web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > News Media (Page 299)

Federal judge blocks Trump administration ‘public charge’ rule targeting poor immigrants

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Federal judge blocks Trump administration 'public charge' rule targeting poor immigrants

The public charge rule will make it more difficult for immigrants to obtain legal residency if they are likely to become dependent on the government. USA TODAY

A federal judge blocked Friday a Trump administration rule that was scheduled to take effect next week that would have denied permanent legal residence to low-income immigrants living in the United States.

The nationwide injunction from District Judge George Daniels in New York City halts the administration’s attempt to redefine what constitutes a “public charge,” or immigrants who are, or who might become, overly dependent on government assistance.

The rule would have affected roughly half a million legal immigrants in the U.S. who apply each year to become legal permanent residents, also known as a green card holder. It would have been carried out by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that decides on immigration cases within the U.S.

Trump administration officials described the revised rule as a necessary mechanism to weed out immigrants who would take advantage of U.S. taxpayers by living off the government dime. But immigration activists bashed the rule as an elitist measure that would upend the nation’s history of serving as a refuge for the world’s destitute by only allowing wealthy immigrants to get a green card.

Nearly a dozen lawsuits were filed by state attorneys general and immigration advocacy groups challenging the new rule. New York State Attorney General Letitica James, who led the multi-party lawsuit that led to Daniels’ ruling, praised the judge’s decision.

“This rule would have had devastating impacts on New Yorkers and our nation, and today’s decision is a critical step in our efforts to uphold the rule of law,” she wrote on Facebook.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to request for comment, but it’s expected that it will appeal Daniels’ ruling. 

Friday’s ruling does not affect a similar rule that went into effect last year targeting foreigners who apply for their green cards while living abroad. That rule has been used by the State Department to screen would-be immigrants on their ability to sustain themselves economically. 

For Wendy Leguizamo, 22, a U.S.-born citizen from Chicago, the State Department rule has simply meant she can’t be with her husband.

Leguizamo married her 24-year-old husband in Mexico in 2017 and has been trying to get him into the U.S. ever since. Despite filing repeated applications, U.S. consular officials in Mexico continue turning down her husband based on the revised public charge rule from last year. That’s left Leguizamo raising their 11-month-old son on her own, seeing her husband only on occasional trips to Mexico or through nightly video chats on her phone.

“He’s missing out on everything,” she said this week during a phone interview after finishing her shift at a clothing warehouse. “It’s so stressful. I’m doing my best. And he’s just working every day, trying to get his mind off of this because it’s been over two years already.”

State public charge rulesfor immigrants have existed going back to the colonial years. The first federal restriction was put in place nearly 140 years ago, when Congress barred any “convict, lunatic, idiot or any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.” Ever since, different administrations have defined “public charge” very differently. 

The Trump administration is now trying to institute the most restrictive definition to date, creating new barriers to the nearly 1 million green card applications filed each year, according to an analysis by the non-profit Migration Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based group that analyzes immigration issues.

The administration had provided little guidance on how the new rules and restrictions were going to be implemented. The result, according to Julia Gelatt of the Migration Policy Institute, had been an international state of confusion hovering over the most important decision in many immigrants’ lives.

“We want there to be some consistency and predictability about how our laws and policies are applied,” said Gelatt, a senior policy analyst at the institute.

Trump also signed a proclamation on Oct. 4 that requires all incoming immigrants to prove they will have health insurance within 30 days of entering the country, or have the financial means to cover their own health care costs.

“Healthcare providers and taxpayers bear substantial costs in paying for medical expenses incurred by people who lack health insurance or the ability to pay for their healthcare,” Trump wrote in the proclamation. “Immigrants who enter this country should not further saddle our healthcare system, and subsequently American taxpayers, with higher costs.”

Health insurance needed: Trump order requires legal immigrants get health care coverage

How it will work: How Trump administration plans to screen green card applicants

The current public charge rule was signed into law in the 1990s by President Bill Clinton. It defines a public charge as someone who is “primarily dependent” on government assistance. That means receiving cash assistance that makes up more than half of their income, including Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), state and local cash assistance and long-term medical care at government expense.

The proposed regulations would also consider “non-cash” benefits, such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (known as food stamps), Section 8 housing and rental assistance, Medicare Part D prescription drug benefits, and Medicaid in non-emergency situations.

They would have grant broad discretion to immigration officials to determine whether someone would become a public charge in the future by weighing a wide variety of “negative factors,” including the applicants’ age (specifically if an applicant is under 18 or over 61), health, education, work skills, income and family status. Earning less than 125% of the federal poverty level — $25,750 a year for a family of four — would also have counted as a strike against them if rule had gone into ef. 

Under Democratic President Bill Clinton, immigrants were routinely denied green cards over their potential to take public assistance. In 2000, his final year in office, U.S. consular officials turned down 46,450 application for green cards on public charge grounds, according to State Department data.

