The program, once billed as a voluntary partnership between the Department of Homeland Security and localities, is now mired in controversy.
LA Times Editorial
May 23, 2011
When federal officials first announced the Secure Communities program in 2008, they billed it as a powerful tool in the battle to identify and deport illegal immigrants who had been convicted of violent crimes. Dozens of states, including California, signed on, agreeing that police would submit the fingerprints of all arrestees to be checked against federal databases for criminal convictions and deportation orders.
But the program, once billed as a voluntary partnership between the Department of Homeland Security and localities, is now mired in controversy. The government is investigating whether it has failed to nab dangerous criminals and has instead been used to target low-level nonviolent offenders. Since its launch, more than half of those deported under Secure Communities had minor or no criminal convictions, according to Department of Homeland Security statistics. In Los Angeles County, for example, nearly half of the 11,774 deported under the program from August 2009 to January 2011 had no convictions or had committed misdemeanors. They were targeted for deportation because the program doesn't distinguish between criminals and those who illegally entered the U.S. or overstayed a visa — a civil violation.
What's more, in some cities with large immigrant communities, police are concerned that their participation in the program will have a chilling effect on immigrants' willingness to report crimes or provide useful information. They point to cases like that of Isaura Garcia, an immigrant living in Los Angeles, who called 911 in February to report an alleged beating by her partner. Because police often arrest both parties in domestic disputes, her fingerprints were submitted to immigration officials; despite having no criminal record, she was flagged for deportation proceedings because she was in the country illegally. Another case involved a street vendor with no prior criminal record who was was arrested in downtown Los Angeles last month after she ran when police approached her. The woman remains detained, though no charges were filed, and is awaiting deportation for being in the U.S. illegally.
The result is that a growing number of states that were initially drawn to the program are telling the Department of Homeland Security that they want to withdraw or modify their participation. A bill sponsored by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) would require that only the fingerprints of convicted felons be submitted to immigration officials. It would also allow any county to opt out of the program. The bill is now before the full Assembly.
If federal immigration officials are unwilling to target the people they said they would target, then Ammiano's proposal will set modest and sensible limits. It would help focus enforcement efforts on felons who commit rape, murder or other violent crimes instead of street vendors and domestic violence victims.
See this and other related stories at: http://latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-secure-20110523,0,4886580.story
Immigration Court Backlog Likely to Get Worse Before It Gets Better
May 18, 2011
by Ben Winograd
See Original Article at: Immigration Court Backlog Likely to Get Worse Before It Gets Better
Our nation’s immigration courts are backlogged. Historically backlogged. At the end of last year, more than 260,000 cases remained pending before immigration judges. Across the country, the average wait was nearly sixteen months. In California, thousands of cases have been pending for more than two years. While justice is not always swift, our immigration courts are getting increasingly further from the finish line.
Numbers aside, the delays remain problematic from both a legal and practical standpoint. For individuals with no viable claims of relief, the backlogs delay the point by which they must inevitably leave the country. Meanwhile, immigrants wrongfully placed in removal proceedings—and asylum seekers whose fates hinge on the outcome of a hearing—remain stuck in legal limbo and can needlessly languish in detention. At the same time, Immigration Judges may feel (perhaps subconscious) pressure to resolve cases quickly rather than thoroughly.
Unfortunately, as numerous witnesses testified today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the backlogs are likely to get worse before (or if) they get better. Juan Osuna, the Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, noted that immigration judges’ burgeoning caseloads are “directly tied to annual increases in cases filed in the immigration courts by DHS.” In other words, the more immigrants are swept into removal proceedings through cooperation with state and local law enforcement, including programs like Secure Communities, the longer the backlog will be.
At the same time, the witnesses agreed that hiring more immigration judges alone could not fix the problem. Karen Grisez, appearing on behalf of the American Bar Association, recommended more extensive use of pre-trial settlement conferences, which allow attorneys to mutually resolve claims before hearings begin, and the initial referral to trained DHS officers of asylum claims raised for the first time in removal hearings. Noting the frequency of meritless claims unwittingly filed by unrepresented immigrants, Grisez also suggested expanding access to the Justice Department’s Legal Orientation Program, which currently is available only to immigrants in detention facilities.
Another witness, Julie Myers Wood, who headed ICE during the second half of the Bush Administration, stressed that government attorneys should more frequently exercise prosecutorial discretion when deciding which cases to bring. A former federal prosecutor, Myers Wood said the hardest cases to litigate involved defendants representing themselves, and thus recommended the appointment of counsel for vulnerable immigrants—such as unaccompanied minors, certain asylum seekers, and those with mental disabilities.
But not every means of reducing the backlog is a good one. For example, Myers Wood, along with Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), suggested expanding a process—known as “expedited removal”—in which certain immigrants can be deported with no hearing at all. Though expanding expedited removal could potentially lessen the caseload on immigration courts, efficiency alone is never a valid justification for sacrificing immigrants’ legal rights.
