Sunday Read: 28 charged in int'l opioid and money laundering scheme

FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA seemed to be an unlikely place for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to announce the indictments for a drug distribution and money laundering scheme but it shows the extent the opioid crisis has impacted the U.S.

One indictment involves Jian Zhang, a 38-year-old Chinese national, who faces five federal charges, including money laundering, conspiracy to distribute drugs, conspiracy to import drugs and criminal enterprise. He is believed to be the leader of the international drug smuggling ring. 

The indictment also names four additional Chinese nationals, who face charges of international money laundering, and seven Canadian and U.S. residents, who face charges of conspiracy to distribute drugs and conspiracy to import drugs.

Zhang and the four other Chinese nationals are considered fugitives, Sessions said. They are believed to be in China. Three other co-conspirators in the case have been arrested in three different states.

The investigation started in North Dakota on Jan. 3, 2015, with the overdose death in Grand Forks of 18-year-old Bailey Henke.

North Dakota emerged as the unlikely epicenter for the drug distribution ring — more than a dozen deaths examined by the Grand Forks County Coroner’s Office since 2014 have been tied to fentanyl — it’s use has been widespread throughout the region as families, law enforcement and health practitioners look to address its toxic and dangerous nature.

The three-year investigation called "Operation Denial" has charged 28 individuals involved in an international ring of  smuggling and distributing opioids and laundering money.

Na Chu, 37; Yeyou Chu, 36; Cuiying Liu, 62; and Keping Zhang, 62, all Chinese nationals, were charged by a superseding indictment returned on Jan. 18, with international money laundering conspiracy, Sessions, U.S.. announced Friday (April 27).

 Attorney Christopher C. Myers for the District of North Dakota and Acting Assistant Attorney General John P. Cronan of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division announced today.

'Operation Denial'

 “Operation Denial” is an Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) investigation into the international trafficking of fentanyl and other lethal drugs, and was significantly aided by the national and international coordination led by the multi-agency Special Operations Division (S.O.D.) near Washington D.C. as part of “Operation Deadly Merchant.”

“Fentanyl and its analogues killed more Americans than any other drug in 2016, and the vast majority of it comes from China,” said Sessions.  “The defendants in this case allegedly trafficked fentanyl from China to 11 states from coast to coast.  As a result, Americans died in at least three states." 

Separate investigations by the U.S. Senate and the Associated Press detailed unchecked production in China of some of the world’s most dangerous drugs.

AP reporters found multiple sellers willing to ship carfentanil — an opioid used as an elephant tranquilizer that is so potent it has been considered a chemical weapon. The sellers used also offered advice on how to evade screening by U.S. authorities.

In a yearlong probe, Senate investigators said last January that it found that Chinese sellers, who openly market opioids such as fentanyl to U.S. buyers over the Internet, are pushing delivery through the U.S. postal system. The sellers are taking advantage of a failure by the postal service to fully implement an electronic data system that would help authorities identify suspicious shipments.

At a time of massive growth in postal shipments from China due to e-commerce, the investigators found that the U.S. postal system received the electronic data on just over a third of all international packages, making more than 300 million packages in 2017 much harder to screen.

“The Postal Service will continue to work tirelessly to address this serious societal issue,” spokesman David Partenheimer said in a statement.

Chinese authorities, as well as Canadian and Mexican authorities, are cooperating with U.S. law enforcement to curtail illegal shipments of the deadly drugs.

Additional defendants previously charged in this most recent superseding indictment with drug trafficking conspiracy include Jian Zhang, aka Hong Kong Zaron, 39, of China; Jason Joey Berry, aka Daniel Desnoyers, 35, of Quebec, Canada; Anthony Santos Gomes, aka Ant, 33, of Davie, Florida; Elizabeth Ton, aka Lisa Gomes, 26, of Davie, Florida; Xuan Cahn Nguyen, aka Jackie and Jackie Chan 38, of Quebec Canada; Marie Um, aka Angry Bird, 37, of Quebec, Canada; Vannek Um, 40, of Quebec, Canada; and Linda Van, 25, of Quebec, Canada.

