U.S. Border Crisis Blocks U.S. Immigration Reform   

Jason Riley, a Wall Street Journal columnist, asserts that the U. S, border crisis is blocking needed reform of U.S. immigration law and procedures.[1] Here is a summary of that argument.

First, “porous borders compromise homeland security. The world is a dangerous place, as recent events have reminded us, and the government needs to know who’s entering the country. Increasingly, the southern border has become a portal not only for Central Americans but also for tens of thousands of foreign nationals from as far away as Asia and Africa. A large majority are economic migrants in search of employment and better living conditions. Still, the possibility that some small percentage is coming here to do us harm deserves more attention than it’s getting from the White House.”

“So long as the border problem persists at crisis levels, the debate over how to repair our immigration system for admitting people legally is going nowhere.”

“[D]espite heightened levels of undocumented immigration, the country still has far more job openings than job seekers. The real problem is a labor shortage that hasn’t gone away even as wages have risen. According to Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former head of the Congressional Budget Office, demographic trends are to blame, and more legal immigration should be part of any solution.”

A major reason for this labor shortage is “the retirement of the Baby Boom generation, [which] is swelling the ranks of retirees entering the large entitlement programs that rely on labor taxes for their funds, raising the specter of a future of smaller cohorts of workers paying higher taxes in a slower-growing economy,” Mr. Holtz-Eakin writes in a new paper. ‘The reform of employment-based immigration can address the near-term scarcity of labor, as well as the looming demographic crisis created by low fertility and the retiring Baby Boom generation.’”

As a result, “Mr. Holtz-Eakin calls for is a less-restrictive H-1B visa program for skilled workers. The number of visas, which often go to graduates of U.S. universities, has been capped at 85,000 since 2004, even though more than 480,000 people are currently seeking one. Visa holders aren’t permitted to switch jobs or start businesses. In addition to the low cap, no country may receive more than 7% of the annual allotment, a rule that stymies nationals from populous countries such as India. ‘The result is long wait times for skilled workers and an inflexible system for employers.’”

“Mr. Holtz-Eakin stresses that our inefficient migrant policies are noticed by other countries and have put us at a competitive disadvantage in the international competition for human capital. Earlier this year Canada announced that it was offering 10,000 work permits to foreigners residing in the U.S. on H-1B visas. Within 48 hours of the program’s launch, all the slots were taken. ‘At present,’ Mr. Holtz-Eakin writes, ‘the near-term outlook for labor is scarcity, the long-term trend is slowing population growth, and the United States’ global competitors are more successful in attracting high-skill immigrants.’”

Mr. Riley concludes, “You can support more legal immigration and better border security at the same time, and polling shows that most Americans do. They understand that allowing more people to come lawfully will help reduce unlawful entries. Moreover, there is agreement among Democratic and Republican lawmakers that the system is dysfunctional and outdated. There is no reason we can’t upgrade our policies in a way that accommodates the aspirations of migrants and satisfies the demands of a 21st-century economy. But don’t expect to see bipartisan appetite for constructive reform so long as illegal immigration rages unchecked.”

Conclusion

This blogger agrees that U.S. immigration law and procedures are “dysfunctional and outdated” and need to be changed to accommodate “the aspirations of migrants and [satisfy] the demands of a 21st-century economy.”

======================

[1] Riley, The Border Crisis Stymies Needed Immigration Reform, W.S.J. (Dec. 5, 2023)

 

 

Analysis of Cuba’s Current Economic Crisis 

“Cuba is going through the worst crisis it has experienced in decades, with widespread shortages of food and medicines, rolling blackouts and a sky-high 400% annual inflation rate. The calls on the communist leadership to open up the economy to the market are getting loud, even from close political allies.”[1]

“But deep divisions at the top of the regime regarding how much freedom to give the new private sector, compounded by a leadership vacuum, are creating paralysis and keeping the country from adopting broader market reforms.”

“Among the people most opposed to any change that smacks of capitalism are hardliners who have the most invested in the regime that has ruled Cuba since 1959: Men in their 90s, with deep roots in the Revolution and historic ties to Castro, who still serve in high-profile positions and who enjoy a standard of living vastly superior to the average Cuban. They resist market reforms, seeing them as a betrayal of Marxist ideology and a challenge to continuing authoritarian rule.”

