PATHETIQUE
Senate Democrats hit roadblock in bid to help millions become U.S. citizens

David Shepardson
Sun., September 19, 2021

U.S. Democratic senators face reporters following weekly

 policy lunch on Capitol Hill in Washington


By David Shepardson

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Senate Democrats hit a major roadblock on Sunday in their effort to allow millions of immigrants to legally stay in the United States, after the Senate Parliamentarian ruled against attaching the measure to a $3.5 trillion spending bill, lawmakers said.

The provision aimed to give a path to citizenship for millions, including so-called Dreamer immigrants, brought to the United States as children, who are protected from deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Farmworkers, essential workers and immigrants with temporary protected status, which gives work permits and deportation relief to those hailing from nations hit by violence or natural disasters, also stood to benefit.

In a statement, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats were "deeply disappointed in this decision but the fight to provide lawful status for immigrants in budget reconciliation continues."

Senate Democrats have prepared alternate proposals and aimed to hold further meetings with the Senate parliamentarian, Schumer added.

A legislative remedy has become all the more pressing since a July court ruling that struck down DACA, which now protects around 640,000 young immigrants.

Sunday's ruling was "deeply disappointing," a White House spokesperson said, but added, "We fully expect our partners in the Senate to come back with alternative immigration-related proposals for the parliamentarian to consider."

On Twitter, Senator Chuck Grassley, the Judiciary Committee's top Republican, praised the parliamentarian's ruling, saying, "Mass amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants isn’t a budgetary issue appropriate for reconciliation."

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, "Democrats will not be able to stuff their most radical amnesty proposals into the reckless taxing and spending spree they are assembling behind closed doors."

An estimate in Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough's ruling, obtained by Reuters, showed the step would have helped about 8 million people become lawful permanent residents, including about 7 million now deemed to infringe the law.

MacDonough said that if the reform were allowed to proceed in a budget bill a future Senate could then rescind anyone's immigration status on the basis of a majority vote.

That would be a "stunning development ... and is further evidence that the policy changes of this proposal far outweigh the budgetary impact scored to it," she added.

"It is not appropriate for inclusion in reconciliation."

Lawful permanent status allows people to work, travel, live openly in U.S. society and become eligible, in time, to apply for citizenship, MacDonough said.

As the Senate's parliamentarian, MacDonough, in the job since 2012 under both Republicans and Democrats, advises lawmakers about what is acceptable under the chamber's rules and precedents, sometimes with lasting consequences.

Chosen by the Senate majority leader, the holder of the job is expected to be non-partisan.

Early this year, MacDonough barred inclusion of a minimum wage hike in a COVID-19 aid bill.

Most U.S. Senate bills require support from 60 of the 100 members to go to a vote. Budget reconciliation measures, however, can clear the chamber on a simple majority vote, in which case Vice President Kamala Harris could break the tie.

The proposed designation of essential workers covered 18 major categories and more than 220 sub-categories of employment, MacDonough said in the ruling.

DACA beneficiaries receive work authorization, access to driver's licenses and better access, for some, to financial aid for education, but not a path to citizenship.

The law protects primarily young Hispanic adults born in Mexico and countries in Central and South America who were brought to the United States as children.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; additional reporting by Mica Rosenberg and Susan Cornwell Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

Daniel Barenboim plays Beethoven Sonata No. 8 Op. 13 (Pathetique)

HIDING BEHIND MUSK
Defending abortion law, Abbott cites Elon Musk’s support of Texas’ ‘social policies’

By Brendan Case
September 3, 2021

Dallas: Texas Governor Greg Abbott, defending new legislation on elections and abortion, pointed to billionaire Elon Musk as a business leader who likes the state’s “social policies”.

Musk replied with a less-than-ringing endorsement.


Texas Governor Greg Abbott claims Elon Musk is supportive of Texas’ social policies.CREDIT:INTERNET

UTILITARIANISM
“In general, I believe government should rarely impose its will upon the people, and, when doing so, should aspire to maximise their cumulative happiness,” the billionaire tweeted on Thursday after Abbott’s remarks hours earlier on CNBC.

“That said, I would prefer to stay out of politics.”

Abbott claimed Musk’s support in arguing that the movement of companies and people to Texas won’t slow down after the state implemented the nation’s most restrictive abortion law and approved new limits on voting access.

In fact, the Governor said, the shift to Texas will speed up as some people leave “the very liberal state of California” partly because of its policies.

“Elon had to get out of California because, in part, of the social policies in California,” Abbott said, adding that he “frequently” talks to the chief executive officer of Tesla Inc.

“Elon consistently tells me that he likes the social policies in the state of Texas.”
Advertisement

RELATED ARTICLE


US politics
‘Unconstitutional chaos’: Biden directs White House lawyers to fight strict Texas abortion law

Tesla is building a new factory in Austin, Texas, to make its Cybertruck pickup.

Musk’s Space Exploration Technologies Corp. is expanding its launch facilities near the Mexican border to test its futuristic Starship rocket.

SpaceX also tests rocket engines in McGregor, which is located between Dallas and Austin.

Musk’s companies aren’t alone in moving to the state increasingly defined by hard-right Republican political ideology.

Other companies including Apple and Toyota have moved operations and university -educated, creative-class workers to Texas in recent years; enclaves like Austin and Houston’s Montrose neighbourhood felt a little like San Francisco with withering humidity.

Elon Musk has been moving his companies to Texas but he doesn’t want to get involved in the state’s politics.

CREDIT:AP

Those workers find themselves in a state taking far-right stances in a culture war with national ramifications for women’s autonomy and presidential politics.

“Other states are competing for people,” said Tammi Wallace, chief executive officer of the Greater Houston LGBT Chamber of Commerce.

“If you look at what our state is doing, and then you see another state where they’re not doing some of those things, you might say, ‘Well, the money’s good, but where do I want to raise my family?’”

Even outspoken tech companies have been glaringly silent on the Texas abortion ban

Tesla CEO Elon Musk summed up the mood in a tweet, saying ‘I would prefer to stay out of politics.’

