Passengers on flights to the U.S. from 10 airports in the Middle East and North Africa will be barred from bringing electronics larger than a cell phone in their carry on baggage, according to the Department of Homeland Security and Transportation Security Administration. The new directive came late Monday, after “evaluated intelligence” was presented to Trump Administration officials that terrorists seek to smuggle “explosive devices in various consumer items.”

Officials said the new travel restrictions are not based on any imminent or specific threats; but rather a broader threat, and general intelligence reports. Taking effect at 3 a.m. Tuesday (airlines have just 96 hours to comply) the new directive will bar passengers from 10 airports in eight countries–none of which are included in President Donald Trump’s recent travel ban–from bringing large electronics in their carry-on luggage. This includes laptops, cameras, tablets, games, and other large devices. Flight crews will not have to comply with the new restrictions, which only apply to foreign carriers.

Affected cities include: Amman, Jordan; Cairo, Egypt; Istanbul, Turkey; Jeddah and Riyadh in Saudi Arabia; Kuwait City, Kuwait; Casablanca, Morocco; Doha, Qatar; and Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates. Royal Jordanian, one of the carriers affected by the new measures, sent out a tweet early Monday that indicated the device restrictions. It later deleted the tweet, but it was preserved by other users:

@RoyalJordanian This Tweet appears to have been deleted , cannot find it back . Is it still valid #ElectronicsBan pic.twitter.com/PYZXwa76MP

— Caroline Kere (@carolinekere) March 21, 2017

It is unclear how long the restrictions will be in place; the DHS, in a briefing with reporters Monday night, said the procedures would “remain in place until the threat changes.” Some technology experts are flummoxed by the new restrictions, saying that people wishing to do harm via a large electronic device could still use their check-in luggage as a conduit for explosives.

“It’s weird, because it doesn’t match a conventional threat model,” Nicholas Weaver, researcher at the International Computer Science Institute at the University of California, Berkeley told the Guardian. “If you assume the attacker is interested in turning a laptop into a bomb, it would work just as well in the cargo hold.”

The U.S. is not the only country issuing more restrictive travel measures. Early Tuesday morning, British news outlet Sky News tweeted:

Passengers travelling to the UK from certain countries will be banned from carrying most electronic devices on flights, Sky News understands pic.twitter.com/aCq7mrBNaM

— Sky News (@SkyNews) March 21, 2017

The report said that Britain, like the U.S., is not basing its new procedures on a specific threat, but “rather a response to the ongoing general threat to aviation.” Paul Schwartz, an information technology professor at the University of California, Berkeley Law School, told the Guardian that the terrorist threat has transcended borders, and targeting travel from a handful of countries might not alleviate the threat entirely.

“One potential problem with this approach where you single out countries is that you ignore the extent to which the terrorist threat is kind of state-less,” Schwartz said. “The terrorists have cells throughout the entire world.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Electronics Banned on U.S.-Bound Flights from 10 Airports in Muslim Countries appeared first on Law Street.

By now, you’ve probably heard the story of Daniela Vargas, a 22-year-old woman who, at the age of seven, was brought to America by her family from Argentina on a visa waiver program. On Wednesday, the Huffington Post reported that Vargas, a Dreamer, was arrested by ICE agents immediately after she spoke about her father and brother, both of whom were detained by ICE agents because of their expired visas, at a news conference put together by immigration advocates in Jackson, Mississippi. Yesterday, the Huffington Post reported that her attorney said that Vargas was set to be deported without a court hearing because she entered the country using the visa waiver program, which abdicates an individual’s right to contest their removal.

Vargas is now being held at an ICE facility in Louisiana, and shared a message through her attorney that the Huffington Post has published: “I don’t understand why they don’t want me. I’m doing the best I can,” part of the statement reads. It continues:

There’s so much that I can bring to the table, so much, like I can even teach music, I’m an excellent trumpet player you can ask my mom about any of that.  I’m great with math, I speak Spanish. You know, there’s a lot of stuff that I can do for this country that they’re not allowing me to do. I’ve even tried to join the military, and I can’t do that. But, I mean that’s not the point, the whole point is that I would do anything for this country.

Her story has sparked outrage from many, and a petition started by the immigrant rights group United We Dream has collected almost 20,000 signatures. While there are many people on both sides of the argument, from people who are fuming at the injustice of the government’s treatment of Vargas to those who think an illegal immigrant is recklessly breaking the law, another perspective has emerged below the fold. It manages to walk the tight-rope between the two binaries and mixes performative empathy with a subtle “rules are rules” detachment. This perspective argues that this whole situation could have been prevented if Vargas had only managed her money better.

The reason why ICE has detained Vargas is because she is not technically a Dreamer with DACA status. According to the Huffington Post, Vargas’ DACA status expired in November and she only recently applied for DACA status again on February 10 because she was raising money for the $495 application fee that those under the reprieve of DACA are required to pay to renew their work permit.

Multiple immigration advocacy websites caution DACA recipients to be cognizant of their renewal dates and of the importance of saving up for the renewal fee. United We Dream recommends that one should renew their DACA status about five months before their status expires. The organization also outlines a variety of savings and fundraising advice for the renewal fee, as well as the opportunity for a fee exemption, though the chances of getting that exemption are very slim.

