Bay Area Stand Down

Demonstrators at Coast Guard Island, Alameda (Wittpenn/Chron)

President Trump said on Thursday that he would not order the National Guard into San Francisco. Yesterday Federal officials confirmed that immigration enforcement actions, including sending the National Guard, were suspended in the entire Bay Area.

The Rev. Deborah Lee, co-executive director of the Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity, a coalition of 300 faith groups across California, was happy to hear the “welcome news” of the Bay Area-wide stand-down, but also wanted to “to make sure that there’s not a false sense of security. … We also want to make sure people don’t let their guard down too much because we’re still in an overall difficult reality.”

In front of Coast Guard Island Bridge shortly after noon Friday, protesters were cautiously optimistic after Lee’s announcement.

“It’s not over yet, but that they’re out of Oakland for now is a huge win for us,” said protester JP Hayes.

“I’ll believe it when I see it,” said protester Ryan Hasty. “Trump could change his mind tomorrow. We need to let them know that even into the future, we don’t want to see it.”

The anti-ICE protestors should take the win and be happy, but your humble blogger senses a tinge of disappointment in some of them that there won't be a confrontation. Eh, it's probably just my imagination.

Trump Backs Off

Donald Trump and Jensen Huang in April (Chron)

President Trump threatened to send National Guard troops into San Francisco, but today he called off the move.

Under pressure from two of Silicon Valley’s most prominent executives, President Donald Trump on Thursday abruptly abandoned plans to deploy federal agents to “clean up” San Francisco — an idea the administration had floated since Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff suggested ahead of the Dreamforce conference earlier this month that the National Guard might be needed to address the city’s safety problems.

Now, after weeks of criticism from residents, colleagues and civic leaders, Benioff — alongside Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang — may have helped spare San Francisco from a federal invasion.

“Great people like Jensen Huang, Marc Benioff, and others have called saying that the future of San Francisco is great,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “They want to give it a ‘shot.’ Therefore, we will not surge San Francisco on Saturday. Stay tuned!”

Mayor Daniel Lurie, in a statement Thursday, confirmed the president “told me clearly that he was calling off any plans for a federal deployment in San Francisco.”

“Friends of mine who live in the area called last night to ask me not to go forward with the surge in that the Mayor, Daniel Lurie, was making substantial progress,” Trump wrote.

The mayor said he touted the city’s momentum during the call.

“San Francisco is on the rise,” he said. “Visitors are coming back, buildings are getting leased and purchased, and workers are coming back to the office” — and warned that “having the military and militarized immigration enforcement in our city will hinder our recovery.”

It always helps to have the CEO's of some of the nation's most prominent companies ask President Trump to do or not do something. They can be very persuasive. Pity poor Portland, which lacks anyone with such clout.

London: What's Going On?

The news feed is filled with stories about the decline of London and the UK in general. If reports are to be believed, hordes of unassimilated migrants go unpunished for rape, murder, and other mayhem while armed police arrest comedians for tweets and residents for waving the Union Jack. Violence against Jews is causing Jewish citizens to emigrate from the U.K. If Britain is collapsing, what are we to make of this?

London: new towers springing next to the old (Zuma/WSJ)

Apple and Citadel Fuel London Office Boom

The office market in London’s ancient commercial quarter—known simply as the City—is booming, fueled by an influx of American law and finance firms, a growing tech scene and demand for the swankiest spaces to lure workers back to their desks.

The boom shows Britain’s finance industry has defied fears of a post-Brexit exodus. Despite losing some business and financiers after the U.K. left the European Union, London still hosts by far the biggest banking and capital markets in Europe.

The buoyant market also reflects the district’s broadening appeal. For decades the area was a bastion of finance and insurance. Now tech companies—including Apple, TikTok and several thousand smaller firms—vie for space, drawn in part by the prospect of easy access to potential investors.

“London, as a location for international businesses, seems to have really proven its resilience,” said Martin Towns, who runs M&G’s $43 billion real-estate business. “The City has a renewed level of vibrancy.”

Finance companies and Big Tech are not known for taking extraordinary risks, so what's going on with the $billions pouring into London? As an Anglophile, I hope that fears of its death have been greatly exaggerated.

Self-Defeating Deportations

Federal agents detain Korean workers in Georgia (Fox News)

While the majority of Americans supports border control in some form, the manner in which the policy is executed threatens to erode that support. Alleged deportation abuses of migrants from south of the border gets all the (negative) publicity, but last week's actions against South Korean workers at a battery plant in Georgia is an unforced error by the Administration.

More than 300 South Korean workers were sent back to South Korea on Thursday after being arrested in an immigration raid on a battery factory next to the Hyundai plant. “This could significantly impact future direct investment in the U.S.,” [President Lee Jae Myung] said at a news conference. South Korean companies “can’t help hesitating a lot” about making new investments in the U.S. if their workers are liable to end up in detention facilities.

Companies often bring in skilled workers to get factories up and running and to train local staff. “It’s not like these are long-term workers,” Mr. Lee continued. “When you build a facility or install equipment at a plant, you need technicians, but the U.S. doesn’t have that workforce and yet they won’t issue visas to let our people stay and do the work.”

