Author: dwkcommentaries

As a retired lawyer and adjunct law professor, Duane W. Krohnke has developed strong interests in U.S. and international law, politics and history. He also is a Christian and an active member of Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church. His blog draws from these and other interests. He delights in the writing freedom of blogging that does not follow a preordained logical structure. The ex post facto logical organization of the posts and comments is set forth in the continually being revised “List of Posts and Comments–Topical” in the Pages section on the right side of the blog.

U.S. Admits “Havana Syndrome” Not Caused by Foreign Adversary

In 2016, officials in the U.S. Embassy in Havana, Cuba reported ringing in the ears followed by pressure in the head and nausea, headaches and acute discomfort. Subsequently similar symptoms were reported by “U.S. career diplomats, intelligence officers and others serving in U.S. missions around the world” and the symptoms became known as the “Havana Syndrome.”[1]

Apparently in late February 2023, the CIA and six other U.S.intelligence agencies concluded their joint participation in reviewing approximately 1,000 cases of “anomalous health incidents.” Here are their conclusions:

  • “Five of those agencies determined it was ‘very unlikely’ that a foreign adversary was responsible for the symptoms, either as the result of purposeful actions — such as a directed energy weapon — or as the byproduct of some other activity, including electronic surveillance that unintentionally could have made people sick, the officials said. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the findings of the assessment, which had not yet been made public.”
  • “There was no ‘credible evidence’ any adversaries had developed a weapon or an intelligence-collection device cable to cause the injuries that American officials have reported.”
  • “One [unnamed] agency . . . determined that it was ‘unlikely’ that a foreign actor was at fault, a slightly less emphatic finding that did not appreciably change the consensus. [Another] agency abstained in its conclusion regarding a foreign actor. But when asked, no agency dissented from the conclusion that a foreign actor did not cause the symptoms.”
  • “The officials said that as analysts examined clusters of reported cases, including at U.S. embassies, they found no pattern or common set of conditions that could link individual cases. They also found no evidence, including forensic information or geolocation data, that would suggest an adversary had used a form of directed energy such as radio waves or ultrasonic beams. In some cases, there was no ‘direct line of sight’ to affected personnel working at U.S. facilities, further casting doubt on the possibility that a hypothetical energy weapon could have been the culprits.”
  • This “assessment also examined whether an adversary possessed a device capable of using energy to cause the reported symptoms. Of the seven agencies, five determined that it was ‘very unlikely,’ while the other two said it was ‘unlikely.’”

“William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director, said in a statement that the findings reflected more than two years of ‘rigorous, painstaking collection, investigative work and analysis’ by the C.I.A. and [the] other U.S. intelligence agencies.’ [Burns continued,] ‘I and my leadership team stand firmly behind the work conducted and the findings. I want to be absolutely clear: These findings do not call into question the experiences and real health issues that U.S. government personnel and their family members — including C.I.A.’s own officers — have reported while serving our country.’”

In contrast to the above conclusions, last year “an independent panel of experts [investigated and] found that an external energy source plausibly could explain the symptoms” and that “a foreign power could have harnessed ‘pulsed electromagnetic energy’ that made people sick.” These conclusions “were consistent  with earlier conclusions by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, which found that  ‘directed, pulsed radio frequency energy appears to be the most plausible mechanism in explaining these cases.’”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken reportedly “remains of the view that something happened to those employees who have reported significant ailments, and he is committed to making sure they are cared for.”

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

[1] Harris & Hudson, ‘Havana syndrome’ not caused by energy weapon or foreign adversary, intelligence review finds, Wash. Post (Mar. 1, 2023); Barnes & Entous, Foreign Adversaries Unlikely to Blame for Havana Syndrome, Intelligence Review Finds, N.Y. Times (Mar. 1, 2023); Strobel, Havana Syndrome Unlikely Caused by Foreign Adversary or Weapon, W.S.J. (Mar. 1, 2023). This blog has discussed the previous occurrences of this medical problem and attempts to determine its causes. (See the following sections “U.S. Diplomats Medical Problems in Cuba, 2017-18” and “U.S. Diplomats Medical Problems in Cuba, 2019” in List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—Topical: Cuba [as of 5/4/20]. )

