U.S Immigration

The System

Introduction 

When examining government programs, funding policies, and their beneficiaries, it's crucial to adopt a systemic approach. One cannot afford to focus narrowly on a single facet of a problem or solution without considering its impact on other entities, beneficiaries, and even policies. In relation to our immigration challenges, it's essential to revisit the roots of the current situation. By understanding that immigration has been a persistent issue for decades, we must question the nature of the problem itself. Who truly benefits in the grand scheme of things? This inquiry demands a comprehensive analysis that goes beyond surface-level observations, aiming to uncover the underlying factors and stakeholders who gain from the status quo.

U.S Immigration History

The Naturalization Act of 1790

The first significant law passed by the U.S. government regarding immigration was the Naturalization Act of 1790. This law established the first rules for naturalization (the process by which foreign-born individuals become U.S. citizens) in the United States. The Act limited naturalization to persons of “good character,” who had lived in the U.S. for two years and had kept their current state of residence for at least one year. It marked the beginning of the legal framework for immigration and citizenship in the United States, setting a precedent for future legislation that would evolve in response to changing social, economic, and political conditions.

The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798

Following the Naturalization Act of 1790, the next significant piece of legislation concerning immigration was the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, specifically the Alien Friends Act and the Alien Enemies Act, which were part of a larger package of laws. These acts were passed during a time of growing political division and concern over foreign influence and national security.

Alien Friends Act (1798): Allowed the president to deport any non-citizen deemed dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, without a trial or hearing. It was set to expire two years after its passage.

Alien Enemies Act (1798): Authorized the president to apprehend and deport resident aliens if their home countries were at war with the United States. Unlike the Alien Friends Act, the Alien Enemies Act was not given an expiration date and remains in effect today, codified under 50 U.S.C. §§ 21–24.

The Alien and Sedition Acts were highly controversial at the time, criticized for stifling dissent and violating the First Amendment rights. They played a significant role in the election of 1800, contributing to the defeat of the Federalists. The Acts highlighted the tension between national security and civil liberties, a theme that would recur in American immigration policy in the years to come.

The Page Act of 1875

The Page Act of 1875 aimed to restrict the immigration of individuals under conditions such as forced labor and to address concerns over moral conduct. It specifically targeted the immigration of workers from Asia under contracts considered tantamount to servitude and sought to prevent the entry of women for the purpose of prostitution. These measures were part of early U.S. efforts to regulate immigration based on specific criteria of desirability and public morality.

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was enacted to address economic concerns and labor competition in the United States, particularly in the western states, where Chinese immigrants were seen as competitors for jobs, especially in mining and railroad construction. This act aimed to reduce these economic tensions by limiting the influx of Chinese laborers. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was repealed in 1943 by the Magnuson Act, which allowed for limited Chinese immigration and for Chinese nationals residing in the U.S. to become naturalized citizens.

The Immigration Act of 1891

The Immigration Act of 1891 expanded the categories of people to be excluded from entering the United States, including those suffering from a contagious disease, felons, polygamists, and those financially unable to support themselves. It also established the federal government’s authority to regulate immigration, including the inspection and deportation of immigrants already in the country who were deemed to fall under these expanded categories of exclusion. The Immigration Act of 1891 has been superseded by subsequent immigration laws that further refined and changed the immigration policies of the United States, including the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 and its amendments.

The National Origins Act (part of the Immigration Act of 1924)

Established quotas based on national origins, severely limiting immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, and virtually banning Asian immigration. During the early 20th century, when the National Origins Act was enacted, the United States was navigating post-World War I recovery and the beginning of the Great Depression. Many countries facing restrictions were experiencing political upheaval, economic distress, or the aftermath of war. The U.S. sought to limit immigration from these areas, partly due to fears of importing radical political ideas like communism and anarchism, and to manage economic strain by reducing competition for jobs during a period of high unemployment.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter Act)

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, also known as the McCarran-Walter Act, reformed the structure of U.S. immigration law. It retained the national origins quota system but also introduced a preference system based on skills and family reunification. The Act represented an attempt to balance national security concerns during the Cold War.  The Act also included criteria related to health, criminal history, and potential for becoming a public charge. It barred entry to individuals considered to be a threat to public safety or national security, including those with certain diseases, those with a history of criminal activity, and those likely to rely on government assistance for their livelihood. This was part of a broader attempt to ensure that immigrants to the United States would be able to contribute positively to society and not pose a risk.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (Hart-Celler Act)

Abolished the national origins quota system, replacing it with a preference system based on family reunification and skilled immigrants, significantly altering the demographic composition of U.S. immigration. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, influenced by the civil rights movement and changing societal values, shifted U.S. immigration policy from a quota system based on national origin to one prioritizing family reunification and skilled immigrants. This change mirrored the nation's growing commitment to equality and nondiscrimination, leading to a more diverse immigrant population that reshaped American society.

