Friday, September 12, 2014
Do you get the daily AILA8 newsletter? If you don't, you should. And if you skim it without reading it closely, you might have missed today's headlines:
- CBP Plan to Detain Migrating Monarchs Outrages Lepidopterists
- Immigration Canada Calls for Northern Border Surge
- You Can Still Register for National Talk Like a Pirate Day
- Section 245(i) Makes a Come-Back!
- Biggest Loser Franchise Threatens Lawsuit over Obama Depiction
- USCIS Teleconference on Tab Removal
- AILA Staffers in Shock over Triple Retirement Announcements
As the newsletter authors note, it's not April Fools, but it is a "a slow news day, both AILA8's editor and her back up are out today, and the Onion wannabes took over."
We appreciate the humor!
As previously reported on the ImmigrationProf blog, a U.S. district court found in May 2013 that Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff's Office had engaged in a pattern and practice of violating the constitutional rights of Latinos. Judge Murray Snow's specifically found that the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office (MSCO) engaged in a pattern and practice of racial profiling in its immigration enforcement activities in violation of the Fourth Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and entered a permanent injunction barring future profiling of Latinos by the MSCO.
Yesterday, Judge Snow ordered that plaintiffs' attorneys would be awarded $4.4 million in legal fees. Click here for the story on the fee award.
After seeing her first Rett Syndrome patient while working as a resident neurological pediatrician at the Baylor College of Medicine, Huda Zoghbi put aside her clinical practice to focus on research. After 16 years of work, her lab successfully identified the mutated gene responsible for this disorder of the nervous system. Zoghbi also works to raise the awareness of Rett Syndrome within the scientific community. She was awarded the 2009 Vilcek Prize in Biomedical Science.
Immigration Article of the Day: Displaced: Toward a New International Legal Framework for Protecting Refugees and Human Rights by Jill I. Goldenziel
Abstract: This article presents a new international legal framework to help resolve one of the greatest human rights issues of our time, the plight of displaced people. More than 50.3 million people now receive legal protection and humanitarian assistance from the United Nations as a result of population displacement. More than 2 million people per year flee their countries for reasons ranging from violence to economic crisis and climate change. No international law currently exists to protect the vast majority of these people, who do not qualify as refugees under international law, and who face increasing immigration restrictions due to post-9/11 national security concerns. This article presents the first comprehensive history of international refugee law in recent years, tracing how the meaning of “refugee” in international law has changed over time in response to changing state interests and the evolution of international human rights law that protects individual rights rather than group rights. It explains how state interests have changed since international refugee law was developed, making the time ripe for the development of new international law to protect displaced populations. The article concludes by outlining a new category of international law that can better protect the human rights of refugees and displaced people.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
Michelle Pistone has been working with several members of the immigration law teachers and scholars community about an ongoing project to produce a collection of educational videos on immigration law (and other subjects as well).
Several of the videos were shot at UC Irvine during ImmProf are now available on the LegalED website,http://legaledweb.com/immigration-law/. Others that were shot in Irvine are still in production.
In addition to the videos shot during ImmProf, Maureen Sweeney produced a video on the Categorical Analysis of Immigration Consequences of Criminal Actions and Stephen Manning and Juliet Stumpf produced a set of videos for their Transformative Immigration Law course, all of which are also available on the website.
Educational videos such as these can be used to give students necessary background information outside of class, to supplement classroom teaching and possibly free up classtime for active learning exercises that enable students to use their knowledge. If you do decide to use them in your teaching, please let Michelle Pistone at firstname.lastname@example.org know how it works. All feedback is welcome and encouraged.
In September 1968, Congress authorized President Lyndon B. Johnson to proclaim National Hispanic Heritage Week, observed during the week that included Sept. 15 and Sept. 16. Congress expanded the observance in 1989 to a monthlong celebration (Sept. 15 – Oct. 15) of the culture and traditions of those who trace their roots to Spain, Mexico and the Spanish-speaking nations of Central America, South America and the Caribbean.
Sept. 15 is the starting point for the celebration because it is the anniversary of independence of five Latin American countries: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. In addition, Mexico and Chile celebrate their independence days on Sept. 16 and Sept. 18, respectively.
The Hispanic population of the United States as of July 1, 2013, making people of Hispanic origin the nation’s largest ethnic or racial minority. Hispanics constituted 17 percent of the nation’s total population. Source: 2013 Population Estimates < http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=PEP_2013_PEPASR6H&prodType=table>
Number of Hispanics added to the nation’s population between July 1, 2012, and July 1, 2013. This number is close to half of the approximately 2.3 million people added to the nation’s population during this period. Source: 2013 Population Estimates National Characteristics: Population by Sex, Race, and Hispanic origin < http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/asrh/2013/index.html>, See first bullet under “Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin”
Percentage increase in the Hispanic population between 2012 and 2013. Source: 2013 Population Estimates National Characteristics: Population by Sex, Race, and Hispanic origin < http://www.census.gov/popest/data/national/asrh/2013/index.html>, See first bullet under “Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin”
The projected Hispanic population of the United States in 2060. According to this projection, the Hispanic population will constitute 31 percent of the nation’s population by that date. Source: Population Projections < http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb12-243.html>
Ranking of the size of the U.S. Hispanic population worldwide, as of 2010. Only Mexico (120 million) had a larger Hispanic population than the United States (54 million). Source: International Data Base < http://www.census.gov/population/international/data/idb/informationGateway.php>
The percentage of those of Hispanic origin in the United States who were of Mexican background in 2012. Another 9.4 percent were of Puerto Rican background, 3.8 percent Salvadoran, 3.7 percent Cuban, 3.1 percent Dominican and 2.3 percent Guatemalan. The remainder was of some other Central American, South American or other Hispanic/Latino origin. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 American Community Survey: Table B03001 < http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_12_1YR_B03001&prodType=table>
It is now 13 years since September 11, 2001. The events of that day had a significant impact on the development of U.S. immigration law and its enforcement. For example, in promulgating a regulation allowing for immigration procedures known as “special registration,” which required certain Arab and Muslim noncitizens to register with the Immigration and Naturalization Service, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft expressly invoked the plenary power doctrine in an attempt to immunize the facially discriminatory measure from the near-inevitable constitutional challenges; he emphasized matter-of-factly that
the political branches of the government have plenary authority in the immigration area. See Fiallo v. Bell, 430 U.S. 787, 792 (1977); Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67, 80-82 (1976). In the context of immigration and nationality laws, the Supreme Court has particularly “underscored the limited scope of judicial inquiry.” Fiallo, 430 U.S. at 792.
Registration and Monitoring of Certain Nonimmigrants, 67 Fed. Reg. 52584, 52585 (Aug 12, 2002) (emphasis added).
Accepting the Attorney General’s general assertion that “the political branches of the government have plenary authority in the immigration area,” courts rejected constitutional challenges to special registration. The special registration doctrine was one of a number of much-criticized measures directed at Arabs and Muslims in the “war on terror.” See, e.g., Susan M. Akram & Kevin R. Johnson, Race, Civil Rights, and Immigration Law after September 11, 2001: The Targeting of Arabs and Muslims, 58 NYU Ann. Surv. Am. L. 295 (2002).
Security fears quickly translated into growing popularity among members of Congress, as well as among the general public, to increase militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border and direct many aggressive measures at undocumented Mexican immigrants and immigrants generally, often in the name of protecting national security. See Kevin R Johnson & Bernard Trujillo, Immigration Reform, National Security After September 11, and the Future of North American Integration, 91 Minn. L. Rev. 1369, 1386-87, 1396-1404 (2007). Even though there is little evidence that the southern border with Mexico has ever been breached by any person seeking to engage in what reasonably can be characterized as terrorist activities in the United States, political leaders after 2001 regularly invoked public safety concerns as justifying increased immigration enforcement efforts along the U.S.-Mexico border.
A renewed focus on public safety also appeared to influence the Supreme Court’s approach to immigration measures generally touching on public safety, such as, for example, making it more tolerant of the detention of immigrants convicted of criminal offenses. See Margaret H. Taylor, Demore v. Kim: Judicial Deference to Congressional Folly, in Immigration Stories 343, 344-45 (David A. Martin & Peter H. Schuck eds., 2005) (contending that the Supreme Court’s decision upholding mandatory detention of noncitizens convicted of certain categories of crimes in Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510 (2003) was influenced by fears surrounding the “war on terror” following September 11, 2001 and explained the decision’s apparent departure from Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 679 (2001), which was decided only months before September 11).
More than a decade has passed since September 11, 2001. The aggressive push for extraordinary immigration enforcement measures in the name of public safety fortunately has diminished. The push for greater enforcement now appears more motivated by a concern with numbers, including the much-publicized migration of unaccompanied minors from Central America. In important respects, the trajectory of immigration law has seemingly returned to a place similar to where it was before September 11.
Immigrant of the Day: Oscar de la Renta From Dominican Republic | Fashion Designer and Philanthropist
Originally interested in becoming an abstract painter, Oscar de la Renta, born in 1932 in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, found that he was more interested in fashion design. After founding his label, he first achieved success with ball gowns. Now one of the world’s leading designers, his work has been worn by Nancy Reagan, Hillary Clinton, and Laura Bush. Also a patron of the arts, de la Renta has served on the boards of Carnegie Hall and the Metropolitan Opera.
The book provides foundational knowledge, introducing current issues in national security law. Written by a “who’s who” in the field of national security law, including: John Yoo, Louis Fisher, and Stewart Baker, the book present a series of debates, organized by chapter, in which an author presents ideas in a short essay, and another offers a response.
Patriots Debate is an accessible book offering informed, educated legal reasoning enabling the reader to understand the foundational legal opinions, laws, policies and mores that form both US government policies, and the surrounding debates based on competing views of the Constitution, statutes, presidential directives, judicial decisions and history itself.
Complex national security issue are exaimined:
An exploration of terrorism interrogations
The government as internet protector
Targeted killing--In accordance with the rule of law Law and cyber war--the lessons of history
The future of military detention
Politico.com reported on the oral arguments last week in federal court, which it states is "a case dramatizing the split personality in the Obama administration over the question of providing counsel to child migrants faced with deportation hearings. No less than Attorney General Eric Holder told the Senate last year that it is `inexcusable' that young children `have immigration decisions made on their behalf, against them, whatever and they’re not represented by counsel. That’s simply not who we are as a nation.' . . . . But in making the case for Justice on Wednesday, Deputy Assistant Attorney General Leon Fresco painted a dire picture of what would result if the court were to insist that children be assured counsel before any deportation hearing."
The federal district court in Seattle, Washington heard oral argument in J.E.F.M. v. Holder, the class action about the right to counsel for children in removal proceedings. Below is the video of the oral argument.
Here is a news report about the argument.
Immigration Article of the Day: Assessing the Prospects of Competing Agricultural Guest Worker Legislation: the Inherency of Unequal Bargaining Power in a Status Quo of Non-Enforcement by Ian David Baldwin
Assessing the Prospects of Competing Agricultural Guest Worker Legislation: the Inherency of Unequal Bargaining Power in a Status Quo of Non-Enforcement by Ian David Baldwin, George Mason University School of Law September 11, 2014
Abstract: This assessment of the major Congressional proposals by Democrats (HR 1773) and Republicans (S.744) to fashion a new guest worker program critiques the solvency of each proposal through the lens of their effect on illegal immigration. While S.744 may succeed at enticing migrants to apply through the W-Visa program in search of higher wages, portability rights, and the opportunity for a path to citizenship, the proposal may prove untenable to employers who view W-Visa holders as too costly. On the other hand, HR 1773 falls victim to the opposite problem - although growers will appreciate the stability of a workforce with little bargaining power, migrants will have little incentive to sign up for a visa program that affords them piece rate wages equal to what they would earn in an illegal setting.
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
Leading up to Citizenship Day, a group of recently naturalized Americans shared their personal stories on how citizenship has changed their lives during a press call today. For a recording of today’s call, please visit here.
Each new American showed that the last step of becoming a citizen brings about critical advantages such as new educational opportunities, increased access to benefits such as healthcare, or simply an easier time practicing their religion.
“I became a naturalized citizen in the month of February,” said Guadalupe Guerrero, 25, of Compton, Calif. “My father had been a permanent resident since 1987 and, once we convinced him to become a citizen, his new citizenship sped up our naturalization process. The peace of mind from knowing you are safe is priceless. The opportunities from obtaining a better education and better jobs are also great.”
Jinzhi Cang, 73, of Houston, who naturalized Sept. 25, 2013, decided to become a citizen so she could feel valuable to U.S. society. “It has been a year since I became a U.S. citizen, and one of the things I see myself doing is voting,” she said. “Before I became a citizen, I saw myself as an outsider. Now I feel like a part of society. I have a voice. I can vote and elect an individual who can truly help and protect the people.”
