Genesis of U.S. Immigration Crisis

Posted on April 10, 2019April 10, 2019 by Denise Simon

Well, we can for sure say that the Democrats side with the Communists, Marxists and Revolutionaries.

Hat tip to Glenn Beck and my buddy Ami Horowitz for the great foot work and investigations to determine where this illegal insurgency is really coming from. Beck pulled out his chalkboard again and his presentation is a good one.

So, while these democrats are not students of history while others have very short memories, there is a longer history to all of this immigration crisis. You see, a few years ago, I read a book titled From the Shadows, written by former CIA Director Robert Gates. Gates was also the Secretary of Defense as part of his long government service resume. He wrote that book in 1996. A particular page stayed in my memory and I did a search in my Book Nook today to find it.

Okay is there more? Yes.There are so many moving parts to the legacy immigration crisis today. Who is to blame? Too many it seems. But for context read on, history does repeat itself.

Going back to an article/summary from 2006, how did we get to this cockamamie asylum policy? It goes to a crisis that was born in 1980.

Citation: The year 1980 marked the opening of a decade of public controversy over U.S. refugee policy unprecedented since World War II. Large-scale migration to the United States from Central America began, as hundreds of thousands of Salvadorans, Guatemalans, and Nicaraguans fled north from civil war, repression, and economic devastation. That same year, in the last months of the Carter administration, the U.S. Congress passed the Refugee Act, a humanitarian law intended to expand eligibility for political asylum in the United States.

The Refugee Act brought U.S. law into line with international human rights standards, specifically the 1951 UN Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. The United States had ratified the Protocol in 1968, thus becoming bound by the Convention’s provisions. While the previous law recognized only refugees from Communism, the Refugee Act was modeled on the convention’s non-ideological standard of a “well-founded fear of persecution.”

The coincidence of the Central American exodus with the passage of the Refugee Act set the stage for a decade-long controversy that ultimately involved thousands of Americans. The protagonists in the controversy included, on one side, immigrants’ rights lawyers, liberal members of Congress, religious activists, and the refugees themselves. On the other side were President Reagan and his administration, the State Department, the Department of Justice (including the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)), and conservative members of Congress. The first group invoked international human rights and humanitarian and religious principles, while the Reagan administration’s arguments centered on national security and the global fight against Communism.

The public debate took place in a number of arenas and with several sets of participants. The federal courts were the venue for class-action cases contesting systemic INS violations of refugee rights, as well as for the criminal prosecution of religious humanitarians.

Unprecedented numbers of Americans became involved through their churches and synagogues, which proclaimed themselves “sanctuaries,” as well as in bar association efforts to provide pro bono representation to Salvadorans and Guatemalans. Throughout the decade, in hundreds of individual immigration hearings, lawyers for asylum applicants and INS lawyers waged a low-intensity struggle over the nature of the conflict in Central America and the rights of individual Central Americans to asylum status.

In Congress, members debated the war and laws aimed at helping Central Americans rejected as refugees. The refugees themselves became a voice in the U.S. public debate. They formed their own community assistance groups and advocacy centers, which worked with lawyers, religious groups, and the movement against United States involvement in Central America.

Cold War by Proxy and Human Rights in Central America

In El Salvador and Guatemala, civil war had been years in the making, as oligarchies supported by corrupt military leaders repressed large sectors of the rural population. In Nicaragua, the socialist revolutionary Frente Sandinista had ousted the brutal right-wing dictator Anastasio Somoza in 1979. The civil war in El Salvador increased in intensity in early 1980. Government-supported assassins gunned down Archbishop Oscar Romero at the altar shortly after he had publicly ordered Salvadoran soldiers to stop killing civilians. In December 1980, four U.S. churchwomen were assassinated in El Salvador, an act of brutality that brought the violence “home” to the U.S. public.

The administration of President Ronald Reagan, who came to power in January 1981, saw these civil wars as theaters in the Cold War. In both El Salvador and Guatemala, the United States intervened on the side of those governments, which were fighting Marxist-led popular movements. In Nicaragua, however, the United States supported the contra rebels against the socialist Sandinista government.

During much of the early 1980s, international human rights organizations (such as Amnesty International and Americas Watch — later part of Human Rights Watch) regularly reported high levels of repression in El Salvador and Guatemala, with the vast majority of human rights violations committed by military and government-supported paramilitary forces.