The Refugee Act of 1980

Standardized the process for admitting refugees to the U.S. by establishing a comprehensive refugee policy and annual caps on refugee admissions. The Refugee Act of 1980 was enacted in response to the increasing numbers of refugees following events like the Vietnam War and political turmoil in other parts of the world. It aimed to establish a comprehensive and systematic procedure for admitting refugees into the United States, emphasizing humanitarian concerns and the need for a consistent policy towards refugees. The sentiment at the time was driven by a desire to address the plight of refugees in a manner that reflected America’s values of asylum and support for those fleeing persecution.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA)

Granted amnesty to certain groups of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. and established penalties for employers who hired undocumented workers. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 aimed to address illegal immigration to the U.S. by legalizing undocumented immigrants who had arrived before 1982 and imposing sanctions on employers who knowingly hired undocumented workers. This legislation sought to curb future illegal immigration while offering a path to legal status for millions already in the country, reflecting a compromise between enforcing immigration laws and acknowledging the reality of a significant undocumented population. 

Ronald Reagan 

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA)

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) was designed to strengthen U.S. immigration laws, adding penalties for undocumented immigrants for various violations and improving border control. It introduced significant changes such as the expansion of aggravated felonies, establishment of expedited removal processes, and new rules for asylum seekers, aiming to address illegal immigration comprehensively. 

IIRIRA

Other source 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002

In response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, this act created the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), consolidating several federal agencies to coordinate and secure the U.S. against threats, including those related to immigration.

Policy and Directives 

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative of 2012

Although not a law, this significant policy directive from the Obama administration allowed certain individuals who came to the U.S. as children and met several guidelines to request consideration for deferred action from deportation.

Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) 

This policy aimed to provide deferred action status to undocumented immigrants with U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident children, living in the U.S. since 2010, but was halted by legal challenges.

Enhancements to the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) 

This policy sought to expand protection to more undocumented immigrants who arrived as children but were stopped by court rulings before implementation.

The Public Charge Rule Change (2019) 

The Trump administration sought to deny visas or residency to those likely to use government aid, faced legal pushback, and was later rescinded by the Biden administration.

The Remain in Mexico Policy (Migrant Protection Protocols, 2019) 

Required asylum seekers in the U.S.-Mexico border to wait in Mexico for U.S. court proceedings, was suspended and later terminated under the Biden administration.

U.S. Immigration Trend 

To grasp our immigration policy, it's important to dive into its history, identifying the consistencies within that historical timeline to understand the dynamics at play. Recognizing these consistencies and comparing them to the immigration policies of other countries helps us discern how we differ or align. Such comparisons pave the way for evaluating the extent to which political agendas influence these policies and laws. While I posit that many of these policies and laws are politically motivated, I remain open to alternative interpretations.

Evolving Definitions of Eligibility and Exclusion

Starting with the Naturalization Act of 1790, U.S. immigration policy has continually evolved, reflecting changing societal norms and national priorities. Early laws were restrictive, focusing on character and potential contributions, while later legislation introduced quotas and targeted exclusions based on nationality, health, economic viability, and potential security threats. This dynamic process reflects an ongoing attempt to balance the benefits of immigration, such as labor supply and cultural enrichment, against concerns related to national security, economic competition, and social integration.

National Security vs. Civil Liberties

The tension between ensuring national security and protecting civil liberties has been a recurrent theme, evident in the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, during wartime periods, and following the 9/11 attacks with the Homeland Security Act of 2002. These laws often expanded governmental power to detain, deport, or deny entry to non-citizens perceived as threats, sparking debates over civil rights and the balance between security and freedom. 

Economic Considerations

Many immigration policies have been influenced by economic factors, such as labor demands and competition. For example, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the National Origins Act of 1924 were responses to economic fears about job competition and wage suppression. Similarly, policies have aimed to attract skilled workers or those who can contribute economically, as seen in the preference systems introduced by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 and the 1965 Hart-Celler Act.

Legislative, Directive and Judicial Trends 

Legislation, additional policy directives, and judicial review constitute essential mechanisms for creating and maintaining a comprehensive immigration system of laws. Legislation involves the passage of laws by Congress to establish the legal framework governing immigration, defining criteria for entry, stay, and naturalization, along with mechanisms for enforcement and penalties for violations. Additional policy directives, often enacted through executive actions, fill gaps in legislation or address emerging issues, providing guidance on the implementation of existing laws and shaping the administrative approach to immigration matters. 

U.S. Immigration, The Broken Trend

Understanding the dynamics of U.S. immigration policy requires recognizing the shifts from historically balancing civil liberties, national security, and economic needs. Presently, a critical perspective, based on my extensive research and evidence from grand jury files and court documents, emphasizes a breakdown in this equilibrium. Specifically, the focus is on the safety and rights of children, who are arguably the most vulnerable group affected by these policies. The concern is not just theoretical but grounded in documented cases that highlight the failings in protecting those who are most at risk.