In a separate indictment returned on March 22, Steven Barros Pinto, aka Yeaboy, 36, of Pawtucket, Rhode Island, was charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribute controlled substances and controlled substance analogues resulting in serious bodily injury and death, conspiracy to import controlled substances and controlled substance analogues into the United States resulting in serious bodily injury and death, continuing criminal enterprise, and a forfeiture allegation.

Additional defendants charged in this indictment with drug trafficking conspiracy include: Louis Felix Bell, 30, of West Palm Beach, Florida; Amanda Renee Schneider, 27, of West Palm Beach; Danny Silva Gamboa, 21, of Pawtucket, Rhode Island; Robinson Andres Gomez, aka Rob, 25, of Pineville, North Carolina; and Keveen Odair Nobre, aka Young Money, 28, of Pawtucket.

Many of the individuals remain at large. The indictments are merely accusations. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Understanding the Opioid Crisis

"There can be no doubt that this is the deadliest drug crisis in American history. Approximately 64,000 Americans lost their lives to drug overdoses in 2016 – the highest drug death toll and the fastest increase in that death toll in American history," said Sessions.

In the late 1990s, pharmaceutical companies reassured the medical community that patients would not become addicted to opioid pain relievers and healthcare providers began to prescribe them at greater rates.

Increased prescription of opioid medications led to widespread misuse of both prescription and non-prescription opioids before it became clear that these medications could indeed be highly addictive.

In 2017 HHS declared a public health emergency and announced a 5-Point Strategy To Combat the Opioid Crisis

Devastating consequences of the opioid epidemic include increases in opioid misuse and related overdoses, as well as the rising incidence of newborns experiencing withdrawal syndrome due to opioid use and misuse during pregnancy.

Substance abuse among the AAPI community is relatively low compared to other ethnic groups. However, a 2017 study reported by the Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment did point out:

• Asians who are U.S. born with high English proficiency have higher rates of past-year drug use.
• Acculturation, gender, ethnicity, age, depression and drinking predict Asian/American drug use.
• Among Asian/American ethnic groups, Filipinos have the highest rates of past-year drug use.

DOJ's report of domestic terrorism full of flaws and lies, says lawsuit

Department of Justice Secretary Jeff Sessions

ASAM NEWS

TWO CIVIL RIGHTS groups are suing the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security for issuing what it called a “misleading, biased and harmful” government report asserting that foreign-born individuals make up 73 percent of individuals convicted of international terrorism.

The complaint, filed April 9 by the Oakland-based Muslim Advocates and Democracy Forward asserts that the Trump Administration distorts the facts “to fabricate a threat posed by immigrants,” especially Muslims.

“The Trump administration’s relentless persecution of immigrants, minorities, and American Muslims has taken many outlandish, unconstitutional, and unlawful forms over the past year and a half. This so-called report is blatantly false, purposefully misleading, and it’s illegal,” said Johnathan Smith, legal director of Muslim Advocates. “The government has an obligation to be truthful and transparent, and we plan to hold this administration to that standard.”

The groups charge that the report violates a law designed to ensure the quality of data-the Information Quality Act or IQA. They says the report “flagrantly violates” requirements under the act.

The lawsuit says the 73 percent figure used by DOJ and DHS is based on “unreliable methodology and misleading presentation” of the data.

A government source told the Daily Beast that U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions took charge of the data and sent it to DHS Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen. The methodology used to collect the data was designed to achieve desired results.

The Justice Department called the Daily Beast story “categorically false.”

“For those of us who were actually involved, this story is as bizarre as it is fictional,” Justice Department spokesperson Sarah Isgur Flores said.

One former FBI agent backed up the Daily Beast story.

Karen Greenberg, director of the Center on National Security at Fordham University School of Law, told Vice that the report is misleading on many levels.

For instance, Sessions said, “We currently have terrorism-related investigations against thousands of people in the United States, including hundreds of people who came here as refugees.”

