Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

Two Systems of Justice: How the Immigration System Falls Short of American Ideals of Justice

Released on Tue, Mar 19, 2013

For Immediate Release

Two Systems of Justice:
How the Immigration System Falls Short of American Ideals of Justice

Washington D.C. - Today, the American Immigration Council issued Two Systems of Justice: How the Immigration System Falls Short of American Ideals of Justice. This new report explores how the justice system for immigrants falls far short of the American values of due process and fundamental fairness. In fact, the immigration system lacks nearly all the procedural safeguards we expect in the U.S. criminal justice system.  Given the high stakes involved in immigration cases and the increasing criminalization of immigration law, the report concludes that we must no longer tolerate a system that deprives countless individuals of a fair judicial process.Read more...

View Release

Report: Info muddled on immigrants and crime

Published on Thu, Nov 19, 2009

That man in the back of a squad car on his way to jail: What are the chances he was born in the United States?

Published in the O.C. Register

House Democrats Unveil Comprehensive Immigration Reform Proposal

Released on Wed, Oct 02, 2013

Washington D.C. - Today, in an important effort to keep the conversation and momentum on immigration reform moving forward in the House, a group of centrist Democrats introduced their version of the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. Although the full text has not yet been made available, it is said to be a modification of the bipartisan Senate bill of the same name adopted earlier this year. Among other reported changes, the House bill takes a different path on border security, incorporating a bill introduced by Republican Congressman Mike McCaul which passed unanimously out of the House Committee on Homeland Security in May of 2013. The House sponsors—including Representatives Garcia, Chu, Polis, DelBene, and Horsford—adopted provisions of the McCaul-Thompson bill as a replacement for the costly, controversial “border surge” strategy adopted by the Senate under the Corker-Hoeven amendment.  

Substantively, the comprehensive immigration reform bill introduced today reflects a series of bipartisan policy and political compromises made during deliberations in the Senate. The original co-sponsors represent diverse interests from within the Democratic Party, including the New Democrats Coalition, Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Congressional Black Caucus, and Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.

The following is a statement from the American Immigration Council’s Executive Director, Benjamin Johnson:Read more...

View Release

President Declares Ongoing Commitment to Immigration Reform

Published on Fri, Jan 29, 2010

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In the State of the Union Address last night, President Obama made clear his ongoing commitment to immigration reform noting “we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system – to secure our borders, enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nation.” Some may continue to argue that immigration reform is too politically risky to move on this year and that we should focus instead on rebuilding our economy. However, comprehensive immigration reform is compatible with economic reform as it would generate needed economic growth, create jobs and increase tax contributions by ensuring that everyone working in the United States is doing so legally. In fact, immigration reform would allow us to take full advantage of the opportunities for economic growth that immigrants bring.

Published in the Hispanic Online Magazine

U.S. District Court in D.C. Hears First Arguments Against Executive Action on Immigration

Released on Mon, Dec 22, 2014

Washington D.C. - Today, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia heard oral arguments in the case brought against executive action by notorious Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is seeking to enjoin the DACA and DAPA programs based on the increased burden on his law enforcement office that would allegedly result from these programs. Specifically, Arpaio’s theory is that the President’s executive actions will cause a “flood” of “millions more illegal aliens,” and in turn a “crime wave”—because many “illegal aliens… are repeat offenders.”

Melissa Crow, the Legal Director at the American Immigration Council was in the courtroom today and issued the following statement:

“It was clear that attorney representing Arpaio, Larry Klayman, a well-known conservative lawyer who founded Freedom Watch and Judicial Watch, was struggling to demonstrate the type of “concrete and particularized” injury that is required to bring a challenge of this nature, or that the alleged harms would be a direct result of DACA or DAPA.  While disagreeing adamantly with the government’s argument that DACA and DAPA would promote public safety by enabling DHS to focus on high priority threats, he failed to provide any compelling explanation for his position.

“Judge Beryl Howell asked probing questions to determine whether Sheriff Arpaio had established that he had “standing” under the law. She listened attentively to Mr. Klayman’s responses, but seemed skeptical that he had met his burden of proof. Before concluding the hearing, Judge Howell indicated that she would issue her rulings very shortly on both Sheriff Arpaio’s motion for a preliminary injunction and the government’s motion to dismiss the case.Read more...

View Release

By the Numbers

Published on Sun, Apr 04, 2010

The American Immigration Council's Immigration Policy Center recently published statistics on every state's immigrant population.

In New Hampshire, the foreign-born share of the population grew from 3.7 percent in 1990 to 5.1 percent in 2007.

In 2007, New Hampshire was home to 67,735 immigrants, of whom around 33,000 were naturalized citizens and eligible to vote.

Published in the Concord Monitor

Time for Congress to Go Back to Bi-Partisan Comprehensive Solutions to Immigration

Released on Tue, Oct 20, 2015

Washington D.C. - Today, the Senate rejected the motion to proceed on Senator David Vitter’s (R-LA) “Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act” (S. 2146). This bill is an enforcement-only approach to immigration and would punish cities and states that adopt community policing policies that work to make communities safer and increase communication between police and their residents. The procedural vote required 60 Yea votes to begin debate on the bill; the motion failed 54-45. 

The following is a statement by Benjamin Johnson, Executive Director of the American Immigration Council:

"The Senate vote is a rejection of another flawed piece of legislation that was overwhelming opposed by faith, law enforcement and immigrant advocates around the country. It stands in stark contrast to the last piece of immigration legislation passed in June 2013, which followed a model of bipartisanship and that understood and addressed the need for comprehensive solutions to our outdated immigration system. 

Clearly the components for success require that efforts be bipartisan and comprehensive. It’s time for Congress to end its politically-motivated and failed attempts at enforcement-only legislation and get back to work on passing meaningful reform that can, in fact, fix our outdated immigration system."

###

For press inquiries, contact Wendy Feliz at wfeliz@immcouncil.org or 202-507-752

View Release

Opinion polls show broad support for tough Arizona immigration law

Published on Fri, Apr 30, 2010

Two lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Arizona’s new immigration law – and the promise of more to come – represent the latest in a surge of outrage over the first-of-its-kind measure to crack down on illegal immigration. The lawsuits follow high-profile protests, calls for boycotts, and a travel advisory from Mexico urging its citizens to steer clear of Arizona.

Published in the The Christian Science Monitor

Why Did They Leave Home?

Why Did They Leave Home? exposes primary grade students to the multiple reasons why people choose to immigrate to America and the challenges immigrants face.

View File

Citizenship-By-Birth Faces Challenges

Published on Tue, May 25, 2010

Many other lawyers say that's a false reading. "Of course they're under our jurisdiction," says Michele Waslin, senior policy analyst with the American Immigration Council, which works to protect the legal rights of immigrants. "If they commit a crime, they're subject to the jurisdiction of the courts."

Published in the NPR