This analysis reveals that the current system, including the role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the unprecedented involvement of the United Nations (UN) in U.S. immigration, may be exacerbating the plight of migrant children rather than alleviating it. There is a particular emphasis on the financial gains of NGOs amidst this crisis, suggesting a conflict between profit motives and the humanitarian needs of migrants. The critique extends to the mechanisms of family reunification programs, which have failed to safeguard the welfare of children, leading to cases of harm, loss, and unaccountability.

Moreover, the evidence points to a lack of coherence in the rationale behind embassy announcements in Latin American countries and the broader immigration strategy, which seems to diverge from the U.S.'s historical approach to immigration that seeks to balance economic needs with the protection of individual rights and national security.

This critique calls for a reassessment of immigration policies and practices, emphasizing the need to prioritize the welfare of migrant children and ensure that immigration processes align with the nation's core values and interests. The documented evidence and financial data gathered demand a response that addresses the systemic issues contributing to the vulnerabilities faced by migrant children, advocating for policies that genuinely protect their rights and well-being.

The Executive Order; Immigration Framework, Setting Up the Business  

Executive Order 13993: 

Revocation of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Federal Regulation (January 20, 2021) - This order revoked a number of Trump administration policies and directives, indirectly impacting immigration policy by signaling a shift in administrative priorities.

Executive Order 13988: 

Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation (January 20, 2021) - This order, though broader in scope, impacts immigration policies related to the treatment of LGBTQ+ individuals.

Executive Order 14010: 

Creating a Comprehensive Regional Framework to Address the Causes of Migration, to Manage Migration Throughout North and Central America, and to Provide Safe and Orderly Processing of Asylum Seekers at the United States Border (February 2, 2021) - Aims at addressing root causes of migration and improving the system for asylum seekers.

Executive Order 14011: 

Establishment of Interagency Task Force on the Reunification of Families (February 2, 2021) - Focuses on reuniting children separated from their families at the border.

Executive Order 14012: 

Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans (February 2, 2021) - Directs a review of the public charge rule and other actions to remove barriers to legal immigration.

Executive Order 14013: 

Rebuilding and Enhancing Programs to Resettle Refugees and Planning for the Impact of Climate Change on Migration (February 4, 2021) - Aims to enhance the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and includes planning for the impact of climate change on migration.

Proclamation 10142: 

Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to The United States (January 20, 2021) - Ends the travel bans on predominantly Muslim and African countries, often referred to as the "Muslim ban."

Departments, Agencies, NGO’s and Programs, Open for Business

The range of departmental and non-governmental organizations engaged with this initiative is extensive, yet their operations are transparent, not shrouded in secrecy. They are quite forthcoming about their activities, and it may be that conservatives are not paying sufficient attention. As conservatives, we seem to have lost our connection with the workings of government, and this oversight can have significant consequences. Disengagement from governmental processes does not negate their influence on every facet of our lives. To effectively advocate for a smaller government, we must take an active role in its restructuring. Neglecting government allows it to expand unchecked; proactive participation is essential to ensure it serves its intended purpose. 

To gain a comprehensive understanding of how this business operates,we need to explore the organizations, agencies, NGOs, and the specific programs they implement across various governance levels—international, national, state, and local. This involves identifying the connections from the international to the national level, from the national to the state level, and from the state to the local level. Additionally, we must examine the agencies, departments, and NGOs involved, along with the programs they administer. This approach will illuminate the intricate web of interactions and collaborations that underpin the system's functionality.

Based on the detailed findings in the in The Supreme Court of Florida Case No.: Sc22-796 Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Presentment of The Twenty-First Statewide Grand Jury it becomes clear that the complex network of relationships among non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, and international bodies like the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), International Organization for Migration (IOM), International Labour Organization (ILO), Intergovernmental Consultations on Migration, Asylum and Refugees (IGC), Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and the Organization of American States (OAS), has significant effects on migration policies and human rights advocacy.

While each of these organizations plays a crucial role individually, their interconnected efforts and the ripple effects of their decisions, particularly in terms of managing migration and aiding refugees, present a multifaceted story of intentions versus outcomes.

International Organizations

United Nations

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

As a concerned citizens, it's essential to understand the nuanced role and impacts of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Your awareness and involvement can play a critical role in shaping more effective and humane policies and practices.

1. Understanding UNHCR: The UNHCR is tasked with a noble and complex mission: to protect refugees globally and to support their voluntary repatriation, local integration, or resettlement to our country. Your understanding of these efforts is vital. It helps you appreciate the challenges of safeguarding the rights and well-being of displaced individuals, ensuring they have the opportunity to seek asylum and find safe refuge.

2. Navigating the Negative Impact: However, your critical eye is necessary when examining the unintended consequences of these humanitarian efforts. The mechanisms employed by the UNHCR, intended to provide aid, can sometimes contribute to systemic issues. This includes fostering unsafe migration practices that might indirectly benefit criminal organizations. Your engagement and inquiry into these matters help highlight the need for strategic adjustments in how aid is distributed and managed.