The final point of agreement at the hearing was that the enactment of comprehensive immigration reform would be the best way to ease the burden on immigration courts. By reducing the number of immigrants eligible for deportation, Congress would, by necessity, reduce the number of immigrants placed in removal proceedings. Yet given the lack of Congressional movement on immigration reform or Administrative relief, the backlog of removal hearings, like the undocumented population itself, appears here to stay for the foreseeable future.
La Opinión: Editorial - Baca and Secure Communities
May 17, 2011
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=O4D4T8SqWG4Uq8B3kcOimivF7b3vw0bc
Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca supports the Secure Communities program, as he explained a few days ago on the radio program "Which Way LA?" Ironically, the reasons he gave for his support are precisely the problems of a program that has been misused and is prone to being abused.
Secure Communities was intended as a public safety program to arrest and deport undocumented dangerous criminals. However, its implementation has strayed far beyond that goal, and people without criminal records have been arrested and deported. For example, it is estimated that 3,000 individuals, almost one-fourth of those deported from Los Angeles since August 2009 under this program, did not meet the definition of "dangerous criminal."
This is not a problem for Baca. According to his explanation, when an undocumented immigrant is arrested by a sheriff’s deputy, it is equivalent to being guilty of a crime since the undocumented do not have civil rights like everyone else. In practice, under the Immigration and Customs Enforcement program, being a suspect is the same as being found guilty of a crime.
This is the essential problem with this program. When suspects are taken to county jail by a police officer or sheriff’s deputy, they are within the reach of immigration authorities. Baca seems to think every arrest made by the police or sheriff’s deputies is justifiable beyond a shadow of a doubt. But it is common knowledge that this perfection does not exist and that —as with everything else— some officers abuse their authority, have bad intentions or just make mistakes during arrests.
When someone reports a crime and the officer in charge sees, perceives or thinks that there is an irregularity regarding the victim or the person reporting it, the situation can take a 180-degree turn and end in the complainant being deported. This can happen, and is a fear many undocumented immigrants have. Because of this, the enforcement of Secure Communities undermines the trust that exists between law enforcement and immigrant communities.
The Latino community does not support the Secure Communities program, as the sheriff believes. Everyone wants dangerous criminals to be taken off the streets, but not at the cost of deporting the innocent. Nor is there complete faith in the infallibility of an arrest such that it should be used to determine that a crime was committed and who committed it.
We have been worried about Sheriff Baca’s enthusiasm for the Secure Communities program. We are much more concerned now after hearing his position, and the arguments to end this program are even stronger.
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=O4D4T8SqWG4Uq8B3kcOimivF7b3vw0bc
Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca supports the Secure Communities program, as he explained a few days ago on the radio program "Which Way LA?" Ironically, the reasons he gave for his support are precisely the problems of a program that has been misused and is prone to being abused.
Secure Communities was intended as a public safety program to arrest and deport undocumented dangerous criminals. However, its implementation has strayed far beyond that goal, and people without criminal records have been arrested and deported. For example, it is estimated that 3,000 individuals, almost one-fourth of those deported from Los Angeles since August 2009 under this program, did not meet the definition of "dangerous criminal."
This is not a problem for Baca. According to his explanation, when an undocumented immigrant is arrested by a sheriff’s deputy, it is equivalent to being guilty of a crime since the undocumented do not have civil rights like everyone else. In practice, under the Immigration and Customs Enforcement program, being a suspect is the same as being found guilty of a crime.
This is the essential problem with this program. When suspects are taken to county jail by a police officer or sheriff’s deputy, they are within the reach of immigration authorities. Baca seems to think every arrest made by the police or sheriff’s deputies is justifiable beyond a shadow of a doubt. But it is common knowledge that this perfection does not exist and that —as with everything else— some officers abuse their authority, have bad intentions or just make mistakes during arrests.
When someone reports a crime and the officer in charge sees, perceives or thinks that there is an irregularity regarding the victim or the person reporting it, the situation can take a 180-degree turn and end in the complainant being deported. This can happen, and is a fear many undocumented immigrants have. Because of this, the enforcement of Secure Communities undermines the trust that exists between law enforcement and immigrant communities.
The Latino community does not support the Secure Communities program, as the sheriff believes. Everyone wants dangerous criminals to be taken off the streets, but not at the cost of deporting the innocent. Nor is there complete faith in the infallibility of an arrest such that it should be used to determine that a crime was committed and who committed it.
We have been worried about Sheriff Baca’s enthusiasm for the Secure Communities program. We are much more concerned now after hearing his position, and the arguments to end this program are even stronger.
President Obama on Fixing Our Broken Immigration System: "E Pluribus, Unum"
Posted by Jesse Lee
on May 10, 2011 at 05:52 PM EDT
In a debate where the participants on all sides are too often portrayed as caricatures, the President sought to break through the stalemate by reminding us all that it is a debate about real people. Speaking in El Paso, Texas, he talked about the graduates from 181 countries at Miami Dade Community College, who erupted with applause as the American flag came out before the President’s commencement address there recently. He talked about a Marine who came from Papua New Guinea and deployed to Iraq three times – when asked about becoming an American citizen, he said, “I might as well. I love this country already.”
He was also up front about the legitimate frustrations that American citizens, including those who immigrated legally, can feel:
"Others avoid immigration laws by overstaying their visas. Regardless of how they came, the overwhelming majority of these folks are just trying to earn a living and provide for their families. (Applause.) But we have to acknowledge they’ve broken the rules. They’ve cut in front of the line. And what is also true is that the presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all those who are trying to immigrate legally."
Perhaps his central argument for fixing an immigration system that we all know is broken, however, was that it’s an integral part of America winning the future and creating a stronger economy for our kids:
"So one way to strengthen the middle class in America is to reform the immigration system so that there is no longer a massive underground economy that exploits a cheap source of labor while depressing wages for everybody else. I want incomes for middle-class families to rise again. (Applause.) I want prosperity in this country to be widely shared. (Applause.) I want everybody to be able to reach that American dream. And that’s why immigration reform is an economic imperative. It’s an economic imperative. (Applause.)
And reform will also help to make America more competitive in the global economy. Today, we provide students from around the world with visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities. (Applause.)
But then our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or a new industry here in the United States. Instead of training entrepreneurs to stay here, we train them to create jobs for our competition. That makes no sense. In a global marketplace, we need all the talent we can attract, all the talent we can get to stay here to start businesses -- not just to benefit those individuals, but because their contribution will benefit all Americans.
Look at Intel, look at Google, look at Yahoo, look at eBay. All those great American companies, all the jobs they’ve created, everything that has helped us take leadership in the high-tech industry, every one of those was founded by, guess who, an immigrant. (Applause.)
So we don’t want the next Intel or the next Google to be created in China or India. We want those companies and jobs to take root here. (Applause.) Bill Gates gets this. He knows a little something about the high-tech industry. He said, “The United States will find it far more difficult to maintain its competitive edge if it excludes those who are able and willing to help us compete.”
So immigration is not just the right thing to do. It’s smart for our economy. It’s smart for our economy. (Applause.) And it’s for this reason that businesses all across America are demanding that Washington finally meet its responsibilities to solve the immigration problem. Everybody recognizes the system is broken. The question is, will we finally summon the political will to do something about it? And that’s why we’re here at the border today."
The President also spoke about another piece of legislation that has been stalled in the stalemate over all things immigration-related -- the DREAM Act:
"And we should stop punishing innocent young people for the actions of their parents. (Applause.) We should stop denying them the chance to earn an education or serve in the military. And that’s why we need to pass the DREAM Act. (Applause.) Now, we passed the DREAM Act through the House last year when Democrats were in control. But even though it received a majority of votes in the Senate, it was blocked when several Republicans who had previously supported the DREAM Act voted no.
That was a tremendous disappointment to get so close and then see politics get in the way. And as I gave that commencement at Miami Dade, it broke my heart knowing that a number of those promising, bright students -- young people who worked so hard and who speak about what’s best in America -- are at risk of facing the agony of deportation. These are kids who grew up in this country. They love this country. They know no other place to call home. The idea that we’d punish them is cruel. It makes no sense. We’re a better nation than that. (Applause.)
So we’re going to keep fighting for the DREAM Act. We’re going to keep up the fight for reform. (Applause.) And that’s where you come in. I’m going to do my part to lead a constructive and civil debate on these issues. And we’ve already had a series of meetings about this at the White House in recent weeks. We’ve got leaders here and around the country helping to move the debate forward.
But this change ultimately has to be driven by you, the American people. You’ve got to help push for comprehensive reform, and you’ve got to identify what steps we can take right now -- like the DREAM Act, like visa reform -- areas where we can find common ground among Democrats and Republicans and begin to fix what’s broken."
Again turning to the real people affected by this issue, he told the story of José Hernández, who went from picking cucumbers and strawberries with his parents as a child to flying 100 miles above the surface of the Earth on the shuttle Discovery:
"Think about that, El Paso. That’s the American Dream right there. (Applause.) That's what we’re fighting for. We are fighting for every boy and every girl like José with a dream and potential that's just waiting to be tapped. We are fighting to unlock that promise, and all that holds not just for their futures, but for America’s future. That's why we’re going to get this done. And that's why I’m going to need your help."
See original article here: President Obama on Fixing Our Broken Immigration System: "E Pluribus, Unum
on May 10, 2011 at 05:52 PM EDT
In a debate where the participants on all sides are too often portrayed as caricatures, the President sought to break through the stalemate by reminding us all that it is a debate about real people. Speaking in El Paso, Texas, he talked about the graduates from 181 countries at Miami Dade Community College, who erupted with applause as the American flag came out before the President’s commencement address there recently. He talked about a Marine who came from Papua New Guinea and deployed to Iraq three times – when asked about becoming an American citizen, he said, “I might as well. I love this country already.”
He was also up front about the legitimate frustrations that American citizens, including those who immigrated legally, can feel:
"Others avoid immigration laws by overstaying their visas. Regardless of how they came, the overwhelming majority of these folks are just trying to earn a living and provide for their families. (Applause.) But we have to acknowledge they’ve broken the rules. They’ve cut in front of the line. And what is also true is that the presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all those who are trying to immigrate legally."
