HONDURANS LOSE PROTECTED STATUS TO REMAIN IN UNITED STATES (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION)

HONDURANS LOSE PROTECTED STATUS TO REMAIN IN UNITED STATES (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION):

MOST HONDURANS HAVE LIVED IN U.S. SINCE 1999 YET THEY DID NOT APPLY FOR LEGAL CITIZEN.

HOW IS IT THEY WERE ALLOWED TO LIVE AND WORK IN ANOTHER COUNTRY ILLEGALLY FOR 19 YEARS??

WHAT ABOUT THE MS-13 GANGS?


Post Sources: Fox News, Daily Mail, PBS News, Washington Post, Youtube


***** Trump administration ends protections for 50,000 Hondurans living in U.S. since 1999


More than 50,000 Hondurans who have been allowed to live and work in the United States since 1999 will have 20 months to leave the country or face deportation, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen announced Friday, the latest in a series of DHS measures aimed at tightening U.S. immigration controls.

The Hondurans were granted temporary protected status (TPS) in 1999, shielding them from deportation, after Hurricane Mitch slammed their country and left 10,000 dead across Central America.

Under President Trump, DHS has been eliminating TPS programs one by one, arguing they were never designed to grant long-term residency to foreigners who may have arrived illegally or overstayed their visas.

In the past six months, DHS has ended TPS for nearly 200,000 Salvadorans, 50,000 Haitians and 9,000 Nepalis, giving those groups 12 to 18 months to prepare a departure or secure some other form of legal status.

According to a DHS statement, Nielsen “carefully considered conditions on the ground” before making the Honduras decision.

“The Secretary determined that the disruption of living conditions in Honduras from Hurricane Mitch that served as the basis for its TPS designation has decreased to a degree that it should no longer be regarded as substantial,” the DHS statement read.

“Since 1999, conditions in Honduras that resulted from the hurricane have notably improved,” the statement continued, adding that the country has made “substantial progress in post-hurricane recovery.”

It was not clear from the DHS statement which improvements Nielsen was referring to.

Honduras remains one of the most violent countries in the world and has been roiled by political instability since presidential elections last year whose legitimacy was rejected by the Organization of American States and other international observers.

Congress established TPS as a humanitarian program in 1990 to avoid deporting foreigners to countries that have been destabilized by natural disasters or civil strife.

The Trump administration hasn’t ended the protections for every eligible nation; in January, Nielsen extended TPS for nearly 7,000 immigrants from war-torn Syria.

More than 86,000 Hondurans received TPS protections after the hurricane, and the latest government estimates show that about 50,000 still depend on the designation to remain in the United States.

Last November, DHS ended TPS for 2,500 Nicaraguans who were also allowed to stay after Hurricane Mitch.

Hondurans were the second-largest group of TPS recipients after Salvadorans, and many have lived most of their adult lives in the United States, running businesses, purchasing homes and raising American-born children.

Critics of the Trump administration say forcing otherwise law-abiding immigrants out of the United States is shortsighted and heartless, particularly at a time when Honduras and some other nations are teetering from gang warfare and political unrest.

“There is little doubt that the White House has been driving these TPS decisions based on ideology, not based upon what is best for our foreign policy interests and for the region,” said Kevin Appleby, senior director of international migration policy at the Center for Migration Studies, a nonpartisan think tank.

“It makes the situation in Honduras and Central America worse and will assuredly come back to haunt us in time,” ¬Appleby said.

Honduras is a significant source of illegal immigration to the United States, and many of the families who joined the migrant caravan through Mexico that captured the attention of President Trump last month said they fled their country in fear for their lives.

They joined thousands of other Central Americans who arrive every month at the U.S. border with Mexico to request asylum, many of them families or women with children.

GUN CONTROL NATIONAL WALK-OUT - MARCH 14, 2018, 10:00am (GEN Y)

GUN CONTROL NATIONAL WALK-OUT - MARCH 14, 2018 - 10:00am:

GENERATION Y vs THE NRA - CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE FOR FEDERAL & NATIONWIDE GUN CONTROL LAWS.

I AM SO PROUD OF OUR BRAVE YOUNG PEOPLE FOR PUTTING PRESSURE ON CONGRESS TO TAKE ACTION.

WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT?

SAVING HUMAN LIVES OR CAMPAIGN MONEY FROM NRA LOBBYISTS??


Sources: ABC News, LA Times, Yahoo News, Youtube


***** Everything to know about the National School Walkout on March 14


Students, teachers, parents and administrators across the country are invited to take part in a National School Walkout in a call on Congress to pass tighter gun control laws.

