Friday, October 22, 2010
"Our immigration laws need to change—and change in significant ways. The current system isn’t working for either security or the economy. It’s not working for our country. Reform needs to be a priority." Remarks by U.S. Customs & Border Protection Commissioner Alan Bersin.
Tony & Janina’s American Wedding is a feature length documentary that gets to the heart of the broken, red tape ridden U.S. immigration system. After 18 years in America, Tony and Janina Wasilewski’s family is torn apart when Janina is deported back to Poland, taking their 6 year old son Brian with her. Set on the backdrop of the Chicago political scene, and featuring Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez at the heart of the immigration reform movement, this film follows the Wasilewski’s 3-year struggle to be reunited, as their Senator Barack Obama rises to the Presidency. With a fresh perspective on the immigration conversation, this film tells the untold human rights story of Post-9/11, that every undocumented immigrant in America faces today, with the power to open the conversation for change.
Check out this trailer for a movie (Precious Knowledge) being developed about the importance and emergence of Ethnic Studies in Tucson, Arizona. The producers are asking for donations to complete the film. An Arizona law banning the teaching Ethnic Studies in the public schools has been challenged in court.
Earlier today, ThinkProgress reported that Latinos for Reform — a Republican 527 group — purchased an $80,000 buy on Univision to air ads urging Nevada Latino voters not to vote. We urged Univision not to air the ads. The network, which heads the non-partisan Latino civic participation campaign, Ya Es Hora, has decided to do the right thing and not broadcast the ads. A Univision spokesperson told ThinkProgress:
Univision will not be running any spots from Latinos for Reform related to voting. It is also important to clarify that while Mr. Robert de Posada has on occasion provided political commentary on Univision, representing one of various points of views, he is not in any way affiliated with Univision. Univision prides itself on promoting civic engagement and our extensive national campaigns encourage Hispanics to vote. Read more...
THOUSANDS OF REFUGEES DENIED PROTECTION DUE TO ASYLUM FILING DEADLINE U.S. Implementation of One-Year Deadline Violates Human Rights, Report Says
The National Immigrant Justice Center, Human Rights First and Penn State Law’s Center for Immigrants’ Rights has released a report on the one-year filing deadline for filing an asylum application. The report is the first to examine how the asylum deadline is handled by the BIA, the highest level of administrative appeal available to asylum seekers.
he study analyzed 3,472 BIA asylum cases decided in January from 2005 to 2008. Among the report’s key findings:
· One out of five asylum cases was denied because it was filed after the deadline.
· In 46 percent of the 662 filing deadline denials, the BIA did not provide any reason for the denial of the asylum application other than that it was submitted after the filing deadline.
· Of the 662 filing deadline denials, the BIA did not recognize any exceptions to the filing deadline.
· When an immigration judge granted an exception to the one-year deadline, the BIA affirmed that decision 75 percent of the time. By contrast, when an immigration judge denied asylum based on the one-year deadline, the BIA affirmed the decision 96 percent of the time.
Diasporas are in a unique position to have a positive effect on the economy of their countries of origin - the key is for those countries to seize the opportunities. In the fifth report in the series, the Migration Policy Institute's Migrants, Migration, and Development Program shares more on the role of diasporas in the development of their home countries, and the policy implications for international development agencies such as the US Agency for International Development (USAID). This newest report, Mobilizing Diaspora Entrepreneurship for Development, discusses diasporas' role in promoting economic growth through entrepreneurship in their countries of origin. The study, by MPI's Kathleen Newland and Hiroyuki Tanaka, documents how diaspora entrepreneurs often are motivated to contribute to job creation and economic growth in their native lands. But, despite the potential to attract diaspora investors and entrepreneurs, many developing countries have met only limited success.
The key findings, which include policy options, point to the potential for a symbiotic relationship:
Diaspora entrepreneurship creates businesses and jobs, and spurs innovation.
Diaspora investors create economic, social, and political capital through global networks.
Diaspora entrepreneurs tap into social capital through their comparative advantages in cultural and linguistic understanding.
ecause of this, governments must then foster entrepreneurship among members of diasporas, supporting and promoting policies and programs that aid such growth. At the same time, a distinction must be made between necessity entrepreneurship (those who have no effect on economic development) and opportunity entrepreneurship (those who impart a positive economic impact by specializing or taking advantage of market openings in high-demand and rapidly growing sectors of the economy).
