Friday, August 15, 2014
Thursday, August 14, 2014
Today, the New York Times published a series of interactive charts about migration patterns within the United States since 1900: Where We Come From, State By State. My eldest son and I are, apparently, among the growing population of Oklahomans born in California (currently 4%). I could see these charts being useful in an immigration class to show local demographic changes.
The Department of Justice has posted thirty-two openings for immigration judges.
The are looking to fill positions in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Virginia.
Brush off those resumes!
Report: Coordinating immigrant integration in Germany: Mainstreaming at the federal and local levels
"Mainstreaming," the practice of reaching people with a migration background through social programming and policies that address the needs of the general population, is gaining policy traction in Europe. Interestingly, however, the concept of embedding immigrant integration into mainstream policy areas such as education, employment, housing, and social cohesion has yet to become part of the discourse in Germany.
A new Migration Policy Institute Europe report, Coordinating immigrant integration in Germany: Mainstreaming at the federal and local levels, assesses the effect of immigrant-focused educational, employment, and youth policies and programmes that Germany has implemented at federal and länder levels.
The report, by Prof. Dr. Petra Bendel of the Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen in Nuremberg, finds that while Germany has embraced integration policies since 2005, the country's complex political and administration system, together with its culture, make the development, implementation, and coordination of such policymaking particularly challenging.
"Autonomy at länder and local levels often still leads to fragmented integration policies, especially when combined with highly decentralised competences on education (purview of the länder), making top-down coordination impossible," she writes.
While immigrant integration policymaking has become increasingly coordinated, the report finds that programmes and responsibilities are intertwined, blurred, and often divided across at least four different ministries.
The report, supported by a research grant from the Dutch Ministry for Social Affairs and Employment, is part of a comparative research project conducted in collaboration with the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society (COMPAS) at the University of Oxford and Erasmus University in Rotterdam. It follows the publication of a recent case study of the United Kingdom, as well as an overview report offering principles of good practice in the design of mainstreaming strategies and initiatives. In-depth studies of Denmark and France will be released over the coming weeks. Read the studies here.
Broadcast journalist Juju Chang, born in 1965 in Seoul, South Korea, serves as co-anchor of ABC’s Nightline. She also appears regularly on that network’s Good Morning America and 20/20. She has covered stories including Hurricane Sandy, the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, and the earthquake in Haiti, and has conducted investigative reports on anti-gay bullying, female inmates giving birth, and other social issues. Chang has won three Emmy Awards and two Gracie Awards.
Immigration Article of the Day: Unshackling Habeas Review: Chevron Deference and Statutory Interpretation in Immigration Detention Cases by Alina Das
Unshackling Habeas Review: Chevron Deference and Statutory Interpretation in Immigration Detention Cases by Alina Das, New York University School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic July 16, 2014 New York University Law Review, Vol. 90, No. 1, 2015 NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 14-31
Abstract: This article questions the application of Chevron deference in federal court habeas review of statutory immigration detention challenges. Since the enactment of a mandatory detention statute for immigrants facing deportation, the Board of Immigration Appeals — an administrative body within the U.S. Department of Justice — has played an increasingly important role in interpreting the scope of detention for thousands of immigrants each year. Federal courts have long served as an important check against executive detention through habeas review and have declined to accommodate other deference norms in the immigration detention context. Federal courts have nonetheless applied Chevron to immigration detention cases without questioning whether such deference to the agency is appropriate. This article argues that federal courts should reject the application of Chevron when exercising habeas review of statutory immigration detention challenges. This article further argues that federal courts, whether or not fettered by Chevron, should apply interpretive norms that properly account for the important physical liberty interest at stake.
Wednesday, August 13, 2014
Yesterday, Lauren Bacall, star of the silver screen, died. Bacall starred in a famous movie touching on the migration issues in Europe during WWII.
To Have and Have Not (1944) is a film directed by Howard Hawks and starring Humphrey Bogart, Walter Brennan, and Lauren Bacall in her very first film. The film is set in Fort-de-France, Martinique, under the Vichy regime in 1940, shortly after the fall of France. Fishing-boat captain Harry Morgan (Humphrey Bogart) is urged to help the French Resistance smuggle some people onto the island. He refuses, until the client, Johnson (Walter Sande), is shot before paying him. The French police take him and several others for questioning and they take his passport and money. A hotel owner known as Frenchy (Marcel Dalio), asks Harry to rent him his boat for one night to transport some members of the resistance. Broke, Harry ends up smuggling Helene (Dolores Moran) and Paul de Bursac (Walter Surovy). Meanwhile, a romance develops between Harry and Marie ("Slim") Browning (Lauren Bacall), an American wanderer who has come to the island. After picking up his passengers, Harry is spotted by a patrol boat, but escapes. Harry is surprised to find that Marie has remained in Martinique to be with him. The police recognized Harry's boat the previous night, and they reveal that they have Harry's drunk buddy, Eddie (Walter Brennan), in custody and will coerce him to tell the truth about the boat's cargo. With Slim's help, Harry turns the table on the police and at gunpoint, Harry forces Police Captain Renard (Dan Seymour) to arrange for Eddie's release and sign harbor passes, so that he can take the Bursacs away. Slim says goodbye to her piano-playing friend Cricket (Hoagy Carmichael). As soon as Eddie returns, he, Harry, and Marie leave Martinique.