In El Salvador, the military and death squads were responsible for thousands of disappearances and murders of union leaders, community leaders, and suspected guerilla sympathizers, including priests and nuns. In Guatemala, the army’s counter-insurgency campaign focused on indigenous communities, resulting in thousands of disappearances, murders, and forced displacements.

The Intersection of Foreign Policy and Asylum Policy

It is estimated that between 1981 and 1990, almost one million Salvadorans and Guatemalans fled repression at home and made the dangerous journey across Mexico, entering the United States clandestinely. Thousands traveled undetected to major cities such as Washington, DC, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston, New York, and Chicago. However, thousands were also detained at or near the Mexico-U.S. border.

The Reagan administration regarded policy toward Central American migrants as part of its overall strategy in the region. Congress had imposed a ban on foreign assistance to governments that committed gross violations of human rights, thus compelling the administration to deny Salvadoran and Guatemalan government complicity in atrocities. Immigration law allowed the attorney general and INS officials wide discretion regarding bond, work authorization, and conditions of detention for asylum seekers, while immigration judges received individual “opinion letters” from the State Department regarding each asylum application. Thus the administration’s foreign policy strongly influenced asylum decisions for Central Americans.

Characterizing the Salvadorans and Guatemalans as “economic migrants,” the Reagan administration denied that the Salvadoran and Guatemalan governments had violated human rights. As a result, approval rates for Salvadoran and Guatemalan asylum cases were under three percent in 1984. In the same year, the approval rate for Iranians was 60 percent, 40 percent for Afghans fleeing the Soviet invasion, and 32 percent for Poles.

The Justice Department and INS actively discouraged Salvadorans and Guatemalans from applying for political asylum. Salvadorans and Guatemalans arrested near the Mexico-U.S. border were herded into crowded detention centers and pressured to agree to “voluntarily return” to their countries of origin. Thousands were deported without ever having the opportunity to receive legal advice or be informed of the possibility of applying for refugee status. Considering the widely reported human rights violations in El Salvador and Guatemala, the treatment of these migrants constituted a violation of U.S. obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention.

As word of the conditions in Central America and the plight of the refugees began to come to public attention in the early 1980s, three sectors began to work in opposition to the de facto “no asylum” policy: the religious sector, attorneys, and the refugees themselves.

Although a number of Congressmen and women were influenced by the position of religious organizations, the administration thwarted their efforts. In 1983, 89 members of Congress requested that the attorney general and Department of State grant “Extended Voluntary Departure” to Salvadorans who had fled the war. The administration denied their request, stating such a grant would only serve as a “magnet” for more unauthorized Salvadorans in addition to the hundreds of thousands already present. In the late 1980s, the House of Representatives passed several bills to suspend the deportation of Salvadorans, but none passed the Senate.

The Sanctuary Movement

The network of religious congregations that became known as the Sanctuary Movement started with a Presbyterian church and a Quaker meeting in Tucson, Arizona. These two congregations began legal and humanitarian assistance to Salvadoran and Guatemalan refugees in 1980.

When, after two years, none of the refugees they assisted had been granted political asylum, Rev. John Fife of Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson announced — on the anniversary of the assassination of Salvadoran Archbishop Oscar Romero — that his church would openly defy INS and become a “sanctuary” for Central Americans. The Arizona congregations were soon joined by networks of religious congregations and activists in Northern California, South Texas, and Chicago.

At the Sanctuary Movement’s height in the mid 1980s, over 150 congregations openly defied the government, publicly sponsoring and supporting undocumented Salvadoran or Guatemalan refugee families. Another 1,000 local Christian and Jewish congregations, several major Protestant denominations, the Conservative and Reform Jewish associations, and several Catholic orders all endorsed the concept and practice of sanctuary. Sanctuary workers coordinated with activists in Mexico to smuggle Salvadorans and Guatemalans over the border and across the country. Assistance provided to refugees included bail and legal representation, as well as food, medical care, and employment.

The defense of the Salvadorans and Guatemalans marked a new use of international human rights norms by U.S. activists. Citing the Nuremberg principles of personal accountability developed in the post-World War II Nazi tribunals, religious activists claimed a legal precedent to justify their violation of U.S. laws against alien smuggling. Other activists claimed that their actions were justified by the religious and moral principles of the 19th-century U.S. abolitionist movement, referring to their activities as a new “Underground Railroad.” Many U.S. religious leaders involved in the Sanctuary Movement had prior experience in the 1960s civil disobedience campaigns against racial segregation in the American South.

The Department of Justice responded by initiating criminal prosecutions against two activists in Texas in 1984, followed by a 71-count criminal conspiracy indictment against 16 U.S. and Mexican religious activists announced in Arizona in January 1985. The Texas trials resulted in split verdicts, one conviction and one acquittal.

The Arizona trial became a major focus of organizing and publicity for the Sanctuary Movement, attracting a stellar team of volunteer criminal defense attorneys. Although the Department of Justice maintained the case was an ordinary alien-smuggling prosecution, the general counsel of INS attended sessions of the lengthy trial.

Despite the judge’s order barring the defense from presenting evidence of conditions in El Salvador or Guatemala, the Sanctuary Movement managed to turn the publicity surrounding the trial into an indictment of the Reagan administration’s war in Central America and its treatment of the refugees. All the Arizona defendants were convicted, but none were sentenced to jail time. After the Arizona trials, the movement continued to attract more congregations.

The Department of Justice did not bring any more criminal indictments of sanctuary activists after the Texas and Arizona cases.

The Lawyers

Along the U.S.-Mexico border, from the Rio Grande Valley to San Diego, local lawyers and religious activists set up new legal services projects to help detained refugees. In Los Angeles, Boston, San Francisco, Washington, DC, Chicago, and other cities, existing nonprofit legal services projects and lawyers in private practice started representing individual refugees. Pro bono panels put together by local and national bar groups — including the National Lawyers Guild Immigration Project, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and the American Bar Association — supplemented their work.

Through coordinated strategies in individual cases, these lawyers began to address detention conditions as well as develop the new case law of the Refugee Act. In California and Texas, civil rights lawyers filed class-action cases to establish basic due process rights. While some of the cases (regarding work authorization, translation assistance, and transfer of detainees between facilities) were not successful, other decisions established national standards for the treatment of detained Salvadoran and Guatemalan asylum seekers.

The refugees and their lawyers faced enormous challenges in asylum hearings, as the required opinion letters from the Department of State, which greatly influenced immigration judges, uniformly denied the existence of human rights violations in El Salvador and Guatemala. However, in some cases, attorneys won important victories before the Board of Immigration Appeals and in the federal circuit courts that established precedents helpful to all asylum applicants. Other efforts, such as an attempt to establish that all Salvadoran civilian young men were a social group persecuted by the government, were less successful.

Finally, a group of lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild, the American Civil Liberties Union, and other organizations brought a major, national class-action case on behalf of religious organizations, legal services projects, and Salvadoran and Guatemalan refugees, claiming that the administration’s wholesale denial of political asylum claims and prosecutions of those who assisted refugees violated their constitutional, statutory, and internationally recognized human rights.

In the case, known as American Baptist Churches v. Thornburgh, the federal courts had dismissed religious organizations’ claims. However, in 1991 the U.S. District Court in San Francisco approved a settlement that allowed the reopening of denied political asylum claims and late applications by refugees who had been afraid to apply. The decision also granted class members work authorization and protection from deportation.

The settlement agreement between the plaintiffs and the government (by that time the Bush administration) included language stating that government decisions on political asylum cases would not be influenced by foreign policy considerations.

The Refugees

In many cities, Salvadoran and Guatemalan refugees formed mutual assistance organizations. Projects such as Casa Guatemala, Casa El Salvador, Comite El Salvador, and others gave the community the ability to get legal advice and information about conditions back home as well as to learn about local health care and food assistance. These groups also worked with local lawyers’ organizations and religious and antiwar activists, who assisted in decisions regarding class-action litigation and supported individual asylum applicants.

Over 20 years later, a number of these immigrant-led projects, including Centro Presente in Boston, Centro Romero in Chicago, and El Rescate in Los Angeles, still exist as full-service, nonprofit legal and community services centers. Many of the leaders of these efforts remain active in the immigrants’ rights movement, as well as in other social justice projects in the United States, El Salvador, and Guatemala.

Congress

In 1990, after its earlier frustrations to address the Central American asylum seekers, Congress finally passed legislation allowing the president to grant Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to certain groups in need of a temporary safe haven. The first TPS legislation contained one provision (never codified as part of the Immigration and Nationality Act) explicitly designating Salvadorans for TPS.

Through the early 1990s, Salvadoran and Guatemalans who had arrived in the 1980s were able to stay in the country under a series of discretionary measures and under the terms of the 1991 settlement in the American Baptist Churches litigation. It was not until the late 1990s that their status was finally settled in a legislative agreement with the supporters of the anti-Sandinista Nicaraguans. The passage of the 1997 Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act finally allowed Salvadorans and Guatemalans protected under the American Baptist Churches settlement to apply for permanent residence.

Conclusion

What spurred the activism of the Sanctuary Movement and Central American refugees and their lawyers was the manner in which the Reagan administration linked the fate of individual asylum seekers to its foreign policy interests. Today, the use of immigration enforcement as a “magic bullet” for national security concerns requires close examination by the U.S. public.

Immigrant communities, members of Congress, policy analysts, religious leaders, and legal experts must determine whether the human rights of individual immigrants and asylum seekers are being trampled in a rush to create a public perception of effective security.

The development of a stronger anti-immigrant grassroots movement in certain areas of the country presents new challenges. Similarly, restrictions on access to the federal courts for review of certain immigration decisions create new obstacles for advocates to overcome. However, at the same time, immigrant-led organizations and immigrants’ rights coalitions have become more sophisticated in their lobbying and public education efforts.

The proimmigrant religious sector (particularly the Catholic Church) is vocal once again, as humanitarian assistance to the undocumented may be criminalized in proposed legislation. Whether the current decade will end with even limited victories for the human rights of immigrants is as yet unknown.

Trolls and Anti-Vaccination(s) Operations

Posted on April 10, 2019April 10, 2019 by Denise Simon

Remember the panic Americans went through of the annual exercises called Jade Helm? It was an Obama operation where his military was practicing to impose martial law across the country so Obama would remain a forever president. Then Alex Jones bought into that notion and the message spread for months. It was a Russian troll operation, a very successful one. The Russians have made a fine art form of disinformation such that even government officials and media cannot make the distinctions.

Then of course there was/is the whole election interference operations not only in the United States but, Britain, Ukraine, France and even Mexico.

Among other disinformation campaigns is the whole vaccination thing. Well, the anti-vaccination thing set in and Americans have in countless cases refused to get their children vaccinated as any of them would or could cause autism.

Image result for measles vaccinations

The United States was not the only target for the Russian troll operation(s). Going back as far as 2014, the fake Tweets began. Even the World Health Organization as well as the American Journal of Public Health bought into the issue and Britain paid the price. But, some savvy media types at least did the digging and research once again proved that pesky Internet Research Agency was the culprit. Russia caused a panic and it has worked. Today, there is a measles outbreak around the country due to this anti-vaccine mission. Beyond Britain, even Russia targeted Ukraine.

Image result for measles vaccinations

We are now in a state by state policy matter over the spread of measles and some towns have quarantine programs for people without vaccines or making laws demanding vaccines be administered. Will it end with measles? Likely no. This will affect international travel and visa programs including approvals.

Russia has effectively weaponsized health systems.

A 2018 report by the American Public Health Association, titled “Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate,” came to a similar conclusion.

“Whereas bots that spread malware and unsolicited content disseminated antivaccine messages, Russian trolls promoted discord. Accounts masquerading as legitimate users create false equivalency, eroding public consensus on vaccination,” the report said.

“Health-related misconceptions, misinformation, and disinformation spread over social media, posing a threat to public health. Despite significant potential to enable dissemination of factual information, social media are frequently abused to spread harmful health content, including unverified and erroneous information about vaccines,” it continued. “This potentially reduces vaccine uptake rates and increases the risks of global pandemics, especially among the most vulnerable.”

Measles was considered eliminated in the U.S. in 2000 because of vaccines against measles, mumps, and rubella. Nevertheless, cases have increased in the U.S. Public health professionals have called the disease a leading cause of death among children.

The World Health Organization has said that fear of vaccines has become one of the top threats to global health as previously eradicated diseases make a comeback.

“Vaccine hesitancy—the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate despite the availability of vaccines—threatens to reverse progress made in tackling vaccine-preventable diseases. Vaccination is one of the most cost-effective ways of avoiding disease—it currently prevents 2-3 million deaths a year, and a further 1.5 million could be avoided if global coverage of vaccinations improved,” a World Health Organization report reads. “Measles, for example, has seen a 30% increase in cases globally.” Read more here from Newsweek.

Border Patrol Collapsing, but 20,000 Caravan Forming Now

Posted on March 28, 2019March 28, 2019 by Denise Simon

Yes and that newest caravan is in Honduras now and it is estimated to be 20,000 strong. Caravans get largest as they move north. Border Patrol has sounded the alarm and so has DHS. Anyone left in Honduras?

Trump Threatens Honduras Foreign Aid Over - One News Page ...

By the way, the United States via all government agencies gave Honduras $180,977,214 in foreign aid in 2017. The money is designated for local governance, counter-narcotics programs, reading programs, treaties, violence prevention, human rights and the justice system…..ever wonder where Congress is on this or an Inspector General? (click that link, it is interactive)

‘Mother of all migrants’ caravans’ is forming up in Honduras: interior secretary

Numbers could go higher than 20,000

A massive cohort of prospective migrants dubbed the “mother of all caravans” is forming in Honduras, the federal interior secretary said today.

“We are aware that a new caravan is forming in Honduras that they’re calling the mother of all caravans . . . and which could be [made up of] more than 20,000 people,” Olga Sánchez Cordero said.

She didn’t offer any details about when the caravan might leave Honduras to start the journey towards Mexico and on to the United States’ southern border.

The interior secretary told reporters that migration and specifically the formation of the huge caravan was a central issue in talks she held yesterday with United States Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen in Miami, Florida.

Sánchez said Nielsen told her that United States authorities returned at least 76,000 migrants to their countries of origin in February and expect to deport more than 90,000 this month and a total of 900,000 by the end of the year.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said in a statement that Nielsen and Sánchez “discussed ways the U.S. and Mexico can work together to address irregular migration and the record levels of illegal entries at the U.S. southern border.”

Thousands of migrants fleeing poverty and violence in Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador have entered Mexico at the southern border since late last year as part of several large caravans.

Despite the federal government issuing more than 10,000 humanitarian visas that allow migrants to live and work in Mexico for up to 12 months, most caravan members have chosen to travel to the United States border to seek asylum.

Yet another migrant caravan made up of around 2,500 Central Americans and Cubans is currently traveling through Chiapas after leaving Tapachula last weekend.

Caravan members walk long distances through Mexico in often hot conditions but also try to hitch rides to reach towns on the well-trodden migrant route more quickly.

Sánchez said today that there is evidence that criminal groups are transporting migrants from Tapachula to the northern border in trucks and charging each person thousands of dollars for the service.

Dog Alerted to the Largest Fentanyl Bust Ever

Posted on February 1, 2019February 1, 2019 by Denise Simon

NOGALES, Ariz. — U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials intercepted nearly 254 pounds of fentanyl at the U.S.-Mexico border Saturday in what the agency called its largest fentanyl bust ever.

Border officials report biggest fentanyl bust

Valued at approximately $3.5 million, the fentanyl was found in a secret compartment inside a load of Mexican produce heading into Arizona. The agency’s police dog team alerted officers to the presence of drugs after a secondary inspection indicated “some anomalies” in the load, Nogales CBP Port Director Michael Humphries said.

Most of the fentanyl was in powder form, though the load did contain about 2 pounds of pills. Agents also seized nearly 395 pounds of methamphetamine with a street value of $1.18 million, Humphries said.

https://t.co/lfWUuvn6nh

— CBP Arizona (@CBPArizona) January 31, 2019

“It is said that a quarter-milligram, or the size of a few grains of salt, of fentanyl, which is a dangerous opioid, can kill a person very quickly,” Humphries said. The seizure, he said, had prevented an immeasurable number of doses of the drug “that could have harmed so many families.” Press release here.

***

The driver was enrolled in the FAST program, a trusted travel program for truck drivers. This program also applies to drivers from Canada. The drivers must have a clean record with regard to immigration, law enforcement and customs.Perhaps using Presidential authority, Trump should suspend this program until such time Nancy and Chuck negotiate in good faith as she pledged when government reopened.

The truck itself was carrying cucumbers and the vehicle had a false floor under which during a secondary inspection, the dog alerted. The truck went through a massive x-ray machine. The fentanyl coming from Mexico however while lethal is not as lethal as that coming from China.

Just a few grains of fentanyl can put a person into a coma. Fentanyl should be declared a chemical agent of mass destruction. Question is why has this not been done? The other question is who was this driver working for and who owned the truck? There are more details that need to be released.

Meanwhile you have to ask if the Democrats are reading CBP press releases like this one:

Arrests Made of Chinese Birthing Hotels in California

Posted on February 1, 2019February 1, 2019 by Denise Simon

By the way, it is not just the Chinese in California, we also have a scandal of the same description in Miami of pregnant Russian women giving birth for US citizenship in Miami.

Any response from Senator Harris or Feinstein? How about Pelosi? Any? Nah….

***

Feds Raid California 'Maternity Hotels' for Birth Tourists ...

Primer:

An Irvine-based immigration attorney has been sentenced to 21 months in federal prison for obstructing justice in relation to a scheme in which he agreed to help a Chinese national flee from the United States after the woman had been designated as a “material witness” in a criminal investigation into “birthing houses” operating in Southern California.

Ken Zhiyi Liang, 39, of Irvine, was sentenced Monday afternoon by U.S. District Judge Andrew J. Guildford. Liang was found guilty in September of conspiring to obstruct justice, obstructing justice, and tampering with a witness, who is referred to in court papers as “D.L.”

Liang “was caught on hours of video and audio recordings selling and marketing his abilities to D.L. to help smuggle her out of the United States in violation of court orders, in exchange for a $6,000 fee to himself and a $1,500 to $3,000 fee for three co-conspirators who would assist him,” prosecutors wrote in a sentencing brief filed with the court.

SANTA ANA, Calif. – Following the arrests this morning of three defendants who allegedly operated “birth tourism” outfits that catered to Chinese clients, federal authorities today unsealed indictments that charge a total of 19 people linked to three schemes that operated across Southern California and charged clients tens of thousands of dollars to help them give birth in the United States.

The indictments charge operators and clients of three “maternity house” or “birthing house” schemes that were dismantled in March 2015 when federal agents executed 35 search warrants, which resulted from international undercover operations.

The 17 cases unsealed today contain the first-ever federal criminal charges brought against operators and customers of birth tourism businesses. The birth tourism operations not only committed widespread immigration fraud and engaged in international money laundering, they also defrauded property owners when leasing the apartments and houses used in their birth tourism schemes, according to the indictments.

These cases were investigated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Los Angeles. Substantial assistance was provided by IRS Criminal Investigation, as well as the Irvine Police Department and the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department.

The indictments describe birth tourism schemes in which foreign nationals, mostly from China, applied for visitor visas to come to the United States and lied about the length of their trips, where they would stay, and the purposes of their trips – which were to come to the U.S. for three months to give birth so their children would receive U.S. birthright citizenship.

“America’s way of life is not for sale,” said Joseph Macias, Special Agent in Charge of HSI Los Angeles. “HSI will aggressively target those who would make a mockery of our laws and our values to benefit and enrich themselves. No one needs to be reminded about the national security and public safety implications of visa fraud and the crimes associated with it. Anyone who would exploit our nation’s generosity and our legal immigration system should be on notice – they may end up being the ones to pay a very steep price.”

According to the indictments that charge the operators of the schemes, they coached their Chinese customers how to pass the U.S. Consulate interview in China by falsely stating that they were going to stay in the U.S. for only two weeks. Their clients were also coached to trick U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at ports of entry by wearing loose clothing that would conceal their pregnancies. The indictments also allege that the customers were directed to fly to Hawaii from China – instead of directly to Los Angeles – because it was easier to get by CBP in Hawaii. The indictments allege that many of the Chinese birth tourism customers failed to pay all of the medical costs associated with their hospital births, and the debts were referred to collection.

“These cases allege a wide array of criminal schemes that sought to defeat our immigration laws – laws that welcome foreign visitors so long as they are truthful about their intentions when entering the country,” said Nick Hanna, U.S. Attorney for the Central District California. “Statements by the operators of these birthing houses show contempt for the United States, while they were luring clients with the power and prestige of U.S. citizenship for their children. Some of the wealthy clients of these businesses also showed blatant contempt for the U.S. by ignoring court orders directing them to stay in the country to assist with the investigation and by skipping out on their unpaid hospital bills.”

Three indictments returned Wednesday by a federal grand jury charge the operators of large birth tourism operations based in Orange, Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties. Pursuant to this week’s indictments, federal authorities this morning arrested three defendants: Dongyuan Li (李冬媛), 41, of Irvine; Michael Wei Yueh Liu (刘维岳), 53, of Rancho Cucamonga; and Jing Dong (董晶), 42, of Fontana. All three are charged with conspiracy to commit immigration fraud, international money laundering and identity theft. Liu is also charged with filing three false tax returns.

According to the indictments charging the operators, all three businesses touted the benefits of giving birth in the U.S., rather than in China, with claims of the U.S. having “the most attractive nationality”; “better air” and less pollution; “priority for jobs in U.S. government”; superior educational resources, including “free education from junior high school to public high school”; a more stable political situation; and the potential to “receive your senior supplement benefits when you are living overseas.”

The indictment naming Li alleges that she operated an Orange County-based business named You Win USA that advertised its “100-person team” in China and the U.S. had served more than 500 Chinese birth tourism customers. Li allegedly used 20 apartments in Irvine, charged each customer $40,000 to $80,000, and received $3 million in international wire transfers from China in just two years. The indictment details communications in which Li referred to U.S. immigration authorities as “the foreigners” and also discussed whether to refund a down payment because, once the customer found out “the baby is a girl, her husband arranged abortion for her.”

“Receiving a tourist visa from the United States Government is a privilege, not a right,” stated IRS Criminal Investigation Acting Special Agent in Charge Bryant Jackson. “The indictments announced today confirm IRS Criminal Investigation’s commitment to following the money – from China to the United States – to help identify the promoters of this alleged illegal international birth tourism scheme. Using cash, fabricated financial documents, and nominee names for the transfer of money from China to the U.S., the promoters attempted to further their lucrative birth tourism enterprise.”

(The investigation into Li’s operation led to another investigation, which resulted in criminal charges against the 20th person to be charged in this matter. Attorney Ken Zhuyin Liang was sentenced to 21 months in federal prison for helping material witnesses flee to China in violation of court orders.)

Another indictment filed this week charges Wen Rui Deng (邓文瑞), 65, a former Irvine resident who is believed to now be in China, with operating Star Baby Care, a Los Angeles County-based operation that is believed to have been the largest birth tourism scheme in the U.S. On its websites, Star Baby Care boasted that it was founded in 1999 as the “number one designated maternity service to the pregnant mother from China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan,” and had “provided services to 8,000 pregnant women (4,000 from China) since we established.” The indictment alleges that Deng’s scheme used 30 apartments in Rowland Heights and 10 properties in Irvine, including some houses. Deng’s scheme served many customers alleged to be Chinese officials, including some associated with Chinese Central Television, China Telecom, Bank of China, and two local taxation bureaus.

In the third indictment filed this week, Liu and Dong are accused of operating USA Happy Baby Inc., a San Bernardino County-based company that charged “VIP” customers as much as $100,000. Using apartments in Rancho Cucamonga and Irvine, USA Happy Baby allegedly also served Chinese officials, including people associated with the Henan People’s Radio Station in Zhengzhou, the Public Security Bureau in the Beijing Municipal Government, and the Harbin Medical University in Heilongjiang Province. Liu and USA Happy Baby are also charged with filing false tax returns that failed to report more than $1.9 million received over three years. The indictment also alleges that Liu and Dong used 14 different bank accounts to receive more than $3.4 million in international wire transfers from China during 2013 and 2014 alone.

