Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

IPC Authors

Many of IPC's publications are authored by outisde scholars, attorneys and experts in a particular field. Click on authors' names to read his/her work:Read more...

IPC Report Featured in the Miami Herald

Published on Sat, Mar 29, 2014

The IPC's "Misplaced Priorities: Most Immigrants Deported by ICE in 2013 Were a Threat to No One" report was recently cited in an opinion piece by the Miami Herald's Mirta Ojito. This piece highlights the impact deportations have on families across the country.

"A report released this month by the Immigration Policy Center of the American Immigration Council revealed that most of the people being deported are not dangerous criminals, as we have been led to believe. In fact, most have 'committed relatively minor, nonviolent crimes or have no criminal histories at all,' the report concluded.

Two thirds of all deportees were apprehended at or near the border, while one third was stopped and detained from the 'interior of the country.' Immigration lawyers say the arrests are happening everywhere: at bus and train stops, on the streets, in homes and in workplaces."

Published in the Miami Herald

Gerald D. Jaynes, Ph.D.

Gerald D. Jaynes is a professor in the Department of Economics and Department of African American Studies at Yale University. Jaynes has conducted extensive research on the impact immigration has on African Americans.

 

Experts Extol Economic Benefits of Immigration Reform

Released on Sun, Apr 12, 2009

During an event hosted by the Immigration Policy Center (IPC), economic and labor experts affirmed the benefits of comprehensive immigration reform in the wake of a renewed commitment from both the White House and members of Congress to introducing immigration legislation this fall. Today's speakers asserted that now is the time to bring undocumented immigrants out of the shadows and level the playing field for all workers -- fair and square.

View Release

Translation Assistance FOIA: Response from CRCL

Full response from DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties

Cover letter dated August 22, 2012 from Fernando Pineiro Jr., FOIA Officer, Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, to Melissa Crow, Director, Legal Action Center, indicating that 5 pages of records were releasable in full, 42 pages were partially releasable, and 42 pages were withheld in full under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) and (b)(6).

Pages 1-12:  Partially redacted internal CRCL e-mails from April 2012 and drafts of memos from Tamara Kessler, Acting Officer for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, to Audrey Anderson, Deputy General Counsel, DHS, requesting advice on legal consequences of Border Patrol officers’ initiation of immigration investigations while providing Spanish interpretation services to local law enforcement agencies.  Redactions under (b)(5) appear to relate to the substance of the requests.  A series of illustrative incidents from Washington, Montana, California and Louisiana, most of which were taken from press reports, is set forth as an appendix to the memo (at 10-11).

Pages 13-18:  Partially redacted internal DHS e-mails from April and May 2012 regarding the above-referenced draft memo.  Read more...

EEVS Made Easy

Released on Thu, Jun 05, 2008

Next week, the House Immigration Subcommittee will hold a hearing to discuss the challenges and problems of a mandatory, nation-wide, electronic employment verification system (EEVS).  EEVS is the centerpiece of the "SAVE Act," introduced in Congress in November of last year by Reps. Heath Schuler (D-NC) and Tom Tancredo (R-CO), which proposes a host of deeply flawed deportation-only immigration measures.  This week, Immigration OnPoint highlights the many serious shortcomings of current federal and state legislative proposals to implement a mandatory EEVS for all employers.

View Release

Entrepreneurship and Innovation Newsletter - September 12, 2013

Latest Research
  • U.S. must confront challenges of attracting global innovation talent: A September 9 post summarizes a new report from the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) about the policy challenges related to attracting individuals from the global talent pool.
Read more...

Senators Issue Promising, but Vague Immigration Reform Plans

Released on Thu, Mar 18, 2010

Washington D.C. - Today, in the Washington Post, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) laid out their blueprint for immigration reform legislation, noting that the American people want Congress to reform the badly broken immigration system. Their framework, welcomed by the President in a statement also released today, rests on four pillars: ending illegal employment through biometric Social Security cards, enhancing border and interior enforcement, managing the flow of future immigration to correspond to economic realities, and creating a tough but fair path toward legalization for the 11 million people currently in the U.S. without authorization. While there will undoubtedly be intense debate over the specifics of each component, the framework marks an important bipartisan step forward on an issue that has been mired in political controversy and held up by both parties for too long.

"Today's statements mark renewed commitment to providing immigration reform that will bolster the economy and provide for America's future," said Mary Giovagnoli, Director of the Immigration Policy Center. "We encourage the President and Senators Schumer and Graham to go beyond words and produce legislation that will finally fix our broken immigration system once and for all." Read more...

View Release

Legal Action Center Argues for Greater Federal Court Oversight of Immigration Decisions

Released on Thu, Oct 07, 2010

Washington D.C. - In a continuing effort to promote greater federal court oversight of immigration decision-making, the American Immigration Council's Legal Action Center (LAC) recently submitted amicus (friend of the court) briefs in two cases involving motions to reopen. For noncitizens facing removal from the United States, a motion to reopen (an opportunity to present new evidence in a case) may be the last and only way to pursue their claims for lawful residency in the United States. Failure to grant such a motion might prevent anyone - from an asylum seeker to a U.S. citizen's family member - from presenting new evidence that could prevent deportation.  Yet, although the federal courts are the last chance for redress, they frequently refuse to hear claims that immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals abuse their discretion when they deny motions to reopen.

The LAC argument is based on the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Kucana v. Holder that the Board of Immigration Appeals cannot shield its decisions from judicial review by labeling these decisions "discretionary." Only Congress can limit court review of motions to reopen, and it has not done so.

Given the gravity of removal from the United States, the high volume of immigration court cases, and the reality that most noncitizens do not have lawyers (only 39% of noncitizens were represented in immigration court in 2009), federal court oversight is critical to ensure due process.  For an immigration system that is widely understood to be plagued with errors, judicial checks and balances are especially critical.Read more...

View Release