Saturday, December 14, 2019

ICE Arrests Virgin of Guadalupe?

Unholy-escort-katie-jo-suddaby

Unholy Escort by Katie Jo Suddaby

Jeff Gammage for the Philadelphia Inquirer offers some background on a piece of political art that touches on immigration.  In explaining the genesis of the art, artist Katie Jo Suddaby, also an ordained minister in the American Baptist Church, said that she had been watching the news coverage of immigration arrests:  "And in the faces of those being led away, she recognized something familiar. It was the way the migrant men and women subtly turned from the glare of TV cameras — it matched the prayerful bow depicted in traditional images of the Virgin of Guadalupe."

413px-Virgen_de_guadalupe1

Suddaby wondered what would happen if the Virgin, perhaps the most revered and powerful religious figure in all of Mexico, suddenly appeared at the U.S. border.  "The minister, artist, and activist answered by working every day for a month to create a provocative sand painting: the sainted Virgin being taken into custody by two ICE agents, her hands not clasped in prayer, but pinned at the wrist by plastic handcuffs."

“Putting the Virgin Mother in that position, taking on the suffering of the refugees,” Suddaby said, “I wanted to say, if you look, you can see the spirit of God, the fingerprints of God, on people who have nothing and who need help.”

Gammage reports that the photo of Suddaby’s "artwork continues to bounce across the internet two years after its creation, shared and re-shared from the United States to South America. It’s been printed on banners and carried by protesters seeking to link migrant dreams to the divine at a time when the Trump administration is aggressively curtailing legal immigration and sending undocumented border-crossers out of the United States."

KJ

December 14, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

TV break: Samantha Bee trolling Stephen Miller

Samantha Bee is trolling President Donald Trump’s senior adviser Stephen Miller, who has shaped many of the administration’s anti-immigration policies, with a wedding gift “we know he’ll hate.” It contains wish list items from U.S.-based charities that assist asylum seekers and immigrants ― such as mittens, beanies, underwear and LED night lights.

The TV segment follows an earlier, passionate critique of revelations that the White House advisor contributed to white nationalist platforms that feed back into current immigration policies and her call that he be fired "right F*Kin now."

For a list of video clips.

MHC

December 14, 2019 | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, December 13, 2019

Judge rules American Samoans are birthright citizens, merit passports [UPDATE 12/14/2019]

UPDATE 12/14/2019 After ruling on Thursday that anyone born in American Samoa should be recognized as a U.S. citizen, the same judge — U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups — on Friday decided to put the order on hold until the issue is resolved on appeal.

A federal judge in Utah said that American Samoans are birthright citizens and should be granted US passports. In the opinion Fitesmanu v. US, the court held: "This court is not imposing 'citizenship by judicial fiat.' The action is required by the mandate of the Fourteenth Amendment as construed and applied by Supreme Court precedent." 

American Samoa, a group of islands in the Pacific with a population of about 55,000, is a U.S. territory, and American Samoans are currently considered “non-citizen nationals” of the U.S. This means that in the 50 states, they cannot vote or run for office, can’t serve on juries, and are not eligible for certain government jobs. American Samoa is the only overseas U.S. territory where people are not granted birthright citizenship. The federal government has already granted citizenship by statute to the people of other territories, such as Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands.

There is likely to be ongoing contestation. In a similar case in 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against five American Samoan plaintiffs, saying the 14th Amendment did not automatically apply to such territories. 

For additional context on the underlying dispute and its implications for birthright citizenship, see the scholarship and writings of Rose Cuission Villazor. For counterperspective, see writings of John Eastman at Chapman University and the Claremont Institute.

MHC

December 13, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Fiscal Year 2019 Removal Statistics: More than 90% of Removals Are Nonciizens from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador

191211ero_eoy_0

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Fiscal Year 2019 Enforcement and Removal Operations Report was released this week.  Here is the press statement that accompanied the release of the data.

The removal data is revealing.  In "Appendix B: Removals by Country of Citizenship Table 3: FY 2018 – FY 2019 ICE Removals by Country of Citizenship" (beginning on page 28), the data shows the following: 

Total Removals              Fiscal Year 2018  256,085    Fiscal Year 2019  267,258

MEXICO                         141,045          127,492

GUATEMALA                50,390            54,919

HONDURAS                   28,894            41,800

EL SALVADOR              15,445             18,981

Total removals for these four nations

FY 2018:  92.06% of all removals

FY 2019:  90.99% of all removals

Latinx migrants thus accounted for more than 90% of the noncitizens removed from the United States in fiscal years 2018 and 2019.  The legal immigrant population in the United States, as well as the undocumented population, is much more divese than these removal numbers would suggest.

