ImmigrationProf Blog

U.S. Immigration Law's Impacts on Families and Juveniles

Families and children often are in the immigration news.  CNN tells the tragic story of a U.S. citizen who was murdered in Mexico while he waited with his Mexican national wife to obtain the necessary pwaperwork to come lawfully to this country.

On a more optimistic note, Public Counsel’s Kristen Jackson has the cover story in the Los Angeles Lawyer about Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. "Sitting largely unnoticed on a single page of the Immigration and Nationality Act is a unique classification whose purpose is not only to benefit immigrant children but also to do so consistent with accepted child welfare principles and with international norms. This classification is known as Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, or SIJS.”  She concludes:  “SIJS has not opened the floodgates to unauthorized immigration, but it has changed thousands of children’s and adoptive parents’ lives. The DREAM Act has the same potential to transform politics, policy, and the futures of many people.”

Also focusing on juveniles and teh U.S. immigration laws, Elizabeth Frankel (Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights at the University of Chicago) has published an article in the Duke Forum on Law and Social Change entitled "Detention and Deportation with Inadequate Due Process: The Devastating Consequences of Juvenile Involvement with Law Enforcement for Immigrant Youth."  The article focuses on the growing population of immigrant children apprehended each year by Immigration and Customs Enforcement after coming into contact with state and local police. It examines how these youth are forced to navigate two competing custodial and legal systems—the juvenile justice and immigration systems—with the likely result that they will end up detained for lengthy periods of time and ultimately deported. The article argues that the unique needs and vulnerabilities of these children gives rise to a due process right to counsel at government expense.

KJ

It is Almost Baseball Season! Cheering for the Criminal Alien

Professor César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández (Professor Capital) discusses the recent arrest in the Dominican Republic of Cleveland Indians pitcher Fausto Carmona for allegedly lying about his name and age to get signed as a baseball player. His take on the arrest, and its possible immigration consequences in seeking to return to the United States, in “Cheering for the Criminal Alien” is interesting.

KJ

Maryland Panel Makes Recommendations on Immigration

From the University of Maryland:

'Common Sense' Immigration Policy Recommended by Maryland State Panel

COLLEGE PARK, Md. - Immigrants to Maryland contribute significantly to the state's economy, and were vital to its workforce expansion in both technical and less-skilled occupations from 2000 to 2010, concludes a new report by a Maryland commission. During this period, immigrants mostly complemented rather than competed with U.S.-born state residents for jobs, it adds.

The Commission to Study the Impact of Immigrants in Maryland, a state panel coordinated by the University of Maryland, evaluated the economic contributions of the state's foreign-born and the cost of government services for them. It also studied the education experience of the children of immigrants, immigration law enforcement issues facing local communities, and the use of the federal E-Verify system to verify workers' immigration status.

The panel's final report, "The Impact of Immigrants in Maryland," says the state's foreign-born workers accounted for more than 57 percent of workforce expansion from 2000 to 2010. This was well above the national average of 45 percent.

Also, the report urges legislators to take a long view of immigration, which will show that the benefits significantly outweigh the costs, even the short run fiscal costs of providing state and local services. It says the state would be "foolhardy" to shortchange the education of immigrants' children, who will be part of the state's future workforce.

"The panel has adopted a common sense approach that we believe reflects the will of the State," says Commission Chair Larry Shinagawa, a University of Maryland professor and demographer. "We've based our findings on the demographic and economic facts and the legal responsibilities of Maryland's jurisdictions, and we believe our recommendations can help the State leverage global energy and talent to continue as a diverse, prosperous, and dynamic community."

The General Assembly authorized the commission in 2008, and the panel first met in 2010. As staff director, University of Maryland economist Jeffrey Werling, who directs the university's econometric research center, Inforum, coordinated the work of the panel, which included representatives from the governor's office, both houses of the Assembly, and the private sector. Together, they scoured data sources and immigration literature and interviewed dozens of witnesses.

Among the report's major findings and recommendations:

ECONOMIC IMPACT
"Immigrants have made considerable contributions to Maryland's leading industries in the information, science, and medical fields," the report says, pointing to evidence from 2000 to 2010. Additionally, unskilled immigrants play important roles in agriculture, seafood, construction, tourism, and transportation.

"Without the influx of foreign-born workers, expansion in these labor-intensive industries would have been choked off, increasing prices and discouraging growth across the economy," it finds.

