Call or write your US Congress to demand they:
OPPOSE handing the President a BLANK CHECK in the budget process while gutting due process. Demand that Congress not support billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund xenophobic, harmful, and shortsighted roundup and deportation schemes-all without due process. What's more, oppose the proposed immigration benefit fees, which will result in exploitation of vulnerable individuals and coercive denial of the right to seek asylum or reunite with family by levying significant fees on immigration benefit applications. Instead, let them know that you want to prioritize funding for healthcare, social security, education, and policies that make our communities stronger rather than sowing fear and tearing them apart.
Submit a regulatory comment to oppose:
Expansive and invasive data collection schemes for people applying for immigration status, which will infringe on free speech and association by requiring sharing of social media information. Your comment should be personalized and share any personal, professional or community concerns you have with the regulation. AHR is concerned about this because:
It would require many applicants for immigration status to submit their personal social media account information, which threatens to impede freedoms of expression and association.
It provides no information as to how the data will be used or how determinations on vetting based on the accounts will be made. This raises concerns that improper conclusions can be made based on free exercise actions or that such vetting will be used to illegally discriminate against certain political opinions, nationalities, religions, or other groups.
The proposal suggests this step is necessary as part of robust national security vetting; however, the change provides no evidence that national security experts support this change or that current vetting processes are inadequate without this expansion.
The proposed change seeks sweeping information about an applicant and their family while providing neither justification for the change, beyond sweeping generalizations about national security vetting, nor information about safeguards against abuse.
Requiring significant information about family members will either discourage individuals from applying for relief that Congress has made available out of fear for family or business impacts or will result in improper dragnets and targeting based on such data collection.
Requiring such sweeping data and information will improperly impact pro se individuals and non-literate, non-English speakers whose case may be denied for failing to adequately respond to such requests or who do not have access to such sweeping information.
The proposed change improperly interferes with privacy and the family.
Changes to processing and policies for noncitizen children that will discourage sponsorship and result in prolonged detention of noncitizen children in costly conditions that inflict trauma and other harms on vulnerable youth. Your comment should be personalized and share any personal, professional, or community concerns you have with the regulation. AHR is concerned about this because:
- The proposed change will make it harder for UACs to be released from government custody, including where they have safe and supportivefamily available, resulting in prolonged detention that has significant health and trauma impacts.
Proposed changes to reduce the number of members to hear appeals in immigration proceedings. Your comment should be personalized and share any personal, professional, or community concerns you have with the regulation. AHR is concerned about this because:
- The government continues to request funds for enforcement and detention without commensurate investment in adjudication and due process, resulting in human harm and violations of rights. Limiting the number of people to hear appeals will add to these harms by increasing the already-long delays in decisions for appeals and discouraging people from advocating their case.
- For people detained and awaiting an appeal, such a change will violate laws against arbitrary and prolonged detention or result in refoulement to face persecution and torture if individuals are forced to give up their appeal rather than languish.
- Due process is a bedrock of functioning societies, and arbitrarily reducing the number of people to make appeals decisions on crucial matters that result in separation of family, exile, and even deportation to harm requires an investment in ensuring adequate care of those cases.
