We have proudly served immigrants from over 115 countries and counting. But two of these groups have been very visibly targeted for years, and certainly under the current administration: Muslims and Latinos. As I wrote over a year ago when the divisive 2016 campaign was still heating up, the time for a strong alliance between these two communities has long since past.

I don't mean to say there aren't efforts to do so. But we need more. Too many folks on one side aren't familiar enough with the parallel struggles on the other side. As lawyers who serve both, we see the genesis and execution of these policies up close and personal.

We need to see these policies as starting from a place of hate, and understand the "evil genius" process that goes into engineering these policies for maximum impact. Time spent identifying these parallels - whether between Latinos and Muslims, or any number of other communities - has a unifying effect on otherwise disparate channels of resistance.

We need visible examples of the commonality of the struggle for rights between groups. Actually, we need to make the examples visible.

How we approach resistance to these policies is as important, if not more, than the substance of the resistance itself. ​The White House seem to have a much clearer idea of what they want to do, though they have definitely suffered a series of humiliating setbacks.

But if we assume the White House is a "unitary actor" then much of the rest of the population are highly fragmented multiple actors. That's less "diversity" and more " disorder" - lacking a common vision, and hence unable to focus. Certain segments are called out, perhaps, more than others (or at least each group is made to feel like they are being called out more than others.) Muslims complain of Islamophobia, Latinos about anti-immigrant sentiment, Jews anti-Semitism, etc. etc. Everyone in their own tidy category.

Believing you have it worse than others inhibits collaboration and communication. Whispers that "it might not be so bad" if you just "give him a chance" similarly inhibit collaboration. Inter-immigrant bigotry, racism, and misogyny also inhibit collaboration.

The fact remains, it's hard to unify disparate classes. People do feel more comfortable with people like them. But rallying around "not Trump" will take you nowhere - you can't expect your GPS to navigate if you put in a place you don't want to go.

So to everyone on the ground, my colleagues who were at the airports, the folks tirelessly working with elected officials to protect due process, the folks at high-level meetings, the rally organizers, the marchers: please take a moment to remember that while another community's fight might seem different to you, it's usually not.

Make sure you're not accidentally registered to vote if you're not a citizen.



On May 11, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order to create a new Commission for Election Integrity. Vice-chaired by notorious anti-immigrant Kris Kobach (the guy who designed the Muslim registry, NSEERS, and co-authored Arizona's "show me your papers" law) this new commission will seek to uncover "widespread" evidence of voter fraud. He promised to do this early on in his Presidency:

That means they will be looking for anything to increase the number of supposed cases.

A few years ago, we represented a refugee who had gone to the DMV to get a driver's license and, unbeknownst to him, had registered to vote by signing onto a "packet" of forms. No one asked whether he was a US citizen; he was eligible for a driver's license, and that was it. He nearly lost his chance to become a citizen - we were able to "timely recant" his registration, to prevent his near-certain deportation. (There are very few waivers for falsely claiming to be a US citizen.)

These cases are more common than you'd think: most folks doing voter registration drives are not aware of the consequences of voter registration on non-citizens. With Trump's new commission, we're going to see a lot more. One of the things Kobach has said he wants to do is to run the immigration database against the voter rolls. Once that's done, we're going to see prosecutions for voter fraud skyrocket, and all of these people - many of whom may have accidentally registered - will be placed into deportation proceedings.
Protect yourself. If you are not a citizen, call your local election board (usually at the county level) and make sure you are NOT registered.

This Wikipedia link has links to nearly all state voter portals, which may help you be able to search for your name.

https://en.wikipedia.org/…/Voter_registration_in_the_United…

And if you are a non-citizen and find you are registered to vote, contact a lawyer immediately.
​

I work with a bunch of amazing lawyers.

One of the challenges to the #MuslimBan 2.0 is pending in the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. A group of 302 lawyers across 25 airports signed on to an amicus brief ("friend of the court") to detail the chaos and due process violations that occurred in the wake of the first Muslim ban in January.

Along with my colleagues across the country, we jumped at the chance to swear out declarations to shed light on what happened at airports around the country (and some internationally) for the benefit of the learned appellate judges.