Some have pointed to Vargas’ inability to prioritize her DACA application fee as the reason why it is so hard for them to sympathize with her. Why didn’t she treat her payment with more urgency? Why doesn’t this 22-year-old have her priorities in order?

The $495 is a fee Vargas absolutely should have paid and planned for. Could she be characterized as mildly irresponsible for not paying this on time? Maybe. But according to the 2016 Consumer Financial Literacy Survey, one out of every five Americans do not pay their bills on time. The difference between these people and Vargas is that when they do have an overdue bill, a government official doesn’t show up to detain them and throw them in a detention facility to be deported.

A distinct freedom in America is the freedom to fail–the freedom to make a small mess and, as the saying goes, pull yourself up by your bootstraps and move on. This is a freedom that is not afforded to people like Vargas who were brought to this country with no choice. People who were raised as Americans and with the privileges that that identity allows, only to be brutally reminded when they reach adulthood that they are not Americans–that they are something else entirely, and every one of their failures is amplified to a dehumanizing degree.

Austin Elias-De Jesus

Austin is an editorial intern at Law Street Media. He is a junior at The George Washington University majoring in Political Communication. You can usually find him reading somewhere. If you can’t find him reading, he’s probably taking a walk. Contact Austin at Staff@Lawstreetmedia.com.

The post The Story of Daniela Vargas: The “Dreamer” About to be Deported appeared first on Law Street.

The Department of Homeland Security issued two memos on Tuesday, establishing harsher immigration enforcement when deporting undocumented immigrants. Taken together, the rules amount to a stricter interpretation of existing laws, and the expansion of others. The new guidelines also call for hiring more federal immigration officials, and erecting new detention facilities.

With last month’s executive order on illegal immigration and Tuesday’s memos, President Donald Trump seems to be following through with one of his principal campaign promises: cracking down on undocumented immigrants.

“The faithful execution of our immigration laws is best achieved by using all these statutory authorities to the greatest extent practicable,” DHS Secretary John Kelly wrote in one of the memos. “Accordingly, department personnel shall make full use of these authorities.”

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said on Tuesday that the rules were designed to “take the shackles off” immigration officers, and that “the number one priority is that people who pose a threat to our country are immediately dealt with.”

While President Barack Obama narrowly focused on deporting gang members, repeat criminal offenders, and high-level criminals who were in the country illegally (some dubbed him the “deporter in chief”), the new order essentially widens the scope of those who could be targeted for deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.

“ICE will not exempt classes or categories of removal aliens from potential enforcement,” said a fact sheet released by DHS on the order. “All of those present in violation of the immigration laws may be subject to immigration arrest, detention, and, if found removable by final order, removal from the United States.”

This effectively means that anyone found to have broken the federal immigration law–which is every undocumented immigrant living in the U.S.–is subject to being deported back to their home country. That does not mean this will happen, as there are roughly 11 million undocumented people living in the U.S., and there are not enough resources to deal with them all. But the new memos also call for more resources to help.

For one, the memos ask for an infusion of 10,000 new federal immigration officers. They also call for new detention facilities, and a new office within ICE to work with victims of crimes committed by undocumented immigrants. But it is unclear how the hiring increases and new infrastructure would be funded. In addition, Kelly told lawmakers on Capitol Hill earlier this month that more officers are not necessarily needed to strengthen security.

“I’d rather have fewer and make sure that they’re high-quality people,” he said. “I will not skimp on the training and the standards.” Regardless of whether ICE is able to hire thousands of new officers, it is expanding an existing program, known as 287(g), that uses local law enforcement officers as proxy federal immigration agents. Currently, 32 agencies across 16 states comply with the program; the new memos seek to expand the number of complying agencies. Between 2006 and 2013, the program resulted in about 175,000 deportations.

Immigration activists and some lawmakers strongly oppose the new guidelines. On Tuesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont), tweeted:

Instead of frightening 11 million undocumented people with deportation, we need comprehensive immigration reform and a path to citizenship.

— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) February 22, 2017

“When you tell state and local police that their job is to do immigration enforcement,” Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project told the New York Times, “it translates into the unwarranted and illegal targeting of people because of their race, because of their language, because of the color of their skin.”

One group that is seemingly safe from the heightened enforcement are undocumented children who were brought to the U.S. by their parents. Obama enacted a program, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, which protects the undocumented children, or Dreamers. That program protected roughly 750,000 children. But under the new rules, their parents are at greater risk of being deported.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Homeland Security Broadens the Scope of Immigration Enforcement appeared first on Law Street.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Wednesday that fulfilled, at least partially, his campaign promise of building a “beautiful wall” on the Mexican border. According to Trump’s spokesman Sean Spicer, the order will direct the Department of Homeland Security to use existing funds and resources to begin work on the wall, perhaps as early as next month. Drafts of another executive order signal Trump will enact strict visa bans for immigrants from “terror prone” nations. He is also expected to temporarily bar refugees from Muslim-majority countries.

Those executive orders have yet to be signed, but they imply Trump will follow through with his promise to clamp down on immigration, whether from Latin America or the Middle East and Africa. Trump signed the executive action on the Mexican border wall at the DHS headquarters Wednesday afternoon. Any additional funding for the wall, which Trump has promised will ultimately come from Mexico’s coffers, would need congressional approval.