In recent years, tech companies and their executive leaders have gotten more political, weighing in on legislation that discriminates against gay and transgender Americans. But the usually more outspoken industry has been notably silent about Texas legislation that prevents a physician from performing an abortion after roughly six weeks into the pregnancy. This week, the Supreme Court denied a petition for injunctive relief on the rule, allowing it to go into effect. In her dissent, Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor called the decision “flagrantly unconstitutional.”

Abortion remains an untouchable political issue for companies. Though doctors insist that abortion is a health decision that should be made between a doctor and his or her patient, some Americans see it as a choice between the life and death of an unborn child. But anti-abortion regulation inhibits medical choice—not just for women seeking the procedure but also for women experiencing a miscarriage—and forces women to seek care through unconventional and sometimes risky means. For this reason, the Supreme Court’s inaction on the Texas law has elicited public outrage—but not from everyone.
Despite the wave of backlash, Governor Greg Abbott is not the least bit concerned that businesses will pull out of his state. “They are leaving the very liberal state of California,” he said in an interview on CNBC’s Squawk on the Street. “Elon [Musk] had to get out of California because of the social policies in California, and Elon consistently tells me he likes the social policies in the state of Texas.” Musk recently relocated to Texas and announced plans for Tesla to build a new factory there.

In response, Musk, capturing the industry’s general mood on the subject so far, tweeted: “In general, I believe government should rarely impose its will upon the people, and, when doing so, should aspire to maximize their cumulative happiness. That said, I would prefer to stay out of politics.”

Fast Company reached out to several companies including Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Google, Dell, PayPal, and Salesforce for their comment because they’ve either been vocal on political issues in the past or have offices in Texas. So far only Microsoft’s publicist has responded to say the company has nothing to share.

Internally, some companies are taking steps to ensure their employees have access to abortion care. Match Group CEO Shar Dubey sent out an email to employees promising that she would personally set up a fund for any staff members who need to travel and obtain abortion care out of state. Similarly, Whitney Wolfe Herd, CEO of dating app Bumble, told employees globally that she would provide financial support to ensure reproductive rights. However, women at these companies likely make enough money and have enough paid time off to travel to another state for reproductive healthcare. Kate Ryder, CEO of Maven Clinic, a company that provides healthcare services to women and families starting at preconception and is now worth more than $1 billion, says that her company has been echoing the message from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which has called the Texas law “a clear attack on the practice of medicine.”

A majority of Americans support keeping abortion legal, according to a 2019 poll from Pew. A more recent poll from YouGov, commissioned by the Tara Health Foundation with support from the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies, suggests that a majority of college-educated professionals don’t want the court to overturn the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which protects a woman’s right to choose whether she wants an abortion. The survey, which went out to 1,800 adults who are either working or looking for work, also indicates that those respondents wouldn’t apply to jobs in states that have laws like Texas’s abortion ban. More than half of respondents want their companies to either make public donations or comment on the issue.

The general quiet on the Texas abortion law is in stark contrast to response on other political issues when companies felt it necessary to throw around their economic weight. In 2015, Apple CEO Tim Cook spoke out against Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which could have allowed for discrimination against queer Americans. He wasn’t the only one who took exception to that law and others like it. Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff vocally opposed the law and a year later threatened to reduce investments in Georgia over a similar rule. Dell Technologies CEO Michael Dell, billionaire Richard Branson, and Microsoft president Brad Smith all voiced public opposition to Georgia’s policy.

In 2016, industry played an important role in dismantling a North Carolina law that forced transgender Americans to use bathrooms according to their gender assigned at birth. PayPal withdrew plans to set up a new facility in the state; Ringo Starr and Bruce Springsteen canceled planned concerts; and both the NBA and the NCAA avoided hosting events there. Deutsche Bank and several major investment firms also made their displeasure known. Target promised that transgender Americans could continue to use the bathroom that comports with their gender identity despite the rule and later faced backlash for it. At the time, CNBC estimated that by the end of 2017 North Carolina would forfeit more than $525 million.

CEOs and companies continue to voice their dismay over laws unrelated to their bottom line. In 2018, Cook vocalized his concern in an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes over the repeal of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, saying, “The DACA situation is not an immigration issue, it’s a moral issue.” And this year, a convoy of tech companies came out to wag their fingers at Georgia’s attempts to erect barriers to the ballot box and voiced support for voting rights laws that enable access like the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

They have also, in the last seven years or so, made moves to ensure that their employees adequately reflect America’s demographic makeup, announcing various diversity initiatives. In particular, some companies have made a show of hiring more women. In 2019, Dell announced that by 2030 half of its workforce would be female. But speaking out on access to women’s reproductive care, it seems, remains too taboo. Technology related to women’s health may garner incredible attention as an opportunity for investment, drawing $1.31 billion in funding so far this year according to Pitchbook data, but women’s health as a moral prerogative has yet to seize the hearts and minds of the tech industry’s luminaries. Maybe next year.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ruth Reader is a writer for Fast Company. She covers the intersection of health and technology.

U.S. states threaten lawsuits against Biden administration in long-shot bid to revive Keystone XL

© Provided by Financial Post The route of the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline lies idle through a farmer's field near Oyen, Alberta.

CALGARY— More than a dozen U.S. states are considering lawsuits against Washington, D.C. following the cancellation of Keystone XL, but experts say Alberta should pursue diplomatic avenues to try to revive the project before taking legal action of its own.

Since U.S. President Joe Biden signed an executive order revoking cross-border permits for the US$14.4-billion Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office, a number of union leaders, Republican and Democrat lawmakers and attorney generals from 14 states have urged the president to reconsider his decision.

The 830,000-barrels-per-day Keystone XL pipeline project has been through regulatory and legal hurdles in the U.S. for over a decade as proponent TC Energy Corp. has sought to build a line from Alberta to carry oilsands crude to heavy oil refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast. Construction was underway in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Montana and South Dakota before Biden’s executive order last month.

U.S. Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia and current chairman of the powerful Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, sent Biden a letter Feb. 9, urging him to reconsider the cancellation of Keystone XL and “take into account the potential impacts of any further action to safety, jobs and energy security.”