The ENOUGH National School Walkout on March 14 is exactly one month after the mass shooting at a Florida high school that killed 17 people.

The event will be at 10 a.m. across every time zone and last 17 minutes -- one minute for each of the victims gunned down in the Feb. 14 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

The walkout is organized by young people working with Women’s March Youth Empower.

Women’s March Youth Coordinator Tabitha St. Bernard Jacobs, one of the few adults helping with the youth-led movement, told ABC News that while the walkout was sparked by the Florida school shooting, the event is about calling out gun violence.

St. Bernard Jacobs said it is a way to shed light on the type of gun violence that exists not just in schools, but everyday gun violence, like shootings that impact minority communities or devastate cities like Chicago, Illinois.

Students across the country have said they will join, as well as groups from schools as far as Ireland, Switzerland and Israel.

How participants spend the 17 minutes of the walkout is up to them. Some people are doing a lie-in, while others are holding rallies, St. Bernard Jacobs said.

This isn't a protest against schools, but a way to encourage school administrators to help students "amplify their voices," she said.

She went on to add, "Some schools are looking to this as an opportunity to really educate their young people about what it means in this moment to be engaged."

Mixed emotions Stoneman Douglas Students return to class: 'School shouldn’t be a war zone'.

The March 14 event is one of many student walkouts erupting throughout the U.S. as a new generation of youth advocates lead a fierce push for gun reform. While many school districts are supportive of the protests, some schools have reportedly threatened to punish students participating in walkouts.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said schools can punish students for missing class for walkouts, but the punishment should only be because students are missing school -- it cannot be a harsher punishment because the students participated in a protest.

Dozens of colleges and universities have said they won't penalize applicants who are peaceful student protesters. Brown University, for example, posted on Twitter, "Applicants to Brown: Expect a socially conscious, intellectually independent campus where freedom of expression is fundamentally important. You can be assured that peaceful, responsible protests against gun violence will not negatively impact decisions on admission to Brown."

"That's very encouraging," St. Bernard Jacobs said of the schools supporting students' decisions to protest gun violence. "This is a moment for youth to find their voice."

PHILANDO CASTILE'S SENSELESS MURDER SPURRED BY JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS

PHILANDO CASTILE'S SENSELESS MURDER SPURRED BY JUSTICE CLARENCE THOMAS:

 PHILANDO'S MURDER SHOULD SPUR BLACK VOTERS TO THE POLLS IN NOV.

PHILANDO HAD A GUN (LEGALLY) BUT POSED NO THREAT TO THE FIVE COPS WHO SHOT HIM.

HOWEVER I STILL DON'T CONDONE KILLING COPS OUT OF VENGEANCE.

Sources:  Slate,  Boyce Watkins, NY Times, CNN, Five Thirty Eight, YouTube

The week of June 20, 2016 SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas (Black man) wrote a Concurring opinion which states that going forward, Police Officers are now legally permitted to seize evidence obtained during ILLEGAL STOPS, which includes TRAFFIC STOPS.

Good-bye FOURTH AMENDMENT!

Wednesday, July 5, 2016 Philando Castile, 33, (another Black man) was murdered by White Cops during a TRAFFIC STOP in Minnesota.

Although Philando was legally carrying a Concealed Weapon when stopped by Police Wednesday, he posed absolutely no threat to the five Police Officers who brutally murdered him in cold blood.

And yes.....

The Officers who murdered him should be prosecuted!

I don't care if Philando did have a criminal record, he did NOT deserve to DIE like an animal if he posed NO threat to a Police Officer or any other human being.

However It's not fair nor reasonable to Hate the POLICE, nor blame all Cops because not all Cops are Racist.

In fact there are many good Cops still serving in our communities.

Thus I DON'T condone Killing Cops out of Vengeance for any reason.

So what can Black citizens in America expect now?

What ACTION do we take for RESOLUTION?

Demonstrations or Riots appear to be Futile and outdated.

Instead Black voters should express their anger at the Polls this November.

POLICY Changes occur on the Federal level and nominating SCOTUS Justices who have not become NUMB to the plights of regular people are the best SOLUTIONS to curbing Police Brutality.

Voting for a new President is not the panacea for curbing Police Brutality, but if Black voters forsake the system, they indeed forsake their future.

Especially the futures of Black men in America.

It's time to hold our Elected Officials accountable!

To the family of Philando Castile I send my prayers and condolences for his senseless murder.

**** Are Black People at Risk When They Carry a Concealed Weapon?

Here’s what three Minnesota gun instructors think.

TThe story of how Philando Castile died, as told by his girlfriend Diamond Reynolds, is one of a man who did everything he could to comply with the police officer who pulled him over. 