Those denial plummeted during the tenure of Republican President George W. Bush, who opposed attempts to limit legal immigration. By 2008, his final year in office, the number had fallen to 6,852. That downward trend continued under Democratic President Barack Obama, falling to 1,076 during his final year in office.

Under the Trump administration, from Oct. 1, 2018, through July 29, the State Department denied 12,179 applications based on the public charge rule, according to data obtained by Politico.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Defenders of the president say such denials are long overdue.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C.- based group that advocates for lower levels of legal and illegal immigration, bristled at the decision by recent administrations — Republican and Democrat — to limit public charge denials. He said that ignores the expansion of the welfare state that legalimmigrants have taken advantage of.Undocumented immigrants do not qualify for public assistance programs, and neither do many immigrants on temporary visas.

“All this rule does is reflect reality a little more accurately, so that if you’re using food stamps or public housing or Medicaid, that would be factored into the decision about whether you are capable of paying your own bills,” Krikorian said. 

Immigration attorneys and activists see something different at play. They say the Trump administration has been hellbent on reducing immigration — both legal and illegal — and the rule change was just another way to do that.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli fanned those flames when he reworked Emma Lazarus’ poem on the Statute of Liberty during a recent interview. 

“Give me your tired and your poor who can stand on their own two feet and who will not become a public charge,” Cuccinelli told NPR in August.

Juliana Macedo do Nascimento of United We Dream, a coalition of young immigrants who advocate for protections from deportation, said such comments clearly show the Trump administration wants to block immigrants of color while opening the door to wealthier, whiter immigrants.

“That’s what this rule is about — it’s about keeping what they consider to be the wrong kinds of immigrants out,” she said.

Leguizamo, the Chicago mother hoping to reunite with her husband, didn’t want to discuss the politics behind the new public charge rule. She says she simply wants to figure out how to get her husband to the U.S.

Leguizamo, who works full time and makes $28,000 a year, at first listed herself and her parents as her husband’s sponsors, but the State Department denied the application. Leguizamo uses Medicaid and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) for her son, two programs that are not supposed to count as negative factors against immigrants or their sponsors. 

Jocelyn Jaramillo, an immigration specialist at Catholic Charities in Chicago who has been helping Leguizamo, says the decision likely came down to Leguizamo’s income, which dropped significantly after she spent six months on maternity leave.

On their second try, Leguizamo listed a cousin who has a higher annual income as the sponsor, but that application was also denied. A third attempt listing a family friend was turned down. A fourth attempt listing Leguizamo’s aunt and uncle was turned down.

Now, on their fifth attempt, Leguizamo listed her parents again, but this time they added the three properties that her parents own onto the application as a form of collateral to show they can sell those homes if needed to sustain the family. 

She hopes the fifth time will be the charm. But after more than two years of repeated denials, she’s not holding out hope.

She said the full weight of the stress hit her the hardest last week when she returned from a two-week visit to Mexico to see her husband. Simply getting their son, Mario Fernando, on the plane reminded her of what life will be like raising an energetic toddler without his father. 

“I was stressing out, I didn’t know how I was going to be able to do it on the airplane,” she said. “My husband, he’s a very helpful person. He wants to do everything, to provide for his family. But he can’t.”

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/10/11/judge-blocks-trump-administration-rule-targeting-poor-immigrants-us/2019751001/

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

White House accidentally sends Ukraine talking points to Democrats again

Westlake Legal Group lzjHLgCG-rxapsd0ratoVjiSk0nfu-l7-BErCUZYMuA White House accidentally sends Ukraine talking points to Democrats again r/politics

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don’t attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Appeals court blocks Ohio ban on Down syndrome abortions

A divided federal appeals court panel ruled Friday that Ohio cannot enforce a 2017 law banning abortions when medical tests show the baby has Down syndrome.

The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati upheld a preliminary injunction saying that the law was invalid because it had the purpose and effect of preventing some women from obtaining pre-viability abortions, which violates Supreme Court precedents.

Signed into law by then-Gov. John Kasich in 2017, the measure imposed criminal penalties on doctors who perform abortions after learning of a fetal diagnosis of Down syndrome.

In February 2018, the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio filed suit to block the law from taking effect. One month later, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy S. Black halted the law, saying it violated a woman’s right to privacy.

Westlake Legal Group 9c5ebac6-protest Appeals court blocks Ohio ban on Down syndrome abortions Morgan Phillips fox-news/us/us-regions/midwest/ohio fox-news/politics/judiciary/federal-courts fox-news/politics/judiciary/appeals fox-news/politics/judiciary/abortion fox news fnc/politics fnc article 3eee2d46-9d2b-5077-b15c-44e1b7eb8f05

Protesters with shirts saying “Stop the Bans” in the Ohio Senate chamber after legislators passed a bill in 2017 banning abortions based on a Down syndrome diagnosis. (AP)

TRUMP TO NAME STATE DEPT. OFFICIAL JOHN SULLIVAN AS NEXT AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA

On Friday the panel of three judges upheld Black’s ruling in a 2-1 decision. A spokesman for Republican Attorney General Dave Yost said the state will ask the full 6th Circuit to review the case, according to Reuters. A large majority of the 6th Circuit court’s members were appointed by Republican presidents, but Friday’s majority consisted of Democratic appointees.

