Posts Tagged ‘immigration’

U.S. Official’s Diplomatic Line in Mexico Differs From Trump’s

February 23, 2017

Mexico Angry Over New U.S. Immigration, Deportation Rules

.

Updated Feb. 23, 2017 3:08 p.m. ET

MEXICO CITY—U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said Thursday the U.S. wouldn’t use military force in immigration operations, even though President Donald Trump earlier in the day described U.S. efforts to enforce immigration laws as “a military operation.”

Mr. Kelly spoke to reporters Thursday

https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-officials-on-tough-trip-in-mexico-trump-says-1487871849

*****************************************

Homeland Security Secretary Kelly: No use of US military to enforce immigration

Image may contain: 2 people, people standing

By Josh Lederman
The Associated Press

U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly pledged Thursday that America won’t enlist its military to enforce immigration laws and that there will be “no mass deportations.”

The declarations came as senior Trump administration officials sought to temper Latin American concerns about a new U.S. immigration crackdown.

Kelly, speaking in Mexico City after he and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met with their Mexican counterparts, said all deportations will honor human rights and the U.S. legal system. That includes multiple appeals offered to those facing deportation. Kelly said the U.S. approach will involve “close coordination” with Mexico’s government.

“There will be no use of military forces in immigration,” Kelly said. “There will be no — repeat, no — mass deportations.”

Only hours earlier, President Donald Trump suggested the opposite. He said the U.S. is “getting really bad dudes out of this country at a rate nobody has ever seen before.”

“It’s a military operation,” Trump said Thursday at the White House during a meeting with manufacturing CEOs. “Because what has been allowed to come into our country, when you see gang violence that you’ve read about like never before and all of the things, much of that is people who are here illegally. And they’re rough and they’re tough, but they’re not tough like our people. So we’re getting them out.”

Mexico and other Latin American nations have been on edge over Trump’s plan to target millions of people in the U.S. illegally for potential deportation — including many Mexicans.

Trump spoke during the presidential campaign about using a “deportation force,” and his Homeland Security Department at one point considered using the National Guard to help with deportations, although the White House has said that idea has been ruled out.

Kelly, Tillerson and their Mexican counterparts spoke before the two Americans planned to meet with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, an outspoken opponent of Trump’s immigration plans, which include making Mexico pay for a border wall along the border.

Tillerson acknowledged the disputes that have damaged U.S.-Mexico relations in recent weeks. But he said the two countries were committed to working through their disagreements.

“In a relationship filled with vibrant colors, two strong sovereign countries from time to time will have differences,” Tillerson said. “We listened closely and carefully to each other as we respectfully and patiently raised our respective concerns.”

Copyright © 2017, Chicago Tribune
.
****************************
.

John Kelly promises ‘no mass deportations’ in immigration crackdown

Homeland Security Secretary’s comments come as Donald Trump calls plans to arrest and deport more illegal immigrants ‘a military operation’

By Katie Forster
  The Independent

The US Secretary of Homeland Security has said there will be “no mass deportations” during Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration.

John Kelly told reporters in Mexico City there would be “no use of military force for immigration operations” and said enforcing new policies would be done legally and with respect for human rights.

Mr Trump has promised to build a wall at the border between Mexico and the US and said he plans to deport two to three million undocumented immigrants with criminal records.

Mr Kelly’s comments came as the President termed new efforts to arrest and deport more illegal immigrants “a military operation”.

“We’re getting drug lords out,” he said at a White House meeting with business executives. “We’re getting really bad dudes out of this country, at a rate that nobody’s ever seen before.”

There are around 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US, according to the Pew Research Centre. More than half of those living in America illegally are from Mexico, found the organisation in a recent report.

Donald Trump’s Mexico wall: At what cost, and how long?
.

According to US government estimates, there are 1.9 million “removeable criminal aliens”, or non-US citizens who have committed crimes and are eligible for deportation, in the country.

But this figure is not limited to illegal immigrants, and includes people from other countries living in the US legally – green card holders, for instance – who could still be sent home for breaking the law.

However, the President appears to have taken a somewhat liberal approach to these estimates.

Police powers under Trump’s new immigration rules are shocking

In his first interview after his election victory, Mr Trump told CBS News he was going to “get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers.”

“A lot of these people, probably two million – it could be even three million – we are getting them out of the country or we are going to incarcerate,” he said.

Mr Kelly and US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson met their Mexican counterparts in the capital. He said actions will occur in close coordination with Mexico’s government.

Mr Trump is also expected to issue a new travel ban, replacing the directive suspending access to the US to citizens of seven mostly Muslim countries, next week.

Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly has called the revised order a “more streamlined version” of the original travel ban, which sparked widespread confusion and mass protests.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/john-kelly-no-mass-deportations-donald-trump-mexico-immigration-crackdown-illegal-us-rex-tillerson-a7596541.html

Sweden’s King wants balanced approach in news reporting — Three days after immigrants riot in Stockholm suburb

February 23, 2017

AFP


© TT News Agency/AFP/File | Several cars were set ablaze in a riot in a suburb outside Stockholm on the night of February 20, 2017

STOCKHOLM (AFP) – Sweden’s King Carl XVI Gustaf has urged news organisations to report objectively on the Nordic nation, after US President Donald Trump drew attention to the country’s immigration challenges.

In an interview with the Sydsvenskan newspaper published on Thursday, three days after a riot broke out in a Stockholm suburb with a large immigrant population, the monarch called for a balanced approach in news reporting.

“It’s important for Sweden’s image in the world to report about the good examples,” the 70-year-old king told the daily.

“It won’t happen without a serious and well-sourced media,” he said.

Images of the violence spread like wildfire around the world, blurring Sweden’s response to Trump and the Fox News channel’s report linking rising crime to immigration to which he had referred.

The king praised Sweden for its research on immigration.

“A lot of good research on integration issues is being conducted at the University of Malmo,” he said after a visit on Wednesday to Sweden’s third city, which is also home to many immigrants.

“(Sweden) has succeeded well with education and research within these sectors. And it is important to get out information about the research that’s being conducted,” he added.

Trump’s remarks touched a raw nerve in Sweden, which is idealised by liberals for its social welfare and immigration policies but also targeted by the alternative right movement.

Trump’s opponents argue that crime levels have not surged since Sweden took in the highest number of asylum seekers per capita in Europe between 2014-2015, and insist that socio-economic factors are the real challenge.

But others see a Sweden where foreigners are twice as likely to appear in crime statistics, are more frequently unemployed, and more often involved in underworld settling of scores.

“It’s important to not give up. I’ve been working with this for more than 40 years,” the king said.

