TRUMP ADMINISTRATION COMBATS DISCRIMINATION AGAINST AMERICAN WORKERS
ICE investigation uncovers company that defrauded Americans out of jobs.
June 28, 2018
Immigration fraud has been identified as a key method of entry and embedding for international terrorists, and fugitives from justice and for transnational gang members. This was the underlying premise for my booklet, Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill.
However immigration fraud may also be committed by companies who seek to create the illusion of complying with our nation’s immigration laws while, in reality, discriminating against American workers by hiring foreign workers for whom they apply for temporary work visas such as the H-2B visa.
It is important to remember that prior to World War II the primary authority for the enforcement and administration of our nation’s immigration laws was primarily vested in the Labor Department to protect American workers from unfair competition from foreign workers. This was of particular importance back then as America was attempting to dig out of the Great Depression.
Our immigration laws were enacted to protect national security, American lives and the livelihoods of Americans.
Nevertheless, wacky candidates for political office such as television actress Cynthia Nixon, who is seeking to unseat New York Governor’s Andrew Cuomo, has called for dismantling ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) as reported in the June 22, 2018 New York Post article, Cynthia Nixon labels ICE a ‘terrorist organization’
On June 26, 2018 the Department of Justice issued a press release, Justice Department Settles Claims Against Landscaping Company for Discriminating Against U.S. Workers.
Here is how the DOJ press release begins:
The Justice Department today reached a settlement agreement with Triple H Services LLC, (Triple H), a landscaping company based in Newland, North Carolina, that conducts business in Virginia and four other states. The agreement resolves the Department’s investigation into whether Triple H discriminated against qualified and available U.S. workers based on their citizenship status by preferring to hire temporary workers with H-2B visas, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).The Department’s investigation found that although Triple H went through the motions of advertising over 450 landscape laborer vacancies in five states, it did so in a manner that misled U.S. workers about the available positions and prevented or deterred some from applying. The Department found that Triple H did not consider several qualified U.S. workers who applied for positions in Virginia during the recruitment period, and instead hired H-2B visa workers. In several states where jobs were available, the Department found that Triple H prematurely closed the online job application process for U.S. worker applicants, filled positions with H-2B visa workers without first advertising the jobs to U.S. workers in the relevant locations, or advertised vacancies in a manner that did not make the postings visible to job seekers using state workforce agency online services.The Department concluded that in taking these actions, Triple H effectively denied U.S. workers access to jobs based on its preference for hiring temporary H-2B visa workers to fill the positions. Refusing to consider or hire qualified and available U.S. workers based on their citizenship status violates the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, regardless of whether an employer has complied with other rules governing the use of temporary employment-based visa programs.
A common claim made by anti-American globalists is that the “immigrants do the work Americans won’t do” while blithely ignoring that Americans will do any job, for a reasonable wage under lawful conditions.
On a personal note, my dad was a tradesman/construction worker, a plumber who worked with his buddies in the construction trades on all sorts of job sites building houses and office buildings. He worked on the 1964 New York World’s Fair and on John F. Kennedy International Airport.
For my dad and his co-workers, the word “impossible” did not exist. For them that word simply represented a challenge because they did not believe that any job was too filthy, dangerous or back-breaking to do.
Today millions of hard-working Americans of every race, religion and ethnicity continue to trudge off to their jobs the are fundamental to our nation, happy to earn that all-important paycheck.
Unscrupulous employers, however, seek to slash their costs by hiring and exploiting foreign workers who are often less qualified than their American counterparts but are willing to work for substandard wages under substandard conditions.
While globalists frequently attempt to play the “compassion card” there is nothing compassionate about exploiting foreign workers or screwing American workers out of their jobs.
The Democratic Party that used to represent American blue collar workers have sold them out by advocating for the flooding of America with huge numbers of foreign workers. Often American and lawful immigrants pay for this betrayal with their jobs and their ability to support themselves and their families. All too often this results in these American and lawful immigrants becoming homeless.
