Other labor rights advocates are drawing attention to the federal government’s ongoing crackdown on immigrant workers. Worksite audits which require employers to check the immigration status of their workers have resulted in thousands of layoffs in recent months. This sweeping trend hurts families as well as local economies, according to a new report from the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center.
The report specifically looks at the economic impact of immigrant workers in Arizona, but its findings present much wider implications. Marcos Restrepo at The Colorado Independent sums up the key points:
• The analysis estimates that immigrants on the whole paid $6 billion in taxes in 2008, while undocumented immigrants paid approximately $2.8 billion.
• Increase tax revenues by $1.68 billion.
The report adds that the effects of deportation in Arizona would:
• Decrease total employment by 17.2 percent.
• Eliminate 581,000 jobs for immigrant and native-born workers alike.
• Shrink the state economy by $48.8 billion.
• Reduce state tax revenues by 10.1 percent.
Meanwhile, the effects of legalization in Arizona would:
• Add 261,000 jobs for immigrant and native-born workers alike.
• Increase labor income by $5.6 billion.
Restrepo adds that, in part because of such mounting evidence, immigrants rights advocates are exhorting authorities to recognize immigrants as workers, first and foremost.
This issue covers the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari in an immigration case involving whether a second drug possession offense is an aggravated felony, a new LAC resource on motions to suppress, favorable court of appeals’ decisions on detention and crimes of violence, and res judicata in removal proceedings.
Atlanta (CNN) -- It's as dependable as the turning of the seasons itself. Every spring, migrant workers -- many of them by all accounts illegal immigrants -- work their way north picking fruits and vegetables, first in Florida, then in Georgia, then farther north.
But this year, growers say, many of those workers are bypassing Georgia, concerned about provisions in a new state law that imposes tough penalties for using fake work documents and allows police broader latitude to check immigration status. The bill is modeled on similar, and controversial, legislation in Arizona.
The result, the growers say, is a scramble to get fruits and vegetables off the ground before they rot.
"The reports we're getting back from our growers is that they are getting between 30 and 50 percent of the work crews that they need to get the crops in," said Charles Hall, executive director of the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association, which represents mostly medium- and large-size operations in the state's $1.1 billion fruit and vegetable business.
Growers say that the improving economy and a consequent slight rebound in construction could be siphoning some of the mostly Hispanic workforce they usually depend on. Some workers likely went home as the long recession dragged on, they say.
But the primary reason workers aren't coming to Georgia, growers say, is the legislation.
"I know a lot of crew leaders," said Jason Clark Berry of Blueberry Farms of Georgia. "Everyone I've talked to from Vidalia to Baxley, where my farm is, down through Homerville has said the exact same thing. People are afraid to come."Read more...
In contrast to the criminal system, virtually no safeguards exist in removal proceedings for respondents with mental disabilities. Each year, untold numbers of noncitizens with mental disabilities are ordered deported without access to counsel or any assessment of their cognitive capabilities. The issue has taken on greater urgency following extensive reports of the challenges that immigrants with mental disabilities face in removal proceedings, as well as alarming accounts of the mistaken deportation of U.S. citizens with mental disabilities. This page contains summaries of recent and ongoing cases regarding the rights of noncitizens with mental disabilities.
The Exchange Visitor Program is proud to announce Ana Catalina “Caty” Santos as April’s Exchange Visitor of the Month. Each month, we select an exchange visitor who has made an effort to get involved in his/her community and explore American Culture. Read more...
Arizona, whose immigration law sparked a lawsuit by the Obama administration and national boycotts, aims to collect tens of millions of dollars in private donations to build a border fence with inmate labor.
The plan, created by lawmakers and signed into law by Republican Governor Jan Brewer in April, would turn donations over to a group of Republican legislators, political appointees and four county sheriffs who have criticized U.S. efforts to combat illegal immigration. They say the fence is needed to stop an “invasion” that may include violent criminals and Middle Eastern terrorists disguised as Mexicans.
“Arizona once more has to step in and do a job the federal government won’t do,” Republican state Senator Steve Smith, who sponsored the bill, said in a telephone interview. He said he believes the Obama administration has failed to secure the border and has now given up. “It is a massive invasion on our social and economic systems. Nobody can deny that.”
The campaign is ratcheting up rhetoric between the state and the federal government over border security. It is modeled after a similar effort by Brewer that taps into the same nationwide discontent over U.S. policy to pay for the defense of Arizona’s immigration law. The campaign, Keep Arizona Safe, has raised more than $3.8 million from about 45,000 donations since June 2010, said Matthew Benson, a spokesman for Brewer.
$50 Million Goal
For the border fence, more than $146,000 has been collected from about 3,000 private donors in 50 states since fundraising began July 20. At least 568 were from Arizona, 329 from California, 182 from Texas, 173 from Florida, 88 from New York and 42 from New Jersey. The goal is to raise a minimum of $50 million, said Smith.Read more...
Flores-Villar v. United States, 564 U. S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 2312, (2011)
The Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s decision in a case involving whether two former citizenship provisions in the INA violate equal protection. These sections imposed a five-year residence requirement, after the age of fourteen, on U.S. citizen fathers -- but not on U.S. citizen mothers -- before they may transmit citizenship to a child born out of wedlock abroad to a noncitizen. Read more...