Pathways to legal residence and border extension measures in the new immigration reform bill. A new law from Reps. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) want to defuse concerns about immigration. It paves the way for illegal immigration to the country and establishes border security measures, among other things. But this approach can only be implemented if the head of the US government declares that the border is secure.
Called the Dignity Act, the bill would be “the first major immigration solution passed by Congress in a decade,” he said Tuesday. words. So far, the bill — an update on similar legislation introduced by Salazar last year — has attracted a group of five co-sponsors. You can get a detailed summary of the main bill Here and all 500 pages (which I haven’t fully read yet) Here.
The meat of Salazar and Escobar’s Bill appears to be two new programs – the Dignity Program and the Redemption Program – through which people in the US illegally can obtain illegal removal or legal citizenship.
The Dignity Program offers deferred action for removal and travel and work permits for undocumented immigrants under certain circumstances. To begin with, they must have lived in the US for five years before this document passed, they must not be ineligible for admission under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and they must not have a serious criminal record, such as a conviction for any crime. a case.
To sign up for the program, people will need to pay a $1,000 “reimbursement” (to be “used to support American workers”) and provide biometric and biographical information to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The suspension period lasts up to seven years, during which applicants must report to DHS twice and pay an additional $1,000 with each report up to $5,000. During this time, they are expected to pay taxes, have health insurance, and be employed or in school for at least four years (subject to certain exemptions for people with minor children, disabilities, etc.). In addition, the applicant cannot “obtain any Federal means-tested benefits or eligible programs” and is required to pay (in addition to other taxes) a 1.5 percent tax that will be included in the Immigration Infrastructure. Money.
Individuals who complete the Dignity Program are considered legal nonimmigrants—authorized to work and eligible for reentry—for five years and can renew as many times as needed. They must also be eligible to apply for the Redemption Program.
Under the Redemption Program, people in the Dignity Program can apply for permanent citizenship, valid for five years and renewable indefinitely. During his tenure in the Redemption Program, he will be required to report frequently to DHS, pay an additional $5,000, work at least 200 hours, and study English with US citizens. (Education requirements may be waived for persons 65 and older.)
Section 24103 of the bill states:
if the alien maintains and meets the requirements of this section, after 4 years from the date the alien’s application to participate in the Redemption Program is approved, and subject to sections 111181 and 1515 of Part A of this Act, the Secretary may change the alien’s status to lawful resident, except that the status of an alien granted under section 24101 may not be extended unless the alien demonstrates that the alien meets the requirements under section 312(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Act (8 USC 1423(a))
People will certainly argue about the importance of Honor and Redemption. Is it fair for participants to pay an additional 1.5 percent tax? Will the multi-thousand dollar required “refund” make the program too expensive for many undocumented immigrants? Should learning English be important? These are all valid questions that reasonable people cannot agree on. But at least this bill sparks a conversation about what such a program would look like and puts the word out there.
The biggest red flag of all of this comes in some of the results set for the Redemption Program. Here we are as Salazar put it:
For the skeptics, many of them in my Republican party, who say we are accepting millions without limits to be safe, as it has been for 30 years, listen to this: there is a section within the Dignity Act that guarantees that no one will be. of the United States until the Office of the Inspector General confirms that the border is safe.
“No one will ever be American”. until the border is confirmed safe?
Looking at the text of the bill, it seems that what Salazar means is that no one who has completed the Redemption Program can be declared permanent without action from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and DHS. From the text of the bill:
The Secretary of Homeland Security may not change a person’s status under section 24103 until the date the Comptroller General of the United States certifies that the Border Patrol has achieved a 90 percent or higher detection and risk assessment of individuals attempting to cross the border. border of the United States illegally in the past 12 months.
The Secretary of Homeland Security may not change the status of a person under section 24103 until the Secretary of Commerce has verified that all employers in all countries are in compliance with the provisions of section 274A(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
These are some of the biggest and most difficult to imagine. How does the commander in chief know that the Border Patrol has reached the 90 percent mark of terror? Naturally, people who sneak into the country are invisible.
Even if adequate monitoring procedures are adopted, and safety objectives are met, this seems likely to keep the Redemption Program in check for a long time.