“Carlos Alzugaray, a former Cuban diplomat who lives in Cuba [and who participated in] an event organized by the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University in October, said, “The country’s top leadership is made up of people who have very dogmatic views of reality and are very attached to certain things from the past. A closed ideological vision prevails in many sectors, in people from the old guard like Ramiro Valdés or in new people like Díaz-Canel.” He also criticized the island’s “immense Cuban bureaucracy that enjoys much discretionary power in implementing changes.”

This point was echoed by John Kavulich, the president of the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, a New York group monitoring business with Cuba, who has three decades of experience dealing with Cuban government officials. He said, “bureaucrats have become more reluctant to take risks since there is uncertainty about who is really in charge.” They are “either frightened or untrusting, and certainly not risk-takers.”

Observers say that there are at least the following centers of power in Cuba:

  • “The administrative branch of the government, including Díaz-Canel, Prime Minister Marrero, the Council of Ministers, the individual ministries and big state-owned companies.
  • The Communist Party, “the superior leading political force of society and the State,” according to the country’s 2019 Constitution.
  • GAESA, a vast business conglomerate run by the military, which runs most of the island’s economy, especially the tourism industry.
  • The military itself, which manages other industries outside GAESA and has developed close relations with the Russian and Chinese military, and whose generals and other top current and former officials hold leadership positions across the government.
  • The Interior Ministry, which oversees the police, the state security apparatus, and intelligence and counterintelligence agencies. The intelligence services have the most to fear from a transition to a market economy that could bring demands for regime change.”

The military is believed by many to have the upper hand. “They exert notable influence not just by commanding the armed forces and security agencies but also through GAESA, whose finances are believed to be untouchable, even by the Ministry of the Economy. The generals have seats in all the major decision-making bodies, including the Communist Party’s Politburo, the Central Committee and the Council of Ministers. The country’s prime minister, Marrero, is a former army colonel who later served as tourism minister. Ultimately, the military may see the private sector as an unwelcome competitor.”

“Government officials, generals and Communist Party leaders have heavily courted traditional allies like Russia, China and Belarus, hoping for a lifeline to keep the economy afloat without giving more space to capitalism. That strategy worked well for Fidel Castro, who struck a deal with Soviet leaders in the early days of the Revolution that resulted in billions of dollars in subsidies during the Cold War.”

“’There seems to be a sort of paralysis and a lack of clear hierarchy in the decision-making process that has grown worse in the last couple of years,’ said a source who has interacted with the island’s authorities over the years to help American companies do business with Cuba and who asked to remain anonymous to speak about meetings with Cuban officials. ‘What was once a fairly clear power hierarchy is now sort of a patchwork, and it’s a guessing game as to why a proposal is getting denied and who is making this decision. And that’s a fundamental change.’”

Some people involved in the private sector “believe Díaz-Canel understands the need to expand the private sector. But he lacks the power to push reforms, despite his position at the top of the Communist Party.”

=============================

[1] Torres, As Cuba’s economy craters and private businesses grow, here’s what’s holding up change, Miami Herald (Dec. 5, 2023).

Cuba Still on U.S. List of State Sponsors of Terrorism

On November 30, the U.S. State Department published its annual list of state sponsors of terrorism. Cuba is still on the list. Others on that list are North Korea, Iran and Syria.[1]

Here is what the report said about Cuba:

  • “On January 12, 2021, the Department of State designated Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism.  The Secretary determined that the Cuban government repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism in granting safe harbor to terrorists.”
  • “Cuba was previously designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1982 because of its long history of providing advice, safe haven, communications, training, and financial support to guerrilla groups and individual terrorists.”
  • “Cuba’s designation was rescinded in 2015 after a thorough review found that the country met the statutory criteria for rescission.  In 2021 the Secretary of State determined that Cuba had repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism in the six years since its designation had been rescinded.  Citing peace negotiation protocols, Cuba refused Colombia’s request to extradite 10 ELN leaders living in Havana after that group claimed responsibility for the 2019 bombing of a Bogotá police academy that killed 22 people and injured 87 others.”
  • “The Cuban government did not formally respond to the extradition requests for ELN leaders Victor Orlando Cubides (aka “Pablo Tejada”) and Ramírez Pineda (aka “Pablo Beltrán”) filed by Colombia.”
  • “In November, pursuant to an order from Colombian President Petro, the Attorney General announced that arrest warrants would be suspended against 17 ELN commanders, including those whose extradition Colombia had previously requested.”
  • “Cuba also continues to harbor several U.S. fugitives from justice wanted on charges related to political violence, many of whom have resided in Cuba for decades.”

