Showing posts sorted by date for query Ron Paul. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Ron Paul. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Thursday, December 21, 2023

‘Intentional cruelty’: asylum seekers are dying at US-Mexico border, say advocates

Paulina Velasco in Los Angeles
THE GUARDIAN
Wed, December 20, 2023 

Photograph: Étienne Laurent/EPA


Theresa Cheng was volunteering with mutual aid groups at the US-Mexico border when she learned of a migrant on the US side of the wall with severe injuries. Cheng, an emergency physician, rushed to an encampment where asylum seekers wait to be processed by border patrol and pumped frantically on the chest of a 13-year-old boy bleeding on the ground while volunteers dialed 911.

It took 60 minutes – nearly as much time as Cheng and another migrant did CPR on the teen – for an ambulance and emergency medical services to arrive at the scene in eastern San Diego county. The boy, whom local media identified as Dario Zamudio, had suffered traumatic injuries in a car collision on the Mexican side of the border and had been taken to the border wall to receive quicker treatment.

Related: Texas governor signs bill allowing police to arrest migrants entering US illegally

Zamudio did not make it.

“His heart stopped while he was laying on the ground in the dirt,” Cheng said. “If EMS had arrived earlier, shortly after they were called, his heart wouldn’t have stopped in the field. He could have gone to a hospital and had much better comprehensive emergency care.”

Nearly two weeks later, Cheng’s frustration is palpable. She says she had to ask border patrol agents to help perform CPR, and that she asked multiple times to be allowed to accompany the child in the ambulance to the hospital, but was denied. She says she had tried previously to communicate to paramedics the gravity of the medical situation in the camps.

“That’s why I’m seething,” she said, “because I had this conversation with people on the ground expressing my concern that they aren’t responding appropriately. And then the very next day, a 13-year-old boy died.”

Cheng, who is also a lawyer, is part of a cohort of medical professionals and mutual aid providers along the US-Mexico border and in San Diego county who have been sounding the alarm about the dangers migrants face in open-air detention, especially the lack of medical care. Volunteers have been helping fill the gaps in medical and humanitarian aid in the camps in Jacumba Hot Springs and San Ysidro, where for several months migrants seeking asylum have been waiting to be processed.

When they are unable to use the government’s CBP One app, or present themselves to a US port of entry to request asylum, migrants cross deserts and climb walls to get on US soil. The injuries from wall falls can be gruesome, and when they arrive, asylum seekers have to wait for days in the dangerous outdoor conditions of the open-air detention sites, or OADs.

An 11 December complaint filed on behalf of immigrant rights organizations – including Al Otro Lado, Border Kindness, Southern Border Communities Coalition and the American Friends Service Committee – against the Department of Homeland Security’s office for civil rights and civil liberties, and Customs and Border Protection, explains how asylum seekers on the US side of the border are being held by patrol officers in freezing temperatures, with little food or water, and inadequate medical attention.

The complaint details violations of CBP’s custody standards and migrants’ human rights, like how border patrol provides migrants at four such locations with just one water bottle and one small snack a day, if that. It describes the dry, windy and cold desert locations where migrants are exposed to the elements with no shelter, as temperatures drop to 20F (-6.5C).

“It’s a recipe for disaster,” said Alexander Tenorio, another volunteer physician. “I do fear that if this does continue into the winter, and we keep exposing them to these conditions, there will be more injury, and I do fear there will be death.”

Tenorio said he had tended to pregnant women with stomach pain and bleeding, babies just months and days old, and people with traumatic injuries such as open wounds and possible bone fractures who desperately needed to be evaluated at a hospital. Cheng described seeing 75-year-old women and organ-transplant patients who had run out of medication, migrants with disabilities and those had experienced severe strokes. Individuals the volunteers encounter are already malnourished from their long trip north, and Tenorio says keeping them for days outside without adequate food leaves them at a high risk of developing a medical emergency, like hypothermia.

Jacqueline Arellano, the director of US programs for the mutual aid group Border Kindness, says she didn’t know what the volunteers would do if there were a mass hypothermia event. “Were we to call 911 if there are multiple people experiencing hypothermia, is that same delay going to be expected where possibly it’s going to have to be like an administrative or bureaucratic decision, how quickly they initiate mass emergency response? We’re unsure. They haven’t communicated that to us,” she said.

The corps of volunteer healthcare workers has to triage patients on the ground and can only escalate individuals with urgent medical needs to border patrol or San Diego county EMS. When they do call 911 to have someone taken to a hospital, Arellano said, they encounter major delays in response times and questions about who is responsible.

In some instances, volunteers say, emergency medical dispatch personnel ask for border patrol to confirm whether there is a medical emergency, or screen calls that come from the open-air detention sites. “There seems to be a delay that is specific to the fact that these are migrants,” said Arellano.

Customs and Border Protection said their agency was providing appropriate medical care and “humanitarian assistance as needed and by routinely coordinating with emergency medical services to assist individuals in need”. CBP did not respond to follow-up questions regarding the medical assistance they provide or the incidents provided to the Guardian at the time of publication.

Erika Pinheiro is the executive director of Al Otro Lado, which provides legal and humanitarian assistance to migrants in southern California. She said that while some border patrol agents do call 911, others deter migrants from accessing care by telling them they are faking their illnesses.

“It’s beyond not providing care. It’s malicious obstruction of care,” Pinheiro said.

She said volunteer medical providers have been told they can’t be on-site: “Border patrol claims people are not in custody, and so they do not have the obligation to provide medical services. But when we try to bring in medical services, the physicians have been asked for their credentials. They’ve been kicked out.”

Volunteers have observed multiple instances of border patrol agents telling migrants erroneously that their asylum process will be in jeopardy if they leave the camps for medical care, so migrants sometimes refuse to go to the hospital in emergency situations. Migrants are also refusing care to avoid being separated from their families.

In late November, Pinheiro witnessed a man having a heart attack at a camp in Jacumba. A border patrol agent called an ambulance, but when it arrived the man refused to go, because it would mean leaving his wife and son in the camp.

“I’m watching this guy’s face drooping in front of me, and I’m watching him double over in pain because of his chest pain,” Pinheiro said. “I thought he was going to die in front of me.” Pinheiro finally convinced him that her organization would help him reunite with his family – yet another service volunteers are providing as migrants are discharged with little help to the streets of San Diego.

“We are running a massive humanitarian disaster response on a shoestring budget, doing the best we can. But we’re exhausted and broke and frustrated, frankly, that we’re even still in this position,” she said

Jacumba, where three of the four open-air detention sites are located, has 600 residents, although Pinheiro says an average of 800 migrants circulate through the three camps each day. She said she knew of no additional resources that had been allocated by the county to address the increased need for medical care.

Border patrol, she said, had had an increase in resources commensurate with the increase in migrants in San Diego county this year: “There’s no justification for this. This is cruelty. This is abject and intentional cruelty. This is meant to create a political spectacle showing that the border is out of control so that they can lobby for additional asylum restrictions and additional funding for border patrol.”

In Washington, border security – including funding and asylum restrictions – is at the center of an end-of-year fight between Democrats and Republicans over military aid to Ukraine and Israel.

Meanwhile, volunteers on the ground in Jacumba and San Ysidro are left asking who will take responsibility for the medical emergencies happening at the border right now.

“No matter how you feel about immigration, I would hope that most people don’t want children dying in camps on the California border,” Pinheiro said.

Texas’ new border law will hurt children and taxpayers, experts say
Diego Mendoza
Tue, December 19, 2023 


Semafor Signals

Insights from El Financiero, The Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights, and El Paso Matters
NEWS

Mexico’s president said Tuesday that he will challenge a new Texas law that gives state authorities power to detain and deport suspected undocumented immigrants.