Homelessness has soared to record levels, often engendering the separation of children from their parents. Ironically while the Democrats vociferously wailed about the administration prosecuting illegal aliens who are caught entering the United States covertly, without inspection and hence separating the children from their parents, these same politicians completely ignore the way that American kids have been taken from their homeless parents.
The investigation into the discriminatory hiring practices of Triple H Services addressed in the DOJ press release uncovered apparent fraud.
Undoubtedly there are many, many other companies operating throughout the United States who defraud various elements of the immigration system to displace American workers to drive down wages and, perhaps, force their workers to work under illegally dangerous conditions.
All that continues to protect them from discovery is the abject lack of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents.
As I noted in my previous article, neither of the bills proposed by House Speaker Ryan or House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte include the funds to hire a single additional ICE agent, although the Goodlatte Bill would increase staffing at CBP (Customs and Border Protection) by 10,000 employees, with half going for the hiring of additional Border Patrol agents.
However, help is on the way.
As we have seen with ramping up enforcement along the U.S./Mexican border, by the stated policy of “Zero Tolerance” for illegal entry of aliens, focusing all efforts on that dangerous and problematic border will not, ultimately succeed.
In November 2001, just weeks after the attacks of September 11 I testified at a hearing before the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus chaired by Congressman Tom Tancredo to explore how the immigration system had failed to abysmally as to permit our nation to suffer the worst terror attack in the history of our nation.
In my prepared testimony I raised the issue of the need to think of the immigration enforcement program as resting on the three legs of what I described as the “Immigration Enforcement Tripod.” In my concept the Border Patrol enforces our immigration laws from between ports of entry, the Inspectors enforce the immigration laws at ports of entry and the special agents of the INS (today ICE) enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.
Traditionally, that third leg representing the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States has always been much shorter than the other legs. Consequently aliens came to expect that if they can, by whatever means possible, enter the United States, they will have little to fear if they violate our immigration laws, commit crimes or attempt to defraud the immigration system to acquire lawful status by committing immigration fraud.
Similarly, employers who hire illegal aliens or engage in fraud to discriminate against American workers also have virtually nothing to fear.
Of course, the abomination of Sanctuary Cities exacerbate this problem in apparent violation of Title 8 U.S. Code § 1324 which deems the aiding, abetting, inducing, harboring and shielding illegal aliens from detention to be felonies when done by individuals or organizations.
While a border wall would help to secure that dangerous U.S./Mexican border, without meaningful interior enforcement of our immigration laws, aliens will continue to find ways of entering the United States, spurred on by Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States and a lack of assets for the enforcement of our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.
Once again the Trump administration is acting to close the loopholes and thus protect national security, public safety and the livelihoods of American and lawful immigrant workers.
Only fools could argue with those vital goals.
AG Sessions Punishes Landscaping Co. for Anti-American Discrimination
Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Department of Justice (DOJ) is hitting a North Carolina landscaping business with a major civil penalty for hiring foreign workers while discriminating against Americans.
18 Democrat AGs Ask Courts to Make Kids into Golden Tickets
AG Sessions Punishes Landscaping Co. for Anti-American Discrimination
Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ Department of Justice (DOJ) is hitting a North Carolina landscaping business with a major civil penalty for hiring foreign workers while discriminating against Americans.
The DOJ announced on Tuesday that it had reached a settlement with the Newland, North Carolina landscaping company, Triple H Services LLC, after the business was accused of hiring foreign workers imported to the United States on the H-2B visa program, rather than hiring American citizens who were available to take the blue collar jobs.
After a DOJ investigation — led by the Civil Rights Division’s Protecting U.S. Workers Initiative — the agency revealed that Triple H misled American workers in job advertisements for more than 450 landscaping jobs in a way that was designed to deter Americans from applying for the positions.
When Americans did qualify and apply for the landscaping jobs, the DOJ investigation found that Triple H “did not consider” those U.S. workers for the positions, and “instead hired H-2B visa workers,” a release by the agency stated.
