Immprof Maureen Sweeney (Univ. of Maryland) is the guest lecturer you need for teaching the categorical and modified categorial approaches to analyzing whether criminal convictions qualify as aggravated felonies or crimes of moral turpitude with deportation consequences.
You might be thinking that you don't have the money to fly Maureen out to speak to your class. I didn't either. But I still brought her into class with her two excellent youtube videos on these topics. And while I've mentioned these before (here, here), it really bears repeating. These are incredibly complex topics that she miraculously makes understandable.
While we're talking about the categorical approach, let me also recommend Kevin Johnson's article Racial Profiling in the War on Drugs Meets the Immigration Removal Process: The Case of Moncrieffe v. Holder. The article offers a lot of background information about the Moncrieffe arrest - what the arresting officer was searching for that night, what he found with Moncrieffe, and his reasoning behind the arrest. The article gives immprofs a great way to talk about the connections between race, likelihood of arrest, quality of representation when accused, and how all those factors will disparately impact immigrants of color in the United States.
Bring Maureen and Kevin to class. Your students will appreciate it.
As one might expect given the prominence of the issue in his presidential campaign and his presidency, Trump spent some time during the speech on immigration. He focused on what the administration had done so far on immigration, the possibility for immigration reform, and the crime victims of immigrants.
"To protect our citizens, I have directed the Department of Justice to form a Task Force on Reducing Violent Crime.
I have further ordered the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, along with the Department of State and the Director of National Intelligence, to coordinate an aggressive strategy to dismantle the criminal cartels that have spread across our Nation.
We will stop the drugs from pouring into our country and poisoning our youth -- and we will expand treatment for those who have become so badly addicted.
At the same time, my Administration has answered the pleas of the American people for immigration enforcement and border security. By finally enforcing our immigration laws, we will raise wages, help the unemployed, save billions of dollars, and make our communities safer for everyone. We want all Americans to succeed --- but that can't happen in an environment of lawless chaos. We must restore integrity and the rule of law to our borders.
For that reason, we will soon begin the construction of a great wall along our southern border. It will be started ahead of schedule and, when finished, it will be a very effective weapon against drugs and crime.
As we speak, we are removing gang members, drug dealers and criminals that threaten our communities and prey on our citizens. Bad ones are going out as I speak tonight and as I have promised.
To any in Congress who do not believe we should enforce our laws, I would ask you this question: what would you say to the American family that loses their jobs, their income, or a loved one, because America refused to uphold its laws and defend its borders?
Our obligation is to serve, protect, and defend the citizens of the United States. We are also taking strong measures to protect our Nation from Radical Islamic Terrorism.
According to data provided by the Department of Justice, the vast majority of individuals convicted for terrorism-related offenses since 9/11 came here from outside of our country. We have seen the attacks at home --- from Boston to San Bernardino to the Pentagon and yes, even the World Trade Center.
We have seen the attacks in France, in Belgium, in Germany and all over the world.
It is not compassionate, but reckless, to allow uncontrolled entry from places where proper vetting cannot occur. Those given the high honor of admission to the United States should support this country and love its people and its values.
We cannot allow a beachhead of terrorism to form inside America -- we cannot allow our Nation to become a sanctuary for extremists.
That is why my Administration has been working on improved vetting procedures, and we will shortly take new steps to keep our Nation safe -- and to keep out those who would do us harm."
Later in the speech, Trump talked about the possibility of immigration reform, but without mentioning a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants:
"I am going to bring back millions of jobs. Protecting our workers also means reforming our system of legal immigration. The current, outdated system depresses wages for our poorest workers, and puts great pressure on taxpayers.
Nations around the world, like Canada, Australia and many others --- have a merit-based immigration system. It is a basic principle that those seeking to enter a country ought to be able to support themselves financially. Yet, in America, we do not enforce this rule, straining the very public resources that our poorest citizens rely upon. According to the National Academy of Sciences, our current immigration system costs America's taxpayers many billions of dollars a year.