“We’re always going to be against these measures, and we want to say to our countrymen and migrants that we’re defending them,” said President Andrés Manuel López Obrador. He accused Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott of pursuing a personal political motive to be a vice presidential contender.

Several civil rights groups, including the ACLU, sued Texas on Tuesday, alleging that the law was unconstitutional.

The Biden administration has rebuked the controversial law – known as SB4 – for circumventing federal authorities, paving a path to a Supreme Court showdown, as Republicans slam the White House for not funding border protection.
SIGNALSSemafor Signals: Global insights on today's biggest stories.
Advocates say Texas’ anti-immigration legislation is “rooted in racism”
Sources: El Financiero, ACLU, Mexican-American Legislative Caucus of Texas

The law means authorities “can detain you just for your appearance,” fueling a “climate of persecution…especially against Hispanics, Mexicans, and citizens of other nationalities,” wrote Mexican columnist Leonardo Kourchenko for El Financiero. He warned those traveling to Texan cities on business not to be a “victim of abuse,” and advised them to always carry their passports and visas. Groups like the ACLU and the Mexican-American Legislative Caucus have accused SB4 of being “rooted in racism.” The organizations called out Texas for Strong Borders — an anti-immigration lobbying group that pushed for the state legislature to pass SB4 — of having reported links to white supremacist Nick Fuentes.

The law could violate children's rights
Sources: Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights, Customs and Border Protection

Advocates warn that children as young as 10 face a high risk of having their rights violated by the law. The number of unaccompanied children crossing the border has skyrocketed since the COVID pandemic, reaching a record high of more than 152,000 minors in 2022, according to government data. The asylum ban in the U.S. already expedites the deportation of children and families, the Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights said, and SB4 will only “exacerbate these conditions” by separating families, rather than protecting children. A federal judge recently prohibited separating families at borders for eight years.

SB4 will hurt taxpayers
Sources: El Paso Matters

Abbott is spending millions on the border in the name of public safety, but there has been little impact on drug flow or crime rates, wrote Democratic El Paso County Commissioner David Stout. The new law will require Texan taxpayers to fund expansive new criminal infrastructure to account for the estimated 88,000 additional arrests per year, Stout explained, costing at least $162 million in El Paso County alone. Texas should instead focus on “investing in immigrants, and in the trade and cultural exchange opportunities,” Stout suggested, citing studies showing that both documented and undocumented immigrants contribute to lower rates of crime and higher rates of entrepreneurship than native-born Texans.


5 big reasons to pay attention to what’s happening at the border right now

Analysis by Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN
Wed, December 20, 2023 at 5:00 AM MST·7 min read

When it comes to the US-Mexico border, there’s often so much noise that it’s hard to hear — and see — what’s really going on.

I’ve covered immigration for more than a decade, through three different presidential administrations and through many different moments when people on all sides of the issue have warned of crisis conditions and authorities have appeared overwhelmed.

That’s happening once again. But a few different factors make this moment feel different. The situation is intensifying on several fronts that could have significant consequences both in everyday people’s lives and on the national political stage.

Here are five big reasons why it’s important to pay attention to what’s going on right now:
1. Many people rely on ports of entry along the border. And we’ve seen a growing number of them closing.

In the past few weeks, the Biden administration has closed ports of entry to pedestrians or vehicles in Eagle Pass, Texas; Lukeville, Arizona; and San Ysidro, California.

On Sunday, officials announced they’d also be temporarily shutting down international railway crossings in Eagle Pass and El Paso.

Why is this happening? Officials say the number of migrants illegally crossing the border in some locations is increasing so significantly that they need to divert resources from ports of entry to handle the influx.

A US Border Patrol agent speaks with immigrants at a transit center near the US-Mexico border on Tuesday in Eagle Pass, Texas. Most had crossed the Rio Grande from Mexico the night before. - John Moore/Getty Images

US Customs and Border Protection blames misinformation from transnational criminal organizations and cartels for the recent spike. Border Patrol Chief Jason Owens told CNN’s Rosa Flores recently that agents are “simply overwhelmed” and noted that closing the ports had freed up employees to help process migrants, but also came at a cost.

“It’s a consequence to our lawful trade and travel. Everybody’s feeling it right now,” he said.

Local officials say the port closures are having a devastating economic and personal impact on communities.

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, said in a news release that the decision to close the port in her state “has led to an unmitigated crisis in the area and put Arizona’s safety and commerce at risk.”
2. Trump is making immigration a central focus of his campaign once again. But the words he’s using are changing.

Former President Donald Trump kicked off his 2016 election campaign with notorious comments describing Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists. And in the leadup to the 2024 election, he appears to be doubling down.

As my colleague Zachary B. Wolf has noted recently, Trump’s “increasingly harsh language demonizing migrants” is reaching new extremes.

In a New Hampshire rally over the weekend, Trump drew comparisons to the language of Nazi Germany with comments about migrants from mostly Africa, Asia and South America “poisoning the blood of our country.”

Former President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally Saturday in Durham, New Hampshire. - Reba Saldanha/AP

The next day, Trump claimed, without evidence, that migrants are largely coming to the US from prisons and mental institutions. And he promised to reorient the US government to purge migrants.

Cracking down on illegal immigration was a focus of Trump’s presidency, and there’s little doubt he’d prioritize the issue once again if reelected.
3. Biden seems ready to support the kinds of restrictions he previously criticized.

Before his election in 2020, President Joe Biden repeatedly vowed to roll back the immigration policies of his predecessor. But in the push to get Congress to approve more aid for Ukraine, the Biden administration has signaled a willingness to implement major restrictions that echo changes pursue by the Trump administration.

Negotiations are ongoing. But proposals under consideration include turning back migrants at the US-Mexico border without giving them the chance to seek asylum, expanding a fast-track deportation procedure to include more undocumented immigrants, and raising the credible fear standard for asylum seekers, sources told CNN’s Priscilla Alvarez and Camila DeChalus.

And immigrant rights groups are releasing increasingly frantic statements, decrying what they see as Biden’s willingness to trade away the lives of vulnerable people who are legally entitled to seek asylum. Frustrated by the lack of attention the issue was getting, RAICES said this week that it had bought a seven-story digital billboard ad displaying a shackled Lady Liberty in Times Square warning that “the end of asylum is dangerously near.”


For its part, the Biden administration is defending its track record, with a White House official telling CNN that the administration has led the largest expansion of legal immigration pathways in decades.

But advocates and some lawmakers say Biden is running the risk of losing support from key allies if he makes the concessions he’s reported to be considering.

“If he does go too far in the Trump direction, it’s going to be felt at the ballot box next year, no doubt about it,” Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla told CNN’s Manu Raju.
4. States are taking matters into their own hands. And the potential impact of a new law in Texas is huge.

Frustrated by what they call the federal government’s failure to secure the border, some state leaders are trying to take matters into their own hands. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican and outspoken critic of Biden, signed a new law this week that makes entering the state illegally a state crime, gives local law enforcement the power to arrest migrants and gives judges in the state the ability to issue orders removing them to Mexico.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signs three bills into law at a border wall construction site in Brownsville, Texas, on Monday, including a controversial measure that makes entering Texas illegally a state crime and gives local law enforcement the power to arrest migrants. - Valerie Gonzalez/AP

The stated aim of the law, which is scheduled to go into effect in March, is cracking down on illegal immigration. Advocates call the law unconstitutional and argue that it will fuel racial profiling in Texas, where 40% of residents are Latino.

The Republican author of the Texas bill has maintained that the measure is constitutional. But state officials may soon have to make their case for the new law in court.

Civil rights groups just filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to block it.

On the day Abbott signed the bill, protesters nearby said they were already afraid of the impact it could have on their communities.
5. In the US, the ‘border’ is everywhere.

The border isn’t just the 1,933-mile line that divides the US and Mexico. It’s something that can be seen in communities across the US.

