Police in Paris, Berlin make arrests in anti-terror raids after Belgian plot thwarted

French police have arrested 10 people in anti-terrorism raids in three towns around Paris, the city prosecutor's office said early Friday.
The prosecutor's office said that the raids were targeting people with links to Amedy Coulibaly, the gunman who attacked a kosher supermarket Jan. 9 and claimed ties to the Islamic State terror group. 
Coulibaly was one of three gunmen who carried out a series of terror attacks that resulted in the deaths of 17 people. Authorities in France and several other countries are looking for possible accomplices. One suspect, Coulibaly's common-law wife Hayat Boumeddiane, is believed to have fled to Syria earlier this month. 
Meanwhile, the Associated Press reported Friday morning that the Gare l'Est train station in Paris had been closed and evacuated due to a bomb threat. A police official, who was not authorized to be publicly named, told the AP that the station was closed "as a precaution," but would not give further details. The Gare l'Est is one of the major stations in Paris, serving cities in Eastern France and countries to the east. 
Also Friday, Berlin police said that they had taken two men into custody on suspicion that they were recruiting fighters and procuring equipment and funding for the Islamic State group, better known as ISIS, in Syria. 
The two were picked up in a series of raids involving the search of 11 residences by 250 police officers. Authorities said the raids were part of a months-long investigation into a small group of extremists based in Berlin. However, they also said there was no evidence the group was planning attacks inside Germany. 
The group's leader, identified only as 41-year-old Ismet D. in accordance with privacy laws, is accused organizing the group of largely Turkish and Russian nationals to fight against "infidels" in Syria. Emin F., 43, is accused of being in charge of finances.
Those recruited include Murat S., a 40-year-old Turkish man who was arrested in September after returning from Syria where had allegedly gone to fight.
In an unrelated raid, German police arrested 26-year-old German-Tunisian dual national into custody Thursday on suspicion he had gone to fight with the terrorist group in Syria. Police made the arrest in Wolfsburg, 120 miles outside Berlin.
The fresh arrests come one day after Belgian police said they had preempted a major terror attack by a matter of hours Thursday, killing two suspects in a firefight and arresting a third in a vast anti-terrorism sweep that stretched into the night in the town of Verviers, located near the German border east of Liege. 
Officials said the militant group targeted in the raid included some who had returned from Syria. Federal magistrate Eric Van der Sypt said the men were "extremely well-armed" with automatic weapons. Belgian media reported that the suspects were targeting police installations. Authorities have previously said 300 Belgian residents have gone to fight with extremist Islamic formations in Syria; it is unclear how many have returned.
Authorities in Belgium signaled they were ready for more trouble by raising the national terror alert level from 2 to 3, the second-highest level. Prime Minister Charles Michel said the increase in the threat level was "a choice for prudence."
"There is no concrete or specific knowledge of new elements of threat," he said.
Earlier Thursday, Belgian authorities said they were looking into possible links between a man they arrested in the southern city of Charleroi for illegal trade in weapons and Coulibaly.
The man arrested in Belgium "claims that he wanted to buy a car from the wife of Coulibaly," Van der Sypt said. "At this moment this is the only link between what happened in Paris."
Van der Sypt said that "of course, naturally" we are continuing the investigation.
At first, the man came to police himself claiming there had been contact with Coulibaly's common-law wife regarding the car, but he was arrested following a search of his premises when indications of illegal weapons trading were found.
A Belgian connection figured in a 2010 French criminal investigation into a foiled terrorist plot in which Coulibaly was one of the convicted co-conspirators. The plotters included a Brussels-area contact who was supposed to furnish both weapons and ammunition, according to French judicial documents obtained by The Associated Press.
Spain's National Court said in a statement it was investigating what Coulibaly did in the country's capital, Madrid, with Boumeddiene and a third person who wasn't identified but is suspected of helping Boumeddiene get from Turkey to Syria.