“The numbers of investigations are always vastly more than the number of indictments,” said Greenberg. “You can’t say because someone is investigated that they’re guilty.” The FBI investigates 7,000 to 10,000 international terror cases in any given year, and in fiscal year 2017, for perspective, there were 44 convictions.

Much of the language in the 11-page report and the accompanying press release is vague, says Greenberg. For example, the release states that “in 2017 alone DHS had 2,554 encounters with individuals on the terrorist watch list traveling to the United States.” But neither the release or report say how those encounters ended.

“This kind of bureaucratic manipulation of what should be objective, professional analysis is what undermines confidence in these institutions,” said Michael German, a former FBI special agent now with New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice.

The flawed report, released in January, is behing used for the justification of the Muslim travel ban instituted by Donald Trump and some of questionable policies of ICE and and law enforcement.

(Views From the Edge contributed to this report.)

______________________________________________________________________________

Trump, DOJ 'going to war' against California, says governor, over sanctuary laws

Assemblyman David Chiu addresses protestors in Sacramento.

NO ONE should be surprised at the latest salvo from Attorney General Jeff Sessions against the State of California. The tension between the state and the Donald Trump administration has been simmering for a long time.

California and the Trump administration have long been on a collision course since Trump announced his candidacy for president by describing Mexican immigrants as drug dealers and criminals, mocking Asian political and business leaders with a sterotypical accent and attacking Hollywood entertainment celebrities and liberal San Francisco.

"California, we have a problem," said Sessions in front an audience of law enforcement officials. The Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit, he told the California Peace Officers Association, to undo the California Values Act, three so-called sanctuary laws that the state's legislature passed last year in response to the Trump administration's immigration enforcement measures.

The lawsuit argues that California lacks the authority to impede cooperation with federal immigration enforcement efforts. It reads:

This lawsuit challenges three California statutes that reflect a deliberate effort by California to obstruct the United States’ enforcement of federal immigration law, to regulate private entities that seek to cooperate with federal authorities consistent with their obligations under federal law, and to impede consultation and communication between federal and state law enforcement officials.

Only a quarter of the audience gave him a standing ovation after his speech.

“This is basically going to war against the state of California,” said Gov. Jerry Brown. “This is pure red meat for the base … The Trump administration is full of liars.”

U,S. Senator Kamala Harris, whose parents are immigrants, called the DOJ's suit hypocritical.

“It’s hypocrisy at its height. Again, I think there’s a distraction in that they’re trying to suggest that this is about the constitution when in fact, what they’re doing is playing politics,” she said. “They’re playing politics and they’re playing politics with California.”

“Trump and Sessions think they can bully California -- but it won't work,” Harris said in a tweet.

Gubernatorial candidate State Treasurer John Chiang said, “California refuses to be a cog in Donald Trump’s deportation machine, and we will not tolerate these attacks on our communities,” he said. “This isn’t just a stand against the administration. This is a statement of values.”

Several state legislators addressed the demonstrators outside the Capitol protesting Sessions' presence and the administration's immigration policies.

"Attorney General Sessions' publicity stunt to sue California will not deter leaders in our state from standing up for our immigrant communities.  California will continue to protect our families and defend our values," said Assemblymember Davie Chiu, D-SF.

"As a former prosecutor, I know sanctuary policies make us safer.  When immigrants feel comfortable reporting crimes to police and testifying as witnesses in court, our communities are safer."

Assemblyman Rob Bonta, the first Filipino/American legislator in California tweeted:

Congressman Ted Lieu of southern California added:

Asian Americans Advancing Justice - California (Advancing Justice - CA) issues the following statement in response:

“Our large and diverse immigrant communities are essential to the fabric of our great state. California is home to 2.6 million undocumented immigrants, 417,000 of whom are Asian American. Studies have shown that jurisdictions with Sanctuary policies are safer and more economically prosperous than non-sanctuary jurisdictions. Immigrants help California thrive.