3. Observing Trends: Observing the evolution of the United Nations' involvement in U.S. immigration reveals significant insights. Recent years, particularly under the current administration, have shown an uptick in efforts to protect migrants and asylum seekers. Yet, your discernment is needed to recognize the gap between the advertised commitment to refugee protection and the practical outcomes. It's an area where your voice and advocacy can contribute to bridging this gap, advocating for policies that truly reflect humanitarian values without unintended consequences.

4. Current Incidents: Specific incidents, as revealed in The Supreme Court Of Florida Case No: Sc22-796 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th Presentment documents, present invaluable learning opportunities.

   For example, the distribution of funds and resources, such as cash and debit cards by UN-affiliated organizations to migrants, initially intended to provide support, has, in conjunction with NGOs, intentionally encouraged risky journeys.

   Your well-informed perspective can advocate for enhanced oversight, accountability, and protocols that guarantee humanitarian aid fulfills its intended purpose effectively and safelyensure humanitarian aid fulfills its intended purpose effectively and safely.

Educating yourself on these complexities allows you to contribute to a more informed dialogue on refugee and migrant support. Your involvement, whether through advocacy, volunteering, or simply staying informed, plays a part in fostering a more humane and effective approach to global migration challenges.

International Organization for Migration (IOM)

1. Role: Promotes humane and orderly migration for the benefit of all, offering services and advice to governments and migrants.

2. Negative Impact: The IOM's efforts to facilitate migration are entangled with broader UN strategies that, as per the grand jury findings, sometimes fail to adequately protect migrants from exploitation and abuse.

3. Observation: The reliance on programs that do not sufficiently deter dangerous migrations underscores the importance of reevaluating initiatives to prioritize migrant safety and human rights.

4. Incidents:

1. International Labour Organization (ILO)

   1. Role: Sets international labor standards, including those affecting migrant workers, to ensure that migration is safe and decent.

   2. Negative Impact: The effectiveness of ILO's standards is challenged by the broader systemic failures to enforce these standards across countries, leaving migrant workers vulnerable to exploitation and grave safety concerns undermining the ILO's goals.

   3. Observation:

2. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

   1. Role: Works on human rights aspects of migration, including the rights of migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees.

3. Intergovernmental Consultations on Migration, Asylum and Refugees (IGC)

   1. Role: An informal, non-binding forum for governments to exchange information and policy ideas on all aspects of migration, asylum, and refugees.

4. Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)

   1. Role: Addresses a range of security issues, including migration, ensuring that migration management is safe, orderly, and regular.

5. Organization of American States (OAS)

   1. Role: Engages in various initiatives focusing on the rights of migrants in the Americas, promoting policies for safe, orderly, and regular migration.

International Agreements Impacting U.S. Immigration

The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol

Impact: Defines the term "refugee," outlines the rights of the displaced, and the legal obligations of states to protect them.

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM)

Impact: The first intergovernmental negotiated agreement, prepared under the auspices of the United Nations, that covers all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner.

Bilateral Agreements and Memoranda of Understanding

Impact: The U.S. has numerous bilateral agreements with other nations regarding the management of borders, the processing of refugees and asylum seekers, and the facilitation or restriction of migration flows.

National Organizations 

1. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

   1. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

      1. Role: Administers the nation’s naturalization and immigration system, including processing asylum and refugee applications, and immigrant petition applications.

   2. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)

      1. Role: Manages, controls, and protects the U.S. borders at and between the official ports of entry.

   3. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

      1. Role: Enforces federal laws governing border control, customs, trade, and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.

   4. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

      1. Role: Though primarily focused on emergency management, FEMA occasionally gets involved in supporting immigrants during crises.

2. U.S. Department of State (DOS)

   1. Role: Handles international relations, including the issuance of visas through its consular sections abroad, refugee resettlement, and international diplomatic efforts on migration issues.

3. U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)

   1. Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR)

      1. Role: Adjudicates immigration cases by fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly interpreting and administering the nation's immigration laws under delegated authority from the Attorney General.

   2. Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL)

      1. Role: Defends the statutes and regulations governing U.S. immigration law in the federal courts.

4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

   1. Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR)

      1. Role: Provides new populations with the opportunity to maximize their potential in the United States, linking them to critical resources to assist them in becoming integrated members of American society.

5. U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

   1. Role: Enforces federal labor laws related to immigrant workers, oversees programs protecting migrant workers' rights, and collects data on immigrant labor market outcomes.

6. U.S. Department of Education (ED)

   1. Role: Provides guidance and resources to support the education of immigrant students and English Language Learners (ELLs) in U.S. schools.

Additional National Entities

National Security Council (NSC)

• Role: Advises the President on national security and foreign policy matters, including immigration policies affecting security.

Congressional Committees

Various committees within the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives play critical roles in shaping immigration legislation and policy.