Big day planned on NATIONAL SECURITY tomorrow. Among many other things, we will build the wall!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 25, 2017

According to another executive order draft on immigration and refugees, Trump will authorize a freeze on refugees fleeing civil wars in Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia. Exceptions will be made for religious minorities who are escaping persecution. The order will also temporarily block visas for immigrants from Muslim-majority countries–Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen–until stricter vetting procedures are in place.

“To think that Trump’s first 100 days are going to be marked by this very shameful shutting of our doors to everybody who is seeking refuge in this country is very concerning,” Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, told The New York Times. “Everything points to this being simply a backdoor Muslim ban.” It is unclear if Trump will block Muslims from other Muslim-dense countries–Indonesia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and others–from coming to the U.S.

A draft of another executive order Trump is considering reviews bringing back CIA “black sites,” all of which President Obama shuttered during his first week in office in 2009. But the draft is clear that the Trump Administration will not bring back water torture, a move he flirted with on the campaign trail. The draft states: “no person in the custody of the United States shall at any time be subjected to torture, or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as described by U.S. or international law.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Trump Makes Good on Mexican Border Wall Promise appeared first on Law Street.

President Barack Obama continued his flurry of 11th-hour moves on Thursday, submitting a final rule to formally end a registry that has not been in use since 2011. It’s the latest in a string of preemptive actions meant to prevent his successor, President-elect Donald Trump, from making good on campaign promises Obama and other Democrats oppose.

The Justice Department under George W. Bush called for the database, the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State and member of Trump’s transition team, assisted with the creation of the database. The program registered visitors to the U.S. from certain African and Middle Eastern countries: Iraq, Iran, Libya, Sudan, Syria, and 20 others. Deemed ineffective and out of date by many Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials, the program has not been in use since 2011.

Obama’s rule change will effectively erase the regulations for one tool that Trump might have used to make good on his campaign promise of registering all Muslims in the country. DHS’s final ruling said the database is “redundant, captured data manually that was already captured through automated systems, and no longer provided an increase in security in light of DHS’s evolving assessment of the threat posed to the United States by international terrorism.”

Although the program has been dormant since 2011, a 2012 report from the DHS inspector general indicated senior officials had been trying to discontinue the database since 2006. “Information obtained from fingerprints, flight manifests, travel and identification documents and intelligence sources is more valuable in determining who poses a potential national security risk,” the report said, adding that the database has “no discernible public benefit.”

Trump’s latest indication of what he might do to fulfill his immigration promises came Wednesday in Florida. He was asked if he would temporarily ban Muslim immigrants, or create a registry for Muslims, Trump replied: “You know my plans.” A spokesman clarified that the president-elect was referring to his plans to block visitors from countries with histories of Islamic extremism from entering the country.

President Obama’s final ruling is set to take effect immediately after it’s published in the Federal Registry on Friday.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Moves to Prevent Trump from Enacting Muslim Registry appeared first on Law Street.

John Kelly, a retired Marine General and 45-year military veteran, will head the Department of Homeland Security under President-elect Trump, CBS News reported on Wednesday. An official announcement is expected in the next few days. Kelly, 66, most recently served in the Obama Administration as the head of the U.S. Southern Command, a unit that focuses on operations in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Kelly did not endorse Trump during the campaign. But he is a widely respected veteran with a deep resume, including experience with many countries the U.S. has had conflicts with over the past four decades, including Iraq and Afghanistan. He has also served as the special assistant to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s supreme allied commander for Europe, and served as an aide to former defense secretaries Leon Panetta and Robert Gates.

Kelly, known for his blunt demeanor, called domestic politics a “cesspool” in an interview with Foreign Policy magazine last summer. Though he said he would be willing to serve either Trump or Hillary Clinton, he said neither was “serious yet about the issues,” and expressed his dislike of campaign rhetoric. Kelly is the third general chosen for Trump’s cabinet, following Michael Flynn as national security advisor and James Mattis as defense secretary. A fourth general, David Petraeus, is a candidate for the secretary of state position.

As the head of DHS, a body that was enacted to combat terrorism in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, Kelly will be charged with carrying out Trump’s vision in regard to illegal immigration. Like Trump, Kelly has said that the U.S.-Mexico border is porous, and is a vulnerable channel for drugs and weapons to pass through. Kelly has not supported Trump’s hardline stance on Muslims, however, saying U.S. troops “respect and even fight for the right of your neighbor to venerate any God he or she damn well pleases.”

He also has a fierce respect for the military, and has personal experience with the sacrifices service members make: Kelly’s oldest son Robert was killed while fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2010. Days after his son’s death, Kelly delivered an impassioned speech in St. Louis. “Their struggle is your struggle,” he said, referring to U.S. soldiers. “If anyone thinks you can somehow thank them for their service, and not support the cause for which they fight—our country—these people are lying to themselves.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Trump Cabinet: Who is John Kelly? appeared first on Law Street.

