Routine License Check Can Mean Jail and Deportation
By Nina Bernstein
The New York Times, May 5, 2005
Congress is still a few days away from establishing sweeping federal requirements for a driver's license, including proof that an applicant's presence in the United States is legal. But as Jorge Medina-Gonzalez discovered late last year driving from a Home Depot with a can of paint, the rules of the road in places like Nutley, N.J., have already changed.
Mr. Medina, 42, was close to home when two Nutley police officers stopped his Jeep Cherokee because of a broken taillight. They asked for his license and registration, then his Social Security number. In the few minutes it took them to search a national database in a curbside version of the kind of checks that Congress is about to require nationwide, the American life Mr. Medina had built over 13 years began to crumble.
Like many of the estimated 10 million illegal residents in this country, Mr. Medina - who came here in 1991 to escape poverty and political violence in his native Guatemala - has repeatedly tried to legalize his status through shifting rules set by Congress, and the delays of an overwhelmed immigration system. He stood before the police as a taxpaying Nutley homeowner with no criminal record, the father of two United States citizens, and a cook at a New York catering company that was sponsoring him for a green card.
But the computer search came back with a single message: immigration authorities, at one point, had ordered him deported. His driver's license became a one-way ticket to immigration jail, where he remains.
Supporters of the provision known as Real ID, which is being fine-tuned in a House and Senate conference committee this week, say it is primarily needed to keep driver's licenses out of the hands of terrorists and criminals. But immigrant advocates say one of its biggest effects will be to trip up workers like Mr. Medina, opening a trapdoor into a system of criminal penalties with few protections.
'The intention is to prevent hijackers and terrorists from getting licenses that would let them get on planes,' said Benjamin Bratter, an immigration lawyer who is appealing an order of deportation entered against Mr. Medina in 2001, arguing in part that a previous lawyer had botched the case. 'But look at who gets caught up in this - a guy like Jorge, a lay minister, a father of two. This can't be the intended result.'
That result, however, is welcomed by advocates for restricting immigration, who say Real ID will deter illegal immigrants by making it harder for them to use driver's licenses to open bank accounts, buy homes and put down roots.
An immigration judge ordered Mr. Medina deported in 2001 after denying his bid for political asylum, pending since 1993, saying that conditions in Guatemala had improved.
Mr. Medina's case highlights the way tougher licensing policies adopted over the last two years in states like New York and New Jersey have already converged with the 2002 decision by Attorney General John Ashcroft to add many civil immigration matters to the National Crime Information Center database, which is maintained by the F.B.I. and checked by the police even in routine traffic stops.
Pending court challenges in New York have slowed the effects of these changes, and temporarily halted the suspension of an estimated 300,000 New York licenses, most held by noncitizens. Real ID provisions, which are expected to be attached to a must-pass Iraq appropriations bill as early as next week, would most likely supersede the court challenges, and would require a vast expansion of the immigration records and national computer databases to be checked whenever anyone tries to get or renew a driver's license.
New Jersey is still phasing in a legislative overhaul of licensing that took effect in 2003, including a requirement that applicants show their presence is legal, according to Gordon Deal, a spokesman for the State Motor Vehicle Commission. A recent check by the commission found discrepancies between Social Security Administration records and the Social Security numbers provided by a half-million New Jersey drivers.
The shifting terrain for immigrants caught Mr. Medina and his wife, Ruth, unprepared, they said, because their first lawyer never notified them that an immigration appeals board had confirmed a deportation order against Mr. Medina in 2002. The lawyer had reassured them that his case was still proceeding.
'We put our last penny in this house,' said Mrs. Medina, in the two-bedroom home they bought late in 2003, a step up from the one-bedroom apartment in Union City where they had been raising Daniela, now 9, and Raquel, 6. 'We were doing our life, like normal people.'
Normal, that is, for immigrants in the gray area occupied by families like the Medinas. Mrs. Medina, as a Honduran citizen, has only 'temporary protected status,' renewed from year to year, that allows her to live and work here. Mr. Medina had been issued annual work permits for years, but saw one green card application derailed when his sponsor, the owner of Word of Mouth Foods, died unexpectedly about four years ago.
He started over with a new application, but his first lawyer failed to file the necessary papers until after Mr. Medina was stopped by the police .
The Rev. Brian Jordan, a Franciscan friar and immigrant advocate who visited Mr. Medina in immigration detention in Elizabeth last week, described the episode as an Orwellian descent into the unexplained.
