America's Voice Blog

Posted 08/27/10 at 03:44pm By Dara Lind

ICE Won’t Deport People Already About To Get Legal Status. “Free Pass,” Or Common Sense?

For a year and a half, Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief John Morton has been saying that he wants his agency to target “the worst of the worst” when it comes to immigration enforcement.  In recent weeks, we've finally begun to see this stance reflected in policy, though there’s still more to be done.

Last week, the agency issued new guidance directing field offices to halt the deportations of a narrow group of immigrants who have “active applications in the system” and are about to become legal residents, according to the New York Times:

“The memo encourages ICE officers and lawyers to use their authority to dismiss those cases, canceling the deportation proceedings, if they determine that the immigrants have no criminal records and stand a strong chance of having their residence applications approved.

“The policy is intended to address a 'major inefficiency' that has led to an unnecessary pileup of cases in the immigration courts, Mr. Morton said. The courts have reported at least 17,000 cases that could be eliminated from their docket if ICE dismissed deportations of immigrants, like those married to United States citizens, who were very likely to win legal status, the memo says.”

The rationale here is good law enforcement policy, but it also happens to jive with common sense.  Surely everyone in America would think it’s smarter to spend ICE resources going after dangerous criminals than immigrants who have applied for residency under the current system and are about to be granted a green card, right?

Well, apparently, not everyone.  Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is seeing red when it comes to the new memo.  Despite his reputation as a budget hawk, he’s bound and determined to oppose every change in immigration policy the Obama Administration makes, even one that would make efficient use of taxpayer resources.

Here's what Grassley told the Times:

“Actions like this demoralize ICE agents who are trying to do their job and enforce the law. Unfortunately, it appears this is more evidence that the Obama administration would rather circumvent Congress and give a free pass to illegal immigrants who have already broken our law.”

It's important to understand that this memo covers only a small fraction of immigrants in the U.S. illegally — the 17,000 who are in active deportation proceedings and have also applied for immigration status through existing laws, like the family-based immigration system.  It won’t give a benefit to anyone who doesn’t qualify for one already; it won’t prevent anyone whose application is denied from being deported in the future; and it won’t end deportation proceedings for the majority of people who are in them.

The policy change simply says that we’re not going to tie up deportation resources going after someone who’s about to become a legal, taxpaying resident —something that most Americans would agree makes good sense.

Most, that is, except Senator Grassley and his crew.  Grassley also doesn’t agree with the vast majority of Americans who support congressional passage of comprehensive immigration reform that requires undocumented immigrants to register with the government, undergo background checks, and get in line for legal status. Americans don’t call that “amnesty,” they call it “accountability.” And they like it.

What they don’t like are leaders who pretend we can deport our way to an immigration solution, or whose strategy on immigration is to block progress at every turn and label every change pursued by the Administration as “amnesty.”

Posted 08/19/10 at 09:26am By Dara Lind

It’s Official: We Are an America That Deports 393,000 People a Year

Remember candidate Barack Obama?  The one who recognized that mass deportation was a failed strategy that tore communities apart, and knew that comprehensive reform was the only lasting solution?  The one who said:

"I think it's time for a President who won't walk away from something as important as comprehensive reform when it becomes politically unpopular. And that's the commitment I'm making to you. I marched with you in the streets of Chicago. I fought with you in the Senate for comprehensive immigration reform.

"And I will make it a top priority in my first year as President -- not just because we need to secure our borders and get control of who comes into our country. And not just because we have to crack down on employers abusing undocumented immigrants. But because we have to finally bring those 12 million people out of the shadows.

"Yes, they broke the law. And we should not excuse that. We should require them to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for citizenship, behind those who came here legally. But we cannot and should not deport 12 million people. That would turn America into something we're not; something we don't want to be."