And for months, we’ve heard many mayors –— including prominent Democratic leaders — saying their cities are struggling to handle an influx of migrants.

New York Mayor Eric Adams said earlier this year that the migrant crisis would “destroy” the city.

And an order he signed could soon lead to the eviction of thousands of migrants from city shelters as part of Adams’ plan to enforce a new 60-day limit for families. A similar 30-day rule for single adults has been in place for several weeks. Families who receive eviction notices can return to the city’s intake center to re-apply for a new shelter spot.

City officials say they need more support from the federal government, and Adams has said the city’s budget will have to be significantly cut in order to meet the needs of the ongoing crisis.

Migrants line up outside the Jacob Javits Federal Building in downtown Manhattan on December 5. - Luiz C. Ribeiro/NY Daily News/Getty Images

The continuing pushback from local leaders in his own party could have political implications for Biden heading into the 2024 election, and may be one reason why these days, he appears more open to taking a tougher stance.

Any one of these storylines alone is significant news.

Looking at them all together, it’s clear things have reached a crescendo that’s impossible to ignore.

In the coming months, I’ll be watching what’s happening at the border closely.

Many things about the future are uncertain, but there’s no doubt that what we hear and see unfolding there is going to be a big part of the conversation in 2024.

CNN’s Rosa Flores, Sara Weisfeldt, Priscilla Alvarez, Camila DeChalus, Zachary B. Wolf and Gloria Pazmino contributed to this report.



Mexican president says he’ll fight Texas migrant crossing law

Nick Robertson
Tue, December 19, 2023 



Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador pledged to fight a new Texas law allowing state authorities to prosecute migrants entering the U.S. from Mexico.

Border issues previously were left to federal authorities, but the inclusion of state and local police contributes to rising tensions between Mexico and the U.S. as Congress struggles to negotiate border security policy.

“The foreign ministry is already working on the process to challenge this law,” López Obrador said Tuesday, Reuters reported.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) “wants to win popularity with these measures, but he’s not going to win anything, but he’ll lose favor, because in Texas there are so many Mexicans and migrants,” he added.

López Obrador has frequently clashed with Abbot and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) over immigration, even encouraging Mexican-Americans not to vote for the pair.

The Foreign Ministry filed a challenge against Abbott’s Rio Grande buoys in July, which were also challenged by the U.S. federal government. A federal appeals court ordered them removed from the river this month.

The new migrant prosecution also sets up a fight with the federal government over border authority because Abbott claims the Biden administration has not done enough to stem the flow of immigration across the U.S.-Mexico border.

“The goal of Senate Bill 4 is to stop the tidal wave of illegal entry into Texas. It creates a criminal offense for illegal entry into Texas from a foreign nation for repeat offenders, that creates the events of illegal reentry with a potential prison sentence term of up to 20 years,” Abbott said Monday at the bill signing ceremony.

“Biden’s deliberate inaction has left Texas to fend for itself,” he added, suggesting Texas has a right to defend itself.

El Paso County and the American Civil Liberties Union also filed lawsuits against the state on Tuesday to challenge the law. The legislation is scheduled to go into effect in March.

Mexico to Challenge Texas on Border Migrant Arrests, AMLO Says

Maya Averbuch
Tue, December 19, 2023 at 8:57 AM MST·1 min read
278




(Bloomberg) -- Mexico’s president says his country will challenge a measure signed Monday by Texas Governor Greg Abbott that allows state law enforcement to arrest migrants who entered the US without authorization.

Abbott has repeatedly clashed with the White House over efforts to keep migrants out of Texas and increase inspections of goods trucked through the US-Mexico border. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has accused the governor of using such measures for political gain ahead of the 2024 US presidential election.

“We’re always going to be against these measures, and we want to say to our countrymen and migrants that we’re defending them. The governor of Texas is acting this way because he wants to be a candidate for vice president,” AMLO, as the president is known, said Tuesday at his daily press briefing. “He’s not going to gain anything with this measure.”

©2023 Bloomberg L.P.

ACLU sues Texas over controversial immigration law

Olivia Alafriz
POLITICO
Tue, December 19, 2023 



The American Civil Liberties Union sued Texas on Tuesday to block a controversial law that would allow police to detain migrants who illegally cross the U.S. border and authorize judges to order their deportation.

The lawsuit, filed in a federal district court, alleges that the bill is unconstitutional and that it runs afoul of federal immigration law.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit with the ACLU of Texas and the Texas Civil Rights Project on behalf of the Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, American Gateways and the County of El Paso, Texas.

“Governor Abbott’s efforts to circumvent the federal immigration system and deny people the right to due process is not only unconstitutional, but also dangerously prone to error, and will disproportionately harm Black and Brown people regardless of their immigration status,” Anand Balakrishnan, a senior staff attorney at the ACLU, said in a statement.

The legislation is the latest in a series of efforts by Texas Republicans to test the limits of the state's authority to tighten border security and stem illegal immigration.

Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed the bill into law on Monday and it is set to take effect in March.

"President Biden has repeatedly refused to enforce federal immigration laws already on the books and do his job to secure the border. In his absence, Texas has the constitutional authority to secure our border through historic laws like SB 4," Abbott said in a statement to POLITICO, adding that his administration would see the fight through to the Supreme Court if necessary.

Several groups suing Texas over new immigration law

John Krinjak
FOX
Tue, December 19, 2023 

AUSTIN, Texas - A new lawsuit is challenging a controversial border bill signed by Gov. Greg Abbott on Tuesday. Senate Bill 4 would make undocumented immigration a state crime, allowing Texas police to arrest suspected migrants.

"We're suing to block one of the most extreme anti-immigrant bills in the country," said Adriana Pinon, legal director for the ACLU of Texas.

Less than 24 hours after SB 4 was signed, to "stop the tidal wave of illegal entry into Texas", according to Abbott, the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Texas, Texas Civil Rights Project and others are suing to try to stop it from taking effect.

"It is not in line with the values of Texas," said Edna Yang, co-executive director of American Gateways.

The Austin-based immigrant advocacy group American Gateways is among the plaintiffs.

"I don't think it's just immigrant communities that are going to be targeted. I think it's communities of color and people who may profile as immigrants based on the color of their skin, unfortunately," said Yang.

SB4, which is set to take effect in March, allows Texas police to arrest people who they think crossed the border illegally. Migrants could face a $2,000 fine and six months in jail. Repeat offenders could get up to 20 years in prison. The law also enables judges to send migrants back.

"When they see someone crossing over the border, as the National Guard see, as the Texas Department of Public Safety see, they are not profiling, they are seeing someone violating the law, and now they're going to have the ability to arrest them and prosecute them," said Abbott on Monday.

Abbott believes that will deter many from crossing in the first place.

But the 20-page lawsuit claims "immigration is a quintessentially federal authority" and that "SB4 is patently illegal".

"We think that the law isn't constitutional, and we hope that the lawsuit will be able to challenge its constitutionality," said Yang.

MORE STORIES:

Texas sued over new immigration law

Border Security: Texas bill signed into law allowing state to arrest migrants, challenging federal authority

Abbott argues the constitution specifically allows states to protect their borders when the federal government fails to do so.

"Biden’s deliberate inaction has left Texas to fend for itself," said Abbott.

But some constitutional law experts believe the lawsuit has teeth.

"It rubs directly up against and conflicts with the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution. The supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution asserts that if a state law conflicts with a federal law, then the state law is unconstitutional," said Dr. Eddy Carder, a constitutional law professor at Prairie View A&M University.

In response to the lawsuit, Gov. Abbott said in a statement late Tuesday:

"President Biden has repeatedly refused to enforce federal immigration laws already on the books and do his job to secure the border. In his absence, Texas has the constitutional authority to secure our border through historic laws like SB 4. Texas will take this fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to protect Texans from President Biden's dangerous open border policies."