'He was taken to the Nutley police station, put in a cell and was never told why he was being incarcerated,' Father Jordan said. When immigration authorities had no agent available to pick him up, Mr. Medina was released, but told to report to an immigration office near Newark International Airport.
There, an immigration officer was reassuring, saying he had not reviewed the file but would call him in a few days.
A week later, when the officer asked Mr. Medina to come in, he and his wife went together, unable to reach their lawyer and confident that it was a routine check-in. Instead, the agent told Mr. Medina to hand over his belt and say goodbye to his wife: he was to be detained and deported.
Even after Citizenship and Immigration Services, an arm of the Department of Homeland Security, provisionally granted Mr. Medina's employer-sponsored petition in March - with a push from Representative Charles B. Rangel - Mr. Medina was still in detention, still fighting deportation.
Mr. Bratter said a lawyer for the agency told him she was willing to file a joint motion to reopen the deportation case in favor of Mr. Medina, but was waiting for authorization. Instead, he said, Mr. Medina was pressed to sign travel documents in an effort to send him back to Guatemala immediately.
When he refused to sign, immigration agents threatened him with criminal prosecution under an obscure 1952 federal statute that carries up to four years in prison for interfering with a deportation.
'There's an existing deportation order, and our mission in restoring integrity to the immigration system is enforcing the lawful orders of a federal immigration judge,' said Manny Van Pelt, a spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He said recalcitrant detainees were being prosecuted under the 1952 law.
After Mr. Bratter intervened, government lawyers decided not to prosecute Mr. Medina, said Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the United States attorney's office in Newark. But that still leaves Mr. Medina facing deportation.
'The little one just doesn't really understand what's going on,' said Mrs. Medina, who has sold her car. 'She just wants her daddy back.'
Minutemen Join New Organization
By Jerry Seper
The Washington Times, April 21, 2005
PALOMINAS, Ariz. -- The Civil Homeland Defense organization of Arizona formally took charge of the Minuteman Project yesterday, reassigning volunteers and designating new supervisors to oversee efforts to prevent migrants from illegally entering the United States.
'This project was just the beachhead for a nationwide effort to secure this nation's borders,' said Bob Wright, a Hobbs, N.M., businessman who helped organize the Minuteman volunteers and is coordinating the CDH effort.
The border vigil proved that 'if citizens in lawn chairs can secure the border, the U.S. government can, too,' said Minuteman organizer James T. Gilchrist, a retired California certified public accountant.
Yesterday in Washington, Sen. Wayne Allard, Colorado Republican, said the government should consider deputizing private citizens, such as the Minuteman Patrol, and better use local law enforcement and state officials to help secure the most porous parts of the U.S.-Mexico line.
'I wonder sometimes if maybe we're not looking too much to a federal solution,' Mr. Allard told Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing.
'I happen to believe that those people down along the border that formed the Minutemen organization have some real concerns,' Mr. Allard said.
Gaining the attention of Congress was one of the project's main goals, said Mr. Gilchrist, who next week is heading to Washington with co-organizer Chris Simcox, the publisher of a Tombstone, Ariz., newspaper, to testify before the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
Mr. Gilchrist and Mr. Simcox have outlined a plan to recruit 'tens of thousands' of volunteers for a border blockade this fall, mostly along the U.S.-Mexico border. It also will target big-name employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens.
Since the monthlong vigil began April 1, nearly 800 Minuteman volunteers have participated in the protest of the nation's lax immigration policies. The volunteers have reported hundreds of illegal aliens to the Border Patrol, leading officials in Mexico and the United States to privately say the protest has been effective.
Mr. Gilchrist said the number of aliens crossing where the Minuteman volunteers had set up observation posts dropped from an average of 64,000 a month to an expected 5,000 this month.
But U.S. Border Patrol officials said the presence of additional agents in the Naco area as part of the government's Arizona Border Control Initiative, along with Cochise County Sheriff's Department deputies who were assigned to monitor the volunteers because of concerns about violence, was responsible for a decrease in the number of detained aliens.
They also attributed the decline to the Mexican military and police, along with a Mexican humanitarian organization, Grupa Beta, for routing would-be illegal aliens around the Naco area.
At the Washington hearing, Mr. Chertoff sidestepped Mr. Allard's suggestion to deputize citizens to patrol the border. But the secretary said Border Patrol agents are working with authorities in Arizona.