Switching away from this current system of lower-skilled immigration, and instead adopting a merit-based system, will have many benefits: it will save countless dollars, raise workers' wages, and help struggling families --- including immigrant families --- enter the middle class.
I believe that real and positive immigration reform is possible, as long as we focus on the following goals: to improve jobs and wages for Americans, to strengthen our nation's security, and to restore respect for our laws.
If we are guided by the well-being of American citizens then I believe Republicans and Democrats can work together to achieve an outcome that has eluded our country for decades."
Near the end of the speech, President Trump returned to immigrants and crime, the topic with which he began his presidential campaign:
"And we must support the victims of crime.
I have ordered the Department of Homeland Security to create an office to serve American Victims. The office is called VOICE --- Victims Of Immigration Crime Engagement. We are providing a voice to those who have been ignored by our media, and silenced by special interests.
Joining us in the audience tonight are four very brave Americans whose government failed them.
Their names are Jamiel Shaw, Susan Oliver, Jenna Oliver, and Jessica Davis.
Jamiel's 17-year-old son was viciously murdered by an illegal immigrant gang member, who had just been released from prison. Jamiel Shaw Jr. was an incredible young man, with unlimited potential who was getting ready to go to college where he would have excelled as a great quarterback. But he never got the chance. His father, who is in the audience tonight, has become a good friend of mine.
Also with us are Susan Oliver and Jessica Davis. Their husbands --- Deputy Sheriff Danny Oliver and Detective Michael Davis --- were slain in the line of duty in California. They were pillars of their community. These brave men were viciously gunned down by an illegal immigrant with a criminal record and two prior deportations.
Sitting with Susan is her daughter, Jenna. Jenna: I want you to know that your father was a hero, and that tonight you have the love of an entire country supporting you and praying for you.
To Jamiel, Jenna, Susan and Jessica: I want you to know --- we will never stop fighting for justice. Your loved ones will never be forgotten, we will always honor their memory."
Astrid Silva, a DREAMer, offered the Democratic reply to Trump's speech in Spanish.
As NPR summarized, "Astrid Silva, a 28-year-old immigration activist from Nevada, delivered the Democrats' Spanish-language response, seeking to cast the president's policies and comments about immigrants in the U.S. illegally as divisive and destructive to millions of otherwise law-abiding families.
She spoke of the case of Guadalupe Garcia de Rayos, an Arizona mother thought to be among the first immigrants deported as a result of Trump's executive order that widely expanded the category of immigrants whom the government considers deportation priorities. . . .
"In this country, there is no space for discrimination, racial profiling or persecution," Silva said. "But sadly, this is what the Trump administration has brought forth for Latinos and immigrants."
This essay offers an early critique of the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Washington v. Trump. Despite its well-meaning intentions, the per curiam opinion is, at bottom, a contrived comedy of errors. First, the court grossly erred by treating a temporary restraining order — that contained no reasoning — as a preliminary injunction. The panel’s insistence that emergency relief be provided is irreconcilable with its own conclusion that no such emergency exists. Second, the panel offered zero analysis of the underlying statutory scheme, which is exceedingly complex and intricate. While it is true that this approach would not resolve all claims, as Justice Jackson reminded us six decades ago, the conjunction or disjunction between Congress and the Presidency informs the exactness of judicial review. This timeless lesson was apparently lost on the panel, which, third, applied the strictest of scrutiny to assess whether the executive order was justified based on “a real risk” rather than alternative facts. Fourth, I analyze the panel’s refusal to narrow an overbroad injunction. Once again, a study of the underlying statutory scheme could have afforded a plausible method of saving part of the order, while excising the unconstitutional portions.
I will close by critiquing the decision’s treatment of two leading precedents. First, the panel distinguished away with gossamer threads Kleindienst v. Mandel, which for four decades established a presumption of non-reviewability for executive decisions concerning exclusion. Second, the court misread Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion in Kerry v. Dinto establish a principle that courts can assess the President’s policy decisions for “bad faith.” Kennedy’s opinion, like Mandel before it, did no such thing; rather, courts could look only at whether individual consular officers acted in good faith, not whether the policy behind that decision was in bad faith.
