Halt Deportations to Haiti Now.

A month ago, I posted about ICE resuming deportations to Haiti. On January 20, 27 Haitians were sent home, and all were incarcerated, as is the common practice with deported immigrants who were incarcerated abroad. Prison conditions are "notoriously unsanitary," and wracked with cholera. Nevertheless, ICE deported 27 people, and within a week, one man, Wildrick Guerrier, died of cholera-like symptoms.

Precisely what FCNL and other activist organizations feared has happened, and it is unacceptable. The bottom line is that Haiti, still a disaster zone, is not ready to absorb hundreds more into the country. It is struggling to take care of the people that are already there. FCNL and the Interfaith Immigration Coalition (IIC) wrote a letter to Secretary Napolitano, imploring her to halt the deportations. It has already resulted in one death. How many more until Homeland Security and ICE decide it's enough?

We'll keep you updated on the situation. Thanks for reading.

Two ICE Raids in January

Last month, on opposite ends of the country, two immigration raids conducted by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Agency resulted in more than 100 people detained. The first, in Ellensburg, Washington, resulted in the detention of 30 individuals, and in the second, which took place Grand Rapids, Michigan, 77 were detained.

Over the past two years, raids have been largely replaced with employer audits, a method of enforcement that punishes employers for hiring undocumented immigrants, systematically removing incentives to hire undocumented immigrants in the first place. Workplace and home raids disrupt families, and devastate communities. We are very concerned for the families of those detained in the recent raids, and the human rights of all immigrants if the raids continue.

The Interfaith Immigration Coalition (IIC), a group or faith-based organization to which FCNL belongs, acts as a voice for just and humane immigration reform for the faith community. Our interfaith platform calls for “Border protection policies that are consistent with humanitarian values and with the need to treat all individuals with respect, while allowing the authorities to carry out the critical task of identifying and preventing entry of terrorists and dangerous criminals, as well as pursuing the legitimate task of implementing American immigration policy.” Raids that leave children stranded at the bus stop, waiting for their parents, are not consistent with humanitarian values.

In a letter delivered this week, the IIC implores President Obama to stop the raids. At one point, the letter appeals, “Mr. President, in your State of the Union Speech last Tuesday night, you rightly called on our nation to “stop expelling talented, responsible young people who can staff our research labs, start new businesses, and further enrich this nation." ... There is something terribly wrong with vowing to work for immigration reform while at the same time rending parents from children and spouses from each other. Effective and humane reform can only be achieved through providing a path to legal status for all undocumented immigrants currently in the country, providing legal and safe avenues for workers and their families to migrate to this country, and eliminating the backlog for families who are separated so that they can be reunited.”

Unfortunately, Republicans in the House have stated that they are interested in conducting more raids. FCNL is strongly opposed to this change in enforcement policy. The likelihood of it changing is not probable because Republicans don't hold the majority in the Senate, but we will have to remain vigilant and block any enforcement legislation introduced that infringes on immigrants' human rights.

What's Up with Immigration in the 112th Congress?

The rhetoric throughout many congressional campaigns was hot. Some of the newly elected members of the House committed to an agenda that would reduce the number of immigrants – both legal and illegal – and send packing all those who are here illegally. Will those campaign promises define the agenda of the 112^th Congress?

Probably not.

Democrats and Republicans – and indeed most people around the country – seem to agree on one central fact: our immigration system is broken. Families are broken up by the multi-year waiting lines for legal immigration – employers of both skilled and unskilled workers have difficulty finding that one particular scientist to fit in a research team, or teams of seasonal workers to harvest crops and serve tourists.

Meanwhile, many employers of workers who entered or stayed in the country illegally are able to take advantage of their workers’ status by offering low pay, demanding long hours, and maintaining unsafe working conditions. The ability of these employers to undercut wage, hour, and safety laws drags down the pay and benefits of other workers on the same rung of the employment ladder, including those born in the U.S. The system is broken – it needs to be fixed.

The disagreement comes in describing the fix. Should the objective be to seal off the country, scan the documents of every person within U.S. borders, and deport all those who don’t make the cut? Should the objective be to re-examine U.S. relations with our neighbors to the South, to determine the extent to which NAFTA and other trade agreements and practices have contributed to the pressures for immigration northward? Should the objective be to address the practical problems in the immigration system itself, to repair what can be repaired?

The new Congress will probably land somewhere in that third objective – fix what needs to be fixed. Which begs the question: what needs to be fixed? FCNL has urged that the legal immigration itself be repaired, to reduce the long lines for visas, to re-unite families and to reduce the pressure for immigration outside the legal system. At the same time, FCNL has encouraged enforcement of wage, hour and safety laws in all places of employment, regardless of the legal status of the workers there. If employers are

(1) able to find workers (fix the legal system) and

(2) unable to

• pay their workers less than minimum wage, or
• forego paying them at all, or
• require more than forty hours of work without overtime pay, or
• require work in unsafe conditions

then the employers’ incentive to reach beyond available U.S. workers to find “imported labor” evaporates. Enforcement of existing “worker protection” laws levels the playing field.