Biden Administration Announces Proposed Restrictions on Asylum Applications

On February 21, the Biden Administration announced a proposed rule that would  require rapid deportation of an immigrant at the U.S. border who had failed to request protection from another country while en route to the U.S. or who had not previously notified the U.S. via a mobile app of their plan to seek asylum in the U.S. or who had applied for the new U.S. humanitarian parole programs for certain countries (Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela). This rule will take effect on May 11, with the expected termination that day of Title 42 that allowed the U.S. to swiftly expel migrants at the U.S. border.[1]

This announcement stated that the new rule would “incentivize the use of new and existing lawful processes and disincentivize dangerous border crossings, by placing a new condition on asylum eligibility for those who fail to do so. These steps are being taken in response to the unprecedented western hemispheric migration challenges – the greatest displacement of people since World War II – and the absence of congressional action to update a very broken, outdated immigration system.”

DHS Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas stated, “We are a nation of immigrants, and we are a nation of laws. We are strengthening the availability of legal, orderly pathways for migrants to come to the United States, at the same time proposing new consequences on those who fail to use processes made available to them by the United States and its regional partners. As we have seen time and time again, individuals who are provided a safe, orderly, and lawful path to the United States are less likely to risk their lives traversing thousands of miles in the hands of ruthless smugglers, only to arrive at our southern border and face the legal consequences of unlawful entry.”

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland added the following: “The Department of Justice is responsible for administering the Nation’s immigration courts and ensuring that claims are adjudicated expeditiously, fairly, and consistent with due process. This proposed rule will establish temporary rules concerning asylum eligibility in those proceedings when the Title 42 order is lifted. We look forward to reviewing the public’s comments on this proposed rule.”

The Administration says that without this new rule, immigration at the U.S. border would “increase significantly, to a level that risks undermining the … continued ability to safely, effectively and humanely enforce and administer U.S. immigration law.”

Reactions to the New Rule[2]

“In a joint statement, Democratic Sens. Bob Menendez (N.J.), Cory Booker (N.J.), Ben Ray Luján (N.M.) and Alex Padilla (Calif.) called on the administration to drop the proposed rule. “We are deeply disappointed that the administration has chosen to move forward with publishing this proposed rule, which only perpetuates the harmful myth that asylum seekers are a threat to this nation. In reality, they are pursuing a legal pathway in the United States.”

 A similar reaction came from leading Democratic House members (Rep. Jerrold Nadler and Pramila Jayapal). In their joint statement, they expressed “deep disappointment” with the newly proposed rule and stated, “The ability to seek asylum is a bedrock principle protected by federal law and should never be violated. We should not be restricting legal pathways to enter the United States, we should be expanding them.”

“Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, said they applaud the expanded pathways for those four countries announced in January but question where that leaves migrants from other countries. She says it favors people with resources who can afford the necessary requirements of finding a financial sponsor and buying a plane ticket to the U.S. And some people are so at risk, they simply cannot wait in their country for a humanitarian parole slot. Critics have also highlighted technological problems with the app.”

“The Federation for American Immigration Reform said that the rule isn’t designed to halt migrants as much as make the process more orderly: “In other words, the real objective is not to end large-scale asylum abuse, but rather to get them through the next election cycle.”

Justice Action Center’s counsel, Jane Bentrott, said the proposed rule “would send asylum seekers back to danger, separate families, and cost lives, as human rights advocates have been asserting for weeks. It is in direct contravention of President Biden’s campaign promises to reverse Trump’s racist, xenophobic immigration policies, and give all folks seeking safety a fair shot at asylum.”

Lindsay Toczylowski, the executive director of Immigrant Defenders Law Center in California, criticized the inept operations of the government’s online system for scheduling an asylum application interview. “It’s almost like a lottery. You have to win a ticket to be able to seek protection in the U.S.”

An ACLU attorney, Lee Gelernt, who successfully challenged similar efforts by the Trump Administration, said that Biden’s new proposed rules had the same legal flaws as the Trump rules  and that the ACLU would sue to block the latest move.

