Supreme Court Tells Many Immigrants Waiting for Visas to Start Over
A divided Supreme Court sided with the Obama administration on Monday in a ruling that will effectively mean many "aged out" immigrants will have to wait several more years to obtain a visa. In other words, if a parent applies for a visa for their family, but one of their children turns 21 before they reach the front of the line (the wait can take years), that "aged out" child will probably have to start his or her wait all over again as an adult.
As the Associated Press explains, the case centered around the story of Rosalina Cuellar de Osorio, who applied for a visa with her then-13-year-old kid. When de Osorio finally got an available visa, her son had already turned 21, meaning that he could no longer go along for the ride on his mother's application. He was put at the back of the visa waiting list, and waited years before he was finally granted one. The Supreme Court decision reverses one from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in de Osorio's favor.
Read the entire article at:
Supreme Court rules against immigrants over visa eligibility
WASHINGTON Mon Jun 9, 2014 12:11pm EDT
The court was divided 5-4 in
deciding that only in limited circumstances does federal immigration law allow
for children to retain their place in line after they become adults.
The case concerns a program that
allows people who are U.S. citizens or legal residents to sponsor relatives who
live overseas. People often have to wait for years for approval of their visa
applications and the number of visas available is capped each year.
The litigation is unconnected to
recent reports of unaccompanied children crossing the U.S. border illegally.
The court endorsed the federal
government's interpretation of the law, which was that only children of
permanent U.S. residents were eligible to keep their place in line once they
reached the age of 21.
The case was brought by two
groups of plaintiffs, including Rosalina Cuellar de Osorio, who was told in
November 2005 that her family was at the front of the line to obtain visas to
enter the United States from El Salvador. The family was told at the time that
her son, Melvin, who had turned 21 just months earlier, would no longer be
eligible.
The Supreme Court decided to hear
the issue after the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
in September 2012 that a broader category of visa applicants was eligible than
had been argued by the administration of President Barack Obama.
The five justices in the majority
were split over which legal rationale to adopt. Justice Elena Kagan, who wrote
the majority opinion, was joined in full by only Justices Anthony Kennedy and
Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Kagan wrote that when a statute
is unclear, the court was required to defer to the interpretation offered by
the government. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia agreed
with the judgment but offered a different rationale.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who,
like Kagan, was appointed by Obama, wrote in a dissenting opinion that the law
was clearer than the majority suggested and that the case should have been
decided with a "commonsense approach."
The case is Scialabba v. de
Osorio, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-930.
(Editing by Howard Goller
and Bernadette Baum)
Read the entire article at http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/09/us-usa-court-immigration-idUSKBN0EK1GX20140609
Immigrant Children Packed in Crowded Texas Border Facilities
Leaked photos show
immigrant children packed in crowded Texas border facilities
By Kolten Parker, San Antonio Express-News
Updated 9:15 am, Friday, June 6, 2014
SAN ANTONIO — Photos leaked
Thursday from a U.S. Border
Patrol facility in the Rio Grande Valley show overflowing holding
facilities of immigrants, many of whom are children.
The photos, obtained by the
conservative website Breitbart, show hundreds of immigrants believed to be in
the country illegally from Central America and Mexico being held in crowded
concrete rooms similar to a jail cell. Many of the children appear to be teenagers
but some clearly are younger.
The photos have a timestamp
of May 27, 2014.
A spokesperson for U.S. Customs and
Border Protection said the agency has not “officially released any
photos at this time in order to protect the rights and privacy of unaccompanied
minors in our care.”
“The influx of
unaccompanied children across the southwest border has resulted in an urgent
humanitarian situation,” the CBP spokesperson said. “It requires a whole of
government coordinated and sustained response.”
President Barack Obama
has directed an effort, lead by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, to provide resources and “humanitarian
relief to affected children,” which is a “priority,” the
spokesperson said.
It is unclear who leaked
the photos to Breitbart.
“Given the deteriorating
security and economic conditions in the Central American countries where most
of these children and adult immigrants came from, it's hard to understand how Department of
Homeland Security didn't see this coming,” Sylvia Longmire,
a contributor to Breitbart who focuses on border issues, said on the website.
“Now, the results of this mismanagement are thousands of individuals living in
inhumane conditions for an indeterminate period of time, as well as exhausted
and overwhelmed Border Patrol agents and CBP detention facilities.”
The overwhelming numbers of
undocumented immigrants during recent months has impacted San Antonio.
A temporary shelter at
Joint Base San Antonio Lackland has housed and provided services to 1,820 unaccompanied
minors from Central America since May 18, San Antonio Express-News reporter
Melissa Fletcher Stoeltje reported. The immigration is part of a “surge” of
children said to be fleeing poverty and violence in their home countries,
she reported.
For more details on this
story, including the conditions of the facility at Lackland, read Fletcher
Stoeltje's story at ExpressNews.com or in Friday's print edition of the San
Antonio Express-News.
Daily Immigration News Clips – May 29, 2014
NATIONAL
By Josh Lederman and Erica Werner
Financial Times: Obama delays review of deportations
By Barney Jopson
Business Insider: Obama Gives Boehner One Last Deadline For Immigration Reform
By Brett Logiurato
National Journal: The Strategy to Hold Off on Deportation Changes Wins Out
By Elahe Izadi
Washington Times: Obama loses left flank by dithering on immigrant deportations
By Stephen Dinan
CNN: Some Latino groups express frustration with administration delay on immigration review
By Kevin Bohn
The Hill: Boehner: Obama 'playing politics' on deportations
By Justin Sink
The Hill: Hoyer 'not optimistic' about immigration bill
By Mike Lillis
Wall Street Journal: More Political Maneuvering on Immigration Reform?
By Jim Manley
Vox: Another 97,000 immigrants will get deported before the White House acts
By Dara Lind
Vox: Did Obama just get played by Republicans on immigration?
By Dara Lind
Mother Jones: Obama Makes Pointless Gesture on Immigration. But Why?
By Kevin Drum
Latin Post: Will Obama's Delay of Deportation Policies Help Save Immigration Reform? Poll Says Tea Party Voters Want Reform This Year
By Nicole Akoukou Thompson
Associated Press: Cantor Pressured From Both Sides on Immigration
By Alan Suderman
Huffington Post: Eric Cantor Attacked From All Sides On Immigration
By Elise Foley
Politico: On immigration, Eric Cantor can't win
By Seung Min Kim
Roll Call: On Immigration, the Pressure Mounts for Eric Cantor
By Emma Dumain
Washington Times: Even back home in Virginia, Cantor feels the pressure on immigration from both sides
By David Sherfinski
Roll Call: Alone, Illegal and Underage: The Child Migrant Crisis
By Jennifer Scholtes and Emily Ethridge
Reuters: Waves of immigrant minors present crisis for Obama, Congress
By Richard Cowan
Washington Times: Children swarming southern border prove a test to Obama's immigration policy
By Stephen Dinan
Politico: Flood of child migrants a neglected challenge
By David Rogers
Associated Press: DHS Secretary Asks to Study Immigration Releases
By Alicia A. Caldwell
Huffington Post (Blog): Immigration On The Concert Stage, Silver Screen & In The Legislature: Calle 13 @ Coachella, The Undocumented, How Democracy Works Now + Mercedes Sosa's Final Recording Session
By Michael Vazquez
Talk Radio News Service: Immigration Activists Decry Continuing Deportations
By Rachel Jungkind
New York Times (Letter to the Editor): Immigration and the Courts
By Evangeline Chan
New York Times (Editorial): Adding Delay to Immigration Failure
MSNBC (Maddow Blog): Cantor's cause for concern in the Commonwealth
By Steve Benen
National Journal (Opinion): What Both Parties Don't Get About Hispanics
By Ron Fournier
Fox News Latino (Opinion): Opinion: Immigrant Detainees Deserve Fair Pay, Justice
By Raúl A. Reyes
Huffington Post (Blog): Scoring House Republicans' Performance on Immigration
By Janet Murguía
2015 Diversity Lottery Applicants Must Use DS-260 Immigrant Visa Application
Beginning with DV-2015, all diversity visa (DV) applicants must submit the
electronic DS-260 “Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration Application” accessible through the
Consular Electronic Application Center (CEAC). The DS-260 will be ready for applicants to use on May 19, 2014.
The Kentucky Consular Center (KCC) will no longer collect the DS-230 and DSP-122, and no physical file will be sent to post. Applicants for DV-2014 will continue to use the DS-230 and DSP-122.
If you have questions or need assistance with your Diversity Lottery application, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
Arnold S. Jaffe
Attorneys at Law
330 E. Carrillo Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
(805) 897-0066
Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law Urges Immigration Reform
The Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law is today is sending a letter to President Obama in response to his request to the Department of Homeland Security on how to slow deportations. We do not believe asking for "Deferred Action Status" is enough. Our letter explains how aside from granting Deferred Action Status (temporary status) to the largest possible group of immigrants, the President could also, with no change in federal laws, grant lawful permanent resident status possibly to as many as two million immigrants -- without requiring any action by Congress. The letter to Obama may be downloaded here and is also attached (if listserv allows attachments).