Personal sentiments about this egregious order should not shade a candid assessment of precedent and constitutional law. This opinion, which enjoins a policy I personally find deeply regrettable, is itself deeply regrettable.
The Urban Institute reminds us that President Trump's recent immigration executive orders affect Asian as well as Latina/o immigrants.
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials last week detained hundreds of undocumented immigrants, including at least one who qualifies for the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive action, prompting emotional reactions from people on both sides of the issue. But public debate about President Trump’s pledge to secure the country’s southern border, cancel DACA, and crack down on illegal immigration often focuses on the large groups of Latinx beneficiaries, overlooking the hundreds of thousands of undocumented Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) families who will also be affected by the president’s immigration actions.
Fox Newsreports that a southern Illinois community that solidly backed President Donald Trump is rallying behind a Mexican restaurant manager who has been detained by immigration officials.
Letters of support for Juan Carlos Hernandez Pacheco, who has a U.S. citizen wife and three U.S. citizen children, have poured in from West Frankfort's mayor, police chief, high school athletic director and the county prosecutor. They describe Hernandez as a role model and praise his robust civil involvement, including funding school scholarships, benefit dinners for families in need and hosting a law enforcement appreciation event.
Hernandez came to the United States in the 1990s but didn't obtain legal status, according to friends. He has been the manager of La Fiesta Mexican Restaurantfor a decade in the community with coal mining roots, about 100 miles southeast of St. Louis.
Though the community largely backed Trump — who has made an aggressive stance on immigration central to his agenda — many residents of West Frankfort said Hernandez' case has complicated their views on immigration policy.
"I think people need to do things the right way, follow the rules and obey the laws, and I firmly believe in that," Lori Barron, the owner of a beauty salon, told The New York Times. "But in the case of Carlos, I think he may have done more for the people here than this place has ever given him. I think it's absolutely terrible that he could be taken away."
"In sum, the justices did not seem to have reached a consensus as to whether Esquivel-Quintana’s crime constituted “sexual abuse of a minor” under the immigration laws. The justices’ questions revealed the complicated interaction among the relevant statutory provisions; the high stakes of removal for lawful permanent residents, the complex state/federal issues involved, and the intersection of criminal and immigration law add to the difficulty and significance of this case. A decision is expected by the end of June."
The Washington Post reports on the body camera footage of a recent protest against President Trump’s immigration policies in Tucson, Arizons shows an 86-year-old woman, weighing less than 100 pounds and standing about 4 feet, 5 inches tall, approaching police officers and pointing at them as she shouted indiscernible words.
Then, a police officer appears to push her arm, causing her to fall backward and hit her head on the pavement. As a 65-year-old woman beside her reaches down to help the woman up, an officer pepper-sprays her in the face, temporarily blinding her and causing her to turn away in pain.
The video footage, released Friday by the Tucson Police Department to a local television station, illustrates the tense clashes from the Feb. 16 protest there that began peacefully but soon escalated as protesters reportedly began disrupting rush-hour traffic. Three police officers sustained minor injuries and four protesters were arrested.
Guest blogger: Marshal Arnwine, University of San Francisco Law Student:
In order to qualify for asylum, an applicant must prove that he or she is a refugee, a person unable or unwilling to return to his or her home country or place of last habitual residence because of past persecution, or a well-founded fear of persecution, on the basis of race, nationality, membership in a particular social group, religion, or political opinion. When the applicant is presenting their case, the story must be credible. A tremendous challenge asylum applicants face is the ability to tell a consistent and highly detailed story of their past persecution or experiences. The inability to tell a consistent story can derive from the severe trauma an asylum applicant experiences. The severe trauma often leads to the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD can cause a person who suffered torture and beatings to blend the different occurrences together and not remember details from a particular event.
