Category: TN State Government

Posted on

State Licensed Bethany Christian Services in Nashville Provides Foster Care to UACs

Why hasn’t Bethany Christian been asked to testify to the Tennessee Joint Study Committee on Refugees whose charge is to address the situation with UAC arrivals to the state? Why is this organization being shielded from legislative and administrative scrutiny?

Tennessee’s Dept. of Children’s Services (DCS) has known or should have known all along that they licensed Bethany Christian Services to provide foster care services to UACs* arriving in Tennessee.

Recall, that DCS was grilled by the Joint Study Committee over their licensing of the Baptiste Group, a federal contractor which was providing housing and other services to UACs in Chattanooga.

Like Baptiste Group, Bethany Christian (BC) is a federal contractor with the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement and gets paid by the federal government to provide services to arriving UACs. Unlike Baptiste which provided the housing itself, BC finds foster care parents to house children smuggled to the border until they are placed with a self-identified sponsor. 

According to Amy Scott, Nashville Branch Director at Bethany Christian, “our role is to care for children who flee to the U.S. without their families, reunite families, and restore communities.” Further down in her January 2021 Tennessean op-ed she makes it clear that she is talking about UACs and discloses that they have provided transitional (short-term) foster care to 8,000 arriving UACs since 2013. 

Scott suggests only good Christians support illegal immigration

BC is among the largest adoption and foster care providers in the country and has multiple offices in other states. In Tennessee BC operates in Nashville, Knoxville, Chattanooga, Johnson City and Memphis, so it is not clear whether Scott’s reference to the 8,000 UACs served refers solely to Tennessee.

According to BC’s website Nashville is the only Tennessee location providing foster care to UACs at this time but they are actively seeking to expand “beyond [the] locations” listed.

BC is also an advocate for increasing the number of overseas refugees to be resettled in the U.S..

Without question, BC is in the same business as the Baptiste Group. The sole difference between them is that Baptiste operated a facility where the UACs were housed whereas BC farms the UACs out to paid foster care homes.

Both Baptiste and BC are responsible for releasing a UAC to self-identified sponsors who present themselves. BC is responsible for vetting the self-identified UAC sponsor. Data indicates that  approximately 78% of UAC sponsors are here illegally themselves. And some “vetted” sponsors have turned out to be labor traffickers like those in the August 2021 investigation. 

Both Baptiste and BC get paid by the federal government for these services.

Both Baptiste and BC are licensed by the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services but only Baptiste was ever discussed by the Joint Legislative Committee on Refugees. In fact, the committee legislators made a big show about going after the Baptiste Group once it became public that Baptiste was being paid to provide transitional housing and services to UAC arrivals in Chattanooga. DCS was grilled about the licensing.

Why hasn’t BC been called to account for facilitating illegal immigration with UACs by the Joint Legislative Study Committee on Refugees? Why hasn’t DCS been questioned about its licensing for BC?

The Joint Committee’s agenda for its upcoming meeting on October 12th, appears to be going after federal ORR contractors which have been identified for providing services to UACs arriving in Tennessee.

Bethany Christian Services is not included – why not? How credible is this Joint Committee or these legislators if they are willing to shield a self-identified UAC provider?

*BC insists that UACs “in the transitional foster care program are not illegal immigrants.” The Congressional Research Service (CRS) which refers to itself as Congress’ “think tank” writes, “[u]naccompanied alien children are statutorily defined as children who lack lawful immigration status in the United States, are under age 18, and lack a parent or legal guardian in the United States or a parent or legal guardian in the United States who is available to provide care and physical custody.” All UACs are illegal entrants until they receive some form of adjudicated immigration relief.

Posted on

TN’s Elected Okay With Illegal Immigration in the State

The first problem is that we don’t have a Ron DeSantis type governor. The second problem is that the TN Chamber of Commerce and NFIB have outsized influence over too many legislators in the General Assembly. The third problem is that there are too many Republicans in the General Assembly who are simply okay with illegal immigration.

With over 130,000 UACs, over 380,000 family units and over 950,000 adults – all illegal aliens, having crossed the border from October through August for a total so far for FY21 of over 1.5 million, untested and untreated for COVID, but still being shipped to communities around the U.S., you’d think our so-called “conservative” super-majority would get serious about the impact on Tennessee.

Add, another 16,000 migrants from Colombia and another caravan of 40 – 60,000 Haitians heading to the border not including those waiting in Mexico which by December, an internal report speculates will total 125,000 migrants waiting to cross into the U.S..

And these massive numbers are on top of the almost 60,000  Afghan (many unvetted or poorly vetted) evacuees being relocated to communities around the U.S. and the 125,000 refugees Biden promises to import from overseas during FY22. BTW, the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants is urging Biden to up the number to 200,000.

Even before Biden opened the border and stopped construction on the border wall in April 2020, the Nashville government issued a report documenting the 31,000 illegal aliens living and working in Davidson County. The following month, the Soros funded Center for Migration Studies reported that at least 66,900 illegal alien “essential” workers were earning their livelihoods in Tennessee. 

The Partnership for a New American Economy 2016 report put the illegal alien population in Tennessee at 128,620.

Then there’s TIRRC….

TIRRC board member Sandra Pita, an illegal alien living in Memphis who has work authorization and temporary deferred deportation because she is a DACA beneficiary of the unconstitutional Obama program tells us that she was promised a pathway to citizenship and it’s time to give it!  In any case she says, she deserves it because of the sacrifices she’s made to “go out every day and work on the front lines to keep this country going” by being paid to clean people’s homes during COVID. Pita says that she has a business that employs other women and was forced to reduce her staff because she was denied COVID relief money.

While both Pita and her husband are illegal aliens, their six children were born here and are considered U.S. citizens. Pita admits that her husband cannot work legally but yet, is employed by a home remodeling firm. See why E-verify is important?

Pita is hoping that her soon to be 21-year old son can file the paperwork to legalize her and her husband.

Pita is a board member of the TN Immigrant & Refugee Rights Coalition (TIRRC), an organization which has benefitted in the past from Soros funding. More importantly perhaps, is TIRRC’s six paid lobbyists who aggressively attack key legislation at Tennessee’s state legislature. It doesn’t hurt that TIRRC maintains a large staff and over $3 million in the bank.

David Lubell, a former organizer with Latino Memphis launched TIRRC at the same time the Nashville Chamber of Commerce signed up to be a paid site for a U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement pilot called “Building the New American Community”. One objective of this grant was to demonstrate how local governments could help immigrants and refugees better integrate.  It emphasized building coalitions and immigrant leadership.

Since then, TIRRC has become the state ringleader with a satellite office in Memphis and along with Latino Memphis, Centro Hispano in Knoxville, La Pax in Chattanooga, and Conexion Americas in Nashville, advocate for illegal aliens and refugees in the state. TIRRC Votes has helped Marxist candidates in Tennessee get elected to local seats.

TIRRC fiercely opposed the sanctuary city bill and the lesser publicized municipal identification bill along with every bill that creates any obstacle for illegal aliens in Tennessee.

It doesn’t help that Tennessee’s Attorney General is super soft on illegal immigration going so far as to advocate for amnesty for the “dreamers” after meeting with TIRRC’s director a few years back. No different than Haslam who ran as a hawk on illegal immigration, refused to sign the sanctuary city bill, and ended up pushing in-state tuition for illegal alien students in Tennessee.

Even though illegal aliens depress the wages of the least skilled Tennessee workers, the General Assembly and its conflict-of-interest driven voting, is complicit in throwing legal Tennessee workers and conservative voters under the bus in deference to the wishes of the Chamber of Commerce and NFIB, because “we are a business friendly state.”

If Tennessee legislators were serious about illegal immigration in the state they would at least…

  • fix the Tennessee municipal ID law and amend TCA 8-5-120 to prohibit the use of consular cards for identification in Tennessee.

Back in 2018, Rep. William Lamberth and then state Sen. Mark Green sponsored a bill that would have prohibited the use of consular cards issued by foreign governments, to be used for identification by state residents. During the hearing in the House, “co-Directors of TIRRC admitted that immigrants who primarily rely on consular cards are ‘people who do not have immigration status’ and that the Mexican consulate visits Tennessee monthly to issue its consular cards.” Lamberth also pointed out that “illegal immigrants use the matricula consular to obtain services here and to avoid deportation” and “impressed upon the subcommittee members that law enforcement can’t run that card through a database to verify a person’s identity.”

City governments had begun issuing local municipal ID cards to illegal aliens to help them appear as   

if they had some type of legal presence. In some cities, municipal ID cards are used to enable voting in local elections.

Lamberth’s bill passed the House intact prohibiting the use of the consular cards. Mark Green  dropped that part of the bill in the Senate and unfortunately, the House ultimately concurred. 

Tennessee law has long prohibited the use of the consular card for identification to get a driver’s license although it is likely that illegal aliens obtaining driver licenses in other states are using these or fraudulent documents to get Tennessee driver licenses.

  • require every business operating in Tennessee to use E-verify. Data from states which mandate the use of E-verify by all employers shows significant reductions in the number of illegal aliens working in those states.
  • require that any individual seeking to do business in Tennessee and obtain a license to operate, provide documentary proof of lawful immigration status. This would apply to independent contractors as well. It is critical for Tennessee lawmakers to understand that DACA does not confer any lawful immigration status. 
  • follow Oklahoma’s example and impose a wire transfer fee on the money illegal aliens send out of the country. 
  • audit the issuance of driver licenses to ensure that fraudulent documents are not being used and that state law is being followed.
  • discontinue licensing companies and organizations that cater to illegal aliens including those that contract with ORR to move and/or resettle illegal UACs to Tennessee 

If Bill Lee and Republicans in the General Assembly were serious about illegal immigration they would hurry up and study Governor DeSantis’ Executive Order 21-223.

It won’t be Congress or another Trumpian president who will soften the blow to Tennessee. It’s highly unlikely that Bill Lee will rise to the challenge.

The Tennessee General Assembly already has the authority and Constitutional mandate. They can help insulate the citizens and legal immigrants living in Tennessee from the disastrous effects of Biden’s illegal immigration policies and the efforts of traitorous and/or inept Republicans in Congress.

Posted on

TN UAC Arrival Numbers Indicator for Illegal Alien Employment Violations?

The federal government only reports county level numbers for Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) arrivals if the number is 50 or more. This means that UACs may well have been placed in more counties throughout Tennessee than are officially reported and since information on individual children and their receiving sponsors is kept secret, state officials have no way to know where or even how many children being smuggled over the border are now making their home in Tennessee.

The latest data posted by the U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services for UAC county placements only goes through May 2021 and shows that a total of 1,470 UACs were placed in the following counties:

Davidson – 719;  Hamilton – 161;  Knox – 88;  Rutherford – 104;  Sevier – 71;  Shelby – 327.

However, the state total for UAC placements is 1,775, suggesting that there are other county placements that do not meet the 50 reporting threshold.

Per federal policy there are three categories or levels of UAC sponsors, none of whom are required to have legal immigration status:

Category 1: Parent or legal guardian (This includes qualifying step-parents that have legal or joint custody of the child or teen)

Category 2A: An immediate relative–a brother; sister; grandparent or other close relatives (aunt, uncle, first cousin) who previously served as the UAC’s primary caregiver. (This includes biological relatives, relatives through legal marriage, and half-siblings).

Category 2B: An immediate relative– including aunt, uncle, or first cousin who was not previously the UAC’s primary caregiver. (This includes biological relatives, relatives through legal marriage).

Category 3: Other sponsor, such as distant relatives and unrelated adult individuals.

Category 4: No sponsors identified

On the issue of illegal immigration the Tennessee state legislature is most accurately described as taking “half measures.” Campaign trail big talk against illegal immigration never quite translates into full measures recommended by experts with E-verify being one of the issues. That being said, there are two action steps the General Assembly could undertake if they are serious about countering the negative impact of illegal immigration in the state.

The Tennessee Lawful Employment Act  is the state’s E-verify law. Discovered violations of the law that is in place to ensure that only individuals legally able to work, are hired. The TN Department of Labor & Workforce Development is responsible for investigating complaints that the law has been violated and if so, levy the prescribed fines.

Recall, that Rep. Mike Sparks was wringing his hands about fines being imposed on law-breaking businesses found to be hiring illegal alien workers. Someone in his district should remind him that the idea behind the fines is to remind businesses that they have to follow the law.

Tennessee’s law also allows lawful residents of the state to submit an E-verify violation complaint form – available here. The law also says that the money collected from the violations is to be put in a fund and used to enforce the law. Feel free to scroll through the violations here.

With the high number of illegal aliens making their way to Southern states, perhaps the Tennessee General Assembly needs to look at bumping up investigating and catching business violators.

Additionally and in some ways perhaps even more importantly, is a focused audit to determine whether driver licenses are being issued to illegal aliens, an issue not addressed in the most recent audit of the Department of Safety and Homeland Security.

Driver licenses are a gateway document. They can be used to bypass being determined ineligible under the state’s E-verify law. They can be used to access almost all public services and is a key document which helps an illegal alien “pass” as if they have some type of legal immigration status. Oh yeah, and vote.

Tennessee’s driver licensing law could be considered one of the few full measure laws in that the documents required to actually get a Tennessee driver’s license are typically not in the possession of an illegal alien. The law also specifically does not permit the matricula consular card to be accepted as “proof of identification for driver license application and issuance purposes”. 

Banning the use of the matricula consular card state-wide for any identification purpose should be put into law.

There have been any number of cases where fraudulent documents have been used to obtain legal documents like driver licenses and other cases like the one in Massachusetts in 2017, where corrupt state workers were selling state driver licenses and identification cards to illegal aliens. Judicial Watch uncovered the trade in fake Puerto Rican birth certificates being used to get U.S. passports and driver licenses.

In February, Homeland Security busted a fraudulent document ring run out of Los Angeles selling counterfeit U.S. passport cards, Social Security cards, driver’s licenses and other documents. 

No telling how many of these fake documents have been processed through Tennessee driver license centers or presented to employers with fewer than 50 employees and who can take a drivers license in lieu of using the E-verify database.

And it wasn’t that long ago that twenty illegal aliens in Tennessee were indicted for using fraudulent documents in order to work. Even border patrol catches illegal aliens using fake documents.

The UAC numbers and known county distribution suggest starting point locations where state officials should scrutinize compliance with the law. 

Posted on

Pro Illegal Immigration Org Says State Needs to Fund More Services for UACs

A June 2021 report issued by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) says that Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and the “parents or other sponsors” to whom they are released after being smuggled across the border illegally, need better post-release services.

Better yet, MPI’s report Strengthening Services for Unaccompanied Children in U.S. Communities, recommends that state and local governments and philanthropy should fund legal, medical, mental-health, economic and educational services needed by these illegal aliens. They are especially concerned about UACs who are relocated to “rural and other underserved communities.”

Major funders of MPI include the U.S. State Department, Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc, National Conference of State Legislatures, Soros Open Society Foundations, and the Gates Foundation.

MPI emphasizes that immigration status and any immigration enforcement must not be connected to any post-release services provided to either the UAC or their sponsor. The disconnect between immigration status and enforcement is echoed in Mark Green’s UAC bill and was similarly ignored in 2015, when Tennessee state senators voted to reward illegal immigration by awarding in-state tuition to illegal alien students in the state.

Then state senator Green voted for that bill as did Sen. Richard Briggs who supports Green’s UAC bill and also sits on the legislative joint study committee addressing the UAC issue in Tennessee.

One particular post-release service emphasized in the MPI report is free legal representation for UACs since it dramatically increases the likelihood that immigration relief will be awarded so they can remain in the U.S.. Noted in multiple reports is the fact that UACs who do not have attorneys simply don’t show up for their immigration hearings. Per the DHS FY20 enforcement report, of the 6,105 UACs ordered removed by immigration judges 4,514 of them failed to show up in court. That was just for FY20 which one analyst says demonstrates the incentive for UACs to enter illegally because they know they can stay and also incentivizes parents to smuggle their children into the U.S..

The MPI authors claim that after the federal government makes sure to dump the arriving UACs into local communities, “most children receive no federal follow-up services.” MPI says that enhanced post-release services are needed because UACs are traumatized by their trip to the U.S. border (many of whom are smuggled by coyotes paid for by parents also in the U.S. illegally), they may be reuniting with parents who abandoned them in their home country and may have now married in the U.S. and have anchor babies, so integrating into this new environment can be stressful for the arriving UAC. 

Like Green’s UAC bill, the MPI authors acknowledge that there is “no citizenship or immigration-related requirement for sponsor (for the UAC) approval. Green’s bill goes one step further and enables an illegal alien sponsor to override a governor’s veto for UAC placement in a state. This effectively puts a state in a position of abetting illegal immigration which former federal prosecutor Josh Jones says is indisputably “linked with organized crime.”

MPI admits that parent benefit from getting UACs into the U.S.:

“The great majority of unaccompanied children who enter ORR custody are released to a parent or close relative. In FY2020 of children who left ORR custody, about 39 percent were released to a parent, 46 percent to another close relative, and 16 percent to a more distance relative, family friend, or other approved sponsor.”

The open border advocates also want schools to do more to provide support to these new students and their families but admit that not all entrants enroll in school. It is reasonable to assume that the high number of male 15-17 year olds currently entering as UACs are not coming for education. Illegal employment and gang connections are, however, reasonable assumptions based on accumulated data. MPI itself cites (and disputes) 2017 ORR data that “1.6 percent of unaccompanied children in ORR custody had gang affiliations.”

While emphasizing the economic stresses for arriving UACs and their families made worse by the COVID pandemic, MPI also confirms what should be of great concern to legislators:

“Unaccompanied children often lack health insurance and lack access to primary care after release from ORR custody. Some children with jobs cannot access health insurance through their employer if they are not eligible for work permits.” (emphasis supplied)

Anyone else wondering how and where they are working? This admission by the left should be enough for Tennessee legislators to finally require ALL businesses in Tennessee to use E-verify.

In addition, officials reported a “900 percent increase in July for the number of migrants testing (COVID) positive.” And while the federal government is putting travel restrictions in place for U.S. citizens and state and local governments are debating whether to revert to certain COVID restrictions, the Biden administration is moving UACs and other illegal aliens from the border to communities across the country.

At the same time, the Biden administration had earlier threatened Americans further by planning to lift the Title 42 public health restrictions used by the Trump administration to block thousands of illegal aliens from entering the U.S. due to COVID. With numbers increasing, rescinding the Title 42 order is on hold.

In the meantime, GOP Senators John Coryn and Thom Tillis are using the “bipartisan” approach to reward illegal immigration by proposing an amnesty for DACA grantees even while admitting that the Obama program is unconstitutional. Tennessee state legislators Mark White and Todd Gardenhire also wanted to reward beneficiaries of the unconstitutional program. Coryn and Tillis unabashedly admit that it’s about maintaining the workforce. This is no different than Tennessee state legislators who refuse to protect legal workers in Tennessee, especially lower skilled workers, by passing comprehensive E-verify. Tennessee has it’s own misguided pro-illegal immigration state legislators who also are all too willing to concede on the issue. 

Posted on

Judge Shuts Chattanooga UAC Facility But TN Legislators Support Them Coming Anyway

Last week an administrative law judge upheld the state’s license revocation for the federally contracted facility in Chattanooga housing unaccompanied alien children (UAC).

During the (misnamed) Tennessee state legislative Joint Study Committee on Refugees meeting three days prior to the judge’s ruling, the Commissioner of the Department of Children’s Services testified and was questioned extensively by Tennessee legislators about the incidents leading up to the suspension of the facility’s license.

Towards the very end of the hearing, state Sen. Bo Watson (R-Hixson, which is part of Hamilton County), offered some very interesting comments. First he reminded everyone that when discussing UACs and referring to them as “children” can be misleading because the data shows an “overabundance of male older youth” which he put at about 70% who are between 15 – 17 years old. 

Then Watson read an excerpt from correspondence he had received from a constituent prefacing it by stating that “it represents what I would believe is a significant percentage in my district.” He went on to read from the correspondence:

“It is heartbreaking to me to see and hear of children being dropped into our city, separated from their families and left to the government system of the United States. Tennessee must insist on the rights of their citizens in this matter. I hope that you will insist that Tennessee expedites the return of these children to their parents, in their country right away. It is not only abusive to these children, but also to require that Tennessee bear the cost of promoting this child abuse.”

Is it safe to assume that Watson read his constituent’s letter into the legislative record because he agrees with it?

If that’s true, then why is Watson supporting Mark Green’s UAC bill which allows an illegal alien living in Tennessee to facilitate the smuggling of a child to the U.S. border without any penalty, and which would override the governor’s veto regarding UAC placements in Tennessee? And to incentivize smuggling even more, the “biological relative” to whom the UAC is reunited with in Tennessee can also be an illegal alien.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has pointed out that “poorly written laws that incentivize the smuggling of illegal immigrants under the age of 18” contribute heavily to the increasing number of UACs crossing the border illegally. In 2018, then DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen cited certain draw factors for increasing the number of UACs surging at the border which included, “an immigration system that rewards parents for sending their children across the border alone…”

Regarding Green’s bill Watson was quoted in full support: “I was glad to provide my input and greatly appreciate Congressman Green seeking it. This bill fully addresses the federal government’s failure to seek Tennessee’s approval and should be passed immediately.”

Worse still, Sen. Richard Briggs (R-Knoxville), who is also on the (misnamed) Joint Study Committee on Refugees also supports Green’s bill and said, “I spoke with Congressman Green at length concerning the unacceptable relocation of illegal immigrants to Knoxville. His legislation is simple, straightforward, and provides the changes necessary to ensure our state has a say in the process.”

And finally, giving law-abiding conservative Tennessee voters a realistic taste of the direction state Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson would move the state should the rumor be true that he is vying to become the next Lt. Governor, he said in support of Green’s bill: “It is unacceptable for the Federal government to relocate unaccompanied minors into communities in Tennessee without the consent of state officials. I am grateful for Congressman Green’s leadership in addressing this pressing issue.”

Watson is chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Briggs is chair of the Senate State & Local Government Committee, and Johnson is the Senate Majority Leader.

Presumably each one of these senators know how to read and understand legislation. Each one of these Senate leaders should be questioned about their support for a bill that would have the state of Tennessee knowingly abet child smuggling and reward facilitating illegal immigration to the state.

Bo Watson – sen.bo.watson@capitol.tn.gov

Richard Briggs – sen.richard.briggs@capitol.tn.gov

Jack Johnson – sen.jack.johnson@capitol.tn.gov

Posted on

TN Must Stand Against Smuggling Unaccompanied Alien Children!

Since we can’t count on Congress to get this done, it will have to come from the state legislature. 

The federal government has known for decades that parents, other relatives and sponsors in the U.S. whether here legally or illegally, have been paying coyotes and other criminal entities to smuggle children to the border who then enter as unaccompanied alien children (UAC). But Congress is too dysfunctional (even when Republicans are in the majority), to do anything about it. State legislators on the other hand have the authority to effectively address the issue. Criminalizing child smuggling is a way that helps protect children, disincentivizes illegal immigration to the state, and makes it clear that the state government will not abet facilitating illegal immigration or turn a blind eye to anyone who does.

Ignoring this practice is unfair to the children and unfair to American citizens and legal immigrants.

Whether a person uses a child to help get them over the border more easily, albeit illegally, or pays a coyote to smuggle a child over the border to reunite with a “biological relative” who may themselves be illegally in the country, using children in this way must stop. 

The first situation was sickeningly and tragically illustrated in a recent case of a 2-year old abandoned on the highway by his father with whom he was traveling. According to the mother, the toddler would make it easier for his father to get across the border – “‘they were going through like this with minors…”’ 

2-year old abandoned by his father and the coyote; toddlers (parents in the U.S.) dropped over the wall

While Tennessee’s state legislators can’t do much about the first scenario, they do have the authority to address the situation (like the toddlers) where someone in Tennessee facilitates the smuggling of a child who will cross the border illegally as a UAC and eventually reunite with a family member or sponsor in the state.

During the General Assembly’s first Joint Study Committee on June 18, 2021, Rep. Ryan Williams (R-  Cookeville), raised an important issue relative to the UAC arrivals in Tennessee. In fact, Tennessee’s GOP Congressional delegation should also pay attention to what Rep. Williams had to say.

Williams talked about his constituent who had travelled to another state to pick up his adoptive child. But before he was able to legally bring his child home to Tennessee, he needed Williams to help him get the paperwork required by the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children corrected. This paperwork creates additional hurdles that must be satisfied before being able to legally bring a minor child across state lines and if not followed to the letter of the law, it can jeopardize the adoption.

BTW, Williams came through for this family.

So here’s the point – an illegal alien living in Tennessee can facilitate the smuggling of a child to the U.S. border without any penalty – federal or state. But a U.S. citizen or legal immigrant  can be penalized if paperwork is faulty? The issue has nothing to do with whether there is a biological connection between the adoptive parent and the child or the smuggling facilitator and the child. It’s about complying with the law.

It’s important to note that smuggling is not the same as trafficking. Human smuggling is defined as:

“the importation of people into the United States involving deliberate evasion of immigration laws. This offense includes bringing illegal aliens into the United States as well as the unlawful transportation and harboring of aliens already in the United States.”

Trafficking on the other hand, is about the exploitation of people using force, fraud or coercion for a sought after objective. It can include for example, sex trafficking, debt bondage and involuntary servitude.

Lt. Gov. McNally and Speaker Sexton are so concerned about Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) being ferried into Tennessee, that they authorized a joint legislative committee to look into the issue; presumably with some intent to determine legislative options in response.

The committee has already held one meeting and has another scheduled for July 13th providing a platform for Blackburn and Hagerty’s offices to wave their consultation bill around and yack about the importance of “transparency”. 

Blackburn’s been in Congress long enough to know that bringing home a “transparency” bill with the laughable “consultation” provision which is legislator talk-speak for sounds good, doesn’t really do anything of consequence to address the problem at home. Shows you how little Hagerty understands that he just obediently tags along after Marsha. 

And like Mark Green’s new UAC bill, Blackburn and Hagerty appear to be unwilling to take on the child smuggling problem. Green’s bill allows a child smuggled over the border to override the governor’s veto regarding UAC placements in Tennessee. And the “biological relative” in his bill can also be an illegal alien.

Sen. Bo Watson (R-Hixson), who is on the Joint Study Committee, has said he doesn’t want the Chattanooga facility to reopen or any other facility like it to open in Tennessee. Sen. Todd Gardenhire (R-Chattanooga), who is also on the Joint Committee, has made it clear that he wants more of these children brought to Tennessee so they can be reunited with “loved ones”. As it turns out, UAC smuggling is more often than not, financed by the parents who themselves are in the U.S. in violation of the immigration laws.

Only time will tell whether the Joint Study Committee is a pro forma or whether state legislators are serious about trying to address the problem. If instead they insist that “immigration is a federal issue” then remind them that 2022 is just around the corner and it looks like that four of the Senate members on the Joint Committee could potentially face a primary if necessary.

Posted on

Why Isn’t Tennessee Helping to Fight the Border Battle?

It’s not as if illegal aliens crossing Biden’s open border aren’t settling in Tennessee.

Last week Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton spent a half hour talking with Center for Immigration Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian, about everything his state is doing to push back against Biden’s open border for illegal immigration.

Paxton is an AG who understands the value of lawfare and that states cannot remain complacent indentured servants to the federal government. To date, Paxton’s office has filed five lawsuits challenging the Biden administration on immigration actions.

Tennessee’s AG Herb Slatery on the other hand, appears to be sitting out the fight which is easier to get away with when you don’t have to answer to the voters. Texas and forty-two other states, unlike Tennessee, elect their AG. And the Tennessee General Assembly isn’t willing to give that power to voters.

Viewed through the laissez-faire illegal immigration lens of Tennessee’s AG and the lack of legislative enthusiasm for insisting that every business in Tennessee use E-verify to help avoid employing illegal aliens, why should we expect anything else.

Add to this that Haslam, who campaigned opposing illegal immigration ending up endorsing actions that encouraged more illegal immigration to the state. For example, in the waning years of Haslam’s second term when he thankfully was going to not be the governor anymore, he was pushing in-state tuition for illegal alien students. Did he stop to even question how many came as UACs (unaccompanied alien children)? Then he cowardly refused to sign the anti-sanctuary city bill that Tennessee needed to make the law effective.

That bill became law without his signature anyway.

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xQxqgJxAgY

When it comes to the UACs crossing the border illegally and arriving in Tennessee, Bill Lee can deny any and all knowledge about it til the cows come home but good luck to him putting a credible spin on the paperwork which the Times Free Press reporter diligently unearthed and which makes Lee look like a ____(feel free to fill in the blank yourself).

So far according to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services data which is only current to April 2021, Tennessee has received 1,111 putting the state in the top ten receiving states. The same data which only tracks counties that receive 50 or more UACs shows the following county numbers – Davidson – 436, Shelby – 213, Hamilton – 99, Knox – 53, Rutherford – 71, Sevier – 51.

U.S. Customs & Border Protection data for the total number of illegal border crossers in the current fiscal year, including family units, accompanied minors, single adults and UACs current to May totals 929,868 individuals. The UAC totals current to May are 79,948 crossing illegally.

By the end of March 2021, the latest data available, 2,946 UACs were released to a parent or step-parent in the U.S. and another 2,991 UACs were released to a relative (see category definitions here).

According to U.S. Senator Ron Johnson, HHS data from 2018-2019 shows 79% of these sponsors were “without status” – that means here illegally.

If you have any doubt, read this April story: 

“Lorena, a Guatemalan mother living in Atlanta, recalls getting a 4:25 a.m. call from her teenage daughters on March 12, a day after they’d crossed into the United States. The girls had borrowed a hidden cellphone from another teen being held in a packed Border Patrol tent in Texas. ‘We’re here,’ said Nancy, 16, crying. ‘When can you come get us?’ That was more than a month ago. The girls were transferred to a makeshift shelter at a San Diego convention center, where the younger daughter – Britney, 15 – became sick with covid-19. ‘I just want them to give me my daughters,’ said Lorena, who wanted her last name withheld because she came to the United States illegally.

Lorena left her daughters with her mother in their rural village outside the city of Huehuetenango more than a decade ago, soon after splitting up with their father.

She earns $14 an hour in a carpet factory in Atlanta, and lives with her 4-year-old U.S.-born son, a brother her daughters have never met. When the eldest began showing symptoms of acute anxiety and a sense of abandonment, Lorena decided the time had come for them to join her in Atlanta.

In November, she paid a smuggler $5,000 to bring the two girls to the Mexican border where they could surrender to U.S. agents. The Trump administration used an emergency health order to deny the girls’ release into the United States and flew them back to Guatemala.

Lorena paid smugglers $5,000 again in February. The Biden administration has pledged to no longer return minors to their home countries, so the girls were allowed in. Lorena said she is filling out all the paperwork, but she’s scared to travel to San Diego because her Guatemalan passport is her only legal identification.”

Human smuggling much? Apparently it’s the best known non-secret in Congress. Even Reuter’s is writing about it.

Are passive states like Tennessee complicit? Are passive federal and state legislators complicit?

And it’s not just people from Mexico and Latin America.

Both Haslam and Lee have feigned shock and surprise upon “discovering” that UACs were being delivered to parents and other relatives living in Tennessee. Surely these governors know that the illegal alien population has been growing for some time in Tennessee. Will Bill Lee pretend he doesn’t know about this either? 

Tennessee’s AG is super soft on illegal immigration going so far as to advocate for amnesty for the “dreamers” after meeting with the director from the TN Immigrant & Refugees Rights Coalition. When was the last time the AG asked your opinion about endorsing illegal immigration?

If your state legislator tells you there’s nothing the state can do about illegal immigration because it’s all in the hands of the federal government, suggest this – take back the $7.3 million dollar grant the state handed over to Catholic Charities of Tennessee to spread their operations into more counties and instead, send it to Texas to help build the wall. 

It’s the least our state elected officials can do.

Posted on

Is Mark Green Conflating Illegal Aliens With Refugees?

It’s anybody’s best guess why Green’s explanation of his bill, H.R.3500, doesn’t match what he’s telling folks it’s supposed to do.

Green’s press release about his new bill, “Leads Fight to Block Refugee Resettlement Without State Consent” states in part:

“Last week, in the dead of night, unaccompanied migrant children were flown into Tennessee without our approval or consent. I am alarmed that the Biden Administration would use taxpayer resources to transport refugees into Tennessee without transparency or coordination with state authorities. This overreach and secrecy has to stop.”

In a recent interview with WRCBtv Chattanooga, Green said that he drafted the bill in response to what happened in Chattanooga and that “this bill would mandate permission of the state before they move illegal migrants to Tennessee.”

One really obvious problem is that U.S. law recognizes refugees as legal immigrants who enter the country with express permission of the U.S. government in conformance to specific criteria in U.S. law defining who is a refugee.

The “illegal migrants” Green refers to are Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) who are either dumped at the border by human traffickers or like 16-year old killer Edwin Mejia who was sent to his illegal alien brother in Tennessee, cross the border on their own.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) which refers to itself as Congress’ “think tank” writes, “[u]naccompanied alien children are statutorily defined as children who lack lawful immigration status in the United States, are under age 18, and lack a parent or legal guardian in the United States or a parent or legal guardian in the United States who is available to provide care and physical custody.”

If the UAC is from a contiguous country, meaning Canada or Mexico and is not a victim of trafficking, Customs & Border Patrol (CBP) can send them back. If however, the UAC is from a non-contiguous country, the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) takes custody. These UACs can apply for asylum or other relief like the Special Immigrant Juvenile Visa (SIJV) which allows them to remain in the U.S. and puts them on a path to citizenship.

Unlike refugees who are legally admissible to the U.S. before they arrive, UACs are subject to removal until and only if they end up with a legal immigration status.

Importantly, the transfer to ORR custody does not in any way convert the UAC into a refugee. In 2002, Congress passed the Homeland Security Act which did many things including moving custody of the UACs from the former Immigration & Naturalization Services to ORR. This change evolved from a series of lawsuits and consent decrees but did not magically make UACs refugees.

An April 2021 CRS paper notes that “[a]ccording to CBP data, almost all apprehended UAC originate from Mexico and the ‘Northern Triangle’ countries – Honduras, ElSalvador, and Guatemala” and that up until FY19 most UACs were coming from Mexico but then flipped to 86% coming from the Northern Triangle countries.

This is a very important data point relating to Green’s bill. Whether he realizes it or not, the way he explains his bill’s purpose is precisely what the Obama administration tried to do in 2014, with the Central American Minors (CAM) program to administratively expand U.S. law on refugees and create a refugee resettlement program for this group. Refugees and asylees must show persecution on account of membership in certain groups, such as nationality or race. The CAM program allowed the ill-defined “particular social group” category to be applicable for various new conditions, such as single motherhood. If it were to be applied system-wide to refugee resettlement it would represent the largest expansion of the definition of the term “refugee” ever seen in the history of the resettlement program. 

 As Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry said:

“I am pleased to announce that we have plans to expand the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program in order to help vulnerable families and individuals from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras and offer them a safe and legal alternative to the dangerous journey that many are tempted to begin, making them at that instant easy prey for human smugglers who have no interest but their own profits.”

Trump ended the CAM program in 2017. 

Looking at Obama’s attempt to expand who qualifies as a refugee, Center for Immigration Studies senior researcher Dr. Nayla Rush questioned whether Central American children even meet the legal definition of refugee. She makes the following points :

    • “the UN says most are not refugees” 
    • the Migration Policy Institute* appears to agree that – “…being forced to join a gang or experiencing violence do not generally qualify as a basis for refugee status or fall readily into one the the [U.S. law] refugee definition categories.”
    • out of the 50 most dangerous cities in the world in 2015 (excluding those undergoing a war), four are in the United States: St Louis, Detroit, Baltimore, and New Orleans.25 Latin America, it is true, remains far ahead, with 41 cities included in the ranking. But are children who flee gang violence in St. Louis, Baltimore, or the other American cities that made it into the top of the most dangerous cities chart ‘potential refugees’? No one would even think to make that claim. 

One of the problems with Obama’s CAM program was that the parent had to be in the U.S. legally to obtain the coveted refugee status for  their child in Central America. In fact, many of the parents in the CAM program are themselves illegal aliens. 

In her conclusion Rush lets the real genie out of the bottle – it’s the children who, if they obtain refugee status, offer the route through which parents and siblings may obtain legal status in the U.S.

The libertarian Niskanen Center think tank also acknowledges that UACs are ineligible for refugee status. They argue that UACs could get refugee status if U.S. law would expand to include forced conscription, gang recruitment and gender discrimination.

It is a very real possibility that the Biden administration will like Obama, use administrative actions to expand who qualifies as a refugee. This is precisely how the U.S. refugee admissions program under Obama created the resettlement program for the LGBT refugee. 

Green’s bill and his explanation of its purpose confuse UACs with refugees – precisely what Obama and the open border leftists want and the reason they categorize every illegal alien as a “refugee”. 

Even if Green is trying to “cleverly” pre-empt a move by the Biden administration to recreate an Obamaesque CAM program, the mandate that “States Have a Say” will fall on deaf ears for the majority of Republican governors who turned down President Trump’s refugee resettlement opt out in 2019.

 

The plain language of Green’s bill says it will amend 8 USC 1522 – the section of federal law that addresses refugee admissions and which by reference to another section of the code, defines the legal term “refugee” – a term which does not include Green’s “illegal migrants”.

Even assuming Green is relying on the language of Trump’s presidential determination on refugee admissions for FY2021, UACs would still have to meet specific criteria to qualify as a refugee.

All of the legal mumbo jumbo aside, what Tennessee taxpayers should really be concerned about with Green conflating UACs and  refugee resettlement, is the lessons learned from Tennessee’s 10th Amendment challenge to the federal resettlement program. The big take-aways simply put are:

    • upon arrival to the U.S. refugees are immediately able to access all forms of public assistance  on the same basis as U.S. citizens
    • refugees must adjust their status to legal permanent resident (green card) status at year one after admission
    • the federal government has admitted that it shifts the massive cost of this program to state governments
    • and, BILL LEE HAS PASSIONATELY DEFENDED BRINGING MORE REFUGEES TO TENNESSEE 

If one accepts Green’s explanation of his bill, then any objection voiced by Bill Lee to the UACs should be questioned. When Trump gave Lee the choice to say “no” to continued refugee resettlement in Tennessee, Lee abandoned the state’s sovereignty in favor of his personal agenda regarding refugees. Then when he was challenged on his decision, he doubled down and in contravention of Trump’s Executive Order, claimed he had the authority to consent to refugee resettlement for the entire state.

Tennessee’s Lt. Governor and Speaker of the House have decided to convene a joint study committee prompted by the delivery of UACs to the state. Lt. Gov. McNally’s office issued a press release about the joint study committee and seems to be the lone voice at this time that understands that refugees, migrants and immigrants are not all the same and have different immigration statuses.

As a first, they need to change the name of the study committee from the misnomered “Joint Study Committee on Refugee Issues” to the more accurate “Joint Study Committee on Refugees, Illegal Aliens, Migrants & Immigrants”.

And as seems to have become the norm, the news about what the Lee administration’s role in another mishandled and mangled state government function, is not good. It seems that another one of Lee’s departments may have facilitated the arrival of the UACs. Some reports suggest that Lee’s Department of Children’s Services knew and approved that the Chattanooga facility applying for a state license was “to provide housing, personal care, supervision and monitoring to up to 100 unaccompanied minor children . . . ideally up to 30 days, until they are reunited with a sponsor home or appear at an immigration hearing.”

Sounds just like the set-up to receive and care for UACs.

If this report is accurate, Lee put some big egg on the faces of every Tennessee U.S. and state elected official yelling for transparency.

At the very least, we can only hope that the new joint study committee looks to real experts in the field on these issues. As for Mark Green, he should take a cue from the Lt. Governor and get some help from experts like Dr. Rush and figure out what he’s really trying to do with his bill. 

For starters though, Green should stop advancing the idea that there is a legitimate connection between illegally entering UACs and refugees and would do well to recall the multiple documented instances when MS-13 gang members entered the U.S. as UACs and were then awarded with refugee status – here, here and here. This should be of paramount concern now that under Biden, USCIS will stop asking about gang-related information when evaluating adjustment to legal permanent resident, aka, the green card which UACs who are awarded either asylum or the SIJV status are eligible to apply for.

At the very least, Green’s voters should expect an informed discussion of the issue.

***********************************************

*”The Migration Policy Institute (MPI) is a think tank that produces research and policy analysis advocating for permanent legal residence for undocumented immigrants in the United States and increased legal rights for migrants and refugees worldwide. Migration Policy Institute receives funding from a variety of left-of-center ideological funders, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.”

Posted on

Radical TN Teachers Misleading Parents and Advocating Breaking the Law.

 

Parents if you don’t pay attention to what your children are learning in public schools, you are the problem.

 It does not matter if you have a D or R on your voter registration card, it matters that your child will be learning to hate others and themselves.

In an article penned By Cathryn Stout of TN Chalkbeat, teachers were asked how they will respond to recent legislation that prohibits teaching the tenets of Critical Race Theory, despite knowing “If the commissioner of education finds that an LEA or public charter school knowingly violates the prohibitions described in (1)-(11), then this amendment requires the commissioner to withhold state funds, in an amount determined by the commissioner, from the LEA or public charter school until the LEA or public charter school provides evidence to the commissioner that the LEA or public charter school is no longer in violation.”   

These are a few of those responses by the teachers interviewed.

“It will make it harder for me in the classroom as most of my students face racism and discrimination in this country. Good teachers should be teaching the truth, which is that every system in the U.S. is built on racism and white supremacy.”  — Travis Vaughn, math teacher at LEAD Southeast High School, Nashville

“To be frank, the bill will not make it harder for my personal classroom because I plan to ignore it. Who’s going to enforce it? This is a bill that viciously favors white children and ignores the needs of children of color. All the reported reasons I read that were given by the lawmakers were to protect the feelings of white children, with no thought or concern to what is best for society as a whole or for children of color.” — Liz Jarvis, English as a second language teacher, Cornerstone Prep, Memphis

“The Republican Party has focused on ‘cancel culture’ quite a bit recently, but this bill is its own form of ‘cancel culture’ that goes entirely too far. History teachers can not adequately teach about the Trail of Tears, the Civil War, and the Civil Rights Movement. English teachers will have to avoid teaching almost any text by an African American author because many of them mention racism to various extents. Even classics written by white authors like ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ and ‘Huckleberry Finn’ will now be off limits.

“Both history and English content standards require students to think critically. Teachers are evaluated based on our ability to inspire critical thinking. How are we supposed to teach the standards and have our students think critically when we can only present and discuss one side of an issue?” — Mike Stein, English and English as a second language teacher at Coffee County High School, Manchester

                                                                                   Mike Stein- Coffee County TN teacher

The blatant disregard by those charged with teaching our children is not only disgraceful but dangerous. Not only is it putting your child’s school in danger of losing funding, but further instills a sense of violating laws is ok to do if you disagree with them.

This no longer is about education, it is about radical, social justice activist teachers spewing their ideology to your child.  It no longer is about the basics, laying a proper foundation for children to excel and move on, it is about  teachers who vomit their personal opinions on students that are young and impressionable.

The very idea some teachers feel it’s their right to degrade, and humiliate white children because the trend says you’re a racist if you don’t, is frightening and alarming.  It is vital parents become involved in their child’s education and demand these politically charged topics be left to the parents to discuss, not teachers.

Statements from teachers like the ones above should be questioned and disciplinary actions should be taken. Not only are they misleading, but would be in violation of state law. Teachers need to held accountable for breaking those laws, as anyone else should be.

The following is what the Tennessee law prohibits, and allows.

The Tennessee General Assembly has passed legislation that prohibits the following:

 (1) One race or sex is inherently superior to another race or sex;

 

(2) An individual, by virtue of the individual’s race or sex, is inherently privileged, racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or subconsciously;

 

(3) An individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of the individual’s race or sex;

 

(4) An individual’s moral character is determined by the individual’s race or sex;

 

(5) An individual, by virtue of the individual’s race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex;

 

(6) An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or another form of psychological distress solely because of the individual’s race or sex;

 

(7) A meritocracy is inherently racist or sexist, or designed by a particular race or sex to oppress members of another race or sex;

 

(8) This state or the United States is fundamentally or irredeemably racist or sexist;

 

(9) Promoting or advocating the violent overthrow of the United States government;

 

(10) Promoting division between, or resentment of, a race, sex, religion, creed, nonviolent political affiliation, social class, or class of people; or

 

(11) Ascribing character traits, values, moral or ethical codes, privileges, or beliefs to a race or sex, or to an individual because of the individual’s race or sex.

 

This bill DOES NOT PROHIBIT this:

 

(1) The history of an ethnic group, as described in textbooks and instructional materials adopted in accordance with present law concerning textbooks and instructional materials;

 

(2) The impartial discussion of controversial aspects of history;

 

(3) The impartial instruction on the historical oppression of a particular group of people based on race, ethnicity, class, nationality, religion, or geographic region; or

 

(4) Historical documents that are permitted under present law, such as the national motto, the national anthem, the state and federal constitutions, state and federal laws, and supreme court decisions.

 

Parents it is time to take control of what your child learns, and who is teaching them. Children are the future, and can either be productive, good citizens or continue to dismantle and destroy the greatest country on earth. What will you do?

 

 

 

Posted on

Why Would TN House Republicans Vote to Denigrate Patriotic Conservative Christians?

It’s no surprise that House Democrats would vote to denigrate Tennessee conservative Christians who  love their country. But what does it say about the House Republicans who voted in agreement? 

Rep. G.A. Hardaway, a Memphis Democrat, was the Chief sponsor of HR110, a resolution to recognize Rev.Dr. William J. Barber II.

Rev.William J. Barber II

Hardway, described the honorific as embodying Barber’s five “interlocking injustices of systemic racism, systemic poverty, the war economy and militarism, ecological devastation, and the false moral narrative of Christian nationalism.”

Not included in the resolution was Barber’s 2013 participation at the Tennessee Highlander Center meeting about how to resist what the assembled group described as the “extreme agenda” being pushed by Republicans.

The resolution failed; only 28 voted yes, 35 voted no, and 20 were either too confused, uninformed, or squeamish, and simply abstained.

Predictably, all 23 Democrats present voted for the resolution; they were joined by 5 Republicans – Reps. Jeremy Faison, William Lamberth, Tandy Darby, Bob Ramsey and Kevin Vaughn.

Faison and Lamberth are part of the House leadership.

 Before the vote, when Rep. Mark Cochran (R-Englewood) questioned what was meant specifically by the term “false moral narrative of Christian nationalism” sponsor Hardaway responded that “there is a Christian nationalism Dr. Barber observes some of those narratives as not being in line with his way of thinking” and why he developed his moral budget ad his moral agenda.

Barber’s Christian nationalism explained by the academic experts

Barber has been understood to use the terms “Christian nationalism,” “religious nationalism” and “white religious nationalism” interchangeably.

Sociology professors Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry explain Christian nationalism in their book “Taking America Back for God,” and they agree with Barber that there’s a white Christian nationalism (the worst), and a Black Christian nationalism which is progressive and wants to uplift the downtrodden and marginalized in our country.

Based on the professors’ national survey questions and responses, “Christian nationalism” is a cultural framework used to refer to white Christians, particularly evangelicals, who say that the U.S. was founded on Christianity and therefore must remain a Christian nation. The authors describe “Christian nationalism” as a form of Christianity “that isn’t just about religion, but is a racialized view of America which “‘includes assumptions of nativism, white supremacy, patriarchy and heteronormativity, along with divine sanction for authoritarian control and militarism’” which dominate the political views of the subset surveyed.

But, as they explain, Black Christians get a pass because blacks haven’t been in power and as such, their version of Christian nationalism is more progressive and about a nation that has never lived up to its professing Christian identity.

The two sociologists claim that their national survey results show that people high on the Christian nationalism rating scale tend to be much more opposed to gun control, are much more xenophobic or racist and define being an American as being white and Christian. Worse still, the white version of Christian nationalism is “connected [to] and it connects all these negative ideologies.”

As used by Barber, Christian nationalism is white and its supremacist. Some of Barber’s examples of the “false moral narrative of Christian nationalism” is exemplified by Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell who don’t “promote the faith from the biblical foundations of love, truth and justice.” Instead, they are part of the “unholy connection” where “[r]eligion is being used as the cover for greed. The term ‘‘evangelical’’ has been hijacked in favor of corporate interests.”  

According to the methodology used by Whitehead and Perry to determine what Christian nationalism means, looks like and implies for the U.S., a phrase like “in God we trust” could be considered a Christian nationalism dog whistle.

What’s obvious is that Barber’s five “interlocking injustices” that form the basis of his moral budget and moral agenda align perfectly with the Movement 4 Black Lives (M4BL) policy platform and the agenda of BLM.

Barber also rallies against Israel and “Trumpvangelicals”

Barber’s speech at the 2018 anti-Israel U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights (USCPR) national conference affirmed his view that Israel is an apartheid state and that “historically, it is important for us to remember that one path regarding the Zionism project in Palestine was a colonialist project from the beginning…[i]t was  never just purely about righting the terrible wrongs of the Holocaust. But for [Britain’s great colonialist] it was about expanding a global empire.”

Not surprisingly, Barber’s comments align with the whole Christian nationalism narrative which is primarily directed at evangelical Christians who tend to be committed advocates for Israel. It also aligns perfectly with both the M4BL and BLM anti-Israel positions and their promotion of the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) campaign.

By no coincidence, the USCPR has endorsed M4BL’s policy platforms.

William J. Barber II reveals what he really means when he uses the slur of Christian nationalism came at the close of his speech:

“In this moment when Trumpvangelicals have linked up with Zionist extremists and the corporate facism of white nationalists around the world, it may seem like [the USCPR’s] goal of Palestinian rights is at a low point….The same corporate interests that used white nationalism to put Trump in the White House, and leaned into Zionist extremism to move the U.S. Embassy to Tel Aviv, also want to cut taxes for corporations, deregulate, ignore climate science, take away healthcare, deny living wages, cut the social safety net and give more and more money to the U,S. military. But here’s the good news: There are far more of us than there are of them. And, God have mercy, even some of them have joined us when we’ve come together in truth and love and mercy.”

If you voted for Trump, Barber was talking about you.
If you’re a white Evangelical Christian, Barber was talking about you.
If you believe our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles and the need to stay true to those principles, Barber was talking about you.
And God forbid, if you support Israel, the sole democratic state in the Middle East, Barber was talking about you and it’s a double whammy if you also happen to be a Christian.

And what about the Barber5 Republicans who voted to honor Barber?

Rep. Bob Ramsey and Kevin Vaughn are illegal alien protectionists.

Rep. Jeremy Faison (chair, House Republican Caucus) – his vote to honor Barber is just one more reason that the House Republican Caucus needs a new chairman.

Rep. Tandy Darby – he’s new and his vote raises questions about him that will require monitoring.

Rep. William Lamberth – at best, his vote is confusing; contact him and ask him to explain – rep.william.lamberth@capitol.tn.gov

The sociologists who defined Christian nationalism say that white Americans who adhere to this ideology, see it almost as an ethnic identity with others who share their cultural values and who “look like them.”

Rep. Yusuf Hakeem (D-Chattanooga) who wants critical race theory (CRT) taught in Tennessee schools, admitted as much during the House Education discussion about HB580, the CRT bill:

“There are those and I’m among them who feel systemic racism is real. As an example of how our system has allowed one group of people see as superior and one inferior. I’m a member of the Christian church like many of you but I remember growing up and when I looked at God he didn’t look like me and I think that some people interpreted that as they were better because they looked like God and some people who looked like me did not. I think this should be cleared up by history, by standards, by what we teach.”

The Barber5 Republicans had already voted to ban the teaching of CRT in Tennessee public schools. How then did the Barber5 completely fail to understand that Barber’s Christian nationalism point of view is nothing more than camouflage for using the lens of CRT in all aspects of life?