“Federal law prohibits employers from discriminating against U.S. workers in hiring because of their citizenship status,” Acting Assistant Attorney General John Gore said in a statement. “The Department will continue to fight to ensure that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged because of their citizenship status.”
The DOJ investigation also discovered that Triple H had ended multiple online job applications before American workers could start and finish the process, instead quickly filling the landscaping positions with H-2B foreign visa workers.
DOJ officials said in their settlement with Triple H that the landscaping company “effectively denied U.S. workers access to jobs based on its preference for hiring” H-2B foreign visa workers.
As part of the settlement, Triple H will have to pay a civil penalty of $15,600, along with establishing a back pay fund capped at $85,000 for workers who were impacted by the company’s anti-American discrimination practices. Triple H will additionally have to be monitored by the DOJ for three years while ramping up their recruitment practices of American workers.
Sessions’ DOJ is set to further its initiative of protecting American citizens and workers by working with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) agency to denaturalize thousands of foreign nationals who are accused of defrauding the U.S. government in their citizenship applications.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
AG Sessions: Trump’s Critics Are Radical, Open-Borders Snobs
The critics of President Donald Trump’s border reforms are radical, hypocritical elites, says Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
“The rhetoric we hear from the other side on this issue—as on so many others—has become radicalized,” Sessions told an audience in Los Angeles. He continued:
We hear views on television today that are on the lunatic fringe, frankly. And what is perhaps more galling is the hypocrisy. These same people live in gated communities, many of them, and are featured at events where you have to have an ID to even come in and hear them speak.They like a little security around themselves, and if you try to scale the fence, believe me, they’ll be only too happy to have you arrested and separated from your children …So they want borders in their lives but not in yours and not in the American people’s lives. That is why the American people are sick of the lip service and the hypocrisy.
Sessions has used his power as Attorney General to aggressively push Trump’s lower-immigration/higher-wage strategy. For example, he has redefined amnesty rules, relocated judges to the border, enforced laws against employers who hire illegals or discriminate against Americans.
But those policies are opposed by the “open borders crowd,” according to Sessions’ prepared remarks:
They don’t like it when we deport people—even
criminal aliens. They don’t like it when we stop
people at the border—even those smuggling
children. They don’t like interior enforcement
and they don’t like work place enforcement. No
matter what we do, they complain.From coast to coast—perhaps especially on this coast—there are politicians who think that having any border at all is mean-spirited, unkind, or even bigoted.The vice-chairman of the Democratic National Committee recently wore a t-shirt that says “I don’t believe in borders.” I wonder what his neighbors think about that.The name of the group that organized the Caravan to stampede our borders is “People Without Borders.”The Attorney General of this state, Xavier Becerra says that “there’s really no difference between my parents and [illegal] immigrants except a piece of paper.” Paperwork, meaning compliance with our law, is important. And it’s a shame that I must say this to the top law enforcement official in California…The so-called elites will always find an excuse to attack President Trump. They will not be satisfied as long as we are enforcing our borders. As long as there is any immigration enforcement, they will oppose any effective limits.
The media is part of the problem, said Sessions. “We get attacked in the media by the so-called elites and their special interests.”
Sessions touted Trump’s pro-American policies, said saying:
This is the Trump era. We are enforcing our laws again.We know whose side we are on — so does this group — we’re on the side of police, and we’re on the side of the public safety of American people.The radical extremist open borders crowd should declare whose side they are on.
I believe that this is one of the main reasons that President Trump won. He promised to tackle this crisis that had been ignored or made worse by so many before him. And now he’s doing exactly what the American people asked him to do.This is a decisive issue. As the President often says, “a country without borders is not a country.” I don’t know why that is so hard for some people to understand …The American people are with us on this issue. One poll last year showed that 80 percent of the American people oppose sanctuary policies. Most cities are not sanctuary cities.
Polls
Amnesty advocates rely on business-funded “Nation of Immigrants” push-polls to show apparent voter support for immigration and immigrants.