“The state’s interest in preventing discrimination does not become compelling until viability,” wrote Circuit Judge Bernice Bouie Donald, appointed by the Obama administration.

Circuit Judge Alice Moore Batchelder, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, dissented.

“Ohio concluded that permitting physicians to become witting accomplices to the deliberate targeting of Down syndrome babies would undermine the principle that the Down syndrome population is equal in value and dignity to the rest of Ohio’s population,” Batchelder wrote, according to Cincinnati.com.

BETO THREATENS TAX-EXEMPT STATUS OF CHURCHES IF THEY DON’T SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE

Batchelder, quoting a May opinion from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, added that states have a “compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.”

Under the law, doctors could have received up to 18 months in prison for performing abortions with the knowledge that the mother had based her decision in part on a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The Down syndrome bill was the latest Ohio abortion law to receive a setback from the courts. In July, a federal judge blocked Ohio from enforcing a fetal “heartbeat” law banning abortions after a heartbeat was detected, or six weeks at the earliest.

A ban on abortions by dilation and evacuation, a surgical procedure most commonly used in second-trimester abortions, has also been challenged in court.

Westlake Legal Group 9c5ebac6-protest Appeals court blocks Ohio ban on Down syndrome abortions Morgan Phillips fox-news/us/us-regions/midwest/ohio fox-news/politics/judiciary/federal-courts fox-news/politics/judiciary/appeals fox-news/politics/judiciary/abortion fox news fnc/politics fnc article 3eee2d46-9d2b-5077-b15c-44e1b7eb8f05   Westlake Legal Group 9c5ebac6-protest Appeals court blocks Ohio ban on Down syndrome abortions Morgan Phillips fox-news/us/us-regions/midwest/ohio fox-news/politics/judiciary/federal-courts fox-news/politics/judiciary/appeals fox-news/politics/judiciary/abortion fox news fnc/politics fnc article 3eee2d46-9d2b-5077-b15c-44e1b7eb8f05

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Democrats’ Bolder Stand on Labor Reflects Nation’s Ideological Shift

Westlake Legal Group 11labor1-facebookJumbo Democrats’ Bolder Stand on Labor Reflects Nation’s Ideological Shift United States Economy Sanders, Bernard Presidential Election of 2020 Organized Labor Labor and Jobs Democratic Party Collective Bargaining

When Bernie Sanders ran for president in 2016, his campaign was strikingly pro-labor. He proposed a $15-an-hour minimum wage, which was much further than most mainstream Democrats, including Hillary Clinton, were willing to go. He denounced a trans-Pacific trade deal that was anathema to many unions. He endorsed an organizing method, known as card check, that would allow workers to unionize without holding a secret-ballot election.

Yet by the standards of the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination, the Bernie Sanders of four years ago was something of a piker. At least half the candidates who will appear in next week’s presidential debate — including Mr. Sanders — have labor platforms that are more ambitious than his 2016 version.

Several candidates have pledged to ban noncompete agreements, which hold down wages for workers, and mandatory-arbitration clauses, which prohibit lawsuits against employers. They would effectively require many companies to treat independent contractors as employees, making the workers eligible for the minimum wage and unemployment insurance. They would enact a number of measures that would help workers unionize and strike, like allowing them to lead boycotts of an employer’s customers, which is currently illegal.

“For the first time we see really robust agendas in labor and employment policy that are about unions and also about really high labor standards,” said Lawrence Mishel, the former president of the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank. “Politicians have been willing to say some of this stuff, but they haven’t been public about it.”

Perhaps the most ambitious proposal is an idea known as sectoral bargaining, in which workers would bargain with employers on an industrywide basis rather than employer by employer. Sectoral bargaining, which is common in Europe, would make it possible to increase wages and benefits for millions of workers in relatively short order, even for those who aren’t union members. It would also give employers an incentive to create better-paying jobs because doing so would no longer bestow a major cost advantage on competitors.

Under a sectoral bargaining system, unions or worker groups would have to show support from a certain share of workers in order to begin negotiating on their behalf — for example, by getting 15 or 20 percent of workers in an industry to sign cards. At that point, a federal agency like the Labor Department would convene the bargaining, with employer groups on one side and the worker groups on the other. The agency would review any resulting agreement, which, once approved, would become binding on all employers in the industry.

In recent months, Mr. Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, along with Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker and Beto O’Rourke, have released labor plans that would either enact sectoral bargaining or take significant strides in that direction by allowing workers to negotiate with multiple employers at once.

That such a range of Democratic candidates have signed on to far-reaching labor proposals reflects the ways that lackluster wage growth, economic insecurity and widening inequality are upending politics and shattering a longstanding policy consensus.