Besides the obvious chaos, here's just some of what my colleagues saw around the country:

1. Widespread denial of access to counsel in nearly every airport.
2. Widespread reports of CBP officials caught completely unprepared with the order, and having no idea what to do.
3. Outright defiance of federal court orders (deporting a student after judge's temporary restraining order; not allowing access to counsel even when ordered to by judge)
4. Lawyers reporting specific laws they could have used to reduce detention times and facilitate processing - ie, *helping* CBP officials to their jobs - but were denied the opportunity to do so.

As signatory amici to the court, we wrote to the Fourth Circuit:

Thank you all for stepping up to protect due process. I am proud to stand with you all.

​Veteran journalist Scarborough tweeted, "I had said Friday was the worst day of Donald Trump's presidency. I was wrong. It is today." He was referring, of course, to FBI director James Comey's March 20 confirmation of an investigation into Trump and his team's connections with Russia. It's almost like emails, except it's a thousand times worse.

But folks like Trump continue to paint pretty pictures of themselves, and pretty horrid pictures of everyone else. Merriam-Webster defines propaganda as "the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person." (Emphasis added.)

Today, the Trump administration released more propaganda, but it wasn't about the Russians.

Section 9(b) of Executive Order 13768 (the one best described by the hashtag #ICERaids) mandated a weekly report from ICE on the number of declined detainers. Called the "Declined Detainer Outcome Report,"  it lists the jails that allegedly failed to honor detainers, requests by ICE to hold over detainees for up to 48 hours until ICE could come pick them up and begin the deportation process.

That costs taxpayers additional money on what is already an extremely expensive process. It turns jails into deportation pipelines, and exacerbates (many times for very minor violations) the traumatic effect of deportation on children, family, and employers. More simply - it's not a local lawman's job to enforce federal immigration law. ICE continues to complain they aren't getting any help, but Trump is giving them 10,000 more officers. ICE knows there is no way to deliver on a campaign promise to deport millions of undocumented people. So, crowdsource. Make others do your job and protest if they don't. It's like complaining about your bad grades because the smart kid didn't help you.

Trump didn't come up with this on his own. At least as far back as July 2015, the right-wing think tank Center for Immigration Studies urged Congress to mandate local cooperation with ICE detainers, running through the same type of numerology seen in today's DDOR. For those who may not be familiar, CIS began as an "independent" offshoot to FAIR, the Federation for American Immigration Reform. CIS began as a FAIR program, which was started by Dr. John Tanton, a far-right white nationalist who believed Latinos were not as educable, saw immigration as a threat, and whose organizations have now grown to wield considerable influence in the current White House. 

That the CIS report from 2015 and today's DDOR report from ICE are barely distinguishable speaks to the root of the problem: xenophobia rooted in white nationalism is informing the immigration policy of the United States.

Note that the DDOR lists people who were both charged and convicted. This is because ICE wants to count people charged but not convicted as people "released" by uncooperative law enforcement. That the charges may have been dropped (or pleaded down; the DDOR does not clarify) is of no import: under the new administration, they are all top priorities for deportation. (In fact, even being charged isn't necessary; just that ICE believes you committed an act that would be chargeable as an offense, and if not that, just being a threat to public safety, which includes merely overstaying a visa, which is not even a crime.)

The DDOR is an attempt to shame jails into doing ICE's job. Jails that don't perfectly comply are broadly labeled as "uncooperative jurisdictions." And, of course, it lists cherry-picked data clusters of mostly low-level offenders and lists their country of nationality. It even counts as "declined detainers" where the jail did inform ICE of the presence of a foreign national, but not quickly enough. Acts of terror perpetrated by white nationalists, or crime committed by those born in the United States is simply not reported. Coupled with Trump's misguided VOICE office (singling out victims of crime committed by immigrants) and other reports on immigration benefits issuance broken down by country, the administration seeks to continue the process of building a state-sanctioned alternative factual narrative correlating immigrants and crime. See generally, definition of "propaganda," above. 