Charlie Hebdo Cartoon

Charlie Hebdo’s moment: Why some media outlets are afraid to run the cover

In the television business, I like to say that people vote with their remote controls.
In Paris right now, people are voting with their francs.
They are buying up the new issue of Charlie Hebdo in such waves that many French newsstands sold out before 7 a.m. yesterday. The usual print run of 50,000 had been boosted to 3 million, and when that was quickly snatched up, it was upped to 5 million.
If there’s been another time in modern history when an entire country — and much of the civilized world — has come together in a passionate embrace of free expression, it doesn’t immediately come to mind.
I think the cover image — Muhammed shedding a tear, with the headline “All Is Forgiven”—is uplifting. And yet many American news organizations won’t run the cover, even as they report on the story.
The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, USA Today, CBS and Fox News, among many others, have carried the cartoon. But CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and the New York Times are among those refusing to do so.
This is very different than last week’s debate on the refusal to publish the offensive anti-Islam cartoons from the satirical newspaper, which helped precipitate the deadly terrorist attack at Charlie Hebdo’s office. Many critics called that decision cowardly. But news executives had to weigh the safety of their employees, as well as their usual practice of not running images that are gratuitously offensive to religion. (Yes, I know that some have run anti-Christian images in the past but seem to be more skittish about offending Muslims.)
The new cover, though, represents fresh news on a huge story, and is not offensive except perhaps to a small minority. It does not mock religion. That doesn’t mean that publishing it is without risk. A former British radical leader, Anjem Choudary, told the Independent that the new image was an “act of war,” one that would draw the death penalty in a Sharia court.
But it’s important that the world press not be intimidated, any more than the more than 1 million people who filled the streets of Paris on Sunday.
Margaret Sullivan, the Times public editor, disagrees with her paper’s decision:
“The new cover image of Charlie Hebdo is an important part of a story that has gripped the world’s attention over the past week.
“The cartoon itself, while it may disturb the sensibilities of a small percentage of Times readers, is neither shocking nor gratuitously offensive. And it has, undoubtedly, significant news value.
“With Charlie Hebdo’s expanded press run of millions of copies for this post-attack edition, and a great deal of global coverage, the image is being seen, judged and commented on all over the world. Times readers should not have had to go elsewhere to find it.”
Columnist Joe Concha whacks the news outlets that have just said no:
“As for CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times and NPR, please save your breathless reports about Charlie Hebdo being an inspiration to us all.
“You just rewarded the objective of terrorists everywhere: Intimidation wins, Sharia Law rules, First Amendment loses, expression is silenced.”
Renald Luzier, the cartoonist who drew the cover sketch – and who is alive only because he was late for work last Wednesday – told reporters that his depiction of the prophet was “nicer than the terrorists’ Muhammad.”
It’s clear that the world prefers the peaceful version. Too bad that some news outlets don’t feel comfortable showing it to their readers and viewers.

IRS chief warns of refund delays, poor customer service this tax year

Taxpayers could see delays in getting their refunds this year -- as well as "unacceptable" customer service -- as the IRS commissioner warns budget cuts are forcing the agency to cut back. 
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, in an email sent to workers and obtained by Fox News, predicted a messy tax season on several fronts. 
"The effect of these cuts will hurt taxpayers and our tax system," he wrote. 
He said the cuts could force the IRS to shut down operations for two days later this year, resulting in unpaid furloughs for employees and service cuts for taxpayers. 
But in the near-term, the commissioner said cuts in overtime and temporary staff hours could cause delays in refunds. 
"People who file paper tax returns could wait an extra week -- or possibly longer -- to see their refund," he wrote, adding: "Taxpayers with errors or questions on their returns that require additional manual review will also face delays." 
He warned that IRS customer service, which already has faced heavy criticism, could be "diminished further." Koskinen set a low bar for what taxpayers can expect. 
"We now anticipate an even lower level of telephone service than before, which raises the real possibility that fewer than half of taxpayers trying to call us will actually reach us. During Fiscal Year 2014, 64 percent were able to get through. Those who do reach us will face extended wait times that are unacceptable to all of us," Koskinen wrote. 
Further, he warned of delays to IT investments of more than $200 million, predicting this would delay "new taxpayer protections against identity theft." 
The IRS has faced tough congressional scrutiny over the last two years in large part over the scandal involving the targeting of conservative groups, and some lawmakers are reluctant to pour more funding into the agency. 
But Koskinen says the agency's $10.9 billion budget is now the lowest level of funding since 2008. When adjusted for inflation, the budget hasn't been this low since 1998, he said. 
He said a short-term shutdown may loom. 
"Unfortunately, this means at this time we need to plan for the possibility of a shutdown of IRS operations for two days later this fiscal year, which will involve furloughing employees on those days," Koskinen wrote in the email. "Shutting down the IRS will be a last resort, but I want to be upfront with you about the problem." 
Koskinen said the agency will extend a partial hiring freeze through the end of the budget year in September. He said fewer enforcement agents will cost the federal government at least $2 billion in lost tax revenue. 
"IRS employees are doing their best to handle the rising demand for their services, but they will simply not be able to keep up," said Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union. "I have urged the IRS not to make any decisions on furlough days this early in the fiscal year and to work with us to find other alternatives."