Related:

Image may contain: fire, night, tree, sky and outdoor

On Monday night, dozens of youths clashed with police after they arrested a suspected drug dealer in Rinkeby. The rioters threw stones at police, burned cars and looted shops.A police officer fired live ammunition to disperse the mob, Stockholm police spokesman Lars Bystrom told AFP.

Image may contain: 6 people, crowd, hat and outdoor

Sweden took in more refugees per capita than any other country in Europe last year. Getty

After Trump Remarks, Sweden Reflects on Immigrants and Crime — “This is an opportunity to reflect over how others see us and how our own self-image coincides with reality”

February 22, 2017

Agence France-Presse | Updated: February 22, 2017 23:04 IST

STOCKHOLM: US President Donald Trump’s controversial statements linking immigration and crime in Sweden, a country idealised by some for its liberal values, have sparked the nation to weigh the successes and failures of its integration policy. Two days after the US president’s baffling remarks on Saturday in Florida, where he suggested an attack had hit the Scandinavian country the previous evening, riots broke out in the immigrant-heavy northern Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby.

“Trump right about Sweden after all! Riot breaks out in Stockholm suburb,” Republican commentator Ann Coulter wrote triumphantly on Twitter on Tuesday.

Image may contain: fire, night, tree, sky and outdoor

On Monday night, dozens of youths clashed with police after they arrested a suspected drug dealer in Rinkeby. The rioters threw stones at police, burned cars and looted shops.

A police officer fired live ammunition to disperse the mob, Stockholm police spokesman Lars Bystrom told AFP.

Image may contain: 6 people, crowd, hat and outdoor

Sweden took in more refugees per capita than any other country in Europe last year. Getty

The images spread like wildfire around the world, blurring the Swedish authorities’ response to Mr Trump and the Fox News channel’s report linking rising crime to immigration to which he had referred.

For Tove Lifvendahl, editorialist at Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet, there is indeed “an ounce of truth in what Trump said.”

“Regardless of what you think of it, this is an opportunity to reflect over how others’ image of us and our own self-image coincide with reality,” she wrote on Wednesday.

So what are these two antagonistic perceptions?

Mr Trump’s opponents argue that Sweden has not seen a terrorist attack since 2010 and that crime levels have not surged since it took in 244,000 asylum seekers, the highest number per capita in Europe in 2014 and 2015. Sweden remains one of the safest – and wealthiest – countries in the world.

While the Nordic nation has not been not spared the difficulties of integration, it has experienced nowhere near the racial tensions, inequalities, poverty and violence in the United States, they point out.

But others see a Sweden where foreigners are twice as likely to appear in crime statistics, are more frequently unemployed, are more often involved in underworld settling of scores, where supposed police no-go zones exist and where around 300 foreign fighters have left to fight with jihadists in Iraq and Syria.

Opportunities and challenges

Social Democratic Prime Minister Stefan Lofven rejected Mr Trump’s allegation of a link between crime and immigration, but did acknowledge that Sweden faces challenges over its immigration policy.
“We have opportunities, we have challenges, we’re working (on) them every day. But I think also we must all take responsibility for using facts correctly, and for verifying any information that we spread,” Mr Lofven told reporters on Monday.

The prime minister’s level response reflected a need to tone down the rhetoric, according to some, and a negligent naivety according to others.

In Rinkeby, residents are equally divided on the reality of everyday life in their suburb.

Chaimaa Hakam, a 28-year-old shop owner, was born and raised in this disadvantaged but grassy neighbourhood, where an innovative high school is visited every year by Nobel laureates.

She chose to stay on in the suburb and trained to become an accountant.

“I have several friends who are real estate agents, who work for political parties, who are reporters and lawyers,” Ms Hakam said, adding that she also has friends who are in prison.

“We all grew up together,” she told AFP.

For Benjamin Dousa, a local conservative politician of Turkish origin, crime in Rinkeby has become “a part of everyday life”.

“We have one riot on average every month, one car blaze every day and the highest number of fatal shootings in the country” per capita, Mr Dousa told the daily Expressen.

But Mr Trump is wrong to stigmatise a population because of its ethnic or religious origin, sociologist Oskar Adenfelt insisted, noting socio-economic conditions played a bigger role.

“Foreign-born Swedes are indeed overrepresented among criminals, but research shows that is the result of three factors: discrimination in the judicial system, conditions in their country of origin and during their emigration, and the conditions under which immigrants live in their new country,” he told AFP.

Swedish historian Carl Marklund noted meanwhile in daily Dagens Nyheter that Sweden is “seen as a positive model for liberal Americans and progressives abroad”, but also “a favourite” target by the alternative right movement.

Related:

Conservative Pundit Sebastian Gorka Brings ‘Global Jihadist Movement’ Theory Into White House

February 21, 2017

Critics say policy addressing terrorism primarily as a religious problem reinforces notion that U.S. is at war with Islam

Image may contain: 1 person

Updated Feb. 21, 2017 12:28 a.m. ET

In the days before President Donald Trump signed the Jan. 27 executive order blocking immigrants and refugees from seven majority-Muslim countries, only a small circle of advisers reviewed the document.

One was Sebastian Gorka, a terrorism researcher and conservative pundit who has gone on to become the administration’s most visible and passionate defender of the ban and increasingly its go-to spokesman on national security issues.

“I’m not going to comment on whose hand was holding the pen,” Mr. Gorka said in an interview, declining to spell out whether he helped draft the immigration order. “I was asked to look at the executive order before it was signed by the president.”

The ban didn’t target Muslims, Mr. Gorka said in its defense, but focused on seven countries that “represent the hotbed of primary jihadi activity today.”

That jihadist activity has been the focus of Mr. Gorka’s work for more than two decades. In blog posts and articles on Breitbart News and elsewhere, in TV appearances and lectures, as well as in a book published last year, he has described a theory of terrorism that he calls the “global jihadist movement,” which he says takes its marching orders from the Quran and from manifestos by militants and terrorist leaders.

Mr. Gorka has now taken that view into the center of power at the White House, where he is part of the new White House Strategic Initiatives Group. He said he reports to Jared Kushner , Mr. Trump’s adviser and son-in-law; Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff; and Steve Bannon, the president’s chief strategist.

The Strategic Initiatives Group has been described by some U.S. officials and experts as a parallel National Security Council, writing executive orders with relatively little input from policy officials and subject matter experts. This organization has posed an impediment to Mr. Trump’s efforts to fill the position of national security adviser , with at least two candidates turning down the job because the president wouldn’t give them control over staffing, according to current and former officials familiar with the matter.

Mr. Gorka is a rhetorical pugilist, and his eagerness to confront the Obama administration’s counterterrorism policies has made him a fixture on conservative talk shows and a frequent lecturer to law enforcement and military groups. He attracted the attention of the Trump campaign, which paid him $8,000 in 2015 for policy consulting, federal records show.

