New USCIS Ombudsman - Is Anybody Else Concerned?

[nightingalejules 678]

11 minutes ago, CookieCat said:

You're understanding wrong. The new administration is not anti-immigrant, but anti illegal immigration. Big difference there. If you're following all the rules legally, there is nothing to worry yet.

Maybe not yet. I probably should have said something like "this administration is seen by some as being anti immigrant." I do disagree with you insofar as they are on record as wanting to stop legal immigration from 6 or 7 countries, and ending legal immigration for certain family members and job classes. Not just illegal immigration.

It's at least partially about optics. If your administration is being accused (rightly or wrongly) of being anti immigrant, is it a good idea to place a member of another accused anti immigrant group in the position of helping immigrants who are having problems with the USCIS?

 

7 minutes ago, Hypnos said:

I'm sure that was of great comfort to those LPRs and immigrant visa holders stranded outside the US when the first executive order on immigration came into being a couple of months ago.

This.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

2 minutes ago, nightingalejules said:

Maybe not yet. I probably should have said something like "this administration is seen by some as being anti immigrant." I do disagree with you insofar as they are on record as wanting to stop legal immigration from 6 or 7 countries, and ending legal immigration for certain family members and job classes. Not just illegal immigration.

It's at least partially about optics. If your administration is being accused (rightly or wrongly) of being anti immigrant, is it a good idea to place a member of another accused anti immigrant group in the position of helping immigrants who are having problems with the USCIS?

 

This.

FAIR isn't anti immigration 

[nightingalejules 678]

5 minutes ago, CookieCat said:

You're comparing apples and oranges and trying to spin it into something else which is not part of the OP's issue. Furthermore, OP is Canadian and Canada was never one of the banned countries. 

Yes I am from Canada.  I'm lucky there. But I'm no more married to my husband than someone from one of the 6 or 7 countries affected.

[dawning 212]

5 minutes ago, Hypnos said:

I'm sure that was of great comfort to those LPRs and immigrant visa holders stranded outside the US when the first executive order on immigration came into being a couple of months ago.

That was my first thought on reading those comments too.

 

I prefer not to spend a lot of time being political on forums.  However, this discussion is so related to some things I have been thinking about lately that I feel compelled to speak up.  What is happening lately in public discourse with the idea of  "illegal immigrants" (in quotes because the phrase tends to be thrown around without a lot clarification about what it means) makes me really uncomfortable, and the more I think about it, the more I come to think that it bothers me because it's targeting a vulnerable group and blaming (scapegoating) them for problems that often have little to do with them.  I'm also really concerned that if you look deeper at the actions of different people in power, target "illegals" is just a beginning.  A lot of their actions seem to me to indicate that there is also a willingness to target people of certain ethnicities and religions.  It's a pattern seen before at different times in history, and the results aren't usually something citizens are proud of 50 years later.  It may be hyperbole to compare the Trump administration's treatment of Muslims and Mexicans to Nazi Germany and the run up to the holocaust, but comparing it to the US's internment of citizens and LPRs of Japanese ancestry is much less a reach.  And while the invocation of US internment camps for Japanese doesn't conjure up nearly the stark horror in the collective consciousness that the word "Holocaust" does, it was unarguably a great failing of the US's ideals of equality, and one that we have an obligation to try to avoid repeating.

 

In other words, they sometimes say they are not against immigrants, but it's not at all clear to me that their actions are bearing that out.

[David & Diana R 1,005]

16 hours ago, nightingalejules said:

Is anybody else worried that the new USCIS Ombudsman - the person who is tasked with assisting immigrants having difficulties with USCIS (petitions that are taking too long or have been improperly rejected) - was previously the executive director for the Foundation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which is a non-profit whose aim seems to be to ban all immigration to the US except for spouses and minor children of US Citizens? 

 

I understand that this administration has already been seen to be very anti-immigrant, but to put someone who ran an anti-immigration non-profit in charge of helping immigrants negotiate their way through USCIS? Really?

 

I think it's great!  About time we will have someone in charge that is not insane.  Immigration NEEDS CHANGE.

[David & Diana R 1,005]

1 hour ago, Dutchster said:

I honestly believe that if they wanted to reform immigration, they would have taking action on that in the first 100 days in office. And I also agree with the changes in the work visas. But yeah, don't believe the media unless it's coming from an official website/news channel and/or the white house itself. Or President Trump's tweets. 

Hahahaha...you mean official news agencies such as CNN and MSNBC?  More fake news  You made me chuckle quietly.

[David & Diana R 1,005]

18 minutes ago, nightingalejules said:

Yes I am from Canada.  I'm lucky there. But I'm no more married to my husband than someone from one of the 6 or 7 countries affected.

Have we had Canadians flooding our borders as "refugees" and participating in anti American activities including bombings, mass shootings, etc?  Not that I have heard.  Where have 95% of all terrorists come from or been associated with as far as countries go?  Which countries openly promote terrorism?  Where have many of these people trained and been indoctrinated?  Perhaps the 6 or 7 countries you mention? I think you Canadians are pretty peaceful people, eh?  God bless America and Canada.