US announces transfer of 5 Gitmo detainees; 4 to Oman, 1 to Estonia

Everyone with half a brain Knows Why Obama is Letting these Creeps Loose from Gitmo.

The Department of Defense announced Wednesday that five Yemeni terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay had been transferred out of the facility after more than a dozen years in captivity. 
Al Khadr Abdallah, Muhammad Al Yafi, Fadel Hussein Saleh Hentif, And Al-Rahman Abdullah Au Ahabati and Mohammed Ahmed Salam were sent to Oman, while Akhmed Abdul Qadir was transferred to Estonia.
This marks the first time either country has accepted former Guantanamo prisoners for resettlement. The men had been cleared for release since at least 2009 but the U.S. has balked at repatriating Guantanamo prisoners back to Yemen, where the government is battling an Al Qaeda insurgency.
All five were captured in Pakistan and detained by the U.S. as suspected Al Qaeda fighters. U.S. officials later determined it was no longer necessary to detain them but have struggled to find other countries willing to take them in. The men are all in their 30s and 40s, including one who was 17 when he was sent to Guantanamo.
The release of the five brings the number of detainees at Guantanamo Bay down to 122.
The transfers of these individuals comes in the wake of Republican senators introducing a new legislation to clamp down on President Obama's ability to transfer terror suspects out of the detention facility. These senators called for a "time out" on releasing more detainees after the Paris terror attacks.
The measure would repeal current law that allows the administration to transfer prisoners to foreign countries to reduce the population at Guantanamo. The bill also would prohibit transfers of terror suspects to foreign countries if there has been a confirmed case where an individual was transferred from Guantanamo and engaged in any terrorist activity.
Any transfers to Yemen would be shut down for two years.
Obama has pushed to close the detention facility since his inauguration in 2009. However, opponents say that Guantanamo is the best location for terror suspects since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
"Now is not the time to be emptying Guantanamo," Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., said at a news conference hours before the latest transfers were announced, during which she warned of fresh terrorist threats.
The administration has been transferring detainees cleared for movement to other countries. Five men who were held for a dozen years without charge at Guantanamo were sent to the Central Asian nation of Kazakhstan for resettlement in late December.
Nearly 30 prisoners were resettled in third countries last year as part of Obama's renewed push to close the detention center.
"We are committed to closing the detention facility. That's our goal and we are working toward that goal," said Ian Moss, a spokesman for the U.S. State Department on Guantanamo issues.

School district to stop interrogating Christian homeschool kids

A Virginia school district has decided to scrap a policy that allowed it to interrogate Christian homeschool teenagers and their parents about their religious beliefs.
Last November Douglas Pruiett and his wife received a letter from Goochland County Public Schools about updated procedures to the district’s requests for religious exemptions for homeschool students.
Under the updated rules, once a child turns 14-years-old, the district requires that homeschool parents reapply for a religious exemption to public education.

It sounds to me like some sort of modern-day religious inquisition – hauling Christian kids in front of the school board to be interrogated about the authenticity of their relationship with Jesus Christ.

The Prueitts have seven children, three of whom were impacted by the revised policy.
“Each application must be completed along with a statement of your bona fide religious beliefs and a statement from your child age 14 or older stating his/her bona fide religious beliefs,” the policy reads.
In other words, the homeschool kids have to prove to the school board that they love Jesus. And then there was this rather ominous paragraph:

“The School Board reserves the right to schedule a meeting with the parent(s) and, in the case of a student age 14 or older, with the student. The parent of a student younger than age 14 may choose to have his or her child attend the meeting. The purpose of the meeting is for the School Board to determine whether the request for exemption is based upon a conscientious opposition to attendance at a public school or at a private, denominational, or parochial school due to bona fide religious training or beliefs. Such meeting will be conducted in a closed meeting of the School Board.”