PTSD is a mental health condition that is triggered by a terrifying event, either by experiencing it or witnessing it. PTSD can affect an asylum applicant’s credibility. For example,
imagine if you were faced with the task of recalling a traumatic event in your life to an immigration judge and if your story does not “sound” credible, your asylum application can be denied. That is an incredible amount of pressure. Unfortunately, this is the pressure that asylum applicants often feel, and worse, they often lack guidance on how to alleviate that pressure. Attorneys should be diligent in preparing their client for their asylum hearing.
I propose that immigration attorneys send asylum applicants to trauma sensitive interventions before a hearing; that will improve the client’s chances of telling the story credibly, increasing their chances of having a winning asylum application. As of 2016, Veteran Affairs provides two forms of therapy to Veterans who suffer with PTSD. I believe that the same therapy Veterans receive can also benefit asylum applicants in being prepared to tell a consistent credible story.
The first form is cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), which is known to be the most effective type of counseling for PTSD. In cognitive therapy, the therapist helps patients understand and change how they think about their trauma and its aftermath. The goal is to help the patient understand how certain thoughts about their trauma causes stress and worsen their symptoms. I believe CBT would be helpful to asylum applicants because they would know what thoughts and words trigger certain negative feelings that could cause them to inaccurately recall what happened.
In the initial sessions of CBT, the patients learn how to identify their thoughts and what makes them feel afraid or upset. The therapist helps replace those thoughts with more accurate and less distressing thoughts. I believe it would be important for the asylum applicant’s attorney to be present at the therapy sessions too. In preparation for a removal hearing, it would be beneficial for the attorney to hear how the therapist uses alternative phrasing to help the client tell the traumatic story without getting consumed in negative emotions.
In the CBT sessions, patients talk about any negative or unhelpful thoughts they had about the trauma and work with therapist to consider other ways of thinking about the situation. When considering CBT as an option for asylum applicants, attorneys must keep in mind that CBT is most effective when the sessions are completed. Normally, sessions occur over a twelve week period are sixty to ninety minutes each. If the asylum applicant has time to participate in CBT before their hearing, it would be worth the investment. The trauma sensitive program would allow the asylum applicant to be mentally prepared to recall their traumatic story and tell it consistently to persuade an immigration judge that their story is credible.
The second form of therapy offered to Veterans with PTSD is called prolonged exposure therapy (PE). PE teaches individuals to gradually approach trauma related memories, feelings, and situations they have been avoiding since the trauma occurred. The goal of PE is to confront the challenges the patient has with rethinking the trauma and decrease the PTSD symptoms.
The therapist starts by giving the individual an overview of treatment and getting to know more about the individual’s past experiences. It would be important for the attorney, the asylum client and the therapist to develop a relationship. Being friendly and personable with the asylum client would make it more effective to advocate for them. Also, the client would feel more comfortable sharing this very personal information to the therapist and attorney.
Lastly, in PE the therapist teaches breathing exercises to help the patient manage anxiety. If an attorney can get their asylum client to manage their anxiety when telling their traumatic story, I believe that would increase the probability of the client telling the story accurately and consistently.
Guest blogger: Kathia Morales, University of San Francisco Law Student:
California’s legislature has recently proposed to make California a “Sanctuary State” in response to President Trump’s aggressive stance on immigration. Cities such as San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles already have sanctuary status meaning that local agencies do not actively cooperative with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That means that on a routine stop or arrest, officers are not inquiring about a person’s legal status. What does a “sanctuary state” entail? According to a Vice News television report, the proposed legislation would prohibit local, county, and campus police departments and state agencies from collaboration with federal immigration authorities. It would also make public schools, courthouses and health facilities a safe haven or “Safe Zone.” More important, SB 54 would prevent the federal government from accessing data on the undocumented population found in the state database. Recently, more than 50 organizations showed up in strong support of the legislation. The California Sheriff’s Association, however, is one of the major opponents to SB 54.
President Trump has threatened to defund sanctuary cities. California receives a total of $368 billion in federal funds. Dan Reeves, the press secretary for State Senator and President pro tem Kevin de Leon (D – Los Angeles) believes that Trump’s comments regarding defunding the state or cities are “empty threats.” According to Gustavo Solis of the Desert Sun newspaper, “the bill aims to limit what information local agencies can gather so that when ICE asks about immigration status, local agencies are allowed to communicate but won’t have much to say.” This would therefore meet the requirements to maintain federal aid.
