皮尤研究中心8月21日发布的专项数据显示，特朗普总统在重返白宫后的前100天内，就以惊人的效率签 署了多达181项与移民相关的行政命令。这些政策一方面严格限制新移民入境，另一方面加大了对非法 移民的遣返力度。虽然这些政策的长期影响尚需时间评估，但已经导致美国移民人口数量出现明显下 滑。 新华社北京9月2日电 美国皮尤研究中心最新发布的报告显示，根据对美国普查局初步数据的深入分 析，2020年1月至7月期间，美国劳动力市场出现了令人担忧的趋势——超过120万移民劳动者从就业市 场中消失。多位经济学家指出，这一现象与特朗普政府推行的强硬移民政策密切相关，这些政策正在对 美国经济的基础劳动力结构产生深远影响。 据美联社9月1日详细报道，这些流失的移民劳动者既包括持有合法工作签证的外籍人士，也包含大量无 证移民。值得注意的是，这些移民群体在美国多个关键行业中都扮演着不可或缺的角色。 （配图说明：6月24日，纽约曼哈顿街头，建筑工人正在烈日下进行道路施工。新华社记者刘亚南摄） 在加利福尼亚州文图拉县，今年春季就发生了多起大规模拘捕事件。当地知名农场主莉萨·泰特痛心地 描述：\"我们的工人甚至是在社区洗衣房或下班回家的路 ...

美国卡车司机缺口背后：是企业用工荒，还是移民政策崩盘？美国这个时候降息，是在给经济火上浇油 吗？ ...

美国联邦部门28日说，两名在华盛顿州执行扑救野火任务的消防员被美国边境巡逻队逮捕，理由是 他们涉嫌为非法移民。此举招致多方谴责。 根据美国土地管理局和边境巡逻队发布的联合声明，土地管理局27日要求边境巡逻队协助核查在一 个偏远地区作业的一群消防队员的身份，巡逻队随后认定其中两人非法滞留并将他们逮捕。 当时共有44名消防人员在执行扑救任务。一名消防员告诉《西雅图时报》，他们到达指定地点，正 在等待上级主管人员，执法人员乘坐多辆没有标志的汽车突然出现，命令他们站成一队并检查身份证 件。他们被盘问和扣留大约3小时，其中两人被带走，执法人员不允许他们拍摄现场情况。 这名消防员说，两名被捕的同事与他关系非常好，其中一人还是他学习的榜样。 他表示，整个过程像是事先设计好的圈套。 这一事件源于针对这两名消防员所属承包商的多部门联合刑事调查。联合声明说，土地管理局已终 止与两家涉事承包商的合同。 联邦机构未就这起调查发布更多细节，两家涉事承包商暂未予以回应。 来自华盛顿州的民主党籍国会参议员帕蒂·默里对此事表达强烈愤慨。她指责特朗普政府"大幅削减 林业局经费"削弱了野火扑救能力，其移民政策"本质上病态"。"共和党抓捕执勤消防 ...

美国公民及移民服务局近日公布的一份政策备忘录显示，美国政府正恢复对美国公民身份申请人进 行"邻里调查"。据报道，这项制度要求调查人员进行"实地调查"，可能包括与申请人的邻居、同事等进 行面谈，以确定申请人符合获得美国公民身份的要求。 （文章来源：央视新闻客户端） ...

（文章来源：央视新闻客户端） "鳄鱼恶魔岛"作为美国关押移民的拘留中心而被大家知晓。当地时间10日，不少美国民众和被拘留者家 属聚集在"鳄鱼恶魔岛"外，要求关闭这座惨无人道的拘留设施，并强烈谴责美国政府的移民政策。抗议 者手举"鳄鱼恶魔岛不人道"的标识、身穿带有"废除美国移民与海关执法局"字样的T恤，高呼要求美国 政府关闭该设施。目前，在"鳄鱼恶魔岛"关押着数百名移民。 ...

果然，对于特朗普来说，美国总统职位不过是副业，真正的"主业"还是赚钱。许多人原本以为，特朗普严格打击非法移民是为了让美国更加安全，减少混 乱，并为本国民众创造更多就业机会。然而，事情的发展却完全出乎意料。当他对非法移民采取强硬措施的同时，却开始针对美国的普通公民采取了新的手 段。特朗普首先推出的"金卡"计划，一张卡卖到500万美元，持卡人便能享受与美国公民几乎相同的待遇。然而，没过多久，他又提出了更为直接的要求： 只要踏足美国领土，就必须缴纳1.5万美元的保证金，确保在规定的期限内离开美国。这一政策究竟是特朗普急需资金，还是在"明抢"呢？ 如果我们回顾美国过去的经济模式，不难发现，过去美国依靠财政和贸易赤字将美元输送到全球，再通过金融市场的庞大规模，吸引全球资本流入，进而进 行财富"收割"。美联储通过铸币税和金融体系来维持美国经济的运行。然而，今天的美国经济环境发生了变化。美联储不再像过去那样大规模放水，导致美 国的财政状况陷入困境，金融市场也不再像以前那样强大，全球资本对美国市场的依赖度逐渐降低。结果是，美国的税收收入没有增加，反而下降，而巨额 的国债却不断飙升。 特朗普的政策目标突然发生了转变，他将"枪口 ...