Although this blogger has been a pro bono attorney for asylum applicants and more generally an advocate for strong U.S. laws and procedures for same and although he is sympathetic to the above criticisms of the new proposed rules, it must be acknowledged that there is nothing in the international treaty or U.S. statutes on asylum that requires the U.S. to provide asylum interviews at the border to undocumented immigrants. Moreover, this and related changes in U.S. asylum laws and procedures are counterbalanced by new procedures in U.S. law for asylum or parole applications in Central American countries for at least some of these immigrants (Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela).

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

[1] DHS and DOJ Propose Rule to Incentivize Lawful Migration Processes, DHS (Feb. 21, 2023); Jordan, Biden Administration Announces New Border Crackdown, N.Y. Times (Feb. 21, 2023); Parti & Caldwell, Biden Administration Proposes New Limits on Asylum Seekers, W.S.J. (Feb. 21, 2023); Miroff, Asylum seekers who cross U.S. border illegally face new Biden rule, Wash. Post (Feb. 21, 2023); Santana, How Biden asylum rule affects immigration, compares to Trump, Wash. Post (Feb. 22, 2023).

[2] See n.1.

 

U.S. Needs To Ameliorate Brutal Jobs Endangering Immigrant Workers

This blog has emphasized the U.S. need for more immigrant labor, especially in those states with aging, declining population.[1]

The U.S. also needs to ameliorate the harsh, brutal working conditions facing many of these immigrants, especially children, as detailed in a New York Times investigation of such conditions in 20 states.[2]

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

[1] Posts and Comments to dwkcommentaries.com: Iowa State Government Encouraging Refugee and Migrant Resettlement (Feb. 3, 2023); Comment: National Worker Shortages in U.S. (Feb. 3, 2023); Comment: Economists Surprised by January New Jobs Data (Feb. 4, 2023); Comment: Migrant Workers Being Paid Premium Wages in Tight U.S. Job Market (Feb. 8, 2023); More Details on U.S. and Other Countries’ Worker Shortages (Feb. 9, 2023); Other States Join Iowa in Encouraging Immigration to Combat Aging, Declining Population (Feb.22, 2023); COMMENT: More Support for Immigrants’ Importance for U.S. Economy (Feb. 23, 2023); U.S. High-Tech Layoffs Threaten Immigrants with Temporary Visas (Feb. 25, 2023).

[2] Drier, Alone and Exploited, Migrant Children Work Brutal Jobs Across the U.S., N.Y. Times (Feb. 25, 2023); Vondracek, Labor Department: Over 100 children hired to clean meatpacking plants, including in Minnesota, StarTribune (Feb. 17, 2023).

U.S. High-Tech Layoffs Threaten Immigrants with Temporary Visas

Many immigrant workers, primarily Indian nationals, are in the U.S. on temporary visas and after being laid off, their visas will expire after 60 days and subject them to deportation unless they are rehired. Many of these immigrants are highly skilled and educated, and some have been here for years, and some for decades. As of 2019, there  were almost 600,000 of these immigrants in the U.S. [1]

These layoffs are part of the U.S. tech sector’s recent spiraling downward with major companies like Google, Meta and Amazon firing workers by the thousands.

Some advocacy groups and Democratic lawmakers have been lobbying the Departments of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to extend the length of time that high-tech visa holders can remain in the country after losing their jobs, from 60 to 120 days.

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

[1] Werner, High-skilled visa-holders at risk of deportation amid tech layoffs, Wash. Post (Feb. 24, 2023)

 

Derek Chauvin’s Ex-Wife Pleads Guilty to Income Tax Evasion

In May 2020, only two days after Derek Chauvin, an ex-Minneapolis police officer, was charged with crimes under Minnesota law for the killing of George Floyd, Kellie Chauvin, Derek’s wife, filed for divorce in Minnesota state court. And in July 2020 the Chauvins were charged in Minnesota state court with nine felony counts of state income tax evasion, underreporting more than $464,000 of income and owing the State of Minnesota nearly $38,000 of state income taxes. Both of them in November 2021 pleaded not guilty to these charges. [1]