“It is of the utmost importance that the United States maintain energy security through strategic relationships with our allies rather than increasing reliance on OPEC nations and Russia. This includes the development of infrastructure, like the Keystone XL and Mountain Valley pipelines, to get this energy to market in the safest and most responsible way,” Manchin wrote.

Similarly, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen along with the AGs of 13 other states wrote a letter to the U.S. President on Tuesday, making the same request and threatening legal action on the pipeline.

“Your decision will result in devastating damage to many of our states and local communities. Even those states outside the path of the Keystone XL pipeline — indeed all Americans — will suffer serious, detrimental consequences,” Knudsen wrote.

While the letter doesn’t say what legal action the states could pursue, it does indicate the states are considering a lawsuit.

“Please be aware that states are reviewing available legal options to protect our residents and sovereign interests. In the meantime, we urge you to reconsider your decision to impose crippling economic injuries on states, communities, families and workers across the country,” Knudsen wrote.

And on Feb. 4, U.S. Senator John Thune from South Dakota, said during a legislative session that scrapping Keystone XL pipeline is nothing more than a symbolic gesture.

“In a nod to the far-left environmental wing of the Democrat Party, the President issued a new moratorium on oil and gas leasing on Federal lands and called a halt to the Keystone XL Pipeline, even though we are a long way from significantly reducing or eliminating our need for oil and natural gas.”

© Todd Korol/Reuters

 A supply depot servicing the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline lies idle in Oyen, Alberta.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has said on multiple occasions his oil-producing province is reviewing its options on suing the U.S. government over the cancellation of Keystone XL, in which the province is an investor. The Alberta government invested $1.5 billion in Keystone XL last year and would provide up to another $6 billion in loan guarantees for the project in March 2020.

“We are monitoring and continuing to talk to American political players about the importance of Canadian energy to the United States,” Kavi Bal, spokesperson for Alberta’s energy ministry, said in an emailed statement. He said the province is “ reviewing every legal tool at our disposal to defend our financial interests in this project.”

TC Energy and the Alberta government may strengthen a potential Chapter 11 free-trade case against the United States by attempting to use diplomatic avenues to get the Keystone XL project re-approved, said Mark Warner, an international trade lawyer and principal at Maaw Law in Toronto.

“There’s no rush. They have time to play out these options,” Warner said, noting the new United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement allows companies such as TC Energy to use the old Chapter 11 complaint process until 2023.

In Chapter 11, processes, complainants need to show that they’ve attempted to pursue other domestic remedies before launching their claims. He said the aggrieved parties also have the ability to sue in U.S. Federal Court.

“They don’t have to file right away, there’s no harm in testing it,” Warner said.

There may be another legal avenue TC Energy Corp. and the Alberta government can pursue in their efforts to revive the Keystone XL project

.

© Chris Schwarz/Government of Alberta Alberta Premier Jason Kenney.

Scott Miller, a senior advisor at the Center For Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., said a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on a program called the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) found former U.S. president Donald Trump contravened the Administrative Procedure Act in signing an executive order cancelling DACA.

Miller said American legal circles are currently chattering about the similarities between the two cases.

“Keystone XL was not just a policy decision to allow a pipeline to cross a border. What came with it were a whole bunch of permits. The policy change had the effect of revoking those permits without due process,” Miller said.

TC Energy did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday, and has remained silent on whether it would scrap the project or launch legal action to revive it . The company previously launched a Chapter 11 NAFTA challenge and a lawsuit in U.S. Federal Court when former U.S. president Barack Obama vetoed the project in 2015.

‘A slam dunk case’: Alberta considers seeking U.S. compensation for Keystone XL via old NAFTA rule

Joe Biden’s attack on fossil fuel goes faster, further than anyone expected

TC Energy to cut 1,000 construction jobs after Keystone XL pipeline permit revoked

Jason Kenney calls Biden’s Keystone XL cancellation an ‘insult’ as he urges retaliation

The company’s earnings announcement on Feb. 18 is expected to disclose a large writedown on the value of the project, which has also affected the earnings of oil producers in Calgary.

Prospective shippers on the Keystone XL pipeline were on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in contingency payments to TC Energy if the Keystone XL pipeline was cancelled.

Athabasca Oil Corp., for instance, disclosed last year it would make US$48 million in contingency payments to TC Energy if the project was cancelled, given its commitment to ship 7,200 barrels of oil per day on the Keystone pipeline.

Suncor Energy Inc. and Cenovus Energy Inc. have disclosed impairment charges related to the cancellation of Keystone XL of $142 million and $100 million, respectively, as those two oil majors reported earnings this month.

Financial Post

Pardon for 'Dreamers'? Some activists tout amnesty for undocumented immigrants if Congress doesn't act

In his first few days in office, President Joe Biden moved swiftly to deliver on promises to Hispanic voters, signing a directive to protect "Dreamers" from deportation and unveiling an outline for sweeping changes to immigration laws.

Tuesday afternoon, the president announced a task force to reunite families separated at the border and an executive order that reviews a Trump administration policy requiring migrants seeking asylum to wait in Mexico while they plead their case.

But executive actions are not permanent, and the White House already has begun tamping down hopes for passage of an omnibus reform measure.

That leaves some Latino advocacy groups looking at an untested fallback plan: a mass presidential pardon for at least some of the estimated 11 million people in the country illegally.

“We believe this is a viable option if the Senate fails to act on comprehensive immigration reform,” said Domingo Garcia, president of the League of United Latin American Citizens.

Reversing Trump: Biden to create task force to reunite families separated at border, sign order to review asylum program

Reuniting families: 628 parents remain separated from their kids after Trump's zero-tolerance border policy. Biden wants to find them.

Hector Sánchez Barba, executive director at Mi Familia Vota,said congressional action is the top priority, and Biden has put forth “the most progressive plan I’ve seen, probably in our history.”

But if Congress fails to reform immigration laws, he said, “I am in an action mode. … We will advocate for anything that reverses the extremism and damage” of the Trump administration.

It is unclear how Biden would respond if pressed to pursue a mass pardon. Moreover, not all immigrant-rights advocates want to pursue that controversial path while there is a chance Congress could act.

Jorge Loweree, policy director with the American Immigration Council, said a presidential pardon for immigration violators falls short because “it wouldn’t put people on a path to citizenship; it would just cure one of the barriers to getting there.”

© Evan Vucci, AP President Joe Biden signs his first executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington. Six of Biden's 17 first-day executive orders dealt with immigration, such as halting work on a border wall in Mexico and lifting a travel ban on people from several predominantly Muslim countries.

The clemency proposition is not new. In late 2016, before Trump was inaugurated, Garcia and others feared the new president would launch draconian deportations of undocumented immigrants – especially those brought to the United States as children, called "Dreamers" based on never-passed proposals in Congress called the DREAM Act.

Dozens of advocacy groups and at least three Democrats in Congress implored then-President Barack Obama to issue last-minute amnesty. In a letter to the president, Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California and her colleagues described the proposed pardon as “a matter of life and death” for many of the nation’s 11 million undocumented immigrants.

Obama denied the request. And Trump carried out his promised crackdown.

© Richard Vogel, AP Protesters gather at the federal courthouse in Los Angeles in June 2018 to object to the Trump administration's separation of migrant children from their parents at the U.S. border with Mexico.

Biden acts to undo Trump's immigration policies

Trump’s promise of a border wall was the hallmark of his first presidential campaign. In office, he tried to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which allows people brought to the U.S. as children to remain in the country, but he was largely blocked by court rulings. As part of a "zero tolerance" policy for illegal entry, children were separated from parents at the southern border. The administration tried to prevent most migrants from claiming political asylum and required those seeking asylum to wait in Mexico.

Cut to 2020 and Biden’s platform was the polar opposite: He vowed to stop construction of Trump's southern border wall, protect "Dreamers" and overhaul U.S. immigration laws that have not changed significantly in three decades.

On his first day in office, Biden signed an executive memorandum reinstating DACA and unveiled a sweeping immigration reform package.

Under that proposal, agricultural workers, people who arrived illegally as children and immigrants with what is known as temporary protected status would immediately qualify for green cards – giving them legal status and a right to work. Other undocumented immigrants in the United States as of Jan. 1 would receive temporary legal status for five years, with a path to citizenship if they passed background checks and paid taxes

.

© Mario Tama, Getty Images Mexican immigrant Vicky Uriostegui, who has lived in the U.S. for 27 years, hauls out water hoses at dawn on a farm in fields near Turlock, California. Agriculture is the main economic driver in the region, and most field work is done by immigrants.

Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, a Republican who had supported a bipartisan immigration reform plan, ripped Biden’s legislative plan as “mass amnesty” – the exact words used by Trump loyalist Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo.

Meanwhile, congressional Democrats who once pushed Obama to pardon "Dreamers" went silent.

Lofgren, a former immigration attorney and the most recent chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship, declined to comment on whether she may ask Biden to use his pardon power.

In a written statement, she said she’s focused on working with the president “to advance our shared bold vision to reform our country’s immigration system.”

Other members of the House and Senate did not respond to emails and calls. Neither did a White House spokesman.
A constitutional ‘gray area’

On Jan. 21, 1977, more than 570,000 American offenders were given pardons.

It was the first full day in office for President Jimmy Carter, and he used it to grant amnesty to Vietnam-era draft dodgers. Nearly 210,000 had been charged with violating the Selective Service Act. Another 360,000 dodged but were not prosecuted.

© AP President Jimmy Carter extended a pardon to over 200,000 Vietnam anti-draft resisters in 1977.

Article II, Clause 1 of the Constitution is terse and clear: “The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

The authority covers all violations of federal law and may be used absolutely or conditionally, according to Cornell University Law School’s Legal Information Institute. It includes a presumed power “to pardon specified classes or communities wholesale, in short, the power to amnesty.”

Draft dodgers were nowhere near the first to benefit from mass clemency. Three years earlier, President Gerald Ford granted a conditional pardon to military deserters who were willing to perform public service.

In fact, presidents throughout history granted amnesty to large groups, beginning with the first pardon issued by George Washington in 1795 to participants in a tax revolt known as the Whiskey Rebellion.

Andrew Johnson gave amnesty to all Confederate soldiers after the Civil War. And, in 1902, Theodore Roosevelt granted amnesty to residents of the Philippines – then a U.S. territory – who took part in an insurrection.

Yet, according to legal experts, no president has ever pardoned someone for illegal immigration during the nation’s 245-year history. Presidential pardons historically have addressed criminal violations; entering or being in the country unlawfully is a civil offense unless it's a repeat violation.

Peter Markowitz, a professor at the Cardozo School of Law, acknowledged it's a legal “gray area.” But he said immigration violations – civil or criminal – clearly constitute offenses, and there is “ample reason to believe it is within a president’s pardon authority.”

In a 2017 law review article co-written with Lindsay Nash, Markowitz advocated just such an action, writing: “The President possesses the constitutional authority to categorically pardon broad classes of immigrants for civil violations of the immigration laws and to thereby provide durable and permanent protections against deportation.”

Other experts say it's not so clear-cut, especially without any Supreme Court precedent on pardons for civil offenses. Some argue that a person in the United States illegally commits an ongoing violation. Pardon power may not be exercised to erase future offenses.

Markowitz conceded that executive clemency is an “imperfect solution” because, while it would protect undocumented immigrants from deportation, it would not grant them legal status or rights.

“Everybody would prefer that this type of durable protection be delivered through legislation,” Markowitz said. But if that proves impossible, clemency at least gives undocumented immigrants peace of mind that they can’t be deported.
'We knew what was coming' with Trump

Despite legal uncertainties and a likely political backlash, Markowitz suggested using pardon power for immigrants would have been worth it four years ago.

In a 2016 opinion piece, Raul A. Reyes, an immigration attorney and member of USA TODAY’s board of contributors, argued that by inviting young "Dreamers" to sign up for DACA, Democrats later exposed them to deportation under the Trump administration.

“It would be a cruel irony if Obama were to turn his back on those here illegally – through no fault of their own – after he helped expose them to risk of deportation,” he concluded.