KJ

December 13, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Putting Americans First: A Statistical Case for Encouraging Rather than Impeding and Devaluing US Citizenship by Donald Kerwin & Robert Warren

Kerwin

Donald Kerwin

Warren

Robert Warren

Putting Americans First: A Statistical Case for Encouraging Rather than Impeding and Devaluing US Citizenship by Donald Kerwin & Robert Warren, Center for Migration Studies

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This article examines the ability of immigrants to integrate and to become full Americans. Naturalization has long been recognized as a fundamental step in that process and one that contributes to the nation’s strength, cohesion, and well-being. To illustrate the continued salience of citizenship, the article compares selected characteristics of native-born citizens, naturalized citizens, legal noncitizens (most of them lawful permanent residents [LPRs]), and undocumented residents. It finds that the integration, success, and contributions of immigrants increase as they advance toward naturalization, and that naturalized citizens match or exceed the native-born by metrics such as a college education, self-employment, average personal income, and homeownership. It finds that:

  • Naturalized citizens enjoy the same or higher levels of education, employment, work in skilled occupations, personal income, and percentage above the poverty level compared to the native-born population.
  • At least 5.2 million current US citizens — 4.5 million children and 730,000 adults — who are living with at least one undocumented parent obtained US citizenship by birth; eliminating birthright citizenship would create a permanent underclass of US-born denizens in the future.
  • Requiring medical insurance would negatively affect immigrants seeking admission and undocumented residents who ultimately qualify for a visa. About 51 percent of US undocumented residents older than age 18 lack health insurance.
  • In 2017, about 1.2 million undocumented residents lived with 1.1 million eligible-to-naturalize relatives. If all the members of the latter group naturalized, they could petition for or expedite the adjustment or immigration (as LPRs) of their undocumented family members, including 890,000 “immediate relatives.” Their naturalization could put 11 percent of the US undocumented population on a path to permanent residency.

The article also explores a contradiction: that the administration’s “America first” ideology obscures a set of policies that impede the naturalization process, devalue US citizenship, and prioritize denaturalization. The article documents many of the ways that the Trump administration has sought to revoke legal status, block access to permanent residence and naturalization, and deny the rights, entitlements, and benefits of citizenship to certain groups, particularly US citizen children with undocumented parents. It also offers estimates and profiles of the persons affected by these measures, and it rebuts myths that have buttressed the administration’s policies. For example, the Trump administration and restrictionist legislators have criticized the US immigration system’s emphasis on family reunification for its supposed failure to produce skilled workers. Yet the article finds that:

  • The current immigration system, which prioritizes the admission of the nuclear family members of US citizens and LPRs, yields a legal foreign-born population that has occupational skills equal to those of the native-born population.
  • The legal foreign-born population living in 24 US states and Washington, DC, and those from 94 source countries have higher percentages of skilled workers than the overall population of native-born workers.

DOWNLOAD

KJ

December 13, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, December 12, 2019

ACLU challenges cell phone surveillance of undocumented immigrants and other privacy migration cross-overs

Immigration and border agents may be scooping up cellphone information from thousands of innocent U.S. citizens in their effort to track a few people who’ve crossed the border illegally — using invasive surveillance tools that were originally developed to protect military operations, says the Joseph Marks in the Washington Post.

As someone inexperienced in this area of the law, I've been asking for examples of scholarship and advocacy on related issues. Glad to hear of law school clinical efforts to protect driver license privacy and DACA privacy @ColoLaw and to hear of a @Sillicon Flatirons conference in the works on Privacy at the Margins (2021). Also, a shout out to Sophia Cope at EFF for work on digital surveillance at border and Georgetown's Privacy & Techn Ctr for their report on biometrics used at airports. Happy to post other work to build a resource list for those who want to learn more, if you add to comments!

MHC

 

December 12, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Strict Scrutiny Podcast: The DACA Arguments in the Supreme Court

 

The future of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.  The three consolidated DACA cases are the most significant immigration cases before the Court in the 2019 Term.