The couple that gunned down 14 people in San Bernardino, California last December exchanged private messages on Facebook nearly two years before the attack, discussing jihad and martyrdom. In the hours following the massacre, Tashfeen Malik–one of the killers–pledged allegiance to the leader of the Islamic State on her Facebook feed. The couple’s social media use prior to and after the attack reiterated ISIS’s savvy online; it also spurred action by the Department of Homeland Security, which announced a few months later a vague commitment to enhance its screening of social media accounts of immigrants who apply for certain immigration benefits, as well as Syrian refugees seeking asylum in the U.S.

Now, there is a push to increase surveillance of the social media accounts of all foreign travelers coming into the U.S. A Customs and Border Protection proposal filed in the Federal Register on June 23 recommends an additional section to forms filled out by tourists and immigrants at customs: “Please enter information associated with your online presence—provider/platform—social media identifier.” The proposed change to the form would be voluntary, and would not ask for passwords. For some, the voluntary aspect of the new proposal renders it useless.

“What terrorist is going to give our government permission to see their radical jihadist rants on social media?” Representative Vern Buchanan (R-FL) said in a statement. Buchanan is the author of legislation that is currently in Congress, the “Social Media Screening for Terrorists Act,” which includes similar proposals to CBP’s, although his bill would make filling out social media account information required. He said the new revision “lacks teeth.” 

Social media has proved an effective tool for proselytizing ISIS’s extremist ideology. But platforms like Twitter and Facebook struggle with policing accounts without breaching First Amendment rights. There is a general consensus that it is not the federal government’s role to impose restrictions on social media. But since the San Bernardino attacks and subsequent terrorist attacks around the globe, the U.S. government has increased its capacity to combat online radicalization. In its proposed revisions to the current customs form, CBP commented: “Collecting social media data will enhance the existing investigative process and provide DHS greater clarity and visibility to possible nefarious activity.”

However the U.S. government ends up beefing up its ability to monitor the social media accounts of people entering the country, ISIS continues to recruit people online. It is definitely an issue to keep an eye on in the coming months.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post U.S. Customs Form Could Soon Include Section for Social Media Information appeared first on Law Street.

The Transportation Security Administration agents recently failed 67 out of 70 total tests, missing 95 percent of the of mock explosives and weapons that were smuggled into airports by undercover Homeland Security Red Teams, ABC News Reported.

Since the administration’s last review in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security spent $540 million on checked baggage screening and $11 million to train Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents. Despite these expenditures, ABC news notes that the TSA has “failed to make any noticeable improvements in that time.” Professors John Mueller and Mark Stewart further reviewed homeland security expenditures using a cost-benefit analysis. They conclude, based on the costs of security and the financial damages of potential attacks, American spending has not produced the necessary results.

The failed airport security tests come at the worst possible time for the TSA. In the past couple months, we have witnessed multiple breaches in airport security. In April, a teenager snuck into a wheel well on an airplane leaving from the West Coast and flew all the way to Hawaii. In late May, a man was able to bypass airport security at LAX, only to be subdued by a TSA officer with a taser as he reached gate 66.

Last August, a woman was able to board a plane in San Jose without a ticket. The woman made it all the way to her destination before being arrested by police, who later determined that the she suffered from a mental illness.

After news of the recent Red Team tests emerged, Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson said,

Changes will be made in response to the identification of the vulnerable aspects by these tests.

According to the ABC News report, one undercover agent was actually stopped after setting off the alarm at the magnetometer, but after a pat down, TSA agents failed to find fake explosives taped to the undercover agent’s back.

The question now becomes, what new security measures will be enacted by the TSA, and will these new measures be any more effective?  The TSA recently started testing electronic devices traveling to and from overseas cities at many U.S. airports with direct international flights. The new rule will require passengers to power on their devices when arriving at security checkpoints for overseas flights. If the device will not power on, it will not be allowed past airport security checkpoints.

Many passengers feel this does not adequately address all the security concerns as it is only being implemented in select airports and does not address the problem of passengers smuggling bombs and weapons on their bodies, which TSA agents failed to detect in the mock testing. In 2014, the TSA  confiscated 2,212 firearms at 24 airports after screening nearly 653 million passengers, a 22 percent increase from 2013 where only 1,813 firearms were confiscated.

With external security threats remaining high according to terrorism experts, it is imperative to keep internal security at its best. Homeland Security has used Red Teams for the last 13 years to detect security flaws; however, the changes never seem to address the problems accurately. NBC News notes that since 2002, TSA agents failed similar Red Team tests on several occasions, indicating that there are many existing security flaws yet to be addressed.

NBC recently learned that 270 TSA security badges went missing at the San Diego International Airport over the last two years. These missing badges would allow non-Homeland Security personnel to gain access to restricted locations within the airport. As of March 2015, the Hartsfield-Jackson Airport in Atlanta saw more than 1,400 badges go missing over a similar time period.

How are we supposed to trust TSA agents with our lives when they can not be trusted with their own badges? Unless the TSA is able to completely restructure the airport security system, it is unlikely that new changes will make a large enough difference to deal with existing security threats.

Jennie Burger

Jennie Burger is a member of the University of Oklahoma Class of 2016 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Jennie at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Does the TSA Really Keep You Safe? appeared first on Law Street.