Rep. Lamar Smith, the new chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has said that his priorities for immigration will center on job creation and job protection. He will focus on workplace enforcement, consider an expansion of the E-Verify program, and step up enforcement of requirements on employers to hire only workers with appropriate documentation. (The E-Verify program is a digital system that would permit employers to check Social Security records immediately to determine whether a job applicant has a valid Social Security number. FCNL and others have opposed broad implementation of the program because of the high incidence of errors in Social Security records, and the fact that most of those errors occur with non-European names.)

Most immigration bills – and indeed, several other bills – in the past several years have included increased and intensified border enforcement. Now that the military and detention industries have entered that arena, it is reasonable to expect that there will be continued upward pressure for more detention space (offered by contractor Corrections Corporation of America) and more military-style hardware and technology at the border (offered by the major weapons manufacturers.) Spending for border security will likely be exempted from concerns about deficit spending, as the Department of Homeland Security is usually lumped in with the Pentagon in the rhetoric about cutting all discretionary spending – except for “security spending.”

One important signal about the coming agenda is the appointment of Rep. Elton Gallegley of California as the chair of the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration. Firebrand Steve King of Iowa was in line for the post and was widely rumored to be the next subcommittee chair; but Chairman Smith chose a more moderate member, one who has not been a prime champion of some of the more extreme rhetorical demands, such as ending birthright citizenship.

Can we expect anything that will actually fix the system? President Obama, meeting with the leadership of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said he would address immigration reform in the State of the Union address. He still wants to seek reforms in the immigration system. The nation needs answers to current problems such as the millions of people living in the U.S. now without appropriate documentation. Rational solutions to that problem and others may be proposed – but they will very likely be coupled (as they have been in the past) with increased border enforcement and employer-based enforcement.

Will the Dream Act resurface? Possibly, in a modified form. Some of the modifications introduced late in the debate last year already severely limited any financial assistance that non-citizen students might receive under the act – those limitations, at least, would return. A more worrisome development would be the elimination of the education option entirely. Military recruiters still strongly support the bill, and would not be unhappy to see the education path eliminated.

ICE Resumes Deportations to Haiti

Due to the catastrophic hurricane in Haiti in January of last year, Congress voted to halt deportation of Haitian immigrants, a success that worked very hard to make happen. Last month, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced that it was lifting this halt and that starting next month, Haitians with criminal records will begin to be moved back to Haiti. Approximately 350 Haitians with criminal records have been detained, though the exact number to be deported is unknown. Haitians without criminal records are still safe under their Temporary Protected Status (TPS), though this is set to expire in July.

FCNL is gravely concerned about ICE's decision to send immigrants back to Haiti. The country, devastated by an earthquake a year ago, remains a disaster zone. Violent protests erupted last month in response to election results and a cholera epidemic has infected tens of thousands and killed more than 1,500. More than one million are still homeless. Haitians who are deported to the island due to a criminal record are sometimes incarcerated, and the prison system is wracked with cholera. We fear that sending them back is a death sentence.

ICE stated that it is concerned about having people with serious criminal records at large in our communities. FCNL does not disagree with the importance of keeping our communities safe, but according to our statement of principles, we believe that our immigration policy should support those displaced by conflict, oppression, environmental change, natural disaster, and economic destitution. Moreover, "criminal records" means any conviction, including minor ones, like shoplifting. We worked very hard a year ago to ensure that the U.S. would not be responsible for sending Haitian immigrants into a disaster zone (see here, and here), and it is clear to us now that although a year has passed, the crisis has not abated and sending Haitians home now would be as unconscionable as it was when the earthquake hit.

For more information:
New York Times Topics: Haiti
Open Letter to the President from the AFSC
Opinion Piece from the Huffington Post

An Independent Commission on Immigration and Labor: What is it?

I attended a day-long conference last week at the Economic Policy Institute called Labor shortages and immigration reform: promises and pitfalls of an independent commission. A number of economists, immigration experts and labor representatives got together to discuss the idea of a commission that would figure out how immigrant workers would fit into the U.S. economy. Two representatives from Britain's Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) were also there, to talk about their experience with a similar commission in the United Kingdom.

The panelists agreed the U.S. should set up an independent professional commission to research labor shortages and make recommendations to the government about how many workers the U.S. should invite in, based on current data. Its main purpose would be to make sure that occupations are filled primarily by native-born workers, and foreign workers are invited in to take jobs when there is a labor shortage and native-born workers are not taking jobs in a given occupation. In times like these, when so many people who are already legally in the U.S. and without work, a commission like this would probably recommend few, if any work-based visas.

Doris Meissner, the Former Commissioner of the US Immigration and Naturalization Service, pointed out that the legal immigration system at the moment so inflexible that it can’t keep up with social changes and economic changes in the U.S. A better way to write policy, she argues, is to create a process that sets annual “quotas” that can be changed as circumstances change. The policy for recruiting immigrant workers should be flexible, not locked in. The independent commission should focus on just this one question: what kind of labor shortages are U.S. employers facing and how many immigrant workers should be invited in to meet that need.

The British commission on immigration and labor consists of economists and experts on immigration and [labor?] policy. The government asks it to research specific questions such as researching labor shortages in a specific occupation that could be filled by foreign workers. In addition to broad national research, the commission engages in meetings and visits with employers to provide "bottom up" evidence as well. The MAC then publishes reports and recommends changes in immigration policy to the government, whichmay or may not be passed.

A main theme over the course of the day was the question, "what is essential to making a commission like this work?" Panelists agreed that the commission must be independent, and non-partisan; [labor and?] immigration [are?] intensely political issues, and the facts are not easily separated from the political arguments that usually occupy the center of the debate. Martin Ruhs, a member of the MAC, said that the commission's non-partisan research has contributed to the quality of the debate on immigration. Secondly, members that are experts in policy, labor, immigration, and economics will ensure that the commission is professional. The research process and data need to be transparent in order for the commission to be accepted and seen as credible by lawmakers and the public.

Immigration commissions are a long part of our U.S. history. Panelist Susan Martin, from the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University, explained that over centuries, commissions have informed immigration law in the U.S. The earliest was the 1775 Industrial Commission, to the Dillingham Commission whose recommendations led to the restrictionist laws in the Immigration Act of 1924 that established strict quotas based on nationality (Check out this blog post for more information on that era). A labor commission like the one being discussed here would focus exclusively on the need for foreign labor for jobs that aren't being filled by American workers and not on the nationality of the workers.

An independent commission fits into the comprehensive immigration reform puzzle by being part of the solution to control future immigration. Research-based empirical evidence can yield realistic and fair quotas to match up with the labor needs of the country, which can change more quickly than legislators can keep up with. The challenges are numerous, such as

• developing reliable and valid data gathering and evaluation tools (i.e. does the research accurately reflect the needs it identifies? Are the recommendations adequately supported?),
• the sheer number of issues that urgently need to be addressed, and
• the risk of politicization of those results on the floor of the House and Senate after publication.
  

The most recent CIR bill introduced by Senators Menendez (NJ) and Leahy (VT) includes a Standing Commission on Immigration, Labor Rights, and the National Interest designed to establish employment-based immigration policy, implement a policy-focused research agenda, and make recommendations to Congress and the President on quotas for employment-based visa categories. The purpose of the commission also includes "promot[ing] America's economic growth and competitiveness while minimizing job displacement, wage depression, unauthorized employment" (To see bill text, click here). By enforcing labor laws for employers and all workers, the commission would prevent further undercutting of U.S. employment. To see FCNL's summary of the Menendez CIR bill, click here, and read the post just below this on It's Our Community!

The keyword of the day was "sensible." Accurate research that shows where we need foreign workers can lead to sensible quotas that allow workers to come and work legally in occupations that need them. Laura Reiff from the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition made the point that there are millions of visas too few for low-skill workers (ie. workers for low-skilled jobs in agriculture, construction and the service industry), which is why we have such a high number of undocumented workers. Is an independent commission the right answer? Let us know what you think.

Thoughts on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2010

In September, Senators Bill Menendez (NJ) and Patrick Leahy (VT) introduced the Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) Act of 2010 (S. 3932). As the word “comprehensive” implies, the bill proposes changing many aspects of the immigration system; it’s a complicated bill. It is important to carefully scrutinize each provision of a bill so large in order to be sure it has the rights and safety of immigrants at heart. The "enforcement-only" approach, which often comprises major parts of CIR bills, is often touted as true reform, though it does not does not stem the flow of undocumented immigrants, does not provide a solution for the millions of undocumented people already here, and has induced human and civil rights abuses. Although FCNL firmly believes that comprehensive reform is needed immediately, there are often provisions that don’t comply with our statement of principles for just and humane immigration reform, and these must be not be overlooked.

Many parts of the more-than-800 page bill are positive reforms that enable immigrants to live and work with dignity. Some of these include:

- The inclusion of important stand-alone bills such as the AgJOBS bill, the DREAM Act, and the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA).

- Creating a Lawful Prospective Immigrant status for undocumented immigrants already living in the United States.

- Improving detention conditions and implementing secure alternatives to detention.

- Expanding labor protections under many work visa programs.

- Improving access to interpreters in state courts.

- Ending the waiting period for refugees and asylees to obtain green cards.

- Improving training and accountability for Department of Homeland Security border and immigration officers

- Coordinating local law enforcement agencies, border security and crime fighting with Canada and Mexico.

Some stipulations of the bill, however, have us deeply concerned. There are a lot of “enforcement-first” provisions that impose steep penalties instead of addressing root causes. Most significantly, the bill calls for many new border enforcement requirements that must be met before any undocumented immigrant is eligible for legal status. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• A total force of 6,410 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents investigating criminal law violations,
• 21,000 Border Patrol agents,
• 7 unmanned aircraft systems,
• Remote video surveillance systems at 300 sites,
• 200 scope trucks,
• 56 mobile surveillance systems

Some “trigger” requirements are positive, such as implementing civil detention standards, dramatically increasing enrollment in alternatives to detention, and utilizing worksite auditors to develop cases against employers suspected of serious violations. The militarization of the border, however, is not an effective way to address the flow of undocumented immigrants.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano testified to a Senate Appropriations Committee in May of this year:

“Every marker and every milepost that has been laid down by the Congress in terms of number of agents, deployment of technology, construction of fencing and the like, has already either been completed or is within a hair’s breadth of being completed … One of the questions I think we need to talk about is whether securing the border is ever going to be reached, or whether that goalpost is going to keep moving.”

When is enough enough? Check out FCNL’s resources on enforcement to find out more about this flawed approached to immigration reform. Other provisions of the bill that are particularly worrisome are:

Heightened penalties for document fraud and illegal entry

Increased penalties result in a larger number of people in prisons. The prison system is already too large, and this is an expensive policy that does not actually solve the problem, and will not serve as an adequate disincentive.

Mandating the use of an employment verification system and biometric identifiers.

The proposed employment verification system depends on the Social Security database, which has an extremely high error rate, especially for individuals with foreign-sounding last names. For example, Asian names and surnames are sometimes mistakenly interchanged, and Latin American names, which are often two first names and two last names, can be improperly categorized. As a result, an employer could run the name of a potential employee through the database and result in “no match,” though this does not necessarily mean the individual is not in the system.

When analyzing a bill, it is important to consider what’s left out of it. At FCNL, we are disappointed not to see any stipulations that mandate the enforcement of wage, hour, health and safety laws in the workplace for all employees. This is essential to the fair treatment not just of immigrant workers, but of U.S.-born workers as well. Broad enforcement of these laws would make it more difficult for a U.S. employer to undercut U.S. born workers by bringing in “cheap” undocumented workers to work without protections of U.S. labor laws. Evening the playing field would allow the Labor Commission (provided for in the bill) to make a realistic and accurate assessment of the number of additional workers needed in the U.S. for various industries.

In all, this CIR bill is a mixed bag. It proposes essential reforms that are urgently needed, such as alternatives to detention and reformation of the legal system, but the enforcement provisions have us very worried. A more detailed summary on the bill can be found on our website. What are your thoughts?

The Economics of Immigration

Does immigration burden or benefit the U.S. economy? This year, several reports have been released demonstrating the economic value of immigration to the United States. It's often hard to step away from the emotional and moral aspects of the debate, but factual, objective research forms the strongest foundation for fair and effective immigration reform. Check out a few reports below:

- The Hamilton Project, a research project with the Brookings Institution, released a paper called Ten Economic Facts About Immigration. The paper's main conclusions are that immigrants come from diverse backgrounds, cover a wide spectrum of skill sets, and generally pay more taxes than they receive in benefits. These might seem obvious, but anti-immigrant arguments often dispute these claims. Read more here.
- A study conducted by the Immigration Policy Center and the Center for American Progress states that comprehensive immigration reform with a path to legal status would increase U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by at least .84 percent. Over ten years, GDP would increase by $1.5 trillion, cumulatively. Mass deportation would reduce GDP by 1.46 percent and would lead to widespread job loss for higher skill natives.
- A paper published through the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco argues that instead of competing for the same jobs, employers hire immigrant workers for low-skill jobs, which expands job opportunities for native-born workers and result in a more productive economy.

Immigrants who come to the U.S. want to be productive members of society, and the research above indicates that regardless of legal status, they are integral parts of our economy. We already believe that immigrants have human and civil rights and deserve to be treated with respect, but it appears in order to change minds about comprehensive immigration reform in the U.S., that alone will not suffice. Hopefully, this research can help inform our conversations about immigration and support our work towards immigration reform.

Time to Say Goodbye!

Today is my last day as a program assistant at the Friends Committee on National Legislation, so I must say goodbye to you for now. It's been a wonderful year, and I have been so heartened to learn of all the passion and enthusiasm across the country for comprehensive immigration reform. All I can say is, keep it up!

Ruth Flower and Hannah Cole-Chu, one of FCNL's incoming program assistants, will be managing the blog from this point on. Hannah does not arrive until September, so it may be a little quiet around here in August. As for me, in September I will be moving to Zimbabwe to work with a clinic that provides medical and legal services for survivors of torture. My role will be to set up a support and referral system for clients seeking income-generating activities. I hope to be there for a year or so.

I hope that you'll stick with us through the transition and thank you for all that you do to support comprehensive immigration reform!

Injunction Granted, Just in Time!

Great news!!

A federal judge has blocked key provisions of S.B. 1070, the controversial immigration law in Arizona that was scheduled to go into effect tomorrow. The judge has blocked the requirement that police have to check the immigration status of anyone they "reasonably suspect" of being in the country without authorization.