It sounds to me like some sort of modern-day religious inquisition – hauling Christian kids in front of the school board to be interrogated about the authenticity of their relationship with Jesus Christ.
“The policy provided the school board the right to call the child before them (and I call it interrogation) to defend those beliefs so they could determine whether indeed the child and the parents still held bona fide religious beliefs to qualify for the exemption,” Prueitt said.
His immediate reaction was to reject the district’s mandate – even though his refusal could have had landed the family in court. He cited the Virginia religious exemption statute which gives families a right to an exemption from school attendance based on the religious training the parents are providing to the child – regardless of what the child believes. The local policy, he said, violates that right.
So like a good citizen, Pruiett contacted the school superintendent.
“When I spoke with the school superintendent about this issue he stated that part of the rationale in changing the policy was to allow the board to ascertain if a home schooled child really wants to be home schooled so that they, ‘can be given the opportunity to go to public school,’” he said.
The Home School Legal Defense Association also weighed in – warning the school district they were in violation of state law and there was no legal ground to force the Pruiett family to do what they had been ordered to do.
“We are still a nation of ‘We the People,’” he wrote. “If liberties are taken away, it is because we did not stand. In a wonderful country like ours, we should desire that all our institutions and policies be characterized by a respect for individual God-given freedoms.”
And that brings us to Jan. 13^th when hundreds of parents piled into the Goochland School Board meeting to show their support for the Pruietts and other homeschool families in the community.
The school board heard the will of the people and voted to repeal the policy. They also decided to suspend any religious exemption letters that were sent to other families.
It took a village to change what was a very bad policy – but it’s proof positive that “We the People” can still engage the political process.
“The board acted honorably to repeal this thing,” Prueitt told me.
But it’s also a reminder that the government seems to believe they know what’s best for our children.
“We are Christians and we homeschool our children so that we can instill in them Christian values – from an educational standpoint so that they will acknowledge God in every discipline of life,” Pruiett told me. “You’re not going to find that in public schools.”
So let what happened in Goochland County, Virginia serve as a warning to school boards across the fruited plain. “We the People” will not tolerate busybody school marms meddling in the private religious affairs of American school children.

ISIS control of Syria reportedly expands since start of US-led airstrikes

The Islamic State terror group have increased the amount of territory they control in Syria as the U.S.-led bombing campaign approaches its four-month anniversary, according to a published report. 
The Wall Street Journal, citing U.S. government and  independent assessments, say that Islamic State, commonly known as ISIS, has control of a large swath of northeastern Syria and is creeping toward key cities in the country's west, including Aleppo, a center of the uprising against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. 
The Journal reports that ISIS' expansion of control can partially be attributed to the U.S. focus on Iraq, where it is working closely with Baghdad to roll back gains made by ISIS last summer. However, as a result, ISIS fighters are flowing into Syria unchecked. In other cases, Syrian rebel groups who once fought against ISIS have been convinced to join their side. 
The paper also reports that nearly three-quarters of the U.S.-led airstrikes in Syria since Sept. 22 have concentrated on the fight for Kobani, a town near the border with Turkey that has seen fierce fighting between ISIS and Kurds. The Associated Press reported Wednesday that the airstrikes had helped Kurdish forces gain an estimated 80 percent of the town, in what would be the first major defeat for ISIS since their current campaign of terror began. 
However, experts tell the Journal that whatever good the strikes have done in Kobani, they have not prevented ISIS from consolidating their control elsewhere, a truth that some U.S. officials readily acknowledge.
"Gaining territorial control in Syria has never been our mission," Col. Patrick Ryder, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, tells the Journal. "That wasn’t the objective of our airstrikes." Ryder calls the Syria airstrikes "shaping" operations, meant to weaken ISIS' hold on key parts of Iraq. 
Matters also are complicated by the lack of a ready-made partner, like the Iraqi government, to take the fight to ISIS on the ground. The U.S. plans currently call for the arming and training of moderate rebels in Syria, associated with neither ISIS nor Assad. However, that plan is still some time from coming to fruition. 
"Absent a partner on the ground in Syria, ours is still an Iraq-first strategy," one defense official told the Journal. "You've got to have forces on the ground."