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. government, under President Trump, will not grant amnesty to illegal immigrants working on farms, while continuing strategic deportation efforts to ensure the agricultural sector has the necessary labor [1] Group 1: Immigration Policy - President Trump emphasized that large-scale deportation actions are ongoing but will be conducted strategically to maintain labor supply in agriculture [1] - Trump expressed willingness to allow immigrant workers on U.S. farms to stay if their employers provide "guarantees" for them [1]

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Trump's executive order issued on January 20, aimed at preventing border-crossing immigrants from seeking asylum or applying for deferred deportation, is illegal and applies nationwide [1][2]. Summary by Relevant Sections - **Court Ruling Details** - The ruling, delivered by Judge Randolph D. Moss in a 182-page opinion, stated that Trump's executive order labeled the increase in border crossings as an "invasion" and halted humanitarian screenings at the southern border, preventing entrants from applying for asylum or deferred deportation [1]. - The court emphasized that the executive order fundamentally conflicts with the protections established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, which guarantees anyone on U.S. soil the opportunity to seek asylum [1]. - **Legal Context and Implications** - The ruling is based on a class-action lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, representing multiple immigrant rights groups and 13 asylum seekers, arguing that the executive order is "both illegal and unprecedented" [1]. - The court's decision will be delayed for 14 days to allow the Trump administration time to appeal; if no appeal is made, the government must resume processing all asylum applications after the ruling takes effect [1]. - **Government Response** - Following the ruling, the White House criticized the decision for circumventing the intent of the Supreme Court's recent ruling and announced plans to appeal [2].

Core Viewpoint - The "Trump Card" program, introduced by the Trump administration, allows foreign citizens to obtain U.S. permanent residency by investing $5 million, with nearly 68,703 applications received within a week of its launch [1][2]. Group 1: Program Details - The "Trump Card" is designed to attract business leaders and institutions seeking U.S. residency for themselves or their employees [4]. - The card will be made of gold and features symbols of American identity, including the President's portrait and the U.S. flag [3][4]. - The initiative aims to generate revenue for the U.S. government and help reduce the national debt of $36 trillion [4]. Group 2: Comparison with Existing Programs - The "Trump Card" is proposed to replace the existing EB-5 visa program, which requires a $1.8 million investment for permanent residency [4]. - In the previous year, approximately 14,000 EB-5 visas were issued, highlighting the potential scale of the new program [4]. Group 3: Legal and Practical Concerns - Critics question the legality of the "Trump Card," suggesting it lacks legislative backing and may face challenges from the Office of Management and Budget [5]. - The program is compared unfavorably to the established EB-5 program, which has a 30-year history and clear legal framework [5]. - Concerns are raised about the program's viability, as it may only attract a limited number of wealthy individuals, potentially requiring 2,000 buyers annually to meet revenue goals [6].

Core Points - The Trump administration's "Trump Card" program has attracted nearly 70,000 online applications within a week of its launch, allowing foreign citizens to obtain U.S. permanent residency by paying $5 million [1][3] - The card is made of gold and is intended to appeal to business leaders seeking residency for themselves or their employees, while also being promoted as a revenue-generating initiative to help reduce the U.S. national debt of $36 trillion [3] - The program is proposed to replace the existing EB-5 visa program, which requires a $1.8 million investment for permanent residency, and has issued approximately 14,000 EB-5 visas last year [3][4] Legal and Regulatory Concerns - Critics argue that the Trump Card program lacks legal foundation, as it does not have legislative text or a framework established by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) [4] - Concerns have been raised regarding the program's compliance with established legal precedents, and it may face potential legal challenges or be rejected by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) [4] - The program is viewed as a payment to the U.S. government without a clear investment component, contrasting with the EB-5 program that has a 30-year legal history [4] Market Viability - The program's success hinges on attracting wealthy individuals, with estimates suggesting that 2,000 buyers would be needed annually to generate $10 billion, which is less than 1% of the budget deficit [5] - There are uncertainties regarding whether Trump has the legal authority to create a new visa category without congressional involvement, raising questions about the market outlook for the program [4][5]