[Dutchster 1,106]

8 minutes ago, David & Zoila said:

Hahahaha...you mean official news agencies such as CNN and MSNBC?  More fake news  You made me chuckle quietly.

Psh, CNN and MSNBC 

[yuna628 9,527]

1 hour ago, Eliis said:

I won't. We will see details tomorrow and in coming weeks. 

Have you read the language of the actual bill?

[Hypnos 6,576]

The country as a whole is moving in a decidedly anti-immigrant direction.

 

In some areas this is just a little (or none); in others it's far more overt. This is the culmination of spending the best part of 20 years whipping people up into a frenzy over those damn Muslim terrorists (but forget all those domestic terrorists--overwhelmingly non-Muslims, by the way) and then electing a right-wing president who pandered to alt-right white extremists to help get himself into the White House.

 

No one, not even me, disputes that the current US immigration system is in drastic need of an overhaul; USCIS is an inept federal agency that needs a complete top-to-bottom clean-out, but no one is willing to pay either the political or monetary cost of doing so, even though it would be in almost everyone's best interests.

 

So when I see stupidity like trying to ban immigrants from seven countries who have killed a total of zero people in US domestic attacks between 1975 and 2015--zero--but at the same time exclude Saudi Arabia (15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia), because presumably... oil?... I cannot believe that the current administration has the nation's legal immigrants' best interests at heart. That's presumably why several federal courts have struck down the ban both times the administration has attempted to enact it.

 

No doubt everyone is familiar with the "First they came" poem by Martin Niemöller. It's done the rounds on various social media platforms for years, but is more relevant today than ever. I feel particular solidarity when someone takes aim at legal immigrants, people who have done everything by the book and in some cases moved heaven and earth to get here. Just because I am not in the crosshairs on that particular occasion doesn't mean that I should not try to speak up or assist those being persecuted... at some point the ire will turn upon staggeringly handsome 30-something tall white men from the West Midlands, and then I'll be in for it. Until then, I view any immigration changes with a highly skeptical eye. The first executive order was a case in point. There is no defending it; it was poorly written, and ambiguous on the status of affected LPRs and immigrant visa holders currently outside the US. The White House essentially had no idea what they were doing and cobbled it together over lunch, or so it appeared. It was rightly stayed by federal courts, as was its successor.

 

Anyway, I'm not waiting until they come for me personally to speak out. Right-wing xenophobia has no place in American society--or any society--and it should be lampooned for the idiocy it is. When politicians on both sides want to get together and make sorely-needed improvements to the country's immigration system then they'll have my support, but Trump's band-aid "solutions" are a nonsense, and will solve exactly 0% of the problem.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Hypnos

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

24 minutes ago, Hypnos said:

The country as a whole is moving in a decidedly anti-immigrant direction.

 

In some areas this is just a little (or none); in others it's far more overt. This is the culmination of spending the best part of 20 years whipping people up into a frenzy over those damn Muslim terrorists (but forget all those domestic terrorists--overwhelmingly non-Muslims, by the way) and then electing a right-wing president who pandered to alt-right white extremists to help get himself into the White House.

 

No one, not even me, disputes that the current US immigration system is in drastic need of an overhaul; USCIS is an inept federal agency that needs a complete top-to-bottom clean-out, but no one is willing to pay either the political or monetary cost of doing so, even though it would be in almost everyone's best interests.

 

So when I see stupidity like trying to ban immigrants from seven countries who have killed a total of zero people in US domestic attacks between 1975 and 2015--zero--but at the same time exclude Saudi Arabia (15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia), because presumably... oil?... I cannot believe that the current administration has the nation's legal immigrants' best interests at heart. That's presumably why several federal courts have struck down the ban both times the administration has attempted to enact it.

 

No doubt everyone is familiar with the "First they came" poem by Martin Niemöller. It's done the rounds on various social media platforms for years, but is more relevant today than ever. I feel particular solidarity when someone takes aim at legal immigrants, people who have done everything by the book and in some cases moved heaven and earth to get here. Just because I am not in the crosshairs on that particular occasion doesn't mean that I should not try to speak up or assist those being persecuted... at some point the ire will turn upon staggeringly handsome 30-something tall white men from the West Midlands, and then I'll be in for it. Until then, I view any immigration changes with a highly skeptical eye. The first executive order was a case in point. There is no defending it; it was poorly written, and ambiguous on the status of affected LPRs and immigrant visa holders currently outside the US. The White House essentially had no idea what they were doing and cobbled it together over lunch, or so it appeared. It was rightly stayed by federal courts, as was its successor.

 

Anyway, I'm not waiting until they come for me personally to speak out. Right-wing xenophobia has no place in American society--or any society--and it should be lampooned for the idiocy it is. When politicians on both sides want to get together and make sorely-needed improvements to the country's immigration system then they'll have my support, but Trump's band-aid "solutions" are a nonsense, and will solve exactly 0% of the problem.