But “choice” polls reveal most voters’ often-ignored preference that CEOs should hire Americans at decent wages before hiring migrants. Those Americans include many blue-collar Blacks, Latinos, and people who hide their opinions from pollsters. Similarly, the 2018 polls show that GOP voters are far more concerned about migration — more properly, the economics of migration — than they are concerned about illegal migration and MS-13, taxes, or the return of Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
Migration Economics
Currently, four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market — but the government provides green cards to roughly 1 million legal immigrants and temporary work-permits to roughly 3 million foreign workers.
The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with foreign labor. That process spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate prices, widens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.
The Attorneys General of 17 states and the District of Columbia, all Democrats, filed a 128-page complaint in federal court in Seattle Tuesday, asking the court to enshrine in law practices that turn children into shields for illegal aliens and frustrate immigration enforcement.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, is being billed by outlets like the Associated Press (AP) as an effort by states to “reunite migrant families.” In reality, the suit has little to do with the small number of alleged illegal aliens whose children are still being housed separately from them as they await criminal trial for crossing U.S. borders without authorization.
Its main focus is on forcing the administration to give up its policy of enforcing American immigration laws and adopt a bevy of open-borders policies aimed at allowing, effectively, unlimited numbers of people to enter the country without recourse.
In addition to calling for blanket orders for the administration to “reunite” children and parents, the Democrat AGs are asking for an injunction forcing the federal government to:
1. “Enjoin Defendants from refusing to accept applications for asylum at a valid port of entry, and from criminally charging asylum applicants with illegal entry or re-entry if they present themselves at a valid port of entry[.]”
This would, if adopted, mean the administration will face further legal penalties if the already overloaded immigration infrastructure is not able to immediately take all comers who make a “credible” claim of “fear of persecution.” As the Democrats’ complaint itself argues, the fact that border crossings are at capacity is no excuse. “Border officials are unlawfully turning away these families on the pretext that the United States is “full” or no longer accepting asylum seekers,” they write. “This unlawful practice exacerbates the trauma already suffered by refugee families while simultaneously artificially increasing illegal entry violations.”
The asylum system is supposed to be an extraordinary remedy for the benefit of people who are genuinely persecuted and in danger in their home countries. Traditionally, this was understood to mean people persecuted, almost always by an authoritarian government, for their religion or political beliefs. Attorney General Jeff Sessions is working to contain the rapid expansion of this definition to include victims of everyday crime in countries that are not as safe as America.
But the “credible fear” claim process is stretching the asylum system into a standard way to gain entry at the southern border. It allows otherwise illegal aliens to enter the country with work authorization, only to join the immigration courts’ years-long backlog before their claim is ever seriously examined.
As word of the efficacy of this tactic in avoiding deportation spread, so did its use. In the last six years, asylum claims have tripled. Central American asylum claims increased more than 800% over the same period. Illegal aliens have quickly learned — often with the helpof immigration lawyers — the magic words that trigger a finding of “credible fear” by a DHS official at the border who has no ability to investigate claims of persecution.
If the federal court in Seattle grants this injunction, DHS will be under even more pressure, under threat of legal action, to quickly accept migrants’ tales of persecution and usher them into the United States. And nothing about this request has anything to do with children, let alone family reunification.
2. “Declare Defendants’ family separation Policy unauthorized by or contrary to the Constitution and laws of the United States” and “Enjoin Defendants from enforcing the family separation Policy, including at all United States borders and ports of entry, pending further orders from this Court[.]”
If the court accepts this injunction request, it means that, in effect, all illegal aliens caught breaching the southern border and charged must be allowed into the United States if they have their children with them. Any other course of action will be presumptively illegal.
The government at the moment faces a trilemma when dealing with “family units” apprehended and charged at the border. They can (1) just release them, (2) detain the parents and separate the children, leading to the outcry this lawsuit is exploiting, or (3) house the families together, which is the administration’s stated preference but is illegal for longer than 20 days under the current interpretation of 1997’s “Flores Settlement. ” If another federal court in California refuses the Justice Department’s request to revise the Flores Settlement, that leaves only options one and two.