But Mr. Gorka also has turned some leading counterterrorism experts and scholars against him because of what they see as his singular focus on Islam as the motivation for terrorism.

“I don’t see him in the mainstream of counterterrorism scholars, and he would also make himself out not to be in the mainstream,” said Clinton Watts, a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute and a former Army officer and FBI special agent. To Mr. Watts and some other experts, Mr. Gorka has bundled disparate groups working at cross-purposes—including Islamic State, al Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Hezbollah—under his single umbrella of global jihad.

In Mr. Gorka’s worldview, they say, violence is a feature of Islam, not a bug. And his insistence that U.S. policy address terrorism primarily as a religious problem, rather than as the result of overlapping factors such as poverty, social immobility, or lack of education, will reinforce the notion that the U.S. is at war with Islam, an idea that two previous presidential administrations strove to combat, his critics say.

To Mr. Gorka’s supporters, that focus on the religious roots of terrorism is precisely what’s been lacking for nearly a decade.

“What he does focus on, which is 180 degrees from the last administration, is the war of ideas,” said James Carafano , a national security expert at the Heritage Foundation who said he has known Mr. Gorka for about 15 years. “I think the notion that we can fight the ideology without discussing and referencing the religion is kind of ridiculous. It’s like combating communism without discussing Karl Marx,” Mr. Carafano said.

The jihadist movement, Mr. Gorka writes in his book “Defeating Jihad: The Winnable War,” includes terrorist groups with different goals that hail from different religious sects. But they share “a vision of the future world that is exclusive and absolutist,” he writes. “Either the whole planet is under their control or they have lost. There is no middle ground.”

“America and her allies are in a war with people who do what they do to please their God and obtain salvation by serving him as warriors,” Mr. Gorka wrote in a 2015 post for Breitbart, a site popular with the alt-right, a loose agglomeration of far-right groups that embrace tenets of white supremacy or say they reject mainstream conservatism.

A Friend and Former Business Partner Speaks Out Against Donald Trump

February 19, 2017

Real-estate developer Jorge Pérez says a border wall with Mexico would be ‘immoral’

Real-estate developer Jorge Pérez, right, who has known Donald Trump for decades, is speaking out against the president over plans for a border wall between the U.S. and Mexico. This photo was taken at Manhattan’s Trump Tower in 2006.

Real-estate developer Jorge Pérez, right, who has known Donald Trump for decades, is speaking out against the president over plans for a border wall between the U.S. and Mexico. This photo was taken at Manhattan’s Trump Tower in 2006. PHOTO: JOE SCHILDHORN/PATRICK MCMULLEN
.

Feb. 19, 2017 8:00 a.m. ET

MEXICO CITY—A billionaire real-estate developer is breaking with Donald Trump over the president’s immigration policies and stance toward Mexico, the latest high-profile businessman to publicly criticize the administration.

Jorge Pérez, a longtime friend of Mr. Trump, is renown in south Florida for helping to shape Miami’s skyline as head of development company Related Group.

 

In mid-December, Mr. Pérez received an email from Mr. Trump, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, with an attachment showing a photo of a border fence near San Diego. On the photo was a message written in uppercase: “Any interest in building a 2,000 mile wall—30’ high—between U.S.A. and Mexico? Call me.”

“I told him I thought the wall was immoral and it wouldn’t achieve the goals he wanted to achieve,” Mr. Pérez said. “Plus, I have lots of business in Mexico—I’d be finished here.”

Trump administration officials didn’t respond to requests for comment. Mr. Trump in January signed executive orders that stepped up deportations and called for a fast start on building a border wall with Mexico.

Mr. Pérez was speaking while on a trip here to promote several new luxury condo projects under development by Related Group.

Companies seeking growth in Mexico are coming under pressure to distance themselves from Mr. Trump, even as some corporate executives broadly have expressed support for parts of his agenda.

While much of the recent focus has been on companies that have moved manufacturing jobs to Mexico, a backlash against Mr. Trump has put firms that sell into Mexico in a difficult spot.

Executives at companies with significant sales in Mexico are speaking out against Mr. Trump’s border-wall proposal and are using advertisements to publicize their position to avoid alienating a consumer base angered by the U.S. president’s actions.

Amid calls for Mexicans to boycott Starbucks Corp., Howard Schultz, the chief executive of the Seattle firm, released a statement in late January saying he favored “building bridges, not walls with Mexico” and highlighting Starbucks’s 15-year history in Mexico.

In November, an ad for Corona, Mexico’s best-selling beer and a brand owned by Anheuser-Busch InBev NV, featured Mexican movie star Diego Luna. “All of us are angry at the wall that mad man wants to build,” the actor said in the online ad before taking the controls of a wrecking ball that smashed through a large concrete barrier.

Last May, as talk of a border wall spurred debate during the presidential campaign, AeroMexico aired an ad showing footage of existing barriers between the U.S. and Mexico and posed the question, “Borders: Has anything good ever come of them?” Later, the airline carrier, in which Delta Air Line Inc. has a minority stake, drove home the point that there are “no borders in the sky.”

The wall is “just something that’s so offensive to everyone in Mexico,” said Jorge Castañeda, Mexico’s former foreign minister. “If any large company got involved, they would likely be boycotted, and the government could respond by denying them contracts.”

Few entrepreneurs who have disagreed with Mr. Trump have as rich a history with the president as Mr. Pérez. The two have been friends for more than a decade, and Mr. Pérez’s company developed a Trump-branded condo project in Hollywood, Fla., and was involved with Mr. Trump in real-estate deals in Sunny Isles Beach and West Palm Beach, Fla., in Mexico and in South America. Both men have discussed their friendship in interviews and public statements.

“The one person who could teach me something about real estate is Jorge Pérez,” Mr. Trump wrote in the foreword to Mr. Pérez’s 2008 real-estate how-to book, Powerhouse Principles. “He dares to dream, and he makes those dreams real. The result has changed lives, and cities.”

Mr. Pérez, 67, is a trained city planner and former economic-development director for Miami, where a modern-art museum bears his name. Mr. Pérez made his early fortune building affordable housing in the 1980s. Later, he branched into luxury housing.

Mr. Pérez also has long had a taste for politics, hosting fundraisers for Democratic presidential candidates and advising President Bill Clinton on the U.S.’s policy toward Cuba, the country he fled as a child.

Jorge Pérez and Donald Trump in 2007.

Jorge Pérez and Donald Trump in 2007. PHOTO: JIMI CELESTE/PATRICKMCMULLAN

Mr. Pérez said Mr. Trump asked him if he was interested in being secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. When he declined, Mr. Trump asked him to have dinner with Ben Carson,who was later nominated for the position, to discuss urban-policy issues, according to Mr. Pérez.

