Thursday, October 31, 2013
Investigative Fund reporter John Carlos Frey, is breaking a story in collaboration with Fusion about border security and excessive and deadly use of force by US Border Patrol agents along the US-Mexico Border. Frey has uncovered new information on border shootings, including a shocking admission from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
1. In an unexpected move, CBP has admitted in an email that Border Patrol agents have shot and killed six Mexican civilians on Mexican soil in the past five years. The rapid hiring of thousands of new agents between 2006 and 2009 is the backdrop for at least 10 cross-border shootings in the last five years, resulting in the deaths of unarmed Mexicans.
2. Just last week Border Patrol shot an unarmed man in the back, 21-year-old Mexican citizen who was while fleeing. He survived the shooting, and is scheduled to leave the hospital today.
3. President Obama has said immigration reform is his #1 priority — but that includes increased border security, a significantly under-covered issue in the national news media. Frey's report reveals the crucial need for massive overhaul of CBP, the largest law enforcement agency in the nation
Tea Party members serving in Congress might find themselves headed to the emergency room with symptoms of a heart attack after hearing about the latest development in universal health care in San Francisco.
As conservative Republicans in Washington, D.C., fulminate over President Obama's Affordable Health Care Act, the city's 6-year-old Healthy San Francisco program is on track to provide care predominantly for immigrants who are living here illegally.
And the kicker? Everybody here is fine with it.
Only in San Francisco? Indeed.
Healthy San Francisco was launched in 2007 to provide universal health care for the city's residents - regardless of employment status, pre-existing medical conditions or immigration status.
It isn't as good as health insurance because it doesn't provide medical care outside the city's borders. But city officials have said since its creation they hoped the program would someday cease to exist in favor of national universal health care.
That's on the road to happening - sort of - but definitely not if you're an immigrant in the country illegally. (Immigration reform is another topic entirely for Washington politicians who love berating each other on 24-hour cable news networks.) In San Francisco, those immigrants will continue to be covered anyway. Read more....
Here is some more good news from California. New University of California President Janet Napolitano has announced that UC will devote $5 million to provide special counseling and financial aid to undocumented students. The former Homeland Security Secretary made the announcement in her first public address since she became head of the UC system a month ago. Some students had expressed concern with President Napalitano's record-setting numbers of deportations as head of the Department in the Obama administration, which has removed more noncitizens than any administration in U.S. history.
To stress the need for immediate action by Congress on immigration reform, Dr. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference (NHCLC), the nation's largest Christian Hispanic organization representing more than 40,000 churches, will begin a 40-day fast on Monday, Nov. 4 that will last through one of the most indulgent national holidays, Thanksgiving.
"In the spirit of Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and other leaders who have acted on the moral imperative to do justice, as well as our ultimate example found in Jesus, I likewise sense an urgent conviction to engage in the spiritual exercise that in my faith narrative produces great results," said Rodriguez. "Starting today, I will be engaging in a personal fast and call others to join me as we pray for the vital importance of immigration reform now."
Rodriguez has committed to fast for 40 days but is willing to extend it until immigration reform is passed. Believing immigration reform is as much a religious issue as it is a policy, Rodriguez and NHCLC leaders have been actively rallying support from the Evangelical Christian community, which was once hesitant to embrace reform but now believes it is necessary to heal communities, usher in peace and promote righteousness and justice.
NHCLC supports reform focused on three main elements that puts an end to all illegal immigration. First, increasing border protection, including using infrared, satellite, and other technologies in addition to border patrols. Second, creating a market-driven guest-worker program that provides clear avenues by which millions of undocumented families can obtain legal status in a manner that reflects the Judeo-Christian value system on which this nation was founded. And finally, developing standards for undocumented residents without a criminal record who are earning citizenship status to go to the back of the citizenship line and receive a financial penalty, while acquiring civic and language proficiency and serving the local community.
Individuals interested in joining Rodriguez in the 40-day fast can email him at [email protected] or message him on Twitter (@nhclc), Instagram (@pastorsamuelrodriguez) or Facebook using the hashtag #Fast4Reform.
The National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, the nation's largest Christian Hispanic organization, which serves millions of Hispanics and represents more than 40,000 churches, emphasizing "seven directives" of Life, Family, Compassionate Evangelism, Stewardship, Justice, Education and Youth. For additional information, visit.