Given that they spend a large amount of time checking passengers and throw away a number of passengers’ personal items, should airport transportation security officers have a hard time finding weapons? With an annual budget of $7 million, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials believe that they set the standard for excellence in transportation security. According to ABC News, after an internal investigation with the Department of Homeland Security red teams, reports have shown otherwise. In fact, the results were so shocking that it led to the resignation of the head of the department.

Red team agents posed as passengers and conducted a series of tests to see just how secure this system really is. TSA agents did not pass 67 out of 70 tests, failing to find several mock weapons and explosives. Homeland Security discovered that the TSA fails to stop fake weapons or explosives from being smuggled through security checkpoints 95 percent of the time at some of our nation’s busiest airports. One red team investigator was stopped after setting off a magnetometer. Shockingly, after a pat-down, TSA agents still failed to find the fake explosive device taped to the investigator’s back. Frustrated by these results Jeh Johnson, the Homeland Security Secretary, set out immediately for a detailed briefing at the TSA Headquarters in Arlington, Virginia. DHS officials stated,

Secretary Johnson immediately directed TSA to implement a series of actions several of which are now in place, to address the issues raised in the report.

Melvin Carraway, the head of the TSA, resigned from his position as the acting administrator upon hearing these reports. He was appointed to this position in January of 2015 and was a veteran of the TSA for 11 years, holding many positions within the organization. Carraway was reassigned to serve in the Office of State and Local Law Enforcement at the Department of Homeland Security headquarters. There doesn’t appear to have been official word from Carraway on why he has resigned yet. Mark Hatfield will be his replacement until a new acting administrator is appointed. In regards to how the TSA will be dealt with moving forward, Johnson stated,

We take these findings very seriously in our continued effort to test, measure and enhance our capabilities and techniques as threats evolve.

Unnamed officials spoken to by ABC News admitted that these results were disappointing. Government officials claim that because red team agents are familiar with TSA procedures these results are not realistic and they are able to get past security in ways that terrorists could not. The TSA requires every passenger to go through various security checks before boarding a plane. Many believe that this process is nothing but an unnecessary and insulting ritual that does not protect anyone’s safety. It seems as if the TSA is more concerned with throwing away harmless personal items than finding weapons that threaten the lives of others.

The @TSA may not be able to find any bombs, but they sure as hell can find my shampoo..

— Larry Kraus (@lsk0334) June 2, 2015

The TSA has been failing to detect mock weapons for years and studies like this spark concerns that airline security is no safer than it was during the 9/11 terrorist attacks. With very few improvements, TSA has to figure out how to change their security procedures and stop these incidents from occurring.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Acting Head of the TSA Resigns After Shocking Test Results appeared first on Law Street.

Heated arguments over The Dress swept the country this week, pitting couples, friends, and coworkers against each other. So naturally the epic battle of white and gold vs. blue and black hit Congress just the same, and wouldn’t you know it, they don’t agree about the color of The Dress either. Shocking, right? To their credit, they weren’t quite as heated as some of us regular folk, considering they had some actual issues to deal with this week with DHS on the brink of shutdown and continued slow-rolling on Loretta Lynch’s nomination.

Take a look at the slideshow below for a full picture of all the members of Congress who weighed in on Dressgate via Twitter. One thing that seems to unite many of them? A love of giving careful non-answers. But hey, that’s how you get elected, right?

Even experts disagree over #TheDress—see what the two we spoke with have to say: http://t.co/EMg1Z2byID pic.twitter.com/iDfYyUp0aC

— Harper’s Bazaar (@harpersbazaarus) February 28, 2015

[SlideDeck2 id=35224 ress=1]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Know What Else Congress Can’t Agree on? The Dress appeared first on Law Street.

There’s been a lot of talk over the potential shutdown of a crucial government agency–the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). But for a lot of Americans, exactly what DHS does isn’t really known. What would the effects of shutting it down be, and how could it affect daily life in the United States? Read on to learn about DHS’s inception, history, functions, and the current debate in Congress over its future.

What is the Department of Homeland Security?

DHS is a department under the Executive Branch of the Government. As a result, the Department reports to the President of the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security was created just after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, when Tom Ridge was appointed to serve as the first Secretary of Homeland Security. However, it was not considered to be an independent office until November 2002, when the Homeland Security Act passed Congress. The first day of business for the new office was March 1, 2003.

The DHS states its mission as follows:

The vision of homeland security is to ensure a homeland that is safe, secure, and resilient against terrorism and other hazards.

Since then the Department has evolved due to acts of Congress or through actions made by its leadership. Often these changes have been made with the intention of streamlining how DHS deals with various areas of national security.

Why did 9/11 spark the creation of DHS?

On September 11, 2001, 19 members of a terrorist group known as Al-Qaeda took control of four United States passenger airplane flights and pointed them at various locations inside America. The targets of the first two flights were the Twin Towers located in New York City. The target of the third flight was the Pentagon in Washington, DC. The target of the fourth flight has not been determined, but many believe that the aircraft was aimed at the White House; however, the plane did not reach its target because it was forced down in a field located in western Pennsylvania. Between the four aircraft and their targets, roughly three thousand people died that day. The video below briefly shows what happened on the fateful day.

Prior to 9/11, an attack on American soil had been virtually unthinkable. The U.S. responded in part by creating the DHS to address the new challenges of terrorism and security in a changing global environment.