A judge grants a preliminary injunction if he or she finds that the case is likely to suffer "irreparable harm" if the judge does not prevent the law (or part of the law) from going into effect. If police in Arizona were to start enforcing S.B. 1070 tomorrow, it would profoundly alter the context in which the lawsuits are considered.

You can read the full decision here.

Still, even though the critical components of S.B. 1070 will not go into effect tomorrow, some of the horrific effects of this discriminatory immigration law are already visible:

• Immigrants - both those with and without papers - have been packing up and fleeing the state in search of safer territory.
• Arizona's economy has plummeted due to a national boycott in which tourism has dropped, conferences have been rescheduled elsewhere, and cities across the country have refused to support business with Arizona.
• U.S. citizens fear being wrongfully deported if they experience racial profiling.
• Well-intentioned police officers in Arizona struggle to determine how to walk a fine line.
  

For more information, see the Detention Watch Network's website about the consequences of S.B. 1070, or see Immigration Policy Institute's new report, "A State of Confusion."

Advocates have been gathering in Arizona to participate in prayer vigils and to consider acts of civil disobedience if the law were to fully come into effect tomorrow. Meanwhile, the private prison industry stands to make a profit from increased arrests, detentions, and deportations - even if the people they detain were picked up due to racial profiling. No matter what, all eyes have been on Arizona.

At FCNL, we welcome the injunction against S.B. 1070. We hope that states considering similar proposals will rethink their positions, given the situation in Arizona at this point. Above all, we urge President Obama and members of Congress to act swiftly to comprehensively reform the broken immigration system, to reassert federal control and restore the U.S. tradition of welcoming immigrants.

Join the Call: Include All Families in Immigration Reform

You're invited to join Representative Mike Honda (CA), Bishop Minerva Carcano, and families impacted by our broken immigration system on a special grassroots call designed for advocates and concerned community members like you!

Learn about the moral imperative to move comprehensive immigration reform forward this year, and hear stories about why LGBT families need your support to make sure their immigration rights are protected.

Comprehensive immigration reform isn't truly comprehensive unless all families, gay and straight, are included. We hope you can join us for this important nationwide call!

To register and receive materials for the call, please go to www.LGBTforCIR.org. You'll also have the unique opportunity to submit questions to Rep. Honda before the call.

In Our Community: Immigration News

It's been a hot, hot week in DC and immigration has been heating up around the country, with Arizona's new immigration law (S.B. 1070) so close to taking effect. Keep up with the news on immigration from Monday, July 19 to Monday, July 26.

On July 24, advocates created their own ICE checkpoint at Netroots Nation, demanding the "papers" of all white conference participants before they would be allowed to enter the cafeteria. This creative direct action drew attention to the problems of racial profiling in immigration enforcement. One of the people who got stopped said, "Even though it was a total satire, it was right on. And you can begin to get a sense of what that would be like to constantly have the fear that you will be asked to produce papers." The checkpoint was inspired by this direct action, posted on YouTube earlier in the year.

Human Rights Watch has published a new report, "Deportation by Default," which addresses the particular vulnerabilities of immigrants with mental disabilities who are held in jail-like detention centers for months or even years. These immigrants do not have the right to a lawyer and they are often unable to represent themselves. Justice is denied. As Sarah Mehta, the report's lead author, says, "Someone who doesn't know their own name or what country they're from is going through some of the most complicated legal proceedings in the United States with no right to assistance, even when everyone in the courtroom knows they need it."

One in five New York public school districts is requiring immigration papers in order for a child to enroll in school, even though the Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that all children, regardless of legal status, must be given equal access to public education. This discriminatory requirement discourages families from bringing their children to school, for fear of being deported.

The Feet in Two Worlds blog has posted an excellent story, "Listening to Both Sides in Arizona's Immigration Debate," which interviews two individuals on different sides of the immigration debate. It's an important reminder of this basic lesson: Listening to one another helps establish trust, which counters the fear that too often drives the conversation on immigration issues.

The TransAfrica Forum has released a new report assessing the conditions in Haiti, now six months after the devastating earthquake. The displacement camps continue to face "atrocious" conditions, with issues such as flooding, gender-based violence, disease, and access to food, water, and housing remaining severe. FCNL worked to secure Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians in the United States, which was granted just after the earthquake.

Arguments in AZ Lawsuits Heard Today

Today, a federal court in Arizona has been hearing arguments in two challenges to S.B. 1070, Arizona's new immigration law which would require police officers to check the legal status of anyone they "reasonably suspect" to be an undocumented immigrant.

The first lawsuit was brought by the ACLU, MALDEF, the National Immigration Law Center, the NAACP, the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center. The second was brought by the Department of Justice.

These two challenges are being argued back to back, and the court will decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction to keep S.B. 1070 from going into effect on July 29.