Immigration Article of the Day: 'Crimmigration' in the European Union Through the Lens of Immigration Detention by Izabella Majcher
'Crimmigration' in the European Union Through the Lens of Immigration Detention by Izabella Majcher, Global Detention Project, Programme for the Study of Global Migration, Graduate Institute (IHEID), Geneva September 30, 2013 Global Detention Project Working Paper No. 6
Abstract: The phenomenon of “crimmigration” — or the convergence of criminal and immigration laws — appears to have a harmful impact on migrants, ranging from increasing negative attitudes about non-citizens to more restrictive immigration policies. This Global Detention Project working paper argues that immigration detention regulated by European Union (EU) directives represents a peculiar manifestation of crimmigration. In particular, detention provisions laid down in the Returns Directive and the recently revised Reception Conditions Directive selectively incorporate criminal justice objectives while rejecting protective features that are provided in criminal processes. Thus, while immigration detention sanctioned by EU directives may pursue objectives similar to those of criminal justice — retribution, deterrence, or incapacitation — detainees are not entitled to due process guarantees afforded to their criminal counterparts. This paper argues that in cases where formally administrative immigration detention is punitive in practice, detainees should be granted broader procedural protections, including presumption in favour of non-custodial alternatives to detention, automatic review of detention, personal hearings, and legal and linguistic assistance.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
The Law & Politics Book Review is pleased to present a symposium on Rule of Law After 9/11.
INTRODUCTION: “THE RULE OF LAW IN A POST 9/11 WORLD" Paul Parker, Law and Politics Book Review Editor
LIBERTY & SECURITY, by Conor Gearty. Reviewed by Angela Mae Kupenda, Mississippi College School of Law.
WHAT IS WAR?: AN INVESTIGATION IN THE WAKE OF 9/11, by Mary Ellen O’Connell (ed.). Reviewed by Donald W. Jackson, Department of Political Science, Texas Christian University.
THE DISTINCTION AND RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JUS AD BELLUM AND JUS IN BELLO, by Keiichiro Okimoto. Reviewed by Wade Mansell, Kent Law School, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK
EU COUNTER-TERRORISM LAW: PRE-EMPTION AND THE RULE OF LAW, by Cian C. Murphy. Reviewed by David Schultz, Department of Political Science, Hamline University
SUPERVISION: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE SURVEILLANCE SOCIETY, by John Gilliom and Torin Monahan. Reviewed by Priscilla H. M. Zotti, Department of Political Science, United States Naval Academy
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND GLOBAL EMERGENCIES : A LAW AND POLICY ANALYSIS, by Antonis Antoniadis, Robert Schütze and Eleanor Spaventa (eds). [Modern Studies in European Law]. Reviewed by Wim Pelt, Department of Law and Cultural Studies, Open Universiteit Netherlands.
CONGRESS AND THE POLITICS OF NATIONAL SECURITY, by David P. Auerswald and Colton C. Campbell (eds.). Reviewed by Darren A. Wheeler, Department of Political Science, Ball State University.
LONG WARS AND THE CONSTITUTION, by Stephen M. Griffin. Reviewed by Kimberley Fletcher, Department of Political Science, Ohio University
NON-LEGALITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: UNRULY LAW, by Fleur Johns. Reviewed by Christopher P. Banks, Department of Political Science, Kent State University
REAPING WHAT YOU SOW: A COMPARATIVE EXAMINATION OF TORTURE REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES, FRANCE, ARGENTINA, AND ISRAEL, by Henry F. Carey. Reviewed by Samuel B. Hoff, Department of History, Political Science, and Philosophy, Delaware State University
THE RISE AND FALL OF WAR CRIMES TRIALS, FROM CHARLES I TO BUSH II, by Charles Anthony Smith. Reviewed by Samuel S. Stanton, Jr. Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Grove City College
THE DEFENDANT IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS; BETWEEN LAW AND HISTORIOGRAPHY, by Björn Elberling. Reviewed by Kathie Barrett, Department of Political Science and Planning, University of West Georgia
CONSTITUTIONAL LIFE AND EUROPE’S AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE, by Alun Howard Gibbs. Reviewed by Dagmar Soennecken, School of Public Policy and Administration, York University.
The global economic landscape is undergoing a profound transformation. This reality calls for a reassessment of enduring assumptions about immigration’s role in the 21st century labor market. Aging workforces and the imperatives of competitiveness and sustaining the welfare state have long undergirded selective immigration policies. But countries cannot reap the benefits of immigration unless they use immigrants’ skills more effectively and also understand the crucial relationship between domestic and immigrant sources of labor. This report, the first in a series examining workforce development systems in three countries, focuses on the increasingly employer-led and flexible UK system that operates alongside centralized immigration and employment policies.
Is there Movement in the House Among Republicans on Immigration Reform? Rep. Jeff Denham (R-Turlock) Sees the Writing on the Wall
Earlier this month, California governor Jerry Brown signed into law a series of bills that would help facilitate immigrant integration into society. Unlike other states, California has seen the need to move forward on immigration rather than pursue mean-spirited, legally indefensible immigration enforcement laws.
California political leaders may lead the way nationally on immigration reform. Cathleen Decker of the Los Angeles Times reports that two Republican congressmen from California have recently reiterated their support for immigration reform. "Expect that to continue, if there is to be a GOP presence in most of California down the road."
Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA, Turlock) signed on over the weekend to a comprehensive immigration measure that has gone nowhere in the Republican-led House. The measure is a similar version to the bill passed in the U.S. Senate. Denham is the first Republican to publicly support the comprehensive House measure. The Times reports that his wife is the daughter of a legal immigrant from Mexico and his sister married a man who entered the country illegally before obtaining legal status.
There is a political imperative pressuring Republicans like Denham and another GOP member from further south, Rep. David Valadao of Hanford, who also has expressed support for immigration measures so far blocked in the House. At a most basic level, the push is from the growing number of Latino voters and the changing demographics of California's Central Valley.
Settlement would block implementation of controversial parts of Alabama immigration law, fees for civil rightsattorneys
CNN reports that some of the most controversial parts of Alabama's immigration law could soon be off the table for good under a settlement filed in federal court yesterday. Alabama officials agreed to block the enforcement of portions of the law, passed in 2011 that was described as one of the nation's toughest state immigration enforcement measures.
The proposed deal blocks several parts of the law, including a requirement for public schools to collect information on the immigration status of students; a provision that criminalized the solicitation of work by undocumented immigrants; and a section that prohibited giving a ride to undocumented immigrants.
The state also agreed to pay $350,000 in attorney fees and expenses to the civil rights groups that challenged the Alabama law.
Here is the propsoed settlement sgreement. Download Settlement The National Immigration Law Center, one of the organizations representing the plaintiffs, issued this press release about the settlement.
Given the poor track record in defending state immigration enforcement law's like Arizona's, Alabama's, and South Carolina's, as well as local versions such as Hazleton, Pennsylvania's and Farmer's Branch, Texas, it would seem that political leaders should be wary of enacting such laws, which can bring bad publicity, result in large attorney fee awards (and payment of fees in defending the laws), and losing on the merits.
For the AP report on the settlement, click here.
Immigration Article of the Day: Smoke Screens: Is There a Correlation between Migration Euphemisms and the Language of Detention? by Mariette Grange
Smoke Screens: Is There a Correlation between Migration Euphemisms and the Language of Detention? by Mariette Grange, Global Detention Project, Programme for the Study of Global Migration, Graduate Institute (IHEID),Geneva September 29, 2013 Global Detention Project Working Paper No. 5
Abstract: Discursive strategies used to describe people moving across borders can have consequences on their well-being, including limiting their access to legal procedures. This paper points to an apparent paradox in these strategies: While language used to describe migrants and asylum-seekers is often euphemistic (or dysphemistic), tending to dehumanise them, language used to characterize their treatment in custody appears aimed at shielding detention from scrutiny. The paper suggests that in the field of immigration detention, the role and impact of misleading language on policy and perception appears to be quite significant and merits more attention from scholars and advocates.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Immigration Article of the Day: Windsor Beyond Marriage: Due Process, Equality, and Undocumented Immigration by Anthony O'Rourke
Windsor Beyond Marriage: Due Process, Equality, and Undocumented Immigration by Anthony O'Rourke, SUNY Buffalo Law School October 23, 2013 William & Mary Law Review, Forthcoming
Abstract: The Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Windsor, invalidating part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, presents a significant interpretive challenge. Early commentators have criticized the majority opinion’s lack of analytical rigor, and expressed doubt that Windsor can serve as a meaningful precedent with respect to constitutional questions outside the area of same-sex marriage. This short Article offers a more rehabilitative reading of Windsor, and shows how the decision can be used to analyze a significant constitutional question concerning the use of state criminal procedure to regulate immigration. From Windsor’s holding, the Article distills two concrete doctrinal propositions concerning the Due Process Clause’s application in cases that have significant equality dimensions. It then shows how these propositions can be used to evaluate the constitutionality of state laws that categorically deny bail to undocumented immigrants. The Article thereby makes a practical contribution to the burgeoning constitutional “dignity” literature. Furthermore, it offers an interpretation of Windsor that will be welcomed by those who applaud the recent triumphs of gay-rights advocates in the Supreme Court, but lament the stagnation and regression of constitutional protections for other groups.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Former ImmigrationProf blogger Professor Jennifer Chacón has informed us that we should save the dates of May 22-24, 2014 for the biennial Immigration Law Professors Workshop, which will be held UC Irvine School of Law. The conference website will soon provide details.
The planning team is hard at work on the event. Leti Volpp is chairing the scholarship planning committee. Ragini Shah is chairing the pedagogy planning committee. Huyen Pham is chairing the works-in-progress planning. Muneer Ahmad is chairing the planning of the clinical workshop that will precede the event.
Abstract: What role should mercy play in immigration law? This essay draws on the robust debate in the criminal law about the role of mercy in the hopes of starting a conversation among immigration law scholars and practitioners. Mercy skeptics argue that mercy contravenes justice, while advocates argue that mercy is a necessary countermeasure to the unrelenting harshness of criminal law today. I argue that the problems of mercy in the criminal law are amplified in the immigration law context. The lack of procedural and substantive protections for immigrants, the acceptance of unfettered discretion and lack of oversight of agency action, and the political subordination of noncitizens all push in the same direction — towards sovereign mercy rather than equitable justice. Sovereign mercy can have laudable effects, as when it encourages the creation of humanitarian programs of immigrant admission. But it can also have harmful effects, departing from important rule of law norms and placing recipients outside the law rather within its protections. I do not seek to resolve these contradictions but rather to draw our attention to them and to encourage scholars and practitioners to look critically at the role of mercy in the regulation of migration.
The big question looming in the political world is whether immigration reform can and will advance on the Hill, and on what terms. But behind the scenes, a big advance for immigrants in the U.S. is going into effect today, October 28, 2013. It may well save migrant workers and their families billions of dollars.
Landmark federal consumer protections are newly available to migrant workers sending money abroad. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) now requires that remittance transfer providers give consumers clear information, upfront, about the price of sending money to other countries. The new rule on remittances also provides complaint procedures and remedies if something goes wrong. Information on the rule is found here on the CFPB’s website.
The rule represents big change. Globally, the remittance market has shot past $500 billion per year, and the world looks to the U.S. as a leader in remittance volume, law and policy. Most migration in the world is spurred in part by the prospect of making more money, then sending some share of earnings home. From the U.S. to developing countries, remittances dwarf both official development assistance and charitable giving.
Before this regulation went into effect, the hard-earned money people sent, arrived on uncertain terms. When it would be available was often uncertain, and even the terms of the transaction were uncertain. Some remittance companies advertised their low fees and hid the more important factor of exchange rates. Customers sought low fees, and perhaps lost an hour or a half-day’s wages because of a high, undisclosed exchange rate or because surprise pick-up fees were subtracted from the amount delivered.
Besides transparency, a second key piece of the new rule affords consumers remedies. The rule establishes mandatory complaint resolution procedures at remittance companies and limited rights to cancellation and refunds. The CFPB has established a complaints data base and an audit protocol. Moreover, the section of Dodd-Frank establishing the remittance transparency regime amended the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, and provided its remedies. This means that the threat of lawsuits and even class actions will impel providers to make good on their promises.
Previously, many migrants sending funds abroad felt disempowered from complaining when transactions went awry. The new regime empowers consumers and re-sets the balance between vulnerable individuals and powerful companies.
A third pillar of the new remittance holds companies responsible for the acts of their agents. No more can companies just tell a disappointed consumer that the “problem was on the other end.”
How did this market transforming change come about? How did Congress and the Administration come together on a change that benefits immigrants, some of whom may even lack legal status? How on earth did progressives score a victory for the vulnerable?
It’s fair to say that it wouldn’t have happened without Appleseed, without committed legislators, and without an administration that persisted in the face of industry opposition.
Many years ago, Appleseed Centers conducted surveys asking immigrants what were the hardest issues for them. They frequently mentioned the high, unpredictable cost of remittances, as well as uncertainty surrounding delivery.
In Appleseed fashion, we did a lot of talking to industry to understand the market and what was workable, and we tried a disclosure pilot with some companies and banks that were willing to give up-front disclosure a try. Customer satisfaction was high and we found out a lot about what was cumbersome for business and what was possible with effort.
The Dodd-Frank financial services and consumer protection reform bill was moving, so we leapt aboard, seeking modernization of the remittance market and consumer protections, and secured them in law, thanks to the interest of leaders like Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Chicago, former Rep. Barney Frank, and former Senator Daniel Akaka.
It’s hard to say that an industry the size of banking and remittances, with its fearsome lobbying capacity, didn’t pay attention to Section 1071 of Dodd-Frank, but the remittance proposal actually generated surprisingly little attention on the Hill during its consideration.
We all know that many reform laws are enacted and then die a quiet death for want of follow through. On the governmental side, there may be no appropriations, no staff, no enforcement, no communications. Meanwhile non-profit advocates, legislative victory in hand, may move on to the next battle.
Appleseed stuck with the issue, and turned to the regulations. We scheduled meetings, responded to draft regulations, built coalitions, kept the pressure up, and were met with success. CFPB Director Richard Cordray and his able staff took up the Congressional directive and embarked upon a thoughtful, thorough rulemaking process.
What will the new regime bring? Market pressures won through a transparency regime should lower prices and improve reliability. Companies should refine their systems and work with consumers to resolve any discrepancies. With an extensive communications effort, immigrants who work hard to send money to family and friends abroad will know that they no longer have to lump it if less money arrives than they expected.
Born in Japan, Koji Uehara pitches for the Boston Red Sox of Major League Baseball. A right-handed pitcher, Uehara has a solid career strikeout rate and excellent walk rate. Through the 2013 season, his career 8.74 K/BB is the best in MLB history for a player with at least 100 innings pitched. Uehara has played with the Baltimore Orioles, Texas Rangers, and teh Boston Red Sox.
On October 19, 2013 Uehara recorded a save in game 6 of the American League Championship Series to help the Boston Red Sox win the Amrican League pennant and was named the series' Most Valuable Player. He participated in 5 games, earning a win in one and saving three others. Last night, Uehara had a nice pick off play to close out the game over the St. Louis Cardinals and knot up the World Series at 2-2.
For the first time in months, House Republicans are facing no immediate cataclysmic deadlines, and GOP leaders are struggling to come up with an agenda to fill the 19 legislative days that are left in 2013.
Need evidence? The House votes Monday evening and will finish its work week Wednesday. After that, the House is out of session until Nov. 12. Internally, Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and senior Republicans aren’t discussing coming back early from the scheduled recess, but instead, they are wondering if they’ll cancel some of the remaining days in session.
. . .
Throughout leadership and the House Republican Conference there’s a sense of bewilderment and confusion about what leadership will move to next. The fiscal fights with President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats have pushed the GOP’s numbers to barrel-scraping lows. And there’s a real sense that Republicans could lose control of the House next year.
Yet there’s not much going on in the Capitol.
. . .
Here’s what won’t get done: immigration reform. The process is completely stalled, and many are pronouncing it dead. House Republican leadership has no plans to bring any bill to the floor — even one to bulk up border security — because of concerns among the rank and file that it could be forced into a bad deal with Obama and the Democratic-controlled Senate. Read more. . .
The conference is on Thursday, October 31, 2013 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Georgetown University Law Center.