Friday, November 18, 2005
The Bar Area Immigrant Rights Coalition (BAIRC) in San Francisco is creating a popular education model to bridge African Americans and immigrant communities. The group is working with Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Tex) on developing a model, casting immigrant rights as the 21st century civil rights movement. In the San Francisco area, BAIRC is working with grassroots organizations such as Mujeras Unidas, Chinese Progressive Association, and San Francisco Day Laborers. For more information contact Sheila Chung at email@example.com
Even as Wal-Mart continues to to litigate the Zavala case (see posts from 10/11, 11/7 and 11/18), which involves the company's alleged mistreatment of undocumented workers, a new story is breaking about the arrest of over 100 undocumented workers at a Wal-Mart construction site in Allentown, PA. A link to that story is here.
Russell Crowe a/k/a THE GLADIATOR may be deportable after convicted of misdeamanor assault. He entered into a plea agreement with the Manhattan DA's Office for hurling a phone at a Mercer Hotel clerk's head. He'll plead guilty to misdemeanor assault today and will receive no jail time or probation, according to the New York Post. The Post quoted a DHS official as stating that "Convictions involving moral turpitude can result in a review of immigration status. . . . [W]e'll review it at that point, but we're not focusing undue attention on his situation. We'll deal with it appropriately - I don't think we're going to be waiting outside of the courthouse for him." Crowe has reportedly said that he feels it might be time to leave the U.S. http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/57736.htm
The 2006 Institute is a collaborative project of UC-San Diego's Center for Comparative Immigration Studies and the Social Science Research Council's International Migration Program. he Summer Institute has two main components: (1) training workshops for junior participants led by senior scholars (June 19-20, 23) on issues pertaining to research design and methodology in immigration studies, and (2) two days of conference sessions (June 21-22), which will give junior scholars an opportunity to present their research and receive comments from senior faculty. The conference will also include plenary sessions in which senior faculty will debate issues central to the study of international migration. Training workshops will cover general research methodologies (historical, ethnographic, quantitative, comparative, community-based, etc.), specific approaches to studying certain immigration research topics, and issues related to academic professionalization (publishing, funding immigration research, grant-writing, the academic job search process, curriculum development, etc.). Conference and plenary sessions will focus on key topics of multidisciplinary significance, depending on the interests of participating junior scholars and faculty. Possible topics include transnational migrant behavior; gender differences in international migration and integration patterns; diasporas; ethnicity, citizenship, and nationalism; emigration policies of migrant-sending countries; immigration and refugee policy-making in cross-national perspective; outcomes of immigration control policies; the functioning of immigrant-dominated labor markets; immigrant political participation in sending and receiving countries; determinants of public opinion toward immigrants; the education of immigrant children; and integration of second-generation immigrant minorities. The Institute will also include an extensive tour of the U.S.-Mexico border by the U.S. Border Patrol. Approximately 25 junior participants for the Summer Institute will be selected through a competitive application process. Applicants must be advanced graduate students working on their dissertations or recent postdoctoral scholars (Ph.D. received in the last 4 years). The application form can be downloaded from the , Associate Director, CCIS, UCSD (Tel.: 858-822-0526).