The report did note that when economic growth is weak, competition from new immigrants may lead to lower wages and contribute to unemployment among lower-skilled workers. "Notably, when it occurs, the negative effects of new immigration are most concentrated on the wage and employment opportunities of previous low-skilled immigrants.”

FISCAL IMPACT
Foreign-born workers' contribution to economic growth largely supplies the tax and other resources needed to cope with the larger population that immigration produces, the report says.

A 2007 Congressional Budget Office report concluded that, in aggregate and over the long term, immigrants pay more in federal, state, and local taxes than they use in government services.

The rapid influx of lesser-skilled immigrants can strain the capacity of state and local government budgets to supply health and education services. About three-fourths of the costs of serving immigrants, regardless of legal status, involve providing a public education for their children - services the U.S. Supreme Court says cannot be denied. Many of these children are U.S. citizens.

LAW ENFORCEMENT
The report finds that immigrants are less likely to commit violent crime than the U.S.-born, and it urges communities to be wary of federal programs designed to engage local police agencies in the enforcement of U.S. immigration law.

There are two major programs that can involve local law enforcement agencies. Under "Secure Communities,"  fingerprints of those arrested for any criminal offense that are sent for identification to the FBI are automatically forwarded to immigration officials to determine whether the person in custody is subject to deportation. A second program,  "287(g)," creates a partnership that deputizes local officers to enforce federal immigration law.

The Commission's recommendation: "Programs that enroll local law agencies in enforcing immigration law can work against the interests of Maryland's communities. Local jurisdictions should engage with these programs only under certain conditions."

EDUCATION
The education of children of immigrant parents provides many challenges to public school systems, the report finds. Some immigrant youth feel a sense of isolation from their communities and pessimism surrounding their futures, failing to get into a positive cycle of academic enrichment, extracurricular activities, and social engagement.

"Regardless of their status, it is most likely that the children of unauthorized immigrants will be part of the labor force over the coming decades," the report says. "This labor force will underpin the U.S. and Maryland economies, not to mention the Social Security and Medicare benefits that current workers expect to receive. It would be foolhardy, then, for state and local communities to withhold education and other opportunities from those future workers."

To insure Maryland's continued global economic and technical leadership, the state must redouble its efforts to provide superior education at every level to all young residents, including the foreign-born, regardless of immigration status, the report concludes.

FULL COPY AVAILABLE
A full copy of the report is available online: http://www.inforum.umd.edu/mdimmigration/content/md_immigration_commission_finalreport.pdf

MEDIA CONTACTS
Neil Tickner
UMD Public Affairs
301-405-4622
ntickner@umd.edu

Larry Shinagawa, Ph.D.
Commission Chair
UMD Professor and Director of Asian American Studies
301-405-0996
lshinaga@umd.edu

Jeffrey Werling, Ph.D.
Commission Staff Director
Executive Director of UMD Inforum Economic Research Center
301-405-4607
jwerling@umd.edu

bh

International and European Migration Call for Papers

From MERKOURIOS

Utrecht Journal of International and European Law

The Editorial Board of Merkourios, the Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, invites you to take notice of our new Call for Papers concerning the subject of International and European Migration Law. We kindly request for the distribution of this Call among professors, colleagues and (PhD-)students. Contact merkourios@urios.com for more information. April 23 deadline.

We thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

On Behalf of the Merkourios Board of Editors
Mindy Cooper
Executive Editor
Merkourios, Utrecht Journal of International and European Law
www.merkourios.org

bh

Terrorist Watch List Challenge to No-Fly Rule Re-instated

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

A Stanford student who was arrested at San Francisco International Airport in 2005 before being allowed to fly to her native Malaysia can sue the U.S. government over her apparent inclusion on its no-fly list, which has kept her from re-entering the United States, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

In a 2-1 decision, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reinstated a lawsuit by Rahinah Ibrahim, who says she was mistakenly placed on a terrorist watch list - a list whose government overseers have acknowledged thousands of errors in the past decade.

The Department of Homeland Security maintains lists of hundreds of thousands of passengers who allegedly pose a risk of terrorism or air piracy, information it shares with airlines. Those on the no-fly list are barred from boarding. Those on the larger "selectee" list can fly but are subjected to additional searches.

Ibrahim's status is unclear. When she arrived at an SFO ticket counter in January 2005, a clerk said he found her name on a no-fly list and called police, who - after contacting federal authorities - handcuffed her and held her in a cell at the airport for two hours.

She was released and allowed to fly the next day, with extra searches at each stop. But when she tried to return two months later, an airport agent in Kuala Lumpur turned her away and said she was subject to arrest. A month after that, the U.S. consulate said her student visa had been revoked under a terrorism law, an explanation that was repeated when she reapplied in 2009. Read more...

bh

Call on Honda, Hyndai, Daimler to Oppose Alabama HB 56

From the Campaign for Community Change:

The Campaign for Community Change is joining with labor, civil rights and human rights organizations today to call on foreign-owned automakers doing business in Alabama to speak out against the state’s vehemently anti-immigrant law.
 
To date, none of the foreign automakers have voiced an opinion on the law, H.B. 56.
 
“Their silence is akin to an endorsement of the law, and if they feel otherwise, the automakers must stand up and speak out against the law, and call for its repeal,” said Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the Campaign for Community Change. “Foreign investors should realize that the law targets anyone who is not a U.S. citizen.”
 
The Campaign for Community Change is part of a national effort to get the top three foreign automakers in Alabama, Daimler AG, Honda and Hyundai, to join the effort to repeal H.B. 56. Information on the campaign can be found at www.repealhb56.org.

bh

Immigration Multimedia Contest

From the American Immigration Council:

The American Immigration Council Seeks Entries to New National Multimedia Contest

The American Immigration Council is calling all young filmmakers and photographers to submit to the 2012 “Change in Motion” Multimedia Contest. The contest invites young adults to explore the role that immigration plays in their lives and communities through video and other multimedia projects. The first place prize is $1,000! Projects should focus on celebrating America as a nation of immigrants and exploring immigration's impact on our everyday lives.

Who is eligible?

Young adults between the ages of 16-25 are eligible to submit entries.  Both individual and group entries are permitted, however there is a single cash prize for first, second and third place.

What do we mean by “multimedia”?

Acceptable entries include videos projects or photo essays. (Check out these examples created in iMovie and Power Point)

How technical does my project need to be?

Your story and the way you tell it matter more than how sophisticated your technical abilities are.

Is there a time limit?

Entries should be no more than 5 minutes in length.

How do we enter the contest?

There are two ways to submit entries.

Submit a complete and signed entry form and a copy of the multimedia file on a CD or DVD, to the American Immigration Council “Change in Motion” Multimedia Contest , 1331 G Street N.W. Suite 200, Washington, DC  20005.

Submit your video entry via your own YouTube account.  Send us an email, attach a complete and signed entry form and a link to the submission on your YouTube account. Type "2012 MULTIMEDIA Contest" in the subject line. We will add the content on the American Immigration Council’s Playlist on YouTube. (When submitting your videos please tag the content with the following: “American Immigration Council’s “Change in Motion” Multimedia contest 2012.)  

Who will judge the contest?

The winners will be chosen by representatives of the American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and a panel of distinguished judges.

What criteria will be used to select the winner?

The multimedia entries will be judged on the basis of concept, originality, creativity, aesthetics, technical execution and relevance.

What is the prize?

There are first ($1,000), second ($500) and third place ($250) prizes.

What is the deadline?

The deadline is Midnight EST, April 17, 2012.

For more information, including the rules and terms of the contest, please visit our Multimedia Contest page or email submissions@immcouncil.org

bh

Tell Cook County to Stand Behind ICE Detainer Ordinance

From the National Immigrant Justice Center:

Action Alert

Tell Cook County to Stay Strong on Immigration Detainer Ordinance

Five months ago, the Cook County Board of Commissioners passed an ordinance to keep taxpayers from picking up the tab for federal immigration enforcement.  For years, the federal government has issued “detainers” that instruct local police to hold individuals after their authority has expired and until immigration agents can take custody, costing Cook County residents millions of dollars each year.

The county board found that the vast majority of individuals held on detainers had only minor criminal charges, and that the federal detainer policy dissuaded immigrant victims and witnesses from stepping forward to report crimes.

The county ordinance is a good policy that protects public safety and reserves limited law enforcement resources.

But the board is now rethinking its vote.

Tell Cook County commissioners to stand behind the original ordinance rejecting these costly detainers.

Why is the Board reconsidering the ordinance?

U.S. Immigration and Customs and Enforcement (ICE) and the media are exploiting one family’s tragic loss to fuel anti-immigrant fear and strong-arm Cook County into paying for federal immigration enforcement.

Saul Chavez killed Chicagoan William McCann while driving drunk last summer. A Cook County judge gave Chavez, an undocumented immigrant with a DUI conviction, an uncharacteristically low bond, which Chavez paid. Chavez has since disappeared, and officials suspect he returned to Mexico.

The McCann family deserves justice, but the solution does not lie in the detainer ordinance. Here’s the problem:  had Cook County honored ICE’s detainer request, Chavez would have been deported to Mexico within a matter of weeks. He would have never made it to a criminal trial. He would not have served a criminal sentence. Justice would not have been served.

This Thursday, the Cook County Board will hear testimony and they need to hear from you!  They may vote to amend the ordinance, costing Cook County taxpayers millions of dollars and harming immigrant communities who help local police keep criminals off the streets.

Tell the Board that immigrants are not scapegoats for a broken criminal justice system. Stand behind the immigration detainer ordinance.

Thank you for speaking out.

Sincerely,

Tara Tidwell Cullen
National Immigrant Justice Center

bh

Best Super Bowl Story: Blind Haitian Immigrant Attends Super Bowl, Son Stars for the Winning Team

Here is the best Super Bowl Story.  And, no, it is not about Madonna, Clint Eastwood, or Eli Manning.  Haitian American footballer, Jason Pierre-Paul, helped lead his team, the New York Giants, to a win in Super Bowl XLVI. Pierre-Paul anchored the Giants' defense as his blind Haitian-born father, Jean Pierre-Paul, sat in the stands, experiencing his first Super Bowl and listening to the game in French.

 

KJ

FEDERAL JUDGE ALLOWS FOR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION PROVIDED TO SOLICITOR GENERAL IN NKEN

The Justice Department has been ordered to disclose the basis for the U.S. government's representation to the Supreme Court in Nken v. Holder that a policy exists for returning wrongfully deported immigrants to this country.  See Download Rakoff ruling. Judge Jed Rakoff, of the Southern District of New York issued a decision yesterday rejecting the U.S. government's attempts to shield Department of Justice emails communicating government policy for immigrants who win their cases post-deportation. On the basis of these emails, the Solicitor General had argued to the Supreme Court in 2009 that the U.S. government maintains a policy and practice for returning immigrants who are deported by ICE while their judicial appeals are pending, but are later found by the courts to have been wrongfully deported. However, the experience of immigrants trying to return home stands in stark contrast to this statement. The NYU School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic represented the plaintiffs in teh case.

KJ

True Immigration Reform: Bringing Immigration Law in Synch with the U.S. Labor Market

In the presidential primaries and state legislatures across the country, immigration reform once again has proven to be the proverbial hot potato. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney now champions policy measures facilitating “self-deportation.” Others, including President Obama, advocate a “path to legalization” for undocumented immigrants. The gulf between these two divergent reform proposals is vast, with passions running high on both sides.

Unfortunately, few policy-makers advocate addressing the basic problem with the U.S. immigration laws – that they long have been out of synch with the nation’s labor needs. Until the nation reforms its immigration laws to address the needs of the U.S labor market – and the demand of employers for workers, we will not adequately reform an immigration system that many have characterized as “broken.”

In the middle of the Cold War, Congress passed the comprehensive U.S. immigration and nationality law, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA). The law was a product of the times and almost annual reforms in the last 50+ years have failed to change it much. Focused on the communist threat, the INA was founded on a deep and enduring suspicion of foreigners and built a plethora of roadblocks to keep prospective immigrants out of the country, including political, economic, and other litmus tests. In the formulation of the INA, labor market and employment considerations were not at the center, or the periphery. Congress never amended the INA to, at a fundamental level, ensure that the laws comport with the nation’s need for workers. Today, the U.S. immigration laws provide many more avenues for family-based than employment-based immigration.

As the social science research makes clear, undocumented immigrants come and remain in this country because of the availability of jobs. Employers often demand low- and medium-skilled labor. That labor is in abundance in other nations, including in our southern neighbor Mexico.

The problem is that the U.S. immigration laws make it much easier for highly skilled, such as Nobel Prize winners, professional athletes, and many of those with advanced degrees, to secure an employment visa, but offer few legal avenues for immigration to low- and medium-skilled workers. Absent a family member in the United States, most workers do not have a way to come legally to this country. Thus, to say that “they should wait in line like everyone else” exhibits a fundamental misunderstanding of the U.S. immigration laws: the law provides no line for many, perhaps most, would-be immigrants seeking jobs to wait in.

Moreover, some skilled immigrants often face impediments to legal immigration. Bill Gates has testified before Congress on the need to increase the numbers of high-skilled immigrants – engineers are what he had in mind -- coming to the United States. This, he claims, is necessary to ensure U.S. competitiveness in the global economy.

The lack of legal avenues for many workers to come to the United States is an incentive for foreign citizens who want jobs and access to the U.S. economy to circumvent the immigration laws to come to this country. At least in good economic times, jobs are available, especially in agriculture, restaurant and hotel, the domestic service industry, and other sectors of the economy. Valued in these job markets, undocumented immigrants get these jobs. There just is not the legal avenue for many foreigners to come to the United States and take those jobs.

There obviously are other important contributors to undocumented immigration. The operation of annual limits on migration from high-migration countries, such as Mexico, the Philippines, India, and China, can mean that a noncitizen may be required to wait many years – even decades -- to rejoin family in the United States. Foreign citizens come to this country because they have suffered, or fear, political, religious, or other persecution in their homelands. Nonetheless, jobs are the predominant reason that many immigrants, legal and not, come to the United States.

As a direct result of the limited avenues for workers to come lawfully to the United States, the nation currently has an estimated undocumented population in the neighborhood of 10-12 million. The population appears to have decreased somewhat, which probably should be attributed more to the tightness of the current job market rather than any border enforcement measures. This logic seems evident once one considers that the undocumented population doubled from around 5-6 million in the early 1990s to around 10-12 million in 2008. This occurred despite unprecedented immigration enforcement efforts, such as military-style border operations – with tens of thousands more “boots on the ground” -- in the U.S./Mexico border region, record-levels of deportations and detentions of noncitizens, and a plethora of security measures directed at noncitizens after the tragedy of September 11.

The truth of the matter is that, when the U.S. economy was good, the undocumented population grew. When the economy tanked, it decreased. The reason for the difference was the relative availability of jobs.

Unfortunately, virtually all of the immigration reform proposals fail to address the labor market phenomenon at the core of immigration. The Mitt Romney “self-deportation” plan (as well as many of the state immigration enforcement laws) champions policies that make the lives of undocumented immigrants – and many others, including U.S. citizens who are Latino – as difficult as possible so that they will “self-deport.” However, the quest for jobs and a better life for one’s family are unlikely to be deterred by, for example, increasing the numbers of immigrants deported for petty crimes (or no crimes but simply arrested and deported). It intuitively seems unlikely that migrants who were undeterred by border enforcement efforts and risked their lives to cross the United States/Mexico border, would “self-deport” because their lives here were merely being made uncomfortable.

Similarly, it is true that a “path to legalization” might ease some of the difficulties faced by a “shadow population” of undocumented immigrants in the United States. One of the many versions of the DREAM Act would be savior to undocumented college students. While I support both measures in principle, we need to make forth deeper and more fundamental changes to the U.S. immigration laws to truly address the causes of undocumented immigration.

Valuable lessons may be learned from the nation’s experience with the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which President Reagan signed into law in 1986. Some might see IRCA as the 1980s equivalent to today’s proposed “comprehensive immigration reform.” IRCA provided for increased enforcement measures, including provisions for the sanctioning of the employers of undocumented immigrants (known as employer sanctions), an “amnesty” program for undocumented immigrants, and guest worker programs. Supporters proclaimed at the time that IRCA was the solution to the nation’s immigration woes, including undocumented immigration. The reform, however, did not include any fundamental changes to the employment provisions for legal immigration.

The result of the 1986 reforms was that, while enforcement was increased and hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants regularized their immigration status, the incentives for undocumented immigration did not change under the law. As described above, many would-be immigrants found it difficult to lawfully come to the United States to work and, in the last 25 five years, millions have circumvented the laws to do so.

Some critics claim that the U.S. government has failed to enforce the immigration laws, including employer sanctions under IRCA. However, sanctions have proven difficult to implement, with employers unhappy about the paperwork and prospective employees concerned with discrimination against perceived undocumented workers. Despite monumental efforts, the nation over many years has sought, but ultimately failed, to come up with a computer database, including the federal E-Verify system, with a sufficiently low error rate that would make it easier for employers to check the employment authorization for workers and applicants. Construction of a system that does not have a high error rate does not appear to be on the horizon.

The nation’s experience with IRCA suggests that piling on enforcement provisions in hopes of encouraging “self-deportation,” or granting relief to today’s undocumented immigrants, will not solve the nation’s immigration concerns. Any reform proposal that does not address the pull of jobs and the needs of the American labor market is likely to fail in the long run. As with the IRCA experience, eliminating an undocumented population, without more, will not prevent the emergence of a new undocumented population.

What the United States needs is an immigration system that recognizes that hard-working people want to come to the United States for jobs and makes it easier for hard-working people to lawfully come to the United States for jobs. The laws should recognize the labor needs of employers and the global thirst for work in the American economy. Making it easier for larger numbers of low-, medium- , and high skilled workers to immigrate would be a good start. This would represent a much-needed move away from the dark suspicion of foreigners embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act.

If I am right, the immigration enforcement laws like those passed in Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and other stated will result in great cost to immigrants and the state economies but will not ultimately address the issues contributing to undocumented immigration. It also means that a reform measure providing a path to legalization for undocumented workers, or the DREAM Act for undocumented college students, will have limited – even if positive -- impacts. The nation needs more fundamental change in the immigration laws.

KJ

Share of Immigration Cases Ending in Deportation Orders Hits Record Low

TRAC reports that. during the first three months of FY 2012, cases disposed of in the nation's Immigration Courts showed a drop in deportation orders and an increase in the number of individuals allowed to stay in the United States. In percentage terms, the shift was striking. In only about half of the cases (50.8 percent) were individuals ordered removed. This was down substantially from the 56.1 percent who were ordered removed during the previous quarter. Nationally, this is the smallest share ever recorded in court data tracking outcomes during the past two decades.

Counting both removal and voluntary departure orders, slightly fewer than two out of every three cases (64.8 percent) in the first quarter of FY 2012 ended in a deportation order, also an historic low.

Note that these dramatic changes may be related to a review by ICE of all pending Immigration Court cases. The aim of this review, announced on August 18, 2011, was to identify cases which were not deemed to be enforcement priorities.

KJ

Mexican and Indian Immigrants Lead Naturalization Numbers

Each year, more than a half million immigrants become U.S. citizens through the naturalization process. In general, these are adult, lawful permanent residents who have resided in the United States for five years. Fewer years of residence are required for those married to a U.S. citizen or those who are in the U.S. military.  For example, in 2010, 619,913 individuals were naturalized. The leading number of those naturalized were from Mexico (67,062), followed by India (61,142), the Philippines (35,465), the People’s Republic of China (33,969), and Vietnam (19,315). The largest number of these new citizens reside in California (129,354), New York (67,972), and Florida (67,484). Read more...

bh

CAIR Asks Clinton to Intervene on behalf of Libyan American

From the Sacramento  Bee:

 A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization today called on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to intervene in the case of a American citizen of Libyan origin barred from returning to the United States and interrogated by the FBI about his religious beliefs, including his belief in "Shariah" (Islamic principles).

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said Jamal Tarhuni, a 55-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen who lives in Portland, Ore., was denied boarding for a flight to the United States in January when he tried to return home from Libya. He was reportedly told that an "unspecified federal agency" wanted to interview him.

Tarhuni said he was questioned by the FBI on January 23 about his religious beliefs and about his work overseeing delivery of relief supplies sent to Libya by a Portland-based Christian non-profit group. His daughter told msnbc.com that FBI agents asked her father whether he practiced "Shariah law."

The msnbc.com report noted: "The question about Shariah law was especially tricky. To Tarhuni, an observant Muslim, Shariah means a set of rules for praying, marrying, parenting and generally conducting a good life, which would be a subject for discussion at any mosque, but not — as some people interpret it — as a set of rigid and punitive rules that Muslims are obliged to impose on others." Read more...

bh

ICE Creates Public Advocate Position

From Immigration and Customs Enforcement:

As part of the agency's ongoing detention reform initiative and other enforcement-related initiatives, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) today announced its first Public Advocate, ICE Senior Advisor Andrew Lorenzen-Strait. Lorenzen-Strait will serve as a point of contact for individuals, including those in immigration proceedings, NGOs and other community and advocacy groups, who have concerns, questions, recommendations or other issues they would like to raise.
"As our first Public Advocate, Andrew Lorenzen-Strait will work to expand and enhance our dialogue with the stakeholder community," said ICE Director John Morton. "We want the public to know that they have a representative at this agency whose sole duty is to ensure their voice is heard and their interests are recognized, and I'm confident Andrew will serve the community well in this capacity."
Lorenzen-Strait has served with ICE since 2008, first as an advisor and analyst on policies related to immigration enforcement, detention and juveniles and most recently, as the senior advisor for Enforcement and Removal Operation's (ERO) detention management division. In 2007, Lorenzen-Strait was named the Maryland Attorney of the Year for Pro Bono Service for his work with Community Legal Services of Prince George's County.
In his new role as public advocate, Lorenzen-Strait will report directly to the Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) Director Gary Mead and will be responsible for:
Assisting individuals and community stakeholders in addressing and resolving complaints and concerns in accordance with agency policies and operations, particularly concerns related to ICE enforcement actions involving U.S. citizens;
Informing stakeholders on ERO policies, programs, and initiatives and enhance understanding of ERO's mission and core values;
Engaging stakeholders and building partnerships to facilitate communication, foster collaboration, and solicit input on immigration enforcement initiatives and operations; and
Advising ICE leadership on stakeholder findings, concerns, recommendations, and priorities as they relate to improving immigration enforcement efforts and activities.
The creation of the Public Advocate position is another milestone is ICE's ongoing work to enact significant policy changes and improvements to focus the agency's immigration enforcement resources on sensible priorities that promote public safety, border security and the integrity of the immigration system. In addition to implementing policies and processes that ensure discretion is used in deciding the types of individuals ICE prioritizes for removal from the country, the agency has also embarked upon a long-term detention reform initiative. These reform efforts are focused on prioritizing the health and safety of detainees in our custody while increasing federal oversight and improving the conditions of confinement within the detention system.
ICE will continue to analyze its policies and the results of its programs, making improvements where necessary to meet our priorities.

bh

Immigration Article of the Day: Constitutionalizing Immigration Law on its Own Path by Anne R. Traum

"Constitutionalizing Immigration Law on its Own Path" Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 33, No. 2, p. 491, 2011 UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper ANNE R. TRAUM, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law.

ABSTRACT: Courts should insist on heightened procedural protections in immigration adjudication. They should do so under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause rather than by importing Sixth Amendment protections from the criminal context. Traditional judicial oversight and the Due Process Clause provide a better basis than the Sixth Amendment to interpose heightened procedural protections in immigration proceedings, especially those involving removal for a serious criminal conviction. The Supreme Court’s immigration jurisprudence in recent years lends support for this approach. The Court has guarded the availability of judicial review of immigration decisions. It has affirmed that courts are the arbiters of constitutional issues (including due process) and criminal statutory interpretation. The Court has accorded agency deference on matters of agency expertise, which does not include interpretation of criminal law and convictions. And the Court has created generally applicable procedural protections in order to minimize court interference with substantive immigration policy. Guided by these core concepts, courts are poised to develop procedural protections for immigrants in removal proceedings that are tailored to the institutional interests at stake and protective of immigrants. By constitutionalizing immigration on its own path, courts may also avoid some of the pitfalls of a Sixth Amendment–based criminal-rights model.

KJ

Ninth Circuit: Obama Administration Must Put Up or Shut Up on Prosecutorial Discretion

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in an order joined by Judges Canby and Fisher (with a stinging dissent by Judge O'Scannlain), has pushed the Obama administration on the exercise of prosecutorial discretion as outlined in the June 2011 memorandum by Immigration & Customs Enforcement head John Morton:

"Luis Mata-Fasardo has filed a petition for panel rehearing in this matter. Mata-Fasardo has had a long-term presence in the United States and has two United States citizen children. He does not appear to have any criminal convictions.