Perhaps his central argument for fixing an immigration system that we all know is broken, however, was that it’s an integral part of America winning the future and creating a stronger economy for our kids:
"So one way to strengthen the middle class in America is to reform the immigration system so that there is no longer a massive underground economy that exploits a cheap source of labor while depressing wages for everybody else. I want incomes for middle-class families to rise again. (Applause.) I want prosperity in this country to be widely shared. (Applause.) I want everybody to be able to reach that American dream. And that’s why immigration reform is an economic imperative. It’s an economic imperative. (Applause.)
And reform will also help to make America more competitive in the global economy. Today, we provide students from around the world with visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities. (Applause.)
But then our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or a new industry here in the United States. Instead of training entrepreneurs to stay here, we train them to create jobs for our competition. That makes no sense. In a global marketplace, we need all the talent we can attract, all the talent we can get to stay here to start businesses -- not just to benefit those individuals, but because their contribution will benefit all Americans.
Look at Intel, look at Google, look at Yahoo, look at eBay. All those great American companies, all the jobs they’ve created, everything that has helped us take leadership in the high-tech industry, every one of those was founded by, guess who, an immigrant. (Applause.)
So we don’t want the next Intel or the next Google to be created in China or India. We want those companies and jobs to take root here. (Applause.) Bill Gates gets this. He knows a little something about the high-tech industry. He said, “The United States will find it far more difficult to maintain its competitive edge if it excludes those who are able and willing to help us compete.”
So immigration is not just the right thing to do. It’s smart for our economy. It’s smart for our economy. (Applause.) And it’s for this reason that businesses all across America are demanding that Washington finally meet its responsibilities to solve the immigration problem. Everybody recognizes the system is broken. The question is, will we finally summon the political will to do something about it? And that’s why we’re here at the border today."
The President also spoke about another piece of legislation that has been stalled in the stalemate over all things immigration-related -- the DREAM Act:
"And we should stop punishing innocent young people for the actions of their parents. (Applause.) We should stop denying them the chance to earn an education or serve in the military. And that’s why we need to pass the DREAM Act. (Applause.) Now, we passed the DREAM Act through the House last year when Democrats were in control. But even though it received a majority of votes in the Senate, it was blocked when several Republicans who had previously supported the DREAM Act voted no.
That was a tremendous disappointment to get so close and then see politics get in the way. And as I gave that commencement at Miami Dade, it broke my heart knowing that a number of those promising, bright students -- young people who worked so hard and who speak about what’s best in America -- are at risk of facing the agony of deportation. These are kids who grew up in this country. They love this country. They know no other place to call home. The idea that we’d punish them is cruel. It makes no sense. We’re a better nation than that. (Applause.)
So we’re going to keep fighting for the DREAM Act. We’re going to keep up the fight for reform. (Applause.) And that’s where you come in. I’m going to do my part to lead a constructive and civil debate on these issues. And we’ve already had a series of meetings about this at the White House in recent weeks. We’ve got leaders here and around the country helping to move the debate forward.
But this change ultimately has to be driven by you, the American people. You’ve got to help push for comprehensive reform, and you’ve got to identify what steps we can take right now -- like the DREAM Act, like visa reform -- areas where we can find common ground among Democrats and Republicans and begin to fix what’s broken."
Again turning to the real people affected by this issue, he told the story of José Hernández, who went from picking cucumbers and strawberries with his parents as a child to flying 100 miles above the surface of the Earth on the shuttle Discovery:
"Think about that, El Paso. That’s the American Dream right there. (Applause.) That's what we’re fighting for. We are fighting for every boy and every girl like José with a dream and potential that's just waiting to be tapped. We are fighting to unlock that promise, and all that holds not just for their futures, but for America’s future. That's why we’re going to get this done. And that's why I’m going to need your help."
See original article here: President Obama on Fixing Our Broken Immigration System: "E Pluribus, Unum
Senators Reintroduce the DREAM Act
May 11, 2011
Washington, D.C. - Today, Senators Richard Durbin, Harry Reid, and Robert Menendez re-introduced the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act. Last fall, the DREAM Act passed the House of Representatives, and garnered the support of a majority in the Senate, but was ultimately defeated when the Senate failed to invoke cloture and proceed to debate. The sponsors of the DREAM Act hope to build on last year’s momentum and continue to highlight the importance of fully utilizing the talent and potential of thousands of young people who are Americans in every way but their birth certificates.
First introduced in 2001, the DREAM Act would address the plight of young immigrants who have been raised in the U.S. and managed to succeed despite the challenges of being brought here without proper documentation. The proposal would offer a path to legal status to those who have graduated from high school, stayed out of trouble, and plan to attend college or serve in the U.S. military for at least two years.
Each year, approximately 65,000 undocumented students graduate from high school, many at the top of their classes, but cannot go on to college, join the military, work, or otherwise pursue their dreams. They belong to the 1.5 generation: immigrants brought to the United States at a young age who were largely raised in this country and therefore share much in common with second-generation Americans. These students are culturally American and fluent in English, growing up here and often having little attachment to their country of birth.
The moral, intellectual and practical rationale for the DREAM Act is overwhelming. The White House supports it. The Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Justice, entrusted with enforcing and implementing our immigration laws, support it. The Department of Education and America's academic and faith community support it, as well as state legislators, community groups, and the American public. The DREAM Act is even part of the Department of Defense's 2010-2012 Strategic Plan to assist the military in its recruiting efforts.
Despite broad support for the legislative proposal, the divisive political environment around immigration poses an enormous challenge for the DREAM Act. If Congress fails to act, the Administration can and should take more decisive steps to ensure that the values driving their legislative agenda are reflected in their implementation and interpretation of current law. DHS should ensure that its officers use their prosecutorial discretion to defer the removal of any eligible student caught up in the broken immigration system.
For research and resources on the DREAM Act visit IPC's resource page:
IPC DREAM Act Resource Page
IPC Executive Action Resource Page
Washington, D.C. - Today, Senators Richard Durbin, Harry Reid, and Robert Menendez re-introduced the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act. Last fall, the DREAM Act passed the House of Representatives, and garnered the support of a majority in the Senate, but was ultimately defeated when the Senate failed to invoke cloture and proceed to debate. The sponsors of the DREAM Act hope to build on last year’s momentum and continue to highlight the importance of fully utilizing the talent and potential of thousands of young people who are Americans in every way but their birth certificates.
First introduced in 2001, the DREAM Act would address the plight of young immigrants who have been raised in the U.S. and managed to succeed despite the challenges of being brought here without proper documentation. The proposal would offer a path to legal status to those who have graduated from high school, stayed out of trouble, and plan to attend college or serve in the U.S. military for at least two years.
Each year, approximately 65,000 undocumented students graduate from high school, many at the top of their classes, but cannot go on to college, join the military, work, or otherwise pursue their dreams. They belong to the 1.5 generation: immigrants brought to the United States at a young age who were largely raised in this country and therefore share much in common with second-generation Americans. These students are culturally American and fluent in English, growing up here and often having little attachment to their country of birth.
The moral, intellectual and practical rationale for the DREAM Act is overwhelming. The White House supports it. The Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Justice, entrusted with enforcing and implementing our immigration laws, support it. The Department of Education and America's academic and faith community support it, as well as state legislators, community groups, and the American public. The DREAM Act is even part of the Department of Defense's 2010-2012 Strategic Plan to assist the military in its recruiting efforts.
Despite broad support for the legislative proposal, the divisive political environment around immigration poses an enormous challenge for the DREAM Act. If Congress fails to act, the Administration can and should take more decisive steps to ensure that the values driving their legislative agenda are reflected in their implementation and interpretation of current law. DHS should ensure that its officers use their prosecutorial discretion to defer the removal of any eligible student caught up in the broken immigration system.
For research and resources on the DREAM Act visit IPC's resource page:
IPC DREAM Act Resource Page
IPC Executive Action Resource Page
President Obama Puts Immigration Reform Back on the Table
May 10, 2011
Washington, D.C. - Today, President Obama offered his most concrete articulation of a new way forward for resolving our broken immigration system. Echoing and expanding upon the concepts of innovation, entrepreneurship, and the American Dream, the President invited the American public to join him in pressing Congress for comprehensive immigration reform.
Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council, issued the following statement:
“The President continues to refine his argument that comprehensive immigration reform is a key component of ensuring our success in the 21st century. While this message cannot be repeated often enough, the blueprint for change released by the White House today marks a new page in the immigration debate. The blueprint offers numerous ideas that can be translated into specific legislation and will challenge both parties to come together to work in the country’s best interests. The blueprint also invites the public to engage Congress directly on this issue, setting the stage for a showdown between the President and the public—who overwhelmingly support immigration reform—and a recalcitrant Congress.
We look forward to engaging in a more robust discussion of the economic impact of immigration, and we take today’s events as a signal that the Administration will continue to lead on this important issue. Immigration reform is on the table, and the time is long overdue for an honest, constructive debate over how to create a 21st century immigration system that is good for American workers and families, and reflects our history as a nation of immigrants.”
To view information on the economics of immigration reform, see:
The Economics of Immigration Reform (IPC Resource Page, 2011)
Washington, D.C. - Today, President Obama offered his most concrete articulation of a new way forward for resolving our broken immigration system. Echoing and expanding upon the concepts of innovation, entrepreneurship, and the American Dream, the President invited the American public to join him in pressing Congress for comprehensive immigration reform.
Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council, issued the following statement:
“The President continues to refine his argument that comprehensive immigration reform is a key component of ensuring our success in the 21st century. While this message cannot be repeated often enough, the blueprint for change released by the White House today marks a new page in the immigration debate. The blueprint offers numerous ideas that can be translated into specific legislation and will challenge both parties to come together to work in the country’s best interests. The blueprint also invites the public to engage Congress directly on this issue, setting the stage for a showdown between the President and the public—who overwhelmingly support immigration reform—and a recalcitrant Congress.
We look forward to engaging in a more robust discussion of the economic impact of immigration, and we take today’s events as a signal that the Administration will continue to lead on this important issue. Immigration reform is on the table, and the time is long overdue for an honest, constructive debate over how to create a 21st century immigration system that is good for American workers and families, and reflects our history as a nation of immigrants.”
To view information on the economics of immigration reform, see:
The Economics of Immigration Reform (IPC Resource Page, 2011)
Paying it forward: Nearly 100 volunteer in Mission for Mentors Telethon
April 13, 2011 5:34 AM
CAROLYN BOLTON, NEWS-PRESS CORRESPONDENT
The 14th annual Mission for Mentors Telethon neared its goals Tuesday as prospective mentors phoned the organization's mobile headquarters at Center Court in Paseo Nuevo. A minute after 8 p.m., as the telethon was winding down and the TV cameras being shut off, 94 people had pledged a total of 4,888 volunteer hours to the Fighting Back Mentor Program, and organizers were hoping for a few last-minute stragglers. "We're already past last year," said Ann Cowell, a mentor program advocate. "We're hoping to shoot for a hundred mentors."
Last year, mentors pledged close to 5,000 volunteer hours, Ms. Cowell said.
"I've been talking to people on the phones and they've been saying that they've been getting a lot of men calling in, which is fantastic 'cause that's what we really needed," Ms. Cowell said. "We're really excited."
Penny Jenkins, project director for Fighting Back, also expressed enthusiasm about the program's success. "It really is rewarding to everybody involved," she told the News-Press.
Ms. Jenkins helped jump-start the mentor program 16 years ago to help reduce alcoholism and drug abuse through prevention, intervention, treatment and aftercare.
"I think we're getting a whole lot more kids that have experienced violence in their life, and more kids that have experienced gang members in their life," Ms. Jenkins said. "So, we're hoping to get more male mentors to work with the more high-risk kids."
While the program is underscoring its need for more male mentors, it still needs female mentors.
"We're emphasizing men, but we still need women," Ms. Jenkins said.
Some students in the program aren't in serious danger of becoming involved in gang-related or abusive activities, but nevertheless need someone to look up to.
"There's also kids that aren't high-risk," Ms. Jenkins said. "They just need a person -- a role model," she said.
Some of the highlights of the mentor program are those students who have excelled despite serious problems, Ms. Jenkins added.
"They come back and see us, and they're in college or they have a good job, or they have a family already," she said.
"The reward is seeing healthy kids as a result of (the mentor program)."
Students aren't the only ones benefitting from the program, Ms. Jenkins said. "The mentors get as much out of this as the kids do," she said.
Arnold Jaffe, an immigration attorney from Santa Barbara, has been a mentor for the past seven years. "It's been really incredible," he said. "You get to be a friend, you get to receive more than you give.
"I learned a lot about listening and sort of drawing a young guy out," he said of his partner, Anthony. "He was in the fourth grade when I started and is a junior in high school now," Mr. Jaffe said. "So, I've got to watch him play football and basketball and go out with girls."
The fun of being a mentor is learning how to give advice when asked for it, he said. "Which is an advantage of being a mentor as opposed to be a parent, where you feel like you have to give advice if you're not asked."
The program has been great because all it has ever required of him is to act naturally, Mr. Jaffe said. "It's a wonderful thing to make a difference in the world in a way that's really easy -- by just connecting and being you," he said. Mr. Jaffe emphasized the need to pay it forward.
"We all, I think, have gotten a certain distance in our lives because of the kindness of other people," he said. "And that's what this is about. It's been terrific."
CAROLYN BOLTON, NEWS-PRESS CORRESPONDENT
The 14th annual Mission for Mentors Telethon neared its goals Tuesday as prospective mentors phoned the organization's mobile headquarters at Center Court in Paseo Nuevo. A minute after 8 p.m., as the telethon was winding down and the TV cameras being shut off, 94 people had pledged a total of 4,888 volunteer hours to the Fighting Back Mentor Program, and organizers were hoping for a few last-minute stragglers. "We're already past last year," said Ann Cowell, a mentor program advocate. "We're hoping to shoot for a hundred mentors."
Last year, mentors pledged close to 5,000 volunteer hours, Ms. Cowell said.
"I've been talking to people on the phones and they've been saying that they've been getting a lot of men calling in, which is fantastic 'cause that's what we really needed," Ms. Cowell said. "We're really excited."
Penny Jenkins, project director for Fighting Back, also expressed enthusiasm about the program's success. "It really is rewarding to everybody involved," she told the News-Press.
Ms. Jenkins helped jump-start the mentor program 16 years ago to help reduce alcoholism and drug abuse through prevention, intervention, treatment and aftercare.
"I think we're getting a whole lot more kids that have experienced violence in their life, and more kids that have experienced gang members in their life," Ms. Jenkins said. "So, we're hoping to get more male mentors to work with the more high-risk kids."
While the program is underscoring its need for more male mentors, it still needs female mentors.
"We're emphasizing men, but we still need women," Ms. Jenkins said.
Some students in the program aren't in serious danger of becoming involved in gang-related or abusive activities, but nevertheless need someone to look up to.
"There's also kids that aren't high-risk," Ms. Jenkins said. "They just need a person -- a role model," she said.
Some of the highlights of the mentor program are those students who have excelled despite serious problems, Ms. Jenkins added.
"They come back and see us, and they're in college or they have a good job, or they have a family already," she said.