The Trump administration has been obsessive in their attack and scapegoating of immigrants," says the AAAJ statement, "fueled by hate, xenophobia, and racism. But the Constitution is clear: the federal government cannot commandeer California’s resources to carry out deportations.
“It is very clear that Donald Trump has California in the crosshairs,” said state Sen. Kevin de León (D), the state Senate president pro tem.

This is partly because Trump's animosity towards California goes way beyond immigration. The state represents to Trump supporters: environmental regulations and gun control, it's at the center of the LGBTQ movement and tech innovation, the state has the largest immigrant population in the country and to top it off, somehow California is the envy of the rest of the country with the country that is the seventh largest economy in the world.

Perhaps most galling to Trump, California has been the center of the political resistance to Trump since he was a candidate. Trump received just 31.6 percent of the vote in California in 2016, lower than any Republican presidential nominee in history. The state has sued and  the GOP's attempt to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

It should be very interesting when Trump visits California next week, his first visit since he was elected. He reportedly will avoid the San Francisco Bay Area, a hotbed of anti-Trump sentiment, and spend most of his time in Southern California.

At the Sacramento rally, Assemblymember Chiu asked, “Are we ready to resist, to defend our state?”  

“Mr. Trump, Mr. Sessions, we are America, we are California, and we will be here long after you are gone,” said Chiu, himself the child of immigrants and the author of one of the bills that Sessions is suing California over.

________________________________________________________________________________

DOJ seeks help from Supreme Court to end DACA

THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT on Tuesday said it plans to take the rare step of appealing directly to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a lower-court ruling that blocked the Trump administration from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

A federal judge in California temporarily blocked the Trump administration's decision to end DACA earlier this month. The ruling required the Department of Homeland Security to resume accepting renewal requests from eligible DACA applicants, at least until lawsuits can play out in court. Apparently, the DOJ can't wait for that process.

“It defies both law and common sense for DACA—an entirely discretionary non-enforcement policy that was implemented unilaterally by the last administration after Congress rejected similar legislative proposals and courts invalidated the similar DAPA policy—to somehow be mandated nationwide by a single district court in San Francisco,” said Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

Trump declared the end of the DACA program last September and gave Congress until March 2018 to come up with a law that would do the same thing: protect from deportation about 800,000 young people who were brought to the U.S. by their undocumented parents.

Congress' inability to come up legislation threatens to shut down the government on Friday when the lawmakers are supposed to pass a budget.

Democrats say they won't sign off on a budget until a the fate of DACA is resolved. Republicans say any deal for DACA must include funds for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

_______________________________________________________________________________

DOJ gives sanctuary cities final chance to comply with Trump's immigration rules

SCREEN CAPTURE / FOX

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions

IN THE ONGOING war between the Trump administration and a host of cities, counties and the State of California, the Justice Department today (Oct. 12) fired off another salvo against those jurisdictions that have refused to comply with the questionable immigration policies.

Initially, the DOJ is targeting seven jurisdictions following a preliminary assessment of the jurisdictions’ compliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373. These jurisdictions were identified in a May 2016 report by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General as having laws that potentially violate 8 U.S.C. 1373. 

The following jurisdictions have preliminarily been found to have laws, policies, or practices that may violate 8 U.S.C. 1373: 

• Cook County, Illinois; 
• Chicago, Illinois; 
• New Orleans, Louisiana; 
• New York, New York; and 
• Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

The Trump administration has taken a hardline position against so-called "sanctuary cities" claiming they leave violent criminals on the streets. The assessment is its latest effort to force "sanctuary cities" to comply with federal immigration orders.

RELATED: Judge upholds injunction vs. federal actions against 'sanctuary' jurisdictions

Proponents of "sanctuary cities," like Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney, say they create trust between police and immigrants, who otherwise might be afraid to report crimes.

Mayor Kenney said Philadelphia welcomes immigrants and supports its immigrant communities.

"We're doing smart policing and, as a result, we had the lowest level of crime in 2016 that we've had in 40 years," Kenney said before the latest DOJ warning. "We will not let this administration interfere with our longstanding efforts to bring members of Philadelphia's immigrant community from the shadows."