In the early stages of the economic recovery a decade ago, most workers were primarily concerned with avoiding unemployment, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster who has conducted research on voters’ economic concerns. But as the expansion has plodded on, the focus has shifted from having any job to having a good job, which workers see as rare.

“You’re really trying to do something about what jobs pay,” Ms. Lake said.

With people increasingly open to more radical tools for accomplishing this, joining a union can seem downright middle of the road. According to recent polling by Pew Research Center, 42 percent of Americans view socialism favorably, up from 29 percent in 2010. During roughly that same time, support for unions has climbed significantly, from less than half to about two-thirds of Americans.

The increased openness to unions and collective bargaining has dovetailed with a palpable shift in expert opinion. For decades, economists tended to play down the importance of unions, attributing much of the increase in income inequality to a growing demand for skilled workers that resulted from automation and the spread of information technology. Some otherwise liberal economists were skeptical or even hostile to unions, seeing them as cartels that drove up wages for their members at the cost of reducing employment.

“I learned this in graduate school in macro — anti-union stuff from people who were highly inclined toward government redistribution,” said the economist and columnist Noah Smith, who earned his Ph.D. at the University of Michigan and has written about economists’ suspicion of unions. “There was this definite anti-union bias among liberals in the economics profession.”

But in recent years, many economists have begun to reconsider those views. Partly this reflects a broader ideological shift in the country away from the market-friendly policy approach of the 1980s and ’90s, which has lost credibility as inequality has widened. “We as social scientists live in a society where clearly the general social and political environment affects the questions we ask,” said Arindrajit Dube, a labor economist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

And partly this reflects a proliferation of research, which some of the campaigns have specifically cited, showing that employers have considerable power to hold down wages below the level the market would set.

Whatever the case, there appears to be a growing consensus among center-left economists that unions are a critical check on the tendency of capital to vacuum up the gains from economic growth. A recent paper by economists at Princeton and Columbia showed that unions raised wages for low-skilled workers in the decades in which inequality was narrowing and concluded that unions have “had a significant, equalizing effect on the income distribution.” A recent paper by the centrist Hamilton Project concluded that “unions lift wages, reduce inequality, and shape how work is organized.”

And then there is the growing consensus among union experts, including labor leaders, that improving workers’ standards of living after decades of declining unionization requires a much more ambitious approach than the movement previously embraced.

Before the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, the politically powerful Service Employees International Union told candidates that they would have to present a detailed health care proposal to be considered for its endorsement. This year, the union asked candidates seeking its support to produce specific plans to help underpaid workers act collectively and urged them to incorporate industrywide bargaining as a key pillar.

Other union experts have helped to deliver this message behind the scenes. Larry Cohen, a former president of the Communications Workers of America and a top volunteer adviser to Mr. Sanders in 2016 and now, said that he has been touting the importance of sectoral bargaining to Mr. Sanders in recent years. “The last time I talked to him about this was right before he decided to run,” said Mr. Cohen, who looked closely at sectoral bargaining systems in Norway and Argentina while traveling to those countries after the last election. “He was genuinely excited by it.”

Mr. Cohen has also been involved in an effort by two faculty members at Harvard Law School, known as the Clean Slate for Worker Power project, to convene dozens of labor experts, activists and organizers to reimagine labor law from the ground up. The group won’t publish its recommendations until January, but in the meantime it has worked to disseminate ideas like sectoral bargaining across the campaigns. Sharon Block and Benjamin Sachs, the Harvard faculty members involved, have weighed in with several campaigns that have embraced this approach, according to aides to Ms. Warren, Mr. Buttigieg, Mr. O’Rourke and Mr. Booker.

Ms. Block, a former Obama administration official and congressional staff member who is a veteran of legislative efforts to make unionizing and collective bargaining easier, said experience had taught her that advancing labor interests through provisions like card check doesn’t work: Such measures tend to be too small to matter substantively, and they fail to generate political excitement among those who would benefit.

“The folks who don’t want this to happen will fight just as hard whether it’s small or big,” Ms. Block said. “But doing something bigger makes moving legislation easier because you have the potential to have a much bigger constituency behind it.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Fox News’ Shepard Smith departs network, steps down as chief news anchor

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Fox News' Shepard Smith departs network, steps down as chief news anchor

“The president’s fighting with a dead guy.” Fox News host Shepard Smith ripped President Trump for making comments about late Sen. John McCain. USA TODAY

Shepard Smith, the Fox News anchor who made headlines for on-air criticisms of President Donald Trump, has departed the conservative-leaning news network. 

During his 3 p.m. show on Fox, Smith announced his decision and said: “Recently I asked the company to allow me to leave Fox News and begin a new chapter. After requesting that I stay, they graciously obliged. The opportunities afforded this guy from small town Mississippi have been many. It’s been an honor and a privilege to report the news each day to our loyal audience in context and with perspective, without fear or favor. I’ve worked with the most talented, dedicated and focused professionals I know and I’m proud to have anchored their work each day — I will deeply miss them.”