We urge all advocates to review the Center's letter and to send similar letters to the President, Secretary of Homeland Security, and Attorney General, with copies to all other principle aides and lawyers listed below. A complete list of names and addresses of officials who should receive letters from the community, unions, faith-based groups, city and county councils, CEOs, etc. is at the end of this email. With "comprehensive" immigration reform in Congress going nowhere, its imperative that as many concerned groups and individuals as possible send letters at this critical time urging that the types of changes suggested in our letter be adopted now.
As you know, in response to political pressure by immigrant advocates, President Obama recently ordered the Department of Homeland Security to come up with recommendations on how to slow deportations of immigrants with special equities through an expansion of the Deferred Action Status program, the same status the administration recently extended to several hundred thousand DACA immigrants who were brought here by their parents as children and attended school here.
In the Center's letter, we make clear that the administration has the authority to grant Deferred Action Status to as many as two million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. with approved visa petitions. The letter points out that these immigrants are already "in the system" as they are named in employment or family-based visa petitions that have been approved by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service. The government therefore already knows their names, addresses, social security numbers, criminal histories, and other personal data. These immigrants very rarely self-deport and are highly unlikely to ever be apprehended or deported.
Despite the fact that approximately two million of these immigrants have approved visa petitions, they are unable to become lawful permanent residents because they entered the U.S. long ago without inspection and therefore cannot adjust their status here but must travel to a U.S. consulate abroad to seek lawful permanent resident status. However, very few do so because in 1996 Congress enacted a so-called 10-year bar which states that an immigrant required to leave the country to process his or her permanent resident visa abroad who has lived in the U.S. for more than one year in unauthorized status must remain outside the U.S. for 10 years before becoming eligible for permanent resident status. While some immigrants are eligible for waivers of the 10-year bar, these are not often granted as the immigrant must prove that denying the waiver would cause extreme hardship to a US citizen petitioner, something most immigrants cannot prove. The result, we argue, is that the vast majority of these immigrants with approved visa petitions, as many as two million, simply continue to live in the U.S. in undocumented status.
Our letter urges President Obama to grant this population Deferred Action Status (DAS), which then allows them to apply for "advance parole" (routinely granted to people on DAS) with which they can briefly travel to their home countries to visit relatives and then reenter the country lawfully on "parole" status. Once they reenter the US lawfully on parole status, they become eligible to apply for lawful permanent resident status in the U.S. without having to leave to have their status adjusted by a US consulate abroad. The 10-year bar does not apply to immigrants who can adjust their status in the United States, only to those who must go abroad for processing at a US consulate.
We argue that "following this administrative approach, President Obama could legally and without the involvement of Congress promptly extend lawful permanent resident status to about two million currently undocumented immigrants who mostly are long term residents of the U.S. and have unique skills that allowed them to obtain employment-related approved visa petitions or immediate family members here that allowed them to obtain family-based approved visa petitions."
In addition, current regulations require that thousands of immigrants with outstanding deportation orders who have become eligible to adjust their status must "reopen" their deportation cases to have an Immigration Judge adjudicate their adjustment applications but the vast majority cannot reopen their cases because of strict time limits to do so. Amending this regulation to allow USCIS handle these applications would permit thousands of immigrants to now be granted lawful permanent resident status.
The letter charges that administrative policies over the past six years have "caused the deportation of hundreds of thousands of immediate relatives of US citizens and lawful permanent residents, resulted in tens of thousands of criminal convictions of persons for no more than entry without inspection (making it difficult to impossible for these migrants to ever legalize their status in the future), resulted in hundreds of thousands of migrants being fired from stable jobs (through “worksite enforcement” that largely misses sweatshops) forcing them to turn to sweatshops and unscrupulous employers to find work (less than 1% leave the US), discouraged thousands of immigrants from reporting serious crimes for fear of exposure to deportation, [and] incarcerated more immigrants than ever before at enormous cost to the public and for no sound public safety reasons ..." We argue that by now "it should be clear that these policies have done nothing to advance the goal of comprehensive immigration reform."
The letter recommends that the largest number of immigrants possible be granted Deferred Action Status even if they are not eligible for adjustment of status under existing law. We also identify about six sub-groups of immigrants with long-term residence and unique equities who should obviously qualify for DAS, including for example, the parents of US citizen children who are unable to petition for lawful permanent resident status until their children turn 21 years of age, unaccompanied abused and abandoned children, the parents of children and youth already granted Deferred Action Status by the administration, etc.. We point out that "granting immigrants Deferred Action Status and temporary employment authorization would immediately benefit US workers by removing the incentive of unscrupulous employers to hire undocumented migrants over equally or better qualified US citizens."
Regarding immigrants with closed deportation cases who are now eligible one way or the other for permanent resident status but cannot get their deportation cases reopened because of time limits on doing so, we point out that Obama could easily amend the regulations to allow the USCIS (instead of Immigration Judges) process these applications for LPR status and this would legalize thousands more people.
We explain why Operation Streamline is a reactionary program that has turned tens of thousands of immigrants into "criminals" merely based upon unauthorized entry, blocking them from legalizing their status in the future, and provide proposals that would reduce border violence and deaths, and reduce ICE involvement with local police which clearly discourages immigrants from reporting crimes.
We hope this letter helps spark a debate that goes beyond Deferred Action Status to include ways to get people lawful permanent resident status now without needing any involvement by the Congress. We have a range of separate ideas on what Congress could be doing that we'll circulated separately fairly soon. For the next few weeks we urge groups to focus on what President Obama and his team could accomplish if they have the political will to do so.
As mentioned above, the officials to write to are listed below with addresses. It is critically important that groups and individuals concerned with the abysmal failure of current immigration policy PROMPTLY communicate their views to the President that NOW is the time for the Administration to show leadership and put its political capital where its mouth has been on immigration reform. Letters can be short or long. But now is the time to act while the Administration has these issues under serious consideration and before they make decisions. Thanks.
Feel free to email me with comments or questions.
Peter Schey,
President, Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law
King: U.S. immigrants deserve pathway to citizenship
Bill King says ongoing Republican resistance to immigration
reform goes against the classic American dream of striving for a better life.
After my column last week outlining the likely
detrimental political effects of the Republicans' intransigence on immigration
reform, a number of my Republican friends took me to task. They charged that I
was being overly cynical about their motivation and understating the subversive
effect granting citizenship to those who came here illegally would have on the
rule of law.
I concede that the argument that granting a
pathway to citizenship for those who came here without visas undermines the
rule of law is a rational and reasonable position, even though I disagree with
it. However, laying aside the political implications for the moment, I think
there are several other flaws with the argument.
First, it assumes that everyone here illegally
(i.e., without a current visa) has broken the law. That is not the case.
Illegal immigrants fall generally into three categories. The largest (about 40
percent) includes those who came here with a valid visa but did not renew it or
did not leave the country when their visa expired. While this group is subject
to deportation, overstaying your visa is not a crime. Many in the group
actually qualify for a visa extension but merely have not done the paperwork,
much like someone failing to renew a driver's license. Would anyone favor
permanently taking away someone's driver's license if they don't renew it on
time? Of course not.
The next-largest group (a little fewer than 40
percent) includes those who crossed the border surreptitiously without a visa.
These individuals did violate a federal criminal statute, albeit a misdemeanor,
punishable by up to a $2,000 fine and six months in jail. But our legal system
routinely grants various forms of leniency for such minor crimes, including
deferred adjudication and probation. Why should this group be any different?
How is granting leniency for this particular crime so much more corrosive of
the rule of law than any other crime?
The last group is made up of those brought here
as children (a little more than 20 percent). Because these individuals crossed
the U.S. border as minors, they are not legally culpable for entering the
country without a visa. Should we have a system that holds these young people
responsible for the crimes of their parents? Are we going to
"sentence" these young people to live their entire lives without
citizenship in the country they consider their home? Again, no.
In the end, the GOP argument has several holes
of logic. It is not true that all of those here illegally have violated the
law, and only a minority has violated a criminal statute. Even then, it is a
relatively minor infraction, the sort of crime for which judges usually grant
leniency. Therefore, granting something akin to probation for those who did
enter the country illegally hardly is inconsistent with or would likely subvert
our respect for the rule of law. But laying aside for a moment the various
policy arguments and the political implications, what troubles me the most is
that it is antithetical to the American experience to deprive those who came
here illegally from any hope of ever becoming citizens.
Our legal system has always incorporated the
concept of mercy. It is a concept taught by every great faith tradition and, of
course, is a core teaching of Christianity. "Blessed are the merciful, for
they shall receive mercy." (Matthew 5:7.)
In the aftermath of the Civil War, Abraham
Lincoln said, "I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than
strict justice." His comment was directed toward those who had committed
treason.
My personal experience with those who are here
illegally is that the vast majority have come here from some hellhole in some
Third World country hoping for a better life for themselves and their children.
Most were not able to come here legally because of our dysfunctional legal
immigration system. They are mostly hard-working, law-abiding, dedicated family
folks. Most are devout Christians.
If this is not a case where we should show some
mercy and bend the rules slightly, then there are none.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)