Philadelphia has filed a lawsuit against the Session's policy tying federal funds to compliance with immigration rules alleging that new JAG funding requirements that force cities to abandon "sanctuary city" policies are unlawful.

Two federal judges, in California and Chicago, have ruled that the Trump administration's new requirements for receiving a key law enforcement grant that hinged on immigration enforcement could cause "irreparable harm," adding that the city had shown a "likelihood of success" in its case that Attorney General Jeff Sessions exceeded his authority in requiring local jurisdictions to comply with the new standards.

U.S. District Court Judge Harry D. Leinenweber blocked the DOJ from enforcing the new measures, which it introduced earlier this summer, meaning cities applying for the funds this year will not have to comply.

"The harm to the city's relationship with the immigrant community, if it should accede to the conditions, is irreparable," Leinenweber wrote. "Once such trust is lost, it cannot be repaired through an award of money damages."

The DOJ also found no evidence that the following jurisdictions are currently out of compliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373: 

• Milwaukee County, Wisconsin; and 
• the State of Connecticut. 

The department also previously sent letters to the following jurisdictions notifying them that the department found no evidence that they are currently out of compliance with 8 U.S.C. 1373: 

• Clark County, Nevada; and 
• Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

Jurisdictions that were found to have possible violations of 8 U.S.C 1373 will have until Oct. 27, 2017 to provide additional evidence that the interpretation and application of their laws, policies, or practices comply with the statute. 

“Jurisdictions that adopt so-called ‘sanctuary policies’ also adopt the view that the protection of criminal aliens is more important than the protection of law-abiding citizens and of the rule of law,” said Sessions. 

“I commend the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office and the State of Connecticut on their commitment to complying with Section 1373, and I urge all jurisdictions found to be out of compliance in this preliminary review to reconsider their policies that undermine the safety of their residents. We urge jurisdictions to not only comply with Section 1373 but to establish sensible and effective partnerships to properly process criminal aliens.”

DACA: Obama breaks his silence; calls reversal 'wrong,' 'cruel,'

WHITE HOUSE FILE

When he was in office, President Barack Obama met with some Dreamers in the Oval office.

THIS MORNING (Sept. 5), former President Obama ended his self-imposed silence to issue a powerful response to Attorney General Jeff Sessions' announcement of the Trump administration's intention to end the DACA program.

The Obama-era program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) was created by Presidential Executive Order in 2012 Congress was unable to come up with a solution with what to do with the hundreds of thousands of young people brought to this country by their parents and who grew up in the United States, attended our schools and our churches and spoke English better than some native-born Americans.

Trump decided to put the onus on Congress rather than to act like a leader and take action against the Dreamers, who he professes to love. In six months Congress must come up with a plan, something they have been unable to do, for this same group of young people, something they were unable to do in the eight year's of Obama's presidency.

This morning's action, compelled President Barack Obama to end the silence that he has maintained since he left office almost eight months ago. Here is his complete statement:

Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that everybody plays by the rules.

But that's not what the action that the White House took today is about. This is about young people who grew up in America -- kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they're undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver's license.

Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to write legislation that would have told these young people -- our young people -- that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you've been here a certain number of years, and if you're willing to go to college or serve in our military, then you'll get a chance to stay and earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked Congress to send me such a bill.

That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented, driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.

But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again. To target these young people is wrong -- because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating -- because they want to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if our kid's science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn't know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?

Let's be clear: the action taken today isn't required legally. It's a political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn't threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid's softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won't lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone's taxes, or raise anybody's wages.

It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it's up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future. I'm heartened by those who've suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.

Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we'd want our own kids to be treated. It's about who we are as a people -- and who we want to be.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals -- that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That's how America has traveled this far. That's how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union

Obama's response is thoughtful, inspirational, more than 240 characters and a sad reminder of what a President is supposed to sound like.
____________________________________________________________________________ 

Judge expands travel ban's "family' to include grandparents, aunts and more

Judge Derrick Kahala Watson

THE DEFINITION of family was expanded by a federal judge as it applies to the slimmed down version of a travel ban ordered by Donald Trump.