U.S. policies can conflict with each other: 1) peaceful containment of China requires strengthening relations with Asian countries like South Korea and india; 2) building up American manufacturing involves penalizing potential and actual allies with tariffs. Deporting South Korean workers when there are not enough skilled Americans to do the work is not only self-defeating but sours a relationship with an important ally.

Ordering the Georgia plant to hire American workers when there aren't any seems as foolish as California shutting down gasoline refineries and fossil-fuel energy plants before alternative-energy replacements are on line.

Northern California: Joining the Party

Burning car in Oakland after ICE protests (Fanjoy/Chron)

Not to be outdone by its bigger brother to the South, Northern California had its own anti-ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) demonstrations, looting, and property damage.

A crowd ransacked a Shiekh shoe store near International Boulevard and 34th Avenue on Tuesday night, according to videos reported by KTVU and police. A car parked on 34th Avenue was set on fire, and trash cans on the sidewalk were knocked over, spilling garbage onto the sidewalk.

The looting and vehicle fire occurred after a peaceful protest denouncing arrests of immigrants by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers had ended, according to businesses owners and Fruitvale residents.

Oakland burgled shoe store after ICE protests (Flores/Chron)

The saving grace is that, unlike L.A., there's no suggestion that the looting and property damage were instigated by the demonstrators or actions by the Trump Administration.

It's sad, however, that there are people who will always use mass gatherings (protests, sports championships, cultural celebrations) as an excuse to commit crimes when police are occupied.

On a Higher Plane

Guillaume Bodinier, The Good Samaritan,
1826 (Wikimedia Commons)

Today's Gospel from the Episcopal lectionary has some relevance to current politics. The applicable verses are Luke 6:32-36:

"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. If you lend to those from whom you hope to receive, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

I've listened with half an ear to this passage (and Matthew's version in Matthew 5:46) dozens of times. It's about Jesus telling us to love our enemies, which sounds great in the abstract but which anyone with life experience knows is difficult in reality. But this is Jesus, who is always asking us to do hard things.

Looking past His main command, Jesus makes the point that it's no big deal to love those close to you ("even sinners do the same"), and to be His follower one should love those who are more distant.

But back to politics. Grok summarizes the timeline of the debate between Pope Francis and Vice President Vance over immigration and loving those who are close vs far, drawing on the Catholic concept of ordo amoris:

The debate between Pope Francis and J.D. Vance over the concept of "ordo amoris" (Latin for "order of love") unfolded in early 2025, centered around differing interpretations of this Catholic theological principle in the context of immigration policy. Here’s a timeline based on available information:

Late January 2025 (circa January 30): The debate began when U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance, a Catholic convert, invoked "ordo amoris" during a Fox News interview with Sean Hannity. Vance argued that compassion should prioritize one’s family, neighbors, community, and fellow citizens before extending to the rest of the world. He framed this as a traditional Christian concept to defend the Trump administration’s immigration policies, particularly its focus on mass deportations. Following criticism on X from Rory Stewart, a former British parliamentarian who called Vance’s take “less Christian and more pagan tribal,” Vance doubled down on January 30, posting on X: “Just google ‘ordo amoris.’ … Does Rory really think his moral duties to his own children are the same as his duties to a stranger who lives thousands of miles away?” This sparked widespread discussion among theologians, Catholic figures, and social media users about the meaning and application of "ordo amoris."

Early February 2025 (circa February 3–4): Vance’s comments gained traction, igniting a theological debate. Some, like Jesuit Father James Martin, criticized Vance for missing the universal call to love in Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan, while others, such as Michael Sirilla of Franciscan University, praised Vance for summarizing the "order of charity" accurately. The controversy grew as Vance’s remarks were linked to his broader critique of U.S. bishops and their involvement in refugee resettlement, amplifying attention on Catholic social teaching.

February 10, 2025: Pope Francis entered the fray with a letter addressed to U.S. bishops, released on this date. While primarily expressing concern over President Trump’s “program of mass deportations,” the Pope appeared to indirectly rebuke Vance’s interpretation of "ordo amoris." Without naming Vance, Francis wrote: “Christian love is not a concentric expansion of interests that little by little extend to other persons and groups. … The true ordo amoris that must be promoted is that which we discover by meditating constantly on the parable of the ‘Good Samaritan’ (cf. Lk 10:25-37), that is, by meditating on the love that builds a fraternity open to all, without exception.” This was widely interpreted as a correction to Vance’s hierarchical view, emphasizing a broader, inclusive love rooted in human dignity rather than a prioritized order based on proximity or nationality.

February 11, 2025: The Pope’s letter was published and reported widely, with outlets like Religion News Service and USA Today framing it as a direct response to Vance. The pontiff’s intervention escalated the debate, drawing attention to the theological and political rift. Vance had not publicly responded to the letter by this date, but the discourse intensified online and in Catholic circles, with commentators like Father Raymond de Souza suggesting the disagreement was more about rhetoric than theology.