U.S. Senate

1. Senate Judiciary Committee

   1. Subcommittees of interest:

      1. Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Safety

         • Role: Oversees the Department of Justice and the agencies under its jurisdiction, including immigration laws and policies, naturalization processes, and border security.

2. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

   1. Role: Provides oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), including its role in immigration enforcement and border protection.

3. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP)

   1. Role: While not directly focused on immigration, it addresses issues that can impact immigrant communities, such as labor laws and education.

4. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

   1. Role: Influences the U.S.'s foreign policy, which can indirectly affect immigration through diplomatic relations and international agreements.

U.S. House of Representatives

1. House Judiciary Committee

   1. Subcommittees of interest:

      1. Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship

         • Role: Handles all matters relating to immigration and naturalization, border security, admission of refugees, and other aspects of the domestic legal system affecting immigrants.

2. House Committee on Homeland Security

   1. Role: Oversees the Department of Homeland Security, focusing on border security, counterterrorism, and enforcing immigration laws.

3. House Committee on Oversight and Reform

   1. Role: While it covers a broad range of issues, it can address matters related to immigration through its oversight of federal agencies involved in immigration policies and practices.

4. House Committee on Education and Labor

   1. Role: Addresses issues around labor standards and education, including matters that affect the immigrant workforce and access to education for immigrant families.

5. House Committee on Foreign Affairs

   1. Role: Similar to its Senate counterpart, it deals with the U.S.'s foreign policy, which includes international agreements and relations that can influence immigration trends and policies.

State Government Departments and Agencies

1. State Departments of Social Services

   1. Role: Often oversee refugee resettlement programs, support services for immigrants, including employment, health, and educational services.

2. State Workforce Agencies

   1. Role: Provide resources and support for workforce integration, including job training and language classes for immigrants and refugees.

3. State Health and Human Services

   1. Role: Offer health-related services to immigrants, including mental health support, vaccination, and public health information.

4. State Education Departments

   1. Role: Develop and implement educational programs for English Language Learners (ELLs) and support integration of immigrant children into the school system.

State-Level Committees and Task Forces

1. State Legislative Committees on Immigration or Refugee Affairs

   1. Role: Focus on state legislation related to immigrants and refugees, including policies that affect their welfare and integration.

2. Governor’s Task Forces on Immigrant Affairs

   1. Role: Advisory bodies set up by state governors to address specific needs of the immigrant population within the state, offering recommendations on policies and services.

Resettlement Agencies and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

1. Local Branches of National Resettlement Agencies

   • Examples: International Rescue Committee (IRC), Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS), Catholic Charities

   • Role: Provide direct assistance to refugees and immigrants, including housing, legal aid, language training, and employment services.

2. State Refugee Coordinator Offices

   • Role: Coordinate resettlement services and support within the state, acting as a liaison between federal agencies and local organizations.

3. Non-Profit Organizations and Community-Based Organizations (CBOs)

   • Role: Offer a range of services, from legal assistance to cultural orientation and integration programs for immigrants and refugees.

Programs for New American Families

• State-Sponsored Integration Programs

  • Role: Specifically designed initiatives to assist immigrant families with integration into the community, focusing on education, health, and economic stability.

Key Areas of County-Level Involvement

• Public Health Services: County health departments often provide services to immigrants, including vaccination, health screenings, and mental health support, irrespective of immigration status.

• Social Services: Many counties have social service departments that offer assistance programs, including food aid, emergency housing, and child welfare services, which are accessible to immigrant families.

• Legal Aid: Some counties offer legal assistance through public defender's offices or partnerships with nonprofit organizations to help immigrants with legal issues, including those related to immigration status, employment, and family law.

• Education Services: County offices of education may provide support for English Language Learner (ELL) programs, adult education, and integration programs in public schools.

• Law Enforcement and Public Safety: Counties are involved in public safety and law enforcement, which can intersect with immigration through policies on cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

• Employment and Workforce Development: County agencies may offer job training, certification programs, and employment services that are accessible to immigrants.

Local Resettlement Agencies and Their Roles

1. Catholic Charities (Faith-Based)

   • Role: Operates as a local affiliate for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), one of the major national resettlement agencies. Provides housing assistance, employment services, English language classes, and legal aid across numerous locations in the U.S.

2. Lutheran Social Services (Faith-Based)

   • Role: Affiliated with Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service (LIRS). Offers comprehensive resettlement services including job training, cultural orientation, and educational programs for children and adults.

3. HIAS Local Affiliates (Faith-Based)

   • Role: Works under the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society to support refugees with legal assistance, social integration programs, and advocacy for immigrant rights, reflecting its Jewish values of welcome and hospitality.

4. World Relief Offices (Faith-Based)

   • Role: As an evangelical organization, its local offices provide spiritual support alongside direct aid like food and clothing, employment services, and language education, aiming to integrate refugees into their new communities.

5. Islamic Relief USA (Faith-Based)

   • Role: While known for its global humanitarian efforts, in local contexts it provides direct aid and support services to immigrant and refugee communities, including health care access and educational programs.