As Reynolds recounted in a harrowing press conference Thursday, Castile told the officer he was armed with a gun after being asked for his license and registration; 

Reynolds says she then told the officer the gun was legal and that her boyfriend had a permit allowing him to carry it. Moments later, the officer shot Castile multiple times, causing injuries that soon proved fatal.

It’s important to note that we don’t know exactly why the officer decided to shoot Castile—there’s no footage of the shooting itself and the St. Anthony Police Department has yet to release its version of events. 

The actions that Reynolds describes, though, sound perfectly reasonable—it’s hard to imagine what Castile, a 32-year-old black man, could have done differently. 

It’s also reasonable to wonder, given the horrific litany of cases in which police officers have used deadly force against black men and women, whether Castile ever had a chance at surviving the encounter.

Thursday, I spoke with three men who don’t agree with that assessment: a trio of white firearms instructors in Minnesota who provide formal training to people applying for concealed-carry permits like the one Reynolds says her boyfriend had. 

In spite of what seems to have happened to Castile, all three instructors told me they firmly believe there are steps people with concealed firearms can take to ensure their safety when dealing with law enforcement. 

Underlying their conviction on this point is a deeply felt optimism about the reasonableness of police. 

Their thoughts, which have been lightly edited for clarity, are below.

~  MIKE BRIGGS,  instructor and owner at Minnesota Fire Arms Training

Advice to students: “Here’s the first thing we say: If you get pulled over and you’re friendly and you don’t lie, and when they ask for ID, if you voluntarily hand up your permit to carry, our experience is you’ve got a huge chance of getting out of your ticket. Cops in Minnesota appreciate you volunteering it up. 

A lot of police in Minnesota teach this class, and most police officers are in favor of permit to carry. And they appreciate you being forthcoming.

“By putting your permit to carry right underneath your license and just giving it to them, you’ve told them without saying a word, I’m a good guy or I wouldn’t have a license to walk around with a gun. 

The sheriff has checked me out. I don’t have to volunteer this up but here you go. You don’t have to worry about me.

 And then if they start asking questions, you answer them truthfully. And that’s what we tell all of our students.”

~ JON KAUTZ,  director of operations and instructor at Gun Permit Center

Personal experience: “I myself have gotten out of several tickets by law enforcement officers by being friendly and completely honest when I got pulled over. When they ask for ID, I don’t say a word—I just put my permit right with my ID and give it to them. And then most of them will say, ‘Are you carrying a firearm?’ And then I’ll say, ‘Yeah, it’s in my center console, or it’s in my backpack, or under my seat, or whatever. What would you like me to do next?’ A lot of them have even been sort of funny with it. I had one state trooper say, ‘You keep your gun in your holster, I’ll keep mine in mine.’ ”

On whether black people can safely follow the same protocol as whites: Absolutely. For sure. It doesn’t matter if you’re black or white. The instructions and the advice are the same.

On Philando Castile: To be honest with you, it sounds to me like he did everything you’re supposed to do. That’s what I’m assuming so far. It sounds like he handled it the way you should. And it sounds like the officer had a short-circuit. That’s what it’s sounding like, but I don’t know what happened before the video.

Advice to students: “In Minnesota there’s no standard protocol for a traffic stop like this, where you have someone who’s carrying. Each police department sets their own policy for how to handle it. Minneapolis might do one thing; in Falcon Heights they might do another. So we always instruct our customers in our training to do whatever the officer says, to always keep their hands visible at all times, and to always ask, ‘How would you like me to proceed?’ and leave it up to the police officer to offer directions on how they want to handle it.”

Personal experience: “If I’m pulled over and an officer asks for my credentials, the next thing I would say is, ‘Officer, I am a permit-to-carry holder. I am carrying at this time. The pistol, or whatever, is located in X spot.’ I’d keep my hands visible on the steering heel or on the dashboard, and I’d say, ‘How would you like me to proceed?’ ”

Thoughts on concealed carry: “If you’re a concealed-carry permit holder and you’re carrying, you assume some risk, you know? Things happen. Whether it’s on accident or intentional—you’re carrying a firearm. You’re assuming some risk in carrying a firearm. You have to assume some risk—it’s just like when you drive a car.”

How the Philando Castile situation will affect his work: “Will we change the way we do the training? No, because we believe we’re teaching it correctly. Will we emphasize this part of the training more? Yes. Will it come up for discussion? Guaranteed.”

~ JOE PENAZ, instructor at Plane Cents Self Defense

Advice to students: “Be totally compliant. If they ask if you have a gun, tell them you have a gun, and make sure you ask them what to do next.