 

 

I totally agree.

[dawning 212]

31 minutes ago, Hypnos said:

The country as a whole is moving in a decidedly anti-immigrant direction.

 

In some areas this is just a little (or none); in others it's far more overt. This is the culmination of spending the best part of 20 years whipping people up into a frenzy over those damn Muslim terrorists (but forget all those domestic terrorists--overwhelmingly non-Muslims, by the way) and then electing a right-wing president who pandered to alt-right white extremists to help get himself into the White House.

 

No one, not even me, disputes that the current US immigration system is in drastic need of an overhaul; USCIS is an inept federal agency that needs a complete top-to-bottom clean-out, but no one is willing to pay either the political or monetary cost of doing so, even though it would be in almost everyone's best interests.

 

So when I see stupidity like trying to ban immigrants from seven countries who have killed a total of zero people in US domestic attacks between 1975 and 2015--zero--but at the same time exclude Saudi Arabia (15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia), because presumably... oil?... I cannot believe that the current administration has the nation's legal immigrants' best interests at heart. That's presumably why several federal courts have struck down the ban both times the administration has attempted to enact it.

 

No doubt everyone is familiar with the "First they came" poem by Martin Niemöller. It's done the rounds on various social media platforms for years, but is more relevant today than ever. I feel particular solidarity when someone takes aim at legal immigrants, people who have done everything by the book and in some cases moved heaven and earth to get here. Just because I am not in the crosshairs on that particular occasion doesn't mean that I should not try to speak up or assist those being persecuted... at some point the ire will turn upon staggeringly handsome 30-something tall white men from the West Midlands, and then I'll be in for it. Until then, I view any immigration changes with a highly skeptical eye. The first executive order was a case in point. There is no defending it; it was poorly written, and ambiguous on the status of affected LPRs and immigrant visa holders currently outside the US. The White House essentially had no idea what they were doing and cobbled it together over lunch, or so it appeared. It was rightly stayed by federal courts, as was its successor.

 

Anyway, I'm not waiting until they come for me personally to speak out. Right-wing xenophobia has no place in American society--or any society--and it should be lampooned for the idiocy it is. When politicians on both sides want to get together and make sorely-needed improvements to the country's immigration system then they'll have my support, but Trump's band-aid "solutions" are a nonsense, and will solve exactly 0% of the problem.

I agree; that poems is something I think about often when I hear immigrant bashing, and I am a native born citizen.  That's why I wrote what I did about "illegal immigrants" being blamed for all the ills of the society.  They are an easy starting point and have less support and options than most of the society.  However, I have known many, and in my experience they are people just like the rest of us, some good, some bad, most in between,  just more vulnerable.

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

17 hours ago, nightingalejules said:

Is anybody else worried that the new USCIS Ombudsman - the person who is tasked with assisting immigrants having difficulties with USCIS (petitions that are taking too long or have been improperly rejected) - was previously the executive director for the Foundation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which is a non-profit whose aim seems to be to ban all immigration to the US except for spouses and minor children of US Citizens? 

 

I understand that this administration has already been seen to be very anti-immigrant, but to put someone who ran an anti-immigration non-profit in charge of helping immigrants negotiate their way through USCIS? Really?

 

Am I concerned ? I am outraged.

FAIR is a mess. It's anti immigrant mission statement:

 

FAIR seeks a moratorium on net immigration by anyone other than refugees and the spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, until it can be shown that higher immigration levels are needed.^[12] FAIR also believes that the perpetual economic and social growths in the United States are no longer sustainable at the current rate of the influx of immigrants into the country. In an article entitled "Why America Needs an Immigration Time-Out", explains it "would ease the pressure on the environment and give us a chance to repair our institutions."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

 

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/federation-american-immigration-reform

 

 

Trump has put the fox in charge of the the house in several agencies and here we see Kirchner, being anti immigrant,

 now in charge to assist immigrants with USCIS.
Give me a break. Anyone not knowing the history of the group's founder John Tanton, should take some time to

read about their white nationalist agenda.
It is an oxymoron to put J.Kirchner anywhere near the Ombudsman agency.

 

 

 

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

https://www.propublica.org/article/ex-director-anti-immigration-group-to-be-ombudsman-at-immigration-agency

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/anti-immigrant-hardliner-job-julie-kirchner-citizenship-trump

 

Not only is she anti immigrant, she is an extremist alt right xenophobic individual.
So many 'antis' in the very agencies they are to assist and help through are eroding and sabotaging the agencies

instead. Insanity.

[mallafri76 1,012]

3 hours ago, Dutchster said:

 

We know that but everyone who believes what the HFP says might think immigrants are being mass deported now. I'm always quite annoyed by their political incorrect/misleading information articles. 

I think that goes for any news outlet in America. I've never seen such biased media reporting before. Whatever happened to objectively reporting the news without personal opinions or political affiliation?!?!?!