J.V. Team Cartoon

White House hit for using security as ‘excuse’ for no-show at Paris rally

WASHINGTON –  While the White House points to security concerns as the chief reason why President Obama skipped the anti-terrorism rally in Paris over the weekend, some suggest the Secret Service and his advance team could have made it happen -- if they really tried. 
Instead, critics say the security explanation is being used as an “excuse.” Brad Blakeman, who served on the advance team for George W. Bush’s campaign, said the Secret Service is the “scapegoat” here.
“The president can go wherever he wants to go,” Blakeman said. 
To be sure, presidential travel is a herculean task – particularly for an outdoor, international rally just days after a major terror attack – but it appears little effort was made to explore the possibility of Obama attending the show of unity in Paris, attended by more than 40 world leaders.
A Secret Service official told Fox News that they were not asked or notified about a possible trip to Paris. This coincides with reports that White House aides were caught off guard by the size of the march and didn’t ask the president if he wanted to attend.
So could Obama have dispatched a high-level surrogate? Even the White House acknowledges that should have happened. (Attorney General Eric Holder was in town, but for reasons that aren’t quite clear he returned to Washington instead of attending the rally.)
But could Obama himself have gone?
Possibly, those with experience in presidential travel say.
“There was no more important event than this and if they put their minds to it, the Secret Service and our military could have secured the area,” Blakeman, a top adviser to Bush, told FoxNews.com. “The fact is, we let a friend down and used security as a convenient excuse.”
Blakeman called it “absolute nonsense” that the White House cited security as a reason for Sunday’s no-show.
On Monday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest made the rare concession that “we should have sent someone with a higher profile to be there.”
But he pointed to the short notice for the event and the security apparatus that would come with a presidential visit – and its potential impact on the event itself.
When pressed by reporters on Tuesday, Earnest once again pointed to security concerns but said under different circumstances, “the president would have liked the opportunity to participate in the march, but there were complications.”
Earnest noted the event was organized in 36 hours, took place on foreign soil and was being held outdoors. “Trying to add the president would have had a significant impact because of security in place,” he said.
When asked why Vice President Biden didn’t attend, he pointed to the same logistical considerations.  
But Blakeman said an advance team could have been scrambled “at a moment’s notice.”
“We wouldn’t have to announce we were going ahead of time,” he said. “We’d have planes at our disposal, armored vehicles on the ground. We don’t have to book a flight commercially.”
Dan Bongino, a former Secret Service agent who ran unsuccessfully as a Republican for Congress last year, said the security explanation is “crap.” He noted that Obama has arranged to travel to large, international gatherings before.
“The Mandela funeral, it was a security disaster but they were able to handle it,” he said, referring to the service for former South African leader Nelson Mandela in 2013.
That’s not to say an Obama visit on 36 hours’ notice wouldn’t be a huge lift for the Secret Service, and potentially cause headaches for the Paris crowd – which the administration claimed was a consideration.
In a statement, the Secret Service said Tuesday “it would have been a challenging advance to have a Secret Service protectee attend the Paris rally based on what we know.”
“Our logistic and security requirements had the potential to affect the planning of the event,” Secret Service spokesman Robert Hoback said.
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday defended the White House, saying the Paris rally was a spontaneous event, and presidential travel “is not spontaneous.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did make it to the rally despite the inherent risks in him attending a large-scale gathering. However, he was reportedly asked by French President Francois Hollande not to attend and did anyway.
“As soon as the security problem was resolved, allowing me to come, it was natural that I come here, it was important that I come here, and, therefore, I came,” he claimed.
Secretary of State John Kerry might have been a logical surrogate but was in India at the time. Kerry said he wanted to attend the march but a “prior commitment” in India meant he wasn’t able to; he plans to visit France later in the week.
Though attending the march was mostly symbolic, failing to send a high-level official cost the U.S. an important leadership opportunity on the world stage and has weakened the country’s role in the global war against terror, some lawmakers claim.
“We should have been there and it’s not sending the right kind of signals,” Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., told Fox News on Tuesday.