On February 24, 2023, Kellie Chauvin, now the ex-wife of Derek, in Minnesota state court pleaded guilty to state felony charges of aiding and abetting false or fraudulent state income tax returns for 2014-19 and not paying such taxes for 2016-18.[2]

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

[1] The Chauvins’ personal legal problems were discussed in the following prior posts: Derek Chauvin’s Divorce Petition Raises Questions (July 8, 2020); Chauvin and Wife Now Charged with Minnesota Tax Crimes (July 22, 2020); State Court Rejects Chauvin Divorce Settlement (Nov. 20, 2020); Complications in Derek Chauvin Divorce Case (Jan. 20, 2021); Comment: Court Approves Redacted Chauvin Divorce Agreement (Feb. 4, 2021); Derek Chauvin and Ex-Wife Plead Not Guilty to Tax-Evasion Charges (Nov. 6, 2021).

(2) Hyatt, Derek Chauvin’s ex-wife pleads guilty to tax evasion, StarTribune (Feb. 24, 2023)

Other States Join Iowa in Encouraging Immigration To Combat Aging, Declining Populations 

A prior post discussed the various ways the Iowa State Government was encouraging the resettlement of refugees and other immigrants in their state to combat its shortage of workers.[1]

Now the Republican governors of Indiana (Eric Holcomb)and Utah (Spencer Cox) have jointly voiced the same desire. They start their appeal as follows: “Indiana has about 220,000 open jobs right now and Utah has 107,000, according to the most recent federal data — more than 6 percent of all jobs in both states. With strong business and tax environments, we like our chances in the competition for job-seekers moving from other states. But they won’t be enough to fill all of those vacancies. We also need immigrants who are ready to work and help build strong communities.” (Emphasis added.)[2]

To meet that need these two governors call on Congress to enable states “to sponsor whatever immigrants serve the needs of their communities. . . . Rapidly declining birthrates and accelerating retirements across the United States mean that our states’ already wide job gaps will grow to crisis proportions without more [immigrants].”

Therefore, these two governors suggest that states be empowered to sponsor immigrants for resettlement “from a pool of new applicants from abroad and from the ranks of current asylum seekers [for refugee status].” They also recognize that there must be “rules to determine who can come in and how, and who can stay; unflinching enforcement of such rules; and some kind of review-and-repeat process to assure that the United States offers paths to citizenship based on our evolving needs. The rules must include a practical approach to illegal immigrants who came to this country as children. And enforcement must include firm control of all entry points.”

Conclusion

Governors Holcomb and Cox added that they believe other states will join this effort from comments they heard at last week’s National Governors Association meeting.

This is good news!

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

[1] Iowa State Government Encouraging Refugee and Migrant Resettlement, dwkcommentaries.com (Feb. 3, 2023).

[2] Holcomb & Cox, To solve out national immigration crisis, let states sponsor immigrants, Wash. Post (Feb. 21, 2023).

U.S. Supreme Court Cancels Argument Over Title 42 Immigration Case

On February 7, the Biden Administration advised the Supreme Court, “The anticipated end of the public health emergency on May 11, and the resulting expiration of the operative Title 42 order, would render . . . moot” the case before the Court over Title 42.[1]

Soon thereafter the Supreme Court cancelled the arguments in the case scheduled for March 1. As a result, the Court is expected to dismiss the case and cancel the order staying the rescission of Title 42 after the administration canels Title 42. [2]

[1]  Liptak, Biden Officials Tell Supreme Court That Title 42 Case Will Soon Be Moot, N.Y. Times (Feb. 7, 2023).

[2] Liptak, Supreme Court Cancels Arguments in Title 42 Immigration Case, N.Y. Times (Feb. 16, 2022). This litigation over Title 42 was discussed in a prior post. (Congress Fails to Adopt Important Immigration Legislation, dwkcommentaries.com (Dec. 28, 2022);immigration Comment: Speculative Interpretation of Supreme Court Decision on Title 42 Case, dwkcommentaries.com (Dec. 29, 2022)..)

