Immigration Rule Change Could Keep OR Families Together

Immigration Rule Change Could Keep OR Families Together

Chris Thomas, Public News Service - OR
January 9, 2012

SALEM, Ore. - It's a relatively small change but, for Oregon's immigrant community, it represents a big step to keep families together as their immigration issues are resolved. A new immigration regulation will allow some people to remain in the United States who typically have had to return to their home countries to apply for a visa or to get what is called a "family unity waiver." Either decision can take months.

Portland attorney Stephen Manning of the Immigrant Law Group says it affects at least 200 families his firm is working with right now. He describes one of them:

"Nice family, good family, good people. He needs to get his immigrant visa to get right with the law and, under the old system, he's probably going to be outside the country for at least 18 months. With two kids in elementary school, it's just not a good deal."

The new rule will apply only to spouses and children of people who are already American citizens. Francisco Lopez, executive director of the immigrants' rights group Causa, hopes it will be expanded to include others in similar situations.

"Not just U.S. citizens that are petitioning for family members, but also green card holders, people with permanent resident status. But also, we want to make sure that this is a good beginning to continue the conversation about a legalization program."

Lopez notes the rule change means that people applying for visas and family unity waivers can stay home while they wait for their U.S. Consulate hearings to be scheduled, and then leave the country for a few days instead of months. The rule change will minimize the time family members are separated, but not prevent it, adds Manning.

"The process is still the same. It's just a change in the timing, so it's where you're going to have to spend the time. So, it's not an amnesty. People should not be tricked into thinking it's amnesty, you know; if you're made promises that sound too good to be true, they're probably too good to be true."

Manning says the current system has meant a lot of expense and stress, particularly for parents when one has to leave for an extended time period. He points out that the Department of Homeland Security rule change is not in effect yet and could take up to a year to become final.

Read more »

Immigration Waiver Process Change Will Keep Some Families Together

January 6, 2012

Immigration Waiver Process Change Will Keep Some Families Together

OR Immigrant Rights Organization Applauds New Regulation for Stateside Processing of Family Unity Waivers and Calls on Administration to Extend Process to Legal Permanent Residents

Salem, Ore.--Today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a new regulation that will direct certain visa applicants to file their applications for family unity waivers within the U.S., to be adjudicated by a specially trained and designated team of professionals.

Currently, U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents face unnecessary and dangerous bureaucratic hurdles in obtaining lawful permanent resident status for their spouse or child. Those applying for a Visa would either need to return to their country of origin or apply for a waiver to be able to remain in the U.S. while completing the Visa process. Getting a waiver can take weeks, months or even over a year to be completed. Meanwhile, families are separated and spouses and children are forced to wait in potentially dangerous situations until a waiver decision is made.

The new procedures announced today will only apply to U.S. citizen spouses and children, who will still have to meet the burden of showing that a lengthy bar from the U.S. would cause their U.S. citizen spouse or parent “extreme hardship”. This welcome development will allow husbands, wives and children of U.S. citizens to remain united with their family members while awaiting a decision on their waiver.

“We applaud today’s announcement by DHS”, said Francisco Lopez, Executive Director of Causa, Oregon’s Immigrant Rights Organization. “This is a much needed change in the current flawed policy – making it one that favors keeping families together. For far too long, families were going through this process separated from one another, and often being placed in dangerous situations. Today’s announcement is another welcome step forward in moving toward a fair and humane immigration process. We look forward to the Obama Administration and Congress continuing to improve our immigration system for immigrants and families.”

The new regulation does not apply to lawful permanent residents, many whose spouses and children face the same obstacles and dangers when required to wait abroad for their waiver adjudications. Causa joins with leaders and organizations around the nation in calling on the Obama Administration to extend the process to legal permanent residents.

Francisco Lopez, Causa's Executive Director will be available for interviews today. He can be reached at 503-269-5694 or at francisco@causaoregon.org

###

Causa, Oregon's Immigrant Rights Organization, is the largest Hispanic civil and human rights and grassroots advocacy organization in the Pacific Northwest. We work to defend and advance immigrant rights through coordination with local, state, and national coalitions and allies. For more information, visit http://www.causaoregon.org/

Read more »

DOJ Responds Forcefully to Civil Rights Disaster in Alabama, What Will DHS Do?

This release come from the American Immigration Council. AIC's mission is to strengthen America by honoring our immigrant history and shaping how Americans think about and act towards immigration now and in the future.