After losing $1 billion during the financial crisis and real-estate downturn, Mr. Pérez mounted a comeback. He snapped up cheap plots of land in Florida and invested outside the U.S. Forbes magazine estimates his current wealth at $2.8 billion.

His latest foray is Mexico. In early February, Related launched sales for the first phase of a luxury beachfront hotel and villa project in Zihuatanejo, an up-and-coming resort area on Mexico’s Pacific coast, and a hotel-condo tower in Cancún.

Mr. Pérez also has his sights set on two development sites in Mexico City’s chic Reforma and Santa Fe areas and is planning another high-end condo development in the northern Mexican industrial center of Monterrey.

Mr. Perez is aware that his bet on Mexico is counterintuitive, given weakness in the country’s economy. But over the long term, he said, Mexico is a good prospect.

“Some buyers are scared about what’s happening politically,” he said. “But I think clear minds will prevail.”

Write to Robbie Whelan at robbie.whelan@wsj.com

Trump Says “Life is a Campaign” At Melbourne, Florida Event; Attacks Media; Turns Back to Governing — Melania leads with “The Lord’s Prayer”

February 19, 2017

.

Image may contain: 3 people, people standing and outdoor

President Donald Trump and his wife Melania, at a “campaign rally” in Melbourne, FL, February 18, 2017. Credit Susan Walsh for AP

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — One day after delighting in a massive campaign-style rally, President Donald Trump is turning back to the business of governing.

Trump, who is spending the weekend at his private club in Florida, plans to spend Sunday interviewing at least four candidates to be his new national security adviser. The meetings come as he seeks to refocus his struggling administration after weeks of tumult.

Speaking to reporters on Air Force One Saturday, Trump said he had “many, many that want the job.” He also hinted he had a favorite.

“I’ve been thinking about someone for the last three or four days, we’ll see what happens,” Trump said. “I’m meeting with that person. They’re all good, they’re all great people.”

Scheduled to discuss the job with the president at Mar-a-Lago were his acting adviser, retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg; John Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations; Army Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster; and the superintendent of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Lt. Gen. Robert Caslen.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said there could be more meetings for the job, which is unexpectedly open after retired Gen. Michael Flynn’s firing early this week.

Also on Trump’s schedule Sunday: phone conversations with several foreign leaders Sunday and a health care policy meeting.

But for a moment on Saturday, Trump went back into campaign mode with a massive rally before thousands of supporters at an airplane hangar in Melbourne, Florida where he revived campaign promises to build a border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, reduce regulations and create jobs — and continued his attacks on the media.

Trump told the cheering crowd that he wanted “to speak to you without the filter of the fake news.”

Trump promised anew to build a border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, reduce regulations and create jobs. He also pledged to “do something over the next couple of days” to address the immigration order that has been blocked in the courts. Said Trump: “We don’t give up, we never give up.”

Insisting he was the victim of false reporting, Trump said his White House was running “so smoothly” and that he “inherited one big mess.” The president has been trying turn the page after reports of disarray and dysfunction within his administration.

The rally was put on by Trump’s campaign, not the White House. Trump told reporters he was holding a campaign rally because “life is a campaign.”

Trump, who held a rally in the same spot in Florida in September, clearly relished being back in front of his supporters, welcoming the cheers and letting one supporter up on stage to offer praise for the president. He also enjoyed reliving his surprise victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton.

And the president’s supporters welcomed the opportunity to see him. Kenneth Wood, a 45-year-old electrical engineer from Daytona Beach, said this is his fourth or fifth Trump rally.

“His bond with his supporters is really like nothing I’ve ever seen,” said Wood. “They’re fun and Trump’s a hell of a showman.”

Asked about Trump’s recent comments about the media, Wood said: “I can’t say I completely disagree.”

The rally came during Trump’s third straight weekend at his private south Florida club, Mar-a-Lago.

Trump has lurched from crisis to crisis since the inauguration, including the botched rollout of his immigration order, struggles confirming his Cabinet picks and a near-constant stream of reports about strife within his administration.

Flynn’s departure was another blow. Flynn resigned at Trump’s request Monday after revelations that he misled Vice President Mike Pence about discussing sanctions with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. during the transition. Trump said in a news conference Thursday that he was disappointed by how Flynn had treated Pence, but did not believe Flynn had done anything wrong by having the conversations.

Trump’s first choice to replace Flynn, retired Vice Adm. Robert Harward, turned down the offer.

___

Associated Press writer Tamara Lush contributed to this report from Melbourne, Fla.

*******************************

Melania leads with “The Lord’s Prayer”

First Lady Melania Trump kicked off her husband President Donald Trump‘s rally at the Orlando-Melbourne International Airport in Melbourne, Florida, on Saturday, February 18, by reciting the Lord’s Prayer.

While receiving a standing ovation from the crowd, the Slovenia native, 46, smiled and said, “Thank you, let us pray,” as the real estate mogul, 70, clapped and squeezed his wife’s right arm in support.

After leading the crowd in the Christian prayer, Melania, clad in a red dress and showing off noticeably blonder hair, addressed her husband’s supporters and repeated her previous vow to support women and children’s issues across the globe. “It is my honor and great pleasure to stand here before you as the First Lady of the United States,” Melania said, reading off a teleprompter.

“The America we envision is one that works for all Americans and where all Americans can work and succeed,” the former model continued. “A nation committed to a greater civility and unity between people of all sides of the political divide. I will always stay true to myself and be truthful to you, no matter what the opposition is saying about me. I will act in the best interest of all of you. I’m committed to creating and supporting initiatives dear to my heart, which will have impact on women and children all around the world. My husband is creating a country of great safety and prosperity.”

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

The president then took the podium and touched upon a variety of topics, including Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, the “mess” he claims former President Barack Obama left behind and his controversial immigration ban. He also invited a random supporter on stage, briefly scaring the Secret Service.

“When President Trump, during the election, promised all these things that he was gonna do for us, I knew he was gonna do this for us,” the man, later identified as Gene Huber, said before shaking the former Celebrity Apprentice host’s hand. “A star is born,” Trump told the crowd as the man cheered with excitement.

Ahead of Saturday’s rally, Donald told his 25.2 million Twitter followers to expect a “big crowd.” He also tweeted that he has “many meetings this weekend at The Southern White House,” his luxury Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida (the president has flown to Florida to stay at Mar-a-Lago three weekends in a row).