Conclusion

 As the above report indicates, “Cuba’s designation was rescinded in 2015 [by the Obama Administration] after a thorough review found that the country met the statutory criteria for rescission.” [2] That is still the proper conclusion.

==========================

[1]  U.S. State Department, Country Reports on Terrorism (Ch.2. State Sponsors of Terrorism) (Nov. 30, 2023);Despite Havana’s tantrums, Cuba will remain on the US list of state sponsors of terrorism for another year, Diario de Cuba (Dec. 1, 2023) .

[2] President Obama Rescinds U.S. Designation of Cuba as a “State Sponsor of Terrorism,” dwkcommentaries.com (April 15, 2015);U.S. Rescinds Designation of Cuba as a “State Sponsor of Terrorism,” dwkcommentaries.com (May 29, 2015). See also “Cuba: State Sponsor of Terrorism?” section of List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—Topical: CUBA [as of 5/4/20]. 

 

Washington Post Editorial: Improving U.S. Asylum Law and Procedures

An editorial in the Washington Post starts by saying the obvious: the current U.S. asylum policies and procedures are not working and that this is due to lack of resources (insufficient number of immigration judges and facilities to house immigrant families).[1]

In addition, the editorial says “the best policies are those that open new doors. The offer of ‘humanitarian parole’ for Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans applying from their home country radically cut border encounters.”

Thus, the editorial concludes, “A bipartisan agreement — more border resources and procedural reforms, in return for more avenues in — has the best shot of fixing the border.”

It, however, failed to address the more challenging issues of what resources in what amounts should be added and details on what new avenues into the U.S. should be adopted.

=========================

[1] Editorial, Here’s a deal to restore asylum and order, at the border, Wash Post (Nov. 27, 2023).

 

U.S. Embassy in Havana Echoes State Department’s Warning: “Worldwide Caution”

On October 20, 2023, the U.S. State Department issued the following Security Alert: Worldwide Caution:[1]  “Event:  Due to increased tensions in various locations around the world, the potential for terrorist attacks, demonstrations or violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests, the Department of State advises U.S. citizens overseas to exercise increased caution.  U.S. citizens should:

On November 24, the U.S. Embassy in Havana reiterated that warning with the following post on twitter: [2]

  • “Worldwide Caution Due to increased tensions in Cuba and in various locations around the world, the potential for terrorist attacks, demonstrations or violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests, the Department of State advises U.S. citizens overseas to exercise increased caution.”
  • “U.S. citizens should: Stay alert in locations frequented by tourists and commonly used locations for demonstrations. • Enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive information and alerts and make it easier to locate you in an emergency overseas. • Follow the Department of State on Facebook and Twitter.”

This warning by the U.S. Embassy came “just hours after a massive demonstration in favor of Palestine [in front of the U.S. Embassy in Havana] that was organized by the ruling Young Communist League (UJC), the University Student Federation (FEU) and the Federation of Students of the Secondary Education (FEEM). Students from that Arab nation on scholarships on the Island participated, some of them carrying photos of Hamas militia leaders.” Also participating in the demonstration, without speaking, were Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Balart and Cuban Prime Minister Manuel Marrero Cruz.

===========================

[1] U.S. State Department, Security Alert: Worldwide Caution (Nov. 14, 2023).

[2] U.S. Embassy in Cuba, Post on Twitter (Nov. 24. 2023); The US issues a warning due to the risk of a terrorist attack for its citizens in Cuba, Diario de Cuba (Nov. 26, 2023).

 

 

 

Response to Derek Chauvin’s Federal Motion for New Trial for Killing George Floyd  

A recent post discussed recent developments in the state and federal criminal cases against ex-officer Derek Chauvin for the killing of George Floyd, including his recent motion for a new trial in federal court based on the opinion of a pathologist who had never examined Mr. Floyd or his corpse and who had never participated in either of these cases.[1] Now here is preliminary analysis of that new Chauvin motion.

Chauvin’s New Motion Challenging His Federal Conviction and Sentencing[2]

On November 13, 2023, Derek Chauvin (without legal counsel) filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota to vacate his conviction and sentencing by that court, which was based on his guilty plea, for the murder and manslaughter of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May 2020.

