Deadline nears for closing shelter for asylum seekers

Democratic Portland Mayor Ethan Strimling

 

 

 

 

 

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Some are accusing Portland Mayor Ethan Strimling of sending mixed signals to more than 200 African asylum seekers about their housing prospects.
The city is racing to find housing for more than 200 people who are living at an emergency shelter at the Portland Expo before Aug. 15, when it will close.
There is not enough housing for all of them in Portland.
So far, 38 families have been placed in housing in Portland and in communities as far away as Bath.
But many newcomers want to stay in Portland, which is home to a Congolese community.
Strimling acknowledged telling some of the newcomers that they cannot be forced to live where they don’t want to. But he also says he told them they could be forced onto the streets.

Immigration roundup that targeted 2,100 nets 35 arrests

WASHINGTON (AP) — An immigration enforcement operation that President Donald Trump said was part of an effort to deport “millions” of people from the United States resulted in 35 arrests, officials said Tuesday. 
Trump billed the operation targeting families as a major show of force as the number of Central American families crossing the southern border has skyrocketed. There are about 1 million people in the U.S. with final deportation orders; the operation targeted 2,100.
Of those arrested, 18 were members of families and 17 were collateral apprehensions of people in the country illegally who were encountered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. None of those arrested resulted in the separation of family, officials said.
The effort was demonized by Democrats as a full-force drive to deport families and trumpeted by Republicans as a necessary show of force to prove there are consequences for people coming here illegally. But career ICE officers described it as a routine operation, one expected to net an average of about 10% to 20% of targets.
A separate nationwide enforcement operation targeting immigrants here illegally who had criminal convictions or charges netted 899 arrests. And officers handed out 3,282 notices of inspection to businesses that may be employing people here illegally.
Acting ICE director Matthew Albence said the operations would be ongoing, stressing the importance of enforcement. “Part of the way you stop people from coming is having a consequence to the illegal activity when you do come,” he said.
The operation targeted families centered on those who had been ordered deported by an immigration judge in 10 cities around the country who were subjected to fast-track proceedings. It was canceled once after media reports telegraphing when and where it would begin, though Trump announced it would be postponed following a phone call with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who urged him to do so.
The second effort began July 14 and again was met with media attention noting where and when it was to start, including from Trump, who announced the date.
Albence conceded the number was lower than that of other operations. A similar operation in August 2017 netted 650 arrests over four days, including 73 family members and 120 who entered illegally as children. There were 457 others encountered during this operation also arrested.
Albence said Trump’s comments didn’t hurt the effort because it had already been the subject of media reports for weeks.
But the overall publicity caused problems for an operation that relies largely on secrecy and surprise. Albence said the publicity made some officers targets, and they had to be pulled off.
Part of the reason other, similar operations, were more successful is because they were “done without a lot of fanfare and media attention,” Albence said. “That certainly, from an operational perspective, is beneficial.”
Another factor was weather; operations were suspended in New Orleans because of the hurricane there.
And immigrant rights activists nationwide had the rare advantage of knowing when to expect increased immigration enforcement, and they pushed “know-your-rights” campaigns hard.
Any hint of ICE activity, including false alarms, brought out dozens of activists to investigate in several cities, including Houston, New York and Chicago. To inform the public, they used hotlines, text networks, workshops and social media and promoted a smartphone app that notifies family members in case of an arrest.
In Chicago, even city officials got involved.
Two city aldermen started “bike brigades,” patrolling immigrant-heavy neighborhoods to look for ICE agents and warn others. Another, Alderman Andre Vasquez, sought volunteers on Facebook to serve as “ICEbreakers.” Over the weekend, it was standing-room only at his ward office as volunteers walked the neighborhood handing out know-your-rights cards and recruited businesses to be on the lookout.
“We were seeing concern and people starting to panic,” Vasquez said. “We want to live in the kind of environment where we never have to worry about ICE and raids.”
Activists reported one clear success story in Nashville, Tennessee, on Monday. Neighbors noticed ICE surveillance in the area and helped a 12-year-old boy and man avoid arrest by calling others and then linking arms around their van. ICE officers eventually called off the operation to avoid escalation.
Nashville showed what’s possible in an organized community: Immigrant families can exercise their rights and their neighbors can help them to defend their rights, Lisa Sherman-Nikolaus, policy director at the Tennessee Immigrant & Refugee Rights Coalition, said in an emailed statement. “The incredible scene that unfolded shows how deeply rooted immigrants are in our community.”
Advocates also said many immigrants simply stayed home.
During the first weekend the raids were supposed to start, some immigrant-heavy churches had noticeably lower attendance and attributed the fear of stepped-up enforcement. Businesses in immigrant-heavy neighborhoods, including in Chicago, Atlanta and Miami, also reported very light traffic.
Those arrested were awaiting deportation. During the budget year 2018, about 256,086 people were deported, an increase of 13%. The Obama administration deported 409,849 people in 2012′s budget year.
On Monday, the administration announced it would vastly extend the authority of immigration officers to deport migrants without allowing them to appear before judges. Fast-track deportations can apply to anyone in the country illegally for less than two years. Previously, those deportations were largely limited to people arrested almost immediately after crossing the Mexican border. Advocates said they would sue.
It was the second major immigration shift in eight days. Last Monday, the administration effectively banned asylum at the southern border by making anyone coming to the U.S. from a third country ineligible, with a few exceptions. Lawsuits are pending.
___
Tareen reported from Chicago.