Currently, more than 3 million undocumented immigrants are estimated to be living in California. I believe the idea of a “sanctuary state” would reiterate that the majority of Californians disagree with the president and are going to maintain dignity for all Californians regardless of immigration status. This bill would prevent cities and counties from extending their authority by collaborating with immigration officials in the rounding up of the undocumented population. This is a positive development because our local and county law enforcement should be focused on preventing crime, not assisting in removal operations of our undocumented populations. A study from the American Community Survey in 2010 shows that the undocumented population is more law abiding than citizens of the United States, and less likely to be incarcerated.
Unfortunately, there are cities in the state such as Fresno and Bakersfield who feel inclined to question an arrestee on their legal status and report violators to immigration officials. Sheriff Youngblood of Kern County stated he was uncertain he would follow SB 54 if it became state law.
Within the past few weeks ICE has conducted raids in sanctuary cities across the country including Los Angeles without the assistance of city and county officials. Similarly, ICE has been spotted in San Francisco’s Mission district. This shows that just because California would become a sanctuary state does not mean that ICE would not be active or visible in the state. This bill would only hamper ICE’s ability to seize the undocumented population. The Trump administration’s new immigration priorities expand on Obama’s priorities for deportation, increasing the eligible population for deportation.
The largest and most progressive state in the country should take the lead in fighting back against the president’s dehumanizing immigration priorities. The criminalization of the undocumented population is a surreal reality and needs to be combatted by California and other progressive jurisdictions across the country. Taking such a stance would send a clear message to the White House and show our undocumented community that although our border may soon close, our back is not turned on the folks who have contributed to American society.
Aguilar’s parents separated when he was 9 and his mother Carmen fought to protect two sons and a daughter in the border town of Ciudad Juarez, where running gun battles between rival drug cartels had turned the city into a danger zone. So she secured travel visas for her children and sold the family’s belongings at a yard sale to finance their journey to Sacramento, where relatives took them in.
“We were just kind of leaving everything behind,” Aguilar remembered. “We weren’t thinking of coming back.” So when those visas expired, the Aguilars exchanged life in Mexico for life as undocumented immigrants in the shadows in the U.S.
If you live in a big city or metropolitan area, you probably don't think much about your healthcare. If you need a specialist, one or two or thirty are just around the corner. That's not the case in rural America. It's not even the case in urban centers (defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as having populations of 50K or more) that are otherwise surrounded by rural America.
For those of us who live in these zones, finding medical specialists can mean hours and hours of driving. This is not an exaggeration. I have driven nearly 7 hours to get to Rochester, MN, and I have driven 5 hours to get to St Paul, MN, in pursuit of medical care for my family. Those are one-way calculations. Which explains why, in December, I was so thrilled to get a referral to a specialist just one city away. It meant a mere two-and-a-half hour round trip drive.
The former Senator of North Dakota, Kent Conrad, understood this problem. He is the name behind the Conrad 30 Program, which waives the J-visa's foreign residency requirement for foreign physicians hired by states to practice in medically underserved areas of the country.
It's an amazing program. But President Trump's immigration policies threaten our ability to recruit and retain doctors in rural America.
CNN Money spoke with one doctor, a Syrian citizen who is just one of five full-time pediatric endocrinologists in the 150,000 square-mile area that covers North and South Dakota. Dr. Al Nofal worries that qualified doctors "may no longer want to practice in the United States."
The Supreme Court will here oral arguments this morning in Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, a removal case based on a criminal conviction for a "sex crime" involving consensual sex with an underage girlfriend. Here is a link to a preview of the argument. I will be re-capping the argument for SCOTUSBlog. Stay tuned!
UPDATE (Feb. 27, 2:15 p.m. PST): Here is the transcript to the argument.
Making worldwide news, Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal was responsible for one of the most directly political moments during the 2017 Oscars ceremony, when he challenged President Donald Trump's planned border wall between the United States and Mexico.
