[Peace] [Sign-on Letter] Opposing Biden's 'Smart Wall'

Wed Feb 24 20:05:20 UTC 2021

ah, in order to sign on, you will need to go to the google doc called
"Short Statement.".. and use the link from inside that document.

The link from the email to the signing on document will tell you that you
are locked out.

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 2:02 PM Karen Medina <kmedina67 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Peace,
>
> Please consider signing this letter put out by Just Futures Law, Mijente,
> and shared by the MediaJustice Network
> to President Biden and members of Congress
> saying that *A Virtual Wall is the Trump Wall By Another Name.*
>
> I have included the email that was sent to MediaJustice members below.
> That email has the text of the letter in it (at the bottom).
> That email also has the link to the way to join statement.
>
> The deadline is today, Wednesday, Feb 24, 2021 at the end of the day.
> Thank you for considering this.
> Sincerely,
> Karen Medina
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>
> I wanted to share and invite you to join a sign on letter from our friends
> at Just Futures Law, Mijente and others groups.
>
> See Julie's note to me below. Deadline to sign on is TOMORROW.
>
> *Hi Brandon (at MediaJustice Network):*
>
> *Below is the final joint statement. Apologies for the delay as groups in
> Texas and South have been dealing with extreme weather. *
>
> *We’d love to have MediaJustice and your network join this statement. In
> fact, the border groups are particularly interested in having tech privacy
> groups that see border militarization & surveillance through a policing and
> racial justice perspective :). *
>
> The statement is available here and below:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cAUo72Yx7IR3XhkClyFlMjk5LxBm74NvBR-8dnHsc0w/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> To join statement, please fill out this Google form:
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfE477HgfkWBlxyMUb3eXhPUZIN76D0mFWxmw89LJv37leZjw/viewform?usp=pp_url
>
>
> The deadline is TOMORROW 2/24 END OF DAY. Thanks for any help that you can
> provide!
>
> A Virtual Wall Is Trump’s Wall by Another Name
>
> In response to the provisions of the Biden administration’s U.S.
> Citizenship Act of 2021
> <https://www.menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/USCitizenshipAct2021BillText.pdf>,
> which directs the Department of Homeland Security to deploy surveillance
> infrastructure and technology along the border, both at and between ports
> of entry, the following border community, immigrant rights, and privacy
> organizations issue this statement:
>
> This “smart border” surveillance technology is a continuation of the Trump
> administration’s racist border policies, not a break from it. We applaud
> President Biden’s efforts to halt Trump’s border wall construction and
> provide relief to immigrant communities, but protection from deportation
> and access to due process should not come at the cost of militarization and
> surveillance. The question cannot continue to be: “How do we more
> efficiently deter migrants?” Rather than pursue failed strategies, the
> Biden Administration should invest in border communities, restore areas
> harmed by wall construction, welcome people seeking safety or a better
> life, and curtail funding for invasive surveillance technologies. Some of
> these surveillance harms include:
>
>
>    - At ports of entry [1], increased surveillance technology is
>    concerning particularly because of increased biometric collection, which
>    most prominently includes expanded facial recognition
>    <https://www.biometricupdate.com/202011/us-border-agencys-proposed-biometrics-rule-draws-divided-reactions>
>    and DNA collection
>    <https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-meet-legal-requirement-collect-dna-samples-certain-populations>,
>    as well as experimental technologies like iris scanning
>    <https://www.irisid.com/iris-id-products-implemented-at-us-mexico-border-crossing/>
>    at pedestrian border crossings. The ongoing DHS build-out of its new HART
>    biometric database means that this biometric data will be accessible to
>    <https://www.dhs.gov/publication/dhsobimpia-004-homeland-advanced-recognition-technology-system-hart-increment-1>
>    major federal law enforcement agencies and some foreign governments via
>    information sharing agreements. Additionally, the rapid expansion
>    <https://www.nextgov.com/analytics-data/2020/07/customs-expand-license-plate-reading-program-nationwide/166841/>
>    of license plate recognition technology used by Customs and Border
>    Protection and other federal agencies is a major privacy
>    <https://www.oig.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/assets/2020-09/OIG-20-71-Sep20.pdf>
>    and policing concern.
>
>
>
>    - Virtual wall technology between ports of entry is not a “humane”
>    alternative to a physical wall. Research shows increased border
>    surveillance technology can lead to more deaths, as migrants take longer,
>    more dangerous routes to avoid detection.[2] Moreover, individuals
>    detected by “smart” border technology are apprehended and incarcerated
>    under harsh immigration detention conditions, often in privatized jails
>    that President Biden has condemned <https://joebiden.com/immigration/>
>    as inhumane. Furthermore, key companies awarded federal contracts to
>    develop virtual wall technology have deep financial ties to former
>    President Trump and created invasive police surveillance tools.[3] The
>    technology evaluations in the Biden bill do not provide adequate
>    oversight.[4] The bill also authorizes DHS to spend any amount of
>    money that it deems necessary, with no cap on spending.[5]
>
>
>
>    - The harms of border technology go far beyond the border and
>    disproportionately impact Black, brown, and indigenous communities, as
>    demonstrated by CBP drones deployed on Black Lives Matter
>    <https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/19/us/politics/george-floyd-protests-surveillance.html?smid=tw-share>
>    protesters last summer. Border enforcement policies have long served as a
>    testing ground for military grade surveillance at the border and far into
>    the interior.
>
>
> We call on the Biden administration to invest in border communities, not
> invasive tech and border militarization. Communities along the
> U.S.-Mexico border have some of the highest poverty rates
> <https://www.texastribune.org/2016/01/19/poverty-prevalent-on-texas-border-low-in-suburbs/>
> in the country due to systemic disinvestment
> <http://www.ruralhome.org/storage/documents/rpts_pubs/ts10_border_colonias.pdf>.
> They have already been the subject of extreme militarization and mass
> surveillance including interior checkpoints, drones, blimps, mobile and
> fixed surveillance towers, and other cameras and sensors placed in
> communities. Instead of pouring billions more into invasive surveillance
> and military technology that only harms immigrants and enriches private
> companies, the Biden administration should listen to the needs of border
> communities
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/16cA0Ix_3bHv-s52zQ121MU7iChu8DlsgokD9IfXhAzM/edit#>,
> address ongoing harms, and invest in communities.
>
> Just Futures Law
> La Unión Del Pueblo Entero
> Mijente
> Proyecto Juan Diego
> Rio Grande Valley Equal Voice Network
> Rio Grande Valley No Border Wall Coalition
> Texas Civil Rights Project
> Southern Border Communities Coalition (SBCC)
>
> [1] DHS has an expansive definition of ports of entry that includes
> airports, border crossings, and shipping ports.
> [2] Peer-reviewed research on the Arizona border details this harm.
> Samuel Norton Chambers, Geoffrey Alan Boyce, Sarah Launius & Alicia
> Dinsmore (2019) Mortality, Surveillance and the Tertiary “Funnel Effect”
> on the U.S.-Mexico Border: A Geospatial Modeling of the Geography of
> Deterrence, Journal of Borderlands Studies, DOI:
> 10.1080/08865655.2019.1570861
> <https://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2019.1570861>. Additionally, Border
> Patrol reported
> <https://www.borderreport.com/regions/texas/remains-of-more-than-250-migrants-found-along-southern-border-in-2020/>
> finding the remains of more than 250 migrants who died along the
> U.S.-Mexico border in 2020 alone.
> [3]  For example, Anduril Industries was founded by major Trump donor
> Palmer Luckey with funding from Palantir’s Peter Thiel and related funds.
> The company was awarded a contract
> <https://www.usaspending.gov/award/CONT_IDV_70B02C20D00000019_7014> by
> CBP in July 2020 for a potential $249,550,000 to set up over 200 mobile
> surveillance towers in border communities; $60.7 million has already been
> awarded but the remaining money is not obligated. This technology forms the
> backbone of the new virtual wall. A recent report also shows that border
> security companies donate more to Democratic Party members than former
> President Trump. See Transnational Institute, AFSC, and Mijente, “Biden’s
> Border,” (Feb. 2021) https://www.tni.org/en/bidensborder.
> [4] The Biden bill’s technology evaluation process allows for the
> deployment of surveillance technologies prior to any evaluation and focuses
> the assessment on migrant deterrence strategies and cost-efficiencies, not
> the quality of life of border residents, civil rights abuses by DHS, or
> migrant safety.
> [5] US Citizenship Act, S. § 2302(c), 117th Congress (2021)
> https://www.menendez.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/USCitizenshipAct2021BillText.pdf
> .
>
>
>

-- 
-- karen medina
"The really great make you feel that you, too, can become great." - Mark
Twain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace/attachments/20210224/ba0914f4/attachment.htm>