February 13–20, 2025: The debate continued to ripple through media and theological discussions. On February 13, Catholic News Agency and National Catholic Register covered the ongoing clash, noting support and criticism for Vance among Catholic thinkers. By February 19, outlets like the Catholic Herald reflected on the broader implications of "ordo amoris," while on February 20, La Croix International published Jesuit theologian Jean-Marie Carrière’s challenge to Vance’s exclusionary rhetoric, advocating an "ordo justitiae" (order of justice) instead. Posts on X during this period, such as from @BurtRigg on February 19, misstated Francis’s position but reflected the public’s engagement with the issue.

The timeline shows a rapid escalation from Vance’s initial remarks in late January to a papal response by mid-February, with the debate evolving from a policy defense into a theological and moral controversy. As of February 25, 2025, no further direct exchanges between Vance and Francis have been reported, but the discussion remains active in Catholic and political spheres.

Quite apart from who is right or wrong, I appreciate how this debate is on a higher plane than the usual sound bite exchange that we see on Twitter or the evening news. I do, however, note that there have been calls for the Vice President to "stay in his lane" and not debate theological matters with the Pope. In response, one of the tenets of the Protestant Reformation was that the individual stands before God, and, contrary to Catholic teaching, no intercession is needed by priest or Pope. Your humble blogger finds much to admire in the Catholic church, but he is not a member.

Easy for Him to Say

2017: only one man looks joyful. (Vucci/AP/WSJ)

Pope Francis condemns the U.S. "program of mass deportations."

For years [Pope Francis and President Trump] have sparred over immigration, which both have chosen as their signature issue. On Monday Francis wrote a letter to the American Catholic bishops denouncing Mr. Trump’s “mass deportations.” It is extremely rare for a pope to condemn a particular policy of a particular government. Principles are usually made explicit with the application left implicit.

The administration left the response to the papal letter to border czar Tom Homan. “I’ve got harsh words for the pope,” Mr. Homan said. “I say this as a lifelong Catholic. He ought to focus on his work and leave enforcement to us. He’s got a wall around the Vatican, does he not?”

Hardly. There are no controls at the Vatican City State border. No one scales the ninth-century Leonine Walls when the arms of Bernini’s colonnade surrounding St. Peter’s Square are open to all. Tens of thousands of people walk in and out without presenting any documents each day. Mr. Homan knows that, but there was a rhetorical attack to be made.

Given that mass deportations aren’t yet a reality—and, in any case, may not exceed the number of deportations during previous administrations—there are good reasons that the pope and president ought not take each other’s bait.

The writer, Ontario priest Raymond J. de Souza, goes on to talk about the emerging debate over Catholic public theology between converted Catholic J.D. Vance and the Pope. The immigration dispute is worthy of an extended discussion, harkening back to Catholic politicians' past differences with the Church on abortion and capital punishment.

Returning to the subject of border controls, I have one comment on Father de Souza's assertion, "There are no controls at the Vatican City State border.....Tens of thousands of people walk in and out without presenting any documents each day."

If it is also true that every inch of public space is not subject to video surveillance, facial recognition, etc. to head off trouble, then I will believe in the Vatican's openness. If the U.S. had such tech at the southern border (and fewer outward and visible signs of physical controls), the U.S. would appear more open, too.

After the break is the Pope's February 10th letter to American bishops.

Priests: Out of Limbo Soon?

Limbo of the Infants: destination of unbaptized infants.
Pope Benedict abandoned the doctrine in 2007.

It is inexcusable that the legal immigration system is so broken that it takes years to process an application. Whatever one's views on immigration, it can't be right or fair to a petitioner, his prospective employer, or his family to keep him in limbo seemingly interminably.

Speaking of limbo ("the border place between heaven and hell where those souls who died without being baptised"), the term's Roman Catholic origins have an ironic contemporary meaning due to the plight of immigrant priests, without whom the American Catholic church would not be able to function.

The Catholic Church in the U.S. doesn’t have sufficient vocations and increasingly relies on immigrants. “We used to send missionaries to other parts of the world,” Bishop Edmund Whalen of New York says. “Now, in a sense, we’re becoming the mission country.” Of the 356 active archdiocesan and extern priests in New York, the bishop says 183 are foreign nationals. The U.S. bishops’ conference recently took stock: With responses from 70% of dioceses and eparchies, it learned that 90% rely on foreign-born religious workers.

Solving the problems specific to Catholic priests is more manageable than fixing the entire immigration system:

Practical relief to the logjam could come in two ways. David Spicer, a lawyer with the U.S. bishops’ conference, says Homeland Security could modify or scrap its regulation—which isn’t mandated by statute—that foreign-born priests have to exit the U.S. for a year once their R-1 visas lapse. The Biden administration informed the conference that it contemplated doing so last fall but failed to follow through. The Trump administration has indicated it may propose a rule in September to offer religious workers more flexibility.

A more durable fix could come through Congress. Sens. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) and Susan Collins (R., Maine) plan to introduce a bill allowing religious workers with pending green-card applications to stay on their R-1s beyond five years. Both Catholic, the senators learned of the issue as it began to affect priests in their states’ parishes. The senators believe their colleagues would overwhelmingly support the measure, but passing any immigration bill has become difficult. They may try fitting the provision into a larger vehicle, say on border security or appropriations.