"The reward is seeing healthy kids as a result of (the mentor program)."
Students aren't the only ones benefitting from the program, Ms. Jenkins said. "The mentors get as much out of this as the kids do," she said.
Arnold Jaffe, an immigration attorney from Santa Barbara, has been a mentor for the past seven years. "It's been really incredible," he said. "You get to be a friend, you get to receive more than you give.
"I learned a lot about listening and sort of drawing a young guy out," he said of his partner, Anthony. "He was in the fourth grade when I started and is a junior in high school now," Mr. Jaffe said. "So, I've got to watch him play football and basketball and go out with girls."
The fun of being a mentor is learning how to give advice when asked for it, he said. "Which is an advantage of being a mentor as opposed to be a parent, where you feel like you have to give advice if you're not asked."
The program has been great because all it has ever required of him is to act naturally, Mr. Jaffe said. "It's a wonderful thing to make a difference in the world in a way that's really easy -- by just connecting and being you," he said. Mr. Jaffe emphasized the need to pay it forward.
"We all, I think, have gotten a certain distance in our lives because of the kindness of other people," he said. "And that's what this is about. It's been terrific."
Judge Gives Immigrant in Same-Sex Marriage a Reprieve From Deportation
May 07, 2011
By JULIA PRESTON
An immigration judge in Newark responded to an unusual signal from the Obama administration that it is exploring legal avenues for recognizing those marriages in immigration cases.
Read the entire article:
Judge Gives Immigrant in Same-Sex Marriage a Reprieve From Deportation
By JULIA PRESTON
An immigration judge in Newark responded to an unusual signal from the Obama administration that it is exploring legal avenues for recognizing those marriages in immigration cases.
Read the entire article:
Judge Gives Immigrant in Same-Sex Marriage a Reprieve From Deportation
As Barriers to Lawyers Persist, Immigrant Advocates Ponder Solutions
By SAM DOLNICK
More than two years ago, a federal judge in New York began a crusade to find lawyers for the many immigrants who are detained or deported because they lack representation. Powerful figures, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, heard the call and helped draw attention to the issue.
But the problem persists in immigration court, where defendants have no right to a court-appointed lawyer, forcing many to go without and drastically raising their chances of being deported. Although Mr. Bloomberg promised $2 million to train lawyers in immigration issues, the city has not produced the money.
On Tuesday, about 200 leaders from legal, governmental and immigration circles gathered in Manhattan to discuss the barriers that deny many immigrants proper legal counsel. Robert A. Katzmann, the federal judge who started the effort and organized the symposium, called the problem a “substantial threat to the fair and effective administration of justice.”
John Paul Stevens, the retired Supreme Court justice, who galvanized immigrant advocates with a decision last year that said lawyers must tell their clients about the deportation consequences of pleading guilty, delivered the keynote address.
“The need for legal representation for immigrants is really acute,” Mr. Stevens said. He urged the audience to push for Congress to grant state and federal judges discretion in deportation cases because, he said, “the consequences are just so drastic.”
Immigrants’ fate in deportation cases often comes down to whether they can afford a lawyer. Immigrants with legal representation are at least five times as likely to win their cases as those without, yet in New York only 40 percent of detained immigrants have lawyers, according to research by Judge Katzmann’s group that was released Tuesday.
More than a quarter of immigration defendants who have not been detained do not have lawyers either, the study showed.
“The fact that so many can face such dire results at the hands of our legal system without the benefits of competent counsel is one of the blatant injustices of our time,” said Matthew Diller, dean of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, where the conference was held.
The problem only gets worse when immigrants are sent to distant detention centers in places like Texas or Louisiana, as happens to nearly two-thirds of those taken into immigration custody in New York. Nearly 80 percent of those immigrants are unrepresented, according to the study, which examined Justice Department data from 2005 to 2010.
“If they don’t have a lawyer, it’s because they don’t have anything,” said Lynn M. Kelly, executive director of the City Bar Justice Center. “People beg, borrow and pass the hat around the community to hire attorneys.”
But simply hiring a lawyer is not necessarily a solution. Lazy and unprepared lawyers fill immigration courts, bungling cases at grave costs to their clients, experts say.
“The too-often-poor quality of representation continues to undermine the effective administration of justice,” said Judge Katzmann, who sits on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
More than 50 New York lawyers who have been expelled or suspended by the Justice Department have cases pending before the immigration courts or the Board of Immigration Appeals, the new research says.
People posing as lawyers are another common problem for vulnerable immigrants, many of whom cannot speak English. “Across New York, fraudulent legal service providers are making huge profits by defrauding immigrant communities,” said Janet Sabel, an official in the state attorney general’s office.
It is highly unusual for a federal judge to embrace a public issue with such vigor, but Judge Katzmann said his background — he is the grandson of Russian immigrants and the son of a refugee from Nazi Germany — had granted him a special sympathy “for those who come to this country and want to make it great.”
His study group, which draws more than 50 immigration experts, has made some progress since it began work in 2008.
The Legal Orientation Program, a Justice Department project that advises immigrants on their rights, opened a New York City branch last year. The ranks of pro bono lawyers working on immigration cases have grown, and the authorities have stepped up efforts to crack down on fraudulent lawyers.