The ICE raids and the Muslim ban have taken up a lot of response time. But alternative factual narratives do much greater, long-term damage. We're being told this is about transparency, but we're only being shown one pane in the window. If we see it and call it the propaganda it is, we can engage in counter-propaganda, which is done by building bridges, strategic partnerships, and relentlessly discrediting the credibility and motives of the propagandists.

The American Anti-Arab Discrimination Committee (ADC) invited attorney Hassan Ahmad today to do a "deep dive" into the Muslim Ban 2.0 today, going over a lot of the policy considerations and details of the new ban. 

• The ban is a bigotry-flavored self-licking ice cream cone: national security experts and DHS have all agreed and stated that such bans are misguided and actually undermine national security, yet the administration persists.
• Enforce a ban, then create the mechanism to create the facts necessary to justify it. How? By publishing regular immigration statistics, and coupling it with reporting on foreign-born terror-related crime focused on Muslim perpetrators. Over time, this will build up an alternative factual narrative the administration hopes will defeat legal challenge.
• It weakly attempts to sever the Islamophobic rhetoric of the campaign trail and the "Muslim Ban" moniker by simply stating that this is not a Muslim ban. This may be the best indication yet that it is, in fact, a Muslim ban.
• It comes down with the implementation memo to DHS, which calls for rigorous enforcement of inadmissibility laws at the ports of entry. This is the counterpart to the calls for rigorous enforcement inside the US, which led to the ICE raids we've seen.
• The message is still the same: "We" don't want "you" here. Regardless of the shade of lipstick on this pig.

Follow attorney Hassan Ahmad on Twitter at @HMAesq.

​Watch the video:

The new executive order on immigration, dubbed "MuslimBan 2.0" signed March 6, 2017 presents a more nuanced, but still ultimately unconstitutional affront to religious liberty. Reviewing the redline version prepared by the ACLU of Massachusetts, coupled with the implementing memorandum to DHS, and the letter from AG Jeff Sessions and S-DHS Kelly to President Trump, a few themes emerge.
​

1. How the new EO works (super briefly): Iraq is off the list. Effective date for remaining 6 countries is 3/16/17. Green card holders excluded from the new ban. Visa holders who have a valid visa as of 3/16/17 are also excluded. Refugee resettlement still paused for 120 days, but now includes Syria (which was indefinitely suspended in the old order) and does not include people formally scheduled for resettlement already. The cap on refugee resettlement is still cut to 50,000. But there are a number of exemptions to those who would otherwise be affected - these 'waivers' existed before but the new order goes into greater detail on what might constitute a waiver. Dual nationals are now exempted. But the EO still provides a mechanism to ban nationals of other countries, in a very similar manner, down the road.
2. The Self-Licking Ice Cream Cone: The MuslimBan 2.0 is an ex post facto creation of justification of the need for the ban. Like I said about the Muslim Registry, it is a bigotry-flavored self-licking ice cream cone, a scheme that exists only to serve itself. Enforce a ban, then create a mechanism to create the facts to justify it. This, even though the (actual, non-alternative) facts *from within DHS* thus far indicate that citizenship is an unreliable indicator of terror threat, and 10 high-ranking current and former national security officials swore under penalty of perjury that such a ban not only doesn't do what it purports to do, it actually undermines US national security.
3. Propaganda Clauses: The order creates reporting benchmarks for future factual justification of its need. The joint Sessions/Kelly statement comes at the issue from the administration's side, saying "we would benefit from a pause on immigration from affected countries," essentially parroting Trump's campaign rhetoric back to him. Trump directs Kelly to start publishing statistics on immigration - number of visas issued, green cards granted, etc. - all broken down by nationality. Every 3 months. Plus, reports on the costs of running the refugee admissions program. Simultaneously, the EO continues to mandate official government reporting of actions of foreign-born radicalization, terrorist attacks, attempts, and domestic violence (example: honor killings). Thus, as time goes on, a narrative can be built correlating visa issuance with terrorism, which will, eventually, survive constitutional scrutiny. Unfortunately, the administration's tenuous relationship with facts and truth makes any such "reports" inherently suspect, and are better described as propaganda rather than "transparency" as claimed by the administration.
4. Rigorous Inadmissibility: Although the classes of foreign nationals directly affected by the new MuslimBan are more limited than the original order, the implementing memo has a very concerning clause: "I direct the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of all other relevant executive departments and agencies (as identified by the Secretary of Homeland Security) to rigorously enforce all existing grounds of inadmissibility and to ensure subsequent compliance with related laws after admission." This is a direct call to rigorously enforce immigration laws at the border, and should be seen as a counterpart to the calls for enhanced enforcement in the interior of the US, which has led to the ICE raids we've seen over the past month. Remember - both officers at overseas consulates and border officials have a great deal of discretion to deny entry to foreign nationals. This is a call to "unshackle" them, giving them even greater latitude.
5. Plenary power: The new EO contains the same, if not enhanced reliance on Section 212(f) of the Immig. & Nationality Act (INA). This will continue to be the foundation of the administration's legal argument: that Congress has total power over immigration and the admission and exclusion of foreign nationals. Some of that power was delegated to the President, who can suspend entry of any particular class of foreign national he wants, while making it appear more digestible (by a 10 day phase in, excluding say, green card holders, etc.)
6. "Not a Muslim ban because we say it isn't." The new EO is cognizant that this looks, talks, walks, acts, breathes, and otherwise is a Muslim ban. And the reckless statements of the administration keep coming back to haunt them. Thus, they smartly recognized they would have to sever religious animus on campaign trail and the first ban from the new ban. They did this, largely, by merely stating, "This is not a Muslim ban." The Sessions/Kelly statement says the ban came from countries that are state sponsors of terrorism, or countries where territories have been lost to extremist groups. But if that's the case, many other countries should have been included - even under a restrictive, Muslim-only definition of terrorism. These, and other reasons (such as the delay in implementation for non-urgent reasons, delays requested in court proceedings, and persistently pesky real facts) undermine the administration's stated rationale. But whether a rationale is good or not will not be the subject of judicial review: there must be a violation of the law. Make no mistake: this is still a Muslim ban, and remains so regardless of the shade of lipstick applied to the pig.