Us Weekly exclusively revealed earlier this week that Melania is struggling with her new role and the scrutiny that comes with it. “This life wasn’t her dream. It was Donald’s,” Trump family friend and stylist Phillip Bloch told Us. “Truthfully, it’s a lot to cope with.”

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/melania-trump-leads-crowd-in-prayer-at-donalds-florida-rally-w467811

No automatic alt text available.

U.S. Proposal Considers Prosecuting Parents Helping Children Entering Country Illegally

February 19, 2017

Draft memo also indicates those trying to cross the border illegally could be returned to Mexico to await legal proceedings

Image may contain: one or more people, mountain, sky and outdoor

US-Mexico border in San Ysidro, California 2008

.

Feb. 18, 2017 9:28 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—Parents and others who help children travel illegally to the U.S. would be subject to deportation or prosecution under new Trump administration policies being completed, according to a memo prepared by the Department of Homeland Security.

The draft memo also indicates people from countries other than Mexico trying to cross the southern U.S. border illegally could be returned to Mexico to await legal proceedings, while others would be held in detention centers.

These proposals—and others which would mark a change from current policies—are outlined in two memos viewed Saturday by The Wall Street Journal. The memos were written to implement two executive orders signed last month by President Donald Trump , with one set of detailed implementation policies for each order. One memo focuses on immigration issues at the U.S. border; the second focuses on enforcement inside the U.S.

The draft memos , both of which have been signed by Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly , are dated Friday.

Asked Saturday about the documents, a White House official said the drafts are currently under review at the White House, and that officials there have raised objections to the current versions with the Department of Homeland Security. He wouldn’t say what the objections were, or which policies in the draft might be altered. “The White House is continuing to work with DHS on what the final policy will be,” he said.

Officials at the Department of Homeland Security declined to comment.

The executive orders and the memos implementing them are meant to discourage illegal immigration, which Mr. Trump and supporters view as a threat to American workers and sovereignty. Opponents say migrants escaping violence and poverty should have a chance to prove they qualify for safe relocation to the U.S. and say it is wrong to hold people who pose no risk in detention centers.

An early draft of one of the memos, reported on Friday by the Associated Press, suggested deploying the National Guard to assist U.S. immigration officials. News of that draft spurred an angry backlash from immigration-rights advocates, but administration officials said it would not be included in the final version. The memos viewed by the Journal don’t include that provision.

Central American child migrants, whose number has surged over the last three years, benefit from a U.S. law that requires placement of unaccompanied minors with relatives living in the U.S. or other protection arrangements pending resolution of the children’s immigration cases. The Department of Homeland Security memo indicates that 60% of these children were placed with their own parents who are living here illegally themselves.

To discourage this, the memo suggests that some of the children, once placed with parents, may no longer be considered unaccompanied minors and may no longer benefit from the law, which requires their cases be heard through immigration courts. Without that special status, the children’s cases could be processed through the courts more quickly.

The proposed policy would also punish parents who pay smugglers to bring their children to the U.S. and may put these children at risk on their journey.

“Regardless of the desires for family reunification, or conditions in other countries, the smuggling or trafficking of alien children is intolerable,” the draft says.

It directs immigration officials to punish those who “directly or indirectly…facilitate the smuggling or trafficking of alien children to the United States” and suggests deportation or possible criminal prosecution.

While the number of illegal crossings has significantly slowed since the 1990s and first half of the 2000s, there has been an uptick of people coming from Central America, many of whom are fleeing violence and poverty.

Most of these people simply turn themselves over to Border Patrol agents, as U.S. law gives these people a chance to apply for asylum and other programs that allow them to stay if they meet certain criteria. A backlog of immigration cases in U.S. courts has meant that, in practice, people can stay in the U.S. for many years before their cases are even heard.

The Trump administration seeks to change that.

The memo directs that those apprehended at the border be detained, or jailed, until their cases are heard, unless they first establishes a “credible fear” of persecution, or meet other limited exceptions.

Leon Fresco , who headed the Justice Department’s Office of Immigration Litigation under President Barack Obama , predicted many of these policies would meet resistance from courts, which are already reviewing smaller changes implemented under the previous administration.

He said he was particularly struck by the change in how children would be handled.

“It is a complete 180 to move from a policy that focused on unaccompanied minors being placed into safe locations while their removal proceedings were pending to placing the custodians of unaccompanied minors into removal proceedings,” he said. Even the smaller Obama version “is already the subject of pending litigation in Los Angeles federal court and is likely going to be viewed with great skepticism by that court.”

Write to Laura Meckler at laura.meckler@wsj.com

.

Wilders calls Moroccans ‘scum’ at Dutch vote launch — championing “ideas of Donald Trump”

February 18, 2017

AFP

© AFP | Dutch far-right politician and leader of the Partij Voor De Vrijheid (PVV or Freedom Party) Geert Wilders is surrounded by security and supporters as he officially launches his parliamentary election campaign in Spijkenisse on February 18, 2017. Firebrand Dutch anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders launched his election campaign with a stinging attack on the country’s Moroccan population, saying he wanted to give The Netherlands back to the “Dutch people”.

SPIJKENISSE (NETHERLANDS) (AFP) – Firebrand Dutch anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders launched his election campaign Saturday with a stinging attack on the country’s Moroccan population, calling them “scum” and saying he wanted to make The Netherlands “ours again”.

Wilders has been leading opinion polls ahead of crunch elections on March 15, seen as a litmus test of European politics after Brexit and Donald Trump’s victory in the United States.

“The Moroccan scum in Holland … once again not all are scum… but there is a lot of Moroccan scum in Holland who make the streets unsafe, mostly young people… and that should change,” Wilders told a scrum of journalists before attempting to take a stroll at a market in Spijkenisse, just south of Rotterdam.

“If you want to regain your country, if you want to make The Netherlands for the people of The Netherlands, your own home again, than you can only vote” for his Freedom Party, Wilders said.

“Please, make The Netherlands ours again,” said the far-right politician, sporting his trademark peroxide hairdo as a small group of supporters chanted “Wilders! Wilders!” in the background.

The MP, who has vowed to ban the Koran and close mosques should he be voted into power, was convicted of discrimination in December over previous comments he made about Moroccans living in The Netherlands.

But his words about “fewer Moroccans” have found some traction among traditional supporters worried about immigration and jihadist attacks across Europe in recent years.

The latest combined opinion polls give Wilders and his PVV party between 24-28 seats in the 150-seat lower house of parliament, two to four seats ahead of Liberal Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s ruling VVD party.

Support for Wilders — who posed for selfies and shook hands with supporters on the town’s medieval square — varied widely and after he left several angry arguments between pro and anti-Wilders supporters broke out.

“We are all voting for Wilders this year,” said one supporter Danny, 59, who declined to give his surname “because that’s dangerous in this country these days.”

