The Immigration Policy Center cites Margaret Stock, a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve, and a former professor at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, who said, ”In a time when several military services are experiencing difficulties recruiting eligible enlisted soldiers, passage of this bill could well solve the Armed Forces’ enlisted recruiting woes and provide a new source of foreign-language-qualified soldiers.”
This issue covers conflicting circuit court decisions on attorneys fees in naturalization delay suits, an update on ineffective assistance of counsel litigation, a circuit court decision upholding the Orantes injunction for Salvadorans, recent decisions addressing how to calculate the one year filing deadline for asylum applications, and a new AILF Practice Advisory on electronic filing in federal court.
According to the Washington D.C. based non-profit Immigration Policy Center, when a person is arrested and booked into jail, "...his or her fingerprints are checked against the U.S. Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US-VISIT), and the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT)...This fingerprint check allows state and local law enforcement and ICE automatically and immediately to search the databases for an individual’s criminal and immigration history."
When a match between the person and an immigration violation arises, the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) and local law enforcement are notified, and a "detainer" or an order to hold the person arrested is issued, giving federal authorities jurisdiction over that individual, according to the Center's fact sheet.
This issue covers litigation related to ICE raids at Swift plants, post-Lopez motions, developments in Acosta and Padilla-Caldera cases, challenges to Matter of Blake, and technical support from the National Immigration Project.
Republicans like Reps. David Vitter and Mike Lee and Sens. Rand Paul and Jerry Moran all built platforms on their “pro-family” politics. So, what does it take for these men to paint childbirth as “reprehensible?” You guessed it: these GOP lawmakers are again thumping their drums against “birth tourism,” an illusory epidemic in which illegal immigrants are traveling to the United States to give birth, thus guaranteeing their child, derided by these men as “anchor babies,” national citizenship.
“It is a reprehensible practice,” said Vitter, a Louisiana Congressman whose career survived revelations that he hired hookers.
Hoping to put an end to these illegal immigrants’ life-giving ways, these Republican leaders have drafted legislation that would “correct” a misinterpretation of the 14th amendment, which clearly reads, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” and restrict citizenship to children born to at least one citizen, someone in the military or a legal resident.
Opponents of the legislation not only point out that “birth tourism” hardly represents the trend Rand Paul and company claim (only 7,670 of the 4.2 million babies born in the U.S. in 2006 were by mothers who don’t live here) but also insist that the Republican leaders are playing with constitutional fire.
“The Supreme Court has upheld birthright citizenship several times, and the leading constitutional scholars agree you would have to change the Constitution, not just the Immigration and Nationality Act as they’re trying to do here,” said Michele Waslin from the Immigration Policy Center.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.
A piecemeal approach to immigration reform is the politically easy option, but there will be unintended negative consequences unless Congress addresses the whole problem.
An effective system to verify a job applicant's eligibility to work in the United States is an essential part of immigration reform. So are tough employer sanctions for those who hire the undocumented.
But if Congress just mandates the use of the employee-screening E-Verify system without dealing with labor demands, the job magnet will remain and the economy will suffer.
The agriculture industry is forthright in saying that up to 70 percent of its workforce is undocumented. There are no Americans to take those jobs.
"Are you raising your child to be a farmworker?" asks Tom Nassif, president of the Western Growers Association, which represents growers in California and Arizona. He says his industry has been trying to educate Congress about the simple fact that making E-Verify mandatory without addressing labor needs "wipes out agriculture."
John McClung, president of the Texas Produce Association, says E-Verify in isolation would be "the death knell" of agriculture in the United States . Without workers, farmers would move their cropland to where the labor is: Mexico and Central America. Nassif says two to three non-farm jobs are created for every farm job, so the result would be widespread job losses in the United States.
The other likely result, as Joe Sigg of the Arizona Farm Bureau points out, would be "under-the-table and off-the-books" employment.
Research bears this out. The nonpartisan Immigration Policy Center study, "Deeper Into the Shadows," found workers who lost their jobs because of enforcement tended to return to work - often at the same job - on a cash-only basis. They were generally paid less and became more vulnerable to exploitation.
E-Verify alone will create problems because it does not deal with the need for labor.Read more...