The study can be found at www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/diasporas-entrepreneurship.pdf and www.microlinks.org/diaspora. The sixth and final report in this series, which examines the role of diasporas in advocacy and diplomacy, will be published in early November, and shortly after that, we will release a book that brings together the series with some additional overarching analysis.
In the last two months, MPI released the first four studies in the series, undertaken in cooperation with USAID's Diaspora Networks Alliance (DNA). The first documented the role of diasporas as portfolio investors in their countries of origin; a second study described the various ways that diasporas spend time volunteering in their ancestral countries; a third looked at the philanthropic donations of diasporas; and our most recent discussed diasporas' role in promoting trade and tourism back home.
The series is available on MPI's Web site at www.migrationpolicy.org/research/migration_development.php and on USAID's diaspora website at www.microlinks.org/diaspora.
For a no-holds barred critique of thr nation's immigration courts, see "Lawless Courts" by Jacqueline Stevens in The Nation. The story quotes,among others, Professor Rachel Rosenbloom (Northeastern) and thr one-and-only immigration maven Dan Kowalski.
ThinkProgress reported that Latinos for Reform — a Republican 527 group — purchased an $80,000 buy on Univision to air ads urging Nevada Latino voters not to vote. The network, which heads the non-partisan Latino civic participation campaign, Ya Es Hora, has decided to do the right thing and not broadcast the ads.
I ran across this recent political science article that sounded most intriguing:
"Immigration and Social Policy in the United States" Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 13, pp. 445-468, 2010 RODNEY E. HERO, affiliation not provided to SSRN. Abstract The United States experienced a period of sustained large-scale immigration from the 1960s into the period of dramatic economic recession in 2008-2009. This article focuses on the impact of immigrants and immigration on social policy in the United States. I summarize the arguably, and surprisingly, scant research that specifically examines the political and policy (more than the social and/or economic) implications of immgration. I first look at the extent and nature of change within and across three minority groups over the past several decades, including evidence on their composition and geographic concentration or dispersion. Next considered are the implications of the American racial order as a context and its impacts on racialization of immigrants. Next examined are the consequences for immigrants in major arenas of American government -- urban, state, and national. Although emphasis is given to issues of immigration, the importance of race/ethnicity as a social force in American politics is also considered, of necessity, because immigration and race/ethnicity are strongly interconnected though analytically separable.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has announced that oral arguments in USA v. State of Arizona, Case No. 10-16645, will be heard by a three judge panel on Monday, November 1, 2010 at 9 a.m. (PST) at the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse in San Francisco. The case involves the constitutionality of Arizona Senate Bill 1070. The U.S. government, arguing that SB 1070 was preempted by federal statutes, sought a preliminary injunction to block enactment of the law. The preliminary injunction was granted in part and denied in part by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The State of Arizona and its governor have appealed.
As we previously reported, C-SPAN will televise the argument. The panel has given consent for live broadcast of the proceeding, which is scheduled to air on C-SPAN Channel 1, beginning at 9 a.m. (PST). C-SPAN will provide an audio/video feed to other media as part of a pool arrangement.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Jeff Yang writes in the San Francisco Chronicle:
The Republican candidate for Senate in Nevada claims to be the state's first Asian American legislator. Wait, what?
This election year, we've witnessed some of the oddest political pronouncements on the nature of identity in recent memory.
There was Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell's refudiation of her youthful flirtation with Wiccanism. ("I'm not a witch, I'm you." Unless you're a witch.)
There was Colorado Senate candidate Ken Buck's declaration that homosexuality is just an addictive lifestyle choice, like alcoholism or smoking. (Gay people are just waiting for science to develop a patch!)
There was Ohio House candidate Rich Iott's assurance that spending his weekends pretending to be a Nazi did not mean he admired Nazis (though he subsequently defended the murderous SS Wiking Panzer unit whose uniform he sported as courageous "fighters for their homeland ... doing what they thought was right for their country").
But last Friday, to use terms native to her state of Nevada, Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle raised the strangeness stakes beyond the reach of amateurs -- effectively going all-in on the crazy.
You see, Isaac Barron, the faculty advisor of Rancho High School's Hispanic Student Union, had invited Angle to address the group to explain her campaign's use of starkly stereotypical images of young Latinos in their advertising. In a slate of recent attack spots, Angle had claimed that her Democratic opponent, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, favored "open borders" and "amnesty" for illegal aliens -- actions that would allow insidiously perilous elements into the U.S. The commercials were illustrated with pictures of scowling, bandanna-clad men with dark complexions and footage of sinister figures sneaking around fences.
Attempting to soft-pedal the impact of the ads to a clearly hostile audience, Angle suggested that the students had "misinterpreted" them -- that the images might not represent Latinos, and the border being discussed might not be the one between the U.S. and Mexico. "Our northern border is where the terrorists came through -- that's the most porous border that we have," she told them.
The students were obviously skeptical that Angle's primary immigration concern was the nonexistent boundary between Nevada and Canada, so the candidate chose to press the issue using a different tack -- stating that, in our diverse country, it's difficult to even tell races and ethnicities apart: "You know, I don't know that all of you are Latino," she said. "Some of you look a little more Asian to me. I don't know that. What we know, what we know about ourselves, is that we are a melting pot in this country. My grandchildren are evidence of that" -- her daughter-in-law is Latino -- "and I'm evidence of that. I've been called the 'first Asian legislator' in our Nevada state assembly."
An enterprising young member of the audience who'd been capturing cellphone video of Angle's talk immediately uploaded footage of Angle's weird self-assessment to the Web. A thunderous clacking could be heard as jaws across the nation dropped to the floor. The Asian American blogosphere unfurled a giant virtual banner bearing the letters W, T and F. And an already chaotic race, in which unqualified and deeply unusual state legislator Angle has been running mostly ahead of her high-profile opponent, Reid, was thrown into even further turmoil.
The top-of-mind question is simple: What exactly was Angle trying to imply by claiming some Latinos in her audience "looked more Asian," and that she herself has been called Asian, despite having no discernable roots in Asia?
It's a mindboggling claim. Veteran Las Vegas political reporter Joe Ralston, who broke the story, spoke for the entire Nevada state establishment when he remarked, "That last comment, about her being called the 'first Asian legislator'? I have no idea what she is talking about." And Angle has always been publicly celebratory of her European heritage, even writing a self-published book, "Prairie Fire," about her first ancestors in this country -- German immigrants and, presumably, legal ones.
The explanation Ralston later unearthed made things clearer, if not less weird. Apparently, an unknown reporter had once told Angle that she "looked Asian." Which, by Angle's logic, was enough to support her claims of being a racial pioneer. Read more.
[The resolution below was passed at Laborers International Union of North America Local 270 in San Jose, California, which submitted it to the South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council where it passed unanimously on October, 18, 2010, with the support of UNITE HERE Local 19 and United Food and Commercial Workers Local 5.]
A RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT AN IMMIGRATION POLICY BASED ON LABOR AND HUMAN RIGHTS
WHEREAS: Thousands of U.S. union members have been fired as a result of the enforcement of employer sanctions against workers in the workplace, including 475 janitors in San Francisco, 1200 janitors in Minneapolis, 300 janitors in Seattle, as well as workers who have stood up to lead organizing drives into our unions, including 2000 sewing machine operators at American Apparel in Los Angeles, and
WHEREAS: Immigration reform bills in Washington, including the Schumer proposal, the REPAIR proposal by Senator Schumer and several other senators, and the CIR-ASAP proposal by Congressman Luis Gutierrez, will cause more of our members to be fired through programs like E-Verify, the national ID card and employment verification, and will make it more difficult for unions to organize non-union workplaces by making immigrant workers even more vulnerable to firings, deportations and the denial of their rights through workplace enforcement, and
WHEREAS: the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Central America Free Trade Agreement, and other similar agreements, and structural adjustment policies and other so-called economic reforms continue to boost corporate profits while creating massive poverty in countries like Mexico, El Salvador and others, and that as a result, millions of workers and farmers are displaced and have no alternative but to migrate in search of work, and therefore will continue to come to the United States to work, join our unions and participate in our organizing drives, and
WHEREAS: the Mexican government fired 44,000 electrical workers and has tried to smash their union, the Mexican Electrical Workers (SME), and brought thousands of heavily armed police into Cananea copper mine to try to smash the 3-year strike of the Mineros, in both cases to create better conditions for giant corporations by breaking unions, privatizing workplaces and throwing workers out of their jobs, and that as a result many of those workers will be forced to come to the United States in order to find work and help their families survive, and
WHEREAS: the largest corporations and employer groups in the United States, including WalMart, Hyatt, Smithfield, the Associated Building Contractors and others have sought to expand guest worker programs, forcing people to come to the United States only through those schemes that treat them as low wage workers with no rights, in conditions described as "Close to Slavery" by the Southern Poverty Law Center, and