What the Democrat attorneys general are asking the court to do is make option two illegal as well, leaving no choice but to allow alleged illegal aliens into the country, where they may or may not show up for an immigration hearing that could be years down the road. Children become an irrevocable “golden ticket” to entry into the United States, a message already heard loud and clear by would-be illegal aliens. Before 2013, aliens bringing their kids across the desert with them were so rare the Border Patrol did not keep statistics on “family units.” Since then, their proportion has increased five times. Last month, they were nearly a quarter of presumed illegals apprehended at the border.
3. “Enjoin Defendants from conditioning family reunification on an agreement not to petition for asylum or other relief available under the INA, or on an agreement to withdraw a petition or other request for that relief” and “Enjoin Defendants from removing separated parents from the United States without their children, unless the parent affirmatively, knowingly, and voluntarily waives the right to reunification before removal after consultation with an attorney[.]”
That is to say, if the court accepts this request, anyone whose children are, for any reason, not removable themselves, becomes immune from deportation. Not only that, but it takes away perhaps the most typical method in which illegal alien families are deported after parents are convicted, with an expedited removal hearing for the parents followed by them agreeing to take their children and go home.
The complaint itself consists in large part of dozens of pages cataloging statements by President Donald Trump and his administration and news articles about the plight of sympathetic illegal aliens. No fewer than three stories about crying children are listed to convince the court to adopt the changes requested above.
But the complaint goes further than merely harping on the family separation scenes left-leaning media outlets frequently portrayed in a wildly false light. It continually tries to use the fact the administration is trying to deter illegal immigration against it. Several times it seeks to use the administration’s plan to use military resources to house apprehended aliens — part of their efforts to keep families together — as proof the Democratic AGs’ open-borders policy must be made law by the courts, giving further lie to the notion, parroted in report after report in the left-leaning press, that this suit is merely about families being separated.
Attorney General Sessions, who is a defendant in the suit, reacted to these bait and switch tactics in a speech he gave in Los Angeles just minutes after the State AGs filed their suit.
“On Wednesday, President Trump ordered this administration to ensure that when we apprehend illegal aliens at the border and hold them for criminal prosecution and to adjudicate their immigration claims, we do what we can to keep families together,” Sessions said in his prepared remarks. “How did the open borders crowd respond? No. Now they don’t want them held or deported at all. Does that surprise you?”
“When they win, they make demands. And when they lose, they make demands. I think there’s a lesson in that. … As long as there is any immigration enforcement, they will oppose any effective limits,” Sessions continued.
“On Wednesday, President Trump ordered this administration to ensure that when we apprehend illegal aliens at the border and hold them for criminal prosecution and to adjudicate their immigration claims, we do what we can to keep families together,” Sessions said in his prepared remarks. “How did the open borders crowd respond? No. Now they don’t want them held or deported at all. Does that surprise you?”
“When they win, they make demands. And when they lose, they make demands. I think there’s a lesson in that. … As long as there is any immigration enforcement, they will oppose any effective limits,” Sessions continued.
The case is Washington, et al. v. U.S., 18-cv-00939 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.
PAUL KRUGMANThe disintegration of California, a Mexican satellite welfare state of poverty, crime and high taxes
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2013/04/paul-krugman-look-at-california-under.html
AMERICA: YOU’RE BETTER OFF BEING AN ILLEGAL!!!
This annual income for an impoverished American family is $10,000 less than the more than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on each unaccompanied minor border crosser.
A study by Tom Wong of the University of California at San Diego discovered that more than 25 percent of DACA-enrolled illegal aliens in the program have anchor babies. That totals about 200,000 anchor babies who are the children of DACA-enrolled illegal aliens. This does not include the anchor babies of DACA-qualified illegal aliens. JOHN BINDER
“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment