Connect with us

New York

White House Urges Eligible Immigrants to Apply for Work Permits

Published

on

White House Urges Eligible Immigrants to Apply for Work Permits

President Biden, under pressure to address a surge of migrants who are overwhelming resources in New York and several other American cities, is ramping up efforts to ensure that some of those people can get jobs — a move designed to ease the spiraling political and financial costs of the crisis.

After more than two years in which his administration has struggled to find short-term solutions to an immigration system that has been badly broken for decades, Mr. Biden now faces demands from within his own party to confront the consequences of that migration, hundreds of miles from the border with Mexico.

Under federal law, migrants have to wait about six months after they file their asylum applications to apply for permission to work in the United States. The requirement has vexed cities like New York, where thousands of people have taken refuge in shelters, straining the system.

Some people who come into the United States legally through special programs are able to request work permits immediately, but they do not always do so. The Biden administration is focusing on those people in a new campaign.

In the last week, federal officials have sent more than one million text messages to migrants across the country who are eligible for permits to work in the United States but have not yet applied for them. Officials say the messages, which are sent in English, Spanish, Haitian Creole, Russian and other languages, are a “first-of-its-kind national campaign” by the federal government.

Advertisement

In addition, they have distributed fliers with QR codes to be posted at residential facilities, shelters, legal services clinics and other public places where new arrivals gather. Migrants can scan the codes with their phones to get information about how to download work authorization documents.

Administration officials said they did not have the official number of migrants in the country who are eligible for work permits but have not applied. But they said the government has distributed close to $770 million in grants to localities, including about $140 million to New York, to bolster services for the migrants. The administration has asked Congress for another $600 million in supplemental funding for this year, and $800 million for next year.

The efforts are a direct response to angry frustration voiced by Democratic leaders like Kathy Hochul, the governor of New York, and the mayors of some of the country’s biggest cities. Eric Adams, the mayor of New York City, declared on Thursday that the cost of caring for more than 100,000 new arrivals could reach $12 billion over three years and “will destroy New York City.”

The issue of how to deal with migrants, and who should shoulder the cost of caring for them in the short term, has led to a fierce and public intraparty spat in the midst of Mr. Biden’s re-election campaign.

Local officials have said the funding and the steps to allow migrants to work do not go far enough. And Republicans who backed former President Donald J. Trump’s tough immigration measures are now seizing on the comments from top Democrats, happily quoting those in New York who say the Biden administration must do more to secure the border.

Advertisement

In response, Mr. Biden and his top aides say Republicans are to blame for refusing to even consider proposals that the president made on his first day in office for a broad overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws. Conservative Republicans have blocked bipartisan efforts to modernize the system for decades.

The political repercussions of a continued migrant crisis have heightened tensions inside the Biden administration. According to emails reviewed by The New York Times, officials have worried for months about the impact of increased migration on big cities, where many migrants head once they cross the border.

The decision by two Republican governors, Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida, to ship thousands of migrants on buses to New York, the District of Columbia and other locations added to the concern and led the local and state officials — all Democrats — to publicly air their anger over the situation.

One key demand from Ms. Hochul and Mr. Adams in recent weeks has been for the federal government to take actions to allow more of the immigrants to work in the United States. That would allow them to leave public shelters and provide for themselves.

Ms. Hochul made that case to Jeff Zients, the White House chief of staff, during a meeting last week. Afterward, the White House released a statement saying that “the administration will work with New York State and New York City on a month of action to help close the gap between noncitizens who are eligible for work authorization and those who have applied, to meet labor needs in New York.”

Advertisement

The issue has been building for months.

When Mr. Biden announced in January a new program that would open the borders to 30,000 migrants each month from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, he hailed it as a humane and orderly way to limit surges in migration and prevent dangerous overcrowding at the border with Mexico.

But his administration did not anticipate that many of those migrants would not immediately apply for work permits despite being eligible, leaving tens of thousands of people seeking housing, medical care and other costly support from the cities they settled in across the United States.

