The recent tragic death of Arizona rancher Rob Krentz made national headlines and brings new attention to the problem of border security. The killing of the third-generation rancher by suspected members of a Mexican drug cartel has become a flashpoint in the immigration debate as residents of border states and politicians cite the episode as further proof that the U.S. must do more to secure the violent U.S.- Mexico border. The murder of Krentz comes at a time when well-armed cartel factions have lately battled each other and federal authorities in several Mexican border cities, resulting in thousands of brutal killings, kidnappings and gun battles. The increased violence has brought renewed cries by border state residents for help from the government in securing the U.S. border.
"The argument that the Justice Department is making here, is you know, the fundamental question, which is where does state authority begin and end when it comes to federal immigration law?" said Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Council.
The Immigration Policy Center reported, "If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Oregon, the state would lose $3.4 billion in economic activity, $1.5 billion in gross state product, and approximately 19,259 jobs."
This Practice Advisory discusses the § 237(a)(1)(H) waiver for fraud or misrepresentation at admission that would otherwise render deportable certain LPRs and Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioners. The advisory addresses contexts in which the waiver is available, the statutory eligibility requirements, and the relief that results from a grant of the waiver.
Earlier this year, the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council released studies estimating that comprehensive immigration reform, as described above, would increase the U.S. gross domestic product by at least $1.5 trillion over 10 years.
In Colorado, immigrants keep tourism going in small mountain towns with pricey real estate; they often drive hours each day to and from minimum-wage positions in ski towns. Migrants also work the fields and grunt construction jobs.
This Practice Advisory addresses the implementation of DHS’s prosecutorial discretion guidelines and provides detail about how DHS’s new joint working group will determine low priority immigration cases.
Students will appreciate the immigration experience through Aliki's Marianthe's Story: Painted Words, Spoken Memories. Through a guided reading and various classroom activities, students will identify with Mari's character as well as improve on reading, geography, art and expressive writing skills.
Mary Giovagnoli, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Immigration Policy Center, cautions about overstating the decline. "I don't think it's really a significant drop," Giovagnoli says. "Certainly, 8 percent is something, but if you look at where we were in 1990, then at the numbers of illegal immigration in 2009, the number of people here illegally has tripled."
It’s not just enforcement that matters, but policies, too. Giovagnoli thinks some policies that focus on enforcement haven’t deterred people from coming, and maybe made them more likely to stay out of status if they’re already here.
Delays by USCIS in deciding naturalization applications have forced many applicants to seek judicial remedies. Section 336(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act allows a federal district court to review a naturalization application if USCIS has failed to decide it for more than 120 days after the date of the examination. The law allows the court to either decide the application itself or remand the application to USCIS for decision.
Often, USCIS will deny a naturalization application while the case is pending in federal district court. The agency’s lawyers will then move to dismiss the federal court case because the application has been denied. If the case is dismissed, the applicant will face even longer delays as an appeal to USCIS will be required before seeking judicial review of the denial. We have successfully challenged this practice, arguing in amicus briefs that once a case has been filed in federal court, USCIS loses its authority over the naturalization application and must wait for the federal court decision before taking further action.
Bustamante v. Napolitano, No. 08-0990-cv (2d Cir. amicus brief filed May 30, 2008). In a precedent decision, the court adopted the position urged by the Legal Action Center and held that USCIS does not have jurisdiction to decide a naturalization application after an applicant files an action in district court under INA § 336(b). Bustamante v. Napolitano, 582 F.3d 403 (2d Cir. 2009).Read more...
Dozens of Washington, D.C. area educators had a unique opportunity to work with experts on immigration law and African migration at the American Immigration Law Foundation's (AILF's) fifth annual Teachers' Symposium on Saturday, February 9. The event, which was funded in part by Wachovia, was organized for educators in an effort to help them teach the importance of America's immigration heritage more effectively.