e-verify

Listen to “What Can Trump Do about the Border?” on Spreaker.

President Trump is backing away from threats to close the U.S.-Mexico border but a former federal immigration official says Trump certainly has that authority but other steps might make more sense.

Trump made the threat in response to the tide of illegal immigration and illicit drugs pouring into the U.S. But after pleas from both Texas senators and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to keep the border open or risk massive economic repercussions, Trump says he will revisit the issue in a year and see if Mexico is living up to its responsibilities to interdict migrants and drugs.

But a former immigration official says Trump does have the authority to close the border.

“The president does seem to have extensive powers and other presidents have actually used those powers on various occasions to close the border,” said Temple University School of Law Prof. Jan C. Ting, who served as assistant commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in the George H.W. Bush administration.

He says other presidents have closed the border, most recently George W. Bush for a brief time in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

But while Trump could close the border, Ting says whether that’s a good idea is another question.

“I don’t think anyone has seriously questioned the ability of the president to exercise that power. The only objection questions have been raised about the advisability of doing so and the economic consequences of doing so.

“Some of those arguments have been found persuasive by the administration, at least to the point of holding off immediate action,” said Ting.

Ting says it’s not clear if closing the border would achieve Trump’s goals, although he believes it would put a lot more pressure on the Mexican government to cooperate with American efforts rather than playing a two-faced game of cooperating in certain situations while also facilitating the passage of Central American caravans to the U.S. border.

So what would be more effective? Ting says Congress could make a huge difference by mandating all employers use -E-Verify to check the validity of the Social Security numbers used by prospective employees. The practice is mandatory in Arizona but not nationwide.

He also says Trump’s prized goal of a border wall would be effective.

“It’s a force multiplier. You can only afford to put so many border patrol agents on the border. Having fencing up or a wall makes those agents more useful,” said Ting.

Listen to the full podcast to hear more of Ting’s analysis on closing the border and alternative methods of achieving greater control over the influx of people and drugs into the U.S. Ting also explains why he believes President Obama greatly exacerbated the crisis at the border, and he details the remarkably swift evolution of Democrats from border hawks in the 1990’s to most presidential candidates in the party today recoiling at the idea of stopping virtually anyone from coming into the U.S.

While the media and many politicians focus on President Trump’s verbiage in response to the immigration legislation presented by the “Gang of Six,” one major immigration reform group says the plan itself is nothing but an amnesty push for more than 10 million people.

The Gang of Six is led by Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

At issue is the effort to provide legal status to young people brought to the U.S. illegally by their parents. In 2012, President Obama unilaterally granted legal status to young people who agreed to sign up with the Deferred Action for Child Arrivals program, or DACA.

President Trump announced in September that he would end the program in March of this year and lawmakers were ostensibly working on a bill to continue granting legal status to DACA enrollees while also tightening some immigration restrictions. Most estimates suggest there are between 800,000-850,000 people impacted by DACA.

Instead, Numbers USA reports the Gang of Six bill extends permanent legal protection to all illegal immigrants who fit the DACA criteria rather than those who actually enrolled and sets them on a path to citizenship.

“They expand DACA to include the entire pool of dreamer illegal aliens. The Migration Policy Institute estimates that that population exceeds three million and is about 3.3 million,” said Numbers USA’s Chris Chmielinski.

In fact, Numbers USA has released a worksheet comparing the Gang of Six bill with a much more conservative plan from house Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, known as the Securing America’s Future Act. It also lines up both plans against President Trump’s immigration reform priorities.

He says there’s a big difference between DACA and everyone who fits under the ‘dreamer’ label.

“When President Obama announced the DACA program, he limited it to folks that entered prior to 2007, had maintained continuous presence until 2012 and were under the age of 31.

“The dreamer population is much, much more broadly defined than that. And again, the Migration Policy Institute estimates that population is about 3.3 million,” said Chmielinski.

So how does the estimate get to 10 million? By opening the doors for the parents of the dreamers.

“It also offers an amnesty for the parents of the dreamers. So if you assume that all the parents have two parents, that’s another 6.6 million. 6.6 million plus and 3.3. million and you’re at 10 million,” said Chmielinski, who says that is clear-cut amnesty even though the parents are not in line for citizenship.

“We define amnesty as anything that allows illegal aliens to stay in the country and work in the United States,” said Chmielinski.

Furthermore, Chmielinski says those parents actually could wind up being rewarded with citizenship.

“Once the dreamers become citizens, they will be able to sponsor their parents under the chain migration laws, because even though they say they address chain migration, they really don’t,” said Chmielinski.

In fact, it’s unclear what immigration enforcement advocates get in exchange for legalizing DACA in the Gang of Six bill. Chmielinski points out the plan does not address chain migration or the visa lottery in any serious way. It does provide almost $1.6 billion for border fencing, but it comes with a massive caveat.

“They appropriate a little funding towards border fencing, but they say that this $1.6 billion they’re assigning can only be used for existing fencing. They’re telling the administration that as part of this deal, you cannot build any new fencing or any new walls. You can only use the money to repair existing fencing,” said Chmielinski.

The Goodlatte bill, in contrast, gives the government broad authority to build new fences and even walls. However, it does not include funding for such projects, meaning lawmakers would have to approve a separate bill to pay for such construction.

Overall, Chmielinski is encouraged by the Goodlatte bill. He says it limits chain migration to an immigrant’s spouse and children, although there is an exception for elderly parents to come over without a path to citizenship so that their children can care for them.

The Goodlatte plan also scraps the visa lottery entirely, makes overstaying a visa a crime and mandates all employers use E-Verify to confirm their new and existing employees are all in the country legally.

Chmielinski also says Goodlatte wants to use cutting edge technology to keep track of who is in the country.

“It requires the implementation of a bio-metric entry-exit system. This is something that was actually passed by Congress in the mid-2000’s as a recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. This is basically a tracking system. Every non-citizen that enters the United States is checked in to the country and then we check them out when they leave, so we know when folks overstay,” said Chmielinski.

The Goodlatte bill seems to have little traction on Capitol Hill right now and the mainstream media have ignored it completely while often hailing the Gang of Six bill. The issue prominent this week as Democrats try to attach legalization of DACA to legislation to keep the federal government running at full capacity.

So what is likely to happen? Chmielinski doesn’t expect much to happen for a few weeks.

“You’ll see a [continuing resolution] passed for about a month. Then over the next three to four weeks, this DACA situation will completely play out. But I think this might be the last time we’re talking about it. I think if nothing’s taken care of over the next month, then nothing will probably happen on it,” said Chmielinski.

Standard Podcast [ 12:57 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download