Immigration Law
Punitive Arizona Immigration Measure Makes Headlines (Again)!
Arizona has made national headlines again. It is not a moment of pride. On Tuesday, the Arizona House of Representatives passed SB 1070, a bill that makes it a misdemeanor to fail to carry proper immigration documents and requires police to determine a person’s immigration status if they have “reasonable suspicion” that the person is an unauthorized immigrant. The bill passed along party lines, and Republican Gov. Jan Brewer is expected to sign the bill. If she does, it will usher in a new, shameful era of profiling and abuse. For the Latino community, most of whom have families with roots that go back generations and whose culture is an integral part of Arizona, it means that they will be required to carry papers proving that they belong. The suspicion, anger, and resentment will be palpable. Read More
Senator Reid’s Commitment to Moving Immigration Reform Still Firm
At the beginning of every new work session in the Senate, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) lays out his plans for the coming few weeks—a sort of roadmap for the Senate and those who follow its sometimes glacial progress towards passage of a bill. Given Senator Reid’s recent statements… Read More
Immigration Reform and a Younger Generation of Voters
Age isn’t just a number anymore—it’s also a number that turns out at the voting booth en masse. The same generation that brought you hope and change now hopes to change the way our country responds to our broken immigration system. A recent article in the L.A. Times examined a new poll which found that California voters are almost evenly split when it comes to proposals that deny public services to unauthorized immigrants—a far cry from Proposition 187 which passed in California with almost 60% of the vote in 1994 (and was later found to be unconstitutional). So who’s responsible for the shift in public sentiment on immigration? Voters, age 18 to 29—and they don’t want to stop there. Read More
Immigrants, African Americans and the Struggle for Civil Rights
In a new report released today by the Immigration Policy Center, Before Brown, There was Mendez: The Lasting Impact of Mendez v. Westminster in the Struggle for Desegregation, author Maria Blanco examines the impact of a federal circuit court's 1947 decision which found the segregation of Mexican American school children in California unconstitutional. It is fitting that Blanco, who is the Executive Director of the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute at Berkeley Law, wrote this paper because of the key role that Justice Warren played in both the Mendez and Brown cases. Before Brown, There was Mendez tells a unique story of an immigrant family as well as the story of the people who came together to support them and make history. The Mendez family story alone is an amazing tale of strength and perseverance in the face of discrimination and bigotry. Read More
Nativist Group Blames Immigrants for Unemployment and Low Wages
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) yesterday released a report, Amnesty and the American Worker, which recycles a number of discredited claims about the supposedly negative impact that immigrants have on U.S. workers and the U.S. economy. According to FAIR, unauthorized immigration has “put Americans out of work and reduced wage levels for all workers across broad sectors of the economy.” The FAIR report also claims that granting legal status to currently unauthorized immigrants would be a drain on the U.S. economy because newly legalized immigrants would qualify for tax credits. FAIR ignores the fact that there is no correlation between immigration and unemployment in the United States—that immigration has provided a small wage boost to most native-born workers and helped “grow” the economy—and that newly legalized immigrants would earn higher wages and therefore spend more in U.S. businesses and pay more in all kinds of taxes. Read More
Strength in Numbers
The positive impact of Sunday’s rally on the mall for immigration reform is already in evidence. Yesterday, after months of pressure, Senators Schumer and Graham finally released their blueprint for immigration reform and President Obama immediately pledged to help push bipartisan legislation forward. Next was Senator Reid who promised to make time for legislation on the floor this year and Senator Leahy also pledging his support. Read More
Congressional Members Call for Presidential Leadership and Bipartisanship on Reform
Expectations are running high when it comes to moving forward with comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Apparently the White House is taking note of the concerns voiced by grassroots groups and the mobilizing around a March 21 march. The White House had three scheduled meetings on immigration today—one with immigration advocates, another with Senators Schumer and Graham and a third with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. While immigration advocates eagerly await outcomes of today’s meetings, the recent momentum of reform has created a buzz among some Congressional members on how exactly an immigration bill might move forward. Read More
Restrictionist Front Group Still Pushing Green Xenophobia
In a new report, Progressives for Immigration Reform (PFIR)—a front group for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR)—regurgitates an argument as tired as it is flawed: that immigration hastens the destruction of the environment in the United States. Specifically, the report claims that immigration-driven population growth is increasing the nation’s “ecological footprint” and exceeding the country’s “carrying capacity.” This is a faulty line of reasoning that overlooks the degree to which destruction of the environment is a function not of population size, but of how a society utilizes its resources, produces its goods and services, and deals with its waste. Read More
Court of Appeals Finds USCIS Acted Outside the Law
Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a simple but clear reminder to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that it must act within the bounds of the law. The issue before the court was whether USCIS could properly deny an employment-based, “extraordinary ability” visa because the petitioner had not demonstrated "the research community's reactions to his [scholarly] publications" – an arbitrary requirement with no justification in the law. The court, in Kazarian v. USCIS, found that USCIS unlawfully imposed a requirement on the petitioner that was not found in the regulations. The court said that “neither USCIS nor an AAO may unilaterally impose novel substantive or evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth [in the regulations].” In other words, USCIS cannot bypass the law. Read More
Report Provides Solutions to Broken Asylum Employment Authorization Clock
Asylum applicants and their attorneys have long struggled to better understand how the employment authorization asylum clock (“EAD asylum clock”) functions. The clock, which measures the number of days after an applicant files an asylum application before the applicant is eligible for work authorization, affects potentially more than 50,000 asylum applicants each year. While the law requires asylum applicants to wait 150 days after filing an application to apply for a work permit and in some instances, permits the government to extend this waiting period by "stopping the clock" for certain incidents caused by the applicant, some applicants often wait much longer than the legally permitted timeframe to receive a work permit, which can cause a host of problems. Read More
All gifts are matched dollar for dollar
No one should face the immigration system alone
