Judulang v. Holder, 565 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 476 (2011)
The Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision overturning the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (Board or BIA) policy of restricting relief from removal, namely section 212(c) waivers, for many lawful permanent residents (LPRs) with old criminal convictions. Under the Board’s now-rejected policy, LPRs found deportable were eligible for 212(c) relief only if they could show that the ground of deportation was substantially equivalent to a ground of inadmissibility. The Board’s policy, referred to as the “comparable ground test,” was announced in the 2005 decisions Matter of Blake, 23 I&N Dec. 722 (BIA 2005), and Matter of Brieva, 23 I&N Dec. 766 (BIA 2005). The Legal Action Center has issued a Practice Advisory offering strategies for LPRs and others impacted by the decision. Read more...
The long and winding road that is the challenges to Alabama’s Taxpayer H.B. 56 has begun. Federal Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn has issued various rulings, but they are early, preliminary and procedural skirmishes, so there are no winners and losers yet.
But I have to ask Alabama decisionmakers, why bother? Many of the politicians involved are restrictionists and nativists who insist that they do not want government overreaching in their lives. And yet, they do not seem to mind, in fact insist upon, reaching into the lives of undocumented families, even at the state level.
Surely it is not large numbers behind this overreaction that is H.B. 56. Immigration Policy Center and Census Bureau figures reveal that in 2010, only 5 percent of Alabamians are Latino (3.9 percent) or Asian (1.1 percent), and in 2009, 87.8 percent of children in Asian families in the state were U.S. citizens, and 85.1 percent of Latino children in the state’s families were U.S. Citizens. With these small communities, why the rush to symbolize intolerance by enacting the country’s most restrictionist and comprehensively anti-immigrant statute?
Such laws are mean-spirited and punitive. The schoolchildren are already not showing up for classes. In enacting bans on college enrollments and counting measures on schoolchildren allowed by law to attend schools since Plyler v. Doe in 1982, Alabamians reveal themselves not as strict constructionists or conservatives, but as ideologues who will use unnecessary legislation and the power of government to intervene in families to punish innocent children. Public shame on them.
The Department of State has released a new version of form DS 7002, the Trainee/Intern Placement Plan for J-1 applicants.
The new form can be viewed online on the Department of State website HERE.
In conjunction with the release of the new form, the International Exchange Center has revised our 2013 Application Packet. In addition to including the new version of form DS 7002, we have streamlined our application materials. We will be continuing to move our appication to an electronic system so please check our website FREQUENTLY for more updates.
What does a tenure “anchor baby” mean? If we were to demeanour it up in a American Heritage Dictionary, we would find a new definition given final week.
The tenure was among some 10,000 new difference and phrases in the fifth book of a dictionary, published in November. It was defined as: “A child innate to a noncitizen mom in a nation that grants involuntary citizenship to children innate on a soil, especially such a child innate to relatives seeking to secure eventual citizenship for themselves and mostly other members of their family.”
But when Steve Kleinedler, a executive editor of the dictionary, review that clarification during a radio talk last month, it uneasy Mary Giovagnoli, a executive of a Immigration Policy Center, a pro-immigration investigate organisation in Washington.
The once-obscure tenure has been used frequently in a recent debate over either to change a Constitution to repudiate automatic U.S. citizenship to children innate in this nation to illegal immigrant parents.
Last Friday morning, Giovagnoli posted an indignant object on the center’s blog, observant a compendium “masks a unwholesome and derogatory inlet of a term, a tenure that demeans both primogenitor and child.”
On Monday, a compendium posted a new definition. It started with “offensive,” in italics: “Used as a adverse tenure for a child innate to a noncitizen mom in a nation that grants automatic citizenship to children innate on a soil, generally when the child’s hearth is suspicion to have been selected in sequence to improve a mother’s or other relatives’ chances of securing eventual citizenship.”
Kleinedler said, “The tenure is now treated likewise to how the dictionary treats a far-reaching operation of slurs.”
If Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach has his way, Mitt Romney’s first term as president will see the largest forced exodus of people from the United States since the mid-1950s. Kobach, an adviser to the Romney campaign on immigration policy, is also the chief legal architect of a long-standing conservative campaign to stop the influx of undocumented immigrants, primarily from Mexico and Central America, who come to America to work .
“If we had a true nationwide policy of self-deportation, I believe we would see our illegal alien population cut in half at a minimum very quickly,” Kobach told Salon in a recent intervew. With an estimated 11 million undocumented residents in the country, Kobach is hoping to force 5.5 million people to leave the country by 2016
Kobach, elected to statewide office in Kansas in 2010, advocates “self-deportation” but says he does not want “to do it at gunpoint.” Undocumented residents, he said, “should go home on their own volition, under their own will, pick their own day, get their things in order and leave. That’s a more humane way.”
A 45-years old Harvard graduate and father of three, Kobach is the man behind the Republican front-runner’s most clearly articulated immigration goal: “Self-deportation.” While the term does not appear on Romney’s campaign website, Kobach uses it all the time. With the Republican candidates gathering in Mesa Arizona tonight for a nationally televised debate, the discussion of immigration issues may well touch on Kobach’s rhetoric, as well as his legal accomplishments.Read more...