There are 16 fugitive defendants whose indictments were unsealed today include. They are:

Qiang Yan (闫强), 42, who is Dongyuan Li’s husband, was indicted in December 2018 on three counts of visa fraud for filing an application for an “O” visa premised upon being an “alien of extraordinary ability,” which falsely claimed that he had co-authored two books and attached fake copies of those books. The indictment naming his wife notes that when Yan was interviewed during a search of Li’s multi-million-dollar residence in Irvine, he told the federal agents that his birth tourism business investment was “chump change,” because he had more than $10 million in his bank accounts in China.
Xiao Yan Liu (刘小燕), 39, who was indicted in November 2018 for two counts of visa fraud and one count of lying to federal law enforcement. According to her visa application, she was the “Chief Physician” at the Henan Shangqiu Power Supply Company Staff Hospital.
Jun Xiao (肖俊), 30, and LongJing Yi (易珑静), 30, who were indicted in February 2018 on charges of conspiracy, visa fraud, obstruction of justice, and criminal contempt. According to their indictment, Xiao and Yi made false statements on their visa applications, namely that they would be staying in the United States for only 15 days. According to court documents in their case, Xiao and Yi paid only $4,600 of the $32,291 in hospital charges related to the birth of their baby. The indictments detail communications from Xiao after he had fled to China, where he continued to denigrate the Court’s Order requiring him to stay in the U.S.: “Anyway, I’m already home. U.S. can’t do anything to me.”
Dongjiang He (贺东江), 46, was indicted in February 2018 for fleeing with his wife to China, in violation of a federal court order. On his visa application, He listed his occupation as “Government” and his position as “Project Manager and Secretary General” for the China Nonferrous Metals Techno Economic Research Institute, which is located in the Haidian District in Beijing. He’s wife, Zhichan Yu (余芝婵), 40, also was indicted in February 2018 on charges of visa fraud, obstruction of justice, and contempt of court after fleeing to China in violation of a federal court order.
Jia Luo (罗佳), 30, was indicted in February 2018 for fleeing to China in violation of a federal court order. According to court documents, Luo lied on her visa application and lied to U.S. Customs officers in Hawaii when asked her if she was planning on having a baby in the United States.
Renlong Chen (陈人龙), 34, and his wife Wei Wang (王伟), 33, were indicted in February 2018 for fleeing to China, in violation of federal court orders. Chen and Wang are accused of making false statements on their visa applications by stating they would be visiting the United States for only eight days, when they actually made arrangements to stay at a maternity house in Rancho Cucamonga for three months so that Wang could give birth in the United States.
Jie He (何洁), 29, was indicted in February 2018 for fleeing to China in violation of federal court order. He allegedly made false statements on her visa application, including that she planned to stay in the United States for only 20 days, when she actually entered into a contract to pay approximately $50,000 to obtain a visa and stay in the United States for several months to give birth. According to court documents, Jie He told HSI special agents that she flew into Las Vegas, rather than Los Angeles, because the Chinese maternity operator had advised her that it was easier to enter through Las Vegas.
Eryun Zhang (张尔芸), 25; her husband, Liang Ni (倪梁), 25; and her mother, Ji Xu (徐激), 50, were indicted in February 2018 for fleeing to China in violation of federal court orders. According to court documents, Ni admitted that, during an interview conducted at the U.S. Consulate in China, he falsely stated that the purpose of their trip was for their honeymoon, rather than the true reason for Zhang to give birth in the United States.
Chao Chen (陈超), 34, a partner in the You Win USA scheme, was indicted in December 2018 with one count of contempt of court for fleeing the U.S. while he was pending sentencing. Chen previously pleaded guilty to visa fraud, marriage fraud and tax fraud.
Ji Zhu (朱洁), 31, who was indicted in March 2018 for one count of marriage fraud, for allegedly marrying a U.S. citizen to obtain U.S. citizenship, even though she really was married to Chao Chen. Zhu fled to China with Chao Chen, where they remain fugitives from justice.

An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The three defendants arrested this morning are expected to be arraigned on the indictments this afternoon in U.S. District Court in Santa Ana.

HSI’s investigation into Dongyuan Li’s You Win USA scheme has resulted in seizure and/or forfeiture proceedings against three real properties with millions of dollars in equity, including her $2.1 million residence in Irvine; six vehicles, including four Mercedes Benz vehicles; more than $1 million from bank accounts; and many gold bars and coins.