Bacall later married Humphrey Bogart, who starred in in the classic refugee film Casablanca, released in 1942. It also Ingrid Bergman, and Paul Henreid; and features Claude Rains, Conrad Veidt, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, and Dooley Wilson. Set during World War II, the film focuses on a man torn between, in the words of one character, "love and virtue." He must choose between his love for a woman and helping her Czech Resistance leader husband escape the Vichy-controlled Moroccan city of Casablanca to continue his fight against the Nazis.
Dean of the University of Toledo College of Law (and immigration law professor) Daniel J. Steinbock wrote a wonderful article on Casablanca from a refugee perspective. See Refuge and Resistance: Casablanca's Lessons for Refugee Law, 7 Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 649 (1993).
Michelle Chen writes for the Guardian:
With an out-of-session Congress deadlocked over immigration reform and right-wing lawmakers hell-bent on “sealing the border”, the White House faces intense pressure to do something – anything – about immigration, after years of burying a civil rights crisis in a mire of political tone-deafness and jingoistic bombast.
Activists hope that President Obama will expand an existing program to shield undocumented youth from deportation and grant reprieves to their family members. But whatever unilateral action Obama may take, it won’t be nearly enough to offset the systematic betrayal of immigrant communities over the past six years, as the White House has dangled vague promises of reform while denying justice to millions of undocumented PEOPLE and their families.
EVEN the young people who have obtained temporary protection aren’t necessarily comforted by the prospect of more executive intervention from Obama. After watching their communities get ripped apart by incarceration and deportation, they’re now not only pressing for relief, but demanding long overdue justice.
In 2012, Obama launched his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca) program as a temporary reprieve for hundreds of thousands of undocumented young people who grew up in the United States. It was little more than a conditional promise from the White House not to kick them out of the country, but in a political arena that tends to demonize the undocumented as criminals or just ignore them, it was hailed as a breakthrough. Many hoped that actually comprehensive reform would eventually follow.
Two years on, Daca stands as a sadly partial success. .....
Others may be unfairly disqualified by a past court conviction. While some may think “criminals” don’t deserve legal status, in reality, using criminal records to judge relief applications perpetuates structural biases in the immigration system and the criminal justice system: a nonviolent pot offense, for instance, or an old driving-under-the-influence charge, could ultimately exclude a young person from protection. Such barriers undermine the basic purpose of deferred action – to stabilize the population and help people escape social marginalization.
In recent years, various immigration reform measures have sought to screen out “undesirables” with blemished records, ignoring the fact that immigrants are often disproportionately targeted by racial profiling, unable to afford decent legal counsel and, in some cases, denied due process in a criminal justice system that heightens penalties for non-citizens. Read more...
Check your blood pressure before and after reading this article. Is there a difference? The assignment is Rolling Stone, "The Fake Border War: How the far right has used the refugee crisis - and ignored suffering children - for short-term political gain."
ABC News reports that Bieber agreed to a plea deal in his Miami DUI case from January. The singer was booked seven months ago on charges of driving under the influence, driving with an expired license and resisting arrest without violence. Under the plea agreement, Bieber must attend 12 hours of anger management classes, pay a $500 fine, complete a YouImpact program in which he'll meet people whose lives were changed by drunk drivers, and pay court costs. Bieber agreed to plead guilty to resisting arrest without violence. The DUI charge was reduced to "careless driving," to which Bieber also pleaded guilty. His charge of driving with an expired license was dropped, and he now has a valid driver's license.
Because he is a Canadian citizen, the plea agreement stipulated that Bieber's lawyers must discuss with him "the possible immigration consequences of accepting this agreement ... [and] the Immigration and Naturalization Service will consider this conviction in any deportation decision."
Bieber reached another plea deal last month in his misdemeanor vandalism case stemming from an egging incident in January. According to that plea deal, Bieber was ordered to serve two years probation, perform five days of community service and pay more than $80,000 in fines. He also has to take a separate anger-management course.
