Category Archives: Legislation

In America: What Exactly is a Refugee?

Posted on by

DHS Officials Admit They Have Not Used ‘Deception Detection Technologies’ to Screen Visa Applicants, Refugees

MRCTV: At a House Homeland Security Committee hearing Wednesday titled “Shutting Down Terrorist Pathways into America,” officials at the Department of Homeland Security admitted they have not explored the use of “deception detection technology” for screening refugees and other visa applicants despite a law signed last year directing the agency to do so.

 

Migrant surge poses challenge for U.S.: Who’s a refugee, who isn’t?

WASHINGTON

Ordonez/McClatchy: U.S. Border Patrol agents will apprehend more family members entering the United States along the Southwest border this fiscal year than they did in 2014, when a massive surge of Central Americans found the Obama administration detaining thousands of mothers and their children.

Newly released U.S. Customs and Border Protection statistics show that while overall apprehension numbers are down from two years ago, the number of family members being apprehended will almost certainly surpass the total of two years ago.

Both family apprehensions and detentions of unaccompanied children have shown dramatic increases over last year’s totals – with family detentions nearly doubling and the number children traveling without parents increasing 52 percent.

Those increases raise serious questions about the Obama administration’s strategy to curb the flow through a combination of immigration enforcement and humanitarian assistance.

“It has been a failure, because people are still coming,” said Amy Fischer, the policy director for the Texas-based Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services.

Many migrants from Central America cite violence in their homelands as the reason for seeking refuge in the United States. The Obama administration has created a variety of programs, including aid to Central American governments, to try to tamp down that violence. The administration acknowledged over the summer that efforts have been “insufficient to address the number of people who may have legitimate refugee claims.”

A total of 68,445 family members were apprehended in 2014, when a surge of Salvadoran, Honduran and Guatemalan mothers and children fleeing violence and poverty raced into the Rio Grande Valley of Texas.

This year, with one month left in the fiscal year, more than 68,080 family members have been apprehended. With apprehensions averaging 6,189 a month, the annual total is certain to be a record. No month this year has seen fewer than 3,000 family members detained. In August, Border Patrol agents apprehended 9,359 family members, the highest yet of the year.

Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador are three of the most violent countries in the world.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees warned last October that women from Central America would continue to flee their countries because of the escalating tide of violence, including domestic violence and rape, fueled by sophisticated transnational gangs.

The number of Central Americans seeking asylum in the United States has grown nearly eightfold in the last six years. Mexico, Canada, Nicaragua and Costa Rica also have seen an increase in Guatemalans, Hondurans and Salvadorans seeking refugee status, according to the United Nations high commissioner for refugees.

Federal officials have an obligation under national and international law to protect the vulnerable. The challenge is determining who qualifies as a bona fide refugee and who has come for family or economic reasons.

The surge has exacerbated an already long backlog of hundreds of thousands who are awaiting cases in immigration court. To receive asylum in the United States, applicants must prove they have well-founded fears of persecution because of “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion.” These cases can take years to resolve.

Homeland Security officials said they continued to monitor migration trends and were working aggressively to “deter unauthorized migration, while ensuring that those with legitimate humanitarian claims are afforded the opportunity to seek protection.”

The White House reached an agreement with Costa Rica in July to host up to 200 Central American refugee applicants while the United States assessed their asylum claims. It was part of a larger package of measures put in place to protect migrants that included expanding the number of people who can apply to the U.S. refugee program for children. The administration also worked with Congress to secure $750 million to help El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras fight poverty and violence as well as reform their governments.

President Barack Obama has authorized spending up to $70 million to meet the “unexpected urgent refugee and migration needs related to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program.”

But Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has made it clear that deportations of Central Americans will continue despite recognition of the crisis.

“As long as we have border security and as long as our borders are not open borders,” Johnson told reporters last month. “We have to be consistent with our priorities.” More here.

 

Best Foreign Hack Job: Library of Congress…Done

Posted on by

The Library of Congress Was Hacked Because It Hasn’t Joined the Digital Age

Motherboard: With the presidential election taking all the air out of the room, July’s IT attack on the Library of Congress barely made the news. But for good governance advocates and policymakers, this denial of service attack, which caused a three day service outage, validated decades of complaints about the Library of Congress’ failure to join the digital age.

Americans are familiar with the Library’s mission to archive the world’s literature and research. But Congress, librarians, and specialized policy wonks are more familiar with the Library’s many other functions, including the intelligence gatherer, legislative tracker, governance think tank, and intellectual property bureaucracy. The library’s dysfunction is bad news for Congressional staff, and the researchers and scholars who defend on the archives of American history and information on the world’s most unstable regions.