FCNL strongly opposes the Arizona law, which opens the door to racial profiling and distracts police officers from their primary tasks of ensuring community safety. Federal immigration law should only be enforced by federal authorities, not by state or local authorities without proper oversight, training, or authorization. Stay tuned for the results of today's arguments in court...

National Guard to be Deployed August 1

The Department of Homeland Security has just published this press release. FCNL is deeply disappointed with the decision to deploy 1,200 National Guard troops on the US-Mexico border. We urge the administration, rather than further militarizing the border, to work toward long-term solutions to reform our broken immigration system and to address the root causes of migration.

The press release is copied in full:

Obama Administration Announces Aug. 1 National Guard Deployment to Support Federal Law Enforcement Along the Southwest Border

Release Date: July 19, 2010

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

Washington, D.C. - Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Defense (DOD) today announced that National Guard deployments to the Southwest border will begin on Aug. 1 as part of the administration’s unprecedented efforts to combat the transnational criminal organizations that smuggle weapons, cash and people across our Southwest border.

“Over the past year and a half, this administration has pursued a new border security strategy with an unprecedented sense of urgency, making historic investments in personnel, technology and infrastructure,” said Secretary Napolitano. “These troops will provide direct support to federal law enforcement officers and agents working in high-risk areas to disrupt criminal organizations seeking to move people and goods illegally across the Southwest border.”

In May, the President authorized the deployment of up to an additional 1,200 National Guard troops to the Southwest border to provide support for intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance, and counternarcotics enforcement—providing support for one year as part of the administration’s unprecedented efforts to crack down on transnational smuggling and cartel violence, as CBP continues to recruit and train additional officers and agents to serve on the Southwest border.

The National Guard Southwest Border deployments augment CBP and ICE resources and assets already at the border, and include:

• 224 in California
• 524 in Arizona
• 72 in New Mexico
• 250 in Texas
• 130 serving as command and control and other support.

In deploying these personnel, the National Guard Bureau is operating under a request for assistance from DHS. Border security is a law enforcement mission, and these troops will augment the Administration's efforts to crack down on the drug cartels and transnational criminal organizations that operate along our Southwest border.

In agreement with DHS, beginning August 1, selected National Guard Members from Southwest border states will begin the necessary training and integration planning to knit them into our nation's border security operating structure,” said Gen. Craig McKinley, Chief of the National Guard Bureau. “The National Guard is deploying in response to DHS’ request for assistance,” he added, “and will serve in law enforcement support roles consistent with the Administration's view that border security is a law enforcement challenge.”

The President has also requested $600 million in supplemental funds for enhanced border protection and law enforcement activities, which are critical to our ongoing efforts.

Last week, Secretary Napolitano announced more than $47 million in fiscal year 2010 Operation Stonegarden grants for the Southwest border states to support law enforcement personnel, overtime, and other related costs to enhance the capabilities of state, local and tribal law enforcement to secure the U.S.-Mexico border. Nearly 80 percent of the fiscal year 2010 funding will go to Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas—up from 59 percent in 2008.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov or www.ng.mil.

In Our Community: Immigration News

Grab a cup of coffee and join us in reviewing the immigration news from Monday, July 12 to Monday, July 19:

What's happening in Arizona these days? Immigration Impact offers a closer look at the 7 lawsuits against SB 1070. Unless the court issues an injunction, the new law will go into effect on July 29, a mere ten days from now. Meanwhile, eight states (Michigan, Florida, Alabama, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia) have submitted an amicus brief in support of SB 1070, despite the Justice Department's assertion that the new law is unconstitutional. In addition, Arizona's tourism industry feels the effects of the boycott and managers express uncertainty about whether the downturn in business will continue into 2011.

Grassroots Leadership has published a draft paper, "Operation Streamline: Drowning Justice and Draining Dollars along the Rio Grande." This report lays out concerns with the Operation Streamline policy, which requires all undocumented immigrants apprehended near the border to be detained and processed in the criminal justice system. Operation Streamline overloads federal criminal courts, strains taxpayers' resources, and fails to provide a practical and humane solution for undocumented immigrants seeking entry to the United States.

More on the border: A Washington Post op-ed finds that it costs about $10 billion per year to maintain operations on the US-Mexico border, but increased enforcement actually has some pretty serious unintended consequences - trapping undocumented workers in the United States. TRAC reports that immigration prosecutions are at the highest level they've been since the height of prosecutions under the Bush administration, with more than 10,000 prosecutions in April 2010 alone.

A new immigration detention center is being built in Virginia. Once completed, it will be the largest of its kind in the Mid-Atlantic, holding between 500 and 1000 immigrant detainees. The state anticipates a rapid influx in detainees as it fully implements the Secure Communities program, which scans jail databases for anyone who may be undocumented. This facility, like many across the country, is privately run. It is clear that Secure Communities, a problematic immigration enforcement initiative, will do one job very well: boosting the profit margins of many private prison contractors.

You can read more about the intersection of immigration and the private prison industry here and here.