Click here to read more.
Posted 08/18/10 at 10:39am By Jackie Mahendra

NYT: As it Stands, “Secure Communities Won’t Make The Country More Secure”

For all the talk that the Obama Administration is changing immigration enforcement priorities to focus on the “worst of the worst,” a new report editorialized in the New York Times today shows that for one flagship program called "Secure Communities," there’s a very long road ahead:

Secure Communities won’t make the country more secure, not the way it is working. Police departments that don’t want to participate should be able to opt out. The Obama administration needs to fix it or jettison it.

The Times paints a pretty damning picture of how the program’s been run:

Secure Communities, an immigration enforcement program created under President George W. Bush and now being greatly expanded by President Obama, is billed as an effort to catch and deport “the worst of the worst,” the violent criminals, drug and gun smugglers, gang members and other dangerous aliens. That would be excellent, if true. It doesn’t seem to be.

According to the data, the Secure Communities program has been in the business of rounding up a majority of non-criminal immigrants; a whopping 79 percent of those deported under Secure Communities have no criminal records “or had been picked up for low-level offenses, like traffic violations and juvenile mischief.”

Click here to read more.
Posted 08/13/10 at 01:20pm By Dara Lind

Why Latinos Are Frustrated: It’s Called Leadership

As Politico reported last week, Spanish-language media, just like Latino voters, are growing increasingly frustrated with Washington's inaction on comprehensive immigration reform -- and with the Obama Administration's policy of continuing Bush-era immigration enforcement policies that deport the undocumented immigrant moms and dads who were supposed to be legal taxpayers and citizens by now.

Seems like pretty justified anger, but over at ThinkProgress, Matt Yglesias states that the President shouldn't get too much blame, because showing leadership would somehow make the near-hysterical immigration debate “partisan” and “polarized:”

"…when Presidents insert themselves into legislative debates, that induces partisan polarization. Immigration has always been an issue that scrambles both parties coalitions, and I don’t think that’s changed today. A more polarized dynamic is only going to make reform harder to achieve. Of course the president would have a role in pushing a bill over the finish line, but success requires a starting baseline of genuine cooperation on the Hill."

Here’s the thing. The immigration debate in Congress is already partisan and polarized.  When it comes to the issue of immigration, Republicans are lock step behind a partisan political strategy instead of a responsible legislative strategy. In a year when John McCain's immigration platform is "complete the danged fence," Lindsey Graham wants to scrap the 14th Amendment to the Constitution because of the imaginary threat of what he calls "drop and leave" births, and GOP candidates propose everything from tent cities to 1940’s-style internment camps for the undocumented, it's clear that Republicans don't feel pressure to offer a pragmatic solution to illegal immigration.

Perhaps the only thing that could break the polarization in Washington and start the long process back toward bipartisanship on the issue is if the Democrats—including the President—spoke up loudly, confidently, and consistently about dangers of the Republican approach and the need for real comprehensive immigration reform. Sure, the President can’t be the only voice of reason in order to break the logjam, but he can guide the way.  He has given some good speeches, but he has not spoken about the issue nearly as much as he needs to.  Doing so would draw clear lines for American voters and raise the stakes for the GOP: will Republican politicians stick with their fantasy-land proposals, or will they be dragged to table to craft a real solution that Americans of all political persuasions actually want?

Instead, the Administration and Democratic leaders often act like they are afraid of the issue, choosing to highlight their similarities with Republicans on “securing the border” instead of highlighting the fact that comprehensive immigration reform is the only way to a truly secure border. Just look at the rush to bring the Senate back from recess to pass an “emergency” bill that sends another $600 million in troops and unmanned drones to the border, but does nothing to deal with the millions of undocumented immigrants in our country today.

As Lynn Tramonte, Deputy Director of America's Voice, said when the border bill was passed:

"By bringing the border bill forward, Democratic leaders say they are hoping to court Republicans who have refused to negotiate on comprehensive immigration reform until the border is 'secure.'  But who decides it’s 'secure,' and when, and how?  Already, Republican Members of Congress are saying the bill doesn’t go far enough.  The fact is, Republican senators and representatives have made a political decision not to work with Democrats on comprehensive immigration reform because they think this is in their electoral interests.  They are wrong.  Not only are they alienating Latino voters with their anti-immigrant rhetoric, but they are irresponsibly blocking a solution that America desperately needs."

Click here to read more.
Posted 06/10/10 at 01:36pm By Maribel Hastings

Another Week, Another Death for the Border Patrol

Translated from America's Voice en Español.

First there was Anastasio, now there is Sergio Adrián -- both with the last name Hernández, both Mexican. One was 42 years old, the other barely 15. Both of them died in encounters with U.S. Border Patrol agents. One died in a San Diego hospital, days after he was beaten and Tased at the hands of the agents who had detained him; the other was shot on the strip of land separating El Paso from Ciudad Juárez. Video of the death of Sergio Adrián has been posted on YouTube by Univision. Watch it:

Anastasio was buried in San Diego; Sergio Adrián is mourned in Ciudad Juárez. Both deaths are currently under investigation. Both have been condemned.

The State Department issued the following statement on Tuesday:

"We understand that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents responded on June 7 to a group of suspected illegal immigrants from Mexico near the Paso del Norte Port of Entry (El Paso, TX).

"The agents were reportedly assaulted with rocks by an unknown number of people. During the assault, an agent discharged his firearm, killing one of the suspects.

"We regret the loss of life."

Amnesty International (AI) has condemned the incident. In a statement issued from London, AI Americas Director Susan Lee said that the shooting was

"a grossly disproportionate response and flies in the face of international standards that compel police to use firearms only as a last resort, in response to an immediate, deadly threat that cannot be contained through lesser means."

The two incidents have occurred in the midst of a tense debate over Arizona state law SB 1070, which is scheduled to go into effect on July 29th, and the announcement that the federal government is dispatching 1,200 National Guard troops to the border.

According to Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the number of U.S. Border Patrol incidents that have resulted in the death or injury of Mexican nationals rose from five in 2008 to 12 in 2009 -- and there have already been 17 such incidents in 2010.

It remains to be seen if the investigations of these incidents will get results, and if, this time, those responsible will be brought to justice.

Posted 04/09/10 at 01:21pm By Patty Kupfer

What Happened to the Worst of the Worst?: NYT Says “Pull the Plug on 287(g)”

An editorial in today’s New York Times adds to a week of attacks on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), since last Friday’s release of a new report by the agency’s Inspector General that slams the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

According to the Times’ analysis of the OIG report:

The [287(g)] program lacks basic safeguards like data collection and reporting requirements to ensure that deputies don’t violate civil rights. The report also found that fewer than 10 percent of its sample of captured offenders had committed serious “Level 1” crimes, and almost half had no connection at all to violence, drugs or property crimes.

The report reinforces what a leading police association and police chiefs, including William Bratton of Los Angeles, have argued strenuously — that 287(g) undermines public safety. Police officers can’t fight crimes when communities they serve fear and avoid them.

Click here to read more.
Posted 04/06/10 at 12:42pm By Jackie Mahendra

Immigration: More Rogue than Right?

Check out our new video, "Immigration: More Rogue than Right?," and then raise your voice about our nation's unjust immigration policies:


Last week, the Washington Post reported that federal immigration agents are using quotas to round up "easy targets" -- moms and dads working to feed their families -- instead of going after serious criminals.

The President himself has said:

When communities are terrorized by ICE immigration raids, when nursing mothers are torn from their babies, when children come home from school to find their parents missing, when people are detained without access to legal counsel, when all that is happening, the system just isn't working, and we need to change it.

Watch the new video and then tell President Obama that the system just isn't working -- we need real immigration reform that protects families, not rogue tactics that destroy them!

Posted 04/05/10 at 09:31am By Marjorie Valbrun

A Helping Hand, Then a Slap in the Face: U.S. Immigration Enforcement Policies Cause More Suffering

Cross-Posted at Huffington Post:

Haitian-Americans, myself included, have been especially proud that our adoptive homeland not only took the lead in recovery and relief efforts in Haiti after the massive January earthquake, but also temporarily suspended deportations of undocumented Haitian immigrants and granted them work permits so that they could earn income and help affected relatives in Haiti.

Obama took these steps in short order while consistently voicing support and sympathy for the Haitian people, not to mention providing $930 million in aid to Haiti after the earthquake. Just last week the U.S. pledged $1.15 billion more in rebuilding aid at the International Donors Conference for Haiti. These moves only intensified the immense goodwill Haitians here and in Haiti have for Americans in general and for Pres. Obama in particular. 

So it was with deep disappointment, and distress, that we learned from the New York Times last week that some of the people who were evacuated from Haiti by U.S. Marines in the chaotic days after the earthquake had been jailed in immigration detention centers from the first day they arrived here. Some of them were even kept in shackles. None had been deemed criminals or a security threats; they simply had no papers proving they were legal immigrants.

That many of the evacuees lost everything in the disaster and arrived with little more than the clothes on their backs was apparently beside the point to U.S immigration authorities. But for Haitian-Americans and non-hyphenated Americans too, this was the point – and an outrageous one at that. How can the very administration that urged Americans to show compassion and charity towards Haiti and its traumatized people turn around and jail some of those very same people?  It was more than a cruel slap in the face; it was bureaucratic kick in the gut.

Click here to read more.
Posted 02/02/10 at 04:13pm By Mahwish Khan

New York Times: ICE Agent Advises Signal International to “Privately” Deport Workers

The New York Times today uncovers how U.S. immigration authorities under President Bush colluded with a Mississippi marine oil-rig company to punish workers exercising their basic labor rights.  The article details shocking correspondence between the employer, Signal International, and the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which advised the company how to privately deport workers who were complaining about mistreatment on the job. 

Apparently, ICE’s advice to the company was this:

Don’t give them any advance notice. Take them all out of the line on the way to work; get their personal belongings; get them in a van, and get their tickets, and get them to the airport, and send them back to India.

Outrageous.

The Signal case is a clear and compelling example of how the Bush Administration prioritized enforcement policies over labor rights to the detriment of all workers, as a recent report from American Rights at Work described and as we, at America’s Voice, have consistently highlighted.

Putting the needs of dishonest employers before the rights of workers is un-American. It's time for a full investigation into the allegations of misconduct that occurred during the Bush years. 

We need to ensure that the enforcement of immigration laws no longer trumps the protection of workers’ rights. 

Posted 12/22/09 at 11:46am By Dara Lind

Disturbing Immigration Enforcement Tactics Underscore Need for Real Reform

A pair of stories published last week reveal disturbing new frontiers in immigration enforcement and underscore the urgent need for real reform.

An article by Jacqueline Stevens in the Nation uncovers several "ruse operations," in which federal immigration (ICE) agents posed as insurance agents, couriers, and even Mormon missionaries in order to collect information on undocumented immigrants or lure them somewhere to be arrested. Here's one representative example:

"A ruse operation about five years ago still rankles Kentucky attorney Julia Thorne. Thorne received a phone call from a man saying he was with a courier service, wanting to confirm her address. Shortly after that, one of her clients, a Polish horse teaser living in the area since 1993, received a call from a man who identified himself as 'Bill, the new guy in Julia's office' and asked the client to stop by Thorne's office and sign some papers--despite the fact that Thorne works alone. Two ICE agents were waiting and arrested him in the lobby. Thorne, eight floors above, had no idea until she received a call from her client in ICE custody.

"When Thorne complained to the Louisville ICE office, she was told, 'No, your client's making that up. We said we were a courier service." When she asked, "How did he happen to show up in my lobby when you were there?' they said it didn't happen."

While most of the operations Stevens recounts took place under the Bush administration, she warns that ICE's current focus on "targeted stealth operations" instead of the highly-criticized workplace raids could make these tactics more common. One researcher quoted in the piece observes that the effect of the ruses is to "send a shudder through the immigrant community, but without the dominant community finding out."

Click here to read more.

 1 2 >