‘Aggressive’ timetable for launching Obama immigration actions raising concerns

Nearly two months after President Obama announced his immigration executive actions, questions remain over whether the Department of Homeland Security can be ready to process millions of additional immigrants through an already-burdened system.
DHS is on a hiring spree as it sets an ambitious schedule – outlined in a recent memo from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the DHS agency in charge of processing the requests -- for accepting new applicants.
The agency plans to begin accepting applications in late February under an expanded program for those who came to the U.S. illegally as children (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA). And the agency is looking to May to implement the biggest, and most controversial, plank of Obama’s plan – effectively legalizing potentially millions of parents of U.S. citizens and legal residents.
But the colossal effort, on a tight timetable, perhaps inevitably has some questioning whether they can pull it off.
One source inside the Department of Homeland Security told Fox News that so far, not enough has been done to get that machine up and running on time. The source raised the specter of the HealthCare.gov launch.
“There is a state of confusion at DHS,” said the DHS source, who works in immigration enforcement, claiming that “just like ObamaCare, the administration is eager to make an announcement, but infrastructure is lacking to make it happen.”
The administration wants to hire 1,000 workers to help process applications out of a new facility in Crystal City, Va., just outside Washington.
Ken Palinkas, president of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council (NCISC), the union representing USCIS employees, said he recently toured the new operations center and it has little in it but leftover furniture from the last government tenant. With the agency aiming for Feb. 20 or so to launch the first phase, that leaves less than six weeks to hire, vet and train these new employees, he told FoxNews.com. 
“They want to do this in February – this is unheard of,” Palinkas said. “I’ve been working in government for 15 years, and I know things don’t get done on time.”
While the administration scrambles to get ready, Republican foes in Congress continue their quest to halt the effort. Republicans are debating legislation this week to block funding for the immigration actions.
But supporters of the program say that beyond leasing new office space and hiring employees, USCIS has been readying for the influx for some time and has learned from the rollout of DACA, which has been processing tens of thousands of young undocumented immigrants since 2012. Further, the administration already has launched a new policy, as a result of Obama’s November announcement, for immigration enforcement and deportations.
“The agency knew for a long time to anticipate something coming,” said Wendy Feliz, of the American Immigration Council. “They have been planning and thinking and modernizing for years. I think ramping it up to five million probably won’t be as hard as you think.”
Under what’s known as “deferred action,” those eligible would be able to work legally and avoid deportation for three years, as well as qualify for services offered by their state. Children and parents would have to demonstrate they have been living in the U.S. continuously since 2010.
DHS officials, meanwhile, describe an across-the-board effort to prepare, including multiple avenues for members of the public to get answers and training for employees.
A DHS spokeswoman stressed that Secretary Jeh Johnson has issued several sets of guidance, and training has begun for the new enforcement and removal program. She noted Johnson met with leaders from several agencies in Texas, and said there has been “extensive communication” with employees, in addition to DHS-sponsored town halls across the country.
As for the looming flood of applications, she said: “USCIS is building the additional capacity needed to begin accepting requests for upcoming immigration initiatives.”
She said additional workers and the new facility “will ensure that every case processed by USCIS receives a thorough review under our guidelines.” The spokeswoman said the USCIS website will be updated with new information “on a regular basis,” and hotlines are available for people to call if they have questions or need help.
Further, the departments of Homeland Security and State recently launched an outreach effort detailing eligibility requirements. The effort, which includes radio and TV ads, is aimed at the Mexican and Central American public, telling them whom the executive actions apply to and urging against more illegal immigration. Separate fliers remind would-be applicants that nobody can apply yet.
An estimated 3.7 million would be eligible for the program affecting parents of legal residents; and roughly 290,000 would be eligible for the expanded DACA.
The example of the 2012 DACA shows a significant number of those who qualify apply, and most who do are approved. According to the Migration Policy Institute, some 55 percent of the 1.2 million who qualified in 2012 have applied in the last two years.
According to their numbers, 682,189 had applied as of July 2014; approval was granted to 587,366. Those approved early in the program already are applying for renewals, which would add to the processing pressure on the agency.
According to the Brookings Institution, renewal applications should be in the 20,000-40,000 range per month until at least June. There have been numerous reports about DACA backlogs threatening a smooth roll-out of the expanded programs.
Meanwhile, a class-action suit filed against DHS and USCIS in July by asylum-seekers who say they have been in “limbo” cited a backlog of more than 45,000 in that program.
“The question is, how prepared is the agency going into this, and what things look like on their end,” said Audrey Singer, a senior fellow at Brookings. She is a supporter of the program who believes USCIS learned a lot in the last two years and will be depending on an “army” of municipal and community-based organizations to help streamline the effort.
According to a New York Times report in late December, the new operations center was leased for nearly $8 million a year, and salaries are expected to cost more than $40 million annually.
Palinkas, who opposes the president’s executive actions, said he’s been surprised at the “aggressive” nature of the roll-out. “My personal opinion is they are working more aggressively for illegal [immigrants] than for people who are legally taking the route [to citizenship],” he said.
Jessica Vaughan, policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which also opposes the actions, questioned where the money for the building comes from. “There is no doubt the agency has been planning this action for a quite some time,” she told FoxNews.com. “My idea is they squirreled away money from the fee revenues from other programs to get this off the ground … without authorization from Congress.”
This is the funding stream congressional Republicans are targeting.
Vaughan also predicted that with the influx of new applicants and the president’s ambitious timetable, USCIS agents will be pressured to “rubber stamp” requests. “It’s completely impossible for the agency to accommodate all these applications and process them with any integrity whatsoever,” she said. “This is five times their workload we’re talking about.”
Singer said aside from criminal background checks, applicants must meet specific criteria and provide documentation of their ages and residency.
“Rubber stamping” isn’t an option, she said. “People can speculate all they want. But this is a program the agency is taking very seriously, it’s very high profile and nothing is going to fly under the radar.”