Presidential Executive Orders being the exception, change in Washington is never instantaneous. However, resolving this issue appears to have bipartisan agreement. Immigrant priests aren't displacing anyone. Let them in. It is abundantly clear that not enough Americans are willing and able to do the job.

The Episcopal Church: plus ça change

Bishop Austin Rios

It's no secret that the vast majority of Episcopalians, both clergy and laity, are politically liberal; in various gatherings around the Bay Area I have never met an Episcopalian who will admit to conservative or Republican leanings, although, to be fair, lay people rarely initiate political discussions.

Austin Rios, who was installed as our Bishop three months ago, has words of reconciliation (complete message after the break) after first stating his own disappointment in the election's outcome: [bold added]

As a long-term supporter of immigrant rights and the former director of an international refugee center, I do not believe mass deportations, promised by the Trump campaign, will make America greater or stronger.

As a former resident of small towns in Texas, Wisconsin, and North Carolina, I have seen how misinformation can easily manipulate the views and feelings in more insular communities.

And I’ve also seen how small communities can sometimes show-up for their neighbors who are in crisis more consistently than those who call big cities their homes.

There is no denying the cognitive dissonance that arises from many Americans preferring an older white male felon to a younger multiracial female prosecutor.

I was uncertain when Bishop Rios was elected, but now it's clear: the Diocese will be led by another social justice warrior for at least a decade. The giveaway is in the last sentence, where the Bishop assigns virtue or vice based on a candidate's sexual and racial identity. I'm disappointed, but as a believer in democracy, I accept the will of my fellow Episcopalians!

BTW, there's a decent chance that all his convictions will be overturned on appeal, and all charges will be dropped in other cases. Will President-elect Trump still be a "convicted felon"?

An Economist's Approach to Immigration

2023 millionaire migrations. (Visual Capitalist)

Economics professor Richard Vedder and Matthew Denhart of the Coolidge Foundation want to allow immigrants to buy their way in: [bold added]

One way to modernize our immigration laws would be to allow market forces to decide who should become new citizens. Consider America like a club, with initiation fees required for admission. Instead of choosing immigrants based on where they are from, admit them based on likely contributions to America.

An example: Sell 8,000 visas to the highest bidders for 250 days a year. Suppose the average price is $30,000. Of the $60 billion in annual visa revenue [blogger's note: 250 days x 8,000= 2,000,000 immigrants per year. 2MM x $30,000=$60 billion], devote one-third to more-intense border enforcement, one-third to income-tax reduction (an “immigration bonus” to taxpayers), and one-third to increasing the anemic defense budget. Or apply the money to debt reduction, helping delay the fiscal armageddon threatening the pensions and healthcare of elderly Americans.

Those buying visas could get access to huge labor and capital markets. Productive potential newcomers would avoid years of waiting to enter the country, and America would gain largely productive citizens.

Once we set aside the romantic notion that all immigrants must be hard-working, law-abiding poor who just need a break, this proposal makes a lot of sense. Immigrants who can buy their way in are unlikely to claim welfare benefits but become immediately productive members of society and not run afoul of its laws. [This concept is already contemplated--but not explicitly with a price tag--through the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program.]

Think of it as a fast track lane through airport TSA where "only" two million can get through. There's still room for many more to enter in the traditional, terribly inefficient way. This proposal is worth a try.

Sad Denouement

Jose Inez Garcia Zarate

After nine years the Kate Steinle murder case reaches its sad denouement:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement plans to deport a Mexican national who was acquitted in the high-profile 2015 murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco, the New York Times reported.

Jose Inez Garcia Zarate, who is undocumented, was acquitted by a jury in 2017 of murder and manslaughter charges but convicted of being a felon in possession of a gun. The trial drew national attention and was used by politicians as a talking point in immigration debates.

Steinle, 32, was fatally shot while walking along Pier 14 with her father.

According to Garcia Zarate’s attorneys, he found a gun along the waterfront and accidentally fired it – causing the bullet to ricochet off the pavement, striking Steinle in the back. The gun was stolen from a federal Bureau of Land Management ranger’s car.

Garcia Zarate’s gun conviction was later overturned by a court of appeals in 2019.

Garcia Zarate remained in prison for federal probation violations until February, the New York Times reported. In mid-February, Garcia Zarate was transferred to ICE custody and the agency plans to deport him to central or southern Mexico within the next week, a Department of Homeland Security official told the New York Times under the condition of anonymity.

Before the 2015 shooting, Garcia Zarate had been deported five times. He was in federal prison on a conviction of felony re-entry into the U.S. but instead of deportation, he was brought to San Francisco, where he was wanted for a possession of marijuana charge. That charge was dismissed and Garcia Zarate was released from custody under the city’s sanctuary policy, which limits local law enforcement’s cooperation with federal immigration officials. Federal immigration officials had requested he remain detained until they could pick him up and were not notified of his release.

Former President Donald Trump used the case to criticize sanctuary cities.

Kate Steinle's death did not cause "sanctuary cities" to renounce their policy of non-cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). And so it is that illegal immigrants continue to be arrested and released by local authorities before they can be turned over to ICE, and some go on to kill American citizens.

The murder of Laken Riley in Georgia last week by an alleged Venezuelan illegal threatens to become Kate Steinle 2.0 this political season. The problem was never solved but only grew worse, and it will be surprising if the voters don't exact a price this November.

No Panacea

(Vancouver Sun photo)

In the nether world between jail and release-upon-recognizance, ankle monitors are a tool favored by the justice system. However, one example shows how ineffective they can be:

Over a span of three years, judges had placed [Shaun] Bailey on electronic monitoring four times — and all four times, Bailey violated the conditions of the program, the filing said. On two occasions, he cut off his ankle monitor. In two other instances, he absconded from a treatment program the day he was admitted.

Yet, despite the arguments of prosecutor Rachel Schneider, Superior Court Judge Victor Hwang placed Bailey on electronic monitoring a fifth time. Roughly a week later, Bailey was arrested again on suspicion of robbing someone at an ATM machine on Columbus Avenue. His defense attorneys declined to comment.

To some law enforcement officials, elected leaders and court watchdogs, Bailey’s brushes with the criminal justice system illustrate a larger problem: that in an effort to release people from jail before trial, judges rely too much on electronic monitors as a form of supervision, even though evidence shows that the monitors often don’t work to deter criminal behavior.

The use of ankle bracelets is exploding, though effectiveness is, to say the least, spotty. [bold added]

San Francisco’s use of pretrial electronic monitoring rose more than twentyfold from 2017 to 2021, according to a 2022 report by UC Berkeley’s California Policy Lab.

Before 2018, the city averaged 75 cases a year. By 2021, the number had jumped to 1,650. As of Feb. 11, Sheriff Paul Miyamoto’s office was supervising 408 people on ankle monitors, all but two of them awaiting trial.

But the devices didn’t seem to be working well. People were cutting them off, tampering with them, throwing them in garbage dumps or in the bay, forgetting to charge the batteries or venturing outside their designated boundaries.

In July 2021, Miyamoto said his office was overseeing 328 people on ankle trackers, and more than a third of them — 126 — had an arrest warrant out for failing to comply. One person in the program between 2020 and 2021 was accused of breaching the rules nine times.

The California Policy Lab report found that in 2021, 60% of defendants placed on electronic monitors prior to trial in San Francisco violated their terms, with more than one-fifth arrested for new crimes.

Abolishing the carceral state is a goal of Progressivism. The least Progressives can do is put resources behind improving the monitoring technology to protect both the public and the criminals who they feel such sympathy for.

In related news thousands of illegal aliens have been released and subsequently tracked with ankle bracelets. In an August, 2023 report

Less than 2% of families arrested at the border in recent months have been selected to be put into FERM [Family Expedited Removal Management], but administration officials have said the program is rapidly expanding and they hope to eventually put a majority of families crossing the border illegally through it.

Hope that works out!

Two Floods Coming

We've been given ample time to prepare for two floods, but readiness is questionable.

El Niño is coming

The chances of any El Niño forming are now 82% by July and 94% by November, according to the NOAA report.

More significant for California, there’s a 46% chance of a strong El Niño by November, increasing to 54% by January, NOAA researchers concluded Thursday...

Since 1951, there have been 26 El Niño events. Of those, 11 have been weak, 7 moderate, 5 strong and 3 very strong. Overall, rainfall in Southern California averaged 126% of normal. In the Bay Area it was 109% of normal.

But two of the three very strong El Niños, during the winters of 1982-83 and 1997-98, were associated with seasons that were among the wettest in recorded California history, with massive Sierra Nevada snow packs and major flooding.

More Migrants are Coming

A pandemic-era public health policy known as Title 42, used to turn away asylum seekers at the U.S. southern border, is coming to an end just before 9 p.m. tonight, prompting concerns about unprecedented migration flows.

Meanwhile, hundreds of migrants have been waiting outside between border walls in San Ysidro for days, sometimes with nothing more to eat all day than a single granola bar handed out by Border Patrol officers.

Federal, state and local officials have had more than two years to prepare for this moment. But officials running migrant shelters on both sides of the border say they have very little information about how to handle the anticipated increase in asylum seekers trying to cross from Mexico into California and other states.

Update: Border appears calm after lifting of pandemic restrictions

The border between the U.S. and Mexico was relatively calm Friday, offering few signs of the chaos that had been feared following a rush by worried migrants to enter the U.S. before the end of pandemic-related immigration restrictions...

“We did not see any substantial increase in immigration this morning,” said Blas Nunez-Neto of the Department of Homeland Security. He said the agency did not have specific numbers because it was early in the day.

By the way, I hope this guy makes it:

“I hope it’s a little better and that the appointments are streamlined a little more,” said Yeremy Depablos, 21, a Venezuelan traveling with seven cousins who has been waiting in the city for a month.

Fearing deportation, Depablos did not want to cross illegally. “We have to do it the legal way.”

Charity: It's Not Only Business that Government Gets in the Way Of

Asylum seekers arrive at the Catholic Charities
Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, TX (WSJ)

It is a 2,000-year-old conundrum: how to be a Christian in a secular world.