FTC fines Facebook $5B, adds limited oversight on privacy

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal regulators have fined Facebook $5 billion for privacy violations and are instituting new oversight and restrictions on its business. But they are only holding CEO Mark Zuckerberg personally responsible in a limited fashion.
The fine is the largest the Federal Trade Commission has levied on a tech company, though it won’t make much of a dent for a company that had nearly $56 billion in revenue last year.
As part of the agency’s settlement with Facebook, Zuckerberg will have to personally certify his company’s compliance with its privacy programs. The FTC said that false certifications could expose him to civil or criminal penalties.
Some experts had thought the FTC might fine Zuckerberg directly or seriously limit his authority over the company.
“The magnitude of the $5 billion penalty and sweeping conduct relief are unprecedented in the history of the FTC,” Joe Simons, the chairman of the FTC, said in a statement. He added that the new restrictions are designed “to change Facebook’s entire privacy culture to decrease the likelihood of continued violations.”
Facebook does not admit any wrongdoing as part of the settlement.
Two of the five commissioners opposed the settlement and said they would have preferred litigation to seek tougher penalties.
The commission opened an investigation into Facebook last year after revelations that data mining firm Cambridge Analytica had gathered details on as many as 87 million Facebook users without their permission. The agency said Wednesday that following its yearlong investigation of the company, the Department of Justice will file a complaint alleging that Facebook “repeatedly used deceptive disclosures and settings to undermine users’ privacy preferences.”
The FTC had been examining whether that massive breakdown violated a settlement that Facebook reached in 2012 after government regulators concluded the company repeatedly broke its privacy promises to users. That settlement had required that Facebook get user consent to share personal data in ways that override their privacy settings.
The FTC said Facebook’s deceptive disclosures about privacy settings allowed it to share users’ personal information with third-party apps that their friends downloaded but the users themselves did not give permissions to.
Privacy advocates have pushed for the FTC to limit how Facebook can track users — something that would likely cut into its advertising revenue, which relies on businesses being able to show users targeted ads based on their interests and behavior. The FTC did not specify such restrictions on Facebook.
Three Republican commissioners voted for the fine while two Democrats opposed it, a clear sign that the restrictions on Facebook don’t go as far as critics and privacy advocates had hoped. That wish list included specific punishment for Zuckerberg, strict limits on what data Facebook can collect and possibly even breaking off subsidiaries such as WhatsApp and Instagram.
“The proposed settlement does little to change the business model or practices that led to the recidivism,” wrote Commissioner Rohit Chopra in his dissenting statement. He noted that the settlement imposes “no meaningful changes” to the company’s structure or business model. “Nor does it include any restrictions on the company’s mass surveillance or advertising tactics,” he wrote
The fine is well above the agency’s previous record for privacy violations — $22.5 million — which it dealt to Google in 2012 for bypassing the privacy controls in Apple’s Safari browser. There have been even larger fines against non-tech companies, including a $14.7 billion penalty against Volkswagen to settle allegations of cheating on emissions tests and deceiving customers. Equifax will pay at least $700 million to settle lawsuits and investigations over a 2017 data breach; the FTC was one of the parties. The money will likely go to the U.S. Treasury.
The FTC’s new 20-year settlement with Facebook establishes an “independent privacy committee” of Facebook directors. The committee’s members must be independent, will be appointed by an independent nominating committee and can only be fired by a “supermajority” of Facebook’s board of directors. The idea is to remove “unfettered control” by Zuckerberg, the FTC said.
Since the Cambridge Analytica debacle erupted more than a year ago, Facebook has vowed to do a better job corralling its users’ data. Nevertheless, other missteps have come up since then.
In December, for example, the Menlo Park, California, company acknowledged a software flaw had exposed the photos of about 7 million users to a wider audience than they had intended. It also acknowledged giving big tech companies like Amazon and Yahoo extensive access to users’ personal data, in effect exempting them from its usual privacy rules. And it collected call and text logs from phones running Google’s Android system in 2015.
Amid all that, Zuckerberg and his chief lieutenant, Sheryl Sandberg, apologized repeatedly. In March, Zuckerberg unveiled a new, “privacy-focused” vision for the social network that emphasizes private messaging and groups based on users’ interests.
But critics and privacy advocates are not convinced that either a fine or Facebook’s new model amounts to a substantial change.
If the company’s business practices don’t change as result of the FTC’s action, “there is no benefit to consumers,” said Marc Rotenberg, the president and executive director of the Washington-based nonprofit Electronic Privacy Information Center.
“The eight-year delay won’t be justified,” he said, referring to when Facebook first told the FTC it would do better.
The fine does not spell closure for Facebook, although the company’s investors — and executives — have been eager to put it behind them. Facebook is still under various investigations in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world, including the European Union, Germany and Canada. There are also broader antitrust concerns that have been the subject of congressional hearings, though it is too early to see if those will come to fruition.
Matt Stoller, a fellow at the Open Markets Institute, which has been critical of Facebook, said the company should admit wrongdoing.
“There should be structural solutions to force competition into the social networking market,” he added. “One of the angles for competition is privacy. They will compete to make a safer space to retain their user base.”
__
Ortutay reported from San Francisco. Associated Press Writer Samantha Maldonado contributed to this story from San Francisco.

