U.N. Official Says U.S. Judge Must Block Donald Trump’s Migration Reforms


The United Nations is legally attacking President Donald Trump’s “credible fear” migration reforms which are curbing the migration of low-wage Central Americans into U.S. jobs, schools and communities.

The federal judge must immediately strike down Trump’s reforms because all worldwide victims or routine crime deserve protection, says the claim from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Filippo Grandi:

UNHCR has long held that violence perpetrated by non-state actors, including gang and domestic violence, may constitute persecution undergirding an asylum claim … As a result, many victims of violence by non-state actors may not even have a meaningful opportunity to apply for asylum … [and] the new policies have interpreted the refugee definition in a manner at variance with the United States’ international obligations on a number of fronts.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions developed Trump’s reforms, which cancel the legal welcomes provided by President Barack Obama to migrants who claim they deserve asylum because they are being persecuted by spouses or criminal gangs.

Since 2010, Obama’s welcome has encouraged hundreds of thousands of low-wage Central Americans to move into the United States, clogging up the immigration courts and so delaying judicial review of their legal claims. Amid the courtroom delays, hundreds of thousands of migrants are legally or illegally working in U.S. jobs, nudging down wages for Americans while providing cheap services to immigration lawyers and other privileged professionals

Sessions’ reform of the “credible fear” rules allows border officials to screen and reject migrants who try to use U.S. asylum laws to win U.S. jobs. The Sessions’ reform is also intended to block the inflow of myriad poor and victimized populations from around the world, which is being encouraged by U.N. and allied pro-migration groups. Pro-American reformers are praising Sessions for his aggressive overhaul of the nation’s pr0-migration procedures, policies, and migration numbers.

The UNHCR legal claim is intended to support an ACLU lawsuit against Sessions, titled Grace v. Sessions. According to the ACLU:

On August 7, 2018, we filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging these new policies on behalf of 12 immigrants – adults and children who fled their home countries after suffering pervasive sexual abuse, kidnapping, beatings, shootings, the murder of family members, and/or death threats. They all received negative credible fear determinations under the new policies even though they would have demonstrated credible fear under a proper application of the immigration laws. Four of our plaintiffs have already been deported.

A 2012 survey by Gallup reported that 150 million foreigners would like to migrate to the United States.

The lawsuit is filed in D.C. and will be appealed by the loser, eventually up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Progressives favor increased migration. Business groups also favor migration because the migrants would serve as cheap workers, as well as taxpayer-subsidized consumers and renters. The migrant population would also drive up the cost of real estate, so delivering a windfall to older and wealthier investors.

The United Nations is represented by a D.C. law firm, Williams & Connolly LLP.




Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.