A question for immigration professors -- is Bieber subject to removal?
In the rush to stem the border crisis, some of America’s resettlement programs are facing big cuts in support. The Washington Post takes a closer look at how this change in funding would impact the organizations running these programs, and ultimately, the refugees who depend on them for survival in their new country.
From the story: File this under unintended consequences: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement allocates funds to programs for refugees and unaccompanied alien children. Earlier this year, when the number of children fleeing Central America and Mexico for the United States started skyrocketing, the office reallocated more money to help address a mounting crisis at the border. That money — $94 million — came directly out of refugee programs and services. Taking the hit were grants that help refugees with employment, preventative health services and adaption to America and its school system. An emergency supplemental spending bill that would have provided more money to help with the border situation — and replenished the coffers of refugee services — fell victim to congressional gridlock. Lawmakers are now on their August break. ahead of the financial limbo facing refugee programs in the U.S.
Review of Gender, Child, and LGBTI Asylum Guidelines and Case Law in Foreign Jurisdictions: A Resource for U.S. Attorneys
The UC Hastings Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS) has released a new resource, Review of Gender, Child, and LGBTI Asylum Guidelines and Case Law in Foreign Jurisdictions: A Resource for U.S. Attorneys. The introduction states that:
Asylum claims involving women, children, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) individuals are increasingly common in the United States. However, in certain circumstances, such claims continue to be controversial and face challenges during the asylum adjudication process. Guidance from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)1 and foreign jurisdictions that are also signatories to the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (the Refugee Convention) and/or the 1967 Protocol may be helpful to supplement U.S. authority in certain types of cases, particularly in areas where U.S. law is undeveloped or diverges from internationally recognized principles of refugee law. Although UNHCR guidance is not binding on U.S. courts, the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal have recognized UNHCR guidance as persuasive authority.2 Opinions from foreign jurisdictions are valuable in demonstrating how sister signatory states have interpreted international refugee law and may also be cited as persuasive authority.3 This resource is intended for use by U.S. attorneys representing asylum seekers involving claims of gender-based persecution and sexual orientation and gender identity-related persecution as well as claims involving child applicants. This resource first discusses what these types of claims entail and how they are defined. Then it provides country by country summaries of any relevant laws, regulations, guidelines, case law, and other sources on these types of claims in key refugee receiving jurisdictions.
A pair of new reports released today from the Migration Policy Institute's Transatlantic Council on Migration continues the research series on the ability of cities and regions to harness the benefits of migration. The first report, Revitalizing Detroit: Is There a Role for Immigration?, considers how policymakers might use immigration to re-energize a city that has become a byword for urban decline and economic decay. Steve Tobocman, an economic revitalization leader and former Michigan state legislator, assesses a host of immigration initiatives designed to address the shrinking and aging population base, diminished city resources, and lack of high-skilled human capital that Detroit confronts. "Immigration alone cannot save Detroit, but if carefully managed in the context of a broader economic development strategy, it may be one promising tool for boosting Detroit's economic prospects," Tobocman writes.
The second report, The Human-Capital Needs of Tech City, London, examines the role that skilled migrants can play in high-tech clusters such as London's Tech City, also known as Silicon Roundabout. While immigration policy can serve as a route for new talent, report author Max Nathan argues that Tech City firms are having trouble making the most of immigration, with visa restrictions making it difficult to hire the right workers. The report suggests that policymakers' control over cluster development is limited and that such development rarely produces expected benefits. Meanwhile, policies that are not cluster specific—such as human-capital interventions aimed at improving the international supply of workers through migration or the local supply of workers via skills training—are likely to have indirect positive effects.
These reports are the latest in a series from the Transatlantic Council on Migration's 11th plenary meeting on the topic "Cities and Regions: Reaping Migration's Local Dividends."
Editors and contributors of The New Republic report on the different angles of the border crisis. From the violence migrants face at home to the smuggling of U.S. guns into countries south of the border, it is clear that America has a moral case to act compassionately when dealing with the influx of migrants.
Franklin Foer makes the case that the U.S. has an obligation to let the migrant children stay. The U.S. has a history of providing refuge to people from different countries and it has a responsibility to provide asylum to Central American migrants today. He writes:
"Of all the [William Wilberforce] revivalists, the most dogged was Sam Brownback, then a senator from Kansas. [...] in a tribute to his idol, he introduced the Wilberforce Act, which was intended to curb the modern-day incarnation of slavery: human trafficking. [...] But arrival of tens of thousands of Central American kids this year has exposed just how badly Congress underestimated the urge to immigrate: A great mass of humanity will endure enormous risk at the least sign that they have America's blessing to flee here."