Grandparents, aunts and uncles and other relatives of people living in the U.S. can no longer be barred from entering the U.S., ruled Judge Derrick Kahala Watson in Hawaii.

It is another blow to Trump's already truncated order that attempts to limit travel from six predominantly Muslim countries.

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said that he would bring Watson's ruling to the Supreme Court.

When the High Court ruled last month that parts of Trump's travel ban could be implemented, it left the definition of "bona fide" family ties to the administration. Watson said Thursday that the State Department had interpreted the Supreme Court ruling too narrowly.

The State of Hawaii challenged the administration's definition of what was a close relative.

Watson condemned the government's definition of a close relative as "unduly restrictive" especially for Asian families who consider grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins part of the immediate family, not the extended family.

"Common sense, for instance, dictates that close family members be defined to include grandparents. Indeed, grandparents are the epitome of close family members", he wrote.

In yet another rebuke to the Trump administration, Watson also said that refugees who have “formal assurance” from U.S. resettlement agencies for relocation to the country — even if the refugees do not have relatives in the U.S. — cannot be prevented from entering.

Watson added that a refugee with a commitment from a resettlement agency met the standard for the “bona fide” relationship referred to in the Supreme Court order.

“It is formal, it is a documented contract, it is binding, it triggers responsibilities and obligations, including compensation, it is issued specific to an individual refugee only when that refugee has been approved for entry by the Department of Homeland Security, and it is issued in the ordinary course, and historically has been for decades,” he wrote.

“Bona fide does not get any more bona fide than that,” he said.

"By this decision, the district court has improperly substituted its policy preferences for the national security judgments of the Executive branch in a time of grave threats, defying both the lawful prerogatives of the Executive Branch and the directive of the Supreme Court," Sessions said.

The Supreme Court is not currently in session but the justices can handle emergency requests. The administration's application could be directed either to Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has responsibility for emergency requests from western states, or to the nine justices as a whole.

"The truth here is that the government’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s stay order defies common sense," said Omar Jadwat, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union. "That’s what the district court correctly found and the attorney general’s misleading attacks on its decision can’t change that fact."

###

Sen. Kamala Harris makes AG Jeff Sessions 'nervous'

Sen. Kamala Harris, right, questions Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

FOR THE SECOND time in less than a week California Sen. Kamala Harris was interrupted  by Republican senators as she questioned a Trump-appointed government official.

Harris, a former prosecutor, was trying to keep Jeff Sessions, Secretary of the Department of Justice, from giving a meandering B.S. response to a simple question about a supposed  DOJ rule preventing him from talking about communications with the president. That's when Sen. John McCain and Sen. Richard Burr, interrupted her aggressive questioning.

Before Sessions could answer, Harris' alloted time was up. You could almost hear the sigh of relief frm Sessions.

Even though some of her fellow senators, particularly Sen. Ron Wyden, were aggressive, only Harris was scolded. Can you say "sexism?" Republican men, it appears, might have problems with smart, aggressive women.

So it went during Harris' turn for questioning Sessions. When Sessions said he didn't recall any conversations with Russian businessmen at the 2016 Republican convention, Harris interrupted again.

“Will you let me qualify it?” he whined. “If I don't qualify it, you'll accuse me of lying. So I need to be correct as best I can. I'm not able to be rushed this fast. It (Harris' prosecutorial style of questioning) makes me nervous.”

Session's appearance before the intelligence committee was intended to disprove the allegations of his collusion with Russians impacting the 2016 elections. However, his inability to answer questions and his apparent forgetfulness of events and meetings that occurred only a year ago raises more questions about his qualifications to be the top law enforcement office in the country.

Harris' performance during the intelligence committee hearings this past week has boosted her national profile and her name continues to come up as a possible candidate for president in 2020.