What is the Homeland Security Act?

The Homeland Security Act was a bill sponsored by former Congressman Richard Armey (R-TX) to create a department that could fulfill a threefold primary mission:

(A) Prevent terrorist attacks within the United States;

(B) Reduce the vulnerability of the United States to terrorism; and

(C) Minimize the damage, and assist in the recovery, from terrorist attacks that do occur within the United States.

Who runs DHS?

The Department is overseen by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Currently that position is held by Jeh Johnson, who was appointed by President Obama in 2013. Prior to Johnson, the Homeland Security secretaries were Tom Ridge, Michael Chertoff, and Janet Napolitano, although James Loy and Rand Beers also served in acting capacities. The Secretary of Homeland Security is a member of the President’s cabinet, and is 18th in the order of Presidential succession.

What kind of a budget does the Department of Homeland Security run on?

DHS is funded by taxpayers, and granted its budget by the United States Congress. For fiscal year 2015, the Department of Homeland Security requested $38.2 billion from Congress. The funding request to Congress was increased to forty one billion, two hundred million dollars for fiscal year 2016.

What does the Department of Homeland Security do?

DHS is involved in a number of initiatives, which cover a wide scope. The big four are known by the acronyms FRG, HSARPA, CSD, and RDP. There are also two other areas, known as SAFECOM and the Blue Campaign. Read on for more information about each of these initiatives.

First Responders Group

The First Responders Group (FRG) is a group of many programs that deal with First Response–or the government reaction to any sort of catastrophe such as the 9/11 terror attacks. The programs run by FRGs range from implementing First Responder training, to improving public safety, to conducting research into technology to help prevent or protect the public and those who are involved in dealing with disasters. One example is the website FirstResponder.gov. The purpose of this website is to keep all information on First Response in one place.

Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency

HSARPA is a group of different programs that aim to protect America’s borders, be they land or sea, from a range of threats. These threats can include chemical, cyber, biological, or conventional explosives. An example of the steps undertaken by HSARPA is the Air Cargo Program, which aims to develop better technology to check luggage for any signs of explosives.

Cyber Security Division

The Cyber Security Division is a branch of HSARPA that deals specifically with cyber threats to America. As it is a branch and not a standalone program, it includes a smaller group of programs. One of the biggest of which is the Rio Grande Valley System’s Analysis Project, which aims to help with the environmental and immigration challenges that are presented by the Rio Grande Valley.

Research and Development Partnerships Group

The Research and Development Partnerships Group is a newer branch of DHS, created in 2010. This group focuses on working with 30 other laboratories around the country focused on keeping America safe. An example of what RDP does is the Disaster Assessment at Harbors and Ports: The Unmanned Port Security Vessel project. The aim of this project is build a ship that functions like a drone to patrol U.S. ports for signs of danger.

SAFECOM

SAFECOM is a program that is designed to help to develop safer communication lines, be it improving already existing methods of communication, or helping to create new methods. One example is  FirstNet. This is an organization that DHS sponsors whose purpose is to set up and maintain a high quality network that is only available for first responders.

The Blue Campaign

The Blue Campaign is a program that was created by the Department of Homeland Security, which works in partnership with law enforcement agencies as well as other government agencies to spot, take down, and prevent human trafficking. It also seeks to provide relief and protection to those who have been victimized by human trafficking.

 What happens if the Department doesn’t get its funding?

If the Department of Homeland Security does not receive the funding that it needs to keep the doors open, all non-vital programs will be shut down and many of its employees–roughly 15 percent, or 30,000–will be furloughed. The rest–approximately 200,000–will still work, but will not necessarily receive anything for their work. While 15 percent doesn’t seem like too many, any reduction in DHS staff is a concern for our national security and first response capabilities. The video below explains not only how America arrived at this situation, but also what will happen if the money doesn’t make it to DHS in time.

Crisis Averted?

The deadline has been postponed, and the DHS is now funded through March 19, 2015. That being said, the argument still isn’t over. There are still a lot of things that Congress will have to sort out before DHS is guaranteed to stay funded. Arguments over President Obama’s immigration plans are first and foremost. The Department of Homeland Security is a vital tool that the United States uses to make sure its borders are secure and that its citizens are safe. If the funding keeps getting held up, the viability of all of these programs is at risk.

Resources

Primary

Department of Homeland Security: Blue Campaign

Department of Homeland Security: Creation of the Department of Homeland Security

Department of Homeland Security: DHS Budget

Department of Homeland Security: First Responders

Department of Homeland Security: Homeland Security Act of 2002

Department of Homeland Security: RDP

Department of Homeland Security: SAFECOM

Department of Homeland Security: Secretary Jeh Johnson

Additional

HISTORY.com: 9/11 Attacks – Facts & Summary

USA Today: Homeland Security Shutdown: What’s It All About?”

MSNBC: A DHS Shutdown by Any Other Name

CNBC: Congress Pursues Funding to Avert DHS Shutdown

Politico: GOP Leaders Set to Swerve DHS Off the Cliff

Chris Schultz

Chris Schultz is a Midwestern country boy who is a graduate of Dordt College in Sioux Center, Iowa and holds a bachelors degree in History. He is interested in learning about the various ocean liners that have sailed the world’s waters along with a variety of other topics. Contact Chris at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Department of Homeland Security: The Rise of National Security After 9/11 appeared first on Law Street.