Only last week — under pressure from New York, where many of the migrants were bused by Republican governors — did the administration launch a concerted effort to get those migrants to sign up for permission to work.

Administration officials said Friday that getting more of the recent migrants to seek work authorization was unlikely to solve the entire problem in New York, where local laws require the city government to provide housing for any migrant who needs it, even if it means putting them up in costly hotels.

Advertisement

The so-called right-to-shelter law in New York is a powerful “pull factor,” administration officials said, attracting migrants who are otherwise unsure where to go after they get to the United States. Officials at the White House and the Department of Homeland Security say they admire the humanity of the law but acknowledge that it adds to the city’s burden in a way that the federal government cannot control.

The effort to deal with the needs of migrants after they spread out to cities is also hampered by a lack of information about who they are and where they go, officials said.

People who enter the United States often tell the authorities where they intend to go after leaving the border. But that is often only their first stop, and they do not stay there. D.H.S. officials said they did not know exactly how many of the 110,000 migrants who arrived in New York City in the last year were currently eligible for work permits.

Some might have come into the United States legally, through a program that allows them to stay in the country for up to two years if they are fleeing from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua or Venezuela. Others might have used a new Customs and Border Protection app to make appointments at the border, which also gives them the right to work.

But others who found their way to New York City may be what the border authorities call “gotaways,” people who slipped by the authorities at the border and made their way to their final destination without being caught. Those people would not be eligible for work permits because they entered the United States illegally.

Advertisement

Migrants who came to the United States illegally and have since started the process to claim asylum are required by law to wait 150 days before applying for a work permit. It takes a minimum of another 30 days before they can begin to work, and the current backlog in processing time sometimes takes weeks longer.

Individuals who are close to the 150-day threshold are among those being targeted by the text messages and QR codes, officials said.

Eileen Sullivan contributed reporting.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

New York

How the Broadway Producer Tom Kirdahy Spends His Sundays

Published

on

How the Broadway Producer Tom Kirdahy Spends His Sundays

Tom Kirdahy is busy, and about to get busier.

Mr. Kirdahy, a Tony and Olivier Award-winning producer, has a slate of Broadway shows that includes “Gypsy” and “Hadestown.” His latest production, “Just in Time,” starring Jonathan Groff, opens this month.

Mr. Kirdahy, 61, lives alone in the Greenwich Village co-op apartment he shared with his late husband, the playwright Terrence McNally. In addition to his theater and film work — Mr. Kirdahy’s company, Tom Kirdahy Productions, is behind a new film adaptation of “Kiss of the Spider Woman,” starring Jennifer Lopez — he runs the Terrence McNally Foundation, which supports early-career playwrights and L.G.B.T.Q. causes.

His Sundays are reserved for friends and family, including Jon Richardson, a composer and performer he is dating. When the two are not in Manhattan, they’re in Provincetown, Mass., where Mr. Richardson, 37, lives and Mr. Kirdahy has a weekend home.

NOT SO EARLY BIRD On a good Sunday morning I’ll get up at 8:30, which is later than the rest of the week. That’s my definition of sleeping in. The rest of the week I’m up before 7. If I wake up early, I force myself to go back to sleep.

Advertisement

FACING FACTS For several months now, I’ve been canceling my trainer at 9. I’ve discovered this is a pattern and I should just give up pretending. I hate to throw in the towel in print this way, but what this is telling me is that I need to get back to that routine. Spiritually, I go to the gym, but in actuality I lounge around.

MADMAN IN MANHATTAN One thing I do religiously is go to Madman Espresso for a triple skim cortado. It’s three shots of espresso and some steamed milk. It’s not nothing. Later in the day I’ll get a double espresso macchiato. But that’s only if I wake up in Manhattan. My home in Provincetown is my happy place. If I have 24 hours for myself on a weekend I’ll drive down at 10 at night and get there at 3 in the morning, just to spend the day.