The New York Times reports on the Obama administration's shift in worksite enforcement, from high-profile raids to so-called "silent raids" in which companies are audited for hiring undocumented workers. The raids of earlier years would detain workers en masse, tear apart families, and deny justice to those who were deported. Audits are certainly more orderly, and they focus on punishing employers rather than employees. Still, without overhauling the immigration system, the economy still requires foreign workers and even well-intentioned employers may struggle to meet those demands while remaining within the bounds of the law.

Truly Inclusive Immigration Reform Must End Discrimination against LGBT Families

Today, key members of Congress stood in unity to call on their colleagues to support passage of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) as part of any future immigration reform effort. Tens of thousands of LGBT binational families are counting on this critically important legislation in order to achieve the most basic equality: The freedom to be with their families, and the people they love.

FCNL joined fellow coalition members from lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT), immigrants’ rights, civil rights and faith communities in issuing a statement for the news conference. The statement reads, in part, "Today, leaders made clear that all future immigration legislation must be truly inclusive, and we are proud to stand with them in that call. We are committed to working, together, for this long overdue and much-needed victory and to honoring our country’s commitment to families and its rich history as a nation of immigrants."

Reps. Nadler (NY), Honda (CA), Gutierrez (IL), Polis (CO) and Quigley (IL) participated in this important news conference. For more information, read Immigration Equality's press release.

As my colleague Bill Mefford, director of Civil and Human Rights for the General Board of Church and Society with The United Methodist Church, said recently:

“Just as Jesus did not set any preconditions on identifying himself with, and loving, the sojourner, so too does he call all who claim to follow him to love and welcome the sojourner without moral preconditions... To demand the right to prophetically challenge the nation to incorporate hospitality into our immigration policy, but then to work to exclude some people based on their sexual orientation, is to lose the moral basis for making that prophetic challenge. We want immigration reform that is just and humane, and that is truly comprehensive and truly moral.”

Immigration reform will only truly be comprehensive when all families, including LGBT families, are included. We welcome the commitment by these members of Congress to work to ensure that binational LGBT families will no longer be locked out of the U.S. immigration system.

Rep. Honda discusses his bill, the Reuniting Families Act.

Rep. Honda states, "The President has called on Congress to address immigration reform, and I stand ready to heed that call and support an effort that is inclusive of LGBT families."

Rep. Polis insists, "We must provide all domestic partners and married couples the same rights and obligations in any immigration legislation."

Rep. Quigley reminds us, "Our march in the direction of progress and justice for families across this country cedes its moral high ground unless we say to say to LGBT families that this is their movement, too."

We listen as Rep. Gutierrez says, "We should modernize our laws to facilitate legal immigration so that we keep families together and individuals do not have to twist themselves in knots to conform to our outdated laws." I had no idea Rep. Honda was right behind me!

In Our Community: Immigration News

Image courtesy of WikiMedia Commons

Congress has remained pretty quiet lately on the subject of immigration, but the impacts of the broken immigrations system continue to disrupt our communities. I'll share a bit of news with you from Monday, July 5 to Monday, July 12.

On July 6, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Arizona over S.B. 1070, the new immigration law that would require police officers to check the legal status of anyone they "reasonably suspect" to be an undocumented immigrant. You can read more about it on our "breaking news" blog post from that date. In addition, Attorney General Eric Holder has requested an injunction to prevent S.B. 1070 from going into effect at the end of the month.

In an effort to push back against hate rhetoric in our communities, FCNL has developed a Letters-to-the-Editor Toolkit for you. Letters to the editor take no more time to write than emails to Congress, and by writing for a public forum, you can potentially influence both your state and federal legislators and many of the voters who elect them.

I've been listening to podcasts from a workshop on detention in the United Kingdom, "Meaning & Practice of Immigration Detention - Perspectives from Legal, Social & Political Theory." The lectures examine the legal and political frameworks as well as the social impact of immigration detention and asylum.

Unemployed? We've got a solution for you. Stephen Colbert and the United Farm Workers have teamed up to promote a new tongue-in-cheek campaign, "Take Our Jobs." This campaign hopes to "recruit U.S. citizens and legal residents to fill jobs that frequently go to undocumented farm workers and to urge enactment of immigration reform."

I'll leave you with a wonderful thought piece from Taquiena Boston, the Director of Multicultural Growth and Witness with the Unitarian Universalist Association, who writes:

In multicultural ministry borders or “la frontera” are described as places where encounter, conflict, and transformation can occur when people of faith use our collective power to amplify the voices and concerns of the oppressed. To my mind when Unitarian Universalists voted at the Minneapolis General Assembly to act in solidarity with Puente and others to support immigrant justice, our movement waded into the turbulence of a human rights issue that puts us at odds with the majority of Americans. To paraphrase an African American spiritual, Unitarian Universalists made a commitment to “trouble the borders.”

Now that the U.S. Justice Department has challenged the constitutionality of Arizona’s SB 1070 legislation, I hope that our movement will not think that we can relax our efforts around immigration...