“It’s not safe in the streets anymore especially in the big cities,” he told AFP stroking his beard, as he watched Wilders stroll around under heavy police protection.

Wilders’s views have seen him receive death threats including from terror groups such as the Islamic State group and Al-Qaeda. He is guarded at all times and called the “best protected man in The Netherlands”.

“Geert Wilders is polarising people against one another,” said Theo de Boer, 50, as he walked away from the market clutching a bunch of flowers.

“He discriminates and I totally disagree with him. We have a constitution and freedom of religion is one of its most important pillars,” De Boer said.

****************************

BBC News

Dutch politician and leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV) Geert Wilders joins with members of the public to be photographed together in the center of Spijkenisse, The Netherlands, 18 February 2017Mr Wilders’ championing of Donald Trump is having a negative effect on his poll ratings. EPA photo

Dutch populist leader Geert Wilders has launched his election campaign by calling Moroccans “scum” and promising to make the Netherlands “ours again”.

Mr Wilders tops opinion polls ahead of the 15 March parliamentary vote, but has seen his lead fall in recent weeks.

He has vowed to ban Muslim immigration and shut mosques if he wins.

His latest comments come two months after he was convicted in a hate speech trial over his promise to reduce the number of Moroccans in the country.

Mr Wilders addressed his supporters on Saturday amid tight security in his party’s stronghold of Spijkenisse, an ethnically-diverse area near Rotterdam.

“There is a lot of Moroccan scum in Holland who make the streets unsafe,” he said. “If you want to regain your country, make the Netherlands for the people of the Netherlands again, then you can only vote for one party.”

He emphasised that he thought “not all are scum”.

According to the 2011 census, there were more than 167,000 Moroccan-born residents of the Netherlands, making up the third-largest group of non-EU residents, a figure that does not take into account second or third-generation Moroccans.

Why Dutch populist Geert Wilders is scenting victory

A few hundred supporters of Mr Wilders turned up in Spikenisse on Saturday morning, as did a small group of demonstrators.

“The things that he’s going to do make very, very scared,” one of the demonstrators, Emma Smeets, told Associated Press.

“A lot of people have gotten used to it and they don’t protest any more, and I think it’s important that you show your voice, that you don’t agree with the things that are happening, and also just to get into contact with the people that are voting for him.”

Firebrand anti-islam lawmaker Geert Wilders, center, talks to the media during an election campaign stop in Spijkenisse, near Rotterdam, Netherlands, Saturday Feb. 18, 2017Image copyrightAP

Mr Wilders’ Freedom Party holds 12 of the 150 seats in the lower house of Parliament. But his nearest rival, right-wing Prime Minister Mark Rutte, has narrowed the lead with just a month until the election is held.

The BBC’s Anna Holligan, in The Hague, said Mr Wilders’ championing of US President Donald Trump’s policies appears to be backfiring, as many Dutch voters believe Mr Trump is bad for global stability.

Even if Mr Wilders wins, he may struggle to put together a coalition, as leading parties have said they would not work with him.

Mr Wilders’ three-week trial last year was triggered when police received 6,400 complaints about remarks he had made during a municipal election campaign in The Hague.

At a rally, he asked supporters whether they wanted “fewer or more Moroccans in your city and in the Netherlands”.

When the crowd shouted back “Fewer! Fewer!” a smiling Mr Wilders responded: “We’re going to take care of that.”

At the trial, prosecutors took testimony from Dutch-Moroccans who said his comments made them feel like “third-rate citizens”. He was convicted of insulting a group and inciting discrimination.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39016179

Trump weighs mobilizing National Guard for immigration roundups (White House Denied This Report — DHS confirms it is 100% false)

February 17, 2017

Trump weighs mobilizing Nat Guard for immigration roundups

The Trump administration is considering a proposal to mobilize as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants, including millions living nowhere near the Mexico border, according to a draft memo obtained by The Associated Press.

The 11-page document calls for the unprecedented militarization of immigration enforcement as far north as Portland, Oregon, and as far east as New Orleans, Louisiana.

Four states that border on Mexico are included in the proposal — California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas — but it also encompasses seven states contiguous to those four — Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the AP report was “100 percent not sure” and “irresponsible.” ”There is no effort at all to utilize the National Guard to round up unauthorized immigrants,” he said.

Governors in the 11 states would have a choice whether to have their guard troops participate, according to the memo, written by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general.

While National Guard personnel have been used to assist with immigration-related missions on the U.S.-Mexico border before, they have never been used as broadly or as far north.

The memo is addressed to the then-acting heads of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It would serve as guidance to implement the wide-ranging executive order on immigration and border security that President Donald Trump signed Jan. 25. Such memos are routinely issued to supplement executive orders.

Also dated Jan. 25, the draft memo says participating troops would be authorized “to perform the functions of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension and detention of aliens in the United States.” It describes how the troops would be activated under a revived state-federal partnership program, and states that personnel would be authorized to conduct searches and identify and arrest any unauthorized immigrants.

Requests to the White House and the Department of Homeland Security for comment and a status report on the proposal were not answered.

The draft document has circulated among DHS staff over the last two weeks. As recently as Friday, staffers in several different offices reported discussions were underway.

If implemented, the impact could be significant. Nearly one-half of the 11.1 million people residing in the U.S. without authorization live in the 11 states, according to Pew Research Center estimates based on 2014 Census data.

Use of National Guard troops would greatly increase the number of immigrants targeted in one of Trump’s executive orders last month, which expanded the definition of who could be considered a criminal and therefore a potential target for deportation. That order also allows immigration agents to prioritize removing anyone who has “committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.”

Under current rules, even if the proposal is implemented, there would not be immediate mass deportations. Those with existing deportation orders could be sent back to their countries of origin without additional court proceedings. But deportation orders generally would be needed for most other unauthorized immigrants.

The troops would not be nationalized, remaining under state control.

Spokespeople for the governors of Arizona, Utah, Nevada, California, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oregon and New Mexico said they were unaware of the proposal, and either declined to comment or said it was premature to discuss whether they would participate. The other three states did not immediately respond to the AP.

The proposal would extend the federal-local partnership program that President Barack Obama’s administration began scaling back in 2012 to address complaints that it promoted racial profiling.

The 287(g) program, which Trump included in his immigration executive order, gives local police, sheriff’s deputies and state troopers the authority to assist in the detection of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally as a regular part of their law enforcement duties on the streets and in jails.

The draft memo also mentions other items included in Trump’s executive order, including the hiring of an additional 5,000 border agents, which needs financing from Congress, and his campaign promise to build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

The signed order contained no mention of the possible use of state National Guard troops.

