California
Border arrests plunge in June to lowest of Biden’s presidency
SAN DIEGO (AP) — Arrests for illegally crossing the border from Mexico plunged 29% in June, the lowest month of Joe Biden’s presidency, according to figures released Monday that provide another window on the impact of a new rule to temporarily suspend asylum.
Arrests totaled 83,536 in June, down from 117,901 in May to mark the lowest tally since January 2021, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said.
A seven-day average of daily arrests fell more than half by the end of June from Biden’s announcement on June 4 that asylum processing would be halted when daily arrests reach 2,500, which they did immediately, said Troy Miller, acting Customs and Border Protection commissioner.
“Recent border security measures have made a meaningful impact on our ability to impose consequences for those crossing unlawfully,” Miller said.
Arrests had already fallen by more than half from a record high of 250,000 in December, largely a result of increased enforcement by Mexican authorities, according to U.S. officials.
Sharp declines registered across nationalities, including Mexicans, who have been most affected by the suspension of asylum, and Chinese people, who generally fly to Ecuador and travel to the U.S. border over land.
San Diego was the busiest of the Border Patrol’s nine sectors bordering Mexico by number of arrests, followed by Tucson, Arizona.
More than 41,000 people entered legally through an online appointment app called CBP One in June. The agency said 680,500 people have successfully scheduled appointments since the app was introduced in January 2023.
Nearly 500,000 people from four countries entered on a policy to allow two-year stays on condition they have financial sponsors and arrive at an airport. They include 104,130 Cubans, 194,027 Haitians, 86,101 Nicaraguans and 110,541 Venezuelans, according to CBP.
Pennsylvania
Thousands of Philadelphia city workers are back in the office full time after judge rejects lawsuit
Thousands of Philadelphia city employees are back in their offices full time after a judge rejected a union’s request to block Mayor Cherelle Parker’s requirement that they return.
District Council 47 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees had sued the city, claiming the mandate violates its contract and would harm city workers. The union, which represents 6,000 administrative and supervisory employees, has also filed an unfair-practices complaint with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, which is still pending.
A two-day hearing held last week on the lawsuit concluded when the judge ruled Friday night that the city could impose the mandate, so the workers had to return to the office Monday.
Parker announced the mandate in May, saying she wanted to create a more visible and accessible government. The decision ended the city’s virtual work policy, put in place in 2021, and essentially returns employee scheduling to what it was before the coronavirus pandemic.
About 80% of the city’s 26,000 employees have been working fully on site since last year, while the rest had worked on site 31 to 75 hours per pay period, Parker said. Former Mayor Jim Kenney had left hybrid work decisions up to department heads.
The union sharply criticized the decision when it was announced, saying it was unilaterally imposed instead of going through collective bargaining. It also believes the policy will worsen the worker shortage the city has suffered since the pandemic.
It also argues that the city lacks enough office space to bring all employees back and that making the change over the summer, when children are out of school, complicates schedules for parents.
Parker, a Democrat, has said her administration does not believe the new policy is subject to collective bargaining. She also noted changes that were made to be more worker friendly, such as extending paid parental leave from six to eight weeks and designating the Friday after Thanksgiving as a holiday. Officials have also said there will be relaxed restrictions on sick leave to care for family members.
Business leaders have welcomed the announcement, saying it will benefit workers and the vibrancy of Philadelphia’s downtown.
South Dakota
Judge’s ruling keeps abortion question on November ballot
A state court judge’s ruling Monday keeps an abortion-rights question on the November ballot in South Dakota.
Judge John Pekas dismissed a lawsuit filed by an anti-abortion group, Life Defense Fund, that sought to have the question removed even though supporters turned in more than enough valid signatures to put it on the ballot.
“They have thrown everything they could dream up to stop the people of South Dakota from voting on this matter,” Adam Weiland, co-founder of Dakotans for Health, said in a statement after the ruling. “This is another failed effort by a small group opposed to giving women the option to terminate pregnancies caused by rape and incest or to address dangerous pregnancies affecting the life and health of women.”
Republican Rep. Jon Hansen, who is a co-chair of the Life Defense Fund, and a lawyer for the group did not immediately return messages from The Associated Press on Monday.
South Dakota is one of 14 states now enforcing a ban on abortion at every stage of pregnancy, a possibility the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door to in 2022, when it overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the nationwide right to abortion.
The amendment supported by Dakotans for Health would bar the state from regulating “a pregnant woman’s abortion decision and its effectuation” in the first trimester, but it would allow second-trimester regulations “only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.”
Since Roe was overturned, all seven statewide abortion-related ballot measures have gone the way abortion-rights groups wanted them to.
This year, similar questions are on the ballots in five states, plus a New York equal rights question that would ban discrimination based on “pregnancy outcomes,” among other factors.
Advocates are waiting for signatures to be verified to get questions on the ballot this year in four more states, including Nebraska, where there could be competing questions on abortion rights before voters.
Border arrests plunge in June to lowest of Biden’s presidency
SAN DIEGO (AP) — Arrests for illegally crossing the border from Mexico plunged 29% in June, the lowest month of Joe Biden’s presidency, according to figures released Monday that provide another window on the impact of a new rule to temporarily suspend asylum.
Arrests totaled 83,536 in June, down from 117,901 in May to mark the lowest tally since January 2021, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said.
A seven-day average of daily arrests fell more than half by the end of June from Biden’s announcement on June 4 that asylum processing would be halted when daily arrests reach 2,500, which they did immediately, said Troy Miller, acting Customs and Border Protection commissioner.
“Recent border security measures have made a meaningful impact on our ability to impose consequences for those crossing unlawfully,” Miller said.
Arrests had already fallen by more than half from a record high of 250,000 in December, largely a result of increased enforcement by Mexican authorities, according to U.S. officials.
Sharp declines registered across nationalities, including Mexicans, who have been most affected by the suspension of asylum, and Chinese people, who generally fly to Ecuador and travel to the U.S. border over land.
San Diego was the busiest of the Border Patrol’s nine sectors bordering Mexico by number of arrests, followed by Tucson, Arizona.
More than 41,000 people entered legally through an online appointment app called CBP One in June. The agency said 680,500 people have successfully scheduled appointments since the app was introduced in January 2023.
Nearly 500,000 people from four countries entered on a policy to allow two-year stays on condition they have financial sponsors and arrive at an airport. They include 104,130 Cubans, 194,027 Haitians, 86,101 Nicaraguans and 110,541 Venezuelans, according to CBP.
Pennsylvania
Thousands of Philadelphia city workers are back in the office full time after judge rejects lawsuit
Thousands of Philadelphia city employees are back in their offices full time after a judge rejected a union’s request to block Mayor Cherelle Parker’s requirement that they return.
District Council 47 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees had sued the city, claiming the mandate violates its contract and would harm city workers. The union, which represents 6,000 administrative and supervisory employees, has also filed an unfair-practices complaint with the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, which is still pending.
A two-day hearing held last week on the lawsuit concluded when the judge ruled Friday night that the city could impose the mandate, so the workers had to return to the office Monday.
Parker announced the mandate in May, saying she wanted to create a more visible and accessible government. The decision ended the city’s virtual work policy, put in place in 2021, and essentially returns employee scheduling to what it was before the coronavirus pandemic.
About 80% of the city’s 26,000 employees have been working fully on site since last year, while the rest had worked on site 31 to 75 hours per pay period, Parker said. Former Mayor Jim Kenney had left hybrid work decisions up to department heads.
The union sharply criticized the decision when it was announced, saying it was unilaterally imposed instead of going through collective bargaining. It also believes the policy will worsen the worker shortage the city has suffered since the pandemic.
It also argues that the city lacks enough office space to bring all employees back and that making the change over the summer, when children are out of school, complicates schedules for parents.
Parker, a Democrat, has said her administration does not believe the new policy is subject to collective bargaining. She also noted changes that were made to be more worker friendly, such as extending paid parental leave from six to eight weeks and designating the Friday after Thanksgiving as a holiday. Officials have also said there will be relaxed restrictions on sick leave to care for family members.
Business leaders have welcomed the announcement, saying it will benefit workers and the vibrancy of Philadelphia’s downtown.
South Dakota
Judge’s ruling keeps abortion question on November ballot
A state court judge’s ruling Monday keeps an abortion-rights question on the November ballot in South Dakota.
Judge John Pekas dismissed a lawsuit filed by an anti-abortion group, Life Defense Fund, that sought to have the question removed even though supporters turned in more than enough valid signatures to put it on the ballot.
“They have thrown everything they could dream up to stop the people of South Dakota from voting on this matter,” Adam Weiland, co-founder of Dakotans for Health, said in a statement after the ruling. “This is another failed effort by a small group opposed to giving women the option to terminate pregnancies caused by rape and incest or to address dangerous pregnancies affecting the life and health of women.”
Republican Rep. Jon Hansen, who is a co-chair of the Life Defense Fund, and a lawyer for the group did not immediately return messages from The Associated Press on Monday.
South Dakota is one of 14 states now enforcing a ban on abortion at every stage of pregnancy, a possibility the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door to in 2022, when it overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the nationwide right to abortion.
The amendment supported by Dakotans for Health would bar the state from regulating “a pregnant woman’s abortion decision and its effectuation” in the first trimester, but it would allow second-trimester regulations “only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.”
Since Roe was overturned, all seven statewide abortion-related ballot measures have gone the way abortion-rights groups wanted them to.
This year, similar questions are on the ballots in five states, plus a New York equal rights question that would ban discrimination based on “pregnancy outcomes,” among other factors.
Advocates are waiting for signatures to be verified to get questions on the ballot this year in four more states, including Nebraska, where there could be competing questions on abortion rights before voters.