Not only must individuals wrestle with their own demons (or angels) they must also comply with both the laws of society and of God, which are sometimes in conflict.

One contemporary American example is rendering certain kinds of assistance to illegal immigrants (I prefer that term to "undocumented" because most people, citizens or not, don't lug around documents in the digital age) when it is forbidden by law.

Catholic Bishop Daniel Flores cites problems with a new Texas executive order:

We can’t provide long-term shelter, but we do offer hot showers, clean clothes, fresh food and water, baby supplies, urgent care from doctors and nurses, and volunteer legal help. These families—already processed and released into the U.S. by federal agents—stay with us for about 24 hours. Then they continue on their journeys. That usually means a bus or plane trip to family members in other parts of the country. Later, an immigration judge will consider their asylum claim.

But our work has been threatened by the Texas state government. Gov. Greg Abbott recently issued an executive order that would prohibit us from transporting those we serve beyond our walls. We filed a friend-of-the-court brief Aug. 12 explaining our ministry’s needs, and a federal court in El Paso temporarily blocked the order from going into effect.

If the order goes into effect, it would forbid our organization to drive a pregnant woman to a doctor’s office or take a child to a hospital for care. It would forbid us to drive a migrant family to a bus station or airport so they could continue their journey to waiting family members. Unable to help move migrant families, we would quickly run out of room to receive new ones in desperate need of help. We would have to tell federal agents that we have no more room. Where would they then leave these families? On the streets of local towns?

We have a religious obligation to serve the poor who are suffering in front of us.

Bishop Flores has an answer to a major concern of Governor Abbott's:

Mr. Abbott says that this is about reducing the transmission of Covid-19, and keeping our staff, volunteers, migrants and the surrounding community safe is critical to our mission. While the U.S. Border Patrol does not test those we serve for Covid, we do. Anyone who tests positive is required to quarantine—sometimes at a site organized with the help of local city and county governments, sometimes at a modest local motel.

The governor’s order would even forbid us to transport families who have tested positive for Covid-19 to the quarantine spaces. Under the order, if someone from our center attempts to drive a migrant anywhere, the Department of Public Safety could stop them and force them to return to the Center—possibly impounding the vehicle. How does that protect Texans from the virus?

I understand and even share Governor Abbott's concern about spreading COVID-19. Another reason for his executive order, perhaps, is that Governor Abbott's party also believes that many migrant families don't show up for immigration court hearings and simply disappear into American society, often aided by people who provide them transportation (note: the no-show claim is disputed).

Solving the problems at the border is way above my pay grade, but so far I have had no trouble differentiating what to render to Ceasar and God.

I work at several charities that supply basic needs (food, clothing, shelter, etc.); I never inquire about recipients' backgrounds or ask what they are doing now or where they are going next. Providing legal aid is ok, but I draw the line at political advocacy, which IMHO weakens the purity of charity and rives the organizations that supply it.

Lately we have seen ideologues who, once placed in power, prefer to destroy businesses and charities for reasons having nothing to do with health and safety. It is my hope and expectation that Gov. Abbott, a Christian, will modify his executive order so that Catholic Charities can continue its good works.

Mexico: Where Political Assassinations are Normal

Politics is indeed a rough business, with opposition researchers delving into every aspect of a candidate's past. What was once personal and off-limits is now fair, or should we say foul, game.

Once in a while Americans should be reminded how lucky they are to have political campaigns that destroy candidates, but only metaphorically.

Popular mayoral candidate and former prosecutor Abel
Murrieta was killed on May 13. (Mexico News Daily)

Headline: Dozens of Mexican Candidates Have Been Killed in a Bloody Election Season [bold added]

Even in a country with a history of electoral violence, this vote is shaping up as the most bloody in recent memory as more, smaller criminal gangs viciously compete to control local areas by intimidating or killing off politicians.

From February to April, 46 elected officials, members of political parties and candidates for office were killed, a 44% jump compared with the 2018 elections, according to Integralia, a Mexican political consulting firm. Since September, when the electoral process began, 82 politicians have been killed, most of them gunned down.

With politicians unable to protect themselves, many of them have withdrawn their candidacies. The gangs are the authority in various towns, and with little or no resistance to confront them, are expanding their operations:

Aside from trafficking drugs to the U.S., these gangs smuggle migrants, sell black-market gasoline, and extort legal businesses which range from avocado farms to taco stands. Once in control of local governments, the gangs also take a cut of tax money meant for public works, according to organizations that track and analyze crime trends.

As more of their income comes from activities such as extortion, these groups’ success depends on their ability to control territory. That means controlling, through threats and bribery, the local mayor, police chief, and other top officials. Those who don’t cooperate are often killed.

The environment in Mexico is so horrifying that we can't imagine how it could be transplanted here.

Meanwhile the progressive leadership in California is pushing for open borders, defunding the police, and more restrictions on private gun ownership. I really do need to learn Spanish...

Countervailing Narratives

Narratives about illegal immigration were initially the exclusive province of open-border, sanctuary-city advocates. Tales were rife about "dreamers" who served in the Armed Forces or were valedictorians, doctors, teachers, and other contributing members to American society.