Texas slapped with lawsuit over new law allowing police to arrest migrants who cross the border illegally

Bradford Betz
FOX NEWS
Tue, December 19, 2023

Civil rights groups, including the ACLU, filed a lawsuit against the State of Texas on Tuesday over a new law that gives police the authority to arrest migrants who cross the border illegally and allows judges to order them to leave the U.S.

The American Civil Liberties Union, its Texas branch, and the Texas Civil Rights Project claim on behalf of El Paso County and two immigrant aid groups that the new law, Senate Bill 4, is unconstitutional and preempted by federal law.

The ACLU of Texas called the law the nation’s "most extreme anti-immigration law."

"SB4 lets police arrest people over ‘suspicions’ about immigration status and judges deport people without due process," the group said in an X post. "This is unconstitutional and will harm Black and Brown Texans the most."

ACLU of Texas argued that the law would lead to "racial profiling" and "harassment" with police stopping people because of their skin color or the language they speak.

MANY SENATORS HAVE ALREADY LEFT TOWN AMID BORDER NEGOTIATIONS AS ILLEGAL CROSSINGS HIT RECORD

READ ON THE FOX NEWS APP

Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed SB4 during a ceremony on the U.S. border in Brownsville on Tuesday.

Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility. But the law that Abbott signed allows any Texas law enforcement officer to arrest people who are suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, they could either agree to a Texas judge's order to leave the U.S. or be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges of illegal entry. Migrants who don't leave could face arrest again under more serious felony charges.

Asylum seekers wait to be processed by U.S. Border Patrol agents after crossing the Rio Grande from Mexico into the United States on Sept. 30 in Eagle Pass, Texas.

Opponents have called the measure a dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since a 2010 Arizona law — denounced by critics as the "Show Me Your Papers" bill — that was largely struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

A White House spokesperson said Tuesday that SB4 "will make communities in Texas less safe."

SOUTHERN BORDER HIT BY RECORD NUMBER OF MIGRANT ENCOUNTERS IN A SINGLE DAY AS THOUSANDS FLOOD INTO TEXAS

Fox News Digital has reached out to Abbott's office for a response to the new lawsuit. SB4 takes effect in March.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott looks on during a news conference on March 15, 2023, in Austin, Texas.

Texas Republicans, meanwhile, say the Biden administration isn't doing nearly enough to control the nearly 2,000-mile southern border. Texas has bused more than 65,000 migrants to cities across America since August 2022 and recently installed razor wire along the banks of the Rio Grande.

Fiscal Year 2023 has broken new records, with more than 2.4 million migrant encounters at the border.

September saw a record for encounters at the southern border, while the following month saw a record for encounters in October — with more than 240,000 encounters border-wide.

Funding for more resources at the border has stalled in recent weeks, as Republicans demand it be coupled with restrictions on asylum and the use of parole — a demand which some Democrats have balked at.

1 day after Texas governor signs controversial law, SB4, ACLU files legal challenge

Lauren Villagran, USA TODAY
Updated Wed, December 20, 2023 


Texas civil rights organizations and El Paso County on Tuesday sued the Texas Department of Public Safety, challenging a new law that empowers state law enforcement to detain and deport migrants entering or living in the U.S. illegally.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in Austin on behalf of El Paso County and two immigrant advocacy organizations, El Paso's Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and Austin-based American Gateways.

In the complaint, the ACLU calls Texas Senate Bill 4 "patently illegal," and says it violates "the federal government’s exclusive immigration powers and the sensitive foreign policy implications of these powers."

The Texas law takes "control over immigration from the federal government" and deprives immigrants of their rights under federal law, according to the complaint. The complaint asks the court to prevent enforcement of S.B. 4 before the law takes effect on March 5.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott didn't immediately respond to USA TODAY's request for comment on Tuesday. The Texas Department of Public Safety declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Abbott on Monday signed Senate Bill 4 into law in Brownsville, Texas. He said it and two other laws dealing with border security will "better protect Texas and America."

"President (Joe) Biden’s deliberate inaction has left Texas to fend for itself," Abbott said in a statement on Monday. "These laws will help stop the tidal wave of illegal entry into Texas, add additional funding to build more border wall and crackdown on human smuggling."

Senate Bill 4 passed both houses of the Texas Legislature in November. The legislation mirrors the federal law that makes illegal entry at the U.S. border a misdemeanor and illegal re-entry a felony.

El Paso County Judge Ricardo Samaniego said the law will put a financial burden on the county. The county would be tasked with providing detention space for an expected increase in migrant detainees, arrested by state authorities. A new jail could cost upward of $40 million, he said.

"We feel its unconstitutional what they are doing, and it’s unlike us," Samaniego told USA TODAY. "We want to continue to be us – humanitarian, above the fray of the political stuff."

In a county where interstate highways overlook the low skyline of Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, and thousands of people legally crisscross the U.S.-Mexico border daily, civil rights advocates say lawful residents and U.S. citizens will inevitably be targeted.

More than 80 percent of El Paso County residents identify as Hispanic, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, and many residents can trace their roots to Mexico within a generation or two.

The new Texas law is "rooted in anti-immigrant sentiment," said Marisa Limón Garza, executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

"We know in El Paso what that looks like. We’re the lucky ones who survived Aug. 3," she said, referring to the Aug. 3, 2019, racist mass shooting targeting Hispanics at an El Paso Walmart in which 23 people died.

Penalties for violating the law against illegal entry range from a class-A misdemeanor to a second-degree felony, which could lead to a 20-year jail sentence.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: SB4 legal challenge: El Paso County sues Texas over immigration law


What we know about Texas' new law that lets police arrest migrants who enter the US illegally

VALERIE GONZALEZ
Tue, December 19, 2023 


Immigration Texas
Gov. Greg Abbott signs three bills into law at a border wall construction site in Brownsville, Texas on Monday, Dec. 18, 2023, that will broaden his border security plans and add funding for more infrastructure to deter illegal immigration. 
(AP Photo/Valerie Gonzalez)

McALLEN, Texas (AP) — How far can a state go to keep migrants out of the U.S.?

The answer may soon come out of Texas, where a new law signed by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott this week will allow police to arrest migrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border illegally and give local judges the authority to order them to leave the country.

Acting quickly, civil rights groups and a Texas border county filed a lawsuit Tuesday that seeks to stop the measure from taking effect in March, calling it unconstitutional. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre also blasted the Texas law but wouldn’t say whether the Justice Department would challenge it.

Here are some things to know:

WHO CAN BE ARRESTED?

The measure allows any Texas law enforcement officer to arrest people who are suspected of entering the country illegally. Once in custody, migrants could either agree to a Texas judge’s order to leave the U.S. or be prosecuted on misdemeanor charges of illegal entry. Migrants who don’t leave could face arrest again under more serious felony charges.

Arresting officers must have probable cause, which could include witnessing the illegal entry themselves or seeing it on video.

The law cannot be enforced against people lawfully present in the U.S., including those who were granted asylum or who are enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

“The goal of these laws is to make sure that when they see somebody crossing over the border, as the National Guard see, as the Texas Department of Public Safety see, they know they’re not profiling. They are seeing with their own eyes people who are violating the law,” Abbott said Monday.

However, critics, including Mexico President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, worry the law could lead to racial profiling and family separation. American Civil Liberties Union affiliates in Texas and some neighboring states issued a travel advisory this week warning people of a possible threat their civil and constitutional rights violations when passing through Texas.

During a news briefing Tuesday, López Obrador said Abbott was looking to score political points with people’s lives.

“The Texas governor acts that way because he wants to be the Republican vice-presidential candidate and wants to win popularity with these measures,” López Obrador said. “He’s not going to win anything. On the contrary, he is going to lose support because there are a lot of Mexicans in Texas, a lot of migrants.”