The new ban still suffers from a very ominous deficiency: both the administration and terrorist groups stand to benefit from another attack. This is one reason the 10 national security officials stated these types of blanket bans are a bad idea, even if they are later tempered. Our judiciary took care of the first ban, but this administration has a narrative they want to protect and nurture. And they will keep blue penciling this order until some court somewhere upholds it.

There will be legal challenge. Where any new case is brought will have tremendous effect. I suspect some of the ongoing litigation will be turned to the new order, since it raises many of the same issues.
What are some things ordinary folks can do?

1. If you're a lawyer, we need you. Amicus briefs. Helping us find plaintiffs. Volunteer at airports (shout out to www.dullesjustice.org!) Offer to take a case under the supervision of an immigration lawyer. (Message me, I will help you!)
2. If you know another language, reach out to a local immigrants' rights group and offer your services to help translate or interpret.
3. LIGHT UP the switchboards on the Hill. Let your congressfolk know that siding with the administration will cost them.
4. Protest, protest, protest. Show up at airports and rallies. Spread your beautiful exercise of First Amendment rights on social media.
5. Support an immigrants' rights organization monetarily. There are too many to list here so I'll ask folks to post them in the comments below.
6. Go hug a lawyer. Yes, we need love too.

If you've read about Daniel Ramirez-Medina, the DACA recipient still detained by ICE, you've seen how ICE has called him a known gang member, or KGM. (Even more troubling are allegations by his lawyers that ICE tampered with his statement to try to "prove" that he was a KGM. This wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened: an ICE attorney pled guilty in 2016 to forging a document meant to deny a Mexican immigrant the chance to apply for a green card.)
​
This is a way the government denies due process for Latinos: by calling them gang members and not giving them any way to challenge the designation. I had a client who reported gang activity - a knife attack - and testified against them, and then got picked up and denied bond because they called him a known gang member.