FAMILY FIRST. NOT LITERALLY. I do a little work on Sunday mornings, just to catch up. It’s very specifically emailing, almost all of it tied to my productions. It can be weighing in on an advertising campaign or providing comments about a script or discussing fund-raising for a particular show. Then it’s family time, which could mean just having brunch with friends or Jon and I taking a walk through the city. My 94-year-old mother is still alive, and I try to call her every Sunday. She’s a snowbird — she’s either in St. Petersburg, Fla., or in Stony Brook, on Long Island.

CIVILIAN BESTIES I remain very close to people I went to high school and college with. I graduated high school on Long Island in 1981, and there’s a group of us that are still very tight. We text every day. None of them are in theater, but they love it and they come to every one of my openings. It’s nice having civilian besties. If we’re having brunch, I try to mix it up and not go to the same place all the time. I’ve lived in New York since 1981 and I’m still madly in love with it, with discovering new places.

TALKING POLITICS This sounds hokey, but the only thing I must have on Sundays is community. I need to see the people I love, and I like it when it’s people outside the industry. I have a deep interest in politics. I’ve been a bit of an activist my whole life. Before I became a Broadway producer, I was providing free legal services to people living with H.I.V. and AIDS. Terrence and I were marriage equality warriors. I try to nourish the political side of my soul on Sundays by talking with friends or seeing people from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center on 13th Street. We have a shared language.

Advertisement

SOBRIETY, SUSTENANCE I also try to get to an A.A. meeting on Sundays. That’s most often at the Center. They’re all different times. It’ll be 25 years in November that I’ve been sober. What I get out of meetings is the comfort of community. People share their wisdom. Hearing their stories sustains me and buoys me.

LIVING THE DREAM When “Just in Time” opens, I’ll have four shows running in New York. On Sundays, I might pop into a show and stand in the back of the theater and watch “Hadestown” and then go say hello to the cast. Same with “Gypsy” and “Little Shop of Horrors.” I love watching an audience take in a show. And I love the energy after a performance. The actors work so hard — I think it’s only fair that they see me with some frequency. I’m a cheerleader for both the industry and my own shows. I’m a kid from the suburbs who gets to go to work on Broadway. I take insane joy from that.

SET IN STONE On my building on Ninth Street there’s a plaque commemorating the fact that Terrence lived in the building. It’s a really great pleasure for me to watch people walk by and read about him. The doormen in my building just really loved him, and they love to report on stories of people reading it and looking at it. I often touch it when I walk in the building.

SHH… Late in the afternoon on my best Sundays I try to take a nap or at least create quiet time. I’ll listen to Bach or some classical music just to kind of rejuvenate. It’s not quite meditation, but it does involve a commitment to quiet. Bach reaches into my soul.

FRY AFICIONADO If Jon is in town he might cook, but I very often have dinner at the Knickerbocker, which is right nearby on University Place. The menu is pretty varied, but I often have steak and French fries. French fries are a key part of my life. If I had to choose the best ones, I might pick the Lambs Club on 44th Street. They’re cooked perfectly and salted perfectly. They’re what a French fry should be.

Advertisement

GOALS Every night before I go to bed I do at least an hour of work. On a Sunday night I’ll draft a bunch of emails I’ll send in the morning, because I don’t like to bother my employees on a Sunday night. The emails are about goals for the week. Prepping them helps me go to sleep, I think, because I’ll have done the work I’ve been obsessing about.

Continue Reading

New York

Robert S. Rifkind, Who Defended a Libel Suit by Ariel Sharon, Dies at 88

Published

on

Robert S. Rifkind, Who Defended a Libel Suit by Ariel Sharon, Dies at 88

Robert S. Rifkind, who played a pivotal role in successfully defending Time magazine against a $50 million libel suit filed by Ariel Sharon, the former Israeli general, defense minister and later prime minister, died on March 12 at his home in Manhattan. He was 88.

The cause was complications of myasthenia gravis, a neuromuscular disease, his daughter Amy Rifkind said.