WHERE WILL THE LAW BE ENFORCED?

It can be enforced anywhere in Texas.

Republican state Rep. David Spiller, who carried the bill in the Texas House, says he expects the vast majority of arrests will occur within 50 miles (80 kilometers) of the U.S.-Mexico border.

Some places are off-limits. Arrests can't be made in public and private schools; churches, synagogues or other established places of worship; hospitals and other health care facilities, including those where sexual assault forensic examinations are conducted.

Under the Texas law, migrants ordered to leave would be sent to ports of entry along the border with Mexico, even if they are not Mexican citizens.

IS THE LAW CONSTITUTIONAL?

Legal experts and immigrant rights group have said the measure is a clear conflict with the U.S. government’s authority to regulate immigration.

A key claim in Tuesday's lawsuit filed by the ACLU and other groups is that it violates the U.S. Constitution's supremacy clause. The suit accuses Texas of trying “to create a new state system to regulate immigration that completely bypasses and conflicts with the federal system.”

Opponents have called the measure the most dramatic attempt by a state to police immigration since a 2010 Arizona law — denounced by critics as the “Show Me Your Papers” bill — that was largely struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court's 2012 decision on the Arizona law stated the federal government has exclusive power over immigration.

Abbott and other Republicans have said President Joe Biden is not doing enough to control the 1,950-mile (3,149-kilometer) southern border.

“In his absence, Texas has the constitutional authority to secure our border through historic laws like SB 4,” Abbott said in a statement.

The U.S. government has not said whether it will challenge the Texas law, as it did with Arizona's measure.

Mexico's president has indicated his country will intervene.

WHAT IS HAPPENING ON THE BORDER?

Abbott signed the law Monday amid an increase in border crossings that has stretched U.S. Customs and Border Protection resources. Troy Miller, the agency's acting commissioner, has called the number of daily arrivals “unprecedented,” with illegal crossings topping 10,000 some days across the border in December.

Thousands of asylum-seekers who have crossed are sleeping outside along the border overnight as they wait for federal agents to process them. Most are released with notices to appear in immigration courts, which are backlogged with more than 3 million cases.

Many are crossing at the Texas cities of Eagle Pass and El Paso, where federal officials suspended cross-border rail traffic in response to migrants riding freight trains through Mexico, hopping off just before entering the U.S.

The U.S. government also recently shut down the nearby international crossing between Lukeville, Arizona, and Sonoyta, Mexico, to free Customs and Border Protection officers assigned to the port of entry to help with transportation and other support. The agency also has partially closed a few other border ports of entry in recent months, including a pedestrian crossing in San Diego.

___

Associated Press writers Acacia Coronado and Paul Weber in Austin, Texas; Christopher Sherman in Mexico City; and Zeke Miller in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.






Friday, December 15, 2023

Sturgeon could SHOULD be listed as endangered species, but Wisconsin’s congressional reps want an exemption. Here’s why.

A bipartisan group of Wisconsin's congressional delegation has urged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to exempt lake sturgeon in the state from any potential listing under the federal Endangered Species Act.

The agency is conducting a status review of lake sturgeon in the U.S. to determine if listing is warranted; it is scheduled to release its findings by June 30, 2024.

A federal listing under the ESA could prohibit angling for or spearing the fish in Wisconsin. The state hosts annual hook-and-line and spearing seasons for lake sturgeon managed by the Department of Natural Resources.

It a statement issued Dec. 7 the six U.S. representatives and two senators highlighted the robust sturgeon population in Wisconsin, the strong state-based management program as well as the cultural, ecological and economical values of the fish.

"Nowhere in the world will you find such a unique cultural connection and staunch dedication to the preservation of sturgeon population levels than in Wisconsin," the group wrote. "In fact, due to such careful management, populations in the state thrive and allow for a sustainable spear harvest season on the Winnebago System every winter. We are concerned that a potential listing of the species under the Endangered Species Act could curtail this successful, science-based management model as well as threaten a cherished and unique Wisconsin tradition."

Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher, whose district includes part of the Winnebago System, led the effort on the statement. It was also signed by Republican Reps. Scott Fitzgerald, Glenn Grothman,, Bryan Steil, Tom Tiffany and Derrick Van Orden as well as Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin and Republican Sen. Ron Johnson.

In 2018 the USFWS received a petition from the Center for Biological Diversity requesting the agency list the lake sturgeon range-wide or as several distinct population segments.

The next year the agency concluded the petition presented "substantial scientific or commercial information indicating listing may be warranted" and initiated a status review process, according to a statement from Melissa Clark, USFWS public affairs specialist.

The USFWS is actively engaged in the review and is gathering and referencing the "best scientific and commercial data available, which includes information regarding States’ management practices for lake sturgeon throughout the range of the species," Clark said.

Lake sturgeon are one of the oldest fish species in North America and are native to at least two dozen states in the central, southern and eastern U.S. according to the USFWS. In Wisconsin they are found in Lakes Michigan and Superior as well as the Wisconsin, Chippewa and Flambeau, Wolf and Fox rivers, among others.

The Wisconsin congressional delegation said the importance of the prehistoric fish is rooted in the Menominee Tribe’s strong cultural ties to the lake sturgeon. The tribe includes sturgeon in its creation story and also relied on the fish as a food source.

The species declined over the last century in many parts of its historical range due to pollution, overfishing and loss of access to spawning habitat.

But several populations are exceptions, including the Detroit River and Lake St. Clair in Lake Huron in Michigan, the Rainy River and Lake of the Woods in Minnesota and the Winnebago System in Wisconsin, said Ron Bruch, retired DNR fisheries director and former sturgeon biologist.

After a period of closed seasons in the early 20th Century due to concerns of overharvest, the sturgeon population in the Winnebago System (lakes Butte des Morts, Poygan, Winnebago and Winneconne and the Fox and Wolf rivers) has grown to become one of the largest in the world, Bruch said.

Fisheries staff with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service net a lake sturgeon for processing at Bamboo Bend on the Wolf River in Shiocton. The fish were measured, sexed and had a passive integrated transponder (PIT tag) implanted and then released back to the river.
Fisheries staff with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service net a lake sturgeon for processing at Bamboo Bend on the Wolf River in Shiocton. The fish were measured, sexed and had a passive integrated transponder (PIT tag) implanted and then released back to the river.

More: Outdoors calendar

The DNR establishes a sturgeon population estimate each year using a mark and recapture process. In 2022 the population was estimated at 12,304 adult females and 24,061 adult males, as well as an undetermined number of juvenile fish, according to the DNR sturgeon stock assessment report.

And strict regulations limit the harvest of sturgeon to ensure the health of the population, Bruch said.

"The sturgeon population in the Winnebago System is as large now as any time after settlement times," Bruch said. "It's strong and naturally-reproducing. In no way is it threatened or endangered."

The two-week sturgeon spearing season is responsible for an estimated $3.5 million economic impact and sturgeon conservation is a major part in the over $200 million annual impact fishing brings to the Winnebago System, according to the Wisconsin congressional members.

In 2023 the DNR sold 13,219 sturgeon spearing licenses and 1,405 sturgeon were registered over the 16-day spearing season in February on the Winnebago System.

A hook-and-line sturgeon season is held in fall on many major river systems in the state. Anglers are allowed to keep one fish per year but most fishing is catch-and-release. The statewide harvest of sturgeon during the fall season has averaged 33 fish over the last 15 years, according to the DNR. The hook-and-line season is not held on the Winnebago System.

Money raised from the sale of sturgeon spearing and fishing licenses is used to fund Wisconsin sturgeon management programs.

A representative for the Center for Biological Diversity, the organization that asked for the review, said it's most likely the most imperiled populations – Lake Superior, Missouri River, Ohio River, Arkansan-White River, and lower Mississippi, in their view – would get listed.