According to the draft memo, the militarization effort would be proactive, specifically empowering Guard troops to solely carry out immigration enforcement, not as an add-on the way local law enforcement is used in the program.

Allowing Guard troops to operate inside non-border states also would go far beyond past deployments.

In addition to responding to natural or man-made disasters or for military protection of the population or critical infrastructure, state Guard forces have been used to assist with immigration-related tasks on the U.S.-Mexico border, including the construction of fences.

In the mid-2000s, President George W. Bush twice deployed Guard troops on the border to focus on non-law enforcement duties to help augment the Border Patrol as it bolstered its ranks. And in 2010, then-Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced a border security plan that included Guard reconnaissance, aerial patrolling and military exercises.

In July 2014, then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry ordered 1,000 National Guard troops to the border when the surge of migrant children fleeing violence in Central America overwhelmed U.S. officials responsible for their care. The Guard troops’ stated role on the border at the time was to provide extra sets of eyes but not make arrests.

Bush initiated the federal 287(g) program — named for a section of a 1996 immigration law — to allow specially trained local law enforcement officials to participate in immigration enforcement on the streets and check whether people held in local jails were in the country illegally. ICE trained and certified roughly 1,600 officers to carry out those checks from 2006 to 2015.

The memo describes the program as a “highly successful force multiplier” that identified more than 402,000 “removable aliens.”

But federal watchdogs were critical of how DHS ran the program, saying it was poorly supervised and provided insufficient training to officers, including on civil rights law. Obama phased out all the arrest power agreements in 2013 to instead focus on deporting recent border crossers and immigrants in the country illegally who posed a safety or national security threat.

Trump’s immigration strategy emerges as detentions at the nation’s southern border are down significantly from levels seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Last year, the arrest tally was the fifth-lowest since 1972. Deportations of people living in the U.S. illegally also increased under the Obama administration, though Republicans criticized Obama for setting prosecution guidelines that spared some groups from the threat of deportation, including those brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

Last week, ICE officers arrested more than 680 people around the country in what Kelly said were routine, targeted operations; advocates called the actions stepped-up enforcement under Trump.

___

The AP National Investigative Team can be reached at investigate@ap.org

Follow Garance Burke on Twitter at @garanceburke

******************************************

– The Trump administration is considering a proposal to mobilize as many as 100,000 National Guard troops to round up unauthorized immigrants, including millions living nowhere near the Mexico border, according to a draft memo obtained by The Associated Press.

The 11-page document calls for the unprecedented militarization of immigration enforcement as far north as Portland, Oregon, and as far east as New Orleans, Louisiana.

Four states that border on Mexico are included in the proposal — California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas — but it also encompasses seven states contiguous to those four —  Oregon, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said the AP report was “100 percent not sure” and “irresponsible.” “There is no effort at all to utilize the National Guard to round up unauthorized immigrants,” he said.

Governors in the 11 states would have a choice whether to have their guard troops participate, according to the memo, written by U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general.

While National Guard personnel have been used to assist with immigration-related missions on the U.S.-Mexico border before, they have never been used as broadly or as far north.

The memo is addressed to the then-acting heads of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It would serve as guidance to implement the wide-ranging executive order on immigration and border security that President Donald Trump signed Jan. 25. Such memos are routinely issued to supplement executive orders.

Also dated Jan. 25, the draft memo says participating troops would be authorized “to perform the functions of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension and detention of aliens in the United States.” It describes how the troops would be activated under a revived state-federal partnership program, and states that personnel would be authorized to conduct searches and identify and arrest any unauthorized immigrants.

Requests to the White House and the Department of Homeland Security for comment and a status report on the proposal were not answered.

The draft document has circulated among DHS staff over the last two weeks. As recently as Friday, staffers in several different offices reported discussions were underway.

If implemented, the impact could be significant. Nearly one-half of the 11.1 million people residing in the U.S. without authorization live in the 11 states, according to Pew Research Center estimates based on 2014 Census data.

Use of National Guard troops would greatly increase the number of immigrants targeted in one of Trump’s executive orders last month, which expanded the definition of who could be considered a criminal and therefore a potential target for deportation. That order also allows immigration agents to prioritize removing anyone who has “committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense.”

Under current rules, even if the proposal is implemented, there would not be immediate mass deportations. Those with existing deportation orders could be sent back to their countries of origin without additional court proceedings. But deportation orders generally would be needed for most other unauthorized immigrants.

The troops would not be nationalized, remaining under state control.

Spokespeople for the governors of Arizona, Utah, Nevada, California, Colorado, Oklahoma, Oregon and New Mexico said they were unaware of the proposal, and either declined to comment or said it was premature to discuss whether they would participate. The other three states did not immediately respond to the AP.

The proposal would extend the federal-local partnership program that President Barack Obama’s administration began scaling back in 2012 to address complaints that it promoted racial profiling.

The 287(g) program, which Trump included in his immigration executive order, gives local police, sheriff’s deputies and state troopers the authority to assist in the detection of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally as a regular part of their law enforcement duties on the streets and in jails.

The draft memo also mentions other items included in Trump’s executive order, including the hiring of an additional 5,000 border agents, which needs financing from Congress, and his campaign promise to build a wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

The signed order contained no mention of the possible use of state National Guard troops.

According to the draft memo, the militarization effort would be proactive, specifically empowering Guard troops to solely carry out immigration enforcement, not as an add-on the way local law enforcement is used in the program.

Allowing Guard troops to operate inside non-border states also would go far beyond past deployments.

In addition to responding to natural or man-made disasters or for military protection of the population or critical infrastructure, state Guard forces have been used to assist with immigration-related tasks on the U.S.-Mexico border, including the construction of fences.

In the mid-2000s, President George W. Bush twice deployed Guard troops on the border to focus on non-law enforcement duties to help augment the Border Patrol as it bolstered its ranks. And in 2010, then-Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced a border security plan that included Guard reconnaissance, aerial patrolling and military exercises.

In July 2014, then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry ordered 1,000 National Guard troops to the border when the surge of migrant children fleeing violence in Central America overwhelmed U.S. officials responsible for their care. The Guard troops’ stated role on the border at the time was to provide extra sets of eyes but not make arrests.

Bush initiated the federal 287(g) program — named for a section of a 1996 immigration law — to allow specially trained local law enforcement officials to participate in immigration enforcement on the streets and check whether people held in local jails were in the country illegally. ICE trained and certified roughly 1,600 officers to carry out those checks from 2006 to 2015.

The memo describes the program as a “highly successful force multiplier” that identified more than 402,000 “removable aliens.”