Mr. Sharon’s suit was prompted by a single paragraph in the Feb. 21, 1983, issue of Time. It referred to an Israeli government report on the massacre months earlier by Christian Phalange militiamen of at least 800 and as many as 3,500 civilian refugees, mostly Palestinians, in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon. The massacre happened after Israel invaded Lebanon and the country’s president-elect, Bashir Gemayel, the Phalange leader, was assassinated.

The article suggested that Mr. Sharon had personally discussed retribution with Mr. Gemayel’s family, and that the Israelis looked the other way when the Phalangists extracted their revenge.

A jury found in 1985 that Time had misrepresented Mr. Sharon’s role in the massacre. But the jury concluded that the magazine’s reporting did not meet the legal threshold for libel in the United States because it did not publish the article with actual malice or a reckless disregard for the facts.

Advertisement

An Israeli commission’s damning conclusions that Israeli forces did not stop the massacre led to Mr. Sharon’s resignation as defense minister. But the commission’s report did not say that Mr. Sharon himself had mentioned revenge to the Gemayel family.

“The case is really not about libel, but a political instrument in the plaintiff’s hands,” Mr. Rifkind, whose law firm, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, represented Time, said while the suit was pending. “A pitched battle in which David, the Israeli war hero, smites Goliath, the American corporate giant, is good political fodder.”

Mr. Sharon, who later became the prime minister of Israel, declared victory, of sorts, because the jury found that Time had acted “negligently and carelessly” in publishing the disputed paragraph. The case cost the magazine millions in legal fees.

“Rifkind was a superb lawyer, who argued many of the motions, and did an admirable job,” U.S. District Court Judge Abraham D. Sofaer, who presided over the case, said this week in an email.

When the lead defense lawyer, Thomas D. Barr, was ill and the Time executive who was monitoring the case was out of the country, and with Mr. Sharon wanting to return to Israel to campaign for office, Mr. Rifkind negotiated a proposed settlement of the lawsuit on the basis of a prepared statement.

Advertisement

“The statement did not include any payment or even an apology,” Judge Sofaer recalled. “It simply said that Time did not intend to convey that Sharon had given permission for the murders. Rifkind had undoubtedly secured a highly favorable result in the case. Sharon was tired of the litigation and gave his political life a higher priority.”

Time, however, confident of a favorable verdict, rejected the proposal. The subsequent finding that the magazine had been negligent — though not malicious — bolstered Mr. Sharon’s case when he sued Time in Israel, where the malice standard did not apply, and won a settlement there.

The case caused a sensation in the United States and the Middle East for its political implications and its impact on the media industry.

Mr. Rifkind figured in several other major cases, including a successful defense of the 1964 Voting Rights Act when he was assistant to the U.S. solicitor general at the time, Thurgood Marshall, a post he held from 1965 to 1968.

Mr. Rifkind argued several cases before the Supreme Court. He was involved in Miranda v. Arizona, the 1966 case that established that police officers must inform suspects of their constitutional rights before questioning. He worked on South Carolina v. Katzenbach, in which the Supreme Court ruled in 1966 that federal intervention to let eligible residents of individual states register and vote was constitutional under the 15th Amendment. (Nicholas Katzenbach was the U.S. attorney general.) And he represented New York City voluntarily, or pro bono, in lawsuits in the 1980s and ’90s challenging the federal decennial census because of what the city said was an undercount.

Advertisement

Mr. Rifkind was also involved in Jewish affairs. He served as president of the American Jewish Committee from 1994 to 1998.

“Bob Rifkind was what all lawyers aspire to be,” said Evan R. Chesler, Cravath’s former presiding partner and chairman. “He was brilliant, had a majestic command of the language and was unfailingly courteous to all those who worked for, with and against him.”

Robert Singer Rifkind was born on Aug. 31, 1936, in Manhattan to Adele (Singer) and Simon H. Rifkind. His father was a federal judge and later a partner in the firm that became known as Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in 1950, four years after it was founded.

Bob Rifkind graduated from the Loomis School (now the Loomis Chaffee School) in Windsor, Conn., and earned a bachelor’s degree in history from Yale College in 1958 and a juris doctor degree from Harvard University Law School in 1961.