David Leopold, immigration counsel for America’s Voice, which advocates a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, said it made sense to consider amnesty at the close of Obama’s presidency because Trump had characterized immigrants as criminals.

“We knew the extremism. We knew the xenophobia. We knew what was coming,” said Leopold, who served as a volunteer adviser in the Biden campaign.

But as Biden’s presidency begins, Leopold does not see presidential pardon power as a serious consideration because about 80% of Americans favor changes in law to protect undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children.

“The answer right now is legislative,” Leopold said. “There’s a moment in history right now when we can do it. … Hopefully, Congress will step up to the plate.”

Doris Meissner, former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, said it would be a legal and political stretch for Biden to simply pardon people who entered the United States unlawfully – a “very out-of-the-blue proposition,” as she put it.

“I’m just having a hard time figuring out how the pardon power … could be justified for that,” said Meissner, now a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute.
Some say it's not the time to talk pardons

Ira Mehlman, media director with the Federation for Immigration Reform, which advocates for strict immigration enforcement and controls, said mass clemency would constitute a “huge overreach” by the president.

In a podcast four years ago, he noted, Cecilia Muñoz, then director of the Obama White House’s Domestic Policy Council, declared that pardons "wouldn’t protect a single soul from deportation.”

Some immigrant rights advocates also resist talk of amnesty, at least for now, for fear it would undermine the push for legislation.

Kristian Ramos of Autonomy Strategies, a communications firm specializing in Latino issues, said Biden’s executive order protecting DACA recipients and immigrants in temporary protected status has, for now, solved the most pressing problem.

“They’re protected,” Ramos said. “He has essentially provided the … reprieve that he could. There’s no real need to pardon them.”

Juliana Macedo do Nascimento, a DACA recipient from Brazil and policy manager with United We Dream, declined to address the amnesty question in a written statement.

Instead, she stressed that Biden and Democrats “have a mandate from the people” to transform America's immigration system. “President Biden must use every tool at his disposal to provide relief for as many people as possible," she said.

“We are tired and not satisfied by executive actions,” said Fernando Garcia, executive director with Border Network for Human Rights. “We need to actually change the law.”

Garcia expressed doubt that Biden would consider amnesty even if legislation fails. “I don’t think it’s realistic that any president is going to say, ‘We’re going to pardon 600,000 Dreamers or 1.2 million Dreamers,’” he said. “And I don’t believe Dreamers are guilty of any offense.”

Loweree, with the American Immigration Council, said America’s support for "Dreamers" is higher than ever, and the president has a “unique opportunity” to fulfill campaign promises beginning with announcements Tuesday.

Loweree said he doesn’t buy into claims that Biden has a debt to Hispanics who helped him get elected. “The issue here isn’t who owes anyone anything,” he said. Rather, it’s about fulfilling a promise made during the Obama administration: "'Dreamers' who came out of the shadows and signed up for DACA were told they’d be protected and allowed to work, not deported."

With that in mind, Loweree suggested talk of presidential amnesty cannot be dismissed entirely: “We expect President Biden will do everything in his power – and consider all options.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: A pardon for 'Dreamers'? Some activists tout amnesty for undocumented immigrants if Congress doesn't act

Biden wants to remove this controversial word

 from US laws

By Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN

Thu January 21, 2021

(CNN)It's just one small part of the sweeping immigration overhaul President Biden is pushing.

But the symbolic significance is huge.

Biden's proposed bill, if passed, would remove the word "alien" from US immigration laws, replacing it with the term "noncitizen."

It's a deliberate step intended to recognize America as "a nation of immigrants," according to a summary of the bill released by the new administration.


Biden starts fast on immigration by halting border wall and travel ban while embracing DACA

The term "illegal alien," long decried as a dehumanizing slur by immigrant rights advocates, became even more of a lightning rod during the Trump era -- with some top federal officials encouraging its use and several states and local governments taking up measures to ban it.

"The language change on the first day of this administration, with Kamala Harris the daughter of immigrants, to me it's not just symbolic...it's foundational," says Jose Antonio Vargas, an undocumented immigrant whose organization, Define American, pushes for more accurate portrayals of immigrants.

"How we describe people really sticks. It affects how we treat them," he says. "How we talk about immigrants shapes the policies. It frames what are the issues really at stake here. It acknowledges that we're talking about human beings and families."

What the laws say now

US code currently defines "alien" as "any person not a citizen or national of the United States."

Officials in the past have pointed to the term's prevalence in US laws to defend their word choices.

In 2018, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions instructed prosecutors to refer to someone who's illegally in the United States as "an illegal alien," citing the US code in an agency-wide email.

Justice Department: Use 'illegal aliens,' not 'undocumented'

The term "alien" was often invoked by President Trump in speeches as he warned of what he saw as the dangers of unchecked illegal immigration.
Speaking at the Mexico border last week in one of his final addresses as president, Trump used the term at least five times.
"We were in the Trump administration the perennial boogeyman," Vargas said. "Whenever Trump was in trouble, he started talking about the 'illegals' and talking about the border."
But not everyone in the Trump administration was a fan of the language.
In an interview with the Washington Post published shortly before he resigned as acting secretary of Homeland Security in 2019, Kevin McAleenan told the newspaper he avoided using the term "illegal aliens" and instead described people as "migrants."
"I think the words matter a lot," McAleenan said, according to the Post. "If you alienate half of your audience by your use of terminology, it's going to hamper your ability to ever win an argument."

This isn't the first effort to change such wording
California struck "alien" from the state's labor code in 2015.
New York City removed the term from its charter and administrative code last year.



Protesters rally against a Supreme Court decision upholding the travel ban in 2018. 

Throughout President Trump's time in office, immigrant advocates criticized dehumanizing rhetoric.
In guidelines issued in 2019, New York City banned the term "illegal alien" when used "with intent to demean, humiliate or harass a person." Violations, the city warned, could result in fines up to $250,000.
And last year two Colorado lawmakers introduced a bill to replace the term "illegal alien" with "undocumented immigrant." The bill never made it to the state Senate floor for a vote.