The 2006 Institute is a collaborative project of UC-San Diego's Center for Comparative Immigration Studies and the Social Science Research Council's International Migration Program. he Summer Institute has two main components: (1) training workshops for junior participants led by senior scholars (June 19-20, 23) on issues pertaining to research design and methodology in immigration studies, and (2) two days of conference sessions (June 21-22), which will give junior scholars an opportunity to present their research and receive comments from senior faculty. The conference will also include plenary sessions in which senior faculty will debate issues central to the study of international migration. Training workshops will cover general research methodologies (historical, ethnographic, quantitative, comparative, community-based, etc.), specific approaches to studying certain immigration research topics, and issues related to academic professionalization (publishing, funding immigration research, grant-writing, the academic job search process, curriculum development, etc.). Conference and plenary sessions will focus on key topics of multidisciplinary significance, depending on the interests of participating junior scholars and faculty. Possible topics include transnational migrant behavior; gender differences in international migration and integration patterns; diasporas; ethnicity, citizenship, and nationalism; emigration policies of migrant-sending countries; immigration and refugee policy-making in cross-national perspective; outcomes of immigration control policies; the functioning of immigrant-dominated labor markets; immigrant political participation in sending and receiving countries; determinants of public opinion toward immigrants; the education of immigrant children; and integration of second-generation immigrant minorities. The Institute will also include an extensive tour of the U.S.-Mexico border by the U.S. Border Patrol. Approximately 25 junior participants for the Summer Institute will be selected through a competitive application process. Applicants must be advanced graduate students working on their dissertations or recent postdoctoral scholars (Ph.D. received in the last 4 years). The application form can be downloaded from theCCIS website and must be postmarked by February 28, 2006. Decisions will be announced by March 15. Admitted junior scholars will be required to pay their own airfare, but all other expenses (local transportation, lodging, meals) will be covered. Immigration studies faculty who will be invited to participate in the 2006 Summer Institute include Marisa Abrajano (UCSD), Rafael AlarcÃ³n (COLEF, Tijuana, Mexico), Robert Alvarez (UCSD), Frank Bean (UC Irvine), Irene Bloemraad (UC Berkeley), Susan Brown (UC Irvine), David Card (UC Berkeley), William Chandler (UCSD), Leo ChÃ¡vez (UC Irvine), Wayne Cornelius (UCSD), Louis DeSipio (UC Irvine), Josh DeWind (SSRC), Yen Espiritu (UCSD), Adrian Favell (UCLA), David Fitzgerald (CCIS-UCSD), Donna Gabaccia (U. of North Carolina-Charlotte), David GutiÃ©rrez (UCSD), Gordon Hanson (UCSD), James Hollifield (Southern Methodist University), Pierrette Hondagneu-Sotelo (USC), TomÃ¡s JimÃ©nez (UCSD), April Linton (UCSD), Philip Martin (UC Davis), Everard Meade (UCSD), Cecilia Menjivar (ASU), Lisa Park (UCSD), David Pedersen (UCSD), Marc Rosenblum (U. of New Orleans/MPI), George SÃ¡nchez (USC), David Shirk (U. of San Diego), John Skrentny (UCSD), Eiko Thielemann (London School of Economics), Takeyuki (Gaku) Tsuda (UCSD/ASU), Monica Varsanyi (CCIS-UCSD), Roger Waldinger (UCLA), Mary Waters (Harvard U.), Chris Woodruff (UCSD), Henry Yu (UCLA), and Elana Zilberg (UCSD). The Fourth Annual Summer Institute is made possible by grants from the Social Science Research Council and the following University of California-San Diego units: Senior Vice Chancellor, Office of Graduate Studies and Research, Division of Social Sciences, and Institute for International, Comparative and Area Studies. For further information, please contact Gaku Tsuda
, Associate Director, CCIS, UCSD (Tel.: 858-822-0526).
An article by Charles Toutant entitled "Have Wal-Mart Plaintiffs Lawyers Found a 'Smoking Gun'?" in the November 18, 2005 New Jersey Law Journal reports that "Plaintiffs lawyers in a federal class-action suit in Newark, N.J., challenging the labor practices of the world's biggest corporation, Wal-Mart, think they've got a fighting chance, now that they hold the fruits of a federal criminal probe. Affidavit testimony from an immigration investigation of Wal-Mart, they say, shows that two senior executives knew the company's cleaning contractors employed illegal aliens across the country -- the very scienter the plaintiffs need to prove their case." The case is Zavala v. Wal-Mart, 03-5309. One of Plaintiff;'s counsel, Gilberto Garcia, of Garcia & Kricko is quoted in the article. The suit charges that the contractors routinely hired illegal immigrants from Mexico and Eastern Europe to work seven days a week, housed them in squalid quarters, paid them less than minimum wage and even locked them in Wal-Mart stores at night.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Veterans Day 2005 found the U.S. in the fifth year of a war that has claimed the lives of more than 2,000 servicemen and women. More than 50 of those who died were immigrants, among the 26,730 foreign-born serving in the nation's 1.4 million-member military. The five nations that have contributed the most recruits are the Philippines: 5,367; Mexico: 3,325; Jamaica: 1,448; Dominican Republic: 782; Haiti: 604.