"The loss of lake sturgeon has been analogous to the slaughter of the buffalo," said Jeff Miller, senior conservation advocate for CBD. "Now there are only nine populations in entire U.S. with more than 1,000 adult fish."

However, Miller said his group doesn't oppose a DNR-managed harvest season in the Winnebago System.

"We don’t see any problem with the short spear-fishing fishery in the Lake Winnebago System and the Upriver Lakes," Miller said. "It hosts a large population of lake sturgeon, and there are strict regulations and quotas."

But the CBD would like to see added protections for sturgeon in other parts of Wisconsin, including lakes Michigan and Superior and their tributaries as well as the Chippewa River.

Lake sturgeon swim along the rocky shore of the Wolf River at Bamboo Bend in Shiocton. The fish congregate at the site to spawn in spring.
Lake sturgeon swim along the rocky shore of the Wolf River at Bamboo Bend in Shiocton. The fish congregate at the site to spawn in spring.

If lake sturgeon were listed under the ESA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service could still allow state fisheries to hold harvest seasons with a fish management plan that is consistent with recovery.

The Wisconsin congressional members asked the Service to to take into "strong consideration the conservation success story of the species in Wisconsin."

"Instead of imposing a nationwide, one-size-fits-all listing that could curtail the state’s management plan and threaten a long-cherished tradition, we ask that Wisconsin lake sturgeon be exempt from any potential ESA listing," they wrote. "Furthermore, we encourage the Service to engage with the Wisconsin DNR, local communities, and other relevant stakeholders to help expand this model to other states and ensure the continued existence of lake sturgeon for generations to come."

The statement by members of Wisconsin's congressional delegation follows an October letter with a similar message signed by 29 members of the state legislature.

A public comment period will be held after the Service issues its findings in June 2024.

This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Lawmakers want Wisconsin sturgeon exempt from endangered species list


Thursday, December 14, 2023


Senate passes defense policy bill with 5.2% pay raise for troops, the biggest boost in decades

THE ONLY GOOD THING IN THE BILL

KEVIN FREKING
Wed, December 13, 2023 


The Pentagon is seen on Sunday, Aug. 27, 2023, in Washington. 
(AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate passed a defense policy bill Wednesday that authorizes the biggest pay raise for troops in more than two decades, but also leaves behind many of the policy priorities that social conservatives were clamoring for, making for an unusually divisive debate over what is traditionally a strongly bipartisan effort.

Lawmakers have been negotiating a final bill for months after each chamber passed strikingly different versions in July. Some of the priorities championed by social conservatives were a no-go for Democrats, so negotiators dropped them from the final product to get it over the finish line.

The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 87-13 It now heads to the House, where opponents have been more vocal about their concerns.



Most notably, the bill does not include language blocking the Pentagon's abortion travel policy and restricting gender-affirming health care for transgender service members and dependents. Republicans prevailed, however, in winning some concessions on diversity and inclusion training in the military. For example, the bill freezes hiring for such training until a full accounting of the programming and costs is completed and reported to Congress.

The bill sets key Pentagon policy that lawmakers will attempt to fund through a follow-up appropriations bill. Lawmakers were keen to emphasize how the bill calls for a 5.2% boost in service member pay, the biggest increase in more than 20 years. The bill authorizes $886 billion for national defense programs for the current fiscal year that began Oct. 1, about 3% more than the prior year.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said the bill would ensure “America’s military remains state of the art at all times all around the world.”

The bill also includes a short-term extension of a surveillance program aimed at preventing terrorism and catching spies. But the program has detractors on both sides of the political aisle who view it as a threat to the privacy of ordinary Americans. Some House Republicans were incensed at the extension, which is designed to buy more time to reach a compromise.

The extension continues a program that permits the U.S. government to collect without a warrant the communications of non-Americans located outside the country to gather foreign intelligence.

U.S. officials have said the tool, first authorized in 2008 and renewed several times since then, is crucial in disrupting terror attacks, cyber intrusions and other national security threats. It has produced vital intelligence that the U.S. has relied on for specific operations, such as the killing last year of al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahri.

But the administration’s efforts to secure reauthorization of the program have encountered strong bipartisan pushback. Democrats like Sen. Ron Wyden, who has long championed civil liberties, have aligned with Republican supporters of former President Donald Trump to demand better privacy protections for Americans and have proposed a slew of competing bills.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., unsuccessfully sought to keep the extension out of the defense bill. He argued that the extension would likely mean no reform to the surveillance program in the next year.

“That means that once again the intelligence agencies that ignore the constraints on their power will go unaddressed and unpunished, and the warrantless surveillance of Americans in the violation of the Bill of Rights will continue,” Paul said.

Enough opposition has developed within the GOP ranks that it has forced House Speaker Mike Johnson to tee up the defense policy bill for a vote through a process generally reserved for non-controversial legislation. Under that process, at least two-thirds of the House will have to vote in favor of the legislation for it to pass, but going that route avoids the prospect of a small number of Republicans blocking it through a procedural vote.

While such a process may ease passage of the bill, it could hurt Johnson’s standing with some of the most conservative members in the House. It only takes a few Republicans to essentially grind House proceedings to a halt or even to end a speaker’s tenure, as former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy learned when eight Republicans joined with Democrats to oust him.

The White House called for swift passage of the defense bill, saying it “provides the critical authorities we need to build the military required to deter future conflicts while supporting the servicemembers and their spouses and families who carry out that mission every day.”

Consideration of the bill comes at an especially dangerous time for the world, with wars taking place in Ukraine and the Middle East, and as China increasingly flexes its military might in the South China Sea.

On Ukraine, the bill includes the creation of a special inspector general for Ukraine to address concerns about whether taxpayer dollars are being spent in Ukraine as intended. That’s on top of oversight work already being conducted by other agency watchdogs.

“We will continue to stay on top of this, but I want to assure my colleagues that there has been no evidence of diversion of weapons provided to Ukraine or any other assistance,” the Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, told lawmakers this week in advocating for the bill.

On China, the bill establishes a new training program with Taiwan, requires a plan to accelerate deliveries of Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Taiwan, and approves an agreement that enables Australia to access nuclear-powered submarines, which are stealthier and more capable than conventionally powered vessels.

Dozens of House Republicans are balking because the bill would keep in place a Pentagon rule that allows for travel reimbursement when a service member has to go out of state to get an abortion or other reproductive care. The Biden administration instituted the new rules after the Supreme Court overturned the nationwide right to an abortion, and some states have limited or banned the procedure.

Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., had for months blocked the promotion of more than 400 senior military leaders over his objections to the policy. He recently dropped most of his holds except for four-star generals and admirals, but many House Republicans were supportive of his effort and had included a repeal of the reimbursement policy in the House version of the defense bill.

___

Associated Press staff writer Eric Tucker contributed to this report.


Senate passes $886 billion defense spending bill with pay raises for troops, Ukraine aid

Rachel Looker, USA TODAY
Wed, December 13, 2023 


WASHINGTON − The Senate passed an $886 billion defense spending plan Wednesday, supported by President Joe Biden, that includes funding for Ukraine and annual pay raises for troops in a last-minute rush to authorize spending before the end of the year.

The National Defense Authorization Act provides funding each year for Pentagon priorities such as training and equipment. The Senate passed the legislation by a bipartisan vote of 87-13. Congress has advanced the must-pass defense spending bill consecutively for the last 61 years.

"At a time of huge trouble for global security, doing the defense authorization bill is more important than ever," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on the Senate floor Wednesday. "Passing the NDAA enables us to hold the line against Russia, stand firm against the Chinese Communist Party and ensure America's defense remain state of the art at all times."