Muslims get called supporters of terrorism under a similar scheme. The whole Muslim Brotherhood issue? Same thought process: find a way to label a community as suspect and then take away their right to challenge it or defend themselves. The anti-immigrant, Islamophobic elements of Fear, Inc. currently advising the White House have been trying for years to label the MB as a foreign terrorist organization (FTO) under INA 219(a). They've failed thus far - because there is no evidence, and in fact the evidence points to the conclusion that the MB is a firewall against terrorism rather than a conduit to it. However,  this is inconvenient for Fear, Inc.as it would rob them of their ability to affiliate notable Muslim organizations with terrorism. If they could do so, it would allow these organizations to be shut down, their leaders arrested, and have a chilling effect on all charitable donation to Muslim causes. 

It would also prevent a wide swath of Muslims from gaining immigration benefits such as green cards and citizenship. We've already seen how the CARRP program accomplishes this (a secret immigration partnership with the FBI designed to delay or deny immigration benefits for largely Muslim applicants.) This program unilaterally labels Muslim applicants as either "known or suspected terrorist" - KST - or "non-known or suspected terrorist" - non-KST. Put them together, and it's...everybody.

The only thing standing in the way of Fear, Inc. is the due process guaranteed by the Constitution. That timeless principle that no right shall be taken away unilaterally without some process, a chance to defend. 

When due process is taken away or limited, the result is disenfranchisement. Whether it's done by KGM or KST, the thought process is the same. And it happens to other communities too. Due process is something we must zealously guard and fight for. Because it affects us all.

The chaos from the Muslim ban continues to tear at the fabric of our country. It's but one page in a playbook, but I'm quite content to focus on it because I believe victories gained here will pay forward to other battles against the accumulation of power.

In one week the executive branch has disrupted countless lives. I've been inundated with stories of separated families, mental anguish, and magnified uncertainty. I've witnessed the outright defiance of a Court order shrugged off as the mere words of "an outside judge." I've seen legislators turned away, unable to penetrate the faceless fortress this new administration has built. And I've witnessed an assault on due process of law, the enlightened principle that a right cannot be taken away without both sides being given a fair chance to defend.

When "due process!" becomes a rallying cry as we saw at Dulles Airport on Saturday, something is seriously wrong. Due process is something to be zealously guarded, and the time and resources spent guarding it is the best preventive medicine a society can buy.

This administration started with immigration its first week because it's the low hanging fruit. There's not much process due an alien, and they want to take it away.

Expanding expedited removal (no hearing.) Mass visa revocations (no right of appeal.) No access to counsel (even with a court order.) Arbitrary suspension of immigration benefits for those who otherwise did it legally (no way to challenge.) Bans effectively on a religion (insulated by the plenary power doctrine.) Immediate blacklisting of entire countries (no notice.) It's all easy within our immigration laws, which are hard to follow, but very easy to break.

And then perpetuating the story of the dangerous and untrustworthy immigrant, rallying popular support behind the ban by doing things like reporting alien crime (but only alien crime) *weekly* and calling it "transparency."

We need borders to be crossed in an organized manner. A country is defined not by its borders as Mr. Trump suggests, but by the people inside it. And those people need to move to keep goods, services, and ideas flowing.

Shutting the door, then, as if to a snake oil salesman, inherently means one does not value those other ideas, that one's native ideas are the only ones needed.

They're not. We need fresh ideas and the grit and determination that frequently comes with them.

Be vigilant in ensuring destructive ideas don't make it in. But be equally vigilant to make sure they don't grow inside the house, either.

And assaulting due process is a very, very destructive idea.

Hassan Ahmad spent the weekend at Washington-Dulles International Airport after the Muslim ban executive order was signed last Friday, volunteering with dozens of other lawyers to fight for the rights of affected foreign nationals. Follow him at @HMAesq. 

On January 25, 2017 President Trump announced two executive orders on immigration, largely in line with the hardline stance he embraced during his campaign.

The first executive order is called "Protecting the Nation From Terrorist Attacks By Foreign Nationals." 

The second executive order is called "Enhancing Public Safety In The Interior of the United States." 

It stands to reason that the administration, in its zeal to deliver swiftly and visibly on campaign promises, begin with hardline anti-immigration policy outside the United States, as the President has nearly unfettered authority granted by law to control the admission of aliens into the United States. See INA 212(f). It is legal to discriminate on national origin or political and/or religious ideology when it comes to admission of aliens. For an administration that embraced nativist rhetoric that ultimately won the White House then, starting at the border is the low-hanging fruit. It's easy to come up with any scheme desired, because courts are unlikely to step in to stop it.

