Grandfather's Journey explores themes of cross cultural experience as well as intergenerational relationships and family history. The award-winning illustrations convey Say's love of family, as well as his love of place. Through a series of reading, writing and reflection activities, students will explore this cross cultural theme and develop a deeper understanding of why immigrants come to the United States.
The Immigration Policy Center, which is on the opposite end of the immigration debate from the federation, argues that their inclusion as a cost of illegal immigration is misleading.
"They are U.S. citizens and denying them education, health care, financial assistance, etc.. would put them at a disadvantage compared to other U.S. citizens," spokeswoman Michele Waslin wrote in an e-mail. "In financial terms, it could probably cost the state much more in the long run to have a population of poorly educated, unhealthy citizens."
Noncitizens facing removal must have a meaningful opportunity to present their cases to an immigration judge. On occasion, noncitizens are deprived of this opportunity due to their lawyers’ incompetence or mistake. Although the government has recognized the need for a remedy for ineffective assistance of counsel, see Matter of Lozada, the framework currently used to evaluate whether ineffective assistance has occurred is severely flawed. The LAC has long worked to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel for noncitizens in removal proceedings.
Matter of Compean, 24 I&N Dec. 710 (A.G. 2009), vacated by 25 I&N Dec. 1 (A.G. 2009)
On January 7, 2009, the Attorney General issued the first Matter of Compean decision, which reversed decades of precedent securing the right to effective assistance of counsel. Subsequently, the LAC (joined by numerous organizations and individuals) urged the Attorney General to reconsider the case. On June 3, 2009, the Attorney General issued the second Compean decision, vacating the prior decision. The June 3 decision directs the immigration judges and BIA to apply pre-Compean standards to motions to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. It also directs EOIR to initiate a rulemaking procedure to evaluate the Lozada framework and to determine what modifications should be proposed for public consideration. To date, EOIR has not published a proposed rule for comment.
Americans are justifiably frustrated that 11 million unauthorized immigrants now live in the United States. Yet the majority of them would have preferred to come legally; there was simply no way under current immigration laws. Moreover, most of them are working, paying taxes, and buying US goods. Other than lacking legal status, most are law-abiding residents. Many are married to US citizens, with children who are citizens.
The problem is that they are often willing to accept low wages and poor working conditions, which creates unfair competition for US workers and gives unscrupulous employers an unfair advantage over law-abiding employers.
We could continue on the same path we have pursued for two decades: spending more money on enforcement and passing increasingly harsh laws in an attempt to drive unauthorized immigrants out. But despite the billions of dollars we’ve spent building walls, hiring border patrol agents, and detaining and deporting hundreds of thousands, the unauthorized population hasn’t decreased significantly.
Instead of “enforcement only,” we should offer unauthorized immigrants a chance to come forward, register, pay a fine, learn English, pass background checks, and legalize their status.
Legalizing them would inject a new level of certainty into their lives, allowing them to invest more in themselves and their communities. Legalized immigrants will earn more, pay more taxes, consume more, buy houses, start businesses, and contribute more to the economy.
Americans want real solutions to the problem of unauthorized immigration that are practical and fair. Enforcement alone has failed. We need comprehensive immigration reform that includes a legalization program.
– Michele Waslin, senior policy analyst, American Immigration Council’s Immigration Policy Center
Pages 447 – 448: Talking points on right to counsel in ICE examinations prepared for then-Acting Principal Legal Advisor Barry O’Mellin in advance of the 2009 AILA Annual Conference; addresses access to counsel during 287.3 interrogation and the right to counsel during a worksite enforcement operation
Pages 736 – 747: Office of the Principal Legal Advisor power point: Interviewing Aliens of Interest in National Security Cases, 2009
“Those children can’t petition for their parents to become U.S. citizens until they are 21 years old and it most cases, the parents would be barred from getting a visa to the United States for 10 years,” said Michelle Waslin, senior policy analyst at the American Immigration Council’s Immigration Policy Center in Washington, D.C. “So that’s a 31-year plan. It doesn’t seem like it’s a very good plan to legalize your status here in the U.S. It doesn’t protect them from deportation.”
Waslin argues that such a change in the law will affect all citizens, creating a complicated bureaucracy.
“My birth certificate will no longer be proof of my U.S. citizenship, so how would anybody prove their citizenship?” she asked.
This issue covers a recently filed naturalization delay class action, a damages suit against USICE employees for violating 4th and 5th Amendment rights during home raids, and a recent decision regarding the confidentiality of asylum applications.