Unlike certain corporate powers that make billions of dollars and pay no taxes, illegal immigrants generate billions of tax dollars for state governments. allgov.com
The Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy has concluded that unauthorized immigrants paid $11.2 billion in taxes last year. This total included $1.2 billion in personal income taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes, and $8.4 billion in sales taxes. allgov.com
The U.S. Immigration Policy Center says these figures should be kept in mind as politicians and commentators continue with the seemingly endless debate over what to do with unauthorized immigrants already living in the United States. sun-sentinel.com
The Washington-based research group says in spite of the fact that they lack legal status, these immigrants -- and their family members -- are adding value to the U.S. economy; not only as taxpayers, but as workers, consumers, and entrepreneurs." sun-sentinel.com
California gets the most out of its undocumented workers, pulling in $2.7 billion in taxes from households headed by illegals in 2010. laweekly.com
Other states that gained the most revenue from illegal immigrants paying taxes were Texas ($1.6 billion), Florida ($807 million), New York ($662 million), and Illinois ($499 million). allgov.com
They were followed by Georgia ($456 million), New Jersey ($446 million) and Arizona ($433 million). allgov.com
Some undocumented workers in California say they are filing income tax returns, hoping that playing by the rules will be an eventual path to citizenship. UPI
FACTS & FIGURES
An estimated 11 to 12 million undocumented immigrants live and work in the United States. That's roughly one in every 20 workers. Reuters
The Obama administration has deported more illegal immigrants from the U.S. than ever before. NPRRead more...
This issue covers the Supreme Court's favorable decision in an aggravated felony case, a legal challenge to the H-1B/Neufeld Memo on the employer-employee relationship, EOIR resources on BIA precedents, a court of appeals decision vacating a BIA precedent on the finality of a conviction, updates on the suits challenging Arizona's immigration law (SB 1070), and LAC litigation on access to courts, motions to reopen, and the Child Status Protection Act.
Alabama now has the nation's toughest immigration law. Arizona should not compete to take back that title.
Our Legislature gave the state a break this year. No controversial immigration law was passed. No new spotlight fell on Arizona.
Yet the adjective phrase "Arizona-style" is still used to describe extreme, enforcement-heavy immigration measures such as the one just passed in Alabama.
In addition to mimicking most of the provisions of Arizona's infamous Senate Bill 1070, Alabama's law builds on Arizona's employer-sanctions law and its voter-identification law.
Alabama also goes after schoolchildren with a requirement that schools report on the immigration status of students. The idea, which has been proposed in Arizona, is to create a record of the cost of educating undocumented children as a basis for challenging the 1982 Supreme Court ruling that all children should be educated, regardless of immigration status.
Checking the status of schoolchildren will mean that kids - even some who were born in this country - will be kept out of school by undocumented parents who fear questions at school will lead to deportation. Alabama's school provisions would create a permanent uneducated underclass.
Like SB 1070, the Alabama law is built around a strategy called "attrition through enforcement." The aim is to make things so uncomfortable that undocumented immigrants self-deport.
Research by the Immigration Policy Center found that undocumented migrants often just go further underground as a result of get-tough measures. They become more vulnerable and less likely to report crime, making local law enforcement more difficult.
Other provisions in the Alabama law, such as making it a crime to knowingly rent to an undocumented immigrant and barring undocumented people from enrolling in postsecondary institutions, are also part of this strategy.Read more...
The Criminal Alien Program (“CAP”) is one of the federal government’s largest and least understood immigration enforcement programs. Through CAP, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) agents screen detainees in jails and prisons across the country and place those deemed removable into immigration proceedings. Between 2005 and 2010, CAP led to the arrest of more than a million people, and the program was implicated in approximately half of all removal proceedings in FY 2009. As a result of CAP, ICE often deports individuals before they have been convicted of a crime or have had the opportunity to speak with an immigration attorney. CAP’s operations vary widely. In some jurisdictions, ICE agents work in jails to routinely interview and process prisoners. At other facilities, ICE agents interview detainees either during regular or ad hoc visits, or by telephone or video conference. Some counties give ICE full access to jails, while other localities limit agents’ access to certain hours or days of the week. Despite CAP’s role in removing hundreds of thousands of individuals each year, very little information about CAP is available to the public. What little is known about the program suggests that CAP targets individuals with little or no criminal history and incentivizes pretextual stops and racial profiling. The LAC and its partners are engaged in litigation intended to enhance public understanding and oversight of one the federal government’s most ubiquitous enforcement programs.
Lawsuit Against ICE for Failure to Disclose CAP Records
AIC v. DHS, No. 12- 00355 (D. Conn. filed March 8, 2010)Read more...
In addition to recommendations of cities to visit during the holidays and a guide to office gift exchanges, this holiday issue includes an alum's memories of a road trip in Texas and the exchange visitor of the month's encounter with a friendly bus driver in Chicago.
It’s not just DREAMers that are getting a reprieve under the Obama administration’s revised deportation policies. When the Department of Homeland Security announced last week that in the coming months it will review its roughly 300,000 open deportation cases with the aim of closing low-priority cases, the agency indicated that for the purposes of deportation policy, it will recognize same-sex couples and families as real families.
The news means that queer families facing deportation may win the right to stay in the country under DHS criteria of who constitutes a high priority for removal. The guiding document for who merits the use of prosecutorial discretion is a June 17 memo written by Immigration and Customs Enforcement director John Morton. Morton advised ICE agents and attorneys to consider those who met any of the following characteristics were a low priority for deportation: those who were victims of crime, especially domestic violence or trafficking; those who are long-time lawful permanent residents; those with are veterans or active-duty military personnel and those with strong family ties in the U.S.
Under the Defense of Marriage Act, federal agencies are forbidden from recognizing the partnerships of same-sex couples, and that’s extended to the world of federal immigration policy. According to the American Immigration Council there are currently 36,000 bi-national same-sex couples in the country, and DOMA has provided the legal justification for the routine denial of same sex couple’s applications for permanent residence, and other immigration benefits like deportation relief, that straight couples are eligible for.Read more...
Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012)
In a 5-3 decision written by Justice Kennedy, the Supreme Court found that three provisions of Arizona SB 1070 were preempted by federal immigration law and so allowed a preliminary injunction against those provisions to become permanent. The Court found that an additional section of the law was not preempted, but did not preclude future legal challenges to that provision. The decision affirmed in part and reversed in part a decision by the Ninth Circuit, see United States v. Arizona, 641 F.3d 339 (9th Cir. 2011).
The Court found that Sections 3, 5(C), and 6 of Arizona SB 1070 were preempted by federal law. Section 3, which would have made it an Arizona state offense for unauthorized immigrants to violate the federal law requiring them to apply for registration with the federal government and to carry a registration card, was found to intrude upon an area of law that Congress has entrusted entirely to the federal government. The Court also held that Section 5(C), which would have made it a state crime for immigrants without work authorization to apply for work, solicit work in a public place, or perform work in Arizona, was preempted by the comprehensive federal system that regulating unauthorized employment of noncitizens. Finally, the Court found that Section 6, authorizing law enforcement to arrest immigrants without a warrant where probable cause existed that they committed a public offense making them removable from the United States, was preempted by the federal immigration enforcement scheme, which only allows local police to perform the functions of federal immigration officers in limited circumstances. In so finding, the Court implicitly rejected Arizona’s argument that local police have inherent authority to make arrests for civil violations of the immigration laws.Read more...
The International Exchange Center is proud to announce Yves Thiers as this month’s Exchange Visitor of the Month. Yves came to the United States from Belgium soon after graduating with a Master of Industrial Science degree. He hoped to be able to gain hands on knowledge of the engineering projects he studied at university. His host company, Dal-Tile Corporation, was just the place for this. Dal-Tile Corporation is a tile manufacturer and distributor based out of Dallas, TX. Read more...