The asserted basis for this new motion was the opinion of a pathologist, Dr. William Schaetzel, who had never examined the Floyd corpse and never testified in any of the criminal cases, but who said based on review of certain papers that Floyd did not die from asphyxia from Chauvin’s actions, but from complications of a rare tumor called paragangliona that can cause a fatal surge of adrenaline.

This Motion Is Bared By Chauvin’s Guilty Plea

This new motion appears to be barred by Chauvin’s guilty plea under oath, where Chauvin admitted in writing that “certain facts were true . . .[and] established his  guilt beyond a reasonable doubt].” [3] Those admissions included the following:

  • Chauvin, ‘while acting under color of law . . . willfully deprived George Floyd of . . . the right to be free from an unreasonable seizure, which includes the right to be free from the use of unreasonable force by a police officer. [Chauvin] . . . held his left knee across Mr. Floyd’s neck, back, and shoulder, and his right knee on Mr. Floyd’s back and arm. As Mr. Floyd lay on the ground, handcuffed and unresisting, [Chauvin] . . . kept his knees on Floyd’s neck and body, even after Mr. Floyd became unresponsive. This offense resulted in bodily injury to, and the death of, George Floyd.”
  • Chauvin “admits that in using this unreasonable and excessive force, he acted willfully and in callous and wanton disregard of the consequences to Mr. Floyd’s life. [Chauvin] . . . knew that what he was doing was wrong, in part, because it was contrary to his training as an MPD officer.. .”
  • Chauvin “also knew there was no legal justification to continue his use of force because he was aware that Mr. Floyd not only stopped resisting, but also stopped talking, stopped moving, stopped breathing, and lost consciousness and a pulse.’ [Chauvin] . . .chose to continue applying force even though he knew Mr. Floyd’s condition progressively worsened. . . . [Chauvin] also heard Mr. Floyd repeatedly explain that he could not breathe, was in pain, and wanted help.”
  • Chauvin “knew that what he was doing was wrong—that continued force was no longer appropriate and that it posed significant risks to Mr. Floyd’s life—based on what he observed and heard about Mr. Floyd.”
  • Chauvin “admits that he failed to render medical aid to Mr. Floyd, as he was capable of doing, and trained and required to do.”

Conclusion

Now we await the State’s response to this motion by Chauvin, any reply from Chauvin and the court’s decision on the morion.

In the meantime, on November 24, 2023, Chauvin was seriously  stabbed by another inmate at the Tucson, Arizona federal prison where Chauvin was incarcerated, but Chauvin is expected to live. [3]

==========================

 

[1] U.S. Supreme Court Denies Derek Chauvin’s Petition To Review His State Court Conviction for Murder and Manslaughter of George Floyd, dwkcommentaries.com (Nov. 20, 2023).

 

[2] Motion To Vacate Conviction and Sentence under 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255, U.S. v. Chauvin, Case No. 21-CR-108-PAM, U.S. Dist. Ct. MN (Nov. 13, 2023); Karnowski (AP), Ex-officer Derek Chauvin makes another bid to overturn federal conviction in murder of George Floyd, StarTribune. com (Nov. 14, 2023); Krauss, Derek Chauvin files motion attempting to overturn federal conviction, StarTribune (Nov. 15, 2023); Price, Derek Chauvin claims new evidence shows he didn’t cause George Floyd’s death, attempts to overthrow conviction, Fox News (Nov. 15, 2023); Naham, Convicted murderer Derek Chauvin’s prison emails revealed as he cites pathologist’s alternate theory George Floyd ‘literally scared’ to death, Law & Crime (Nov. 15, 2023).

[3] (Sisak, Ex-officer Derek Chauvin, convicted in George Floyd’s killing, stabbed in prison, AP sources say, StarTribune (Nov,. 24, 2023); Olson & Sawyer, Derek Chauvin expected to survive after prison stabbing, StarTribune (Nov. 25, 2023); Hughlett, Derek Chauvin survives Arizona federal prison attack, raising questions about security, StarTribune Nov. 25, 2023).