Mr. Rifkind in 1998. “Bob Rifkind was what all lawyers aspire to be,” a colleague said.Credit…Bernd Settnik/Agence France-Presse

He joined Cravath the next year and, except for his stint with the solicitor general in Washington, remained with the firm until he retired in 2001. He had senior counsel status after retiring as a litigator.

Advertisement

In 1961, he married Arlene Brenner; she died in 2021. In addition to his daughter Amy, he is survived by another daughter, Nina Rifkind, and five grandchildren.

His daughters, both lawyers, invoked their grandfather this week in a letter to Brad Karp, the chairman of Paul, Weiss, in which they publicly criticized the firm’s decision to commit $40 million in pro bono legal services for causes President Trump championed if the White House rescinded an executive order that would have suspended Paul, Weiss’s security clearances and prohibited its lawyers from entering federal buildings.

Continue Reading

New York

What Does Eric Adams’s Exit From the Democratic Primary Mean for Voters?

Published

on

What Does Eric Adams’s Exit From the Democratic Primary Mean for Voters?

Here is what to know about how the mayor’s decision could affect the mayoral primary.

Nine Democrats are challenging Mr. Adams, though none are as close to unseating the mayor as Mr. Cuomo, whose ample name recognition and high-powered fund-raising have fueled his rise to the top of the primary field in nearly every survey of the race. Zohran Mamdani, a state assemblyman from Queens and a social-media-savvy democratic socialist who is building a base of new and younger voters, is the next highest-polling candidate. He is still well behind Mr. Cuomo.

Other Democrats running in the primary include the city comptroller, Brad Lander; the City Council speaker, Adrienne Adams; the former comptroller, Scott Stringer, and the state senators Jessica Ramos and Zellnor Myrie.

This is New York City’s second mayoral election under ranked-choice voting, a system in which voters can select up to five candidates in order of preference. The system is being used only for the primary, so Mr. Adams, once a critic of ranked-choice voting, will avoid it now that he is running as an independent and will be on the ballot only in the general election. In November, the candidate who wins a plurality of votes will be the next mayor.

Progressives, led by the Working Families Party, had encouraged their supporters not to rank Mr. Cuomo or Mr. Adams in the Democratic primary. Now that Mr. Adams is eschewing the primary altogether, the groups are recalibrating their approach. The D.R.E.A.M. movement — an acronym that once stood for Don’t Rank Eric or Andrew for Mayor — is now focused solely on blocking Mr. Cuomo’s momentum, renaming itself Don’t Rank Evil Andrew for Mayor. The Working Families Party, too, has plans to coalesce behind a single candidate ahead of the general election.

Advertisement

The mayor will face the winner of the Democratic primary alongside Curtis Sliwa, the sole Republican candidate, and Jim Walden, a centrist lawyer also running as an independent.

The Working Families Party is also likely to run a candidate in the general election. The group is taking steps to run a place-holder candidate to preserve its ballot line until its leaders decide on a plan after the winner of the Democratic primary is confirmed.

This is not the first time that Mr. Adams has shifted political parties, even as he says he will remain a registered Democrat. The mayor was a registered Republican during the 1990s and considered running on that line earlier this year.

New York City politicians have a long track record of changing their party affiliation for political gain. In 1950, Vincent R. Impellitteri, who was serving as acting mayor, won an upset independent bid after failing to win the nomination of the Manhattan Democratic machine, known as Tammany Hall.

Former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg left the Democratic Party in 2001 to run for mayor as a Republican and won. He changed his party affiliation to independent during his second mayoral term, running on the Republican and Independence party lines in 2009, before switching back to being a Democrat and running in the party’s 2020 presidential primary.

Advertisement

Earlier, John V. Lindsay, in 1971, changed from Republican to independent before switching to the Democratic Party. Mr. Adams, clearly aware of this legacy, claimed to quote Mr. Lindsay in his Thursday video, saying, “I have made mistakes.”

Jeffery C. Mays contributed reporting.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending