“a DHS official told Fox News that terms like “potential sponsor” have precise meanings in Department of Homeland Security regulations — meanings that severely limit the number of people the budget keeps safe from deportation.”
Further, because the bill only applies to kids who are unaccompanied, it does not provide protection for those bringing kids into the US.
Another major alleged “poison pill” that may be misunderstood is a clause requiring the federal government to “confer and seek to reach mutual agreement” with local governments before building any wall.
The Center for Immigration Studies, which favors lower immigration levels, tweeted that “the spending bill would give local governments in the Rio Grande (all of which are *heavily* Democratic) the ability to veto the fence. If those blue municipalities don’t agree with DHS, the fence can’t get built.”
But the DHS official told Fox News on background that the exact language in the budget — “confer and seek to reach mutual agreement” – nowhere requires the federal government to actually reach an agreement before building fences.
Rather, it just requires DHS to consult with local governments – something DHS already generally does, the official noted.
h/t Proud Trump Supporter
Related Posts:We truly are under attack. We need user support now more than ever! For as little as $10, you can support the IWB directly – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. 447 views