In 2008, the film “Taken” shocked America and launched a blockbuster trilogy success. The movie wasn’t just gratuitous action scenes, however–it offered a lens into the world of human trafficking. It included a common stereotype that human trafficking doesn’t occur in the United States, and that it’s the rest of the world’s problem. This is not true–trafficking does happen here in the U.S. and it’s a big issue. Here’s a breakdown of everything you should know about human trafficking in the U.S.

What is human trafficking?

According to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, “victims of human trafficking are subjected to force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of commercial sex or forced labor.” It exists in rural, suburban, and urban locations. Human trafficking is sometimes known as modern day slavery. It usually occurs in the U.S. when people from other nations are brought in illegally to serve as free labor.

Read more about ending modern day slavery.

Human trafficking commonly brings to mind confinement, blindfolds, and drugs. Sometimes that can happen, but human traffickers also practice more subtle approaches. They influence their victims with various means, including:

• Debt Bondage: Captors will claim their victims owe a debt. The debt is paid in exchange for forced sex or labor.
• Public Isolation: Keeping victims from family, friends, work associates, and religious groups can cause victims to feel helpless and weaken their resolve to fight back.
• Confiscations of identification/traveling documents (Passports, visas, identification cards, etc.): Foreigners smuggled into the country need proper documentation to leave the country. The applications for documentation can be tedious and cause embarrassment, especially if they don’t have the identification required.
• Shaming: Human traffickers will threaten exposure to victims’ families, particularly if the victim has been forced to engage in sex work.
• Threat of Deportation/Imprisonment: Victims are threatened to be exposed to immigration authorities for violating immigration laws.
• Financial Control: Traffickers will withhold their victims’ money for “safekeeping,” making it impossible for the victims to set out on their own.

Each of these strategies is designed to make victims feel helpless and alone.  A demoralized victim is a weaker victim. Empowered victims are more likely to run away, alert authorities, and/or take a stand.

What happens to the victims of human trafficking?

There are long-term damages to victims of human trafficking. Tragically, a large percentage of these victims are children. Physically, victims of human trafficking can suffer from disease, stunted growth, and malnutrition. Psychologically, many victims will bypass key social, moral, and/or spiritual development. They can feel ostracized from the outside world. They are also at higher risk to fall victim to similar crimes again.

Statistics

It is important to note that due to the invisibility and nature of these crimes, statistics vary widely. While the following statistics are based on estimates, they’re still very disturbing.

Globally

There are quite a few estimations, but there are approximately 27 million slaves around the world, although only six percent are considered “identified.” There 800,000 people  trafficked across international borders every year, and one million children fall to the commercial sex trade. Of all the world’s trafficking victims, 80 percent are women and children. There are currently 161 countries affected by human trafficking, which is a $32 billion industry.

United States

In the United States, the average entry to prostitution is 12-14 years old. Previously sexualized victims and runaways are high-risk victims. Domestically, between 14,500 and 17,500 victims are trafficked into the United States annually. California has the highest volume of sex trafficking areas. The top 20 highest volume cities include Houston, El Paso, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Chicago, Charlotte, Miami, Las Vegas, New York, Long Island, New Orleans, Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Phoenix, Richmond, San Diego, San Francisco, St. Louis, Seattle, and Tampa.

Case Study: Inside the FBI Weekly Podcast

A 2009 podcast, “Inside the FBI,” details the account of a prominent U.S. human trafficking case. In it, Neal Schiff interviews FBI Special Agent Tricia Whitehill. She was involved in a case where multiple members of the Vasquez-Valenzuela family were indicted for “conspiracy, sex trafficking, and various immigration offenses.”

The investigation all started in 2006 when the family’s taxi driver called in a tip to CAST, the Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking. He remained a source throughout the investigation. The family had brought in girls in their teens and early twenties from Guatemala to the U.S. The family targeted poor and uneducated girls, some of whom did not even know their own birthdays. The Vasquez-Valenzuela family lured the girls back to the U.S. by promising them jobs in the jewelry and restaurant industries.

Once the girls were successfully smuggled, they were told they owed a debt that had to be paid in prostitution. If the girls didn’t initially comply, they were threatened with violence, witchcraft, and the death of their families. After the arrests of eight out of the nine offenders, one family member was left unaccounted for and went on the run. She was finally weeded out of hiding through the help of publicity and the general public. Public awareness can make all the difference. The leader of the family received the toughest sentence of 40 years in prison.

While this was a case in which the traffickers were successfully apprehended, in many more instances that’s not the case, even in the U.S.

What legislation does the U.S. use to fight trafficking?

Side by side with public awareness, strong legislation is key to the battle against human trafficking. Here are some of the most important laws addressing human trafficking here at home.

The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000

Long overdue in 2000, this act officially made human trafficking a federal offense. A federal crime is prosecuted under federal criminal law. It also includes provisions for the victims, including federal and state assistance, asylum in the U.S., and shelter and counseling.