But federal watchdogs were critical of how DHS ran the program, saying it was poorly supervised and provided insufficient training to officers, including on civil rights law. Obama phased out all the arrest power agreements in 2013 to instead focus on deporting recent border crossers and immigrants in the country illegally who posed a safety or national security threat.

Trump’s immigration strategy emerges as detentions at the nation’s southern border are down significantly from levels seen in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Last year, the arrest tally was the fifth-lowest since 1972. Deportations of people living in the U.S. illegally also increased under the Obama administration, though Republicans criticized Obama for setting prosecution guidelines that spared some groups from the threat of deportation, including those brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

Last week, ICE officers arrested more than 680 people around the country in what Kelly said were routine, targeted operations; advocates called the actions stepped-up enforcement under Trump.

Trump Administration Plans New Immigration Order Next Week, Ends Legal Push in Appeals Court

February 17, 2017

‘The new order is going to be very much tailored to what I consider to be a very bad decision,’ president says

Image may contain: one or more people, people standing and suit

.

Updated Feb. 16, 2017 7:32 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—The Justice Department told an appeals court Thursday that President Donald Trump would soon rescind and replace his executive order on visas and refugees, adding the court had no further reason to consider the current version.

 

The move came as Mr. Trump said he would issue a new order next week. The developments provided the most definitive indications yet that the Trump administration would undertake a considerable rewrite of its Jan. 27 order in light of adverse court rulings, instead of pressing ahead with its current legal defense and attempting small changes at the margins.

The White House was in effect acknowledging that a reset is its best option to get a ban in place quickly. The administration hasn’t signaled how it will revise the order, but the new version is certain to trigger another series of lawsuits as challengers test whether it is any more acceptable to the courts than the previous one.

The original order suspended entry to the U.S. for visitors from seven predominantly Muslim countries—Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen—for at least 90 days, froze the entire U.S. refugee program for four months and indefinitely banned refugees from Syria. The president said the order was needed to keep terrorists from entering the U.S.

Mr. Trump has also reduced the total number of refugees the U.S. will admit this year to 55,000—down from 110,000 set by the previous administration—and the State Department is warning its embassies that the U.S. is already approaching the revised cap. In a directive sent this week, embassies were told to slow resettlement of refugees for the next few weeks and then to suspend it after March 3.

The president has unilateral authority to set the annual refugee cap, and that part of his executive order isn’t affected by legal action.

Mr. Trump’s executive executive order caused confusion among travelers and initial chaos at airports, prompting more than 20 lawsuits. Challengers argue that the order violated individual rights and wasn’t justified by a new national-security threat.

One judge in Boston sided with the president. Multiple other courts have ruled against Mr. Trump and placed the executive order on hold, notably the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit , based in San Francisco. Mr. Trump hasn’t hesitated to attack the judiciary for the rulings, and he did so again Thursday in a press conference.

“The court system has not made it easy for us,” he said. “Our administration is working night and day to keep you safe.”

The Ninth Circuit last week found the order likely violated constitutional guarantees of due process, while a federal judge in Virginia this week said it likely violated constitutional protections against religious discrimination.

Mr. Trump said in his press conference that the new order could achieve many of the same goals as the initial measure while taking the Ninth Circuit’s objections into account. “The new order is going to be very much tailored to what I consider to be a very bad decision,” he said.

The administration gave no details of the new order, but objections specified by the courts suggest areas Mr. Trump could rewrite. The White House attempted to clarify the initial order saying it didn’t apply to legal permanent residents of the U.S., for example, but some courts have declined to credit that clarification; it’s possible Mr. Trump could resolve that issue more formally.

The Ninth Circuit judges said the executive order didn’t provide notice or a hearing prior to restricting individuals’ ability to travel, raising due process questions. The court went so far as to suggest the Trump administration could address those concerns if it rewrote the order.

It is less clear whether Mr. Trump’s new order will attempt to address complaints that the order discriminates against Muslims. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia made that the central focus of her ruling against the president this week, but the White House strongly denies any discrimination.

At his press conference, Mr. Trump addressed concerns that the order had been hasty by saying he had wanted to delay it for a month, in which case “everything would have been perfect.” But Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly warned him that “bad people” would enter in the interim, he said.

The Justice Department’s court filing Thursday said officially for the first time that the president would rescind his initial order. Following the Ninth Circuit ruling last week, by a three-judge panel, an unnamed judge on the court asked colleagues to vote on whether to reconsider the case before a larger group of judges.

The Justice Department said Thursday that wasn’t necessary in light of plans for a new order. “Rather than continuing this litigation, the president intends in the near future to rescind the order and replace it with a new, substantially revised executive order to eliminate what the panel erroneously thought were constitutional concerns,” the department wrote.

The Justice Department also urged the Ninth Circuit to toss out last week’s opinion once the president issues his new order; the Trump administration would like that precedent wiped out, while challengers would like it to remain on the books.

All the litigation so far on the order has been preliminary, focusing on whether it should be suspended while legal challenges continue to its underlying legality. Still, in suspending the order, judges have found the challengers have a likelihood of ultimately succeeding on the merits.

The immigration issue continued to swirl around the White House in other ways. Mr. Trump on Thursday talked up his administration’s work to deport more people who are in the U.S. illegally and said he had ordered a “crackdown” on so-called sanctuary cities that don’t turn over illegal immigrants sought by federal officers.

“We have begun a nationwide effort to remove criminal aliens, gang members, drug dealers and others who pose a threat to public safety,” Mr. Trump said.

As he spoke, the acting director of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, Thomas Homan , was on Capitol Hill to provide a closed-door briefing to lawmakers on the administration’s approach, particularly a five-day enforcement “surge” in at least six states last week.

Agitated Democrats demanded details of the new Trump policy, and afterward, lawmakers of both parties said that Mr. Homan made clear that ICE officers seek to target criminal offenders but will arrest others here illegally if they encounter them.

Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D., N.M.) said she asked who is at risk of deportation under the current rules and was told, “Everyone who is here in this country without legal status.”

“They said that we can and should expect many more arrests and removals this year,” said Rep. Linda Sanchez (D., Calif.), another participant.

The briefing included Republican and Democratic congressional leaders, but most members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus were excluded. Mr. Homan had originally planned to meet with caucus members at their request, but that meeting was canceled and the bipartisan session held in its place.

A spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said the Trump administration asked that the session be limited to members of Congress with “jurisdictional interests” in immigration enforcement, such as leaders of relevant committees and subcommittees. Members of the Hispanic caucus tried to enter the room but were removed.

Aruna Viswanatha and Maria Abi-Habib contributed to this article.

Write to Brent Kendall at brent.kendall@wsj.com and Laura Meckler at laura.meckler@wsj.com

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-plans-new-immigration-order-next-week-ends-legal-push-in-appeals-court-1487275058