What if safety goals or employer compliance goals are not defined – where does that leave people in the programs? It seems that people who send data, pay additional taxes, pay refunds, and follow all other requirements, may be confused, unable to fulfill the legal promises that were promised because of things that did not help them.
Florida hamburger joint sues over anti-drag show law. Senate Bill 1438, signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, earlier this month, gave state agencies the power to close or revoke the licenses of liquor stores that allow children to see “adult acts.” Hamburger Mary’s, which allows small children at its Sunday brunch, is being sued.
“Danielle Otterbein says she and her friends often go to Hamburger Mary’s with their daughters on Sundays.” documents WESH 2 Florida:
“I love the game. I love camp. I love the silliness of it. My daughter is the same way. It’s fun. It’s a great time,” he said.
However, he says he and his friends have not been able to bring their children since the state legislature passed the law.
The owners of Hamburger Mary’s are suing the state of Florida over the bill, saying the law is too easy. They also say that bookings dropped by 20% in May after they told customers that children would no longer be coming to the show.
Republican Rep. Randy Fine says the bill makes no sense at all.
“It’s not clear at all. What’s clear is that you have a business in Orlando saying they’re going to leave if they can’t do sex shows to children. That’s amazing,” he said.
The new law defines adult behavior as a live show that “shows or simulates genitalia, sex, sexual pleasure, or other sexual activities” or “loose behavior, or shows genitalia or breasts” when it is “extremely popular.” disgust, shame, or disgust; is clearly repugnant to existing standards,” and/or “is meaningless, artistic, political, or scientific” to children. This may not sound like a question, but critics say it should ban any theater that allows parents to bring their children or that goes too far, preventing even young adults to avoid watching shows and dirty jokes (eg A Drag Queen Christmas, expected last December and the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation).
A a group of Chinese citizens Florida residents are suing to prevent the government from banning many citizens of China, Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, Russia, or North Korea from buying property in the state. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). You can find the whole complaint here.
Florida’s new law – SB 264 – “closely resembles the anti-immigrant laws” of the past, they write BecauseJacob Sullum:
DeSantis demonstrations SB 264, which severely restricts the ownership of land by Chinese citizens, as part of the government’s efforts to contain the influence of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). But the plaintiffs represented by the ACLU, who are legal residents of Florida but do not have green cards, have nothing to do with CCP. They have been working or studying in the United States for years and are frustrated by the inconsistent, restrictive laws in their country that suddenly hinder their plans to buy a place to live. …
DeSantis wants us to believe that barring a nutritionist, property manager, or professor from buying real estate in Florida, based on their nationality and non-immigrant status, is damaging to the “Chinese Communist Party” and “destabilizing.[s] in communist China.” But it is difficult to see why innocent people should suffer because of the mistakes of the oppressive regime that he left behind.
“Florida’s discrimination law is unfair, unjust, and unconstitutional,” said Ashley Gorski, senior attorney for the ACLU’s National Security Project. he said in a sentence. “Everyone in the United States is entitled to equal protection under our laws, including citizens of other countries. If SB 264 goes into effect, it will seriously harm our customers and countless other Florida residents.”
Often referred to as “masks do harm” research was dismissed.
Editors: “…complaints were correct… the article does not meet editorial and scientific standards…”
He can act as a zombie & take back part of the plot. pic.twitter.com/wyXHVJC76T
— Timothy Caulfield (@CaulfieldTim) May 19, 2023
• Says Gov. Florida Republican Ron DeSantis he is expected to announce his presidential election tomorrow in a conversation with Twitter CEO Elon Musk.
• Republicans “want a new, unprecedented war,” David Weigel he warns to Street lights.
• “The South Carolina Senate approved a bill Tuesday banning abortions for most people after six weeks of pregnancy — before most people know they’re pregnant — and sent it to the Republican governor, who has vowed to sign the bill into law as soon as possible. . . . reports and the Associated Press.
• A bill that would have required Texas schools to display the Ten Commandments in all classrooms he failed to advance in the GOP-controlled state house.
• BecauseNatalie Dowzicky donated her bones for free. But not everyone should do it without compensation, he they write.
• Purpose is pull some LGBT ads among customer complaints.
• In Arizona battle over tamales.