RELATED:

• Sen. Kamala Harris chided ... she persisted.
• Four AAPI women mentioned as possible presidential candidates 
• Kamala Harris career shaped by civil rights giants

Although the California senator continues to insist that she has no interest in the presidency, she presents an attractive alternative to the same old names trotted out as 2020 challengers to Donald Trump.  She checks off on a lot of issues that really makes her someone to bears watching.

She is relatively new (check) on the political scene, takes a progressive stance on immigration, the environment and fighting Wall Street was a hallmark of her time as California's Attorney General (check, check and check). Harris is a woman (check), who can claim Asian Indian and black heritage, (check and check). 

And from these hearings, the nation found out that Harris is not a demure Asian woman by her questioning of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (the first instance when she was admonished by McCain and Burr)k, former FBI director James Comey and Sessions demonstrated that she comfortable in the spotlight.

Her close association with the Obamas might help her bring back the Obama voters who came out droves  for the U.S. first African/American president but disappeared in 2016. 

"From here on out, we need to be mindful of two things: one, this is not a TV show—it is a very serious matter and must be treated that way; and two, this process should not make us forget the fact that Senate Republicans are still trying to rip health care away from millions of Americans, undo consumer protections," Harris warned in a message to her supporters.

After the past week's hearings in the Senate, a national spotlight is shining on Sen. Harris.

###

AG Sessions wants tougher enforcement vs. immigrants

SCREEN CAPTURE

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions wants the DOJ to make enforcement of immigration laws a priority for the DOJ.

U.S. ATTY.  General Jeff Sessions last week released a memo directing federal prosecutors to prioritize the prosecution of immigration status-related “crimes,” including an increase in felony charges for immigration status violations.

The memo also prioritizes prosecution of people for transporting or harboring undocumented immigrants.

“For those that continue to seek improper and illegal entry into this country, be forewarned: This is a new era. This is the Trump era," Sessions declared to an audience of Customs and Border Protection personnel. Immigration cases already make up 50 percent of the Department of Justice attorneys' caseload.

Asian Americans Advancing Justice, an affiliation of five civil rights organizations, condemns the April 12 memorandum.

“The administration’s recently announced policy of prosecuting people for entry into the U.S. without permission is cruel and dangerous. Separating families does not seem to be enough for this administration," reads the AAAJ statement. "Now they want to throw mothers and fathers in prison who are crossing the border to flee harsh, unsafe, economic conditions—seeking safety for their children and the right to put food on the table. Undocumented immigrants are human beings who seek safety, work, and a better life."

Although the Trump administration has targeted border crossers from Latin America, among the 11 million estimated immigrants without documentation, about 1.7 million are from Asia.

Sessions’ policy and language fosters fear by falsely by painting every undocumented immigrant as criminals and gang members when facts clearly do not support this alternative reality. Many are children trying to escape violence in their home countries. "It’s shameful that we must remind Attorney General Sessions and President Trump that immigrants, both with and without papers, are the bedrock of our nation" said the AAAJ.

Furthermore, prioritizing prosecutions for harboring or transporting of undocumented immigrants appears to be aimed at humanitarian workers and other “good Samaritans” to deter them from assisting undocumented immigrants in any way, such as taking someone to the hospital or treating someone in an emergency situation, the AAAJ statement explained.

Targeting border crossers for criminal prosecution will inevitably sweep up asylum-seekers fleeing violence and persecution and further deter victims of trafficking and abuse from coming forward for fear of criminal prosecution. The mass prosecution and deportation efforts of this administration are unconscionable, shameful actions that are reminiscent of Japanese incarceration when people of Japanese descent were targeted based on their nationality, forcibly removed from their homes, and imprisoned.

The rhetoric and policies coming from the Trump administration are eerily similar to past efforts to scapegoat immigrants that led to the Chinese Exclusion Act and limited immigration from all Asian countries to almost zero. The Trump administration appears intent on persecuting immigrants and determined to heighten anti-immigrant hysteria at the expense of other, more pressing issues facing our nation.