Community-Based Organizations (CBOs)

1. The Immigrant Learning Center, Inc. (Community-Based)

   • Role: Focuses on providing free English language learning and civic education to immigrants and refugees, facilitating their integration into American society.

2. Make the Road New York (Community-Based)

   • Role: Offers a broad spectrum of services, including legal aid, educational programs, health advocacy, and community organizing focused on empowering immigrant communities.

3. Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC (Community-Based)

   • Role: Works on rights education, advocacy, and providing legal services to protect the interests of Asian Americans and immigrant communities at large.

4. CASA (Community-Based)

   • Role: Primarily serves the Latino and immigrant populations with workforce development, education, health navigation, and legal services, facilitating access to necessary resources.

5. Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) (Community-Based)

   • Role: Engages in advocacy and provides legal representation and educational services to immigrants, focusing on securing their rights and promoting policy reform.

U.S. Immigration Programs

U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP)

Agency/Department: Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Unaccompanied Refugee Minors (URM) Program

Agency/Department: Administered by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) Program 

Agency/Department: The Department of State (for processing abroad) and the Department of Homeland Security (for admission to the U.S.), with resettlement services provided through ORR. 

Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Asylum Seeker Assistance Program

Agency/Department: Various, as asylum seeker support can be provided through non-profit organizations and legal aid societies, often with funding from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or other sources.

Reception and Placement (R&P) Program

Agency/Department: Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM).

Matching Grant Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), with implementation by national resettlement agencies.

Preferred Communities Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), implemented by national resettlement agencies.

Trafficking Victim Assistance Program (TVAP)

Agency/Department Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Central American Minors (CAM) Program

Agency/Department: Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), in coordination with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Refugee School Impact Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Ethnic Community Self-Help Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Microenterprise Development Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Wilson/Fish Alternative Refugee Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Refugee Agricultural Partnership Program

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Refugee Health Promotion Grant

Agency/Department: Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Immigrant Children and Family Services Program

Agency/Department: Varied, as this can encompass state and local government programs as well as initiatives by non-profit organizations, often supported by funding from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) or other sources.

Community Sponsorship Programs

Agency/Department: Implementation can vary, but these programs are often supported by the Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) or the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) within HHS, in partnership with national resettlement agencies and local community organizations.

Family Reunification Programs

Agency/Department: These programs involve multiple agencies, including the Department of State (for processing abroad) and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with support from national resettlement agencies for the resettlement services.

The Evolution of UN's Harmful Role

Advertised Role by the UN

“The UN's involvement in US immigration has evolved significantly over time, with increased activities in recent years, especially under the Biden administration, which has shown a commitment to refugee protection and a more humanitarian approach towards migrants and asylum seekers. The UN Secretary-General welcomed positive steps announced by the US administration towards migrants and refugees, highlighting a long history of US support for addressing the needs of displaced people globally. This partnership aims to provide assistance, protection, and sustainable solutions to displaced people, emphasizing human rights and humanitarian values at the center of the US asylum system” (UN News).

Contrasting Reality

“Billions of dollars of grant funds are disbursed every year by federal agencies to Non-Government Organizations (NGOs), many of which also receive financial aid from groups affiliated with the United Nations. These monies are not spent accountability. For example, on March 28, 2023, the DHS Inspector General released a report following its audit of funds of $12.9 million examined, the NGO awardees were unable to account to the DHS OIG for $7.4 million (58%). Nonetheless, FEMA's Shelter and Services Program (SSP) for NGOs sent another $77 million, bringing the total to around $291 million this year alone. We also heard from witnesses and examined annual reports from some of these NGOs, learning that in some cases more than 70% of their funds were spent on salaries (with many executives making several hundred thousand dollars annually) and "expenses' ' unrelated to actual alien service.”

Advertised Role by the UN

“Furthermore, in early 2021, UN agencies began preparing individuals and families at the Matamoros informal camp near the US-Mexico border for entry into the US, following the termination of policies that forced asylum seekers to wait for immigration hearings in Mexico. This marked a significant shift in handling asylum processes, prioritizing humane treatment and the health safety of migrants, including conducting COVID-19 tests” (UN News).

Contrasting Reality

“We have seen videos showing the squalor of these camps and the treacherous, muddy, disease-infested and flooded conditions through which these people travel. We have seen the virtual destruction of native settlements by erection of NGO way stations which effectively drown the native village in a tsunami of human misery. We have seen the United Nations International Organization for Migration (UNIOM) branded "rape kits" containing condoms, a whistle, and "morning after pills" funded by the U.S. Department of State, and other items these groups distribute to females, knowing in advance that many of them will be raped along the way; we have been shown the "rape trees" on which cartels and gang members hang their "trophy" lingerie in the deserts of Mexico and Texas. Doctors Without Borders published a recent survey wherein 68% of women, and 17% of men, reported being sexually abused during their trip to this country; testimony before the House Subcommittee on Oversight of DHS in 2021 put that figure at 80%.”