(Toronto Sun image)

The 2015 shooting death of Kate Steinle in San Francisco by illegal immigrant Jose Ines Garcia Zarate was the flashpoint for the counter-narrative that non-enforcement of immigration laws posed physical danger to citizens. Donald Trump referred to Kate Steinle during the 2016 campaign and called Jose Zarate's acquittal in 2017 an "outrage."

Immigration reform has been paralyzed by the competing narratives (and political polarization, but that's way beyond the scope of this post).

In 2018 New York enacted a Criminal Justice Reform Package that "eliminate[d] monetary bail for people facing misdemeanor and non-violent felony charges." Bail reform got most of the ink, but another part of the legislation, Expanding the Discovery Process, may have resulted in disaster for a witness who was going to testify against MS-13: [bold added]

Wilmer Rodriguez (Daily Mail)

Mr. Rodriguez agreed to testify against the gang members, who were charged with assault and witness intimidation as a result of the attack, officials said.

On Sunday, Mr. Rodriguez was found beaten to death outside a home in New Cassel, N.Y.....it came several weeks after a judge ordered prosecutors to disclose Mr. Rodriguez’s identity to lawyers who represented the gang members accused of attacking him, officials said.

Reformers say that defendants should be given witness names weeks in advance. Detractors counter that violent defendants will stop at nothing to prevent these witnesses from testifying. Reformers are denying any responsibility for Mr. Rodriquez' murder:

“This has absolutely nothing to do with the new criminal justice reforms,” said Mike Murphy, a spokesman for the State Senate’s Democratic majority....

Lisa Schreibersdorf, the executive director of Brooklyn Defender Services, said...“There is absolutely no way this is related to the discovery laws.”

There is no proof that Wilmer Rodriguez had been killed by MS-13, yet the gang's history of murder and other violence makes the supposition plausible. Unless the suspicion is countered soon, the narrative connection between the 2018 Reform Bill and the Rodriguez murder will be unshakeable.

Familiarity Breeds Tolerance

According to Yale political scientist Dennis Huber, communities which are directly affected by immigration do not display an increase in anti-immigrant attitudes.

Dennis Huber

A narrative arose after the 2016 U.S. presidential election that Trump had used his anti-immigration platform to exploit people’s fears over immigrants moving into their neighborhoods.

To test the narrative, the researchers needed to drill down to the community level. They acquired voting-precinct data, which offer a more precise measure of people’s local experiences than county-level data, Huber said. They combined the precinct data with demographic data from the U.S. Census and the American Community Survey, which provides estimates of population changes...

They chose to study the key battleground states of Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Georgia and Nevada were selected because their populations have diversified in recent years. Washington state was studied because it is less diverse and lacks significant policy conflict over immigration, Huber said.

While the study shows that people living in increasingly diverse communities aren’t as a result driven to support anti-immigrant candidates, he said, it does not challenge the idea that people are upset by demographic changes happening in the United States.

“There are people who are very upset by increasing diversity and immigration,” he said. “They just don’t appear to be living in places experiencing an increase in immigration. It does not appear to be a story about local contact.”

Comments:

1) Immigration advocates consistently conflate anti-illegal immigration with anti-immigration--in my view to tar opponents of illegal immigration as racist and xenophobic. (Your humble blogger values the rule of law higher than any specific policy and also wants more legal immigration.) I didn't see anything in the article that said the researchers distinguished the two points of view.

2) I also hope the researchers performed the basic step of excluding recent immigrants from the population who gave feedback. After all, we are trying to measure the politics of those already in place, right?

3) The study's purported result--those most upset by immigration do not have much personal experience with it themselves--is consistent with behavior of activists in other areas. For example, California environmentalists are much more opposed to fracking in North Dakota or drilling in Alaska than the people who live there.

4) The study's purported result also is consistent with a hoary principle: it's less likely that people will hate groups with whom they've had personal contact. We've seen how stereotypes melt away (not all the time, though) when people interact with others of different races, religions, cultures, and sexual orientation. Familiarity doesn't breed contempt but tolerance.

(Image from EHS Daily Advisor)

Jeremiah: Relevant Advice

As an infrequent Old Testament reader, your humble blogger was surprised by today's lesson from Jeremiah 29: [bold added]

Jeremiah, Sistine Chapel ceiling

This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says to all those I carried into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon: “Build houses and settle down; plant gardens and eat what they produce. Marry and have sons and daughters; find wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease. Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the LORD for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.”

Before the Babylonian Exile the prophet Jeremiah was a haranguer; he constantly admonished the Jews to change their evil ways, to no avail. Babylon destroyed the Jewish kingdom and deported its leaders.

Once the Exile became fact Jeremiah softened his tone and told the Jews to accept their new lives and "settle down". Moreover, they were to "seek the peace and prosperity" of their new country because it would benefit the Jews as well.

If today's migrants followed that advice--and if host nations trusted that they were trying to do so---the world would be a much happier place.

Third World Story

One advantage of making a succession of outrageous statements and tweets (even his supporters are occasionally appalled) is that President Trump's past provocations become buried in the 24/7 news cycle. One such example is the reference to s***hole countries in January:

President Donald Trump referred to Haiti and African nations as "shithole countries" during a meeting with a bipartisan group of senators at the White House, a Democratic aide briefed on Thursday's meeting told NBC News.