The Department Of State's Visa Office (VO) Response To The Following Questions On Availability Of Employment-Based Visa Numbers
In anticipation of the last quarter of FY05 starting on July 1st, can VO confirm, discuss and/or explain the following?
·(1) Is it correct that the limits of section 201(a)(2) do not apply to the fourth quarter of FY05?
VO: Correct, the 27% limitation only applies to the first three quarters, with any remaining numbers to be made available in the final quarter. But remember that if the 27% limits are being reached, then a maximum of 19% of the annual limit would be available for the final quarter. In recent years the quarterly limits were not a factor because of the lack of demand for numbers, primarily from CIS for adjustment of status cases. During FY-2005 the quarterly limits are being met as a result of the CIS backlog reduction efforts.
· (2)What plans do the VO, NVC, and IV posts have to ensure that all documentarily qualified visa applicants from the three EB-3 visa retrogressed countries will be able to be issued visas during this last quarter of FY05?
VO: We are confident that all available visa numbers will be made available in FY05. For FY05 the total employment-based numbers available for use will be the regular 140,000 + approximately 7,000 unused family from FY04 + 101,000 AC21. It is preferable to make a larger amount of the numbers available during the first three quarters of the fiscal year, so that there is not an unmanageable amount available during the final quarter. We attempt to avoid situations requiring a drastic increase in processing at a time when the overseas NIV workload is at its peak, there could be overseas staffing shortages because of the summer rotation cycle, or CIS processing could be impacted because of end of year staffing issues. Currently CIS is using about 90% of all Employment-based numbers, and maximizing number use can be controlled through moving or holding the cut-off date for the three oversubscribed countries.
(3) Was the visa cut-off for purposes of computing the 27% demand value under INA 202(a)(2) based on the statutory 140,000 (per INA 201(d)(1)(A) or on the total available under paras. 1-5 of INA 202(b)? If the latter, shouldn't this include the temporary AC21 "pool" visas and thus should equal 241,000? If the former, why?
VO: Calculations were based on the total amount of numbers available during FY-2005, which are estimated to be approximately 247,000, including the remaining AC21 numbers. Per AC21 approximately 131,000 numbers were "recaptured" based on unused FY-1999 and FY-2000 Employment-based numbers. During FY-2003 approximately 30,000 were used, and the remaining 101,000 are being utilized during FY-2005. AC21 numbers were not required in the other fiscal years because demand did not exceed the amount of numbers available under the normal annual limit.
·(4) What you expect in advancement per country for the remainder of FY05 and as of 10/1/05? EB3 Philippines? EB3 China? EB3 India?
VO: For the remainder of FY05 EB3 should remain pretty much where it is now, with no retrogression for EB1 or EB2. Based on the current numerical guidelines established by the INA we expect the oversubscription of the China and India EB2 categories at some point during FY-2006. It is possible that FY06 could also see the oversubscription of the EB1 category for China and India. At this time we expect Philippines EB1 and EB2 to remain "current". For the foreseeable future Employment visa availability will be impacted as both CIS and DOL continue with their backlog reduction efforts. The priority dates of applicants in these backlogs could require cut-off date movement to slow, stop, and in a worst case scenario retrogress. The Other Workers category is going to retrogress and could go unavailable. Notifications regarding visa availability can result in a rush to finalize action on cases, resulting in fewer numbers being available for the remainder of the year, which affects the cut-off dates.
An Almost Unbelievable Story
The following link is to an incredibly inspiring story about four
undocumented high schoolers from Mexico who went head-to-head
with the smartest college teams in the country (including MIT) on
a hi-tech underwater-robot competition sponsored by the US Navy
and NASA ---- and WON!
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.04/robot_pr.html . Read the
entire story in Wired magazine to see how these teenagers (who
came to our country thru tunnels and hidden in the backseats of
cars) are engineers in the best American tradition in creating
their underwater-robot out of plastic pipe, tampons (not a typo!)
- and beat the MIT robot which was co-sponsored by Exxon-Mobil,
the Carnegie Mellon robot and others. The DREAM bill, if Congress
can find the wisdom to enact it, would offer hope to these gifted
teenagers and others, who perhaps are not so gifted, but equally
deserving of the title American.
Death Sentence?
Immigration Bill Could Jeopardize Asylum Seekers, Critics Say
By Dawn Herzog Jewell
Christianity Today, April, 2005
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill in February that would make it harder for asylum seekers to gain their freedom. Supporters of the 'REAL ID' bill, introduced by Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., say it will help keep would-be terrorists out. If ratified by the Senate and signed by President Bush, it will also block illegal immigrants from gaining driver's licenses.