The podcast Strict Scrutiny has an episode on the DACA argument in the Supreme Court (November 12) and speak with Luis Cortes, who worked on the DACA case and is a DACA recipient himself. They also talk about their favorite Thanksgiving sides and desserts.

The contributors (Melissa Murray, Kate Shaw, and Jaime Santos) take a deep dive into the oral arguments in the DACA case.  It is insightful and accessible. 

December 12, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Joe Biden Announces His Immigration Program

Joe_Biden_2013

Former Vice President Joe Biden has unveiled a program for immigration ("The Biden Plan for Securing Our Values as a Nation of Immigrants")

Among other things, the plan states that 

"As president, Biden will forcefully pursue policies that safeguard our security, provide a fair and just system that helps to grow and enhance our economy, and secure our cherished values. He will:

Take urgent action to undo Trump’s damage and reclaim America’s values

Modernize America’s immigration system

Welcome immigrants in our communities

Reassert America’s commitment to asylum-seekers and refugees

Tackle the root causes of irregular migration

Implement effective border screening" 

 

The Biden plan calls for an ambitious first 100 days:

"In the first 100 days, a Biden Administration will:

Immediately reverse the Trump Administration’s cruel and senseless policies that separate parents from their children at our border . . . .

End Trump’s detrimental asylum policies. . . .  

End the mismanagement of the asylum system, which fuels violence and chaos at the border. . . .

Surge humanitarian resources to the border and foster public-private initiatives. . . .

End prolonged detention and reinvest in a case management program. . . . 

Reverse Trump’s public charge rule . . . .

End the so-called National Emergency that siphons federal dollars from the Department of Defense to build a wall. . . . 

Protect Dreamers and their families. . . .

Rescind the un-American travel and refugee bans, also referred to as `Muslim bans.' . . .

Order an immediate review of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for vulnerable populations who cannot find safety in their countries ripped apart by violence or disaster. . . .

Restore sensible enforcement priorities. . . .

Ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) personnel abide by professional standards and are held accountable for inhumane treatment. . . .

Protect and expand opportunities for people who risked their lives in military service. . . .

Restore and defend the naturalization process for green card holders. . . ,

Revitalize the Task Force on New Americans and boost our economy by prioritizing integration, promoting immigrant entrepreneurship, increasing access to language instruction, and promoting civil engagement. . . .

Convene a regional meeting of leaders, including from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Canada, to address the factors driving migration and to propose a regional resettlement solution. . . ."

The Biden immigration plan also calls for immigration reform, with, among other things, a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants, and efforts to better integrate immigrants in our communities.

CNBC notes that "While the crowded 2020 Democratic presidential field has widely called Trump’s immigration policies inhumane, candidates have differed in how they want to fix the system. A handful of Biden’s rivals, first former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro and then Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., have called for decriminalizing border crossings. Biden does not want to do so."

KJ

UPDATE (12/14):  Nicole Narea on Vox reviews the Biden immigration plan.

December 12, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Reentry Services for the Removed by Katie Tinto

Tinto

Reentry Services for the Removed by Katie Tinto, Florida Law Review Forum, Vol. 70, 2019

 Response to Amy F. Kimpel, Coordinating Community Reintegration Services for “Deportable Alien” Defendants: A Moral and Financial Imperative.

Abstract

Each year, thousands of individuals are released from prisons in the United States. Reentry services—services aimed at helping an individual reintegrate into the community upon his or her release—have long been neglected as an afterthought of the criminal justice system. However, in recent years, prison officials, criminal justice reformers, and politicians alike have increasingly recognized the critical role reentry services play in ensuring individuals do not reoffend once released from prison. In her article, Coordinating Community Reintegration Services for “Deportable Alien” Defendants: A Moral and Financial Imperative, Amy Kimpel convincingly argues that, despite this increased attention, there is at least one group of individuals being released from prison for whom reentry services remain inadequate. Noncitizens who face removal from the United States at the end of their prison sentence are unable to access many existing reentry services within the prison system. In addition, noncitizens lack reentry services specific to their unique needs both while in custody and upon reintegration into the country to which they are released. In addition, and perhaps a consequence more persuasive to some, significant financial costs result from the recidivism and re-imprisonment rates for noncitizen offenders for whom reentry services either are ineffective or simply do not exist. Thus, Kimpel offers several reforms that would begin to address the reentry needs of those facing removal, ranging from smaller “in-house” changes within a prison to large governmental projects. This Response builds on Kimpel’s work by considering the potential effectiveness of these proposals for noncitizen-focused reentry services and how their effectiveness should be evaluated.

KJ

December 12, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, December 11, 2019

SCOTUSBlog: Argument Analysis for Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr and Ovalles v. Barr

SB

Over at SCOTUSblog you can find my analysis of oral argument in the combined cases of Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr and Ovalles v. Barr, which are all about the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D).

But first, I'm going to tell you something I didn't write in that piece: I CALLED IT.

Here's the deal. Way back nine days ago when I did an argument preview, I concluded with the following thoughts:

Lurking in the background of this case are formidable policy questions that are largely ignored by the parties. Would review of equitable-tolling issues overwhelm the courts of appeals? To what extent should federal courts defer to the findings and conclusions of the BIA? Look for the justices to potentially ask questions about these larger issues during oral argument on December 9.

As it turns out, during oral argument, they focused on just that. Well, okay, not JUST that. The court didn't ask whether equitable tolling case might overwhelm the courts of appeals so much as question whether allowing review of such cases would open the floodgates by authorizing review of issues Congress intended to foreclose. And the court didn't ask whether and how federal courts defer to the findings and conclusions of the BIA so much as focus on whether the government's reading of the statute would prevent review of numerous BIA decisions no matter how erroneous.

But I'm still officially calling it a win. It's WAY better than that time I opined to the WSJ that the case United States v. Texas was going to come down to standing.

-KitJ

December 11, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

New GAO report on immigration enforcement priorities and selected vulnerable populations

US-GAO-logo

A new U.S. General Accountability Office report addresses issues related to immigration enforcement priorities and certain vulnerable populations.  The report examines

(1) ICE data on arrests, detentions, and removals from calendar years 2015 through 2018;

(2) the policies in effect for selected populations and any changes ICE made to align these policies with the 2017 DHS memo; and

(3) the extent to which ICE collects data on selected populations and what those data show. 

The report finds that that the numbers of administrative arrests (arrests), detentions, and removals of aliens (people who are not citizens or nationals of the United States) by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) varied during calendar years 2015 through 2018, and increased overall for the period. Males, aliens from four countries—Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras—and convicted criminals accounted for the majority of ICE arrests and removals. The majority of detentions were made up of males, aliens from the same four countries, and non-criminals. The report also found that ICE does not collect or maintain readily available data on detained parents or legal guardians of U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident minors, as required by ICE policy, and recommends that ICE collect and maintain data on this population in a readily available format. DHS/ICE disagreed with this recommendation; however, the GAO continues to believe this recommendation is valid as discussed in our report.


KJ

December 11, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Delicious Irony Anyone? Foreign National, a GOP Donor and Trump Supporter, Is Sentenced in Sacramento for Voter Fraud

220px-Official_Portrait_of_President_Donald_Trump

For years, President Trump has alleged voter fraud by undocumented immigrants.  He had established a commission that was unable to substantiate widespread voter fraud

The U.S. government did find one voter who committed fraud -- a Trump supporter!

No comment here.

KJ

December 11, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Citizenship for Muslims threatened in India [UPDATED]

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, or USCIRF, on Monday said it was “deeply troubled” by the passage of the Citizenship Amendment Bill in Lok Sabha and sought sanctions against Union Home Minister Amit Shah and other principal leadership if it is passed by the Rajya Sabha.

"In a statement, the commission said the bill was “a dangerous turn in the wrong direction”, pointing that the legislation uses religion as a legal criterion to grant citizenship. “It runs counter to India’s rich history of secular pluralism and the Indian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law regardless of faith,” USCIRF added.

According to the NY Times, as of Wed Dec 11, the bill had passed the lower house of Parliament. It would establish a religious test for migrants who want to become citizens, giving migrants of all of South Asia’s major religions a clear path to Indian citizenship — except Islam.

Many see the  measure as a significant step by the governing party to make second-class citizens of India’s 200 million Muslims, one of the largest Muslim populations in the world, and render many of them stateless. The legislation follows the initiation of a citizenship test in Assam earlier this year, which required residents of the state to prove that they or their ancestors were Indian citizens. Mr. Modi also stripped away autonomy and statehood for Kashmir, which used to be India’s only Muslim-majority state. And last month, Hindu fundamentalists won a court victory allowing them to build a new temple over the ruins of a demolished mosque in Ayodhya.

UPDATED 12/12/2019: Terming the Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) as a direct assault on India’s secular character, Punjab Chief Minister (CM) Amarinder Singh on Thursday said his government would not allow the legislation to be implemented in his state. [H/T Anil Kalhan]

MHC

December 11, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Supreme Court Oral Argument Analysis: Justices consider federal courts’ statutory authority to review decisions from the Board of Immigration Appeals

1995-136-3-sm

ImmigrationProf blogger Kit Johnson On SCOTUSBlog analyzes the oral argument in the Supreme Court on Monday in the consolidated cases of Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr and Ovalles v. Barr. These cases focus on the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) and judicial review of "questions of law," mixed questions of law and fact, and fact questions.  Kit sees the case as possibly having broad impacts on judicial review of Board of Immigration Appeals rulings.

KJ

December 11, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Not A Matter of If, But 'When': Expanding the Immigration Caging Machine Regardless of Nielsen by Felipe De Jesus Hernandez

"Not A Matter of If, But 'When': Expanding the Immigration Caging Machine Regardless of Nielsen" by Felipe De Jesus Hernandez, Harvard Latinx Law Review, Vol. 22, No. 5, pp. 87-145, 2019

Abstract

Annually, over 400,000 people are held in 3x3m immigration cages (las hieleras), without access to counsel and subject to traumatic abuses, for an average time of six months before removal. To immigrant communities, the reality is that the immigration detention machine is constantly expanding and feeding on more Black, Brown, Asian, and Native who are politically designated as "illegal."

In Nielsen v. Preap, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether a noncitizen after released from criminal custody can be subject to mandatory detention if the U.S. Department of Homeland Security does not immediately take the individual into custody. On October 2018, the Court was offered three interpretations to define “when” immigration authorities may detain (i.e. cage), without bond, undocumented people after they are released from criminal custody: (1) immediately, (2) within a reasonable time, or (3) anytime, without restriction. In March 2019 and in a 5-4 decision, the Court decided that DHS can detain and cage someone at any time after they are released from criminal custody. This article examines how this holding will contribute to the expansion of the immigration caging machine by entrenching Congressional authority to use immigration prisons as part and parcel of deportation procedures, incentivize private and State actors to bolster investment in immigration prisons and broaden criminal statutes to capture more immigrants, and expand State and Federal policing power. Most importantly, this article argues that even if the Court would have adopted an “immediate” or “reasonable when” holding, that these decisions would have also expanded the caging machine. This article traces the settler-colonial roots of the immigration caging machine to show that the institutional triangle of actors involved are fundamentally constructed and incentivized towards expanding the machine by criminalizing, caging, and removing as many immigrants as possible as forms of control and elimination.

This article concludes by arguing that, following the lead of organizers and directly impacted communities, movement lawyers must move beyond reform and instead abolish the immigration caging machine. This article seeks to add to immigration prison abolition scholarship by demonstrating how
Nielsen ―the premiere immigration detention case before the Supreme Court in the Trump era―complicates the immigrant liberation struggle.

KJ

 

December 11, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Life Imitating Art? Immigrant Rights Group Demands ICE Restore Detention Hotline Featured in "Orange is the New Black"

 

375px-Orange_is_the_new_Black

I was a dedicated viewer of the Netflix show Orange is the New Black.  This season added an interesting twist to the study of a women's prison by adding immigration detention to the storyline.  That addition resulted in, as the Hollywood Reporter reports, life imitating art.

A national hotline for detained immigrants was shut down after it was spotlighted in Orange Is the New Black. Now, the group behind the hotline is demanding that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) restore the resource.

Today, Freedom for Immigrants filed a lawsuit to reinstate its National Immigration Detention Hotline, which was named on the show. The hotline was shut down Aug. 7, according to the group, echoing a plotline from the television show.

KJ

December 10, 2019 in Current Affairs, Film & Television | Permalink | Comments (0)

Happy Human Rights Day!

Hrd_change_en

December 10 is Human Rights Day.  The United Nations has declared the following 2019 Theme: Youth Standing Up for Human Rights:

"After a year marked by the 30th anniversary celebrations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which culminated on 20 November, 2019, our plan is to capitalise on the current momentum and spotlight the leadership role of youth in collective movements as a source of inspiration for a better future.

Under our universal call to action "Stand Up for Human rights," we aim to celebrate the potential of youth as constructive agents of change, amplify their voices, and engage a broad range of global audiences in the promotion and protection of rights. The campaign, led by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), is designed to encourage, galvanise, and showcase how youth all over the world stand up for rights and against racism, hate speech, bullying, discrimination, and climate change, to name a few."

KJ
KJ

December 10, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

New York University Immigrant Defense Initiative Seeks Staff Attorney

New York University Immigrant Defense Initiative Seeks Staff Attorney

N1ew York University’s Immigrant Defense Initiative (IDI) seeks a full-time Staff Attorney for a one-year
contract position with the possibility of renewal. IDI is a project of NYU Law School’s Immigrant Rights
Clinic, directed by Professors Alina Das and Nancy Morawetz. IDI provides free legal advice,
representation, and referrals to members of the NYU community, including students and staff, who are at
risk of deportation or who are otherwise in need of urgent legal immigration support. IDI also organizes
Know Your Rights trainings and other community events in response to ongoing concerns with
immigration policies and recent legal developments.


Responsibilities:

Legal Screenings & Direct Representation: The Staff Attorney will be responsible for conducting
screenings and consultations, and representing members of the NYU community in removal defense
and/or affirmative applications and waivers as needed.

Referrals: The Staff Attorney will work closely with our pro bono law firm partners to refer cases
for longer term representation and/or additional support.

Community Education: The Staff Attorney will conduct Know Your Rights trainings and present
at community events. They will also be responsible for developing materials and advisories in
relation to current and potential changes to immigration law and policy.

Community Outreach & Support: The Staff Attorney will conduct broader outreach in the NYU
community and will work closely with directly affected groups on campus, including undocumented
students, to identify needs and provide additional support as needed.

Qualifications:

● A minimum of two years of experience working in removal defense is required.
● Experience with asylum law, family visas and related waivers is strongly preferred.
● Familiarity with student and employment visas, and naturalization applications is preferred but not
required.
● Must be comfortable with and interested in conducting Know Your Rights trainings and community
presentations.
● Must be interested in working directly with students and other directly affected groups on campus.
● Must be able to work independently without direct supervision.

Terms of Position and Salary:

The position is available for one year, with the possibility of renewal. The position is full-time (35 hours
per week) with a flexible work schedule and the ability to work remotely. Salary will be commensurate
with experience.

The position comes with a generous array of benefits, which include medical, dental and vision. Further
information regarding benefits can be found  here.

Applications:

Applicants should submit a resume/CV and a cover letter describing their interest in the position and
relevant experience to the Immigrant Defense Initiative Program Coordinator, Noelia Rodriguez, at
noelia.rodriguez@nyu.edu. Applications will be considered on a rolling basis through January 2, 2020.

KJ

December 10, 2019 in Current Affairs, Immigration Law Clinics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Nationwide injunction on elimination of fee waivers for naturalization

Northern District of California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction barring USCIS from implementing changes that would limit access to citizenship for lawful permanent residents, including an elimination of fee waivers based on receipt of means-tested benefits. The ruling lifts another barrier to legal migration and citizenship for poor immigrants.  

Legal services providers can now use the previous Form I-912 again for recipients requesting a fee waiver based on receiving a means-tested benefit, such as SNAP, Medicaid, SSI, or TANF.

More information on the case here.

MHC

December 10, 2019 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Second appeals court backs lifting injunction on Trump 'public charge' rule

Logo

As previously reported, the Ninth Circuit stayed the injunction on the Trump public charge rule.  Yesterday, the Fourth Circuit did the same.  The court delivered another partial legal win to the Trump administration on its public charge rule, which penalizes immigrants who have lawfully accessed public benefits.

In a 2-1 ruling, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a district court injunction. But the Trump plan still cannot take effect because of a separate nationwide injunction put in place by a district judge in New York.

The Fourth Circuit ruling mirrors a ruling last week by the Ninth Circuit. Despite these decisions, however, an injunction entered by a district court in New York continues to apply across the country.

KJ

 

December 10, 2019 | Permalink | Comments (0)