Enter Trump, Kobach & Co. These executive orders on immigration reek of nativist rhetoric. They are framed by a narrative of Muslims (and especially Syrians) as terrorists, and immigrants as threats to public safety. Like its failed predecessor, NSEERS, it blacklists entire countries, and mandates a scheme that will enable countries to continue to be blacklisted by executive fiat, while placing the blame on those countries for being blacklisted. They utterly fail to recognize a single redeeming quality of any immigrant, preferring instead to look only at an "alternative fact" balance sheet of liabilities.

Turning attention towards the inside of the United States, the administration seeks to deliver on its promise to deport. They need more officers and they'll get hired. But it's still not enough - there are too many people. So they will crowdsource deportation to law enforcement around the country, and anyone else who dares challenge the administration's authority. Because the number of aliens with serious criminal records is too low to satiate the administration's nativist base, prioritization schemes have been eviscerated. Everyone is subject to deportation, and their due process rights (limited now) will likewise be eviscerated.

For each blanket ban, the government gives itself authority to grant exemptions - what remains to be seen is what color the "exemptions" are. It also gives itself even more authority to deny visas.

No administration-turned-regime would be complete without a bit of propaganda. So, under guise of keeping the public informed, it will publish lists of immigrants with criminal backgrounds, terror-related convictions, and the like on as much as a weekly basis. This will become part of a permanent government record, an official narrative that feeds off its own policy, laying the groundwork for future dystopian policy.

​Here's how they work:
​

Executive Order #1: Protecting The Nation From Terrorist Attacks By Foreign Nationals

The order's salient points:

1. The Order claims that protection of the nation requires those who commit acts of bigotry and hatred, violence against women (including "honor killings") or persecution of a protected class. The Order does not state the obvious: that all these acts are already grounds of inadmissibility under INA 212. The Order also includes a vague reference to "not supporting the Constitution" as a visa requirement. That way, if the admitted immigrant does something the government doesn't like, they can be caught in a lie. This same requirement currently exists for naturalization - but it also provides a way to denaturalize a US citizen. See 8 USC 1451(c). They've taken a rather obscure law and made it generally applicable. That's a recurrent theme throughout these orders. ​
2. The Order blacklists entire countries. It does this by creating a scheme that requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to determine, within 30 days, new requirements the government will now need in order to adjudicate a visa application. It could be anything - as the earlier section stated, knowing whether a foreign national supports the US constitution or has engaged in an act of hatred would make a visa applicant inadmissible. The report must list countries that do not or cannot provide the required information. While this report is being generated, nationals from 7 countries will be flatly refused entry into the US. These countries are Libya, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. This is the first iteration of Trump's "total shutdown of Muslim immigration until we can figure out what the hell is going on."
3. After the 30 days are over, we will have a new list of blacklisted countries. These countries will be listed on a Presidential Proclamation, and will have the force of law. It may be the same 7 countries from the immediate 30-day ban, or more or less. Those countries will have 60 days to start providing the required information, whatever it is, if they want their nationals to be able to enter the United States. For those countries on the Proclamation, blacklisting will continue until compliance with the requirements occurs. Thereafter, any country may be blacklisted at any time.
4. Individuals from blacklisted countries may, during any blacklisted period, be admitted on a case-by-case basis.
5. The visa ban affects all nationals of these countries who are not US citizens. That includes green card holders.
6. The President has been empowered by Congress in section 212(f) of the INA to exclude any class of foreign nationals, with nearly no limitation. Thus, the scheme in the Order and resultant Proclamation will likely survive constitutional scrutiny, shielded by the plenary power doctrine.
7. Section 4 of the Order is the creation of a scheme of "extreme vetting."  The language is extremely vague - not unusual for executive orders - that merely mandate creation of mechanisms to verify identity, criminal intent, and likelihood of ability to contribute to the United States. The contribution portion is new: while it is beyond dispute that immigrants contribute, blending it into the requirements for a visa may pose an insurmountable obstacle and yet another extremely easy way to deny admission.
8. The Order shuts down all refugee resettlement for 120 days, and for Syrians indefinitely, during which time vetting procedures are ordered to be, for lack of a better term, vetted. The scheme is similar to the blacklisting procedure described above: after 120 days refugee admissions will resume only for countries that pass the newer, more stringent requirements. Refugees who would have been admitted 120 days before may only be admitted if they pass these newer requirements. This is akin to completing a college degree, only to be told on stage that you have to go back and take another class.
9. Refugees fleeing religious persecution will be prioritized, but only if they are a minority religion in the country. This clearly means non-Muslim minorities.
10. Moreover, the worldwide cap of refugee admissions will be reduced to 50,000. The 120-day shutdown will be used to pick and choose which refugees to admit. My educated guess is it will not include many Muslims. There is a case-by-case exception to the 120-day shutdown as well
11. The plan for Syrians is truly despotic. While shutting down their resettlement, the US government will create "safe zones" in Syria and in neighboring countries. Look at the terms used in the EO: firm settlement and third-country resettlement. These are legal terms in asylum law, and if a foreign national is firmly settled or resettled, they are statutorily barred from asylum in the US. The US will create these so-called "safe zones" and arbitrarily label them as zones in which people are firmly settled. A Syrian who goes there (and may not have any choice) would then be ineligible to seek asylum in the United States.
12. The Order directs consideration, but stops short of mandating, the rescission of exemptions to the terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (TRIG) under INA 212(d)(3)(B). Obviously, terrorism and material support of it are grounds of inadmissibility to the US. But overly strict application of these grounds led to absurd results, such as women who were forced to cook and clean for terrorist warlords being denied asylum on grounds they "materially supported" terrorism. So over the years, Congress allowed DHS to create situational and group-based exemptions. The new EO recommends rolling back to the overly strict application of TRIG.
13. Complete the US-VISIT biometric entry-exit tracking system first recommended by the 9/11 Commission.
14. All applicants under the Visa Waiver Program must be interviewed. This is a clear nod to the attacks in Paris and Brussels, where EU citizens of Middle Eastern descent (who would have qualified for visa-free entry into the US under the Visa Waiver Program) engaged in horrific acts of terror. 
15. Propaganda: Every 6 months, names of individuals convicted or charged with terrorism-related offenses, or those deported from the US, radicalized and thereafter engaged in terrorism-related acts (not necessarily formal crimes), plus information breaking down violence against women and so-called honor killings in the US will be published. This will create enormous pressure to charge and convict under terrorism-related criminal statutes, and may also lead to the enactment of more such statutes. It creates a governmental stage on which the state-sanctioned narrative of the dangerous Muslim immigrant can play.

Executive Order #2: Enhancing Public Safety In The Interior of the United States

The order's salient points:

1. This is a statement of the policy of the executive branch under Trump. Presumably, all actions taken by the Trump administration will be in line with the framework, assumptions, and thrust of this Order.
2. The policy sees "many" out of status aliens as a significant threat, with those who have committed crimes to be a greater threat. The policy does not explicitly state that an out-of-status alien could pose no threat, nor does it recognize any contributions of an out-of-status alien.
3. The policy sees unilateral detention and deportation as the sole means of enforcement of federal immigration law, and seeks to reduce or eliminate the right to contest such enforcement.
4. The policy sees so-called sanctuary cities as wilful violators of federal law, when in fact sanctuary cities merely refuse to assist federal immigration authorities perform their enforcement obligations.
5. Although prior administrations reached record-high numbers of deportations and engaged in noxious practices such as detention of refugee women and children, the Trump administration finds that the federal government has failed to discharge its duties of enforcement.
6. Enforcement necessarily includes mandatory use of all available means to detect and remove aliens, without regard to the consequences, such as resource drain on state and local law enforcement, loss of federal funding, engendering mistrust between community and police, due process and other constitutional concerns, or deleterious effects on public safety.
7. In contrast to prior schemes of prioritization of removal, the new policy is, essentially, to not prioritize. This means everyone is at risk, not just those with serious criminal records. The policy defines as a priority for removal anyone not only convicted of a crime, but anyone charged with a crime, or committed acts which would constitute a crime (whether proven or not), who have a final order of removal (whether such order was lawfully obtained, and without regard to the passage of time), and a catch-all: anyone whom the immigration officer believes poses a risk to public safety or national security. When all out-of-status aliens are seen as a threat to some degree, the catch-all provision on paper (and certainly in practice) provide justification for apprehension and removal of anyone the officer comes across.
8. Within one year, aliens and those who faciliate their unlawful presence may be subjected to civil fines and penalties. There is no indication that a lawyer representing an undocumented personn may not be subjected to such fines, nor an employer who unknowingly hires one, or indeed, anyone who helps an undocumented person in any way.
9. Up to 10,000 additional deportation officers will be hired.
10. Resurrect the failed 287(g) program, which deputized local law enforcement to begin the deportation process when they come across a person they superficially determine to be in the US without documentation. Also resurrect the failed Secure Communities program, which also set up ill-conceived federal-state partnerships on immigration enforcement, which is a solely federal task.
11. Propaganda: Where a detainer is not honored, criminal actions performed by such aliens shall be made public weekly. Data on aliens serving time shall be published quarterly. 
12. All diplomacy with foreign nations shall include a condition precedent that the country swiftly accept its nationals who are removed from the United States.
13. Aliens who are not green card holders are unable to benefit from the Privacy Act. This means all their personal identifying information can be shared and disclosed.

