CAP is a massive, nationwide enforcement program administered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that identifies removable noncitizens and places them into removal proceedings. CAP is currently active in all state and federal prisons, as well as more than 300 local jails throughout the country. The program is implicated in approximately half of all removal proceedings. Although CAP supposedly focuses on the worst criminal offenders, the program appears to target individuals with little or no criminal history and to incentivize pretextual stops and racial profiling. Despite CAP's role in facilitating the removal of hundreds of thousands of individuals each year, and despite serving as ICE's “bedrock” enforcement initiative, very little information about CAP is available to the public.
Seeking greater transparency, the American Immigration Council (AIC), in collaboration with the Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic of Yale Law School and the Connecticut chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), brought a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to compel the release of records that would shed light on the program. Pursuant to a court-approved settlement, ICE must begin producing responsive, non-exempt records by late October 2013.
Problem is, you did exist. And, thankfully, researchers have gone back to the original records. The D.C.-based Immigration Policy Center, in particular, has done a marvelous job of digging deeper.
Their scholars have reconstructed 1866 debates in which concerns were raised about the nation being overrun by births from people clearly viewed then as less equal: gypsies in Pennsylvania and Chinese immigrants. Senators also discussed birthright citizenship in context of native tribal sovereignty.
This issue covers recently filed lawsuits involving access to counsel at immigration interviews, abuse of minors in detention, and the border fence between the U.S. and Mexico. The newsletter also includes updates on the Duran Gonzales class action in the Ninth Circuit (involving 245(i) and I-212s), Matter of Blake litigation, and the class action suit to restore SSI benefits for refugees and asylees.
In a stunning turnaround, Arizona Republicans killed 5 of the state's notorious immigration bills. Terry Greene Sterling obtains a report showing deportations pummeling the local economy.
In a surprise St. Patrick’s Day coup, conservative Republican senators in Arizona slapped down five harsh immigration bills that aimed to deny state birth certificates to babies born to unauthorized immigrants, turn school teachers and hospital workers into immigration enforcers, prohibit undocumented immigrants from attending college, and criminalize them for driving.
Article - Sterling Immigration Retreat A protest outside the Arizona capitol building on March 17 as the state senate debated the latest immigration bills. (Credit: AP Photo) The roundly defeated measures signal that Arizona is ticking slightly towards the right-center. And, like many states that have rejected immigration measures this year, is beginning to recognize that immigration-crackdown laws can derail already fragile economic recoveries.
An embargoed report obtained by The Daily Beast details how deporting all of Arizona’s unauthorized immigrants would spell disaster for the already stressed economy. Not only would 17 percent of jobs vanish statewide, the liberal Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center say, but ousting all of Arizona’s undocumented migrants could “shrink the state economy by $48.8 billion.”
Even so, ridding Arizona of its 400,000 or so “illegals” has long been the stated goal of Russell Pearce, the temperamental Tea Partier with a reputation for bullying who ascended to the presidency of the state senate after sponsoring SB 1070, Arizona’s notorious immigration law that makes it a crime for unauthorized migrants to set foot in the Grand Canyon State. (Parts of the law have been temporarily stayed by a federal judge.)Read more...
Annnd... Arizona's anti-immigration campaign hurtles still further into red-state ridiculousness.
This morning, Governor Jan Brewer announced her latest, greatest battle plan in the war against illegal border-crossers: collect Internet donations to build a massive fence across the Arizona-Mexico line. (And what'll donors get in return? Why, an "I Helped Build the Arizona Wall" keepsake T-shirt, of course!)
In support, State Senator Russell Pearce squeezed in a few words of pro-fence propaganda on L.A.'s KNX news radio this morning. Here's the pile of steaming misinformation he dumped from his politickin' piehole:
Pearce claimed that illegal immigrants commit 2.5 times more violent crime than any other demographic.
He also used a Sin City analogy as a fear tactic to garner out-of-state support ("Unlike Vegas, what goes into Arizona doesn't stay in Arizona") and called the immigrant influx from Mexico an "invasion," but we'll let all that slide in the interest of clearing up this crime thing once and for all.
In response to Pearce's theory, we can almost see Wendy Sefsaf of the Immigration Policy Center roll her eyes over the phone.
She recommends we speak to the Department of Homeland Security about the fence idea (which, amusingly, cites prisoners as the perfect candidates for erecting the thing), but guesses it's "unprecedented, and probably illegal" for a state to evade federal strategy and take something so controversial into its own hands.
A Homeland Security rep will only say, "My apologies, DHS does not comment on state legislation." Ironically, President Obama is headed to the South tomorrow to push a more progressive (read: fenceless) U.S. immigration policy.
But as for the violent-crime statistic: The Immigration Policy Center released a March 2008 report that showed just the opposite, and Sefsaf says the trend has stayed consistent. An excerpt:Read more...
This Litigation Issue Page provides information about developments in immigration-related mandamus actions, with particular emphasis on cases seeking to compel the adjudication of applications that are delayed because of security checks.
USCIS Revisions of FBI Name Check Policy and Practice
In a June 22, 2009 press release, USCIS stated that, in partnership with the FBI, it had eliminated the FBI name check delays - officially described as the FBI National Name Check Program (NNCP) backlog. USCIS stated that it had met the goals set forth in a joint business plan between USCIS and the FBI announced on April 2, 2008: to achieve a sustainable performance level by the NNCP of completing 98 percent of name check requests submitted by USCIS within 30 days, and the remaining two percent within 90 days. USCIS stated in its press release that this performance level will become the new agency standard.Read more...