Advertised Role by the UN

“Additionally, the UN has budgeted significant resources for migrants bound for the US in 2024, planning to distribute millions in Cash and Voucher Assistance (CVA) and Multipurpose Cash Assistance (MCA) to immigrants in transit. This financial aid, often distributed as prepaid debit cards, aims to increase the dignity and autonomy of migrants by providing them the flexibility to cover their urgent expenses. The support reflects a broader UN vision to assist people displaced from their home countries due to various factors, including conflict, violence, or the search for better opportunities” (CIS.org).

Contrasting Reality

“The United Nations Missing Migrants Project reported that in 2022, 1,457 fatalities were confirmed to have occurred along routes to the Americas, marking not only the deadliest year in recent history but terming 'the growing death toll a humanitarian emergency of great dimension.' This data likely represents a massive undercount, perhaps only half the true toll, based on surveys of people actually passing along the routes.”

NGO’s Appalling Performance

The NGOs Involved with U.S Immigration do not operate purely on humanitarian grounds. Instead of using federal grant money to dissuade individuals from embarking on perilous journeys, they enhance the allure of economic opportunities that supposedly lie at the journey's end. By providing cash cards, cell phones, and transportation, along with what are essentially safari-style navigation aids through jungle areas and across hazardous terrains, they inadvertently increase the number of people deciding to undertake these dangerous migrations. This, in turn, facilitates the accumulation of vast wealth by Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) and creates an inexhaustible supply of victims. Research by DHS and the Rand Corporation as early as 2017 revealed that up to two-thirds of migrants from the Northern Triangle countries employed the services of smugglers to reach our borders, generating over $2 billion in profits for these smuggling networks from these nations alone. These figures have surged dramatically over time with the escalation of migrant flows.

Statements From THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.: SC22-796, Appendix B-014

“Billions of dollars of grant funds are disbursed every year by federal agencies to Non-Government Organizations (NGOs)5, many of which also receive financial aid from groups affiliated with the United Nations. These monies are not spent accountability. For example, on March 28, 2023, the DHS Inspector General released a report following its audit of funds awarded to FEMA's Emergency Food and Shelter Program, used by NGOs to assist illegal aliens encountered at the southern border. Of $12.9 million examined, the NGO awardees were unable to account to the DHS OIG for $7.4 million (58%). Nonetheless, FEMA's Shelter and Services Program (SSP) for NGOs sent another $77 million bringing the total to around $291 million this year alone.”

“We also heard from witnesses and examined annual reports from some of these NGOs, learning that in some cases more than 70% of their funds were spent on salaries ( with many executives making several hundred thousand dollars annually) and "expenses" unrelated to actual alien service. For example, the UAC program administered by HHS alone doled out $2. 7 billion to NGOs last year ($15 .6 billion since 2008), or more than $20,000 per child. HHS also gave two non-UAC no-bid contracts to a single NGO totaling $617 million. The river of accountability-free money has absolutely polluted the entire process.” 

“Given the breadth of our mandate, we focused on transnational criminal organizations and illegal immigration (detailed further at other sections of this report); we discovered however, that there are also "legal" organizations who appear to be misusing federal contract monies and their "nonprofit" status in order to abet the price and likely the actors responsible for the illegal activity we are describing. In fact, several NGO actively obstructed our investigation , refusing to provide subpoenaed information and refusing to answer some direct questions (supposedly under orders from the federal government, in the person of the Agency for Children and Families, a subsidiary of the Department of Health and Human Services).”

“We have seen and heard people being robbed, beaten, raped, maimed and murdered (including being beheaded or doused in gasoline and burned alive); we have viewed gun battles between Panamanian defense forces and the cartels and paramilitary gangs that control virtually every section of the route; we have seen these criminals selling children into bondage and burning dismembered torsos of aliens who literally walked into their trap courtesy of these NGOs. We have seen the bodies literally strewn along a trail "parents" force their children to pass and corpses stacked like cordwood in the backs of sun-baked semi trailers.” 

“We have seen airplanes packed full of unaccompanied alien children, fleets of boats brimming with passengers to the point of capsizing heading up muddy reptile-infested rivers and swamps, convoys of buses traversing rutted dirt roads and trains overflowing with travelers stacked on rooftops of railcars, hanging off side rails, or getting their legs chopped off under the wheels. And we have seen "Parents" physically force wailing children through barbed concertina wire and across predator- and disease-infested bodies of water, with not just the blessing but the active assistance of NGOs spending billions of federal dollars.”

“We have seen charts and advisory pamphlets showing aliens possible routes of travel (none of which was, for example, that the territory about to be entered is controlled by violent cartels) handed out by NGOs.”

“Thus, foreign governments, with the help of NGOs and the willing participation of agencies of our federal government, are not only turbocharging this process, they are directly profiting from it.”