To serve, nonicitizens must be in the U.S. legally, have permanent residency status and pass background checks. The Bush administration in 2002 made it easier for immigrants who serve to become citizens. Immigrant soldiers can petition for citizenship immediately rather than waiting the usual five years to begin the process. If a foreign national dies fighting for the U.S., his or her family can seek citizenship as well, even if they are undocumented. Some military specialties are off limits to immigrant soldiers because they lack the required security clearances. they can't be pilots or work in sensitive jobs such as radio interception and aircraft maintaenance, and they don't have access to sophisticated radar and computer systems. They cna't serve in elite units such as the Navy SEALS.
Source: Riverside (CA) Press-Enterprise Nov. 11, 2005
The Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law <http://www.centerforhumanrights.org>, a Los Angeles non-profit organization that focuses its work on the civil and human rights of insular minorities including immigrants, refugees, children, and indigenous peoples, is recruiting for an Equal Access Fund Staff Attorney position. The Center initiates and conducts major class action litigation and engages in technical support activities for legal services providers, pro bono attorneys, and community-based organizations. In the interest of diversity and having a multi-lingual staff, we would like to hire an Asian attorney for this open position, but anyone interested is encouraged to apply. Salary $45,000 plus medical and dental insurance and relocation assistance. Position is immediately available. Job Qualifications are: 1. Admitted to the California State Bar; 2. Bilingual preferred, not required; 3. Strong research and writing skills; 4. Demonstrated commitment to social justice issues; 5. Experience with Lexis or Westlaw; and 6. Immigration experience preferred. The following services are provided to California legal services groups, community-based organizations, pro bono attorneys, and eligible clients in cases dealing with immigrant children and legalization opportunities for immigrants:
1. Assist in development and implementation of training programs
2. Provide technical support and assistance on complex cases
3. Assist in the research and writing of policy analysis, articles, outreach materials, etc.
4. Provide consultations, referrals, or representation to eligible clients
Please email a cover letter, resume, writing sample, and list of three references to Peter Schey, Executive Director at firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>
For some reason, this little story about Judi Werthein's designer shoes for undocumented migrants is generating some press (AP, WashPost, etc.). It's also being cross-posted on various websites. Predictably, on certain websites, it is generating overtly racist commentary. The little flurry of interest in the story has left me wondering about the utility/futility of these these larger-than-life, but ultimately substance-free gestures to "assist" migrants. Do they undercut more serious efforts at reform, and make work harder for those working on behalf of noncitizens through law and policy channels? Or do they spark helpful discussion about immigration and generate positive sentiment toward immigrants? My initial sense is that the former is probably more likely. Of course, it is equally likely that they have no real effect one way or the other....
An El Paso Times article discussing ICE's extension of expedited removal policies to the entire southwest border -and particularly to El Paso - can be found here. The article does note some of the serious concerns raised by expedited removal (including the low probability that immigration officials will be able to determine whether the migrants subject to these expedited proceedings are not victims of trafficking or individuals with valid asylum claims), although this discussion is not highlighted, and appear the end of the article.
Here is the latest from the Department of Homeland Security on border enforcement. The Orantes litigation was a landmark case in which the federal government was found to have violated the rights of Salvadoran asylum-seekers by effectively denying them access to counsel, pressuring them to "voluntarily" depart the country, and taking steps to discourage them from exercising their legal rights. The district court issued (685 F. Supp. 1488 (C.D. Cal. 1988), and the Ninth Circuit affirmed (919 F.2d 549 (9th Cir. 1990)), a broad injunction. In any event, her's the DHS press release:
The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Secure Border Initiative received assistance from the Department of Justice (DOJ) today, who filed a motion to end the Orantes injunction. The injunction was issued in the 1980s and the circumstances that gave rise to the injunction are no longer present. Moreover, the injunction is now undermining is DHS’ ability to apply Expedited Removal procedures to Salvadorans apprehended along the Southwest border. In order to gain full control of our borders to prevent illegal immigration and security breaches, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff last month announced the Secure Border Initiative, a broad multi-year initiative looking at all aspects of the problem across the board – deterrence, detection, apprehension, detention, and removal. Accomplishing this vision takes tremendous partnership across the federal government, such as with DOJ. If successful, the DOJ motion will allow DHS to apply Expedited Removal to Salvadorans, which currently account for the largest number of non-Mexican illegal aliens arrested by U.S. Border Patrol. Expedited Removal allows DHS to remove an illegal alien with false documents, or no documents, without the need for that alien to attend a hearing before an immigration judge. Secretary Chertoff’s expansion of Expedited Removal to the entire Southwest border has resulted in declines in the amount of apprehensions of other nationalities such as Brazilians, while the number of Salvadorans continues to rise. In FY06 to date, U.S. Border Patrol has apprehended over 6,600 undocumented aliens from El Salvador, which trails only Mexico in the number of illegal aliens arrested. The Orantes injunction, issued over 17 years ago, mandates that the U.S. Government provide Salvadorans with a specific notice of rights indicating that they are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge. In the Expedited Removal process aliens are not automatically entitled to such a hearing unless they express a fear of return and then pass a credible fear interview with an asylum officer. In addition, in order to facilitate the alien’s obtaining of counsel, the injunction also hinders DHS from transferring a detained Salvadoran out of the jurisdiction of apprehension for seven days. As a practical matter, this would make it difficult to comply with the mandatory detention requirement of the Expedited Removal statute, since detention beds in the area of apprehension are often full. By removing the injunction, the typical processing time for Salvadorans could decrease from the current average of over 90 days to 35 days, the approximate Expedited Removal processing time. However, except for those required to be detained by law, due to limited bed space most Salvadorans are currently not being detained. With shorter turn around time, more detention space becomes available. The injunction was based heavily on civil rights abuses in El Salvador which do not currently exist and affords Salvadorans arrested by immigration officers greater protections than aliens of other nationalities. This special treatment is no longer warranted due advances in El Salvador since the 1980s. In particular, El Salvador has been a country at peace since 1992 and has established institutions to ensure that human rights are protected. El Salvador now has a constitution which protects individual rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Procedures for removal have changed dramatically since the injunction was established, including the 1996 Congressional mandate which allows Expedited Removal of undocumented aliens without a hearing before an immigration judge, unless the alien demonstrates a credible fear of persecution before an asylum officer. Because the specific terms of the Orantes injunction were modeled on the old removal process, they interfere with the government in applying the Expedited Removal statute to Salvadorans. As the Expedited Removal process is a major aspect of the DHS effort to control the border, the injunction jeopardizes national security. Further, many aspects of the injunction have become part of standard operating procedures that apply to all apprehended aliens, not just Salvadorans. Regardless of nationality, apprehended aliens are generally provided a list of free legal service providers. In addition, detention facility standards require access to telephones, a law library, generous legal visitation hours, and the opportunity for legal service providers to give group legal presentations to detainees. Expedited Removal procedures will continue to ensure that aliens in Expedited Removal who fear return to their country have the opportunity to pursue an asylum claim. Officers must ask every alien in Expedited Removal if they fear return to their country. If the alien indicates such a fear, they are referred to an asylum officer for a credible fear interview. If the officer finds that the alien has a credible fear, the alien’s asylum claim is then heard by an immigration judge. This process meets the underlying goals of the injunction, making the Orantes injunction unnecessary.
A copy of the government's motion of the case can be found at Download notice_of_mot_lodged_11172005.pdf
The debate this week on http://ourlatinamerica.blogspot.com/2005/11/weekly-debate-should-us-construct-wall.html is on immigration and the border fence Congressman Duncan Hunter wants to build. Specifically the question posed by the blog is "Should the US construct a wall to keep out immigrants?" Many of the commentors support the idea. The truth of the matter, however, is that we can build wall after wall on the sourthern border with Mexico without any long term impact on migration patterns. The economic, social, and political forces at work make it likely that migration will continue for the foreeseeable future. The massive military efforts along the border that began in the mid-1990s and hit a high after September 11, 2001, have not reduced the undocumented immigrant population in the United States. Indeed, this population has INCREASED since the border enforcement measures were taken.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
CUNY-Queens invites applications for a visiting Teacher/Supervising Attorney in the Immigrant and Refugee Rights Clinic of the Law School’s Main Street Legal Services Clinic ("IRRC") for the Spring 2006 semester. They arere seeking creative and experienced lawyers with a desire to work collaboratively in a diverse environment, a serious interest in clinical teaching, and a commitment to the school's mission as a public interest law school. In collaboration with other IRRC faculty, duties include direct supervision of third-year students in litigation and policy advocacy projects; joint classroom teaching; and participation in law office management. The current programmatic areas covered in IRRC include immigrant workers’ rights, deportation defense, asylum law, and VAWA petitioning. he attorney in this one-semester visiting position will focus on supervision and teaching in the area of immigrant workers’ rights and federal practice. Experience in these areas is required. Experience in public interest representation, including significant litigation experience, clinical teaching or supervisory experience, work with community organizing groups, and/or bilingual proficiency, preferred. J.D. degree or its equivalent required. Appointment is for one semester. Exact start date is somewhat flexible. CUNY School of Law is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer. We affirmatively seek diversity in our staff with regard to gender, race, national origin, sexual orientation, and physical abilities. To apply, please send cover letter and resume. No phone calls please. Email of cover letter and resume will be accepted. Applications should be submitted as soon as possible. We will begin reviewing applications as they arrive and will continue until a suitable candidate is found. Early applications are encouraged. Contact: Ms. Maureen McCafferty, Administrator to Faculty Appointments Committee; City University of New York School of Law at Queens College; 65-21 Main Street; Flushing, New York 11367. The City University of New York is an Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action/Immigration Reform and Control Act/Americans with Disability Act Employer.
From the www.nbc.com website describing the November 15 episode of popular television show Law & Order:
MURDER OF SMUGGLING TRUCKER COULD BE LINKED TO BORDER PATROL GROUP -- When the owner of a big-rig trucking company is shot to death, Detectives Fontana (Dennis Farina) and Green (Jesse L. Martin) learn that the victim was hauling illegal aliens and suspect a member (Daniel Roebuck) citizen's border patrol group -- but their only witness is an undocumented Hispanic woman (Aixa Rosario Medina) who risks deportation if she testifies. Meanwhile, prosecutor McCoy (Sam Waterston) is incensed when the witness is physically intimidated as he tries to turn one organization member against the other in court.
Here is the invitation from the organizers of the 2006 Immigration Law Teachers Workshop. Be there or be square!!
We are writing to tell you about plans for the seventh biennial Immigration Law Teachers Workshop, which (as previously announced on the Immprof listserv) will take place on May 4-6 at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law.
Professor David Thronson of the UNLV law faculty is serving as logistics coordinator for the workshop. The other members of the planning committee are Linda Bosniak as chair, Leti Volpp and Hiroshi Motomura on the scholarship panels, and Margaret Taylor on the teaching panels.
The conference begins with a dinner on Thursday evening, May 4, at 7:00 p.m., and concludes after lunch on Saturday May 6. Program events will be held at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, William S. Boyd School of Law.
We have blocked a group of rooms for our group at the Luxor Hotel in Las Vegas, a hotel on “the Strip” that UNLV routinely uses for conferences. Available rates are $149 for Thursday night, and $189 for Friday and Saturday. You may, of course, look around for better rates, but the Law School tells us that these are quite low in this market. You might also consider sharing a room with a fellow conference attendee to limit costs.
To book a room at the Luxor, call 1-800-288-1000, identify yourself as a participant in the Immigration Law Teachers Workshop and provide group code TIMM6. The Luxor will hold this block of rooms until April 4, 2006. Transportation will be provided daily from the Luxor to the law school and back.
The conference registration fee will be $150. This covers administrative expenses, continental breakfasts and box lunches for both Friday and Saturday, and dinner on Friday evening. For Thursday night’s dinner, you will need to pay your own way.
The workshop will consist of the following sessions: four plenary scholarship panels, one plenary teaching panel, and several smaller break-out sessions devoted to scholarly works in progress and topical teaching issues.
Four plenary scholarship sessions. Each of these sessions will focus on an important issue or recent development that prompts fundamental rethinking of scholarship in our field. The subject areas are Citizenship, Culture and Immigration Law, Administrative Law, Federalism and Delegation, and International/Domestic Refugee Law. We are using these panels as an opportunity to include scholars from disciplines other than law whose work has some bearing on immigration and citizenship, legal academics whose scholarly centers of gravity are not necessarily in immigration and citizenship, scholars who have not attended any/many of the six prior Immigration Law Workshops, and a diversity of voices from within our community.
These panels will be constructed not around traditional papers, but rather short pieces (about five pages) that panelists will submit by way of commentary on an issue or recent development. The moderator will assume that all workshop attendees will have read the pieces (to be distributed before the meeting), so we can devote the full session time to discussion.
One plenary teaching panel: The plenary teaching session will address the tough choices that professors now face when deciding what to cover in a basic immigration course. New legislation and new Supreme Court cases have added to the raw material that we teach, and the universe of what might be considered an essential part of “immigration law” is expanding. How does one make these choices and build a syllabus for an immigration law course? Are there certain topics that must be covered, certain skills that must be imparted, or does coverage even matter? What underlying (and perhaps unarticulated) assumptions and goals shape our choices? The syllabus bank for immigration law professors will be reactivated in anticipation of this program, so that participants will have the opportunity to review the syllabi of panelists and other colleagues before the session. Once the final program has been set, we’ll inform you how to access this material.
Breakout work-in-progress sessions. These will be small breakout sessions designed to engage in intensive discussion, and provide constructive criticism, of each work-in-progress. Obviously, the size of each session will depend on the total workshop size and the number of works-in-progress submitted. Each paper will have a commentator, who will assume that all attendees will have read the paper in advance and will proceed immediately to discussion.
For these sessions, we are asking scholars to volunteer to share their works-in-progress. In order to set up these groups, we ask that you provide Hiroshi (firstname.lastname@example.org) with a title and brief abstract of your work-in-progress by January 15. Please do this by filling out the works-in-progress questionnaire that accompanies this letter.
The papers themselves must be submitted by March 15. The March 15 date will allow the planning committee to review each paper, arrange for a commentator, and assemble a discussion group. We will distribute the papers to attendees around April 15, i.e., three weeks before the workshop.
In order to keep the advance reading for workshop participants reasonable, please limit your submission to a maximum of 50 pages. If your paper will be longer, please plan on providing an edited version that focuses the discussion in a way that you would find most helpful as an author.
Breakout teaching sessions. Smaller workshops on teaching will be offered as break-out sessions; some teaching workshops may be scheduled simultaneously with the works-in-progress sessions. The precise schedule will depend on the level of interest for various discussion topics. Workshops will be led by facilitators who have proposed ideas or have agreed to lead discussion on certain topics. Possible topics include workshops for new law teachers or for adjunct teachers, workshops on integrating exercises or simulations into the classroom, or workshops on teaching upper-level specialized seminars.
The questionnaire accompanying this letter (to be returned to Margaret, at email@example.com by January 15) provides the opportunity for you to propose a workshop and/or indicate your interest in various topics.
Please mark your calendars, if you haven’t done so already! You can book air travel and hotel now.
If you are interested in presenting a work-in-progress, please fill out the Works-In-Progress Questionnaire that accompanies this letter (in Word format) and send to Hiroshi (firstname.lastname@example.org) by January 15, 2006. The questionnaire asks you for the title and an abstract of your paper. Also, if you would be interested in serving as a commentator on a work-in-progress, please so indicate on the form, and indicate as well if you have any subject-matter preferences.
If you plan to attend the conference, please fill out the Teaching Sessions Questionnaire that accompanies this letter (in Word format) to indicate your relative interest in various teaching topics, and return it to Margaret (email@example.com) by January 15, 2006.
We are very excited about this workshop. We look forward to hearing from you, and to seeing you in Las Vegas.
Roberto Lovato's story for www.salon.com is entitled "Gulf Coast slaves Halliburton and its subcontractors hired hundreds of undocumented Latino workers to clean up after Katrina -- only to mistreat them and throw them out without pay."
Conference Call for Papers: The Changing Demographics of US Society May 8-9, 2006 Hosted and Organized by University of London's Institute for the Study of the Americas And The British Library's Eccles Centre for American Studies.The Institute for the Study of the Americas at University of London's School of Advanced Study, and The Eccles Centre for American Studies at the British Library invite papers for a multidisciplinary conference on 'The Changing Demographics of US Society" Proposals are welcome from all disciplinary perspectives. Papers might address topics including, but not limited to: **regional population and economi c changes and their impact;
**the impact of changing demographics on politics;
**new immigration shifts, and the impact of new immigration;
**the greying of America; **the enduring significance of race and ethnicity;
**borderland populations, lives and literatures.
A selection of the conference papers will be included in a volume edited by Iwan Morgan and Philip Davies, published by The Institute for the Study of the Americas Press (distributed by Brookings Institution Press in the US). Confirmed keynote speakers: William Frey, University of Michigan Population Studies Center And Rhodes Cook, leader in US political opinion polling Accommodation will be provided for one night for UK- and Europe-based speak ers, and four nights for trans-Atlantic-based speakers, or a comparable con tribution to defray conference costs. Deadline for proposals: Monday, 12 December 2005. Proposals (maximum length four pages, including a short c.v.) should be emailed to: Iwan.Morgan@sas.ac.uk and Philip.Davies@bl.uk
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
The number of new international graduate students enrolling in American universities appears to have rebounded slightly this fall following three years of decline. The figure rose 1 percent compared to a year ago, according to the Council of Graduate Schools. Following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the numbers fell 8 percent in 2002, 10 percent in 2003, and 3 percent in 2004.
Experts blamed the sudden drop in interest among international students in attending American graduate programs after the 2001-02 school year on a range of factors, from visa delays to anti-Americanism to sharper competition from universities in other countries. The trend alarmed both university administrators and foreign policy-makers because universities depend on foreign students for teaching and research — especially in the sciences. The also were concerned because educating international students, who then return home with a positive, firsthand experience of America, is seen as an important foreign policy tool. Educators say the State and Homeland Security departments have streamlined visa approvals, and many universities have stepped up recruiting, which has at least leveled off the decline.
Source: Associated Press, Nov. 7, 2005
The Congressional Research Service issued an updated report on the Visa Waiver Program. http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,1116-crs.pdf