The bill now heads to the House, where some ultraconservative Republicans have threatened to tank it after lawmakers dropped contentious provisions that would have modified the Pentagon's abortion policy and some gender affirming health care. They are also unhappy with a temporary extension of a domestic surveillance program included in the bill without reforms.
What is in the NDAA?

A local resident sorts out debris at the site of a private house ruined in the Russian missile attack in Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, Dec. 11, 2023.

The Senate's NDAA is a compromise version of the spending bill the House passed earlier this year. The House version included provisions targeting transgender health care policies in the Pentagon and an amendment that would revoke a Pentagon policy that reimburses out-of-state travel for service members who receive abortions. The abortion policy is one Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., protested for 10 months by blocking all military promotions in the Senate.

The Senate NDAA includes provisions that will:

Authorize $844.3 billion for the Department of Defense and $32.4 billion for national security programs within the Department of Energy


Support Defense department activities among Australia, United Kingdom, and the United States


Extend the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative through fiscal year 2027 and authorize the full budget request of $300 million in fiscal year 2024


Provide a 5.2 percent pay raise for military servicemembers and the Defense department civilian workforce


Support requested funding for naval vessels, combat aircraft, armored vehicles, weapon systems and munitions

A handful of Senate Republicans threatened to delay the passage of the spending bill over the last few weeks because of the missing amendments on social issues.

Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, forced procedural votes in an effort to delay the bill's passage in the upper chamber.

"Shame on Schumer for backing the Biden admin’s radical abortion agenda. I never back down from a fight," Ernst wrote Tuesday on X. "The Pentagon should be focused on protecting innocent life, not destroying it."

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., also looked to block the NDAA's package after the final version stripped his proposed legislation that would provide compensation for victims of nuclear contamination. He forced a procedural vote on the NDAA last week, but failed to delay its package.
Republicans debate surveillance program

Speaker of the House Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., talks to reporters after a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the U.S. Capitol, Tuesday, Dec. 12, 2023, in Washington.

The Senate's NDAA also includes a four-month extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a domestic surveillance program which is set to expire this month. The program allows the government to gather private messages of foreign nationals overseas who are using U.S.-based messaging platforms.

The Senate voted to block an amendment proposed by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., that would remove the extension of Section 702.

FBI Director Christopher Wray has said allowing the program to lapse would jeopardize national security.

Some lawmakers agree and view Section 702 as necessary for keeping the country safe. But others say it has been misused.

"Congress has the chance to say no more unconstitutional searches on Americans authorized only by secret courts," Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., wrote on X. "We must stand our ground and protect Americans’ civil liberties."

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pulled two bills from consideration on the House floor last week after facing opposition from within his caucus over how to address the program's reauthorization.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., called Section 702 the "biggest abuses and violations of the fourth amendment in our country’s history."

"Our Republican base is concerned with stopping the weaponized government and right now there is no accountability," she wrote on X.
Will it pass in the House?

The NDAA now heads to the House where it needs two-thirds of votes to pass.

But there is strong opposition among some Republicans over the missing provisions on social issues.

"The sole focus of the NDAA should be on national defense and security issues, but instead it funds transgender surgery in the military and still allows drag queen shows on military bases. Time to go back to the drawing board," Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., said in a statement.

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Senate OKs $886 billion defense bill with pay raises, Ukraine aid


Senate passes sweeping defense policy bill

Clare Foran, Ted Barrett and Morgan Rimmer, CNN
Wed, December 13, 2023 

The Senate voted on Wednesday to pass a critical defense policy bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act, which sets the policy agenda and authorizes funding for the Department of Defense annually.

The final negotiated version of the NDAA for fiscal year 2024 authorizes $886 billion in national defense funding, an increase of $28 billion over last year.

It is expected to be approved by the Senate with bipartisan support and would next go to the House, with lawmakers hoping it will pass through both chambers before the end of the week. The Senate passed the bill by a vote of 87 to 13.

The sweeping legislation authorizes a 5.2% pay raise for members of the military as part of a wide range of provisions related to service member pay and benefits, housing and childcare.

In a move that sparked anger from some lawmakers, the bill will include a short-term extension of a controversial law that permits warrantless surveillance of foreign nationals. Supporters argue it is a critical tool for safeguarding national security, but it has come under criticism from some lawmakers over alleged misuse.

The law, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, enables the US government to obtain intelligence by collecting communications records of foreign persons based overseas who are using US-based communications services.

The searches are governed by a set of internal rules and procedures designed to protect Americans’ privacy and civil liberties, but critics say that loopholes allow the FBI to search the data it collects for Americans’ information – as opposed to from foreign adversaries – without proper justification.

Tensions have flared on Capitol Hill over the issue with some conservative Republicans expressing significant frustration over the extension’s inclusion in the defense policy bill. The extension will run through April 19.

Congressional leaders have said that they hope to negotiate consensus legislation to make changes to FISA authorities aimed at preventing abuse that could pass both chambers in the new year.

According to a summary of the bill from the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee, the bill would also put in place a watchdog to oversee US aid to Ukraine in the form of a special inspector general as well as set up a collection at the National Archives of government records on unidentified anomalous phenomena, commonly known as UFOs, that will be accessible to the public.

The legislation does not include two controversial provisions related to abortion and transgender health care access, which were in the House defense policy bill that passed this summer.

Senate passes mammoth annual defense policy bill

Wed, December 13, 2023 

The Senate on Wednesday passed the annual defense policy bill, a compromise $886 billion package that lays out how the Pentagon will be funded through the next fiscal year.

The vote to approve the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was 87-13.

House lawmakers will next take up the legislation. The bill faces resistance in the House from far-right lawmakers who are opposed to the package, in part because it fails to include House-passed provisions to rid the Pentagon of what they say are “woke” policies.

In addition to keeping the Defense Department’s programs and policies funded, the defense bill will authorize tens of billions of dollars for aircraft and ships and give a historic 5.2 percent pay raise to troops.

The NDAA also eyes bolstering U.S. national security abroad, with $11.5 billion slated to deter China in the Indo-Pacific region and another $800 million to support Ukraine.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday urged senators to pass the NDAA as the U.S. faces challenges across the globe.

“At a time of huge trouble for global security, doing the defense authorization bill was more important than ever,” Schumer said on the Senate floor. “Passing the NDAA enables us to hold the line against Russia, stand firm against the Chinese Communist Party and ensure that America’s defenses remain state-of-the-art.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also championed the NDAA for bolstering national security and ridding the Defense Department of cultural politics.

“It will focus the Pentagon more squarely on tackling national security challenges instead of creating new ones with partisan social policies,” McConnell said.

The only major resistance to the NDAA in the Senate came from Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who said he would vote against the bill because it failed to include compensation for victims of radiation exposure in his state and extend those protections. He put up a couple procedural hurdles in its path to a final vote.

“When the government causes injury the government should make it right,” Hawley said this week. “It is wrong to let it expire, it is an injustice, it is a scar on the conscience of this body and on this nation.”

The NDAA is one of the largest bills passed annually by lawmakers and is a yearlong process for Congress.

The defense bill was finalized by conference negotiators in the House and Senate last week, after the chambers passed vastly different versions over the summer, with House Republicans slipping in provisions on the culture wars engulfing America.

The final bill dropped many of the controversial House amendments. An amendment to block the Pentagon’s abortion policy failed to make it into the NDAA, as did another preventing the Defense Department from funding gender-affirming surgery.

Hard-line Republicans, including Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), are vowing to vote against the NDAA in the House because those amendments are not included.

They are also upset about a short-term extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows for warrantless surveillance of foreigners abroad but is controversial because Americans can get swept up in the surveillance.

Some senators took to the Senate floor to protest the FISA extension, including Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).

Ahead of the NDAA vote, an effort to remove the FISA Section 702 extension from the bill was defeated in a 35-65 vote. In remarks, Paul accused senators of trying to “rubber stamp this and look the other way” to allow FISA to continue without any reforms.