In light of ICE Director John Morton’s June 17, 2011 memo regarding prosecutorial discretion, and the November 17, 2011 follow-up memo providing guidance to ICE Attorneys, the government shall advise the court by March 19, 2012, whether the government intends to exercise prosecutorial discretion in this case and, if so, the effect, if any, of the exercise of such discretion on any action to be taken by this court with regard to Petitioner’s pending petition for rehearing."

The same panel entered a similar order in a number of other cases. See here, here, here, here. The motions panel appranetly decided to prod the Justice Department to live up to the much-publicized endorsement of the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in removal cases involving long term residents without criminal records. We shall see how the DOJ responds.

KJ

8 U.S. States Suffering the Worst Brain Drain

“8 U.S. States Suffering the Worst Brain Drain” lists the top 8 states losing the highest percentage of their college graduates. The states, all which have suffered economically in recent years, are:

1. Michigan

2. Colorado

3. Oklahoma

4. Idaho

5. Alaska 6.

6. Ariuzona

7. Wyoming

8. Iowa

KJ

Discrediting Self Deportation as Immigration Policy

Today, the Immigration Policy Center releases Discrediting "Self Deportation" as Immigration Policy by Michele Waslin, Ph.D. The term “self deportation” has been used lately as a way to deal with our nation’s immigration woes. However, the concept of self-deportation is not new and is part of a broader “attrition through enforcement” strategy, which is designed to make life so inhospitable for unauthorized immigrants that they will leave on their own. The groups behind “attrition through enforcement” have pushed federal and state legislative proposals, provided litigation support, and created a network of organizations to promote it. However, this strategy does nothing to address our national immigration problems and instead places unprecedented legal, fiscal, and economic burdens on states and local communities.

KJ

BORDER PHOTOS SHOW ON THE BORDER WALL ITSELF

Border Wall, Mexicali, Baja California Norte February 2 through April 30 "Beyond Borders" -- photographs by David Bacon

On February 2, the Center for Cultural Investigation of the Autonomous University of Baja California mounted an exhibition of 18 large photographs, taken by photographer David Bacon, on the border wall, next to the garita, or gate, between Mexicali, in Mexico, and Calexico, in the United States. The photographs, which measure about 6' by 4', hang on the steel beams that make up the wall in the section of the border that lies between the two cities. They hang on the Mexican side, next to the lanes where traffic lines up, waiting to cross into the U.S. At times, hundreds of cars spend over an hour in the lines, giving drivers ample opportunity to look at and react to the images. The show, called "Beyond Borders," consists of images that document the process of migration. Some show the life of Mexican migrants in the U.S., while others were taken in migrants' home communities in Mexico. Three photographs show children working in the fields in northern Baja California, including one taken just a few miles from the Mexicali gate itself.

In an interview with local media at the show's opening reception, in a park across the street from the wall, Bacon explained, "As a photographer, I've tried to create images that aren't neutral. They are, first, a reality check, showing what life is actually like, trying to do it through the eyes of people themselves. But they are also a form of social criticism - of poverty, of the discrimination and unequal status migrants face, especially in the U.S., but even in Mexico itself. Therefore, they're also a call for social change. So what better place to show them than on the wall itself? The Center is using an object hated on both sides of the border, and reclaiming it as a site for developing popular culture, and even more, a space where people can be urged to make changes so that some day we live in a world where the wall itself will not exist."

Luis Ongay, director of the Center for Cultural Investigation of the Autonomous University of Baja California, said that many people will see the show, because of its location where cars and pedestrians are crossing to the United States. "We know this is an open space, it's bringing the museum into a public space." He invites people to give their comments on its Facebook page.

Christian Fernandez, center subdirector, noted that the exhibit uses images that are part of a project of popular art and culture, and then shows them in a way that is accessible to ordinary people. "We have a show about migration, and the people looking at the images are those who themselves are crossing the border - migrating." He pointed to two images, one depicting an old labor camp in the Palo Verde Valley, which housed bracero workers in the 1950s, and another portrait of a former bracero, taken in Oaxaca. "Some former braceros, who are very old now, come on Sundays to this park to meet and talk with each other. What will they think of the images that show parts of their own experience?" Bacon especially thanked Natalia Rojas, who was able to create the very high quality prints. The prints were made on plastic-coated fabric, stretched across metal frames, and coated with an anti-UV protective film. Fernandez said he hoped that the prints would survive the next three months of the show, and that if they did, the center might then bring them to other sections of the border wall in Baja California.

KJ