International “Tribunal” Rules U.S. Embargo (Blockade) of Cuba Violates International Law  

On November 17, 2023, the “judges” on the so-called International Tribunal Against the Blockade of Cuba decided that the U.S. embargo (“blockade”) of Cuba violates international Law and universal norms for peaceful coexistence. They also stressed that the blockade violates the UN Charter, which enshrines the sovereignty of the countries, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and agreements of the World Trade Organization, among other norms.

It also should be noted that the U.S. was not a party to this proceeding and that the “tribunal urged” the United States to end the blockade against Cuba and compensate affected companies and citizens.”(emphasis added).[1]

The “judges” presiding over the tribunal included Norman Peach, a German International Law expert; Dimitris Kaltsonis, a professor and member of the Democratic Jurists Society; Ricardo Joao Duarte, a member of the Lawyers College of Portugal; Suzanne Adely, president of the National Lawyers Guild;  Daniela Dahn, writer and journalist; and Simone Dioguiardi, International Law specialist.

The “prosecutors” in this proceeding were Jan Fermon of the Lawyers College of Brussels, Nana Gyamfi of the National Conference of Black Lawyers of the United States, and Antonio Segura of the Lawyers College of Madrid.

In addition to the prosecution’s arguments, the “judges” heard oral and written arguments from Members of the European Parliament, members of European and Cuban civil society, scientists, Cuba solidarity activists, representatives of the business community in Europe, Cuban cancer patients, journalists, feminist activists, and many others whose lives and livelihoods have been impacted by the many different components of the U.S. blockade on Cuba.

The “tribunal,” which held its hearing in the European Parliament in Brussels, Belgium, was organized by the Cuban Institute of Friendship with the Peoples and The Left, a parliamentary group in the European Parliament.

Conclusion

Although this blogger is a retired U.S. attorney with some experience in international law and believes that the U.S. embargo (blockade) of Cuba has been and is a stupid U.S. policy that is probably illegal under international law, he objects to the self-identification of the group that conducted this proceeding as an international tribunal.

==================

[1] International tribunal finds US blockade of Cuba in violation of international law, peoples dispatch (Nov. 17, 2023); Court rules that blockade of Cuba violates international law, Granma (Nov. 17, 2023).

 

 

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Derek Chauvin’s Petition to Review His State Court Conviction for Murder and Manslaughter of George Floyd

On November 20, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court without opinion denied Derek Chauvin’s petition for review of  his state court conviction for the murder and manslaughter of George Floyd in May 2020.[1] It thus appeared that this state court criminal case was over as was Chauvin’s federal guilty plea, criminal conviction and sentencing for the killing of George Floyd. However, as discussed below, a recent development in the federal case raises the question of whether one or both of those cases could be reopened.

Prior State Court Proceedings[2]

Chauvin’s state court conviction resulted from an April 2021 Hennepin County jury verdict that he was guilty of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. The following June Hennepin County District Judge Peter Cahill sentenced him to 22 ½ years in prison for those crimes.

Chauvin’s appeal of that conviction was rejected by the Minnesota Court of Appeals in April 2023 with a 50-page opinion and the Minnesota Supreme Court in July 2023 denied his appeal from same without opinion.

That Minnesota Supreme Court decision was then challenged by Chauvin’s petition to the U.S. Supreme Court,  which just denied that petition.

Derek Chauvin’s Federal Court Proceedings[3]

In  May 2021, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota filed a criminal complaint against Chauvin and the other three Minneapolis ex-policeman over the killing of George Floyd.

Without a trial Chauvin pled guilty in December 2021 to these charges.  In that guilty pleaChauvin admitted in writing that certain facts were true . . .[and] established his  guilt beyond a reasonable doubt].” [3] Those admissions included the following:

  • Chauvin, ‘while acting under color of law . . . willfully deprived George Floyd of . . . the right to be free from an unreasonable seizure, which includes the right to be free from the use of unreasonable force by a police officer. [Chauvin] . . . held his left knee across Mr. Floyd’s neck, back, and shoulder, and his right knee on Mr. Floyd’s back and arm. As Mr. Floyd lay on the ground, handcuffed and unresisting, [Chauvin] . . . kept his knees on Floyd’s neck and body, even after Mr. Floyd became unresponsive. This offense resulted in bodily injury to, and the death of, George Floyd.”
  • Chauvin “admits that in using this unreasonable and excessive force, he acted willfully and in callous and wanton disregard of the consequences to Mr. Floyd’s life. [Chauvin] . . . knew that what he was doing was wrong, in part, because it was contrary to his training as an MPD officer.. .”
  • Chauvin “also knew there was no legal justification to continue his use of force because he was aware that Mr. Floyd not only stopped resisting, but also stopped talking, stopped moving, stopped breathing, and lost consciousness and a pulse.’ [Chauvin] . . .chose to continue applying force even though he knew Mr. Floyd’s condition progressively worsened. . . . [Chauvin] also heard Mr. Floyd repeatedly explain that he could not breathe, was in pain, and wanted help.”