(Actually, there is some question whether the President used the term, because he purportedly said it at a closed-door meeting, a Democratic aide reported the utterance second hand, and some Republicans present denied that it happened.) Be that as it may, your humble blogger respectfully submits that a derogatory, some-might-say-racist remark should not be used to make policy.

In fact I support the basic meaning behind the President's alleged expletive--that limited slots for legal immigrants means that the United States should admit, say, an engineer from India over a farmer from the Caribbean. Apply the standards that a college admissions office would---which candidate is more likely to succeed? A bad choice doesn't help the college or the admittee; it often hurts the community because of the extra cost in helping the person assimilate.

Red Cross workers after the 2010 earthquake (CNN)

Setting the issue of immigration aside, what does a well-intentioned society do to help an impoverished one like Haiti? There's financial assistance, but pervasive corruption diverts funds from the suffering masses to the ruling few. Consequently donor countries and organizations insist on maintaining control of the relief, which leads to gross waste in the process:

"USAID has spent about $1.5 billion since the earthquake...Less than a penny of every dollar goes directly to a Haitian organization."

A growing reliance on U.S. and other international contractors helps explain why the payoff of foreign aid in Haiti often seems so low. For instance, it cost more than $33,000 to build a new housing unit in one post-earthquake program, a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office said last year. That's five times more than one nonprofit, called Mission of Hope, spends per house, using local contractors.

"International companies had to fly in, rent hotels and cars, and spend USAID allowances for food and cost-of-living expenses"

Even people who donate their own services and money find the task difficult, even dangerous. From July 9th:

But as violent protests over sharply rising fuel prices shook the island nation, a dozen members of North Albemarle Baptist Church still took refuge Monday in an orphanage outside the capital city...Plans to board a flight out Sunday were aborted when the group's Haitian contacts found that armed civilians still barricaded roads and were charging tolls to motorists. The unrest left businesses burned and looted.

North Albemarle Baptist sends mission teams to Haiti three or four times a year, [Pastor Brad] Lynch said, and considers the trips so safe that middle-school students sometimes go. The orphanage's location outside Port-au-Prince and local reverence for the institution worked in favor of his team, which Lynch said was handling the situation calmly.

"We just never saw this coming," he said. "It just completely blew up out of nowhere."

President Trump is alleged to have used an inapt term. Even if he did, he was not wrong.

Dropped From Sight

In this week's version of "it's the end of America as we know it" President Trump will soon nominate another Supreme Court Justice. Anthony Kennedy retired last week, kicking off a nomination firestorm that will dominate headlines into fall.

For perspective I pulled up the 2018 Time covers to see if the overturning of Roe v. Wade (a threatened occurrence, BTW, with every Supreme Court nomination by a Republican President since 1987) would be more outrageous than any of the other things that Donald J. Trump was responsible for this year.

There were several weeks of #MeToo coverage that recounted numerous incidents of sexism, sexual harassment, and sexual assault that predated not only President Trump but also the 21st century. Yes, let's shame or prosecute the people responsible, but at least give President Trump indirect credit. #MeToo would never have happened under President Hillary Clinton, with big-time supporter Harvey Weinstein yukking it up with the Big He in the Lincoln bedroom.

Then there are President Trump's inflammatory speeches and tweets directed at Kim Jong Un. Time's February mushroom cloud (which indeed would have been worse than anything going on with the Supreme Court) was superseded by the June cover that showed the two leaders talking amiably.

And what happened to those determined, angry kids who want gun restrictions? I agree that stopping school shootings has to be a national priority. Despite the polarization, surely we can reach common ground on mental illness, rapid-fire technology, and background checks. Or was it all a voter registration drive for Democrats?

Then there are the pictures of border families and crying kids who seem to elicit powerful emotions from people on all sides of the illegal immigration issue. Here's where over two decades of screening grant requests has hardened my heart. Everyone who wants money knows that crying babies trump nearly all rational consideration. OK, reunite the border families, but you still have to deliberate over the adults, some of whom are using their children to catch a break. Note: in California alone there are over 50,000 children separated from their parents by Child Protective Services, undoubtedly for good reason. Over 20,000 are age 5 or younger; I'll bet some of them cried when they were taken away, but their pictures aren't on the cover of Time. I do get it, CPS good, border patrol bad. Indeed, I have to work on my hardened heart.

Other observations: 1) the portraits of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and a sexual-predator felon are both cast in shadow. I wonder what Time's editorial position is on these guys. 2) Pictures or representations of President Trump appear on four covers, only one of which is non-hostile. If Time were a person, I'd advise it to get therapy for its obsession. 3) What happened to Russia-Russia-Russia and the anytime-now impeachment of Donald Trump? 4) What happened to the tariff wars that will plunge the world into the next Great Depression? (I'm actually worried about this one and wonder why they're not using this to undermine the President's support from business.)

Now that I've done the half-year in review I feel a lot better. These "crises" must not have been so important after all because they've dropped from sight.