Sick of Democrats Cartoons

Trump administration aims to expand fast-track deportations across US, legal fight expected

The Trump administration on Monday announced plans to extend the power immigration officers have to deport migrants before they appear at court, a move the White House said could mean less time for migrants in detention while cases wind their way through the legal system.
The American Civil Liberties Union and American Immigration Council promised that they would sue to block the policy that is expected to begin Tuesday.
Fast-track critics insist that the policy grants too much power to immigration agents and U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials.
The announcement was the second major policy shift in eight days following an unprecedented surge of families from Central America's Northern Triangle of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.
Royce Murray, the managing director of the American Immigration Council, told The New York Times that the Trump administration is “throwing everything they have at asylum seekers in an effort to turn everyone humanly possible away and to deport as many people as possible."
The fast-track deportations can apply to anyone in the country illegally for less than two years.
Kevin McAleenan, the acting Homeland Security secretary, portrayed the nationwide extension of “expedited removal” authority as another Trump administration effort to address an “ongoing crisis on the southern border” by freeing up beds in detention facilities and reducing a backlog of more than 900,000 cases in immigration courts.
He said Homeland Security officials with the new deportation power will deport migrants in the country illegally more quickly than the Justice Department’s immigration courts, where cases can take years to resolve.
Omar Jawdat, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, slammed the plan as “unlawful.” He said under the plan, “immigrants who have lived here for years would be deported with less due process than people get in traffic court.”
"Expedited removal" gives enforcement agencies broad authority to deport people without allowing them to appear before an immigration judge with limited exceptions, including if they express fear of returning home and pass an initial screening interview for asylum.
McAleenan said 20,570 people arrested in the nation's interior from October 2017 through September 2018 year had been in the U.S. less than two years, which would make them eligible for fast-track deportation under the new rule.
The average stay in immigration detention for people in fast-track removal was 11.4 days from October 2017 through September 2018, compared to 51.5 days for people arrested in the nation's interior.
The Associated Press contributed to this report

Lawmaker at center of viral grocery store dispute suggested Parkland shooter was victim of 'the system'