Lee said the American people deserve freedom from “warrantless searches.”

“The American people aren’t going to take this anymore,” he said. “The American people expect more, and the Constitution demands it.”

Other provisions of the NDAA may draw objections from Democrats, including one restricting critical race theory at military academies and another banning unauthorized flags on military bases, which Republicans have said would prohibit LGBTQ flags.

The NDAA also directs the Pentagon to consider reinstating troops who were fired for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine and includes limitations on the Biden administration’s ability to build out Space Command headquarters in Colorado.

Here’s what’s in the $886 billion defense bill

Tami Luhby, CNN
Wed, December 13, 2023



The Senate and House Armed Services committees have rolled out their must-pass $886.3 billion defense bill, which would provide the largest raise for service members in more than two decades, temporarily extend a controversial surveillance program and strengthen the US posture in the Indo-Pacific region to deter Chinese actions.

The chambers are expected to vote this week on the nearly 3,100-page National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2024 before sending it to President Joe Biden for his signature. The package authorizes $28 billion, or about 3%, more than the previous fiscal year.

The legislation outlines the policy agenda for the Department of Defense and the US military and authorizes spending in line with the Pentagon’s priorities. But it does not appropriate the funding itself.

Also notable, the joint package does not include two controversial provisions related to abortion and transgender health care access, which were in the House defense policy bill that passed this summer. The House version would have prohibited the secretary of defense from paying for or reimbursing expenses relating to abortion services. It also would have barred a health care program for service members from covering hormone treatments for transgender individuals and gender confirmation surgeries.

But the final version of the bill does include multiple measures aimed at “ending wokeness in the military,” according to a summary provided by the Republican-led House Armed Services Committee.

Funding for a separate $105 billion national security package that would provide more assistance to Israel and Ukraine continues to be a point of contention in Congress, with Senate Republicans insisting that more foreign aid be paired with major border security policy changes. While there have been talks to try to find consensus, no bipartisan deal has been reached.

The defense authorization bill would extend the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative through the end of 2026 and authorize $300 million for the program in the current fiscal year and the next one. The program provides funding for the federal government to pay industry to produce weapons and security assistance to send to Ukraine, rather than drawing directly from current US stockpiles of weapons.

Here are some key provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act, according to summaries provided by the House and the Democratic-led Senate Armed Services committees:

Support for service members and their families


The package contains several measures to improve service members’ wages and benefits in hopes of aiding in recruitment and retention.

It would provide a 5.2% boost in service member basic pay and authorize a monthly bonus for junior enlisted members. The bill would also adjust the Basic Allowance for Housing calculation to boost reimbursement for junior enlisted service members so they could better afford rising rents. And it would expand the Basic Needs Allowance to help low-income service members with families.

The bill would also authorize $38 million over the budget request for new family housing and $356 million over the budget request to renovate and build new barracks.

To help military spouses, it would expand their reimbursements for relicensing or business costs and help those working for the federal government keep their jobs by allowing them to telework when service members transfer locations.

And the legislation would reduce child care expenses for military families and authorize $153 million over the budget request for the construction of new child care centers.

Plus, it would authorize the Department of Defense to fund – and Armed Services members to participate in – clinical trials using psychedelic substances and cannabis to treat post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injuries.

Warrantless surveillance of foreign nationals

The bill includes a short-term extension of a controversial law that permits warrantless surveillance of foreign nationals, extending authority for the program through April 19.

The law, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, enables the US government to obtain intelligence by collecting communications records of non-Americans overseas who are using US-based communications services.

Supporters argue Section 702 is a critical tool for safeguarding national security, but it has come under scrutiny from some lawmakers over alleged misuse.

Focus on Indo-Pacific region

To counter Chinese aggression, the package would authorize $14.7 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and extend it through fiscal year 2024. And it would establish a training, advising and institutional capacity-building program for the military forces of Taiwan.

It would enable the implementation of the AUKUS agreement between the US, United Kingdom and Australia and authorize the eventual sale of nuclear-capable submarines to Australia. The bill would also establish the Indo-Pacific Campaigning Initiative, which would facilitate an increase in the frequency and scale of exercises conducted by the US Indo-Pacific Command, among other efforts.

‘Ending wokeness in the military’

The package would prohibit funding for the teaching, training or promotion of critical race theory in the military, including at service academies and Department of Defense schools, according to the House summary. And it would prohibit the display of any unapproved flags, such as the LGBTQ pride flag, at military installations.

It would also put in place a hiring freeze on diversity, equity and inclusion positions until the US Government Accountability Office completes an investigation of the Pentagon’s DEI programs. Plus, the bill would cut and cap the base pay of DEI staffers at $70,000 a year.

The package includes a Parents Bill of Rights, which would give parents of children in Department of Defense schools the right to review curriculum, books and instructional materials, meet with teachers and provide consent before schools conduct medical exams or screenings of students.

In addition, the legislation reiterates that no funds may be spent on drag shows, Drag Queen Story Hours or similar events.


Help service members who did not get the Covid-19 vaccine


The legislation would require the defense secretary to inform the 8,000 service members who were discharged for not receiving the Covid-19 vaccine of the process they can follow to be reinstated.

It would also treat the lapse in service as a “career intermission” so future promotions are not affected, and it would require the Defense Department to grant requests to correct the personnel files of those discharged so they can receive full retirement benefits.

CNN’s Clare Foran contributed to this report.


US Senate passes mammoth defense policy bill, next up vote in House

Updated Wed, December 13, 2023

U.S. military personnel train on the waters near Coronado, California


By Patricia Zengerle

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Senate backed a defense policy bill authorizing a record $886 billion in annual military spending with strong support from both Democrats and Republicans on Wednesday, sidestepping partisan divides over social issues that had threatened what is seen as a must-pass bill.

Separate from the appropriations bills that set government spending levels, the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, authorizes everything from pay raises for the troops - this year's will be 5.2% - to purchases of ships, ammunition and aircraft as well as policies such as measures to help Ukraine and pushback against China in the Indo-Pacific.

This year's bill is nearly 3,100 pages long, authorizing a record $886 billion, up 3% from last year.

The NDAA "will ensure America can hold the line against Russia, stand firm against the Chinese Communist Party, and ensures that America's military remains state-of-the-art at all times all around the world," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said before the vote.

But the final version of the NDAA left out provisions addressing divisive social issues, such as access to abortion and treatment of transgender service members, that had been included in the version passed by the House over the objections of Democrats, threatening to derail the legislation.

The 100-member Senate backed the NDAA by 87 to 13. The House is expected to pass it as soon as later this week, sending it to the White House where President Joe Biden is expected to sign it into law.

The fiscal 2024 NDAA also includes a four-month extension of a disputed domestic surveillance authority, giving lawmakers more time to either reform or keep the program, known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

The Senate defeated an attempt to remove the FISA extension from the NDAA on Wednesday before voting to pass the bill.

The Republican-majority House passed its version of the NDAA earlier this year, followed by the Senate, where Biden's fellow Democrats have a slim majority. Negotiators from both parties and both chambers unveiled their compromise version last week.

The bill extends one measure to help Ukraine, the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, through the end of 2026, authorizing $300 million for the program in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2024, and the next one.

However, that figure is a tiny compared to the $61 billion in assistance for Ukraine that Biden has asked Congress to approve to help Kyiv as it battles a Russian invasion that began in February 2022.

That emergency spending request is bogged down in Congress, as Republicans have refused to approve assistance for Ukraine without Democrats agreeing to a significant toughening of immigration law.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy met with lawmakers at the Capitol on Tuesday to make his case for the funding requested by Biden, but emerged from meetings with lawmakers without Republican commitments.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Leslie Adler, Sandra Maler and Grant McCool)