"But the unanticipated numbers of children availing themselves of the Wilberforce Act shouldn't undermine the initial logic for it. The bill's conservative authors understood that the United States has obligations to the world's most desperate cases--and that those obligations should play a decisive role in shaping our immigration policy."
"If you listen for radio traffic in the Rincon Village area, it's amazing," Border Patrol Agent Albert Spratte, a union sergeant-at-arms, told me at the height of the crossings in June. "It's, OK, we need two buses. OK, some vans. In that area, over the night, it's probably several hundred or more." Upon reaching U.S. soil, most of these women and children surrender to the first person in uniform they see. Managing the stream of migrants from Central America from a security standpoint seems to call less form overwhelming force than for running an efficient taxi service.
Alec MacGillis reports that guns are one of the main reasons for the gangs' oppressive control over Central American countries. The U.S. is thus partly responsible as a significant number of these guns can be traced to U.S. retail dealers. He writes:
"[Harry] Penate...is the [U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)'s] only agent for all of Central America. From his desk at the U.S. Embassy in San Salvador, he is the one responsible for tracing U.S. guns smuggled into the Northern Triangle: El Salvador Guatemala, and Honduras. [...] And since Penate took on the job two years ago, he has come to an inescapable conclusion: U.S. weapons are partly to blame for the carnage--and in turn for the kids who are fleeing it."
"The flow of guns is critical to the gangs' chokehold over the Norther Triangle. [...] "The firearm is to a gang member what a hammer is to a carpenter," Penate says."
Óscar Martínez depicts the violent and hopeless circumstances Central American civilians face when dealing with gangs. He argues that the only option these civilians have is to flee to the U.S. He writes:
"When a family keeps its children out of the gangs, the gangs have a way of still getting to the family. [...] Every month, you see a newspaper headline announcing a new group abandoning their homes. The families are threatened for all sorts of reasons: because their sons didn't want to join a gang, because a family member filed a police report, because they won't let a gang member rape their daughter. Or simply because they visited their grandfather in enemy territory. [...] It's only natural that someone who can't find a corner in which to hide in his own country would consider migrating to the United States to join relatives already there."
LEXIS NEXIS Legal Newsroom Immigration Law reports on a Cooley LLP announcement that it filed suit against the Department of Justice on behalf of sitting Immigration Judge A. Ashley Tabaddor. The lawsuit raises challenges under the First Amendment and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to an order recusing Judge Tabaddor indefinitely from all cases involving Iranian nationals. Tabaddor v. Holder et al., filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, asserts that the DOJ ordered the blanket disqualification in a racially discriminatory fashion, based on Judge Tabaddor's national heritage and association with the Iranian-American community, including her speaking, educational and volunteer activities within that community. The recusal order runs counter to federal laws and regulations and contradicts written DOJ policies applicable to immigration judges, including those encouraging civic engagement and providing that recusal determinations are to be made by the presiding immigration judge on an individualized case-by-case basis, not superimposed by DOJ officials based on generalized or arbitrary criteria.
Daisy Expósito-Ulla is one of the major forces in the growth of Hispanic marketing and communications in the U.S. As the former chairman and CEO of The Bravo Group, she led it to become the largest agency to target Hispanics in America. She was twice recognized by Crain’s New York Business as one of New York’s 100 Top Minority Executives and Multicultural Leaders. Currently, she is president and CEO of d expósito & Partners.
The Los Angeles Times reports on a positive response to the recent increase in immigrant children coming to the United States from Central America. A number of philanthropic groups have formed an emergency relief fund to assist Los Angeles nonprofits overwhelmed by the number of immigrant children and their parents needing assistance. On Thursday, a coalition of groups announced a pledge drive to raise money for the fund.
The first recipients of the grant money will be the Esperanza Immigrant Rights Project, which provides pro bono legal services to immigrants, and the Central American Resource Center, which connects immigrants with case workers. Money from the fund will also be used to pay for a full-time staffer to coordinate the relief effort.
From the Bookshelves: Immigrant America: A Portrait (Updated, and Expanded) by Alejandro Portes and Rubén G. Rumbaut
This revised, updated, and expanded fourth edition of Immigrant America: A Portrait provides readers with a comprehensive and current overview of immigration to the United States in a single volume. Updated with the latest available data, Immigrant America explores the economic, political, spatial, and linguistic aspects of immigration; the role of religion in the acculturation and social integration of foreign minorities; and the adaptation process for the second generation. This revised edition includes new chapters on theories of migration and on the history of U.S.-bound migration from the late nineteenth century to the present, offering an updated and expanded concluding chapter on immigration and public policy.