DOJ Responds Forcefully to Civil Rights Disaster in Alabama, What Will DHS Do?

November 4, 2011

Washington D.C. – This week, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it was filing suit in South Carolina to block Act No. 69 (formerly SB 20), South Carolina’s new anti-immigrant law—modeled on Arizona’s SB1070. DOJ argues—like it did in Utah and Alabama—that the law is unconstitutional and interferes with the federal government’s ability to set and enforce immigration policy and is likely to result in civil rights violations. Following the legal challenge, the DOJ Civil Rights Division also sent a letter to Alabama’s public schools reminding them of their duty to provide public education to all children in the state regardless of immigration status.

The DOJ is challenging state legislatures that pass immigration enforcement laws that interfere with the federal government’s role in enforcing immigration laws and setting priorities. The DOJ’s effort on this case reflects their commitment to protecting constitutional principles and individual rights, a commitment that should extend to pursing vigorous challenges in other states that have passed similar laws, including Utah, Georgia, and Indiana.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) also has a strong role to play and should respond to the civil rights crisis taking place in the states and make good on Secretary Napolitano’s assurance that her agency will not be complicit in enforcing Alabama’s new law through federal immigration enforcement actions. 

If one agency of the government is arguing that Alabama’s law is unconstitutional, another agency, DHS, should act consistently and closely review the cases of all immigrants brought to their attention as a result of Alabama’s new law and exercise appropriate discretion. Good government requires consistency across agencies. DHS, like DOJ, should treat implementation of Alabama's new anti-immigrant law as the civil rights crisis that it is and respond swiftly.

Read more »

Oregonians to participate in National Week of Action against failed S-Comm Program

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 18, 2011

Contact:
Eliana Machuca, Portland Jobs with Justice, 503-703-1407,
Natalie Patrick Knox, CAUSA Oregon, 503-915-5701
Erik Sorensen, CAUSA Oregon, 503-488-0263

Oregonians to participate in National Week of Action against failed S-Comm Program

Members of the immigrant, faith, labor and civil rights community to deliver report to elected officials today

Portland, Ore--This Week, the Safe Communities Project, a coalition of immigrant and civil rights organizations, is joining with faith, labor, and community leaders in Oregon and around the country to ask elected officials at every level to stand against the Department of Homeland Security’s fatally flawed and misnamed “Secure Communities” (S-Comm) program.

Already several events raising awareness about the highly controversial program have happened around the country this week including in Los Angeles and Oakland, California, Tucson, Arizona, and Chicago, Illinois.
Today, as part of the national week of action, members of the Safe Communities Project will be going to city, county, and state elected officials, the offices of Oregon’s Congressional Delegation, and sheriff's and police departments in Portland, Salem and Bend to deliver a report released on Monday condemning the S-Comm Program.

RESTORING COMMUNITY: A National Community Advisory Report on ICE’s Failed “Secure Communities” Program, released by NDLON and a National Community Advisory Commission, is a shadow report to DHS’s S-Comm Advisory Committee that was convened to water down the wildfire of opposition. The report focuses on the failed and fundamentally flawed “Secure Communities” program and gives a firsthand account from individuals who have been swept into S-Comm’s deportation dragnet—mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, workers, and students from across the United States.

The full report can be downloaded by linking here: http://altopolimigra.com/s-comm-shadow-report/  

On August 5th, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced that they would unilaterally withdrawal the Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) that they had originally signed with 39 states when implementing the program. Despite increasing national criticism from Governors, law enforcement officials, and community leaders, DHS said that these agreements, which provided a mechanism for states to “opt-out” of S-Comm, were never needed and that the program will continue to expand.

“In light of the widespread criticism of Secure Communities coming from an array of stakeholders, including community groups and public safety officials, ICE should suspend Secure Communities until the misinformation and misapplication that have plagued the program from the beginning are corrected,” said Ashlee Albies, Co-Chair of Portland Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild and civil rights attorney with Creighton & Rose. “ICE's recent actions undermine our system of democracy and weaken protection for already vulnerable communities in Oregon."

While sold as a program to target serious criminals, ICE’s own statistics show that 77% of people identified as a result of S. Comm. have been arrested for lesser offences, including traffic violations, while nearly one third of those had no criminal record. Additionally, ICE has consistently rejected calls for greater transparency. A federal judge hearing Freedom of Information Act litigation against ICE over S-Comm stated that “[t]here is ample evidence that ICE and DHS have gone out of their way to mislead the public about Secure Communities.” The program is currently under scrutiny by members of Congress.