Selfreports on other political statements at the Oscars. One more subtle message was by film director Ava DuVernay. As she put it on Twitter,
"A small sign of solidarity. I chose to wear a gown by a designer from a majority Muslim country. Thanks to @AshiStudio of Lebanon. #Oscars."
“Are we a country of deportation or are we a country of aspirations?” Espaillat asked CNN “New Day” host Alisyn Camerota. “I think that’s what’s on the table right now. Have we changed the course of America? Are we now a heavy-handed, bullying country, or are we a country that anybody could do anything, including an undocumented young boy that’s now a member of Congress.”
Espaillat was brought by his parents from the Dominican Republic to the United States when he was just nine-years-old. He lived with his grandparents who worked as a seamstress and in a Ray Ban factory in New York.
CNN reportsthat, decades before being elected to Congress, Rep. Espaillat arrived in America as a young boy on a visa with his family before becoming undocumented. "I came here at the age of 9 with my parents and my brother and sister. We were here on a visa and overstayed," he told CNN's Alisyn Camerota Wednesday on "New Day." "I was a young boy but I remember my grandparents talking to us about being careful where we went, not approaching any strangers."
"It sent a chilling effect to anybody who doesn't have any documents," the New York Democrat said. "How do you move around? How do you go to school? How do you go to a store?"
Those days of living in fear of being deported shape his view of how children of undocumented parents must be processing President Donald Trump's immigration proposals, Espaillat said.
“To humiliate one nation with the pretext of guarding the security of another is not a new phenomenon in history and has always laid the groundwork for the creation of future divide and enmity,” he wrote.
UPDATE (Feb. 28): The Salesman won the Oscar.
A statement read on behalf of Iranian director Asghar Farhadi, who was absent from Academy Awards, challenged President Trump’s “inhumane” travel ban.
We know that President Trump likes golf and has built a golf course or two. Perhaps the argument that might sway him on immigration is that the administration's heightened enforcement will adversely impact golf course maintenance workers. Gabriel Thompson for Golf Digest looks at the concern that Trump's immigration enforcement policies might have on immigreant workers on the nation's golf courses.
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek— And finding only the same old stupid plan Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.
O, I’m the man who sailed those early seas In search of what I meant to be my home— For I’m the one who left dark Ireland’s shore, And Poland’s plain, and England’s grassy lea, And torn from Black Africa’s strand I came To build a “homeland of the free.”
It is not a happy poem. While the title of the work speaks of an America that once was, the poem itself talks about an America that never was: "(America never was America to me.)" And yet, near the end, there is a stanza of hope:
O, yes, I say it plain, America never was America to me, And yet I swear this oath— America will be!
It has been a wild and wooly few weeks in the U.S. immigration world. The headlines tell us just how much immigration enforcement has changed with the inauguration of President Trump. As the New York Timesreports, immigration officers feel emboldened by the Trump administration's support for aggressive enforcement measures. It thus seems likely that we will see more events like those described below in coming weeks, months, and years.
The son of legendary boxer Muhammad Ali, born and raised in Kentucky, USA, was detained for hours by immigration officials at a Florida airport. Muhammad Ali Jr., 44, and his mother Khalilah Camacho-Ali, the second wife of Muhammad Ali, were arriving at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport on Feb. 7 after returning from speaking at a Black History Month event in Montego Bay, Jamaica. They were pulled aside while going through customs because of their Arabic-sounding names, according to family friend and lawyer Chris Mancini. Immigration officials let Camacho-Ali go after she showed them a photo of herself with her ex-husband, but her son did not have such a photo and wasn't as lucky. Mancini said officials held and questioned Ali Jr. for nearly two hours, repeatedly asking him, "Where did you get your name from?" and "Are you Muslim?
News from California
Australia’s best-loved children’s author, Mem Fox, was left sobbing and shaken after being detained for two hours and aggressively interrogated by immigration officials at Los Angeles International airport. Fox says she’s unlikely to ever travel to the United States again after being made to feel like “a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay.”