Chauvin “knew that what he was doing was wrong—that continued force was no longer appropriate and that it posed significant risks to Mr. Floyd’s life—based on what he observed and heard about Mr. Floyd.”

  • Chauvin “admits that he failed to render medical aid to Mr. Floyd, as he was capable of doing, and trained and required to do.”

In July  2022 U.S. District Judge Magnuson sentenced Chauvin to 245 Months for Depriving George Floyd and John Pope [a teenager in a different case] of Their Federal Civil Rights.

It thus appeared that this federal case was over while Chauvin concurrently served his federal and state sentences in a federal prison in Colorado.

Recent Chauvin Challenge to Federal Conviction and Sentencing[4]

However, on November 13, 2023, Derek Chauvin (without legal counsel) filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota to vacate his conviction and sentencing by that court, based on his guilty plea, for the murder and manslaughter of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May 2020.

The asserted basis for this motion was the opinion of a pathologist, Dr. William Schaetzel, who had never examined the Floyd corpse and never testified in any of the criminal cases, but said based on review of certain papers that Floyd did not die from asphyxia from Chauvin’s actions, but from complications of a rare tumor called paragangliona that can cause a fatal surge of adrenaline.

This development will be explored in a subsequent post.

=====================

[1] Hyatt, U.S. Supreme Court rejects review of Derek Chauvin’s latest appeal attempt, Star Tribune Nov. 20, 2023) Supreme Court rejects appeal of former Minneapolis police officer convicted of killing George Floyd, APNews (Nov. 20, 2023)

[2] Derek Chauvin Trial: Week Seven {Conviction), dwkcommentaries.com (April 21, 2021);Derek Chauvin Trial: Chauvin Sentenced to 22.5 Years Imprisonment, dwkcommentaries.com (June 28, 2021);Derek Chauvin’s Appeal of State Conviction and Sentencing for Killing George Floyd, dwkcommentaries.com (Jan. 23, 2023); Minnesota Court of Appeals Affirms State Court Conviction of Derek Chauvin for Killing George Floyd, dwkcommentaries.com (April 19, 2023); Derek Chauvin Asks Minnesota Supreme Court To Review His Conviction for Killing of George Floyd, dwkcommentaries.com (May 18, 2023); Derek Chauvin Will Ask U.S. Supreme Court To Review His State Court Conviction for Murder and Manslaughter of George Floyd , dwkcommentaries.com(July 21, 2023); Derek Chauvin Files Petition for U.S. Supreme Court Review of His State Court Conviction for Murder and Manslaughter of George Floyd, dwkcommentaries.com (Oct. 25, 2023).

[3] Federal Criminal Charges Against Ex-Policemen Over George Floyd’s Killing, dwkcommentaries,com (May 7, 2021); Derek Chauvin Pleads Guilty to Federal Charges Over George Floyd Killing and Excess Force Against Teenager ,dwkcommentaries.com (December 16, 2021);  Federal Court Sentences Derek Chauvin to 245 months (20.4 Years) for Depriving George Floyd and John Pope of  Their Federal Civil Rights, dwkcommentaries.com (July 8, 2022); Comment: Federal Court’s Criminal Judgment for Derek Chauvin, dwkcommentaries.com (July 9, 2022).

[4] Karnowski (AP), Ex-officer Derek Chauvin makes another bid to overturn federal conviction in murder of George Floyd, StarTribune. com (Nov. 14, 2023) Krauss, Derek Chauvin files motion attempting to overturn federal conviction, StarTribune (Nov. 15, 2023) Price, Derek Chauvin claims new evidence shows he didn’t cause George Floyd’s death, attempts to overthrow conviction, Fox News (Nov. 15, 2023) Naham, Convicted murderer Derek Chauvin’s prison emails revealed as he cites pathologist’s alternate theory George Floyd ‘literally scared’ to death, Law & Crime (Nov. 15, 2023) Motion To Vacate Conviction and Sentence under 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255, U.S. v. Chauvin, Case No. 21-CR-108-PAM, U.S. Dist. Ct. MN (Nov. 13, 2023).

