At least 50 Venezuelan men, who entered the United States legally, have been sent to a prison in El Salvador, raising serious questions about the evidence supporting claims of gang affiliations. During the recent Trump administration, tattoos were specifically listed as indicators of gang membership. Opponents argue that the evidence behind these assertions is scant and unconvincing. Together, these changes have fueled a national outcry over the administration’s scapegoating of legal immigrants and the chilling effect on the future of immigration policy.
The men’s initial legal entry into the United States occurred through vastly different means. The most significant of these was the implementation of the CBP One App with enhanced entry permission. Surprisingly, only two of these people are criminally convicted in the U.S. Both offenses are pretty “minor” drug infractions. This begs the question whether removal was justified or fair, and gang members are often singled out and removed.
Legal Entry and Minor Offenses
The situation of how these Venezuelan men entered the U.S. is key. Having this context is important to understand the vast history of their mistreatment. Among those is Neiyerver Adrián Leon Rengel, 27 who came to the U.S. through this temporary pathway with the CBP One App. He has one Texas misdemeanor conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia. Like them, 27-year-old Kevin Nieto Contreras of Colorado pleaded guilty to a minor drug charge early in 2023 at a Colorado Springs nightclub.
Running the Cato Institute’s new analysis simple but fascinating data comes to light. Of the less than 90 people with known points of entry, 50 came into the United States legally. This meant people on tourist visas and people who were refugees. Critics counter that these men had to go through extensive and rigorous vetting and screening while still overseas before being allowed entry in the U.S. This indicates they obeyed immigration laws prior to their detention and deportation.
Questionable Evidence of Gang Ties
The Trump administration’s focus on tattoos to determine whether someone is affiliated with a gang has raised eyebrows and skepticism from experts and advocates. David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, has criticized the government’s approach, stating, “They’ve effectively turned these legal immigrants into illegal aliens.” He further added, “It’s shocking the extent to which the government has attempted to conceal information about these people.”
Many experts argue that tattoos do not provide conclusive evidence linking individuals to gangs like Tren de Aragua or other criminal organizations. The families of the imprisoned men vehemently deny any allegations of gang involvement. They will continue to claim that their family members are law-abiding and not engaging in criminal behavior.
The lack of definitive guidance is a cause for great alarm. Fifth, people care about the due process rights for those people that the government has decided in secret are criminals. Public records reveal that a third of the men sent to CECOT have no identifiable prior history at all. This should raise serious doubts as to why they are classified as threats.
Government Statements and Public Reaction
Up until these most recent actions, the White House has staunchly defended the actions taken against these individuals. Abigail Jackson, a spokesperson for the administration, stated, “Illegal aliens removed to CECOT are dangerous criminals and pose a risk to the American public.” Immigrant rights advocates and legal experts have fought valiantly against this claim. According to a recent testimony by the National Alliance of Forest Owners, they say those claims are seldom true.
Tricia McLaughlin, an immigration policy analyst, expressed concern about how immigrants are categorized: “Many people counted as ‘non-criminals’ are actually terrorists, human rights abusers, gangsters and more. They just don’t have a rap sheet in the U.S.” Those kinds of statements indicate the widening gulf between how immigration enforcement should operate and who should be considered a threat.
Leave a Reply