Dori Dinsmore, executive director of World Relief-Chicago, agrees that 'the current system is broken' but says targeting asylum seekers is unfair. (World Relief settles more refugees in the United States than any other agency.)
Dinsmore said the bill would increase the burdens asylum seekers face. The bill would require a refugee to prove the 'central' reason for his or her persecution.
Even if refugees testify credibly, they could be denied asylum if they can't produce documents to the satisfaction of an asylum officer or judge. But Dinsmore said family members remaining in the home country could place themselves in jeopardy by trying to get a birth certificate or other documents out of the country.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a D.C.-based think tank, told ct that detention is necessary to protect America's borders. 'Every asylum case should be detained in humane circumstances until the case is approved,' he said. Krikorian added that the problem is a lack of resources.
Only days before the House passed the bill, the bipartisan U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) issued a 500-page report detailing serious failings in the U.S. treatment of refugees who apply for asylum.
The federal agency's study concluded that the Department of Homeland Security's system often unnecessarily treats asylum seekers as criminals, frequently detaining them in jails or jail-like facilities. People seeking asylum sometimes have been strip-searched, shackled, and handcuffed in their cells.
The uscirf study found that asylum is granted arbitrarily, 'depending on where the alien arrived and which immigration inspectors addressed the alien's claim'.
Michael Cromartie of the USCIRF told CT the study aims to help ensure 'the system is fair and just for people without jeopardizing security concerns for the U.S.
Edward Neepaye knows the situation firsthand. He escaped from war-torn Liberia and landed in Newark, New Jersey, seeking refuge. Neepaye had been senior pastor of a large church in Liberia's capital and an outspoken human-rights advocate.
He ministered to more than 500 youth, many of whom were forcibly recruited as child soldiers for President Charles Taylor. Taylor's security forces targeted Neepaye for death.
However, when he arrived in the United States in April 2003, Pastor Neepaye was promptly locked in a detention center for three months while his case was decided.
The Department of Homeland Security oversees 19 facilities--including 6 county jails--to process asylum claims. Applicants sometimes live alongside inmates facing criminal prosecution.
Human Rights First (formerly the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights), a Washington-based advocacy and legal group that matches asylum seekers with pro-bono attorneys, helped Neepaye. 'If I didn't know I would be killed back at home, I would never have submitted to such humiliation,' he told CT.
The bill faces an unknown fate in the Senate. Last year similar asylum provisions were stricken from an intelligence-reform bill.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The USCIRF report is online at:
http://www.uscirf.gov/countries/global/asylum_refugees/2005/february/index.html
Court Rescues a Victim of Judicial Arrogance
Times-Picayune (New Orleans)
Sunday, April 03, 2005
By: James Gill
The federal court of appeals in New Orleans is not known as a protector of
the downtrodden these days, but it appears to have a heart after all.
A three-judge panel has just come to the rescue of a Cuban facing
deportation by order of an immigration judge who must be a candidate for the
title of biggest jerk in the Department of Homeland Security.
No doubt the competition for that title is hot, and lots of tinpot officials
take every advantage of their power to torment easy marks. Immigration judge
John Carte of San Antonio, however, has set a new standard in arrogance and
petty malice.
So all hail to the panel. Jacques Wiener wrote the ruling that gave Luis
Enrique Alarcon-Chavez a break. He was joined by Edith Jones, a fire-eating
right-winger best known for her view that the death sentence may be properly
imposed even when the defense attorney sleeps through portions of the trial.
Also concurring was the staunchly conservative Edith Brown Clement.
But no bleeding heart was required to conclude that Alarcon-Chavez had
gotten a raw deal, although his attorney, Dan Kowalski of Austin, says he
will not "uniformly condemn" Carte, who, he says, has "many sides."
One of those sides may have been on display recently when Carte ruled in
favor of another Kowalski client. But, if it is unwise for immigration
lawyers to badmouth immigration judges in public, newspapermen are under no
such constraint. The only possible conclusion to be drawn from the
Alarcon-Chavez case is that Carte has grown way too big for his boots.
Wiener did not put it in those words, preferring to cite Carte as "an
example of what the late Chief Judge of this court, John R. Brown,
frequently referred to as 'the curse of the robe' when cautioning judges to
remember that they are appointed, not anointed."
Immigration officers arrested Alarcon-Chavez when he crossed the border at
Brownsville without papers in 2002, but released him on parole three days
later after deciding he had made a credible case that resuming life under
the Castro regime would be hazardous to his health.