“Absent the overheated rhetoric from all political angles, the situation truly is not complicated: individuals from other countries are enticed to come to this country, the overwhelming majority with no plausible claim to asylum whatsoever. And serious harm results on both sides of our border as the situation is exploited for crime and profit by cartels. funding by NGOs, and political clout-chasing by others. All the while, we and our fellow taxpayers pick up the tab.”

“In December of 2022, we reviewed a study which disclosed that following geofencing of NGO facilities on both sides of the Southern border during the month  of January 2022, more than 30,000 unique mobile devices were detected at these NGO facilities. The devices were later traced to 431 separate U.S. congressional districts out of a total 435 congressional districts, including a great number in Florida.” 

Welcoming Centers

Purpose: Welcoming Centers are designed to help immigrants and refugees integrate into their new communities by providing access to critical services and resources. These centers often serve as hubs where newcomers can find assistance with language skills, employment, legal services, cultural orientation, and other integration-related needs.

Implementation: They can be run by state and local governments, non-profit organizations, or through public-private partnerships. The services provided are tailored to meet the local community’s needs and the specific challenges faced by newcomers in that area.

Examples of Services: Language and educational classes, employment assistance, legal and immigration advice, health services, and cultural orientation workshops.

The Safe Mobility Offices

The Safe Mobility Offices (SMOs) are a part of the Biden administration’s initiative to provide legal migration pathways for migrants from Central and South America. These offices are located in several countries, including Guatemala, Costa Rica, Colombia, and Ecuador. They screen and refer applicants for refugee resettlement or other lawful options in the U.S. or elsewhere.

After the screening process, approved refugees are transported to the U.S. This is a legal and transparent process. As of January 2024, about 3,000 refugees have arrived in the U.S. and 9,000 have been approved through the SMOs.

The Safe Mobility Offices (SMOs) are indeed a new initiative by the Biden administration, announced in April 2023. They were established to provide legal migration pathways for migrants from Central and South America. The SMOs are not the same as the welcoming centers or the border bypass program that were proposed by some lawmakers and advocates12.

The SMOs are currently in their initial phase and have different eligibility criteria and processes in each participating country, which include Guatemala, Costa Rica, Colombia, and Ecuador12. They are not issuing visas directly, but rather screening and referring applicants for refugee resettlement or other lawful options in the U.S. or elsewhere.

The Safe Mobility Offices (SMOs) are located in several countries in Latin America. Here are the details:

1. Guatemala: The U.S. and Guatemala implemented the initial phase of the Safe Mobility program on June 12, 2023, with the help of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

2. Costa Rica: Costa Rica is one of the countries where the SMOs were launched in their initial phase.

3. Colombia: Colombia is another country where the SMOs were launched in their initial phase.

4. Ecuador: Ecuador joined the program with its own iteration in October 2023.

These offices are part of a broader initiative to promote safe and orderly legal migration with access to protection mechanisms. They offer a free process to learn about different legal migration pathways to the United States and other countries.

NGO relationships with The Safe Mobility Offices

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and Catholic Charities are indeed involved in initiatives to welcome and support migrants and refugees.

USCCB: The USCCB’s Department of Migration and Refugee Services, along with dioceses across the country, is helping to welcome displaced families to the United States through Welcome Circles¹. These Welcome Circles provide displaced families with the tools, connections, information, and financial support they need to become self-sufficient and settle into American communities¹. The USCCB, in close partnership with the Community Sponsorship Hub, oversees the process through which Circles are vetted, certified, and matched with newcomers who opt into the program.

Catholic Charities: Catholic Charities locations across the U.S. have ramped up efforts to welcome refugees, including those from Afghanistan. The USCCB is one of nine resettlement networks in the United States, and it partners with 45 Catholic Charities agencies across the country to provide resettlement services.

Several non-profit resettlement agencies and their affiliates are involved with the Welcome Centers and Safe Mobility Offices. Here are some of them:

1. Church World Service (CWS): CWS is one of the nine national refugee resettlement agencies that work with the U.S. Department of State.

2. Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC): ECDC is another one of the nine national refugee resettlement agencies.

3. Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM): EMM is also one of the nine national refugee resettlement agencies.

4. International Rescue Committee (IRC): IRC is a global humanitarian aid, relief, and development nongovernmental organization that offers emergency aid and long-term assistance to refugees.

5. US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI): USCRI is a non-profit organization that is dedicated to addressing the needs and rights of refugees and immigrants.

6. Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (LIRS): LIRS is one of the largest refugee resettlement agencies in the United States.

7. World Relief Corporation (WR): WR is a global Christian humanitarian organization that brings sustainable solutions to the world’s greatest problems, including refugees.

8. Bethany Christian Services: Bethany is a global nonprofit organization that brings families together and keeps families together.

These organizations work in partnership with the U.S. government, UNHCR, and other actors to provide resettlement services to refugees. They help refugees with the initial resettlement process, including providing housing, basic needs, financial support, employment and education services, mental health resources, legal assistance, and more.