What we make of it, that's what.

In his victory speech, our new President-Elect said, "I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be President for all of Americans, and this is so important to me." (Emphasis added.)

But what about all the non-citizens of our land?

Trump's 100-day plan is horrific for immigrants. Deferred action for Dreamers, gone. Prosecutorial discretion, gone. In its place, deportation, detention of men, women, and children, and exclusion based on faith. I fear for a culture that will go from "no" to "hell no." No doubt, there are dark clouds on the horizon for non-citizens in America.

What does this mean for you, a resilient, enterprising group of people? 

First, it's impossible to tell exactly what will happen. And it further depends on your particular background: your immigration history, time in the US, ties to the community, and yes, your faith. But with the right advice, you can get some answers. So go get the right advice.

Second, some immigrants might not be affected immediately. If that's you, and you've been waiting, your wait is over. Take this as a priority. This is an insurance policy on your life in the United States.

Third, kill your fear, because fear kills your intelligence. You need to make sure you are calm enough to figure out what to do. The new President is surrounding himself with people who know how to create fear. Do NOT be a victim. Never forget that it was a minority of people who elected him into office. The majority of Americans are with you. I'm proud to be one of them.

Fourth, do not run and hide. This is the time to stand together with the majority of Americans who are with you. That's what the Trump supporters did, and it worked. I know that many of you have survived much worse than this. This is not bigger than you. You can do this. You will do this.

​
And to the supporters of President-Elect Trump:

Your struggles are every bit as real as the struggles of immigrants in this country. We all want prosperity and security. Problems come when we don't want for our neighbors what we want for ourselves. Instead of worrying about dividing the pie, let's bake a bigger one. You were right: you've been ignored and passed over for a long time. I strongly agree with what our new President said: you will be forgotten no longer.

But some of you supported him for other reasons, because you thought it would usher in a new America that was closed to people of different races and faiths. If that's you, know that you will be pushed back into the fringes of society where you belong. America is bigger than your fantasy white utopia, and we're not some ragtag guerrilla resistance calling for a revolution. We're Americans.


And finally, to our President-Elect and his new advisors:

You said, "For those who have chosen not to support me in the past, of which there were a few people, I'm reaching out to you for your guidance and your help so that we can work together and unify our great country."
​
You haven't yet earned the trust of the majority of Americans. But remember that you will be held to your word, whether you like it or not. Don't mistake peace building as a sign of surrender. Don't think your can deport opposing viewpoints. Don't think you can fire disagreement.

​You wanted the White House, you got it.

I wanted to send a message of support to immigrants and allies who might be feeling scared. Mandela said "If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head. If you talk to him in his language, that goes to his heart." The six languages I speak in this video are rusty, but I hope it does some good helping to conquer fear.
( PS: turn on subtitles)