Alarcon-Chavez applied for asylum under the Convention Against Torture, took
up residence in Austin, from where his uncle drove him to San Antonio every
time a hearing was scheduled. He was always on time until Jan. 30 last year,
when, his uncle being unavailable, he drove himself to San Antonio, arriving
in the middle of the morning rush hour. In the confusion he took the wrong
exit.
Even so, he strode into the courtroom only 20 minutes late. But Carte had
already swept out, having issued an order of deportation on grounds that
Alarcon-Chavez had "failed to appear."
That should not have presented much of a problem, because Carte was just
across the hall and was promptly notified that the petitioner had arrived.
But the great man is evidently a stickler for punctuality and refused to
budge.
Whatever awaits Alarcon-Chavez should he return to Cuba will probably not be
pleasant, as immigration officers determined when paroling him into the
United States. Carte's order may well have amounted to a death sentence for
Alarcon-Chavez, which seems a tad harsh for taking the wrong exit and being
20 minutes late.
The Board of Immigration Appeals did not think so, however, upholding
Carte's ruling without explanation.
Kowalski, though not inclined to be too hard on Carte, has no such
compunction with the BIA, which he "roundly condemn(s)" for rubber-stamping
the deportation order.
But that has not been unusual since 2002 when then-Attorney General John
Ashcroft reduced the number of judges on the appeals board and urged those
remaining to reduce the backlog of cases. The result has been that more
aggrieved immigrants are getting the bum's rush and are turning for help to
the federal appeals courts.
In ruling for Alarcon-Chavez, the New Orleans court left it to the appeals
board to decide whether his case should now be assigned to a different
immigration judge. If it is not, you can bet Alarcon-Chavez will be very
careful where he gets off the interstate.
Republicans Splinter On Bush Agenda
Poll Finds Rifts Opening Over Social Security, Judicial Filibusters, Schiavo Case
By John Harwood
The Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2005; Pg. A4
Almost three months into President Bush's second term, a raft of economic and social issues -- Social Security, immigration, gay marriage and the recent national debate over Terri Schiavo -- is splintering the Republican base.
. . .
On Mr. Bush's proposal to grant legal status to some illegal immigrants already in the U.S., Republicans are opposed by 50%-48% -- almost matching the 54%-42% opposition among Democrats. About 55% of independents oppose Mr. Bush's plan, while 38% favor it.
Feds Fingerprint Departing Foreign Visitors
By Mary Lou Pickel
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, April 1, 2005
Monica Chazaro of Veracruz, Mexico, thought nothing of giving her fingerprints to the U.S. government Thursday as she left Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport for her flight home.
Collecting biometric data -- fingerprints and mug shots -- is the Department of Homeland Security's new procedure for foreigners leaving the country. This week the government began the procedure at Hartsfield-Jackson.
It's part of a pilot program now running in 10 airports and one seaport. The exit system will be expanded to 80 airports by the end of the year, officials said.
The U.S. government began collecting data for incoming foreign visitors last year and has registered 23 million so far. Last year a Mexican traveler entering Atlanta was found to have an outstanding warrant for a probation violation in relation to a forgery conviction in Cobb County. He was turned over to the Atlanta Police Department.
Prior to the automated exit procedure, it was up to foreign passengers to turn in slips of paper to their airline as they left. The airlines shipped the boxes of paper slips to a processing center in Kentucky where the information was typed into an Immigration and Naturalization Service database.
It would take 'months and months' to get access to the information, US-Visit Communications Director Anna Hinken said.
Some of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists overstayed their visas, she said, yet they were allowed back into the country under the old system.
The new system provides real-time data as to when a person leaves and whether he overstayed his time, she said.
Because the system is still in its pilot phase, however, there is no penalty for failing to register before leaving the country, said Robert Mocny, deputy director of US-Visit.
If someone continually fails to do so, consular officials and Border Patrol agents will take into consideration that fact. 'It can be used against them when they go to reapply for a visa,' Mocny said.
Chazaro said she didn't feel more secure because of the new procedure. 'I feel pretty much the same,' she said.
'Maybe it'll speed my entry when I come back,' she said, holding her granddaughter's hand. She had come to the United States for a visit to Raleigh-Durham. 'I'm not doing anything bad so it's not a problem,' she said.