Key Facts about the “Secure Communities” (S-Comm) Program:

• S-Comm separates families and destroys communities, violates our due process rights.
• DHS is using S-Comm as a vehicle to meet the agency's deportation goal of 400,000 people per year, subjecting people to detention and deportation regardless of whether or not they committed any "crime," the degree of severity of legal infractions, how long ago any charges occurred, what kind of rehabilitation has taken place, or what ties they have to communities.
• S-Comm compromises our communities' safety by driving a wedge between local police and the communities they are supposed to serve, adding to the already tenuous relationship.
• S-Comm encourages racial profiling and indiscriminately funnels immigrants into an unjust and dysfunctional immigration detention and deportation system.

###

The Safe Communities Project is a coalition of immigrant & civil rights organizations which includes VOZ Workers’ Rights Education Project. Portland Immigrant Rights Coalition, Oregon New Sanctuary Movement, Portland Central America Solidarity Committee, North West Immigrant Youth Alliance, American Friends Service Committee, Jobs with Justice and CAUSA , Oregon’s Statewide Immigrant Rights Coalition.

Read more »

New Report Challenges DHS on Use of Resources and Targeting of Harmless Individuals

The American Immigration Lawyers Association has just released a new report challenging the claim made by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that it is focusing its finite resources on the "highest enforcement priorities" - namely those who present threats to public safety and national security.

AILA's report, Immigration Enforcement Off Target: Minor Offenses With Major Consequences, shows 127 cases where people all over America being picked up by police for minor offences like loitering or failing to signal before changing lanes. Others have even been picked up for no offences at all.

According to AILA, the stops were so trivial as to betray the real motive for the stop—namely to question someone about their immigration status. None of the people were stopped or charged for anything that could be considered a “serious crime.” In a few cases, police said they made the stop because the person “looked illegal.”

For more on the report and AILA’s recommendations for DHS, please link here: http://immigrationimpact.com/2011/08/17/new-report-shows-dhs-way-off-target-going-after-harmless-individuals/

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is the national association of immigration lawyers established to promote justice, advocate for fair and reasonable immigration law and policy, and advance the quality of immigration law practice.

Read more »

DHS tells states they can't opt-out of flawed program

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 5, 2011

Department of Homeland Security tells states they can't opt-out of flawed program

Salem, Ore. – During a teleconference today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said that they are rescinding the Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) on Secure Communities (S-Comm) with states like Illinois, New York and Massachusette that want to withdrawl from the program. DHS maintains that the Secure Communities program is mandated by federal law and that agreements were never necessary. The Department said it intends to implement the program regardless and that it will be made mandatory in 2013. The statement by the Department of Homeland Security contradicts their original position that the program would be optional for cities and states.

CAUSA, Oregon's Statewide Immigrant Rights Coalition, joins with public officials, law enforcement and public safety and immigrant rights advocates around the nation in expressing serious concerns over DHS's and Immigration and Customs Enforcement's continuing to force a program onto states that they recognize as severely flawed.

CAUSA joins with others in calling on DHS and ICE to:

1. Amend their rules so that states and localities, and not the federal government, decide if Secure Communities is appropriate for them.
2. Meaningfully address the erosion of public trust in law enforcement created by the Secure Communities Program.  
3. Address the severe flaws in the Secure Communities Program, as it lacks the internal safeguards to prevent profiling. ICE must also address bias and discriminatory practices that are feeding people into the program.  

Although no jurisdictions in Oregon have signed any letters to opt-out of the Secure Communities Program, there has been serious concerns raised in many counties around the state including Multnomah and Marion. In community meetings,  members of the public have made their serious concerns be known to county law enforcement over the program.

A study recently conducted by the City of Portland Human Rights Commission concluded that, among other disturbing findings, the flawed and costly program makes Oregonians less safe by undermining community trust of police and encourages local police to target immigrants.  During a recent interview with Univision Portland KUNP-TV, Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber said that a line needed to be drawn between federal immigration enforcement and local law enforcement.

As this controversial program is shrouded in lies and deception, CAUSA maintains that the Secure Communities program must be halted immediately until these and other issues are addressed.