 

 

Charge to Westminster Presbyterian Congregation by Rev. Dr. Tim Hart-Andersen

At the close of each Westminster worship service during Rev. Dr. Tim Hart-Andersen’s tenure as Senior Pastor he offered the following charge to the congregation:

Go forth into the world in peace.

Be of good courage.

Hold fast to that which is good.

Render to no person evil for evil.

Strengthen anyone fainthearted.

Support anyone weak.

Heal anyone afflicted.

Honor all people.

Steward the creation.

Love and serve the Lord,

Rejoicing in the power of the Holy Spirit.

This charge originally was found in the 1928 Church of England Book of Common Prayer, based on a paraphrase of 1 Thessalonians 5:12-28, amended with a reference to Genesis 2:15.

The elements of this charge were elaborated in Rev. Hart-Andersen’s final seven sermons before his retirement at the end of this October.[1]

===================================

[1] “The Benediction of Life Together” at Westminster Presbyterian Church, dwkcommentaries.com (Oct. 19, 2023)(9/10/23 sermon); “The Benediction Never Ends” at Westminster Presbyterian Church, dwkcommentaries.com (Oct. 20, 2023)(9/17/23 sermon); ;“World Communion Sunday at Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church Celebrates Its Global Partners (Oct. 11, 2023) (10/1/23 sermon); “We Are the Church: Be of Good Courage. Hold Fast to That Which Is Good” at Westminster Presbyterian Church, dwkcommentaries.com  Nov. 2, 2023) (10/8/23 sermon) ; “We Are The Church: Render to no person evil for evil. Strengthen anyone fainthearted. Support anyone weak. Heal anyone afflicted” at Westminster Presbyterian Church, dwkcommentaries.com (Nov. 3, 2023)(10/15/23 sermon); “We Are The Church: Honor all people. Steward the creation” at Westminster Presbyterian Church (10/22/23 sermon) [blog post to follow]; “We Are the Church: Love and serve the Lord, rejoicing in the power of the Holy Spirit (10/29/23 sermon) [blog post to follow].

 

 

 

Central American Countries’ Northward Busing of South American Immigrants

This October, the Costa Rican government declared a national emergency and formed a plan with Panama to shuttle migrants [on buses] from its southern border to its northern one. Costa Rican officials say the busing program has removed . . . [a migrant encampment], as well as alleviated the strain on border communities and provided people a safer alternative to paying human smugglers. A similar busing program has been adopted by Honduras.[1]

This Costa Rican program is in response to a “doubling the number of crossings from [200,000] last year and leading to a massive tent encampment along Costa Rica’s borders, complaints from business owners and a rise in abusive smuggling operations.”

This development “has raised alarms in the United States, which has called on its Latin American allies to deter people from making the treacherous journey north by encouraging them to apply for refugee status closer to their home countries.” U.S. officials have also argued that the busing routes only incentivize more migrants to flee their homes and make the dangerous journey to the U.S. border. Their Central American counterparts argue migrants are already set on traveling to the United States and the busing system is making the journey less dangerous.”

“The busing program is not free, and has added one more fee to the many that migrants are confronted with on their costly journey north. . . . In Panama, each person must pay $60 to be bused to Costa Rica’s main terminal. They then must pay another $30 to board a shuttle that will take them to the Nicaraguan border. The fees are collected by the bus companies, which are licensed by the governments.”

This busing “can also be dangerous. Earlier this year, at least 39 people were killed when a bus ferrying migrants through Panama fell from a cliff. Last month, 18 migrants died in a bus crash in Mexico and a crash in Honduras left four dead and a dozen injured.”

It should also be mentioned that Panama is in the midst of violent protests about a government contract that allows a Canadian company to expand its copper mining operations here and whether the country should preserve its natural resources or develop them.[2]

=====================================

[1] Youngs & Bolanos, A New Answer for Migrants in Central America: Bus Them North, N.Y. Times (Nov, 8, 2023).

[2] Salcedo, Why ordinarily quiet Panama has erupted in deadly protests, Wash. Post (Nov. 8, 2023).