State Democrat Rep. Erica Thomas

The Democrat Georgia state lawmaker who recently claimed in a tearful viral video that a white man told her to "go back where you came from" in a grocery store checkout lane -- then walked back her story, before doubling back down on it -- sounded a note of sympathy for high school mass shooter Nikolas Cruz last year on social media.
"My heart goes out to Nikolas Cruz!! Some don't know how to cope with being an orphan. I thank God everyday for getting me through the system in one piece. #FloridaShooting #mentalhealth #PrayforDouglas #prayfornik," State Rep. Erica Thomas wrote on Feb. 16, 2018.
Several journalists and commentators flagged and condemned the post late Monday, including Mike Cernovich, Harry Cherry, who called for Thomas' resignation, and Ryan Petty.
Cruz, a former student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School who'd been expelled for disciplinary reasons, shot and killed 17 people there on Feb. 14, 2018. More than a dozen others were wounded.
On Monday, Thomas reiterated her viral claim that a white man told her to "go back where you came from" during a testy argument in a supermarket checkout lane, after walking back the claim over the weekend. The man has denied the encounter unfolded the way she described.
The episode, hot on the heels of a national controversy over President Trump's remarks directed at four progressive Democrats, quickly made the rounds on social media.
Multiple news organizations on Sunday portrayed the episode as a plausible instance of racism using the lawmaker's original claim, though she already had tried to clarify her accusations.
Thomas herself acknowledged in an interview with local media on Saturday that she did not recall exactly what the man, Eric Sparkes, had said to her.
"He said, 'go back,' you know, those types of words," Thomas said on Saturday. "I don't wanna say he said 'go back to your country,' or 'go back to where you came from,' but he was making those types of references, is what I remember."
"So, you don't remember exactly what he said?" a reporter pressed.
Thomas answered: "No, no, definitely not. But I know it was 'go back,' because I know I told him to 'go back.'"
That admission contradicted the tearful video Thomas posted to Facebook this past Friday, in which she said she was with her young daughter in the market and had more than 10 items in the supermarket's express lane.
"I decided to go live because I'm very upset, because people are getting really out of control with this, with this white-privilege stuff," she said. "I'm at the grocery and I'm in ... the aisle that says '10 Items or Less.' Yes, I have 15 items, but I'm nine months pregnant and I can't stand up for long, and this white man comes up to me and says, 'You lazy son of a b---h... You need to go back where you came from.'"
Thomas went on to accuse Trump of inciting hate. During the television interview Saturday, she said Sparkes "needs to be held accountable because people can't just go out and berate pregnant women."
However, in a press conference with her lawyer on Monday, Thomas doubled down on her original allegation.
"He said, 'Go back where you came from!'" Thomas insisted, saying the man "kept harassing me."
"I was embarrassed, and I was scared for my life," she said.
Sparkes has forcefully denied making the racially charged comment, and in a dramatic moment, showed up in the middle of a television news interview featuring Thomas outside the Atlanta-area Publix store where the initial confrontation had unfolded.
"Did I say that? Is it on video?" Sparkes asked Thomas in front of reporters. He acknowledged calling Thomas "a lazy b---h" because she had taken too many items to the express checkout lane, but he denied the incident had anything to do with race.
Sparkes later told WSB-TV that despite Thomas' claim he's white, he is of Cuban descent -- and, like Thomas, is a Democrat. Sparkes said Thomas' accusations were politically motivated.
Fox News' Louis Casiano contributed to this report.

Trump administration to propose rule that would cut 3.1 million people from food stamp program: report

The Trump administration is set to propose a rule Tuesday that would cut about 3.1 million Americans from the food-stamp program in an effort to save taxpayers about $2.5 billion a year, reports said.
The U.S. has seen low levels of unemployment, which is seen as a major factor in low levels of participation in the program. President Trump tweeted earlier this month that food stamp use is at a 10-year low. Politifact verified the claim.
Reuters, citing a U.S. Department of Agriculture, reported that residents in 43 states who receive help from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, automatically enroll in the food-stamp program, known as the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, or SNAP.
The USDA intends to review these TANF cases to see if participants qualify for the program.
“This proposal will save money and preserve the integrity of the program,” Sonny Perdue, the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, said in a conference call. “SNAP should be a temporary safety net.”
SNAP, which was formerly known as the Food Stamps Program, is a federal program that provides grocery assistance for people out of work or with low incomes living in the U.S. To qualify for the program, individuals must make 130 percent or less of the federal poverty level based on the household size.
The move was criticized by Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., who told The Washington Post that the move is another attempt by the Trump administration to “circumvent Congress and make harmful changes to nutrition assistance that have been repeatedly rejected on a bipartisan basis.”
Fox News' Andrew O'Reilly and the Associated Press contributed to this report