Prank callers targeted the term early in the Trump administration
One of the first times the use of the term "alien" drew widespread attention during the Trump administration was in 2017 after officials publicized a hotline for victims of "crimes committed by removable aliens."
Prank callers swiftly flooded the line with reports about space aliens, sharing examples on social media of their comments about Martians and UFOs.

Top-level trolling overloads ICE's undocumented immigrant hotline with calls about space aliens

But Vargas says the term and others used to demonize immigrants are no laughing matter.
"Language has power. And I think we saw that in the Trump administration, how it used dehumanizing terms and how it debased language and in turn debased people," Vargas says. "If you call them 'alien,' of course you're going to put them in jail, of course you're going to lock them up, of course you're not going to care that you're separating little kids from their parents."
Vargas says the new administration's effort to use more respectful language gives him hope that some Americans' views on undocumented immigrants could also shift. Changing just one word, he says, could have a far-reaching impact for millions of people.

Biden might succeed in legalizing millions of undocumented immigrants. Here’s why | Opinion




Andres Oppenheimer
Wed, January 20, 2021

Under the immigration bill that President Joe Biden is expected to send to Congress, known as the U.S. Citizenship Act, undocumented immigrants would be given an eight-year path to citizenship if they pass background checks and prove they have paid taxes.

That would be anathema for Republican anti-immigration zealots. But here are the reasons why Biden may succeed:

First, Biden will enjoy a big advantage over former President Obama on immigration issues, because public opinion has changed in recent years. Polls show that most Americans may be ready for more pro-immigrant policies.

Perhaps it’s because Americans have grown tired of former President Trump’s and Fox News’ constant demonization of undocumented immigrants. Or maybe enough Americans have been shocked by the Trump administration’s cruelty when they saw pictures of immigrant children kept in cages or learned about the separation of babies from their migrant parents.

A Gallup Poll shows that Americans’ support for pro-immigration policies is at its highest level in half a century.

At least 34 percent of Americans believe immigration should be increased, and another 36 percent think it should be kept at current levels. That combined pro-immigration stand of 70 percent is larger than at any time since Gallup began asking this question in 1966, the poll shows.

Likewise, a Pew Research Center study shows that 60 percent of Americans believe that the growing number of newcomers is good for the country, while only 37 percent believe it’s a threat to U.S. customs and values.

Just in the past four years — during Trump’s term — pro-immigration sentiment in the country rose by 14 percentage points, the Pew study says.

“Trump’s nativism backfired with the majority of the public,” Frank Sharry, head of the America’s Voice pro-immigration advocacy group, told me. “There’s more political space and more political will to legislate and reform immigration policy now.”

Second, the Biden administration plans to use a new strategy to legalize undocumented residents, people familiar with the president’s plan tell me.

Instead of asking Congress to approve Biden’s immigration package as a stand-alone bill, the administration is likely to attach it to a larger COVID-19 or economic-stimulus legislative package.

The administration will argue that millions of undocumented workers — including first responders, hospital workers and waiters — are essential workers who are needed to fight the pandemic and to help revamp the economy.

An estimated 7 million of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the country qualify as essential workers or are “DREAMers” — people who were brought to the country as infants by their undocumented parents — or have temporary protected status. Those 7 million would be the first group to be legalized.

Third, Biden will have a greater urgency to pass an immigration bill than Obama did, because he wants to mark a sharp contrast with the Trump administration’s brutality against immigrants.

Biden knows that immigration reform is a pending assignment for the Democrats, and that he may only have two years to get his plan passed by Congress.

Historically, the party that is in the White House tends to lose the midterm elections, so Biden could lose his congressional majority in 2022. For Biden, it will be now or, possibly, never.

It won’t be easy, but Biden may succeed in his plan to legalize many of the estimated 11 million undocumented residents. I’ll be rooting for it.

Don’t miss the “Oppenheimer Presenta” TV show at 8 p.m. E.T. Sunday on CNN en Español. Twitter: @oppenheimera

Biden Launches Effort To Undo Trump's Damage 

On Immigration


Rowaida Abdelaziz
·Reporter, HuffPost
Wed, January 20, 2021, 

After years of Donald Trump attacking immigrants, President Joe Biden is beginning his tenure by undoing many of the former president’s policies and overhauling the U.S. immigration system.

The Biden administration has what it calls a comprehensive approach to immigration. In his first few hours as president, Biden plans to propose a new bill that would include a path to citizenship for millions of undocumented people in the country.

In addition, he issued immigration-related executive actions:

He ordered government to halt the construction of the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and review whether contracts already issued for it could be diverted to other projects, as well as to end the national emergency declaration for the border. Trump used the declaration to justify taking money slated for other means to fund the wall.

He rescinded Trump’s travel ban, which primarily targeted Muslim-majority countries.

Biden launched an effort to preserve the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, also known as DACA, which allows undocumented young people to remain in the U.S. and work legally. The program remains in effect in spite of Trump’s efforts to end it, but is still facing legal challenges.

Biden is also expected to take more actions on immigration:

Biden will reinstate deportation priorities undone by Trump, who encouraged immigration agents to pursue removal for all undocumented people rather than focusing first on criminals and repeat border-crossers.

Biden will reverse Trump’s effort to exclude undocumented immigrants from the census.

The onslaught of immigration reforms signals a new and welcomed era for immigrants, who were among Trump’s favorite scapegoats and targets. Immigration reform advocates and experts applauded Biden’s first-day plans for prioritizing immigration and quickly undoing the damage done by the previous president.

Biden’s ambitious legislative bill, which will be sent to Congress on Wednesday for review, details an eight-year roadmap to citizenship for current immigrants, including approximately 700,000 Dreamers and 400,000 immigrants living with Temporary Protected Status.

Members of those programs, as well as certain farm workers, would qualify for green cards immediately and be eligible for citizenship after three years. Other undocumented immigrants would be eligible for green cards after five years. In all cases, the immigrants would be subjected to background checks and required to pay taxes.

The plan would also reunite families, boost technology at the border, and increase the diversity visa program from 55,000 visas to 80,000 visas per year. Trump attempted to terminate the diversity visa program, as well as DACA and certain TPS programs.

The proposal would set up multiple processing centers abroad to identify and screen refugees, in addition to allotting $4 billion in aid to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras over four years to address the root cause of migration.