Your Longevity Is Important for Many Reasons  

Longevity or how long you will live has always been important in making many decisions about your future. But this blogger has never known until reading the Wall Street Journal article cited below that the American Academy of Actuaries and Society of Actuaries have calculated longevity factors based upon the assumption that everything goes well for the individual and upon the latest mortality data from the U.S. Social Security Administration.

That data has been compiled in the Actuaries Longevity Illustrator, which helps an individual see how long he or she might live. (This is different from life expectancy tables that have the average number of years someone will live from a given age.)  [1]

The Illustrator is simple to use. You only enter your date of birth, your retirement age, your gender, whether or not you smoke and whether your general health is excellent, average or poor, which terms are not defined.

Examples of Excellent Health Males and Females

For example, an 84 year-old non-smoker male with excellent health has a 94% chance of living to age 85, 59% chance to age 90, 26% chance to age 95 and 7% to age 100.

An 83-year old female non-smoker with excellent health would have a 91% chance of living to age 85, 64% chance to age 90, 33% chance to age 95 and 12% chance to age 100.

Examples of Average Health Males and Females

An 84 year-old non-smoker male with average health would have a 92% chance of living to age 85, 51% chance to age 90, 18% chance to age 95 and 4% chance to age 100.

The 83 year-old non-smoker female with average health would have a 89% chance to reach age 85, 56% chance to age 90, 25% chance to age 95 and 7% chance to age 100.

Observations

Josh Zumbrun, the author of the Wall Street Journal article on this subject, says, “The good news [from these longevity statistics] is that many Americans live a lot longer than they expect. The bad news is that this often leads to financial regret as they realize, sometimes too late, that [earlier in life they made financial decisions that have not provided sufficient financial resources for these additional years].”

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

[1] Zumbrun, You Might Live Longer Than You Think. Your Finances Might Not, W.S.J. (Feb. 10, 2023); Actuaries, Longevity Illustrator.

A Contemporary Perspective on the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862

This blog previously explored various aspects of the 1862 U.S.-Dakota War that was fought in the State of Minnesota.[1]

Sarah Wakefield’s Contemporaneous Discussion of the War[2]

A contemporary perspective on that war was offered 160 years ago by Sarah Wakefield, a 32-year old white wife of a medical doctor assigned to the Upper Sioux Agency at the time of the war and who along with her four-year old son and 20-month-old daughter were held captives by the Dakota for the war’s six-weeks duration.

After the war ended, she testified on behalf of the Dakota people in criminal proceedings and thought her testimony had saved a Dakota farmer named Chaska who had been especially helpful to her and the children. Subsequently she learned that this Indian named Chaska had been hanged on December 26, 1862, apparently mistaken for another Indian with the same name.

A year later in 1863 Wakefield published a book about this experience, “”Six Weeks in the Sioux Tepees.” There she insisted her captors had treated her and the children well. They had saved her from sexual assault and had placed them in hiding during the war’s most dangerous moments. The Indians also had provided her with a blanket when she was cold.

Her book also criticized Col. Henry Sibley’s delays in rescuing the captives as well as the U.S. inhumane policies that had prompted a militant faction of the starving Dakota to wage war. Wakefield’s words brought on a lot of criticism of her from U.S. soldiers and officials. But Wakefield said, “My object was to excite sympathy for the Indians and in so doing, the soldiers lost all respect for me, and abused me shamefully, but I’d rather have my own conscience than that of these persons who turned against their protectors, those that were so kind to them in that great time of peril.”

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

[1] See these posts to dwkcommentaries: The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Nov.3, 2012); White Settler’s Contemporaneous Reaction to the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Nov. 6, 2012); Commemoration of the 150th Anniversary of the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Nov. 9, 2012); The U.S.-Dakota War Remembered by Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church (Part I) (Nov. 18, 2012); The U.S.-Dakota War Remembered by Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church (Part II) (Nov. 25, 2012); The U.S.-Dakota War Remembered by Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church (Part III) (Nov. 29, 2012); Personal Reflections on the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Dec. 10, 2012); Commemoration of the 150th Anniversary of the Hanging of the “Dakota 38” (Dec.26, 2012); Minneapolis and St. Paul Declare U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 “Genocide” (Jan. 12, 2013); President Abraham Lincoln’s Involvement in  the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (May 21, 2013); U.S. Military Commission Trials of Dakota Indians After the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (June 11, 2013); President Abraham Lincoln’s Involvement in the Military Commission’s Convictions and Sentences of the Dakota Indians (June 24, 2013).

[2] Brown, Sarah Wakefield’s 160-year-old account still illuminates our understanding of the U.S.-Dakota War, StarTribune (Feb. 11, 2023).

More Details on U.S. and Other Countries’ Worker Shortages

This blog already has discussed the current declining and aging populations of many countries, and their impact on employment in those countries. [1]

Here are some additional articles on these subjects.

Wall Street Journal Analysis [2]

“Employers in healthcare, education, leisure and hospitality and other services such as dry cleaning and automotive repair . . . [accounted] for 63% of all [recent U.S,] private-sector job gains. .. . In January alone, restaurants and bars added a seasonally adjusted 99,000 jobs. The healthcare industry grew by 58,000, and retailers added 30,000 jobs.”

This result is helped by “more workers . . .searching for jobs: bigger paychecks and benefits, diminishing fear of getting sick, and financial worries amid high inflation.” Also “more women are flowing back into the labor force, which could help service-sector employers fill positions that traditionally have been held by women.”

Increased U.S. Immigration [3]

Last year U.S. net immigration increased by about a million people, and the “foreign-born work force grew much more quickly than the U.S.-born work force.” This “helped power the job recoveries in leisure and hospitality and in construction, where immigrants make up a higher share of employment, and where there were bigger increases in wages and job vacancies.”

This employment result happened despite the inadequate staffing of the U.S. immigration agencies, resulting in huge delays in acting on asylum applications as well as those for green cards and work permits. “One of the few industries with unlimited immigrant visas is agriculture, where the number of guest worker visas “has risen by double-digit percentages over each of the last few years, reaching 371,000 in 2022.”

Difficulties in Raising Birth Rates [4]

Echoing the pessimism of Ross Douthat of the New York Times caused, in part, by China’s recent declining birth rate and population, other Time’s authors say, “History suggests that once a country crosses the threshold of negative population growth, there is little its government can do to reverse it. And as a country’s population grows more top-heavy, a smaller, younger generation bears the increasing costs of caring for a larger, older one. . . . That’s because the playbook for boosting national birthrates is a rather thin one. Most initiatives that encourage families to have more children are expensive, and the results are often limited. Options include cash incentives for having babies, generous parental leave policies and free or subsidized child care.”

This more recent Times article claims, “many young Chinese are not interested in having large families. Vastly more young Chinese people are enrolling in higher education, marrying later and having children later. Raised in single-child households, some have come to see small families as normal. But the bigger impediment to having a second or third child is financial, [and] many parents cite the high cost of housing and education as the main obstacle to having more children.”

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

[1]  See these posts to dwkcommentaries.com: Another Defining Challenge of the 21st Century (Jan. 28, 2023); Skepticism About Douthat’s Defining Challenge of the 21st Century (Jan. 30, 2023); Comment: Developments in Africa and Italy Accentuate Douthat’s Concerns (Jan. 31, 2023); Iowa State Government Encouraging Refugee and Migrant Resettlement (Feb. 3, 2023);Comment: National Worker Shortages in U.S. (Feb. 3, 2023); Economists Surprised by January’s  New Jobs Data (Feb. 4, 2023); Sub-Saharan Africa Is ‘New Epicenter’ of Extremism, Says UN,  (Feb. 8, 2023); Migrant Workers Being Paid Premium Wages in U.S. Tight Labor Market, (Feb. 8, 2023).

[2]  Cambon & Smith, Mass Layoffs or Hiring Boom? What’s Actually Happening in the Jobs Market, W.S.J. (Feb. 9, 2023).

[3] DePills, Immigration Rebound Eases Shortage of Workers, Up to a Point, N.Y. Times (Feb. 6, 2023).

[4] Jacobs & Paris, Can China Reverse Its Population Decline? Just Ask Sweden, N.Y. Times (Feb. 9, 2023).