The American Immigration Council Addresses Problems with Draft Immigration Detainer Policy

October 5, 2010

Washington D.C. - The American Immigration Council has joined a number of organizations in formally commenting on a proposed detainer policy issued by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Detainers are requests from ICE to local law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to hold people - whom they suspect may be in the country illegally or who may be deportable for other reasons - so they can be transferred into ICE's custody. There has been much criticism about how ICE uses detainers, and the use of detainers has expanded over time with enforcement programs like 287(g), Secure Communities, and the Criminal Alien Program. To address the criticisms, ICE developed new draft guidelines on the issuance of detainers.

The Immigration Council acknowledges ICE's attempt to ameliorate its detainer policies and is grateful for the opportunity to comment. However, the comments identify several major problems with the proposed guidance, including:

• The proposed guidelines do not reflect ICE's stated enforcement priorities. In July, ICE issued a memo on its enforcement priorities, focusing on immigrants with serious criminal histories. ICE's proposed detainer guidelines contradict those priorities. Although ICE claims to target convicted criminals who pose a threat to public safety, the proposed guidance would allow ICE to issue detainers against people arrested for minor offenses and suspects charged with crimes but not convicted.
• The guidance does not address the continuing confusion about detainers. Many LEAs mistakenly believe that detainers require them to detain people until ICE assumes custody. In fact, a detainer is merely a request, not a requirement. Moreover, federal regulations clearly state that detainers permit LEAs to hold people for no more than 48 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) after their release from local custody. Because LEAs regularly violate this rule, they unlawfully detain people who then languish in detention with little recourse. The proposed guidelines contain no provisions to educate LEAs about detainers and do not require ICE to educate detained people about their rights or their ability to challenge a detainer.

Getting detainer policy right is important because ICE detainers have severe consequences for people being held in jails. Apart from the concerns raised above, detainers impact whether people are granted bail, the amount of bail, and their ability to have legal representation and a fair hearing in their criminal cases. Communities also incur significant costs for the extended incarceration of people subject to ICE detainers. Though ICE should be commended for formalizing a written detainer policy, the draft guidance leaves the most challenging issues unresolved.

To view American Immigration Council's comments in their entirety, see:

Comments on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Draft Detainer Policy (Legal Action Center, October 1, 2010)

For more information on immigration detainers, see:

Immigration Detainers: A Comprehensive Look (Immigration Policy Center Fact Check, February 17, 2010

More Problems with ICE's Secure Communities Program

Lack of Clarity around Immigration Enforcement Program Continues

October 1, 2010

Washington, D.C. - Earlier this week, the Santa Clara (CA) Board of Supervisors and the Arlington County (VA) Board both voted unanimously to opt-out of the Secure Communities program - an ICE program that allows the fingerprints of individuals booked into jails to be used for immigration enforcement purposes. Secure Communities has been controversial since its inception, with concerns being raised about the cost of the program, the potential for racial profiling, and the fact that the program has not complied with ICE's stated objective of focusing on individuals convicted of serious crimes.

However, the Washington Post reported today that opting out of its Secure Communities "is not a realistic possibility, and never was" for local police agencies. According to a senior ICE official:

Secure Communities is not based on state or local cooperation in federal law enforcement. The program's foundation is information sharing between FBI and ICE. State and local law enforcement agencies are going to continue to fingerprint people and those fingerprints are forwarded to FBI for criminal checks. ICE will take immigration action appropriately.

This is in direct conflict with an August 17, 2010 ICE memo laying out an opt-out process, which was later confirmed by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano in a September 7, 2010 letter to Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren. ICE has provided conflicting messages about Secure Communities since the program was first rolled out in March 2008.

Secure Communities is a rapidly expanding program, currently active in more than 650 jurisdictions in 32 states. It is expected to be active in every state by 2011 and in all of the 3,100 state and local jails by 2013. Yet there is much confusion about what the program is and how it works. In the current environment confusion and the lack of transparency undermine the trust necessary to properly implement the program and achieve legitimate goals. It is important that communities educate themselves about Secure Communities and urge ICE to be more forthcoming with information about the program.

For more information on Secure Communities and immigration detainers, see:

Secure Communities: A Fact Sheet (IPC Fact Check, October 2010)

The Secure Communities Program: Unanswered Questions and Continuing Concerns (IPC Special Report, November 2009)

Counties Say No to ICE's Secure Communities Program, But is Opting Out Possible? (Immigration Impact Blog, October 2010)

Immigration Detainers: A Comprehensive Look (IPC Fact Check, February 2010)

Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill Introduced in the Senate

Menendez-Leahy Bill Another Step Forward

September 30, 2010

Washington D.C. - On Wednesday, Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced S.B. 3932, The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2010. The bill takes a broad approach to solving the wide range of problems that plague our broken immigration system. It offers proposals on border, interior, and worksite enforcement, on legalization, and on future flows of immigration. Now the Senate and House both have a vehicle (Congressman Luis Gutierrez previously introduced a CIR bill in the House last December) for generating a serious discussion on immigration reform in the coming weeks. These bills are a direct response to the overwhelming public demand for solutions to our broken immigration system. Both political parties have acknowledged that this broken system is no longer sustainable, and is disrupting America's businesses, families, and long-term economic recovery.

"It is hard to turn ideas into legislation and legislation into good law, but Senators Menendez and Leahy have injected new life into the immigration reform debate," said Mary Giovagnoli, Director of the Immigration Policy Center. "At a time when every social issue we care about bumps up against immigration - healthcare, national security, and the economy - this bill is a step in the right direction. However, attention now turns to the rest of the Senate and House - where there are serious comprehensive proposals which lawmakers can react to and build upon - and the question remains; will they embrace this challenge or kick it down the road once again?"

The Immigration Policy Center has prepared a summary of the The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2010 which can be accessed at:

The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2010: A Summary (September 30, 2010)

Role of Immigration in Strengthening America's Economy

Congressional Hearing Featuring Bloomberg and Murdoch

September 29, 2010

Washington D.C. - On thursday, the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law Membership will hold a hearing on the "Role of Immigration in Strengthening America's Economy," featuring New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Fox owner Rupert Murdoch (an immigrant himself). The two formed a new coalition earlier this year to press for immigration reform.

In anticipation of the event, the Immigration Policy Center wants to draw your attention to a resource page featuring a wide range of studies which analyze the economic impact of immigration on the U.S. The available data shows that legalizing undocumented workers would improve wages and working conditions for all workers, and increase tax revenues for cash-strapped federal, state, and local governments. The IPC has also synthesized a number of state studies which assess the economic impact of immigration on state and local economies.

To view the Economics Resource Page, see:

The Economics of Immigration Reform (Resource Page)

To view the State by State Economic Benefits of Immigration, see:

The Economic and Political Power of Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians in all 50 States (IPC State by State Fact Sheets)

The DREAM Act: Creating Economic Opportunities

September 20, 2010

Washington, D.C. - As the bipartisan call for passing the DREAM Act gets louder - from military, education, faith, and Republican leaders alike - some may overlook the economic benefits of granting legal status to eligible undocumented youth who want to attend college or join the military. There are currently 2.1 million undocumented youths living in the U.S. who, without the DREAM Act, are unlikely to go to college and cannot work legally in the U.S. The DREAM Act, however, would provide an opportunity for them to live up to their full potential as future doctors, nurses, teachers, and entrepreneurs and make greater contributions to the U.S. economy and society.

The DREAM Act would give beneficiaries the opportunity to increase their standard of living - and their tax contributions: If legalized, DREAM Act beneficiaries would have access to greater educational opportunities and better jobs, which in turn means more taxable income. According to a study from Arizona State University, an individual with a bachelor's degree earns approximately $750,000 more over the course of his/her lifetime than an individual with only a high-school diploma.

The DREAM Act would save taxpayers money: A RAND study from 1999 shows that raising the college graduation rate of Hispanics to that of non-Hispanic whites would increase spending on public education by 10 percent nationwide, but the costs would be more than offset by savings in public health and benefits, as well as by increased tax revenues resulting from higher incomes.

The DREAM Act keeps talented students in the United States: Letting the talent of DREAM Act students go to waste "imposes economic and emotional costs on undocumented students and on U.S. society as a whole." The DREAM Act would stop brain drain by allowing our most talented students to remain in the country.

While some in Congress continue to play politics with the DREAM Act, America and its taxpayers continue to lose. Without the DREAM Act, the United States is missing out on talented workers and entrepreneurs, and is losing vital tax revenues and other economic contributions.


To read IPC's Fact Check, see:

The DREAM Act: Creating Economic Opportunities
(IPC Fact Check, September 16, 2010)


For more information on the DREAM Act see:

The DREAM Act in Arizona: An Economic Perspective
(Arizona State University, September 17, 2010)

Essential to the Fight: Immigrants in the Military
(IPC Special Report, November, 2009)

IPC DREAM Act Resource Page

DREAM Act Coming to the Senate Floor

Senator Reid to Attach Act to Defense Authorization Bill

September 15, 2010

Washington, D.C. - Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that he would attach the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act to the Department of Defense authorization bill expected to come before the Senate as early as next week. The vote will be an important test of whether Congress can transcend partisan politics and work together on crafting solutions to the broken immigration system that both Democrats and Republicans acknowledge is in desperate need of reform. That the proposal will be considered as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill is appropriate, given the Department of Defense's support for DREAM Act as a way to improve military readiness.

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 to the U.S. without proper documentation. The proposal would offer a path to legal status to those who have graduated from high-school, have 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 to college, join the military, work, or otherwise pursue their dreams. They belong to the 1.5 generation - any (first 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, growing up here and often having little attachment to their country of birth. They tend to be bicultural and fluent in English.

Research has shown that providing a legal status for young people who have a proven record of success in the United States would be a boon to the economy and the U.S. workforce. University presidents and educational associations, as well as military recruiters, business and religious leaders have added their voice to those calling for passage of the bill. Foreign-born students represent a significant and growing percentage of the current student population. Unfortunately, immigration status and the associated barriers to higher education contribute to a higher-than-average high dropout rate, which costs taxpayers and the economy billions of dollars each year.

The DREAM Act would eliminate these barriers for many students, and the DREAM Act's high school graduation requirement would provide a powerful incentive for students who might otherwise drop out to stay in school and graduate. This will help boost the number of high skilled American-raised workers. As they take their place in the workplace as hard working, taxpaying Americans, they will contribute a lifetime of revenues at the local, state and federal level.

Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Military Personnel Policy, Bill Carr, supports the DREAM Act and stated that the law would be "good for readiness" and would help to recruit "cream of the crop" students. The DREAM Act is part of the Department of Defense's 2010-2012 Strategic Plan to assist the military in it's recruiting efforts.

For more information on the DREAM Act see:

The DREAM Act: Creating Opportunities for Immigrant Students and Supporting the U.S. Economy (IPC Fact Check, July 2010)

Essential to the Fight: Immigrants in the Military (IPC Special Report, November, 2009)

IPC DREAM Act Resource Page

Immigration Enforcement in a Time of Recession

Explaining the Recent Decline in Unauthorized Migration

September 9, 2010

Washington, D.C. - Recent estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center indicate that the number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has declined by roughly one million since 2007-bringing the total size of the unauthorized population to approximately 11.1 million. Coming after the release of similar estimates by the Department of Homeland Security in January, these figures have provoked considerable speculation as to how much of the decline is attributable to the current recession, and how much is the result of heightened immigration enforcement.

Ultimately, it is impossible to disentangle the impact of the recession from that of enforcement with any degree of certainty. Nevertheless, the available research indicates that the recession is likely playing a major role in discouraging new unauthorized immigrants from entering the country due to the lack of jobs. After all, federal spending on immigration enforcement has been rising steadily since the early 1990s, while the size of the unauthorized population continued to increase until the current recession hit. Research also suggests that when the economy begins to improve again, unauthorized immigration is likely to increase as well - unless the broken immigration system which spurs unauthorized migration has been fixed by then.

To read IPC's Fact Check see:

• Immigration Enforcement in a Time of Recession (IPC Fact Check, September 9, 2010)