Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

Our economy needs illegal immigrants

Published on Sun, Jun 12, 2011

By STEPHEN M. NeSMITH JR.

As an immigration attorney, I highly favor immigrants coming to this country legally. There is no question illegal immigration is a major issue in this country and the United States needs a strong enforcement policy. But no matter what side of the debate you're on, Alabama's immigration law will only worsen our already struggling economy.

The authors of House Bill 56 claim illegal immigration causes economic hardship. Naturally, during tough economic times, we want to blame someone else for our problems. Illegal immigrants are an obvious target since there are negative consequences to their presence, such as increased education and medical costs. But what I don't understand is why my fellow Republicans ignore the benefits they bring.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimates illegal aliens cost Alabama $112 million. However, the Immigration Policy Center estimates illegal aliens in Alabama pay a total of $130 million in taxes (personal, property and sales). So, whatever "economic hardship" illegal aliens cause by their presence, they easily offset with the money they pay back into the system.

We are a nation of laws and must enforce those laws. But the hard truth we must face is, at this moment (and until we fix the broken immigration system), our economy is dependent on illegal immigrants.

It is simple supply and demand. Before an enforcement-centric policy would be prudent, we must ensure we have a sufficient supply of workers to meet our needs. The governor of Georgia realized this, albeit too late.Read more...

Published in the Alambam.com

Court Finds Parent's Residence and Status is Not Imputed to Child for Cancellation of Removal

Holder v. Martinez Gutierrez, 566 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 2011 (2012)

The Supreme Court unanimously affirmed a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision barring lawful permanent resident (“LPR”) children seeking cancellation of removal from using their parents’ years of U.S. residence or LPR status to satisfy the seven-year continuous residency or five-year LPR status requirements under INA § 240A(a). In so doing, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, see Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder, 580 F.3d 1102 (9th Cir. 2009).

The Supreme Court held that the BIA’s construction of the cancellation of removal statute was permissible under Chevron. Justice Kagan, writing for the Court, began the analysis by noting that the statute’s plain text did not mandate imputation. The Court then went on to reject arguments that (1) the legislative history demonstrates that Congress intended a parent’s residency and status to be imputed to a child for purposes of cancellation of removal and (2) the statute’s goals of family unity demand imputation.

The Court also explained that the regulation is not arbitrary and capricious despite the BIA’s acceptance of imputation in other contexts. The Court found that the BIA consistently “imputes matters involving an alien’s [subjective] state of mind, while declining to impute objective conditions or characteristics” such as duration of residence.

Will Obama’s deportation policy pose ‘nightmare’ for law enforcement?

Published on Fri, Aug 19, 2011

Sheriff Neil Warren, dubbed "Wild West Warren" by pro-immigration groups, has racked up nearly 15,000 immigration-related arrests in Cobb Country north of Atlanta. A new deportation policy announced Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security could mean that many of those arrested by Mr. Warren may not only get out of jail, but could go back to Cobb County with a legal work visa in hand.

Responding to criticism that the US deportation net has been cast too wide – sweeping up college kids, grandparents, and other noncriminal illegals – the Obama administration on Thursday formalized new rules that could mean release for many of the 300,000 people currently facing deportation in the US. Its goal will be to focus on deporting only the worst and most hardened criminals.

The move centers on prosecutorial discretion, with the Obama administration deciding whom it will and won't deport. Clearly, the shift has political ramifications, with Latino groups lauding the decision and conservative critics calling it a backdoor "administrative amnesty."

But perhaps more important to Main Street America is the question of how the new policy will affect police departments, primarily in the West and Southeast. Many of these departments have used federal programs as a means to arrest every illegal immigrant they come across. Now, the Department of Homeland Security's announcement introduces new uncertainty about whether many of those arrested will simply be sent back.

It is further proof that, until comprehensive immigration reform passes Congress, states and federal agencies will continue to nibble at the issue with different and often contradictory measures. In the meantime, the latest move makes for a "law enforcement nightmare," says the union that represents US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel.Read more...

Published in the Alaska Dispatch

IEC will not review new applications for J-1 sponsorship (September 1-7, 2014)

The IEC will not review applications during the first week of September (09/01/2013 - 09/07/2013).

New applications received during this week will not be looked at until September 9 at the earliest, and will be processed on a first-come, first-served basis.

Expedited applications received on or before 08/23 will be reviewed by 08/30. Non-Expedited applications received on or before 08/16 will be reviewed by 08/30. Staff will not be available to conduct Skype webcam interviews during the week of 09/01 - 09/07.

This crucial break during the first week of September will allow the International Exchange Center to conduct an internal review of our procedures in anticipation of some new changes that we hope will improve the programs we offer to J-1 Trainee/Intern participants, host organizations, and AILA attorneys who utilize our services.

Staff will not be available to make exceptions. Thank you for supporting us through this exciting transition!

-The International Exchange Center Staff

Quick Fact: Undocumented immigrants want to have legal status

98 percent of undocumented immigrants would prefer to live and work legally in the U.S. and would do so if they could.

Kris Kobach: Immigration bills likelier to pass

Published on Fri, Oct 14, 2011

LAWRENCE — Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach said Thursday that bills targeting people living in the United States illegally may be more likely to pass this year because of the pressure conservative candidates are applying on moderate state senators.

That includes, he said, a possible repeal of in-state tuition for the children of illegal immigrants.

Kobach, one of the nation's most prominent advocates for tougher immigration laws, shared his opinion after a wide-ranging discussion of the impact of illegal immigration at the State of the State Kansas Economic Policy Conference on the campus of the University of Kansas.

Kobach defended the controversial laws he co-authored for Arizona and Alabama that, among other things, require law enforcement officers to check immigration status when they've stopped someone on suspicion of any other crime and are suspicious the person is here illegally.

Alabama's law allows police to detain people without bond who can't prove their residency, and it also requires schools to check residency status when kids register. Since key parts of the law were upheld by a federal judge in late September, illegal immigrants have been fleeing the state and schools have reported higher absentee rates.

Kobach acknowledged that such an exodus was an intended outcome of the law he helped write for Alabama. It may decrease population, but it has opened jobs for legal residents.

His views were fiercely challenged.

Benjamin E. Johnson, executive director of the nonprofit American Immigration Council in Washington, D.C., said those laws undercut increasingly successful community policy efforts, use up time that officers could spend on more important matters, and lead to discrimination.

The laws specifically prohibit racial profiling.Read more...

Published in the The Wichita Eagle

Board

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Paul L. Zulkie, President
Robert E. Juceam, Secretary
Warren R. Leiden, Treasurer 
Leslie Holmann, AILA Immediate Past President

Annaluisa PadillaAILA 1st Vice President   
Anastasia Tonello, AILA 2nd Vice President
Lori Chesser, Chair, Board of Trustees
Benjamin E. Johnson, AIILA Executive Director

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

Lori Chesser, Chair
F. Daniel Siciliano, Vice-Chair Read more...

New stats released on political, economic role of Ariz. immigrants

Published on Fri, Jan 13, 2012

On Thursday, the research and data-gathering Immigration Policy Center released an extensive report detailing the vast contributions of immigrants to the U.S. The enlightening report titled “Strength in Diversity” breaks down by each state the information gathered and also makes important nationwide conclusions.

Nationally, the IPC estimates that 12.5 percent of U.S.-Americans are immigrants, rising steadily from 7.9 percent in 1990. In total, there are over 40 million immigrants in the U.S. today. Former Mexicans make up the largest segment of this country’s immigrant population at nearly 30 percent. The vast majority of U.S. immigrants are authorized residents, with just 28 percent undocumented. And the report estimates that at least 4.5 million native born U.S. citizen minors in this country have at least one undocumented parent. 

In addition, the statistics gathered by the IPC demonstrate the tremendous economic and political contributions made by immigrants to this country. Ten percent of all registered voters in the U.S. are naturalized immigrants or the U.S. citizen children of immigrants. More than 15 percent of all U.S. workers are foreign born, including 40 percent of our nation’s farming, fishing and forestry work force. And households headed by undocumented immigrants annually pay $11.2 billion in state and federal taxes. The IPC concludes that if the nation’s undocumented population were to be completely expelled, the U.S. would lose $551.6 billion in economic activity, $245 billion in gross domestic product and 2.8 million jobs.

In Arizona, specifically, the IPC estimates that 13.4 percent of the state’s population or 856,663 state residents are immigrants. This is up from 7.6 percent in 1990.Read more...

Published in the Tucson Examiner

Attorney FAQs

ATTORNEY FAQs:

1. What types of J-1 exchanges can the American Immigration Council sponsor?

2. What occupational categories can the American Immigration Council sponsor?

3. What are the minimum qualifications for program participants?

4. What are the fees for sponsorship?

5. What is the refund policy?

6. Does the International Exchange Center accept electronic signatures on application materials?

7. What is the Dun & Bradstreet DUNS number and is it an absolute requirement for potential host companies?

8. Can potential exchange visitors change status to a J-1 trainee or intern visa?

 

ATTORNEY FAQs:

 1. What types of J-1 exchanges can the American Immigration Council sponsor?

The International Exchange Center of the American Immigration Council is designated by the Department of State to sponsor intern and trainee J-1 programs.

2. What occupational categories can the American Immigration Council sponsor?

The American Immigration Council is designated by the U.S. Department of State to sponsor J-1 programs in the following occupational areas:

• Arts and Culture

• Social Sciences, Library Science, and Social Services

• Tourism

• Information Media and Communications

• Management, Business, Commerce and Finance

• Public Administration and Law

• The Sciences, Engineering, Architecture, Mathematics and Industrial Occupations

3. What are the minimum qualifications for program participants?Read more...