Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

Prospects Remain Grim for Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Published on Mon, Aug 30, 2010

The best bet for reforming the immigration system this year lies with smaller bills, and immigrants rights groups have attempted to push for these measures instead. If this happens, the future of comprehensive immigration reform is still unclear, according to Mary Giovagnoli, director of Immigration Policy Center.

“We don’t have a good measure anymore of what will happen once we get something discreet like the DREAM Act passed,” she says. “But when the sky doesn’t fall in and if people still get re-elected after supporting DREAM, it may show members of Congress that leaning into the immigration issue and voting for comprehensive immigration reform could help them politically.”

Published in the The Washington Independent

VAWA

<This page is under construction>

Working with partner non-profits, the LAC convinced USCIS to adopt a policy that allows VAWA applicants to apply for adjustment of status under INA § 245(a) even if the applicant is present in the U.S. without inspection and admission or parole. This policy favorably impacts thousands of battered immigrants.

 

White House White Board: Why Immigration is Beneficial to America

It's clear commonsense immigration reform is good for the economy as a whole. Don't take our word for it — study after study has shown that commonsense immigration reform will strengthen the economy, spur innovation, reduce the deficit and increase US trade and exports.

Year Released: 2013

View Link

Groups Mobilize NY Immigrant Vote

Published on Tue, Oct 19, 2010

Their coordinated efforts have been a success, with more than 280,000 new citizens being registered to vote. This year, with tight congressional races for state Assembly and Senate elections, their goals are to demonstrate the impact of that voting bloc, which already counts more than 1 million registered voters in New York, according to a new study by the Immigration Policy Center.

Published in the Epoch Times

Appointed Counsel for Children in Immigration Proceedings

Each year, the government initiates immigration court proceedings against thousands of children, but does not guarantee that those children have legal representation. Like adults, children who cannot afford to hire an attorney or find pro bono counsel are forced to navigate the complex and adversarial immigration system on their own, even though the government is always represented by a trained attorney.

CASES | RESOURCES

CASES

J.E.F.M. v. Holder

On July 9, 2014, the American Immigration Council, with co-counsel American Civil Liberties Union, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Public Counsel, and K&L Gates LLP, filed a nationwide class-action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of children who are challenging the federal government's failure to provide them with legal representation as it carries out removal proceedings against them.

The complaint charges the U.S. Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Health and Human Services, Executive Office for Immigration Review, and Office of Refugee Resettlement with violating the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and the Immigration and Nationality Act’s provisions requiring a “full and fair hearing” before an immigration judge. It seeks to require the government to provide children with legal representation in their immigration proceedings.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit, children between the ages of 3 and 17, are scheduled to appear in immigration court without any legal representation.Read more...

State rep. pushing Ariz.-style immigration law has ties to organization working to repeal 14th Amendment

Published on Mon, Jan 10, 2011

Michelle Waslin, an Immigration Policy Center senior policy analyst, tells the Independent that “SLLI wants to spark a legal challenge that goes all the way to the Supreme Court. They want to set up a system for citizens and another for people who can be discriminated.”

Waslin also says that amending the 14th Amendment is not a solution for illegal immigration. “Under the current system, you’re born here, you get a birth certificate,” she says. “If we didn’t have that system we would need a bureaucracy to determine citizenship.”

She points out that if automatic citizenship is eliminated, all U.S. citizens would be affected. She compares the outcome to the current situation of a U.S. serviceman in Germany, married to a German woman, who together have a baby. That couple has to hire an immigration lawyer have to clarify if the baby if a U.S. citizen.

Published in the Florida Independent

Litigation Clearinghouse Newsletter Vol. 2, No. 9

This issue covers successful challenges to state ordinances, rehearing petition in 5th Circuit natz delay case, the Orantes injunction, and news from AILF's Legal Action Center, including recently filed and successful amicus briefs.

Published On: Monday, August 6, 2007 | Download File

GOP Tries To Scare Minorities Into Supporting Anti-Immigration Policies

Published on Thu, Mar 03, 2011

On Tuesday the House Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement held a meeting that purported to explore the effects of undocumented workers on the labor market. “Making Immigration Work for American Minorities” included prepared statements from the President of the San Antonio Tea Party and a professor representing the abjectly titled—and thoroughly unprogressive—Progressives For Immigration Reform (PRIF), among other specialists.

There were few surprises during the hearing—the subcommittee chair, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.) began with a statement that read, in part, “Virtually all credible studies show that competition from cheap foreign labor displaces American workers, including legal immigrants, or depresses their wages.”

His references include a Pew Hispanic Survey that shows seven million undocumented immigrants have jobs in the U.S. and a study conducted by the risibly partisan The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) that determined undocumented workers depress wages for all low-skilled workers by $1,800 a year. Rep. Smith then cites a Harvard research paper by George Borjas that found undocumented workers reduce the wages of low-skilled American workers by 7.4 percent.

I’ll get to the findings in a moment, but I think it’s bedeviling Rep. Smith relies on two studies that view undocumented immigrants in a negative light, and stops right there. Doing more to cement anti-immigrant advocates as purveyors of hyperbole and anecdote, Smith says:

“But research is not the only proof. After illegal workers are arrested and detained during Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) worksite enforcement actions, many businesses replace them with American minorities.”

A footnote? A statistic? He doesn’t even offer a number pulled from the firmament. Instead, he entreats lawmakers to fix an immigration system that hurts “American workers” and particularly “African Americans.”Read more...

Published in the Campus Progress