WHEREAS: our labor movement has called for basic reform of our immigration laws, and adopted a position at the AFL-CIO convention in Los Angeles in 1999 that demands the repeal of employer sanctions, immediate amnesty for undocumented workers, protection of the right to organize for all workers, the strengthening of family reunification as the basis of immigration policy, and opposition to guest worker programs, and
WHEREAS: our labor movement believes that solidarity with workers fighting for their rights in Mexico and around the world is an important part of immigration reform,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the South Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO reiterates its support for the immigration position adopted by the AFL-CIO Convention in 1999, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the South Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO rejects all the proposals in Congress that promote employer sanctions and the consequent firing of immigrant workers, open the doors to new guest worker programs, and do not contain a program for the quick and inclusive legalization of undocumented workers, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the South Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO strongly supports proposals for immigration reform that include the renegotiation of NAFTA, CAFTA and all other trade agreements, including those with Colombia and South Korea, in order to stop the enforced poverty that displaces communities abroad and "Right Not to Migrate", to protect jobs in the United States, and will oppose any new trade agreements that cause such displacement and do not protect jobs, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the South Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO supports the proposal for an alternative immigration reform bill made by the Dignity Campaign, because it is based on protecting the labor and human rights for all people, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the South Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO supports the SME and the Mineros, and calls on union members and working people to defend their rights by developing and taking supportive actions, and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the South Bay Labor Council, AFL-CIO forwards this resolution and the Dignity Campaign summary to the Congresspersons that represent this area, to our affiliates, Northern California Labor Councils, State Labor Federation, AFL-CIO, and to the community organizations with which we work on issues of immigration for their concurrence and action.
A PROPOSAL FOR ALTERNATIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM BASED ON HUMAN, CIVIL AND LABOR RIGHTS FOR ALL
Legalize all people without status quickly, with low fees
People will receive permanent residence status
Newly legalized people are entitled to public benefits
Anyone in the country for five years can apply for legal status
2. Family Reunification
Raise the number of family visas available, and issue all unused visas
Process all applications for family preference visas
3. Repeal Employer Sanctions and Enforce Labor Rights
Immediately repeal employer sanctions, and dismantle the E-Verify dataabase
Increase enforcement of worker protection laws, for all workers
Make threats from employers using immigration status a crime
job creation and job trainng programs for unemployed workers
All people can get a Social Security number, regardless of immigration status
4. Guest Workers and Future Flows
All existing guest worker programs (H1-B, H2-A, H2-B) will end after five years.
Reform existing guest worker programs during those five years, force employers to hire domestic workers first, and enforce labor standards for guest workers ts
All guest workers can organize and join unions, and can sue over violations
Make green cards available during times of low unemployment for migrants who don't qualify for family preference visas
5. Trade Policy and Displacement
Hold hearings about the effects of NAFTA and CAFTA, and collect evidence about the way those agreements displace people.
Existing agreements will be renegotiated to eliminate causes of displacement.
No new trade agreements that displace people or lower living standards.
Prohibit U.S. military intervention or aid to support trade agreements, structural adjustment policies or market economic reforms
6. Due Process and Detention
Repeal federal laws barring drivers licenses to undocumented immigrants
Prohibit local law enforcement agencies from enforcing immigration law
End roadblocks, immigration raids and sweeps
Prohibit privately-run detention centers, and tear down existing centers
Families with children may not be separated by detention or deportation.
7. Repeal Border Militarization and Enforce Human Rights
Dismantle the wall and the "virtual wall" along the border
Remove National Guard troops from the border
End the privatization of border control and security operations on the border
End criminal charges to prosecute immigrants based on their immigration status
Prosecute private vigilante groups for violations of the rights of migrants
Reduce the budget for border enforcement and detention, and redirect the funds to social services, healthcare, education, family reunification, processing visa backlogs and enforcing civil rights.
From the Daily Journal:
By Erin Tinoco
This might sound like a radical assertion to make, but I'm just going to go ahead and make it. I am a misdemeanor domestic violence prosecutor, and I think that misdemeanor domestic violence should not be a deportable offense. While today's sound-bite society might deem such an opinion fit only to belong to one who is "soft" on domestic violence, I want to boldly assert that it should nevertheless be the position of anyone who truly cares about domestic violence victims and the successful prosecution of their abusers.
Immigration and criminal law intersect in many interesting and sometimes contradictory ways, but for the purposes of this piece I am going to limit my discussion to the particular intersection of immigration and domestic violence. For years now, society has recognized that if a domestic violence victim fears he or she will be deported for coming out of the shadows to report the victimization, he or she will be less likely to make such a report. In recognition of this phenomenon, policies and laws have been changed in an attempt to overcome this reluctance. As a policy, police and prosecutors do not inquire of a domestic violence victim's immigration status, and through new federal laws, we have actually created pathways to citizenship for victims of domestic violence who come forward and cooperate with law enforcement in the prosecution of their abuser.
The next step is to realize that victims of domestic violence are sometimes equally reluctant to cooperate with the prosecution of their abuser if they know that conviction for such offense will lead to the abuser's deportation. For those who do not work in the domestic violence field this might seem surprising. After all, if your spouse or significant other was beating you, you might think that you would only be pleased by the fact that he or she would not only be punished by the criminal justice system, but additionally with actual banishment from the country. The reality is that the dynamics of domestic violence are a much more tangled web.
In the real world, a victim might have been married to her husband for 15 years and have four minor children with him. One night, things get out of hand and her husband shoves her to the ground. She calls the police and he gets arrested and charged with misdemeanor domestic violence. If he is a citizen, he would likely receive three years probation, would be subject to a protective order, might receive a short jail sentence, and would be required to attend a year-long domestic violence counseling program. If the victim wanted to reunite with her husband, counseling would be available for her and eventually peaceful contact would be allowed. If the victim did not want to reunite with him, her husband would still be around to work and provide spousal and child support to his family, and would likely be allowed to visit his children.
If the abuser husband is not a citizen, this situation changes quite dramatically. In addition to all of the punishments imposed by the criminal court, he would be deported to his home country. If the victim wanted to reunite with him, she would likely have to relocate to that home country even if she and her children had only ever lived here. If the victim did not want to reunite, she would likely be left with limited to no financial support from her husband, and her children would likely be left without a father in their lives. This is quite the load to bear by anyone's standards.
In the world of misdemeanor domestic violence prosecution, the vast majority of victims, regardless of any immigration issues, are reluctant to cooperate. They may feel financially or emotionally dependent on their abuser, or feel pressure from other family members to "drop the charges," or all of the above. These are reasons a prosecutor can usually deal with by explaining to the victim that all we want is for everyone to be safe, and for their abuser to receive counseling. Most will agree with this sort of outcome and will continue to cooperate albeit reluctantly. When you throw the deportation consequence into the mix, all of this bargaining power with victims is lost. Consequently, the prosecution is usually lost, and more importantly, safety for the victim is lost. Not only has the abuser been empowered by the lack of accountability in the present case, but the experience has also likely trained the victim to be all the more reluctant to ever seek police assistance during any potential future domestic violence incident.
It is for these reasons that I once again say: I am a misdemeanor domestic violence prosecutor, and I think that misdemeanor domestic violence should not be a deportable offense. I say it not because I am "soft" on domestic violence, but because to the contrary I work every day to try and end the cycle of violence and to work for increased safety for victims, their children, and the community at large. My one statement might not make a difference, but I figure people deserve to know what really goes on in the trenches of the criminal justice system. So often, it is easy for politicians or policy makers to have an over-simplified "get tough" message. Equally often, this same message implemented does not equate to actual justice on the ground level and in some instances, like the one here, it is actually counterproductive.
Surviving and coming out of an abusive relationship is a difficult task with many obstacles. As a society, we should remove the obstacles that are imposed by our laws.
Erin Tonoco is a deputy city attorney assigned to the Anaheim Family Justice Center. This article expresses her personal opinion and is not meant to represent the opinions of her office.
Here is an article on a hot issue from the immigration symposium issue of the Wayne Law Review: Sanctuary Policies & Immigration Federalism: A Dialectic Analysis Pratheepan Gulasekaram Santa Clara University School of Law Rose Cuison Villazor Hofstra University - School of Law Wayne Law Review, Vol. 55, No. 4, 2009. Abstract: This Article explores the doctrinal and theoretical challenges confronting San Francisco’s non-cooperation ordinance, and similar subfederal actions. It does so using a non-conventional but useful method where we, the authors, engage in a dialectic exchange. Through a fictional conversation, we present the opposing doctrinal views on whether San Francisco’s ordinance is preempted by 8 U.SC. § 1373.19 Agreeing that only one provision of the ordinance potentially faces a preemptive strike, we articulate the underlying doctrinal and theoretical issues facing sanctuary laws specifically and sub-federal immigration regulation generally. Ultimately, through our exchange, we develop how inclusionary measures such as sanctuary laws may survive preemption analysis and exclusionary measures such as bans on rental housing may be invalidated on preemption grounds. In addition, apropos to the focus of this symposium, we assess the impact of any potential comprehensive federal immigration reform on such policies.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
It Guess That It Must Be Election Season -- Georgia Legislator: Time to Allow Border Officers to "Shoot to Kill"
It is the fall. Election season is going hot and heavy. The debate over immigration has been so heated that it was only a matter of time until an elected state official proposed a truly extraordinary border "enforcement" proposal akin to border enforcement in the old East Germany. The Raw Story reports that
"Georgia's Republican State Rep. John Yates . . . wants US border agents empowered to `shoot to kill.' Asked to justify his position, Yates recently told a reporter in Atlanta that illegal immigrants are enemies of America who must be dealt with severely. `Stopping Hitler was worth the price,' the 89-year-old lawmaker said." (emphasis added). Just how are undocumented immigrants somehow comparable to Hitler?
Refusing to back down, Representative Yates later defended his remarks.
Unfortunately, more generally, as Matea Gold reports in the Los Angeles Times, "Democrats and Republicans pounding each other on the airwaves in the run-up to the Nov. 2 midterm elections have found one common enemy: foreigners."
A group of state legislators announced yesterday their intention to pass state-based legislation that would challenge birthright citizenship currently protected in the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This is the latest attempt to introduce bills that would deny U.S. citizenship to children whose parents are in the U.S. without authorization or on temporary visas. As restrictionist groups and legislators continue in their attempts to restrict or repeal birthright citizenship in State Houses and the U.S. Congress, it's important to remember that ending birthright citizenship would be unconstitutional, impractical, expensive, complicated and would not stop unauthorized immigration. The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) has developed a range of resources which present a strong case for maintaining and celebrating birthright citizenship and our civil rights heritage. To view IPC's resources on birthright citizenship, see Defending the Fourteenth Amendment (IPC Resource Page, August, 2010).
Penn State Law's Center for Immigrants' Rights is putting on a fall colloquium marking the 30th Anniversary of the Refugee Act on November 12, 2010 at 10:30am-2:15pm. Confirmed speakers include:
Elizabeth Dallam, Senior Protection Officer, UNHCR
Regina Germain, Professor and author of The Asylum Primer, published by the American Immigration Lawyers Association
Tara Magner, Senior Counsel to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Office of Senator Patrick Leahy
Jeanne Smoot, Public Policy Director, Tahirih Justice Center
Anne Sovcik, Advocacy Counsel, Human Rights First
Moderator: Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Clinical Professor and Director of the Center for Immigrants' Rights, Penn State Law
Latino Children of Immigrants in the Child Welfare System: Findings From the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being
by Alan J. Dettlaff, Ph.D., and Ilze Earner, Ph.D.
Latino children and families are often treated as a homogenous group, with little understanding of the potential differences that may exist between immigrant and native-born families. This research brief provides findings from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW) related to the involvement of Latino children of immigrants in the child welfare system. These findings represent the first national data concerning the characteristics, risk factors, and types of maltreatment experienced by this population. Read more.
From the Korematsu Institute:
Join us in commemorating the signing of the Fred Korematsu Day bill!
Please join the honorable Warren T. Furutani to commemorate the signing of Fred Korematsu Day of Civil Liberties and the Constitution
Assemblymembers Warren Furutani and Marty Block authored Assembly Bill 1775, which establishes January 30 as Fred Korematsu Day of Civil Liberties and the Constitution. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 1775 on September 23, 2010.
WHEN: Thursday, October 21, 2010, 3: 00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
WHERE: Japanese American National Museum
George & Sakaye Aratani Central Hall
369 E. First Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
For more information or to RSVP, please contact Yong Eo at Yong.Eo@asm.ca.gov or (916) 319-2055.