For Thanh Bui, a 79-year-old new citizen also from Houston, the decision to become a citizen was a life-saving change: “I found out I was diagnosed with liver cancer. Had I not had my citizenship, I might have not had the Medicare and Medicaid benefits I needed to be able to help me through the stages of my liver cancer.”
“I cannot say just how much citizenship means to me. The International Rescue Committee has been such a huge help in earning my citizenship,” added Zoreh Ravani, a newly naturalized citizen from New York City. “I have the power to vote here. I can get my American passport and travel to any country I want to go without any restriction. I can freely practice the religion I want to, which I wouldn’t have in my own country of Iran.”
All four new Americans thanked the New Americans Campaign and affiliated organizations such as Boat People SOS (Houston) and the Chinese Community Center (Houston), for helping them complete their citizenship applications.
“Since 2011, the New Americans Campaign has naturalized more than 120,000 citizens. We have saved aspiring citizens and their families more than $85 million in USCIS fees,” noted Vanessa Sandoval, Immigration Legal Services Program Director for SIREN (Services, Immigrant Rights, and Education Network) in San Jose, Calif., the lead organization for the New Americans Campaign in San Jose. “Most of our communities are unaware of the resources available to help them apply for citizenship — and the many benefits one can gain as a new American.”
Stanford Law School’s Lucas Guttentag began serving the Obama administration today as Senior Counselor to the recently confirmed Director of U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS), Leon Rodriguez. USCIS is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Guttentag has taught courses at Stanford Law School (SLS) since 2012 and was appointed Professor of the Practice of Law in 2014. Guttentag described his new role as “advising the director on policy matters in support of the administration’s efforts to improve and reform the immigration system.”
Guttentag has a long history of expertise in immigration law and rights. He founded the Immigrants’ Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation in 1985 and was its national director for 25 years. He has argued major class action and constitutional cases on behalf of immigrants before the U.S. Supreme Court and many federal circuit and district courts for three decades. He has litigated other cases that challenged the indefinite detention of Haitian refugees at Guantanamo Naval Base, a federal law penalizing citizens and immigrants who marry during deportation hearings, and numerous challenges to state and local immigration laws.
Guttentag was named a Human Rights Hero by the American Bar Association’s Human Rights journal in 2001, was honored as one of the leading immigration advocates of the last 25 years by the National Immigration Forum in 2007, and was chosen as California Lawyer of the Year for Appellate Law by California Lawyer magazine in 2002. He received the annual outstanding litigation award from the American Immigration Lawyers Association four times. He received his JD cum laude from Harvard Law School and his BA with honors from the University of California at Berkeley. In addition to being on the Stanford faculty, he was regularly teaching at Yale Law School.
As pressure mounts for President Obama to quickly take action to provide relief from deportation for all undocumented immigrants, the California Immigrant Policy Center today released a new report detailing the contributions of immigrants to the state.
The report, the latest edition of “Looking Forward: Immigrant Contributions to the Golden State,” features statewide statistics and local data from seven key regions: the Central Coast, Central Valley, the Sacramento area, Greater Los Angeles, Inland Southern California, San Diego/Border region and the San Francisco Bay Area. Authored by researchers at the University of Southern California’s Center for the Study of Immigrant Integration (CSII), the report includes updated information on demographics, labor force participation, economic contributions, entrepreneurship, and numbers of eligible voters among all immigrants.
“Looking Forward” also zeroes in on undocumented immigrants’ contributions to the state’s GDP and the contributions of vulnerable workers with intermittent employment.
KEY FINDINGS FROM THE STUDY INCLUDE:
Demographics and mixed-status families
• 10.2 million Californians are immigrants - over one quarter of our state’s population.
• 26% or about 2.6 million of California’s immigrants are undocumented. Almost three in four non-citizens live in households that also have citizens.
• Immigrants produce 31% of the state’s Gross Domestic Product – nearly $650 billion annually.
• Undocumented immigrants alone contribute $130 Billion of the GDP – a figure greater than the entire GDP of Nevada - or AT&T’s total revenues.
• Immigrants are more than one-third of the state’s labor force and are more likely to be entrepreneurial and create their own jobs.
• Undocumented immigrants represent almost 1 in 10 of the state’s workers, making up 38% of the agriculture industry and 14% of the construction industry statewide. Civic participation.
• By 2015, immigrants eligible to naturalize and the already naturalized could represent as much as 33% of California’s electorate.
"En Los Campos del Norte" or "In the Fields of the North" is an exhibition of photographs of farm workers in the U.S., almost all migrants from Mexico, taken by David Bacon. They are hung on the iron bars of the border wall, on the Mexican side of the wall between Mexico and the U.S. in Playas de Tijuana. The exhibition was organized Jose Manuel Valenzuela and Gabriela Zamora of the Colegio de la Frontera (COLEF), and was printed and mounted by the Centro Cultural de Tijuana (CECUT).
Comprehensive immigration reform and Executive action on immigration have been put off until after the November 2014 elections. One might guess that, at least for the moment, immigration as a legislative issue is at a standstill. But maybe not. CNN reports that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said Tuesday Congress should "use all means necessary" to prevent President Obama from granting what Cruz characterizes as "amnesty" to immigrants unlawfully in the country. "He said it would be `appropriate' to include a provision that would block the President from doing so in a critical government-funding bill that Congress must approve this month. Democrats immediately seized on the issue and charged that Cruz wants to shut down the government by attaching a `poison pill' to the funding bill, which is known as a continuing resolution or CR. "
Senator Cruz's latest threat makes it even clearer that immigration reform is being used as a partisan political football with little regard to the real human costs of the U.S. government's failure to act.
This week, UC Davis School of Law has been hosting the internationational Wine and Spirits Law Academy. Wine wine and spirits law experts from around the world converged on UC Davis for the latest legal and marketing knowledge about the wine and spirits industry. It has been a funloving group, which took a trip to St. Helena and a private tour of a Napa Valley winery.
Last night, Ken Starr, President of Baylor University, was the keynote speaker at dinner.
Sponsors include UC Davis School of Law, Robert Mondavi Institute for Wine and Food Science, UC Davis Extension: Center for International Educationational Education, UC Davis Confucius Institute, and Wine & Law Program at the University of Reims (France).
The academy concludes today.
Born in 1930 in Budapest, Hungary, George Soros worked for several Wall Street firms before setting up his own private investment concern in 1973 that eventually became the Quantum Fund, one of the first hedge funds. Hugely successful, he was the first American to earn $1 billion in one year. He has also been a major philanthropist since the 1970s. In 1984, he established the Open Society Foundations, funding initiatives around the world “to advance justice, education, public health, business development and independent media.”
Immigration Article of the Day: Deconstructing and Reconstructing Rights for Immigrant Children by Erin B. Corcoran
Deconstructing and Reconstructing Rights for Immigrant Children by Erin B. Corcoran University of New Hampshire School of Law August 8, 2014 18 Harv. Latino L. Rev. (2015) (Forthcoming)
Abstract: Children rights advocates and scholars alike continue to call for the development of innovative and alternative rights models, which specifically provide for an expansive conceptualization of children’s rights. Central to their calls for reform is a simultaneous recognition that children’s rights must embody agency – a child’s voice (a proxy for autonomy) – free from governmental interference, as well as the establishment of certain fundamental “needs” that place an affirmative obligation on the State to ensure the child has, and affirmatively provide, when necessary. Reimagining children’s rights also requires reforming our laws in such a way that reflects children as inimitable rights holders possessing unique positive rights. Yet, in U.S. immigration law, children are still most often seen as illegal migrants and their status as alien is continually prioritized over their status as children. With a few notable exceptions, immigration law has been stagnant to adopt dynamic models that incorporate rights models that are informed by the developmental needs of children. This Article contributes to the much-needed discourse about how children’s rights should be understood and realized in immigration law. Unlike other areas of the law, U.S. immigration law still affords no legal distinction between children and adults when adjudicating potential forms of relief. Procedurally there are no compulsory child specific accommodations for immigrant children, as there are in family or juvenile court. Moreover, children are held to the same credibility and evidentiary burdens as adults. This Article concludes that international human rights law, specifically the Convention on the Rights of the Child, articulates a workable, comprehensive, framework of children’s positive (or welfare) and liberal rights that can and should be implemented in U.S. immigration law. Specifically, immigration law must at a minimum prohibit the return of a child to a country where the child would face irreparable harm; permit children when appropriate to petition for immigration relief on their own behalf; provide experts trained in child welfare and immigration law to assess the best interests of the child; and provide free legal counsel to children facing deportation.