Ahead of second round of 2020 debates, Biden unveils sweeping criminal justice reform plan

Democratic presidential frontrunner Joe Biden is the only candidate reliably polling in double digits who wants to expand Obamacare; Peter Doocy reports Sioux City.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden on Tuesday unveiled a wide ranging plan to reduce the country’s prison population, reform the nation’s criminal justice system and eliminate racial and income disparities in sentencing.
The former vice president’s campaign also highlighted that the proposal, officially titled the ‘Biden Plan for Strengthening America’s Commitment to Justice,’ would prioritize reform of the juvenile justice system - using $1 billion per year “to make sure we give more children a second chance to live up to their potential.”
Senior Biden campaign officials tell Fox news that the sweeping plan would be paid for using costs saved from reducing mass incarcerations.
Biden’s expected to spotlight his plan this week while addressing an NAACP presidential candidate’s forum Wednesday in Detroit, as well as the next day in Indianapolis when he speaks at the National Urban League’s annual conference.
And the release of the plan comes just eight days before Biden faces off against nine of his rivals – including Sen. Kamala Harris of California – on the second night of the second round of Democratic presidential primary debates.
Biden, the front runner right now in the race for his party’s 2020 nomination, has seen his once formidable lead in national and early voting state polling deteriorate following his less-than-stellar performance late last month during the first round of Democratic presidential nomination debates.
Senior Biden campaign officials emphasized that the criminal justice reform policy – as well as the former vice president health care proposal, which he unveiled last week – “is something we have really been talking about out there on the campaign trail. There are real differences in this race between Vice President Biden and a number of people on that stage. You can expect him to draw that contrast next Wednesday.”
Criminal justice reform’s a thorny issue for Biden.
As a senator from Delaware, he helped craft the 1994 crime bill that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Biden has long highlighted his role in helping write the law, which at the time was the largest anti-crime bill in the nation’s history. The measure provided for thousand of new police officers, millions of dollars to fund prevention programs, and billions of dollars to build new prisons.
But the law’s been criticized in recent years by Democrats who blame the measure for spiking incarcerations, particularly among minorities, due to mandatory life sentence policy for repeat offenders.
Facing jabs from numerous rivals over the law, Biden has repeatedly defended the measure. He’s credited the law’s gun control provisions – including the assault weapons ban - which he said helped him “beat the NRA.”
Two of the 2020 Democratic White House hopefuls who've targeted Biden over the measure - Harris and Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey - will be standing next to Biden on the debate stage next week.
His new plan would create a new $20 billion competitive grant program to spur states to shift from incarceration to prevention. His campaign explained that “in order to receive this funding, states will have to eliminate mandatory minimums for non-violent crimes, institute earned credit programs, and take other steps to reduce incarceration rates without impacting public safety.”
The plan also aims to eliminate racial and income-based disparities in the country’s criminal justice system and “eliminate overly harsh sentencing for non-violent crimes.”
Biden would do that by expanding and using the power of the Justice Department to address systemic misconduct in police departments and prosecutors’ offices, resuming a practice from the Obama administration that’s been reduced the past two and a half years under the administration of Republican President Donald Trump.
Biden’s plan also calls for investing in public defenders’ offices to ensure defendants’ access to quality counsel, eliminating mandatory minimums, ending the federal crack and powder cocaine disparity, decriminalizing cannabis use and throwing out prior cannabis use convictions, and ending all incarcerations solely for drug use.
The former vice president would also call for the elimination of the death penalty, stop jailing people for being too poor to pay fines and fees, and stop corporations from profiteering off of incarceration ending the federal government’s use of private prisons. That would build off a policy implemented during his eight years as Obama’s vice president, but rescinded by the Trump Administration.
And as part of his proposals to reform the juvenile justice system, Biden’s campaign said the former vice president “would incentivize states to stop incarcerating kids and Expand funding for after-school programs, community centers, and summer jobs to keep young people active, busy, learning, and having fun.”