Surprisingly, the Library of Congress was among the first in government to embrace the power of the Internet. Pushed on the Library by Newt Gingrich and thrown together with a quick and dirty build, THOMAS.gov (the predecessor to Congress.gov) debuted in January of 1995. Despite the fast execution and concern over who could even access this site when comparatively few people had internet access, THOMAS.gov handled almost a million queries within the first 38 days of operation.

So what happened? Government investigations as far back as 2002 have highlighted the mismanagement of contractors, budget, overall management, and IT services. Many government watchdogs and library scholars also point to the former librarian, Dr. James Billington. Serving 28 years in the position, Billington had a reputation for both being difficult manager and an infamous luddite, even reportedly requesting at times that staff fax him at home and refusing to use email.

staff fax him at home and refusing to use email.

Library of Congress Great Hall. Image: Ed Schipul/Flickr

Appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1987, Billington has had some positive moments in his legacy. His review of the DMCA in 2010 (which the library holds jurisdiction over and is tasked with reviewing every three years) massively changed the future of copyright. Around Washington, Billington gained a reputation as a dynamic private fundraiser, using these funds to supplement library budgets for collections and programming. However, much like his overall management, Billington’s fundraising style has also come under fire, both over the exclusivity and possible use of donated funds for donors-only swank dinners and performances.

The library does have a Chief Information Officer, but in recent years, it struggled to fill the position, cycling through five temporary CIOs before being forced to find a permanent CIO by recommendations in a scathing 2015 Government Accountability Office report on the Library’s IT systems.

In this report, the GAO again confirmed what scholars, lawmakers, and their staff have been struggling with for years: the Library of Congress is simply not equipped to join the 21st century. The GAO estimates that the LOC spends roughly $120 million dollars on IT functions, but the library’s accounting records leave much to be desired, particularly when recording acquisitions of new IT assets.

These overseas offices have even become an important tool in the fight against ISIS.

When asked to account for the number of systems within the library, the number of systems was first recorded to be 30, then 46, and eventually 70. Most notably, overseas office systems were left off the list. Since 1962, these offices have been tasked with collecting materials in underdeveloped and politically volatile areas, including (infamously) the acquisition of a copy of Osama Bin Laden’s autobiography.

These overseas offices have even become an important tool in the fight against ISIS. With the wanton destruction of cultural artifacts and archives by ISIS and general civil unrest, experts at the library’s Middle Eastern offices have been at the forefront of providing support in the salvaging of damaged books and other materials. The collection of materials (in 2014, the overseas offices collected over 800,000 items) has been invaluable for researchers in the United States. However as the associate librarian for library services, Mark Sweeney, noted in a March 2015 testimony before the Senate Legislative Appropriations Subcommittee, security is a continuing concern for these offices.

With overseas offices in cities such as Islamabad, Cairo, and Jakarta, accurately managing cybersecurity risks to the Library’s overseas collections and personnel is difficult, particularly when, as admitted by Chief of the Library Services Automation and Planning Office, these systems haven’t been accredited or credentialed.

The library has also been unable to keep an accurate inventory of key resources and assets. It reported having fewer than 6,500 computers in use, while the actual number is somewhere around 18,000. While the library does have oversight of initial technology investments, it lacks any effective way to oversee continued funding. For example, the library reported in 2013 “missing” the review of the $2.2 million dollar project, the National Library Catalog.

An .xml database and public facing web service intended to replace Online Public Access Catalog, the library’s current publically accessible database, the National Library Catalog was intended to finally allow a smooth search experience of the Library’s many different archives and websites after a 2009 report by the Office of the Inspector General that highlighted the difficulty the public had accessing the library’s resources.

Library of Congress. Image: Monica Volper/Pixabay

In March 2012, the project was dumped after being denied release when it was discovered that a recommended switch to Solr-based platform had been ignored. Due to a lack of communication, the entire project was scrapped, including the usable .xml database which had cost 1.25 million dollars and 33 months to develop.

Even offices with separate functions operating under the Library’s jurisdiction haven’t been free from massive mismanagement. The copyright office still runs on a largely paper based system (some records kept are still kept in card catalogues) and is forced to share the library’s aging IT systems. Large digital projects have even failed to materialize, such as the promise of an archive of everything that has been tweeted since 2010. Digitization projects are so far behind that only a fraction of the Library’s 24 million titles have been made available online.

While Congress has been reluctant to criticize Billington, a bill to term limit the Librarian of Congress to 10 years seems very conveniently timed to Billington’s retirement. Congress also took a step in the right direction with the confirmation of Carla Hayden, former president of the American Library Association. Despite opposition from some conservative advocacy groups and Republican Senators on her stances on the Patriot Act, censorship, and frankly ridiculous assertions that she didn’t have the appropriate scholarly background to helm the library, Hayden was confirmed late this summer to become the first female and African American librarian.

Read more: The Twitter Archive at the Library of Congress Won’t Actually Be Very Useful

Hayden’s reputation as a technologically savvy reformer is well deserved, having modernized Baltimore’s flailing Enoch Pratt Free Library and ushered in a period of unprecedented expansion for Baltimore’s library system in an otherwise bleak time for the city. Hayden even became a beacon of stability and normalcy after the Freddie Gray riots with her decision to keep the library open despite the unrest.

With Hayden in the top job, policy advocates and scholars might have a glimmer of hope that the former crown jewel of American libraries can be pulled out of mothballs and dragged into the 21st century.

ODNI Report on Released Gitmo Detainees

Posted on by

In an attempt to prevent the closure, Congress is now voting on a bill preventing further transfers of inmates until a new defense policy bill is passed.

Currently, 61 detainees still remain at the detention camp, following the release of 15 in August, the largest single transfer under the Obama administration. Additionally, 16 others have been cleared for transfer.

Summary of the Reengagement of Detainees Formerly Held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

Wednesday, September 14, 2016
From the Office of the Director of National Intelligence:

Summary of the Reengagement of Detainees Formerly Held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

The Director of National Intelligence submits this summary consistent with direction in the Fiscal Year 2012 Intelligence Authorization Act, Section 307, which states:

(a) “The Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, shall make publicly available an unclassified summary of,

(1) intelligence relating to recidivism of detainees currently or formerly held at the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department of Defense; and

(2) an assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism or communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

(b) Updates – Not less frequently than once every 6 months, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Secretary of Defense, shall update and make publicly available an unclassified summary consisting of the information required by subsection (a) and the number of individuals formerly detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who are confirmed or suspected of returning to terrorist activities after release or transfer from such Naval Station.”

Section 307 (a) (1) Intelligence relating to recidivism of detainees currently or formerly held at the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department of Defense.

**

Reengagement of Former Guantanamo Bay (GTMO) Detainees as of 15 July 2016
Total Pre-22 January 2009a Post-22 January 2009
Detainees Transferred 693* 532 161
Confirmed of Reengaging 122 of 693 (17.6%) 113 of 532 (21.2%) 9 of 161 (5.6%)**
Dead – 30 of 122 29 1
In custody – 25 of 122 25 0
Not in custody – 67 of 122 59 8
Suspected of Reengagingb 86 of 693 (12.4%) 75 of 532 (14.1%)** 11 of 161 (6.8%)**
Dead – 3 of 86c 2 1
In custody – 18 of 86 18 0
Not in custody – 65 of 86 55 10

a Executive Order 13492 was signed on January 22, 2009 to determine the disposition of the 240 detainees then remaining at the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

b The Defense Intelligence Agency assesses five additional detainees are suspected of reengagement.

c Due to a coding error this number was previously reported as 4.

*An additional nine detainees died while at GTMO, and one was transferred to New York for trial, was convicted, and is now imprisoned in Colorado.

**Each of these categories includes detainees who were transferred pursuant to a court order.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism.

Based on trends identified during the past eleven years, we assess that some detainees currently at GTMO will seek to reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities after they are transferred. Transfers to countries with ongoing conflicts and internal instability as well as recruitment by insurgent and terrorist organizations could pose problems. While enforcement of transfer conditions may deter reengagement by many former detainees and delay reengagement by others, some detainees who are determined to reengage will do so regardless of any transfer conditions, albeit probably at a lower rate than if they were transferred without conditions.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

Former GTMO detainees routinely communicate with each other, families of other former detainees, and previous associates who are members of terrorist organizations. The reasons for communication span from the mundane (reminiscing about shared experiences) to the nefarious (planning terrorist operations). We assess that some GTMO detainees transferred in the future also will communicate with other former GTMO detainees and persons in terrorist organizations. We do not consider mere communication with individuals or organizations—including other former GTMO detainees—an indicator of reengagement. Rather, the motives, intentions, and purposes of each communication are taken into account when assessing whether the individual has reengaged.

Definition of “Terrorist” or “Insurgent” Activities. Activities such as the following indicate involvement in terrorist or insurgent activities: planning terrorist operations, conducting a terrorist or insurgent attack against Coalition or host-nation forces or civilians, conducting a suicide bombing, financing terrorist operations, recruiting others for terrorist operations, and arranging for movement of individuals involved in terrorist operations. It does not include mere communications with individuals or organizations—including other former GTMO detainees—on issues not related to terrorist operations, such as reminiscing about shared experiences at GTMO, communicating with past terrorist associates about non-nefarious activities, writing anti-US books or articles, or making anti-US propaganda statements.

Definition of “Confirmed” Activities. A preponderance of information which identifies a specific former GTMO detainee as directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.

Definition of “Suspected” Activities. Plausible but unverified or single-source reporting indicating a specific former GTMO detainee is directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.

Who is Stopping the Giveaway of the Internet?

Posted on by

Stop Obama’s Internet giveaway

Ending ICANN could lead to censorship

By Jenny Beth Martin – – Wednesday, September 14, 2016

WashingtonTimes: The development and maintenance of the open Internet has been one of the greatest boons to the enhancement of free speech and free commerce since time began. But if the Obama Administration has its way, both will be threatened in the very near future – unless Congress acts by the end of this month to block the Obama Internet Give-Away. Will it?

Russia, China and Iran don’t have a First Amendment, and their governments regularly clamp down on free speech. So why would we want to end American protection of the open Internet and transfer it to Moscow, Beijing and Tehran instead?

On Oct. 1, the Obama administration plans to end the U.S. Government contract with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN. Doing so would kick off a transition that could irreparably harm the open Internet, leading to censorship abroad that could, quite realistically, lead to censorship right here in the United States. Under this transition of Internet oversight, China, Russia and Iran, which have all demonstrated their contempt for Internet freedom by blocking websites and restricting Internet access to their own citizens, would be newly empowered to block specific websites from users all over the world, including in the United States.

Let’s back up.

The Internet was originally launched as a project of the U.S. Defense Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in the 1960s. Then, in the 1980s, access to ARPANET was expanded courtesy of U.S. taxpayer-funded grants via the National Science Foundation, and, eventually, the Internet as we know it was developed.

So U.S. taxpayers paid for the creation, and development, and maintenance of the Internet. It is, in a very real sense, American property.

Article IV of the U.S. Constitution reads in part: “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States …”

So under what authority, exactly, does President Obama claim the authority to make a decision on the disposition of a U.S. property – to wit, the Internet – without explicit permission from Congress?

Perhaps as important a question to ask is, where in the world are congressional leaders on this, and why are they not screaming bloody murder about yet another executive overreach by this overreach-hungry president?

Enter Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who has introduced S. 3034, the Protecting Internet Freedom Act. Rep. Sean Duffy of Wisconsin has introduced a companion bill, H.R. 5418, in the House. The bills would simply prohibit the Commerce Department from moving forward on its plan unless it first wins congressional approval.

Similar legislation blocking the transfer of domain registration authority has been included in the government’s annual funding bills for the last few years. The current prohibition expires on Sept. 30. If that prohibition – embodied nicely in the Cruz-Duffy legislation – is not enacted again before Oct. 1, the administration believes it can do whatever it wants.

Cruz believes otherwise, and will be chairing a hearing of his Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts on Wednesday morning to examine the subject further. The hearing, entitled “Protecting Internet Freedom: Implications of Ending U.S. Oversight of the Internet,” will begin at 10 AM.

Moreover, Cruz wants to add the provisions of his bill to the upcoming Continuing Resolution, the one piece of legislation Congress must pass and send to the president before September 30. That’s a smart play on his part.

And it would be a smart play on the part of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan to agree to add it. They’re already going to have a tough enough time winning votes for passage from among the more conservative elements of their respective GOP caucuses; adding the Cruz-Duffy provision blocking the proposed Obama Internet Give-Away would add a sweetener that could woo enough conservatives to allow the measures to pass without the leaders’ having to move left in search of Democrat votes.

And would Harry Reid or Barack Obama be so determined to give away U.S. control over the Internet that they’d be willing to shut down the government to get their way? Is that a fight either one of them would want to play out in public just five weeks before a crucial election?

Most importantly, though, Ryan and McConnell should move on the Cruz-Duffy legislation simply because it’s the right thing to do.