“I also say that if you have a gun on you and it’s on the same side as your wallet, and going for your wallet is going to expose the weapon, it would behoove you to tell the officer at that time, even though you don’t necessarily have to, ‘I have a weapon on me and it’s on the same side as my wallet.’ ”

Personal experience: “I usually start out by asking, ‘Are you having a good night, sir?’ I do. So few people ever say anything like that to a police officer. I’ve ridden with police many, many, many times. And all they ever do is get yelled at, spit on, cussed out. ‘Why aren’t you out arresting real criminals?’ and stuff like that. What does it hurt to ask, ‘Are you having a nice day?’ Wouldn’t you say that to someone at a Home Depot or a Dairy Queen? The only reason you’re not saying that is you’re getting pulled over and generally you don’t get pulled over unless you’ve done something wrong.”

On whether it’s dangerous for black people to take his advice: “Absolutely not. I have quite a few black people in my classes. I just don’t see that as a problem.”

IMMIGRATION AMNESTY POLICY BLOCKED BY SCOTUS 4-4 (SCALIA'S ABSENCE)

IMMIGRATION AMNESTY POLICY BLOCKED BY SCOTUS 4-4 (SCALIA'S ABSENCE):

ISIL HAS RUINED ANY CHANCE FOR IMMIGRATION AMNESTY IN THE UNITED STATES.

Sources:  NY Times, CNN,  NBC News, WSJ, Youtube

****** Supreme Court Deadlocks on Obama Immigration Plan. It Remains Blocked.

The Supreme Court on Thursday announced that it had deadlocked in a case challenging President Obama’s plan to shield millions of immigrants from deportation and allow them to work. 

The 4-4 tie left in place an appeals court ruling blocking the plan, dealing a sharp blow to an ambitious program that Mr. Obama had hoped would become one of his central legacies. 

Instead, even as the court deadlocked, it amplified the already contentious election-year debate over the nation’s immigration policy and presidential power.

The case, United States v. Texas, No. 15-674, concerned a plan to allow as many as five million unauthorized immigrants who are the parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents to apply for a program that would spare them from deportation and provide them with work permits. 

The program was called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA.

Mr. Obama has said he took action in 2014 after years of frustration with Republicans in Congress who had repeatedly refused to support bipartisan Senate legislation to update immigration laws. 

A coalition of 26 states, led by Texas, promptly challenged the plan, accusing the president of ignoring administrative procedures for changing rules and of abusing the power of his office by circumventing Congress.

In February 2015, Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Federal District Court in Brownsville, Tex., entered a preliminary injunction shutting down the program while the legal case proceeded. 

The government appealed, and a divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans affirmed the injunction.

In their Supreme Court briefs, the states acknowledged that the president had wide authority over immigration matters, telling the justices that “the executive does have enforcement discretion to forbear from removing aliens on an individual basis.”

 Their quarrel, they said, was with what they called a blanket grant of “lawful presence” to millions of immigrants, entitling them to various benefits.

In response, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. told the justices that this “lawful presence” was merely what had always followed from the executive branch’s decision not to deport someone for a given period of time.

“Deferred action does not provide these individuals with any lawful status under the immigration laws,” he said. “But it provides some measure of dignity and decent treatment.”

“It recognizes the damage that would be wreaked by tearing apart families,” Mr. Verrilli added, “and it allows individuals to leave the shadow economy and work on the books to provide for their families, thereby reducing exploitation and distortion in our labor markets.”

The states said they had suffered the sort of direct and concrete injury that gave them standing to sue.

Judge Jerry E. Smith, writing for the majority in the appeals court, focused on an injury said to have been suffered by Texas, which he said would have to spend millions of dollars to provide driver’s licenses to immigrants as a consequence of the federal program.

Mr. Verrilli told the justices that Texas’ injury was self-inflicted, a product of its decision to offer driver’s licenses for less than they cost to produce and to tie eligibility for them to federal standards.

Texas responded that being required to change its laws was itself the sort of harm that conferred standing. 

“Such a forced change in Texas law would impair Texas’s sovereign interest in ‘the power to create and enforce a legal code,’” the state’s lawyers wrote in a brief.

Judge Hanen grounded his injunction on the Obama administration’s failure to give notice and seek public comments on its new program. 

He found that notice and comment were required because the program gave blanket relief to entire categories of people, notwithstanding the administration’s assertion that it required case-by-case determinations about who was eligible for the program.

The appeals court affirmed that ruling and added a broader one. The program, it said, also exceeded Mr. Obama’s statutory authority