The power helped the attorney general to manage this system - knitting adjudications, rulemaking, & other decisions into one coherent immigration policy framework.
Even those casually following immigration are likely aware of the active role Trump's attorneys general played.
This participation entailed unprecedented use of "referral & review"... a power with a problematic & twisted journey beyond Trump...
More in my report out today⬇️
The power helped the attorney general to manage this system - knitting adjudications, rulemaking, & other decisions into one coherent immigration policy framework.
Allowing the attorney general—the country’s chief law enforcement officer—to intercede in individual immigration cases has raised questions about the true independence of the immigration adjudication system.
Under the government restructuring following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, most of the immigration system was moved out of the Justice Department.
The attorney general was left with the immigration court system and...referral & review.
It became their tool to affect policy.
These decisions even bind DHS, now the lead agency on immigration.
With the Trump administration's aggressive immigration agenda & strategy of pursuing a wide range of administrative tools, attorneys general under Trump self-refer more decisions than under any prior administration.
This compares to 4 during the entirety of the Obama
administration and 10 under George W. Bush (both administrations that lasted two terms rather than one).
Given its speed and flexibility, referral & review could be a huge help.
A mandatory process requiring transparency & briefing could be an important step in the right direction.
https://t.co/ndMANPaj5o
More from Government
You May Also Like
Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
