus thoroughly confused the general public.

And, allowed the Supreme Court to muck around and write refugee law (see my Supreme Court category by clicking here.)

supreme-court-2017

The vote to permit the ban to be carried out for now was 7-2 with only Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissenting.

That said, I’m reporting here a brief summary from CNN of what happened yesterday. We will have a better understanding when the refugee industry gets in gear today and begins blasting away at Trump again.

They must be feeling the one-two punches, actually more than two punches when you consider the reduced numbers of paying clients (aka refugees) entering the US, the US withdrawal from Obama’s UN compact, and now this.

From CNN:

Washington (CNN)The US Supreme Court on Monday allowed the newest version of President Donald Trump’s travel ban to take effect pending appeal.

This is the first time justices have allowed any edition of the ban to go forward in its entirety. It signals that some of the justices might be distinguishing the latest version from previous iterations and could be more likely, in the future, to rule in favor of the ban.

Issued in September, the third edition of the travel ban placed varying levels of restrictions on foreign nationals from eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Somalia and Yemen.

Readers need to know that the only country in that list that we take significant refugees from is Somalia (and not even directly from Somalia, but from Kenya and elsewhere).  So I assume this doesn’t completely close the Somali spigot for now, but I suspect this will make it harder for those Somali ‘refugees’ living in the US to travel back and forth to Somalia (the country they were supposedly escaping) as they have been doing!

We have been taking some ‘refugees’ from Iran, but most have been those practicing minority religions and not Muslims. And, although there was a big push for Syrians that number didn’t reach monumental numbers. Those other countries in the restricted list send very few (none in some cases) refugees to the US.

Countries from which we do receive Muslim refugees that are not on the travel ban list are: Burma (growing number of Rohingya entering US now), Iraq, Afghanistan, and several African countries.  So this travel ban is in no way a Muslim ban!

CNN continues…

Lower courts in two separate challenges had partially blocked the ban.

The order is a significant temporary win for the Trump administration, which has fought all year to impose a travel ban against citizens of several Muslim-majority countries. Monday’s order means it can be enforced while challenges to the policy make their way through the legal system.

The Trump administration has maintained that the President has the authority to install travel bans in order to protect national security.

“The Constitution and acts of Congress confer on the President broad authority to prevent aliens abroad from entering this country when he deems it in the nation’s interest,” Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued in court papers. Francisco argued that the ban was necessary “in order to protect national security.”

The White House said it was “not surprised” by Monday’s order.

More later when some bright legal minds weigh in.

And, remember this isn’t the end of it since there are still cases working their way through the lower courts.

Posted in Africa, Changing the way we live, Crimes, diversity's dark side, Muslim refugees, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, Trump | Tagged: | 2 Comments »

Supreme Court won’t hear ‘travel ban’ case, but refugee portion not addressed

Posted by Ann Corcoran on October 11, 2017

I wish I could explain to you what all of this means for the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program which we reported got off to a flying start for FY18 with 98 arrivals since October 1, but I can’t.  I’m not a lawyer and the whole thing just seems like a huge mess that should not distract you from doing what you must do locally and on the state level (see here).

supreme court 2017

The Supremes should never have wandered in to refugee law in the first place by literally writing, although temporarily, new law.

However, until I read this story at The Hill about the ban, I had forgotten that the 120-day refugee moratorium was still in place until October 24th!

You can thus see how meaningless that moratorium was since 98 arrived in ten days from October 1 and October 10 with the third largest number being the supposedly banned Somalis.

(In fact thousands of refugees were admitted during the ‘moratorium’ at the end of FY17 because of the Supreme Court mucking around in refugee law.)

Here is a bit from The Hill that reminded me:

The court has not yet ruled on whether to ultimately hear the other challenge to the ban, which was brought by the state of Hawaii. That case also challenges the part of Trump’s ban halting the U.S. refugee resettlement program for 120 days. That provision does not expire until Oct. 24.

More here.

HIAS was a plaintiff in the case.

Moral of the story: You are going to have to continue local and state political organizing and not rely on the courts, or the President, or the Washington swamp to bring a resolution to the issue.

See my whole category entitled ‘Supreme Court’ if you want to learn more about what they did regarding refugees.

Posted in Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Supreme Court, Trump | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

Except for Somalia and Syria, new rules for travel to US won’t have much impact on refugee program

Posted by Ann Corcoran on September 26, 2017

In Trump’s new mixed bag, most of the eight countries are not significantly represented in the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP).

Editor:  By the way, I assume you saw that the Supreme Court has cancelled arguments on the previous travel ban, here I don’t know yet what that means for the refugee portion of the case.

Other than Somalia, Syria and Iran we don’t see many refugees from the other five countries. And, you should know, for Iran, that the vast majority of those we admit as refugees are Christians and other religious minorities.

As I remarked the other day, we do admit very large numbers of questionable refugees from Afghanistan, Iraq, Burma (Rohingya Muslims) and some additional African countries who will not be getting the extra scrutiny.

I checked Wrapsnet just now to see how many refugees we have admitted between FY07 and FY17 from the 8 ‘travel ban’ countries. But, don’t forget that many others from these countries get in to the US through other legal programs as well as illegally.

Refugees admitted FY07-FY17 (to date).  Here is what I found:

Chad (182)

Iran (38,236 but only 405 of those are Muslims while over 20,000 are Christians)

Libya (12)

N. Korea (203)

Syria (21,110)

Yemen (146)

Somalia (67,158)

Venezuela (13)

The new vetting rules may have a large impact on Somalis entering the US….

Check out here where all those Somalis have been planted.  Minnesota tops the list with 8,529. But that doesn’t tell the whole Minnesota story as Somalis resettled elsewhere move in large numbers as what the USRAP calls “secondary migrants” to MN.

 

Screenshot (872)

Screenshot (873)

Alaska welcomed 294, but Hawaii (the state that loves diversity) welcomed zero!

 

Posted in Muslim refugees, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Refugee statistics, Supreme Court, Trump Watch!, Where to find information, Who is going where | Tagged: , , , | 4 Comments »

Two weeks away from new fiscal year, FY17 refugee ceiling surpassed by 2,282 refugees

Posted by Ann Corcoran on September 17, 2017

So why is that significant? Never in the history of the Refugee Act of 1980 has a CEILING been breached. That happened because the US Supreme Court unconstitutionally changed refugee law when it set exceptions to its concurrence that Trump did have the legal right to cap refugee numbers.

As we wait for the Presidential determination for FY18, I thought you might like to see how many refugees we have as of this morning and where they went. We broke through the 50,000 ceiling in July.  2,282 have been added since.

From Wrapsnet:

Screenshot (844)

Screenshot (845)

Alaska got 68 and the state whining for more refugees, Hawaii, got 3!

Posted in Changing the way we live, Colonization, Reforms needed, Refugee Resettlement Program, Refugee statistics, Supreme Court, Trump, Where to find information | Tagged: , | Comments Off on Two weeks away from new fiscal year, FY17 refugee ceiling surpassed by 2,282 refugees

 
%d bloggers like this: