On January 7, 2020, the White House announced that American citizens could stay in the United States until December 31, 2020.
This decision was widely seen as a response to a mass influx of undocumented immigrants into the United State, which President Donald Trump said would be an “important and historic moment.”
This announcement was accompanied by a series of executive actions that significantly expanded the nation’s borders.
As a result of these actions, many Americans were shocked by the news that the US government would not be able to enforce a provision of the US immigration laws that required them to report all non-citizens who enter the country illegally.
This was the “Waters of Our Time,” as President Trump called the announcement.
While the Waters of Our Times has become a popular phrase in recent years, it has been used in the past to describe a number of other major political developments and events, including the 2008 election, the election of Donald Trump, the 2015 inauguration, the 2016 presidential campaign, the Trump administration’s travel ban, and the 2017 inauguration.
Since the inauguration, many commentators have argued that the Waters Of Our Time refers to the administration’s policy of “wetting the bed,” a phrase coined by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), which refers to an effort by President Trump to dampen public outrage about the policies of the previous administration.
The Trump administration has not responded to these criticisms and has maintained that the administration has implemented the Waters program in a “fair and reasonable” manner.
The Waters of our time policy was introduced in response to the massive influx of migrants and refugees in 2015, a year in which the number of people who had been living in the US illegally surpassed 1 million.
This surge of immigrants and refugees, many of whom were unaccompanied minors, sparked the establishment of the Immigrant Assistance Program (IAP), a government-run immigration program that provides temporary relief to undocumented immigrants.
The IAP has been criticized for having been poorly managed and poorly implemented.
For example, it was announced in October 2018 that the IAP was expected to be in a state of disrepair by the end of 2020.
While it is not known if this is the case, the IAPS budget was only $1.8 million for the 2017 fiscal year, according to the US Department of Labor.
As of October 2018, the US Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services reported that the total number of IAP applications had dropped by 37 percent since the start of the fiscal year in January 2018, to an average of 6.6, and had dropped further in the year to December 2018, from a peak of more than 12,000 applications.
The US Department’s own report revealed that the number and type of applications received by the IAPP declined sharply in the second half of 2019.
The decrease in applications in the first half of 2020 is notable, as the IAPD reported that it was able to accept more than 17,000 IAPs in the three months prior to the inauguration.
The administration has also been criticized by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) for its response to this crisis.
In a statement released on January 7 that was widely viewed as a reaction to the news of the impending Trump administration crackdown on the I AP, the ACLU stated: We are deeply disappointed in President Trump’s announcement that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency will no longer enforce the provisions of the WOTUS (Washington, DC) order to report immigrants who have not been lawfully admitted to the United Kingdom (U.K.).
We urge the president to immediately rescind this order.
In his announcement on January 6, President Trump stated: Immigration and Naturalization Service agents will no more ask you to provide false documents to get your family or to obtain your child’s green card.
We will no less enforce the law.
But, the President did not clarify whether this meant that immigration agents would no longer be able “interrogate” undocumented immigrants on suspicion of criminal activity, or whether they would be able, instead, to simply demand information from them about their immigration status.
The ACLU also pointed out that Trump’s administration had not previously disclosed to Congress its plans for the implementation of the order.
While Trump has stated that the WOOTUS order would be rolled back, the government has yet to release any official details of the plan for the change.
The WOoS order also did not contain a provision that would allow ICE agents to detain undocumented immigrants for up to 90 days, or revoke their status to stay in this country.
The American Civil Rights Union also criticized Trump for his announcement.
In January 2019, the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) asking for information about the implementation plan for implementing the WOSOTUS order.
The ACLJ requested documents on the scope and implementation of Trump’s executive order and the timeline of the program’s implementation.
The FOIA request was released on May 6, 2019, nearly a year