###

CAUSA, Oregon's Immigrant Rights Coalition, is the largest Latino and Latina civil and human rights and advocacy organization in the Pacific Northwest. We work to defend and advance immigrant rights through coordination with local, state, and national coalitions and allies. For more information, visit http://www.causaoregon.org

For more information contact Erik Sorensen, Communications Director at 503-488-0263 or at erik@causaoregon.org

Read more »

DHS Acknowledges that U.S. Immigration Policy Needs to Spark Economy and Attract Entrepreneurs

Originally posted at Immigration Impact,  a project of the American Immigration Council.

DHS Acknowledges that U.S. Immigration Policy Needs to Spark Economy and Attract Entrepreneurs

By PAUL ZULKIE, PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL

Yesterday, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Alejandro Mayorkas announced a series of policy initiatives designed to “fuel the nation’s economy and stimulate investment” by attracting foreign entrepreneurs who can invest in fields of high unemployment, create jobs, and form startup companies. It is encouraging that USCIS recognizes that immigrant entrepreneurs and innovators are a key to continued growth and to maintaining America’s competitive edge into the 21st century. It’s important that the agency keep this recognition in mind as it adjudicates visa petitions and applications.

Read more »

FBI Prevents States from Opting Out of Flawed Secure Communities Program

It has now become clear that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) won’t let states that are concerned with the flawed Secure Communities program opt out of participating.

According to Mahwish Khan at America's Voice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is playing a major role and is the reason states are being forced to comply with DHS’ greatly flawed Secure Communities program.  Khan says that, "it’s all part of a much larger scheme, with even bigger problems."

Read more »

Obama Administration Addresses Detention Crisis with Change in Policy

The Department of Homeland Security announced today that it will change the way it conducts oversight and accountability in America’s immigration detention facilities. Specifically, it will make changes to policies regarding an immigrant detention facility in Texas.

In a press release, the National Immigration Forum, the leading immigrant advocacy organization in the country, expressed they were pleased that the administration will take important steps to address immigration detention conditions that are currently a "national embarrassment".

Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, said that the “the single most important thing we can do with regard to immigrant detention is to reduce the need for its use for millions of non-criminals, families, and workers in the first place.”

Noorani added that the we need a functioning legal immigration system -- one that brings millions of immigrants living here illegally into legal status, rather than attempting to enforce our way out of our current situation.

He finished by saying that the Forum “is supportive of the changes announced to the detention system and hope this signals more oversight and accountability throughout DHS and our immigration enforcement system”.

According to the New York Times, among the changes DHS will make is to stop sending families to the notorious T. Don Hutto Residential Center, a former state prison near Austin, Texas. The facility was sued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) after news coverage showed young children behind razor wire.

An ACLU lawsuit settled in 2007 brought to light how children under 10 years old were confined for up to a year in “family cells with open toilets, with only one hour of schooling a day”. Children said they were threatened by guards with separation from their parents--many asylum-seekers from around the world. Only after judicial enforcement of the settlement were children granted such “liberties" as "wearing pajamas at night and taking crayons into family cells" said the New York Times.

Although immigration reform advocates see the Administration’s action on the Detention Crisis as a step in the right direction, passage of humane and just immigration reform legislation will offer the only workable solution to our nation’s dysfunctional and unjust immigration system.

For more on the Administration’s immigration detention policy, read the full story at the New York Times by linking here. To read the full release from the National Immigration Forum, please link here

Additional Resources

The Math of Immigration Detention http://www.immigrationforum.org/images/uploads/MathofImmigrationDetention.pdf

Summaries of Recent Reports on Immigration Detention 2007 – 2009
http://www.immigrationforum.org/images/uploads/DetentionReportsSummaries2007-2009.pdf

Read more »

Widow not married long enough to stay in U.S.

The Associated Press is reporting that a widowed Jamaican Woman who lost her husband in a Staten Island ferry crash in 2003 cannot stay in the United States. The reason the appeals court gave is that she and her husband weren’t married long enough.

Osserritta Robinson, 31, of Mahwah, N.J., is reported by the Associated Press as,

“one of about 170 immigrants who have been denied residency status because of what some call the "widow penalty" a U.S. law that requires an immigrant to be married for two years to remain in the country if the American spouse dies.”

Before her husband's death, Louis Robinson had filed citizenship papers on behalf of his wife. However, because of a government bureaucratic backlog, they were never processed.

Robinson's attorney, Jeffrey Feinbloom, had this to say about the court's decision:

"These people are victims. They've already been through the ultimate tragedy. They're just being re-victimized."

Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has asked her staff to review the issue and others involving non-citizen spouses.

To read more on this story and get a copy of the court ruling, link here

Resources:
US appeals court nixes widow's immigration bid

Read more »

Widows of Americans Face Deportation

This week on CBS, 60 Minutes aired a special report titled “Loss of Love and Country”. The focus of the report was the pending deportation of foreign born spouses of U.S. Citizens that passed away before they were able to complete their applications for citizenship.

It was once an honored rule that a foreign born immigrant who marries a U.S. citizen was entitled to become a U.S. resident. That concept is is not as straight forward as it once was. The Citizenship and Immigration Service (CIS), under the direction of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), says that if an immigrant spouse doesn’t complete their application while the citizen spouse is alive, they cannot remain in the country.

Listening to the stories of the widows, it becomes apparent that it is often not possible for a spouse to complete an application while their wife or husband are still alive. And, though they may have been in the process already, many widows who have lost their spouse are still facing deportation.

Taking their case against before the courts, a group of widows being denied citizenship won. In fact, four courts ruled in favor of the widows, however, the Department of Homeland Security continues to appeal the cases at taxpayer expense.

Why CIS making this such an issue? They argue that although a foreign born spouse is eligible for citizenship, they don't consider a widow a spouse. They cite Black’s Law Dictionary, which defines spouse as "a married person”. However, as the 60 Minutes report points out, the court sided on behalf of the widows because same law dictionary defines a surviving spouse as "one who outlives the other".

The Department of Homeland Security refused a request for an interview from CBS News, leaving the public to speculate why these widowed spouses and their families are left in limbo.




For more details on the report, visit CBSNews.com

Read more »

Immigrants' Rights Organizations Sue Department of Homeland Security

This release comes from our allies at the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). NILC is dedicated to protecting and promoting the rights of low income immigrants and their family members.

Immigrants' Rights Organizations Sue Department of Homeland Security for Public Accountability About Deportation Program that Sidesteps Legal Process for Immigrants

SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., November 12, 2008-Today a coalition of immigrants' rights organizations asked a federal judge to compel the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to disclose information about a program under which it removes non-citizens from the U.S. without hearings before immigration judges. The program, called "stipulated removal," has resulted in the removal of over 96,000 non-citizens since its inception.

The Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic, together with the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the ACLU of Southern California (ACLUSC) and the National Lawyers Guild of San Francisco (NLGSF) filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to gain access to agency records about stipulated removal from DHS and its sub-agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The lawsuit also seeks access to records from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and its Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR).

Stipulated removal allows the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to remove a non-citizen, even one with valid defenses against deportation, as long as the non-citizen signs an order. DHS appears to target non-citizens in immigration detention for stipulated removal, and does not allow the non-citizen to appear before a judge prior to being deported. Advocates have expressed concerns that immigrants signing these orders do not realize they are giving up their rights to challenge their deportation.

In the lawsuit, NLGSF et al. v U.S. DHS, the plaintiffs note that news reports, Congressional testimony, and agency press releases reveal that the DHS and DOJ have broadly implemented stipulated removal on a nationwide basis for at least 12 years. However, DHS and DOJ have failed to produce records that reflect the full scope of stipulated removal's implementation, and the select information DHS and DOJ have divulged to date provide a "strong indication that other documents have been improperly withheld."

"DHS is running a federal program that has resulted in the deportation of almost 100,000 people without legal hearings, and yet the public knows very little about the program," said Jayashri Srikantiah, director of the Immigrants' Rights Clinic at Stanford Law School. "Stipulated removal raises serious due process concerns because immigrant detainees may not know that they are signing away their rights, and no judge ever speaks to the detainee to ensure that they understand the process."

The lawsuit comes after two FOIA requests in December 2005 and February 2008 yielded only minimal information. According to data that was released under those FOIA requests by the DOJ's Executive Office of Immigration Review, that office entered 96,241 stipulated removal orders between October 1999 and June 2008.

Karen Tumlin, Staff Attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, observes: "DHS has revealed close to nothing about a program that impacts thousands of immigrants' due process rights. The stipulated removal program gives detained immigrants an impossible choice: sign away your rights or stay in detention."

"Immigrant detainees may be refugees or have U.S. citizen family members," said Ahilan Arulanantham, an ACLU of Southern California staff attorney. "The public should know whether DHS is pressuring these detainees to give up their right to a hearing."

"Stipulated removal appears to target the most vulnerable parts of the immigrant population," observed Carlos Villarreal, Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild - San Francisco Bay Area. "Immigrant detainees often lack the money to pay for lawyers and bond money to get out of detention."

Jennifer Lee Koh, Cooley Godward Kronish Fellow with Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic, said: "Before DHS further expands its implementation of stipulated removal, the public should know whether the program satisfies basic due process requirements. Immigrant detainees should know exactly what they are giving up when they sign a stipulated order."

Students in the Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic participated in drafting the FOIA requests and the complaint filed today.

For more background about stipulated removal, see Backgrounder: Stipulated Removal-- Federal authorities are deporting immigrants without hearings, but the public knows very little about the program, attached to this release.

A copy of the complaint filed today in federal district court will be available later today at www.nilc.org.


MEDIA CONTACTS:

Stanford Immigrants' Rights Clinic: Jayashri Srikantiah, 650-724-2442

National Immigration Law Center: Linton Joaquin, 213-674-2909

ACLU of Southern California: Gordon Smith, 213-977-5247

National Lawyers Guild-SF: Carlos Villarreal 415-377-6961

Read more »

DHS Undermines Economic Security with No-Match Rule

The following release comes from our partners at the National Immigration Forum. The National Immigration Forum, founded in 1982, is the nation’s premier immigrant rights organization. The Forum advocates and builds public support for public policies that welcome immigrants and refugees and are fair to and supportive of newcomers to our country. For more information, visit their website at: www.immigrationforum.org

DHS Undermines Economic Security with No-Match Rule

Washington, DC - Today, DHS issued a final administrative rule notifying employers that failure to take action upon receipt of Social Security Administration "no-match" letters will serve as constructive notice that an employer had hired an employee who was an undocumented immigrant. These "no-match" letters are in fact wage report letters issued by the Social Security Administration that are designed to identify possible record-keeping errors and other problems associated with matching wages to Social Security numbers. The following is a statement from Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum.

While Congress holds hearings on Wall Street's financial crisis and the Bush administration's response, and the Department of Labor releases unemployment statistics confirming the pain of a slow down in the economy, the Department of Homeland Security continues to march to the beat of its own deportation-only drum. While the country focuses on a severe credit crisis, the lack of health insurance crisis and a looming recession, DHS's action effectively pours salt onto a wound widening everyday. To burden good employers with mounds of enforcement-laden paperwork based on bad data stifles an economy struggling to survive.

Today's release of a final administrative rule regarding "no-match" letters is opposed from all corners of our economy. The so called "no-match" rule turns an advisory letter issued by the Social Security Administration - designed to ensure that individuals paying into the Social Security system are properly credited for their work - into a tool for tracking down undocumented workers. While employers should certainly take steps to correct discrepancies, the no-match rule will not seriously address the problems of illegal immigration.

Inaccurate databases, human error, and failure to report name changes can all contribute to the "no-match" problem, but this new rule is likely to turn all no-match letters into scarlet letters, leading to unnecessary dismissals and possible discriminatory hiring practices. Given our country's rapidly unraveling economy, measures that further weaken businesses and threaten the economic security of our nation and of legitimate workers - native and immigrant worker alike - is bad public policy.

The Bush administration is determined to continue the drumbeat of deportation-only practices, using its last few months in office to put regulations in place that will make it that much more difficult for a new administration to tackle immigration in a straightforward and reasonable way. The administration should heed the call of thousands of employees and employers who fear the ramifications of this new rule.

The next administration and Congress should move quickly to help America get back on its feet by enacting immigration reform that is fiscally responsible, creates genuine security for communities, and leads to rational regulation of immigration. The no-match rule makes no contribution to those objectives and should be shelved before it disrupts the economy even further.

Read more »

Immigration Detention in 2008

This video link is from our partners at FIRM and was released on YouTube on Monday by a writer from California. Check out her other videos by linking here.

Read more »

Department of Homeland Security or Department of Economic Ruin?

This release came today from the National Immigration Forum. Established in 1982, the National Immigration Forum is dedicated to embracing and upholding America’s tradition as a nation of immigrants. The Forum advocates and builds public support for public policies that welcome immigrants and refugees and are fair to and supportive of newcomers to our country.