AAAJ urges Congress to stand up as a check against this extreme anti-immigrant agenda. Asian Americans Advancing Justice also supports the passage of state and local policies that disentangle state and local law enforcement from deporting community members.

Senators and congressmembers will have an opportunity to vote on the immigration enforcement budget in a couple of weeks. "We urge them to deny the Administration any additional funds for their anti-immigrant agenda,” said the AAAJ.

###

California justice doubles down after rebuke from Trump officials

California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye

ATTY. GEN. JEFF SESSIONS and Homeland Security chief John Kelly issued a strong response to California's Chief Justice in a letter made public Friday. 

The two Trump appointees mansplained the meaning of "stalking" to Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, who used the term describing ICE agents who are making arrests at the state's courthouses.

"As the chief judicial officer of the State of California, your characterization of federal law enforcement officers is particularly troubling. As you are aware, stalking has a specific legal meaning in American law, which describes criminal activity involving repetitive following or harassment of the victim with the intent to produce fear of harm."

Cantil-Sakauye, a Republican, wrote a letter to the Attorney General and Homeland Security on March 16 because of instances where ICE agents made arrests at courthouses.

Instead of backing off, the Chief Justice doubled down on her original criticism. “Making arrests at courthouses, in my view, undermines public safety because victims and witnesses will fear coming to courthouses to help enforce the law,” said the Filipina/American justice. “I am disappointed that despite local and state public safety issues at stake, courthouses are not on ICE’s ‘sensitive areas’ list that includes schools, churches, and hospitals.”

“When others see that happening and even for that person themselves, it can absolutely feel like what we all would commonly call stalking,” said Stanford Professor Jayashri Srikantiah. “If you’re undocumented and you’re the victim of domestic violence, it may make you very reluctant to go to the courthouse at all, even if you have a very valid need for the legal system.”

Kelly and Sessions also made an obvious slap at California's top elected officials who have been opposed to many of Donald Trumps policies, especially in reference to immigration.

"We would encourage you to express your concerns to the Governor of California and local officials who have enacted policies that occasionally necessitate ICE officers and agents to make arrests at courthouses and other public places," concluded the letter from Sessions and Kelly.

Yesterday, April 3, the California Senate voted to make the state a sanctuary state. The bill goes to the state Assembly before going to Gov. Jerry Brown.

Undocumented being arrested in the courts, says California chief justice

IN A LETTER, California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye expressed her deep concern "about reports from some of our trial courts that immigration agents appear to be stalking undocumented immigrants in our courthouses to make arrests." 

The letter asked Homeland Security and the Attorney General to cease the practice.

“Courthouses should not be used as bait in the necessary enforcement of our country’s immigration laws,” Cantil-Sakauye wrote Thursday to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly. “[E]nforcement policies that include stalking courthouses and arresting undocumented immigrants, the vast majority of whom pose no risk to public safety, are neither safe nor fair.” 

Reports from attorneys up and down the state, from the urban centers to the Central Valley, are telling the Chief Justice that since January, ICE agents are arresting immigrants when they show up at courthouses, according to the Huffington Post. 

RELATED: Looking for an Asian/American in the U.S. Supreme Court

Cantil-Sakauye's Filipina mother was a farmworker, and her Hawaiian-born Filipino/Portuguese father, worked in sugar cane and pineapple plantations before moving to Sacramento. 

She is the 28th Chief Justice of the State of California. She was sworn into office on January 3, 2011 by then Gov. Arnold Swarzenegger. She is the first Asian/Filipina/American and the second woman to serve as the state’s chief justice.
Since Trump has taken office, border control officers and ICE agents have been more aggressive in going after people who have no documentation. In some instances, the agents have arrested people inside the courtroom.

"Enforcement policies that include stalking courthouses and arresting undocumented immigrants, the vast majority of whom pose no risk to public safety, are neither safe nor fair," reads the letter. "They not only compromise our core value of fairness but they undermine the judiciary’s ability to provide equal access to justice."

###