If passed, Biden’s reforms would be the largest legislative overhaul of the U.S. immigration system since Republican President Ronald Reagan’s administration in the 1980s.

However, it may be difficult to get them through Congress. The last immigration overhaul bill passed the Senate in a 68-32 vote in 2013, but the Democratic majority was larger at the time than the 50-50 split Biden will be dealing with. (Vice President Kamala Harris, as president of the Senate, can cast a tie-breaking vote.)

However, it will be an easier lift in the House, where that 2013 bill never got a vote. Democrats control the lower chamber now and are likely to support a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

Biden unveils immigration proposal that offers green cards and overtime pay to farm workers and a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers
Wed, January 20, 2021

Over 200,000 temporary agricultural workers come to the United States each year. 

Davis/Portland Portland Press Herald via Getty Images


President Joe Biden is offering foreign-born farm workers the chance to immediately apply for permanent residency.


Biden's immigration proposal would also give agriculture industry workers the right to overtime pay.


Each year, over 200,000 temporary agricultural workers come to the United States.

President Joe Biden is presenting a sweeping immigration reform bill to Congress on his first day in office, prioritizing a sharp rebuke to the Trump years. It would award permanent residency to farm workers who have kept the country fed throughout the pandemic, offer a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers - giving hope to one son of farm workers and brother of a Dreamer.

Those who receive green cards would also be fast-tracked for citizenship, part of an effort to provide a path to legal status for more than 11 million undocumented people currently in the US.

The bill, which Biden is introducing within hours of his inauguration, will also incorporate the central feature of legislation that Vice President-elect Kamala Harris introduced as a senator, extending overtime pay to all who toil in the agriculture industry.

To receive permanent residency, temporary agricultural workers - who have spent at least 100 days in four of the last five years working in the US as part of the H-2A visa program - would be eligible for residency if they pass a criminal background check. Residency, among other things, would give potentially hundreds of thousands of farm workers the freedom to leave an abusive employer, something effectively denied them under the H-2A program, where visas are tied to a company sponsor (over 200,000 such visas are issued each year, the vast majority to Mexican nationals).

"This bill is fundamentally different than what any other president has ever done in emancipating farm workers so they can escape pervasive fear and behave like free men and women," United Farm Workers President Teresa Romero, a member of Biden's transition team, said in a statement.

A reprieve for Dreamers

As The Washington Post reported on Tuesday, the "centerpiece" of the Biden administration plan is an eight-year path to citizenship for millions of undocumented Americans, providing them temporary status for five years and then a green card for three; those who pass a background check and pay their taxes would ultimately receive citizenship.

In addition to farm workers, those brought to the United States as children, as well as adults who fled natural and human disasters in Central America and elsewhere, would also be eligible to immediately receive permanent residency.

Biden is also poised to issue a slew of executive orders reversing his predecessor's more controversial policies, such as the de facto "Muslim ban" prohibiting travelers from countries such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Somalia. The Post reported that he is also likely to reinstate a program providing temporary legal status to minors from Central America.
The real-world impact of Biden's proposal, should it become law

Ruben, an 18-year-old college student in Washington, is one of five children born to farm workers who came to the US from Mexico (Insider is withholding his last name due to parents' undocumented status). He spent summers picking apples and blueberries - backbreaking work that has led him to pursue a career in medicine.

He's relieved that the Trump era is over. Former President Barack Obama may have deported millions, but Ruben said he did not demonize and instill fear in millions quite like his successor did, "stereotyping Latino immigrants and just yelling out whatever he thought."

"My grandma was here and she would watch the news every day, "Ruben said, "and she would just panic. We just told her to stop watching."

Ruben campaigned for Biden, spending over a month in Arizona knocking doors in a state where the Latino vote delivered a knockout to Trump's hopes for a second term. He's hopeful that the stress of the last four years can give way to some optimism, purchased with his contribution to getting out the vote. For him, there's the chance that his family, including an older brother who is a DACA recipient, could stop living in fear.

His parents, however, in the US since 2001, have lived through two rounds of presidents pledging to make the immigration system a little more humane. Still, Biden's proposal, the most liberal in decades - with two houses of Congress to clear before becoming law - is to them no less than a potential godsend.

"They're kind of shocked," Ruben said. "They're pretty religious, so they just have faith in God that this one's going to pass."

Read the original article on Business Insider

Joe Biden's Immigration Bill Aims to Address the Root Causes of Migration. Will it Work?

Jasmine Aguilera, TIME
Wed, January 20, 2021

Migrants, who arrived in caravan from Honduras to try to make their way to the United States, wait at the border in Vado Hondo, Guatemala, on January 18, 2021. Credit - Photo by Luis Vargas/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

On his first day in office, President Joe Biden sent an immigration bill to Congress filled with goals that are a far cry from the Trump Administration’s hardline policies. Along with proposals for a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who meet certain qualifications, Biden’s bill plans to address the deeper goal of addressing the root causes of migration, particularly from Central America. However, while it is a loftier in its aims in how to tackle immigration, experts say that it will take a lot more than is being proposed to address the issues that cause immigration from the region.

Biden’s bill comes after a caravan of thousands of Honduran migrants heading north to the U.S. was dissipated by Guatemalan security forces. Biden Administration officials warned migrants not to make the journey to the U.S., but experts believe people from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala will keep attempting to migrate to safer locations such as the U.S. as they have in recent years because of the dire situations they continue to face in their home countries.

Through the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, Biden has put forth a $4 billion four-year plan that aims to decrease violence, corruption and poverty in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, the home countries of many of the migrants who have arrived at the U.S.-Mexico border to seek asylum in recent years. The bill would also establish centers throughout Central America for people to pursue refugee resettlement in either the U.S. or other countries.

Though the $4 billion is an increase in investment compared to the Trump and Obama Administrations, Ariel Ruiz Soto, a policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, says that $4 billion over the course of four years alone will not be enough to tackle the underlying issues. Investment from the U.S. needs to coincide with partnerships with the governments of Central American countries and Mexico, he says, and include special attention to education and jobs for youth, not just emphasis on security and enforcement measures, as was done under Trump and Obama. Improving economies could allow for people to have a stable future in their home countries, causing migration to decrease in the long run, possibly decades from now.