Smith has been with the network since its inception in 1996. 

Fox News’ President Jay Wallace called Smith “one of the premier newscasters of his generation.”

“While this day is especially difficult as his former producer, we respect his decision and are deeply grateful for his immense contributions to the entire network,” Wallace added. 

In August 2019, Trump slammed Smith and analyst Juan Williams. He also criticized the network for hiring Donna Brazile, the former interim DNC director. Brazile forwarded questions to Hillary Clinton during the Democratic primary season. 

“Fox hires ‘give Hillary the questions’ @donnabrazile, Juan Williams and low ratings Shep Smith. HOPELESS & CLUELESS! They should go all the way LEFT and I will still find a way to Win – That’s what I do, Win. Too Bad!” Trump tweeted.

Smith also made headlines for opposing fellow Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who declared in August that white supremacy is “not a real problem” in America. Smith said the issue is “without question a very serious problem.”

Contributing: Rebecca Morin

More: Jeanine Pirro talks about her suspension from Fox News, rips network as ‘unbelievable’

More: Fox News contributor Guy Benson marries boyfriend, says Megyn Kelly brought them together

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2019/10/11/fox-news-shepard-smith-trump-critic-leave-network/3946561002/

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Shep Smith Out At Fox News

Westlake Legal Group 5da0e0eb210000c307344443 Shep Smith Out At Fox News

Shepard Smith, the longtime Fox News anchor who also headed up the network’s breaking news division, has abruptly left the network after more than two decades, shocking even some of his colleagues. 

Smith’s final show aired Friday afternoon, when he bid his audience a surprise farewell. Fox confirmed the departure in a statement. 

“Recently I asked the company to allow me to leave Fox News and begin a new chapter. After requesting that I stay, they graciously obliged,” Smith said. He signed a multi-year contract with the network in March 2018.

The anchor has no plans to move to a different news outlet “at least in the near future,” but will instead spend more time with his boyfriend, Gio Graziano, he said on-air.  

“Even in our currently polarized nation, it is my hope that the facts will win the day. That the truth will always matter. That journalism ― and journalists ― will thrive,” Smith said in an apparent nod to President Donald Trump’s war on what he calls “fake news.” Trump has repeatedly bashed Smith on Twitter for airing stories that took a critical look at the president and his administration.

Fox said a series of rotating anchors will host “Shepard Smith Reporting” at 3 p.m. ET until a new program is announced. 

Calling Smith “one of the premier newscasters of his generation,” Jay Wallace, president and executive editor of Fox News Media, said those at the company respect Smith’s decision and are “deeply grateful for his immense contributions to the entire network.” 

But some who worked with him over his 23 years at Fox were left stunned.

“It was a total shock today to find out he’s leaving,” wrote Fox reporter Bret Baier on Twitter. “He anchored breaking news -fast-moving events —better than anyone. I wish him well in whatever lies ahead.”

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

2020 Dems aren’t going far enough to address California homeless crisis, advocates claim

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6089382313001_6089383617001-vs 2020 Dems aren’t going far enough to address California homeless crisis, advocates claim fox-news/topic/homeless-crisis fox-news/politics/2020-presidential-election fox news fnc/politics fnc article Andrew Craft 04fcef39-d5e7-5f16-a9b7-ea566f6f4e65

LOS ANGELES — Many of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates are calling for sweeping affordable housing plans to address the chronic issue of homelessness, but advocates on the ground who see the issue up close say it doesn’t go far enough and they wish candidates would assign it more urgency.

Homelessness in Los Angeles County and across Western states is skyrocketing. In 2019 so far, the number of homeless residents in Los Angeles has risen 12 percent from 2018, according to county statistics.

“We need a FEMA-like, Red Cross-like, National Guard-like [solution],” said Rev. Andy Bales, the CEO of L.A.’s largest homeless shelter, Union Rescue Mission. “Army Corps of Engineers needs to come and we need to figure out immediately how to get 44,000 people off the streets.”

Candidate plans that are more forward-looking, like five to 10 years down the road with millions of dollars in investment in affordable housing units, can be good in theory and are necessary, these advocates say, but don’t address “chronic” homelessness, or those who have lived out on the streets for six months or more in the past year.

HOMELESS MAN RANDOMLY PICKS UP 6-YEAR-OLD, SLAMS HIM ON CONCRETE: REPORT

“We’ve been doing $600,000 to $700,000 per person, per unit, and it’s planned over the next 10 years and that will not get it done,” Bales says. He added that only one candidate has reached out to him on how to remedy the situation.

Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary under President Obama Julian Castro and Beto O’ Rourke have actually visited homeless encampments on Skid Row, a notoriously expansive homeless encampment in downtown Los Angeles.

O’Rourke released a plan this week similar to Castro’s and Sen. Bernie Sanders’ plans, saying he wants to triple funding for homeless assistance grants through HUD providing $50 billion over the next 10 years, fully funding housing choice vouchers, capping rent increases, and pumping investment in dilapidated public housing units.

But for those who study the issue of homelessness, they say the problem should be coming up more in candidate rhetoric and dialogue as they campaign. It’s not so much to just have a job to maintain housing, they say, because rent prices have become so unsustainable.

“I think it’s becoming an intractable issue because we don’t have the investment and broader solutions to homelessness, which is why I think many of the presidential candidates are focused on affordable housing….it’s still something that’s just emerging and most of the candidates have not yet addressed,” said Christopher Herring, a UCLA PhD student.

Herring said affordable housing is the main way to go, but there needs to be more steps done to prevent people from becoming homeless in the first place and notes that with Castro and Sanders’ plans, respectively, much of the dollar figures they’re proposing will be spent quickly and frivolously unless backed up by creating and maintaining affordable housing quickly and cost-efficiently.

“To put it another way, that expansion of the billions of dollars for homelessness in Castro and Sanders plans will be pissed away quickly and a waste of taxpayer money if not backed up by more robust structural reform in the production and preservation of affordable housing.”

TOMI LAHREN: CA DEMOCRATS IGNORING HOMELESS ‘EPIDEMIC’ IN FAVOR OF TRUMP IMPEACHMENT PUSH

California’s Democratic primary will be early in 2020, moving up to March from June, making the state in play again for candidates vying for the nomination with 500 delegates up for grabs.

Voters in the state have homelessness high on their list of issues. Some in Los Angeles county say it even trumps traffic and the environment in what needs to be fixed first in the city.

But ultimately, homeless people have very little, if any political power as a constituency, which could be why voters haven’t heard about the problem in states other than California.

“For the most part, the people who are experiencing homelessness are not voting, at least they’re not voting en masse, they don’t have a strong political voice, they don’t have political champions, and elected officials who are sensitive to what their constituents want or else they’re going to get voted out of office, it’s not a constituency they have to pay a lot of attention to,” said Adam Murray, executive director of LA’s Inner City Law Center.

California senator and presidential candidate Kamala Harris is supporting a bill in the Senate to provide $13 billion in emergency relief to areas affected by chronic homelessness over the next five years. But Republicans are unlikely to bring it up for a vote, citing the huge price tag.

Harris has blamed the Trump administration for cutting off funding to support what local government needs around affordable housing.

President Trump, on the other hand, has spoken about the issue on Twitter and at his rallies numerous times, largely in irreverent tones.

At a rally in Cincinnati in August, he said, “What they are doing to our beautiful California is a disgrace to our country…It’s a shame. The world is looking at it. Look at Los Angeles with the tents and the horrible, horrible conditions. Look at San Francisco, look at some of your other cities.”

Herring says California needs a federal response like what Trump is suggesting, saying, “Trump has drawn attention to this and it’s woken up the Democratic candidates to putting forward and putting pressure on them to make real solutions.”

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6089382313001_6089383617001-vs 2020 Dems aren’t going far enough to address California homeless crisis, advocates claim fox-news/topic/homeless-crisis fox-news/politics/2020-presidential-election fox news fnc/politics fnc article Andrew Craft 04fcef39-d5e7-5f16-a9b7-ea566f6f4e65   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6089382313001_6089383617001-vs 2020 Dems aren’t going far enough to address California homeless crisis, advocates claim fox-news/topic/homeless-crisis fox-news/politics/2020-presidential-election fox news fnc/politics fnc article Andrew Craft 04fcef39-d5e7-5f16-a9b7-ea566f6f4e65

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Schedule set for 2020 general election presidential and vice presidential debates

CLOSEWestlake Legal Group icon_close Schedule set for 2020 general election presidential and vice presidential debates

The 2020 election is nearing and with that, comes the caucuses and primary elections. But what’s the difference? Just the FAQs, USA TODAY

The nonpartisan organization that sponsors presidential general election debates has announced the schedule for the 2020 election season, including three presidential and one vice presidential debates.

The Commission on Presidential Debates announced the dates and locations of the debates on Friday, and will release further details including the moderators and format next year.

The first presidential debate will be Sept. 29, 2020, at the University of Notre Dame in Notre Dame, Ind.

The only scheduled vice presidential debate will be hosted by the University of Utah in Salt Lake City on Oct. 7, 2020.

A second presidential debate is set for Oct. 15, 2020, at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.

The third and final presidential debate will be hosted by Belmont University in Nashville, Tenn., on Oct. 22, 2020, which is less than two weeks before Election Day.

Election 2020: An interactive guide of who is running for president

All four scheduled debates will be hosted in states won by President Donald Trump in the 2016 election.

The first debate of the season will also be the first presidential debate ever hosted at Notre Dame, school officials said. The university is located in one of just four counties in Indiana that voted Democratic in 2016. That county also contains South Bend, the city where 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg is mayor.