Intelligence Reform and Prevention Act of 2004

This law established a Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center to “serve as a focal point for interagency efforts to address terrorist travel.” It promotes cooperation between state, federal, and intelligence agencies in this effort. It also requires an annual assessment delivered to Congress “regarding vulnerabilities in the United States and foreign travel system that may be exploited by international terrorists, human smugglers and traffickers, and their facilitators.”

Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act Of 2000

A large percentage of human trafficking occurs in the labor industry, for example in restaurants. This legislation creates investigations into properties suspected of human trafficking and alerts property owners. This prevents the ability of owners to claim ignorance of criminal activity on their property.

Activism to Fight Trafficking

In order to end human trafficking, legislation won’t be enough. Here are some of the steps that others have taken to attempt to combat human trafficking.

Polaris, CAST, and CCO

In September 2014 in a valiant effort to raise awareness against human trafficking in the greater Los Angeles area, Polaris, a non-profit organization fighting against human slavery, CAST, and Clear Channel Outdoor (CCO) announced their collaboration. CCO donated 25 digital billboards, 20 conventional billboards, and 20 transit shelter posters. The campaign ran in Spanish and English.

The campaign focused on two aspects. First, it promoted the National Human Trafficking Resource Center, a 24-hour, multi-lingual hotline designed for victims and members of the community. The campaign also encouraged victims to come out of the shadows and seek the help they deserve. The campaign tried to induce a sense of community for victims feeling alone.

The promotion also brought on board regionally elected officials and spokesmen like former NFL player and actor Terry Crews. He championed the cause saying:

Modern slavery is the husband coerced through violence to harvest crops, it’s the mother forced to work excessive hours as a domestic servant with little pay, and it’s the daughter sold online for sex against her will. Modern slavery is the 20.9 million people worldwide estimated to be victims of sex and labor trafficking, and we must do what’s in our power to restore their freedom. The more we raise awareness about the help available for victims of human trafficking in America, the more we can empower them to become survivors.

The more people who receive this message, the stronger the fight. The campaign hopes to target more cities across the U.S. in the future.

Presidential Involvement

In a step to bring further awareness to the general public, President Obama designated January to be National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month. In a press release, he wrote:

Even today, the darkness and inhumanity of enslavement exists. Millions of people worldwide are held in compelled service, as well as thousands within the United States. During National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month, we acknowledge that forms of slavery still exist in the modern era, and we recommit ourselves to stopping the human traffickers who ply this horrific trade.

In September 2012, continuing his commitment, President Obama spoke to the Clinton Initiative in New York. Partnered with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the President laid out a three-part plan to combat human trafficking. First, to “spot it and stop it.” That part of the plan calls for extensive reports to further government understanding, more effective training for all interagency task force members involved, collaboration with transportation services, and aid educators to spot potential trafficked victims among their students. Second, the plan hopes to use the internet as a weapon against human trafficking. The internet has been a great tool for the human-trafficking industry and the President wants to “turn the tables.” The plan aims to recruit tech companies and college students to the fight. Third, the plan aims for further dedicate resources for recovery. For example, to simplify the application for T-visas, designed to protect victims of human trafficking.

Other Groups Involved in the Fight Against Trafficking

There are many other groups involved in the fight against trafficking that attack different parts of the problem. They include:

• Not for Sale: A non-profit, international organization dedicated to raising awareness for sexual slavery.
• Bilateral Safety Corridor Coalition (California): Based in San Diego, the BSCC is comprised of more than 40 government and nongovernment agencies in the U.S. and Mexico to battle human trafficking.
• You Are Never Alone (Maryland): YANA provides a safe haven to women and children involved in prostitution who are seeking a better life.
• New York City Community Response to Trafficking (New York): The CRT is a team of community-based organizations and criminal justice agencies dedicated to responding to and raising awareness of human trafficking.
• Center for Multicultural Human Services (DC): CMHS received a joint federal grant with the Break the Chain Campaign from the Office for Refugee Resettlement to administer pre-certification and post-certification services to victims of trafficking in the Washington D.C. metro area.

Conclusion

With all of these laws in place, and so many activists working to fight it, why is trafficking still happening at such an alarming rate? It is hard to stop an industry so high in demand across the globe, regardless of its vile nature. In recent years, the internet is largely to blame. It allows for anonymity and easy communication internationally between buyer and seller. The deep web, not accessible through standard web searches, is a large black market tool. Another answer is that sex trafficking is almost impossible to obliterate when most of the victims are unidentified. Both rape and sexual slavery victims rarely come forward due to the highly personal sensitivity of the crime. However, we’re taking steps in the right direction with more laws and movements of activism. Hopefully, someday, the travesty that is human trafficking will become a thing of the past.

Resources

Primary

Office of Refugee Resettlement: What is Human Trafficking

Homeland Security: Human Trafficking Laws and Regulations

U.S. Department of State: U.S. Trafficking Report

White House: Presidential Proclamation

Additional 

Case Act: What is Human Trafficking

FBI Podcasts and Radio: International Human Trafficking

Polaris: Polaris, Cast, and Clear Channel Outdoor Law Anti-Human Trafficking Awareness Campaign

Judges’ Journal: President Obama’s Speech on Human Trafficking

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Human Trafficking: Alive in the United States appeared first on Law Street.