“[$4 billion] is an upgrade, and it will have significant consequences,” Ruiz tells TIME. “But it is only going to be effective if it’s sustainable over decades…it can’t be just four years, it can’t be eight years, it has to be sustained.”

It’s also an effort the U.S. should not undertake alone, Ruiz adds. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador also supports investing in Central America. López Obrador has worked with the U.S. and Canada on similar efforts made to address the root causes of migration in Central America, and in 2018 the U.S. backed Mexico by investing $5.8 billion. However, much of that money was already previously committed, according to The New York Times. “The United States by no means needs to be the only one doing this work,” Ruiz says. “What will make it more successful is if Mexico and the U.S. are speaking with the same voice about investment in the region.”

Any plan for investment should also cater to the specific needs of each country, Ruiz says. For example, 47% of Guatemalan children under the age of five suffer from chronic malnutrition according to the World Bank, and Guatemala ranks ninth in the world for level of risk to the effects of climate change, meanwhile in Honduras, 48% of people live in poverty and there is a high level of violence.

Investment by the U.S. and Mexico also means engaging with the private sector to create job opportunities in the Northern Triangle, Ruiz adds.

“Now that the new president (Biden) is here we are waiting for the answer, all of us immigrants who are here from Honduras,” one Honduran man, 18-year-old Eber Sosa who was in the caravan this week, told the Associated Press. “We are looking to see what the new president says to move forward.”

Violence continues to be high in Honduras and El Salvador, though homicide rates have been decreasing steadily, and Guatemalans face high unemployment, poverty and malnutrition. Hondurans were particularly devastated by hurricanes Eta and Iota in November. The three countries have also suffered economically as a result of COVID-19.

Ian Kysel, visiting assistant clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School and co-director of the Asylum and Convention Against Torture Appellate Clinic, says he sees this effort by Biden as a first step in creating a regional immigration policy grounded in human rights. “Going back decades, the U.S. Government has failed to adequately invest in making rights and human dignity the cornerstone of U.S. policy in the region—on migration or otherwise,” he tells TIME in a statement. “Human rights are key to addressing the major challenges facing migration. Past administrations have heavily invested in deterrence and securitization, forcefully externalizing the U.S. border to the detriment even to those seeking protection from persecution.”

But whether $4 billion does end up being allocated to Central America depends on Congress. On Wednesday, U.S. Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat from New Jersey, announced he would be the one to introduce Biden’s bill. Menendez was one of the so-called “Gang of Eight” Senators who led the push for comprehensive immigration reform in 2013, an effort by former President Barack Obama to provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants that ultimately failed in the House.

What to know about Joe Biden's pathway

to citizenship immigration plan

MOLLY NAGLE

Wed, January 20, 2021, 3:16 AM

President-elect Joe Biden will send to Congress an extensive immigration reform bill that includes an eight-year pathway to citizenship on Wednesday, following through on a long-standing campaign pledge to move on immigration on day one of a Biden presidency.

The new details of Biden’s legislation were first reported by The Washington Post, and confirmed by Biden transition officials.

Biden will send to Congress on Wednesday a policy that will include an eight-year pathway to citizenship for immigrants without legal status, and expand admissions for refugees to the country.

He would also take a different approach from the Trump administration’s border wall for enforcement, investing in technology at the border instead.

PHOTO: President-elect Joe Biden speaks during an event at The Queen theater, Jan. 15, 2021, in Wilmington, Del. (Matt Slocum/AP)

Biden, who worked as vice president on addressing the root causes of migration from Central American countries, will seek to do the same with his new legislation, the officials confirmed.

The plan tracks closely with the approach to immigration Biden discussed on the campaign trail, but expands on how Biden will structure the comprehensive overhaul.

MORE: Trump's immigration legacy: A border wall Biden vows to freeze

For those living in the U.S. without legal status as of Jan. 1, Biden’s planned pathway would allow for five years of temporary status, and the opportunity to earn a green card upon meeting requirements like paying taxes, and passing a background check. Eligibility to apply for citizenship would follow three years later.

Vice President-elect Kamala Harris also spoke about the policy in a recent interview, previewing the eight-year pathway to citizenship, along with expanding protections for DREAMers and DACA recipients.

“These are some of the things that we're going to do on our immigration bill, and we believe it is a smarter and a more humane way of approaching immigration,” said Harris in an interview with Univision last week.

MORE: Trump-Biden transition live updates: Trump unlikely to issue pardons for self, family

Biden had long previewed his plan to send a bill overhauling the immigration system to Congress on the first day of his administration -- a significant move that places a priority on addressing the issue that the Obama administration was criticized for during their time in office.

“[W]e made a mistake. It took too long to get it right,” Biden said of the Obama Administration's record on immigration, during the Oct. 23 presidential debate.

While Democrats will hold a slim majority in both chambers in Congress during the start of Biden’s presidency, the proposal would still need to earn support from some Republicans in the Senate to pass into law -- testing Biden’s campaign trail pitch that he could garner bipartisan support for his legislative efforts as president.

Biden’s immigration push will be introduced as the country continues to grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic, and added to the ambitious legislative efforts Biden’s administration is already undertaking to get a handle on the virus.

MORE:Biden seeks early momentum on COVID and more: The Note

Biden unveiled a nearly $2 trillion COVID rescue plan last week to offer immediate relief to families struggling amid the continued economic downturn due to COVID.

Introducing the legislation is just one part of the aggressive start Biden is planning for the beginning of his administration. Over his first 10 days in office, Biden also plans to take executive action on a number of additional policy issues, including climate change, racial inequality and criminal justice reform.

On Inauguration Day alone, Biden will sign executive orders on extending the existing pause on student loan payments and interest, re-join the Paris Climate Agreement, and reverse the Trump administration’s travel “ban” on predominantly Muslim countries, in addition to putting in place a mask mandate on federal property amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

What to know about Joe Biden's pathway to citizenship immigration plan originally appeared on abcnews.go.com