For Immediate Release
July 24, 2008

Contact:
Douglas Rivlin rivlin@immigrationforum.org)
(202) 383-5989 or (202) 441-0680 (mobile)

Department of Homeland Security or Department of Economic Ruin?
Oversight Welcome

Washington, DC – On Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 11 a.m., the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law will hold a hearing on “Immigration Raids: Postville and Beyond.” The following is a statement by Ali Noorani, Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, a non-partisan, pro-immigrant advocacy group in Washington.

Two months after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) conducted the largest immigration enforcement raid in the nation’s history, devastating the community of Postville, Iowa in the process, the furor over DHS’s misguided immigration enforcement continues. Today’s oversight hearing addresses the range of due process violations and sleight-of-hand procedures used by DHS and the Department of Justice to transform undocumented workers into identity theft criminals with the stroke of a pen, using the threat of long jail sentences to coerce undocumented workers into taking deportation orders as the path of least resistance.

The Postville raid has confirmed for many that DHS’s deportation-only policies destroy not only individual lives, but entire communities, leading to the conclusion that the Department of Homeland Security should more accurately be called the Department of Economic Ruin. Enforcement-on-steroids in the absence of real reform will not fix our profoundly broken immigration system or solve the problem of 12 million immigrants in the country illegally. We need genuine immigration reform that addresses the underlying problems of undocumented workers and all other workers alike. We also need balance in workplace enforcement that puts at least as much emphasis on enforcing labor and workplace safety laws and holds employers at least as accountable as unauthorized workers in such situations. We call on Congress to change the system before DHS actions destroy more communities and families.

Read more »

Another ICE official arrested on suspicion of bribery

ICE attorney arrested for alleged immigrant bribes

LOS ANGELES - An attorney for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and his wife were arrested on suspicion of accepting thousands of dollars from both legal and illegal immigrants in exchange for immigration benefits, authorities said.

ICE Assistant Chief Counsel Constantine Peter Kallas, 38, and wife Maria Kallas, 39, both of Alta Loma, were arrested Thursday at the San Manuel Indian Bingo and Casino, where authorities believed they were accepting such a bribe, U.S. Attorney spokesman Thom Mrozek said in a statement....

"The egregious acts of corruption alleged in this case are extremely disturbing to those of us who have sworn to serve the United States," U.S. Attorney Thomas P. O'Brien said in a written statement. "As a law enforcement official, Mr. Kallas abused his position in the Department of Homeland Security simply to line his own pockets."...read full article

Read more »

Congress Investigates Immigrants Dying in U.S. Detention Centers

Today members of the U.S. Senate are questioning Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and assistant secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Julie Meyers over reports of medical negligence and deaths of immigrants in ICE detention, as well as improper detentions of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents.

During a news conference with families of immigrants who have died in U.S. custody, Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) said in response to those being neglected in detention centers, "The Constitution is what makes this country unique in the world, and its presumption of fundamental rights for all people at the end of the day makes us the beacon of light for the rest of the world. I am not willing to have it eroded."

Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Representative John Conyers (D-MI) and Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), head of the Immigration Subcommittee will be holding a hearing after the Memorial Day recess.

An LA Times Editorial entitled "Immigrants Detained to Death", characterized the grim situation for immigrants in detention, stating that “Such callousness reflects a neglect that is shockingly permissible against immigrants nationwide. The country's 300 immigrant detention centers, including facilities in Los Angeles, have voluntary healthcare standards, not mandatory ones. Because of that, immigrants who are detained at the centers -- some are in the country illegally; others are held because of clerical errors or while they wait for their asylum claims to be heard -- often are subjected to indifference, even cruelty.”

References
DHS Will Face Questions on Care of Detained Immigrants, Washington Post, 5/22/08
Immigrants Detained to Death, Los Angeles Times, 5/20/08

Read more »

Breaking Laws to Build a Border Fence

This one from KJ over at ImmigrationProf Blog about breaking laws to build a border fence. In a post today, KJ asks a great question, "Is it worth bending the rule of law for a fence of no value to effectively address immigrataion control concerns AND results in deaths?"

In response, he highlights an article, "Power to Build Border Fence Is Above U.S. Law", that appeared in the New York Times today.

Securing the nation’s borders is so important, Congress says, that Michael Chertoff, the homeland security secretary, must have the power to ignore any laws that stand in the way of building a border fence. Any laws at all. >>read on

KJ also offers an op/ed on "how the border fence is indicative of American insecurity" by Gregory Rodriguez. You can get that link here

Read more »