Judicial Watch Sues State Dept. for Obama Records on Refugee Resettlement Locations

Plane Loads Of Illegal Immigrants
Judicial Watch Sues State Dept. for Obama Records on Refugee Resettlement Locations

Washington, DC – -(Ammoland.com)- Judicial Watch recently announced that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for records on sites that were considered for the resettlement of refugees in the United States during the last two years of the Obama administration. (Judicial Watch vs. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:18-cv-01244))

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the State Department failed to respond to a February 23, 2017, FOIA request seeking:

  • All records reflecting the locations within the United States that were considered as possible sites for refugee resettlement under the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) in 2015 and 2016.
  • All records reflecting the criteria used to determine the suitability of locations as refugee resettlement sites in 2015 and 2016.
  • All records reflecting the names of local organizations promoting any of the locations identified above for consideration as refugee resettlement sites.

In October 2016, Judicial Watch made public 128 pages of documents it obtained from the mayor of Rutland, Vermont, showing a concerted effort by the mayor and a number of private organizations to conceal from the public their plans to resettle 100 Syrian refugees into the small southern Vermont town. The mayor and resettlement organizations shrouded the plan in such secrecy that not even the town’s aldermen were informed of what was taking place behind closed doors. The aldermen eventually wrote to the U.S. Department of State protesting the plan and opened an investigation into the mayor’s actions.

The State Department says it currently works with nine nonprofit organizations to resettle refugees. Those nonprofits have about 315 affiliates in 180 communities throughout the U.S.

According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the U.S. admitted 84,994 refugees during the fiscal year 2016, just short of the 85,000 target set by the Obama administration. The U.S. admitted 16,370 refugees from the Democratic Republic of Congo, 12,587 from Syria, 12,347 from Myanmar, 9,880 from Iraq and 9,020 from Somalia. Pew Research reports that nearly 39,000 Muslim refugees entered the U.S. in the fiscal year 2016, the highest number on record, according to the analysis of data from the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center.

In the fiscal year 2015, the U.S. reportedly admitted 70,000 refugees. The Obama administration also proposed admitting 110,000 refugees for the fiscal year 2017.

President Donald Trump on January 27, 2017, issued Executive Order 13769, which included a suspension of the USRAP for 120 days. There were 29,022 refugees reportedly admitted to the U.S. in 2017 – the lowest number since 2002.

In a July 2017 report on the refugee applicant screening process and associated fraud risks, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) noted that “Increases in the number of USRAP applicants approved for resettlement in the United States from countries where terrorists operate have raised questions about the adequacy of applicant screening.”

“Judicial Watch is suing to find out which towns across America were, without input and over the objections of residents, targeted for refugee settlements by the Obama administration,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And we are investigating to make sure now that the current State Department is being more transparent in its placement of refugees.”

Judicial WatchFounded in 1994, Judicial Watch Inc. is a constitutionally conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. JW is perhaps the most active FOIA requestor and litigator operating today.

  • 11 thoughts on “Judicial Watch Sues State Dept. for Obama Records on Refugee Resettlement Locations

    1. I suspect Obama was looking at large Metropolitan areas in republican states they would simply inject themselves into neighborhood politics and as crime rates went up oblivious liberal voters would out number rural areas and vote the states Democrat.

      Watch Texas (Houston, San Antonio, and Dallas/Fort Worth.

      1. Witness also the 2016 vote in Minnesota, where the liberal enclaves in seven counties (and the ever suspected fraudulent vote since we don’t have a voter ID law) outweighed the votes of eighty other counties to give the state’s electoral college votes to hillary.

    2. Hate to say,but an SS squad could be very effective. You catch the ones coming over illegally and put them back across the border,no fuss,no muss.Put up signs.IF CAUGHT CROSSING YOU WILL BE SHOT. It wouldn’t take long for the word to get out.Then the lawyers that want to jump in to help the illegals,grab them up and put them in gitmo along with left wing judges.

    3. It was clever of the Barry Soetoro administration to inject those foreigners into American communities, knowing that the taxpayers of the various states would pay the majority of their upkeep their upkeep … forever.

      1. Another facet of the deliberate machinations of the global socialists then in power and salivating in anticipation of returning to power, to destroy the economy and society of the United States. These people will be professional welfare recipients for generations, and vote reliably democrat if/when they achieve citizenship, as well as providing a steady supply of jihadist fanatics to provide random attacks on American citizens.
        By employing the “bottom up, top down strategy”*, these puppeteers intend to bring about a socialist police state.

        * “bottom up, top down strategy”: By increasing poverty and squalor (witness muslim “no go zones” and gang controlled neighborhoods), there is an increase in crime, the system is hamstrung by restrictive regulation, oversight, and liberal judges, the appeals process, and prison overcrowding puts criminals back on the streets having “earned their stripes”.
        As a reaction, the population of victims demands ever more restrictive laws and more government, eroding their own freedom in the name of “safety”

      1. The short answer is: Never. They simply do not care about the cost to American citizens.

        The longer answer is the cost associated with resettlement and upkeep is part of the liberal “Narrative”. Increased taxes, increased dependence on the state, reducing of true liberties, etc. The end goal of “The Narrative” is the decline of the USA into a Euro-zone type socialist utopia of dependent citizens, lacking in any form of excellence, no real entrepreneurialism, etc.

          1. It’s a sad situation but we cannot take care of everyone! Let immigrants know that we are no longer safe to travel to. It would be better to invest in their countries and provide safe spaces for people, than to let people make the journey here. Spread the word, we are no longer going to care for everyone.

    Leave a Comment 11 Comments