new york immigration coalition
Anti-Migrant Directives Under Consideration by Biden Slammed as 'Trump Policy'
"People seek asylum because they fear for their lives. President Biden would be making a grave mistake if he moves forward with this policy," said Rep. Chuy García.
Immigration rights advocates on Wednesday condemned President Joe Biden's reported consideration of a series of anti-migrant actions, including invoking an executive authority used by the Trump administration to make it more difficult for people to seek asylum in the United States.
According to reports, Biden is considering acting without Congress in an election year bid to stem the flow of undocumented migrants at the southern U.S. border.
"This would be an extremely disappointing mistake. Cruel enforcement-only policies have been tried for 30 years and simply do not work," Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said in response to the reporting.
"Democrats cannot continue to take pages out of Donald Trump and Stephen Miller's playbook—we need to lead with dignity and humanity," she added, referring to the former U.S. president and 2024 GOP front-runner and his xenophobic senior immigration adviser.
As Politicoreported:
Among the ideas under discussion include using a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act to bar migrants from seeking asylum in between U.S. ports of entry. The administration is also discussing tying that directive to a trigger—meaning that it would only come into effect after a certain number of illegal crossings took place, said the three people, who were granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations.
A trigger mechanism was part of a bipartisan Senate border deal that never reached the floor earlier this month. During the deal's construction... Biden repeatedly said it would have given him the authority to "shut down" the border.
The White House is also reportedly considering invoking Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which empowers the president to ban entry to noncitizens who are deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States." Trump repeatedly tried to use Section 212(f) as his administration pursued draconian anti-migrant measures. However, three levels of the federal judiciary, including the U.S. Supreme Court, blocked him from doing so.
The White House would not comment on the reports, but spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández said that the Biden administration "spent months negotiating in good faith to deliver the toughest and fairest bipartisan border security bill in decades because we need Congress to make significant policy reforms and to provide additional funding to secure our border and fix our broken immigration system."
"No executive action, no matter how aggressive, can deliver the significant policy reforms and additional resources Congress can provide and that Republicans rejected," he added, calling on House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Republicans to "pass the bipartisan deal to secure the border."
In addition to expanding Title 42—a provision first invoked by the Trump administration at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic—to expel more than 1 million migrants under the guise of public safety, Biden also forced migrants to prove that they previously sought asylum in a third country before applying for U.S. protection.
"The cruel measures being proposed collectively create a government-mandated asylum ban."
The Biden administration also required asylum-seekers to schedule an appointment using an app that connects them to Customs and Border Protection instead of attempting to cross the border. Asylum-seekers often did not have internet access, and the app was riddled with glitches.
Title 42 ended last May, and a federal judge blocked some of Biden's other anti-migrant policies in July.
"What is needed now more than ever from the Biden administration is to ensure that any border security executive actions protect due process for asylum-seekers and provide resources for a fair, efficient, and humane asylum system," Murad Awawdeh, executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition, said in a statement on Wednesday.
"The cruel measures being proposed collectively create a government-mandated asylum ban, which even border officials contend will only create more chaos at the southern border, while failing to address the real issue at hand," he added. "We call on the Biden administration to abandon this cruel proposed plan and immediately invest in strategic, humane actions that will help secure our border and provide fair treatment for asylum-seekers."
Teachers Union Sues NYC Mayor Over 'Draconian' Budget Cuts
"We are already seeing more overcrowded classrooms," said a union leader. "We are seeing children with special needs not getting their mandated services. And if these cuts go through, all of these situations get worse."
As New York City Mayor Eric Adams on Thursday delivered a speech claiming he has been able to "get stuff done" for working people over the past two years, a teachers union in the largest U.S. public school district sued the Democrat for trying to slash the education budget for fiscal years 2024 and 2025 "by staggering amounts."
"The approximate $547 million in immediate budget cuts to the New York City School District announced on November 16, 2023, together with the further cuts proposed that may amount to close to $2 billion stripped from city schools this fiscal year and next, will have a far-reaching and devastating impact on teachers and New York City children," says the complaint filed in state court by the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) and individual educators.
"The cuts come as 653 schools—43% of the school community—have already been forced to make in-school year budget cuts due to enrollment," the document notes. "The mayor's draconian cuts are as unnecessary as they are illegal. While the law allows a reduction in education spending proportional to a decrease in city revenue, the opposite is expected to occur."
"These cuts are based off of a fiscal crisis that we feel is completely fabricated at this point."
The complaint explains that "the cuts are being made at a time when the city collected nearly $8 billion more in revenue last fiscal year than was anticipated, and when the city's reserves of over $8 billion are at a near-record high (despite the false narrative, an annual refrain during budget negotiations, that the city is careening towards a fiscal cliff)."
According to Gothamist, UFT president Michael Mulgrew similarly said during a Thursday press conference that "these cuts are based off of a fiscal crisis that we feel is completely fabricated at this point."
"We are already seeing more overcrowded classrooms," he continued. "We are seeing supply shortages. We are seeing children with special needs not getting their mandated services. And if these cuts go through, all of these situations get worse."
The complaint points out that while "the mayor's purported need for these cuts has been largely fueled by an unverified estimate that an increase of $11 billion... over the next two years is necessary to address the migrant population ($2.5 billion of which has already been budgeted)," other recent analyses "conclude that the likely migrant costs are significantly less."
Mulgrew said in a statement that "the administration can't go around touting the tourism recovery and the return of the city's pre-pandemic jobs, and then create a fiscal crisis and cut education because of its own mismanagement of the asylum-seeker problem. Our schools and our families deserve better."
Welcoming the suit, Liza Schwartzwald, New York Immigration Coalition's director of economic justice and family empowerment, said that "all students in New York City have the right to a quality education. The mayor has continuously scapegoated asylum-seekers to justify current and proposed cuts to the education budget. But the administration's austerity cuts do not reflect the reality of our city's financial situation."
"Rather than pursuing long-term solutions to lower asylum-seeker costs further, the mayor instead doubles down on unjustified cuts that will have long-term detrimental effects on the many students who have been struggling to catch up after years of destabilization and uncertainty," she added. "As enrollment rates are increasing for the first time in over five years, it is time to invest in our public schools. We stand with the United Federation of Teachers, and all New York City public school students, in the fight to ensure a quality education for all New York children."
Politico reported Thursday that the UFT suit follows another filed in the same court by "DC 37, the city's largest public sector union, which accused the mayor and his administration of failing to properly vet a decision to nix thousands of union jobs as city officials look to close an anticipated $7 billion budget gap."
As the outlet detailed:
The mayor, at a City Hall event Thursday highlighting the growth in jobs and drop in crime under his administration this year, sought to downplay the two lawsuits.
"Henry's a friend. He has to represent his members," Adams told reporters of DC 37 executive director Henry Garrido. "The same with the UFT. They have to represent their members. And from time to time, friends disagree. And sometimes it ends up in the boardroom and sometimes it ends up in the courtroom."
Adams is seeking reelection in 2025. Early last month, he canceled meetings in Washington, D.C. as Federal Bureau of Investigation agents raided the Brooklyn home of his fundraising chief, Brianna Suggs. Later in November, The New York Timesobtained search warrants revealing that U.S. prosecutors and the FBI "are examining whether the campaign conspired with members of the Turkish government, including its consulate in New York, to receive illegal donations."
In a statement from his campaign, Adams said, "I have not been accused of wrongdoing, and I will continue to cooperate with investigators."
Still, the scrutiny has added to arguments that the city "deserves better," as James Inniss, a Bronx native and public safety organizer with New York Communities for Change, wrote for Common Dreams last month. "We deserve a mayor that is honest, open, transparent, and abides by the rule of law. We deserve a mayor that stands for the ideals New York stands for: democracy, inclusivity, and promotion of the common good. Mayor Adams does not speak for our communities."
So far, no one has confirmed they will challenge the incumbent in two years, but there is already a list of possible candidates.