Take Our Jobs

Image courtesy of Ag Worker Health Project

Are you a native-born resident of the United States? Looking for a job? Sign up today to be a farmworker! But United Farm Workers offers a cautionary note:

Job may include using hand tools such as knives, hoes, shovels, etc. Duties may include tilling the soil, transplanting, weeding, thinning, picking, cutting, sorting & packing of harvested produce. May set up & operate irrigation equip. Work is performed outside in all weather conditions (Summertime 90+ degree weather) & is physically demanding requiring workers to bend, stoop, lift & carry up to 50 lbs on a regular basis.

On Thursday, Stephen Colbert hosted Arturo Rodriguez, the president of United Farm Workers (UFW), on his political comedy show, "The Colbert Report." The interview promotes the UFW's national “Take Our Jobs” campaign, a tongue-in-cheek effort to "recruit U.S. citizens and legal residents to fill jobs that frequently go to undocumented farm workers and to urge enactment of immigration reform."

You can watch the interview here.

About 85% of the U.S. farm worker population is foreign-born, and the vast majority of these immigrants lack work authorization. AgJOBS, as part of a comprehensive immigration reform package, would provide these workers with protections and offer a pathway to legal status.

Breaking News: Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against Arizona

Photo from Alto Arizona

The Justice Department has filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Arizona, regarding its new law requiring police officers to check the legal status of anyone they "reasonably suspect" to be an undocumented immigrant. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that the lawsuit would be filed several weeks ago, and it comes on the tail of President Obama's major speech on immigration last week.

The official press release is available on the Justice Department website. Politico also provides coverage.

As expected, the Justice Department's brief states that S.B. 1070 is unconstitutional. “[T]he Constitution and federal law do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country.”

The brief also makes the point that S.B. 1070 interferes with federal immigration enforcement and distracts police officers from their regular duties.

Arizona's new law is scheduled to go into effect on July 29. Attorney General Eric Holder has requested an injunction but it has not yet been granted.

FCNL recognizes that inaction at the national level has created a vacuum into which states have stepped to create their own immigration laws. We oppose the new Arizona law, which opens the door to racial profiling and erodes trust between police officers and the communities they serve. We welcome the Department of Justice’s lawsuit, which asserts that federal immigration laws should be enforced by federal authorities. The Obama administration does not want to see a patchwork of state laws created, which would only yield a more chaotic and less humane immigration system.

The outcome of this lawsuit may influence the twenty-two other states which have proposed or introduced similar legislation. Ultimately, however, blocking state legislation will not be enough to fix the broken immigration system. We urge Congress to enact comprehensive, humane immigration reform before more states and cities decide to follow Arizona’s path toward a reactionary state in which we all have to “show our papers” to prove our legitimate status in the United States.

Not Surprising

Photo courtesy of Latin American Studies

Yesterday, President Obama delivered his first major speech on immigration reform.

A year and a half ago, when he took office, President Obama was poised to act on an agenda of change - and to make good on a promise to reform the broken immigration system within the first year. That promise has not been kept.

In fact, the situation now is worse than it was then. Deportations are on the rise, immigration courts are overburdened, and families live in constant fear of being separated. In the absence of bold leadership from President Obama and swift action by Congress, states have taken matters into their own hands with dire consequences.

This speech was notable as much for its omissions as its content. We did not hear the president setting a timetable for drafting and passing a bill. We did not hear a commitment to protecting vulnerable populations during immigration enforcement actions. We did not hear any mention of the anticipated Department of Justice lawsuit against Arizona's new law.

What did we hear? A compassionate description of the value of immigrants' contributions to U.S. society and economy, an outline of the major components of immigration reform, and accusations that the minority party has impeded the creation of a viable bill. In short, nothing new.

President Obama did call the new Arizona law "ill conceived" and "divisive," and he acknowledged that we can't "solve the problem only with fences and border patrols." Still, at the moment the administration is doing just that. At FCNL, we are deeply disappointed with the president's decision to deploy 1,200 National Guard troops on the U.S.-Mexico border.

As the New York Times editorializes, "Mr. Obama appealed to middle of the debate, to Americans who crave lawfulness but reject the cruelty symbolized by Arizona’s new law." If lawfulness is the goal, then we need Congress to provide a federal solution - and soon.

Missed the speech? You can watch the video here or read the transcript here.

The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal both offer coverage of the speech.

Obama's Speech on Immigration: Why Now?

Today, President Obama will deliver a major speech on comprehensive immigration reform. But the lackluster effort by Congress to create a bipartisan bill, and the ever-rising rate of deportations, leads us to ask: Mr. President, why now?

The Daily Beast's Bryan Curtis offers an incisive assessment of the timing of the president's speech in this article. Bottom line: When the Obama administration took office, we expected bold leadership on humane immigration reform but that promise has not yet been fulfilled. The humanitarian crisis stemming from the broken immigration system has become increasingly severe.

Stay tuned for an analysis of the speech later today.