Salt Lake City, where the only vice presidential debate will take place, is likewise a region in the vastly Republican state of Utah that voted Democratic in 2016. A 2016 Republican primary debate in Salt Lake was canceled after Trump said he would not participate.

Ann Arbor, Mich., voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016, as did Nashville. Belmont University also hosted a 2008 debate between then-Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain.

Re-election campaign: Trump lashes out at Democrats over impeachment inquiry at Minneapolis rally

Each 90-minute debate will begin at 9 p.m. ET and run without commercials, the commission said.

The commission sets criteria for appearing in a general election debate, which includes that candidates must qualify to appear on enough state ballots to have a mathematical chance of securing the electoral college votes needed to win the election (at least 270), and that they must receive an average of at least 15% in five selected national polls.

The criteria allow for qualifying candidates outside the two major parties to participate in debates, though no third-party candidate has qualified in recent years.

Democratic and Republican nominees will be announced in July and August of 2020, respectively. Election Day is Nov. 3, 2020.

In the meantime, the Democratic National Committee’s criteria continue to narrow the field for the party’s primary debate stage, and the president has said he will not debate GOP primary opponents

Electability: Four decades separate 2020’s presidential candidates.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/10/11/2020-dates-locations-announced-general-election-debates/3944404002/

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Judge blocks ‘public charge’ rule that would restrict green cards for immigrants on welfare

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072217294001_6072217998001-vs Judge blocks ‘public charge’ rule that would restrict green cards for immigrants on welfare fox-news/us/immigration fox news fnc/politics fnc article Adam Shaw 9f80092a-2eed-5336-b560-baab25ff43b5

A federal judge on Friday blocked a Trump administration rule that sought to strengthen the ability of federal officials to deny green cards to immigrants deemed likely to rely on government assistance — the latest defeat for the administration’s aggressive immigration policy in the courts.

Judge George B. Daniels issued a preliminary nationwide injunction, stopping the rule from taking effect on Oct. 15. New York State Attorney General Letitia James, who was part of the lawsuit, along with New York City and the states of Vermont and Connecticut, welcomed the decision.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BOOSTS ABILITY TO DENY GREEN CARDS TO IMMIGRANTS USING WELFARE PROGRAMS

“Once again, the courts have thwarted the Trump administration’s attempts to enact rules that violate both our laws and our values, sending a loud and clear message that they cannot rewrite our story to meet their agenda,” James said in a statement. “This rule would have had devastating impacts on all New Yorkers – citizens and noncitizens alike – and today’s decision is a critical step in our efforts to uphold the rule of law.”

While a “public charge” inadmissibility standard has long been part of U.S. immigration law, it had not been formally defined by statute. The rule, announced by U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services in August, would have defined a “public charge” as an immigrant who received one or more designated benefits for more than 12 months within a 36-month period.

“The principle driving it is an old American value, and that’s self-sufficiency,” USCIS Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli told Fox News in an interview in August. “It’s a core principle — the American Dream itself — and it’s one of the things that distinguishes us, and it’s central to the legal history in the U.S. back into the 1800s.”

Those benefits that would be designated included Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), as well as most forms of Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps. The rule expands the number of benefits that can be considered from interim guidance issued in 1999.

ICE CHIEF WARNS COURT RULING BARRING DATABASE ACCESS ENDANGERS PUBLIC, RIPS ‘JUDICIAL OVERREACH’

But Judge Daniels’ ruling said that the government had failed to provide a reasonable explanation for changing the definition of public charge. Daniels also objected to the government’s inclusion of English proficiency as a sign of self-sufficiency.

“”The United States of America has no official language. Many if not most, immigrants who arrived at these shores did not speak English,” he wrote.

He went on to claim that the definition has “no support in the history of U.S. immigration law” and described the rule as “repugnant.”

“The rule is simply a new agency policy of exclusion in search of justification. It is repugnant to the American Dream of the opportunity for prosperity and success through hard work and upward mobility,” he wrote.

Cuccinelli responded to the ruling by predicting that the administration would ultimately prevail, arguing that “an objective judiciary will see this rule lies squarely within long-held existing law.”

“Longstanding federal law requires aliens to rely on their own capabilities and the resources of their families, sponsors, and private organizations in their communities to succeed,” he said in a statement. “The public charge regulation defines this law to ensure those seeking to come or stay in the U.S. can successfully support themselves financially and will not rely on public benefits as they seek opportunity here.”

CLICK HERE FOR  THE ALL-NEW FOXBUSINESS.COM 

The legal defeat is the latest in a series of setbacks for the administration on immigration policy — where it has faced legal defeats on both legal and illegal immigration. Trump last week issued a presidential proclamation that would require immigrant visa applicants to prove that they have health insurance, or the financial means to cover reasonable health care costs. That proclamation, scheduled to go into effect Nov. 3, was also expected to be hit by a legal challenge.

The moves by the administration have faced fierce opposition from immigrant activists, as well as many Democrats — who have opposed measures to limit welfare for immigrants, while also calling for the extension of various forms of government aid to illegal immigrants as well.

Fox News’ Marta Dhanis contributed to this report.

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072217294001_6072217998001-vs Judge blocks ‘public charge’ rule that would restrict green cards for immigrants on welfare fox-news/us/immigration fox news fnc/politics fnc article Adam Shaw 9f80092a-2eed-5336-b560-baab25ff43b5   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072217294001_6072217998001-vs Judge blocks ‘public charge’ rule that would restrict green cards for immigrants on welfare fox-news/us/immigration fox news fnc/politics fnc article Adam Shaw 9f80092a-2eed-5336-b560-baab25ff43b5

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Maddison Brown: 5 things to know about Liam Hemsworth’s reported new romance

It seems Liam Hemsworth has moved on from his relationship with singer Miley Cyrus.

Just yesterday, Hemsworth, 29 was spotted holding hands with actress Maddison Brown.

Here are five things to know about the 22-year-old.

JENNIFER LOPEZ SHOWS OFF SKIN TO PROMOTE NEW SINGLE ‘BAILA CONMIGO’

Westlake Legal Group Liam-hemsworth-Maddison-Brown-BackGrid Maddison Brown: 5 things to know about Liam Hemsworth's reported new romance Nate Day fox-news/person/liam-hemsworth fox-news/entertainment/events/couples fox-news/entertainment/celebrity-news fox-news/entertainment fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 8b3fa1c0-3b2e-5236-bde5-fd89dce066ac

Liam Hemsworth is seen with an ear to ear smile in the underground subway with actress Maddison Brown in Soho, New York. (Backgrid)

1. She’s an Aussie

Like Hemsworth himself, Brown is Australian. She calls Sydney home, while Hemsworth and his brothers hail from Melbourne.

The two cities aren’t particularly close, so they have their time in Los Angeles to thank for bringing them together.

2. She’s an actress

Brown doesn’t have many credits to her name yet, but her biggest is working on CBS’ reboot of “Dynasty.” She plays Kirby Anders, a steward’s daughter.

She’s appeared in 22 episodes of the show’s second season and is set for at least three episodes in the coming weeks of the third season.

Westlake Legal Group GettyImages-462060404 Maddison Brown: 5 things to know about Liam Hemsworth's reported new romance Nate Day fox-news/person/liam-hemsworth fox-news/entertainment/events/couples fox-news/entertainment/celebrity-news fox-news/entertainment fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 8b3fa1c0-3b2e-5236-bde5-fd89dce066ac

Actresses Maddison Brown and Nicole Kidman attend the ‘Strangerland’ Premiere at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival. (Photo by Jason Merritt/Getty Images)

3. She’s a model

Brown has posed for several different companies, including Calvin Klein and Vogue.

‘SAVED BY THE BELL’ STAR TIFFANI THIESSEN EXPLAINS WHY THE’S NOT RETURNING FOR THE REBOOT

4. She’s got some famous friends

Aside from Hemsworth, Brown has been associated with some big names in Hollywood.

She starred in the television movie “Strangerland” with Nicole Kidman, Hugo Weaving and Joseph Fiennes, and played a young version of Elizabeth Debicki’s character in “The Kettering Incident.”

Brown has also been spotted with several other big names in Tinseltown, like “Avengers” star Elizabeth Olsen.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Westlake Legal Group GettyImages-462294918 Maddison Brown: 5 things to know about Liam Hemsworth's reported new romance Nate Day fox-news/person/liam-hemsworth fox-news/entertainment/events/couples fox-news/entertainment/celebrity-news fox-news/entertainment fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 8b3fa1c0-3b2e-5236-bde5-fd89dce066ac

Maddison Brown and Elizabeth Olsen at the Christian Dior show in 2015. (Photo by Rindoff/Dufour/Getty Images)

5. She started acting at a young age

Currently only 22, Brown kicked off her career early in life. Her first IMDb credit is a 2004 television movie called “Go Big,” which was released when she was only 7 years old.

Westlake Legal Group Liam-hemsworth-Maddison-Brown-AP-Getty Maddison Brown: 5 things to know about Liam Hemsworth's reported new romance Nate Day fox-news/person/liam-hemsworth fox-news/entertainment/events/couples fox-news/entertainment/celebrity-news fox-news/entertainment fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 8b3fa1c0-3b2e-5236-bde5-fd89dce066ac   Westlake Legal Group Liam-hemsworth-Maddison-Brown-AP-Getty Maddison Brown: 5 things to know about Liam Hemsworth's reported new romance Nate Day fox-news/person/liam-hemsworth fox-news/entertainment/events/couples fox-news/entertainment/celebrity-news fox-news/entertainment fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 8b3fa1c0-3b2e-5236-bde5-fd89dce066ac

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com