 

The Internet was conceived, built, developed, and grown to fruition long before Barack Obama became president. It was done at the hands of U.S. scientists and engineers, working with funds taken from U.S. taxpayers. The Internet is U.S. property. President Obama has no authority to give it away without explicit authority granted him by the U.S. Congress.

Sen. Cruz and Rep. Duffy understand that. Do leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan?

 

Illegal Immigrant Children in US Gangs and Slavery

Posted on by

Unaccompanied minors swelling ranks of American gangs, say experts

FNC: surge of unaccompanied children coming across the southern border could be swelling the ranks of one of America’s most dangerous gangs, either as fresh recruits or hardened sleepers, according to federal authorities.

Some 227,149 unaccompanied children have been apprehended at the border over the last six years, according to the U.S. Border Patrol. They remain in federal custody until a sponsor can be located, at which time they are often sent to communities where they are ripe for recruitment by Latin gangs such as the infamous MS-13.

“Our safety standards have increased,” Andrea Helling, spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, told FoxNews.com. “In the last few months screening procedures of children and sponsors has increased in their intensity which we hadn’t done previously.”

Federal law requires the Department of Homeland Security transfer children under 18 to the custody of Helling’s agency until they are released to an appropriate sponsor, usually a relative, while their immigration cases are adjudicated. Some observers say that, at the least, the process sends a steady stream of loosely supervised youths lacking in language and coping skills right into the waiting arms of criminal gangs. At worst, the unaccompanied minors were already initiated into the gangs before they arrived at the border.

MS-13 is believed to be among the largest street gangs on New York’s Long Island, and more than 250 members have been convicted on federal felony charges since 2003. Federal prosecutors there have pinned more than 20 murders on the violent gang.

Meanwhile, over the last year, Long Island has received 2,093 unaccompanied children, and between October 2013 and July 2016, all of New York received 12,478 children from Central America. The overwhelming majority of the kids are not criminals and likely have competent sponsors. But some are.

In June 2015, MS-13 members and El Salvadoran immigrants Jose Cornejo, 17, Bryan Larios, 18 and Joel Escobar, 17, all of Brentwood, N.Y. were charged with the brutal rape of a 16 year-old girl on a local golf course.

Earlier this week, Joshua Guzman, 15, was shot and killed in the Long Island city of Hempstead. While not an unaccompanied immigrant, the boy’s father, Raul Guzman, told Newsday his son was under pressure to join a gang. Police believe his murder may be related.

“We’re looking at the possibility,” said Lt. Richard LeBrun, spokesman, Nassau County Police Department, that Guzman’s murder could be gang related.

MS-13 has a foothold in numerous other communities, where unaccompanied minors are being sent. Texas, which has seen a spike in MS-13 crime has received 15,999 over the same period. The 2015 Texas Department of Public Safety Gang Threat Assessment found MS-13 boasts some 800 members, and authorities explicitly blamed the flood of unaccompanied children being placed in the state.

“The influx of illegal alien gang members crossing the border into Texas in 2014, along with reports of extremely violent murders committed by its members in the Houston area, positions the gang as one of the most significant gang threats in the state for this upcoming year,” the report stated.

Other areas that have seen an influx in MS-13 crime are Maryland, Texas, and Virginia. Fairfax County, Va. has seen a 160 percent increase in MS-13 related incidents through April compared to the previous year.

Helling said HHS is looking more closely at the sponsors who step forward to take custody of the minors.

“Our responsibility is providing a safe place for these children,” she said.

She said that high-risk children who may have been identified as gang members by DHS would likely be placed in either a staff secure or secure-juvenile detention facility. But even if they are not gang members when they come into the U.S., the risk remains that they could fall prey to recruitment efforts.

****

The other part of the story, the dark side of America:

Human Trafficking—Exploitation of Illegal Aliens

ISSUE BRIEF | AUGUST 2016

FairUS.org: The large and persistent influx of illegal aliens contributes to an environment of vulnerability and abuse. Wherever the law fails to hold people accountable, crime will flourish. The federal government’s failure to effectively address the illegal alien dilemma creates and perpetuates an environment in which exploitation runs rampant.

It is estimated that 17,000 to 19,0001 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States each year. Trafficking is the recruitment and possible transport of persons within or across boundaries by force, fraud, or deception for the purpose of exploiting them economically. Victims are lured with false promises of good jobs and better lives, and then forced to work under brutal and inhuman conditions. Victims of trafficking are exploited for purposes of commercial sex, including prostitution, stripping, pornography live-sex shows and other acts. However, trafficking also takes place as labor exploitation, including domestic servitude, sweatshop factories, agricultural work and more. After drug dealing, human trafficking is tied with the illegal arms industry as the second largest criminal industry in the world today, and it is the fastest growing.

While anyone can become a victim of trafficking, illegal aliens are highly vulnerable to being trafficked due to a combination of factors, including lack of legal status and protections, limited language skills and employment options, poverty and immigration-related debts, and social isolation. They are often victimized by traffickers from a similar ethnic or national background, on whom they may be dependent for employment or support in the foreign country.

The information below, taken from news and government sources, demonstrates the prevalence of human trafficking in the United States and the precarious nature many illegal aliens face. American immigrants seek opportunities far better than these nightmares, but often fall victim to a flawed immigration enforcement system. Human trafficking violates the promise that every person in the United States is guaranteed basic human rights. A critical strategy in ending human trafficking is better enforcement of our immigration laws and improved federal-local cooperation in law enforcement.

Examples of Human Trafficking in the United States

    • June 2016 — Aroldo Castillo- Serrano was sentenced to more than 15 years in prison for his part in smuggling Guatemalan workers, including minors, and making them work 12 hour days. They were forced to live in cramped conditions and were made to pay off a significant debt incurred by Castillo-Serrano. Ana Angelica Pedro Juan was also sentenced to 10 years in prison for her part in the operation.
    • January 2015 — Rafael Alberto Cardena-Sosa was sentenced to serve 15 years in prison for participating in a family run sex trafficking organization. His family member, Carmen Cadena, pleaded guilty and faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison. The two family members are responsible for luring young women and girls from Mexico and illegally smuggling them into the United States. They then imposed a smuggling debt and forced them into prostitution with physical force and death threats.
    • January 2015—Three brothers, Jorge, Ricardo and Leonel Estrada-Tepal pled guilty to sex trafficking charges. The Mexican nationals illegally transported females from Mexico to the United States and forced them to work as prostitutes in various cities. They face sentences ranging from a minimum of ten years behind bars to a maximum of life in prison.
    • September 2014—Charles Marquez was sentenced to life in federal prison for recruiting women in Mexico by placing an advertisement in Ciudad Juarez offering jobs in the United States. Once recruited, he harbored them in motels and forced them into prostitution. He worked with Martha Jimenez Sanchez who faces up to ten years in prison after pleading guilty. Sanchez was released on bond and is awaiting sentencing.
    • May 2013 — German Rolando Vicente-Sapon, an illegal alien, was sentenced to more than 15 years in federal prison for illegally smuggling and trafficking a 14 year old Guatemalan girl to Chattanooga, TN for $2,000 and coercing her into having sex. He will be deported after completing his prison sentence.
    • March 2013 — Susan Lee Gross was sentenced to 30 months in prison for her role in using a massage parlor as a front for a prostitution house. She transported women to work as prostitutes at her parlor and laundered the proceeds. Gross made them travel to various places around the United States. The women were originally from Korea and some were unlawfully present in the United States. Most lacked language and employment skills.
    • March 2013 — Moonseop Kim, who was illegally in the country, pleaded guilty to illegally transporting women from South Korea into Mississippi for financial gain with a sex trafficking organization. He posted an internet ad offering Korean female escort services. He is facing a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison as well as a deportation following the completion of his prison term.
    • July 2012 — Omelyan Botsvynyuk and Stepan Botsvynyuk were convicted of recruiting workers from Ukraine and forcing them to work through physical violence and threats of sexual assault. The victims never received compensation, but were rather instructed to work until their debts, ranging from $10,000 to $50,000, were paid off. They told victims that their families would be kidnapped and forced into prostitution if anyone attempted to escape. The two brothers were found guilty and received sentences of life plus 20 years in prison and 20 years.
    • October 2011 — Edk Kenit and Choimina Lukas pleaded guilty to document servitude and labor trafficking. The Micronesian couple recruited the victim from their home country to become their domestic servant. When she arrived, the couple took her passport in order to compel the victim to work for them. The couple prevented the victim from having friends, going out of the house or participating in social gatherings.
  • January 2011 — Lucinda Lyons Shackleford was indicted on charges of forced labor and document servitude (The withholding of an individual’s legal documents). He promised to take care of the victim after placement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Family Reunification Program, but instead forced him to engage in various types of labor. Shackleford failed to provide him with adequate food or any form of payment for his labor.

Endnotes

  1. Shandra Woworuntu, “My life as a sex-trafficking victim,” BBC News, March, 2016, ; Trafficking in Persons Report, 2007, U.S. Department of State.