But with much work remaining, many advocates looked to Mr. Bloomberg to fulfill his 2009 campaign promise to spend $2 million to train lawyers. Fatima A. Shama, the city’s immigrant affairs commissioner, said the mayor had not forgotten.
“We will do what we need to do, not only to maintain our commitment around a campaign promise, but around what’s right,” Ms. Shama told the crowd.
At the session Tuesday, many acknowledged that there were no quick fixes to the challenges of immigrant representation.
“These problems have been around for a long time,” said Claudia Slovinsky, a veteran immigration lawyer. She said that only a sweeping solution ensuring representation to all immigrants would address the fundamental inequalities.
“Everything we’re doing in the meantime is short-term improvements of a weak system,” Ms. Slovinsky said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/nyregion/barriers-to-lawyers-persist-for-immigrants.html?scp=5&sq=immigration&st=cse
More than two years ago, a federal judge in New York began a crusade to find lawyers for the many immigrants who are detained or deported because they lack representation. Powerful figures, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, heard the call and helped draw attention to the issue.
But the problem persists in immigration court, where defendants have no right to a court-appointed lawyer, forcing many to go without and drastically raising their chances of being deported. Although Mr. Bloomberg promised $2 million to train lawyers in immigration issues, the city has not produced the money.
On Tuesday, about 200 leaders from legal, governmental and immigration circles gathered in Manhattan to discuss the barriers that deny many immigrants proper legal counsel. Robert A. Katzmann, the federal judge who started the effort and organized the symposium, called the problem a “substantial threat to the fair and effective administration of justice.”
John Paul Stevens, the retired Supreme Court justice, who galvanized immigrant advocates with a decision last year that said lawyers must tell their clients about the deportation consequences of pleading guilty, delivered the keynote address.
“The need for legal representation for immigrants is really acute,” Mr. Stevens said. He urged the audience to push for Congress to grant state and federal judges discretion in deportation cases because, he said, “the consequences are just so drastic.”
Immigrants’ fate in deportation cases often comes down to whether they can afford a lawyer. Immigrants with legal representation are at least five times as likely to win their cases as those without, yet in New York only 40 percent of detained immigrants have lawyers, according to research by Judge Katzmann’s group that was released Tuesday.
More than a quarter of immigration defendants who have not been detained do not have lawyers either, the study showed.
“The fact that so many can face such dire results at the hands of our legal system without the benefits of competent counsel is one of the blatant injustices of our time,” said Matthew Diller, dean of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University, where the conference was held.
The problem only gets worse when immigrants are sent to distant detention centers in places like Texas or Louisiana, as happens to nearly two-thirds of those taken into immigration custody in New York. Nearly 80 percent of those immigrants are unrepresented, according to the study, which examined Justice Department data from 2005 to 2010.
“If they don’t have a lawyer, it’s because they don’t have anything,” said Lynn M. Kelly, executive director of the City Bar Justice Center. “People beg, borrow and pass the hat around the community to hire attorneys.”
But simply hiring a lawyer is not necessarily a solution. Lazy and unprepared lawyers fill immigration courts, bungling cases at grave costs to their clients, experts say.
“The too-often-poor quality of representation continues to undermine the effective administration of justice,” said Judge Katzmann, who sits on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
More than 50 New York lawyers who have been expelled or suspended by the Justice Department have cases pending before the immigration courts or the Board of Immigration Appeals, the new research says.
People posing as lawyers are another common problem for vulnerable immigrants, many of whom cannot speak English. “Across New York, fraudulent legal service providers are making huge profits by defrauding immigrant communities,” said Janet Sabel, an official in the state attorney general’s office.
It is highly unusual for a federal judge to embrace a public issue with such vigor, but Judge Katzmann said his background — he is the grandson of Russian immigrants and the son of a refugee from Nazi Germany — had granted him a special sympathy “for those who come to this country and want to make it great.”
His study group, which draws more than 50 immigration experts, has made some progress since it began work in 2008.
The Legal Orientation Program, a Justice Department project that advises immigrants on their rights, opened a New York City branch last year. The ranks of pro bono lawyers working on immigration cases have grown, and the authorities have stepped up efforts to crack down on fraudulent lawyers.
But with much work remaining, many advocates looked to Mr. Bloomberg to fulfill his 2009 campaign promise to spend $2 million to train lawyers. Fatima A. Shama, the city’s immigrant affairs commissioner, said the mayor had not forgotten.
“We will do what we need to do, not only to maintain our commitment around a campaign promise, but around what’s right,” Ms. Shama told the crowd.
At the session Tuesday, many acknowledged that there were no quick fixes to the challenges of immigrant representation.
“These problems have been around for a long time,” said Claudia Slovinsky, a veteran immigration lawyer. She said that only a sweeping solution ensuring representation to all immigrants would address the fundamental inequalities.
“Everything we’re doing in the meantime is short-term improvements of a weak system,” Ms. Slovinsky said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/nyregion/barriers-to-lawyers-persist-for-immigrants.html?scp=5&sq=immigration&st=cse
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)