Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

Detainers

The LAC works with other concerned advocates to encourage DHS to develop meaningful detainer guidance to address the pervasive problems with the current detainer system. LEAs consistently violate the 48 hour rule - the statutory period that LEAs can hold noncitizens subject to ICE detainers after they would otherwise have been released from state custod - because ICE often fails to take custody of a person subject to a detainer within this timeframe. As a result, unlawfully detained persons languish in LEA custody with no recourse. Moreover, in violation of ICE’s stated enforcement priorities, ICE issues detainers without regard to the seriousness of the criminal offense for which an alleged non-citizen was arrested. Detainers also are issued without sufficient evidence of individuals’ removability, and arrested persons and their attorneys are often not advised that a detainer has been issued or how to challenge an improperly or improvidently-issued detainer. More generally, ICE has not carried out the kind of oversight or data collection necessary to ensure compliance with existing detainer guidance.

In April 2011, the LAC co-drafted comprehensive comments on DHS proposed detainer guidance and recommended that DHS promulgate new regulations that ensure more effective oversight over the issuance of detainers and better protection for those subject to detainers.

In response, ICE has since released a new detainer form that does not substantively address the comments on the proposed detainer guidance.

ADVOCACY | RESOURCESRead more...

What Makes Us American: A Video Montage

This video presents a montage highlighting the diversity and pluralism that makes our nation uniquely multicultural.

When you think of the United States what is the first thing that comes to mind? Maybe you think of the food, the holidays, or symbols of the American identity? Each of these elements paints a picture of the United States, but what truly makes our country what it is today, is the people.

For more information, resources, and lesson plans: www.communityeducationcenter.org

 

Do any university presidents oppose the DREAM Act?

Published on Mon, Dec 13, 2010

Finally, I called up Wendy Sefsaf, communications director at Immigration Policy Center, a group that supports DREAM. She hadn't heard of any presidents issuing public statements against the legislation either, but she did have this to say about the lack of academic opposition: "It diminishes any argument that allowing undocumented students to go to college is bad for universities, in terms of economic impact, pushing other students out, or overcrowding. If it wasn't a good idea, universities and their presidents wouldn't be unanimously in support of it."

Published in the Boston Globe

Litigation Clearinghouse Newsletter Vol. 4, No. 9

This issue covers two class actions, one seeking to recover TPS fees and the other involving the Child Status Protection Act; upcoming BIA argument on Matter of Perez Vargas (IJ's jurisdiction to apply INA § 204(j)); a decision on the consular nonreviewability doctrine; and a court order compelling DOL to adjudicate a PERM application.

Published On: Monday, August 3, 2009 | Download File

Border Challenges

What Thousands of Interviews with Undocumented Migrants Tell Us about Achieving Effective Enforcement

Washington D.C. - While the immigration issue remains the subject of countless hearings, speeches, and speculation on Capitol Hill, for the last 3 years researchers at U.C.-San Diego have been documenting and assessing the impact and effectiveness of the U.S. border-enforcement strategy through interviews with over 3,000 migrants and potential migrants. The U.C.-San Diego research team has conducted interviews in Mexicans' hometowns in the states of Jalisco, Zacatecas, Oaxaca, and Yucatán, as well as in the U.S. cities that are their primary destinations.  Their most recent study was conducted in Oaxaca and San Diego County, from December 2007 to February 2008.  The research team's data, gathered from the people whose behavior has been targeted by the U.S. enforcement strategy, is the most direct and up-to-date evidence of whether border-enforcement efforts are actually keeping undocumented migrants out of the United States, and reveals the border strategy's significant unintended consequences. Read more...

Litigation Clearinghouse Newsletter Vol. 2, No. 4

This issue covers Hutto detention facility litigation, U visa litigation, post St. Cyr litigation (trial vs. plea), and interim EAD delays.

Published On: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 | Download File

To sell the repeal of birthright citizenship, Republicans like Vitter lie about scope of ‘baby tourism’

Published on Fri, Apr 08, 2011

I guess this is how Republicans do the Latino-outreach thing: Demonize Latino children, threaten to take away their birthright citizenship, and blatantly lie about the numbers of “anchor babies” being born by mothers coming here specifically to have citizen children.

Here’s Sen. David Vitter yesterday on Fox News, promoting his new federal bill to strip American-born children of undocumented immigrants of their birthright citizenship:

VITTER: It’s a very real problem. About 200,000 women come into this country annually from other countries legally, with a tourist visa, something like that, to give birth in this country so that child can automatically become a U.S. citizen. 200,000 a year!

I’m guessing that Vitter’s source for this number is either somewhere up his own nether regions, or those of hate groups such as FAIR and CIS that pump out fake statistics like this for eager Latino-bashers like Vitter and his three Senate colleagues to regurgitate into policy.

Because, as ABC News explained in their own report on this legislation:

Of the 4.2 million live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, only 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.

Some of those mothers could be “baby tourists,” experts say, but many could be foreign college students, diplomatic staff, or vacationers. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship.

Indeed, as the story notes, the “anchor baby” problem is a statistical pimple:

“There’s no evidence that birth tourism is a widespread problem,” said Michele Waslin, a senior policy analyst with the Immigration Policy Center. “There are ways to dealing with that issue without such sweeping changes. This is like using a sledgehammer, not a scalpel.”Read more...

Published in the Crooks and Liar

Litigation Clearinghouse Newsletter Vol. 5, No. 4

in

This issue covers the Supreme Court's favorable decision in an aggravated felony case, a legal challenge to the H-1B/Neufeld Memo on the employer-employee relationship, EOIR resources on BIA precedents, a court of appeals decision vacating a BIA precedent on the finality of a conviction, updates on the suits challenging Arizona's immigration law (SB 1070), and LAC litigation on access to courts, motions to reopen, and the Child Status Protection Act.

Published On: Friday, June 18, 2010 | Download File