Adan Nunez Ramos of Mexico City whizzed through the checkout process at Concourse E. He walked up to the kiosk in the hallway, scanned his passport, placed his left index finger and then his right on a metal pad and stood still while the camera took his picture.
Out came a little black and white receipt card proving that he had gone through the process. The airport will have 11 such kiosks throughout the concourses.
The use of biometrics will play an increasing role in international travel, Mocny said.
Atlanta will handle more than 7 million international passengers this year and can expect an increase when the airport completes its expanded international terminal.
Conservatives Split In Debate On Curbing Illegal Immigration
By Shailagh Murray
The Washington Post, March 25, 2005; Pg. A02
Republican lawmakers are headed for a showdown over illegal immigration, an issue that exposes a deep and bitter rift within the GOP.
The drama will unfold when Congress returns early next month and turns to finish an emergency spending bill to fund the Iraq war. The House version, approved before the Easter break, carries tough immigration restrictions, reigniting a long-simmering battle with the Senate over how to deal with the growing illegal population.
It is a conflict that President Bush scarcely needs as he tries to unite his party behind contentious Social Security changes and judicial nominations. Meeting Wednesday with Mexican President Vicente Fox, Bush promised to continue pushing Congress for a program allowing temporary guest workers. That accommodation is the opposite of what House conservatives are seeking with the crackdown on asylum seekers and state driver's-license requirements for illegal immigrants that they attached to the Iraq bill. Bush acknowledged the limits of his influence: 'I'm not a member of the legislative branch,' he told Fox.
The immigration debate pits one core GOP constituency (law-and-order conservatives) against another (business interests that rely on immigrant labor). One camp wants to tighten borders and deport people who are here illegally; the other seeks to bring illegal workers out of the shadows and acknowledge their growing economic importance.
Bush does not support giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, but he wants to address the problem of undocumented workers by expanding temporary-worker programs for the millions who are already here. The president ranks illegal immigration as one of the 'big problems' he wants to tackle in his second term. White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. has called the issue a greater immediate threat than Social Security. 'This elephant is sitting at the table right in front of us,' Card said at a U.S. Chamber of Commerce meeting in January.
A recent Pew Hispanic Center survey found that the number of illegal immigrants in the United States has jumped by 25 percent in four years, to about 10.3 million. The growth has been scattered, extending into regions in the South and Midwest, which have traditionally seen little foreign influx. That has helped to transform immigration from a regional concern to a national one, as did the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, which infused the issue with new security concerns.
'Nobody wants to pay the political price if you suddenly have a major terror incidence with illegal aliens with driver's licenses,' said Dan Stein, head of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a leading voice in the law-and-order camp. All 19 hijackers involved in the Sept. 11 attacks entered the United States with valid documents, but some committed fraud to obtain them.
Business leaders tell GOP lawmakers a different story: Congress must address a growing dependency on illegal labor as the U.S. population ages -- and as more jobs, especially at lower skill levels, go unfilled. Four days before the 2001 attacks, U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas J. Donahue told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that immigrants are 'our best hope to curb chronic American labor shortages.' He cited Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that by 2008, the United States will have 154 million workers for 161 million jobs.
A group of House conservatives, led by Judiciary Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), say the measures will bring security improvements needed to prevent terrorist acts. For now, they want to deal only with that specific concern. Sensenbrenner had added the restrictions to the intelligence-restructuring bill but withdrew them in December when the Senate objected. House leaders assured him the restrictions would move on this year's first 'must-pass' bill -- the Iraq spending legislation.
Sensenbrenner warned Senate Republicans when he reintroduced his measures in January that they were making a mistake by trying to use the funding bill 'as a horse to get more controversial provisions enacted.'
But the House move gives the Senate a green light to advance its broader immigration agenda when it takes up the Iraq bill next month. 'Those are very specific,' Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said of the House proposals, in a Fox News interview. '. . . And I think we need to look at immigration reform in a more comprehensive way.'
One possible Senate amendment would offer temporary legal status to undocumented farmworkers. Broader guest-worker proposals, including the plan that Bush is advocating, also could end up in the mix.
Rancor over illegal immigration has become a staple on conservative blogs and talk radio, with much of the wrath directed at Bush. Stein, of the immigration reform group, said the president has dragged his heels on security improvements and 'is not leading the American people on this issue.'
The outcry may be resonating. House Rules Chairman David Dreier (R-Calif.) got a jolt during his 2004 reelection campaign, when radio hosts in his outer Los Angeles district decided to make him a 'political human sacrifice' for his immigration views, Dreier said, accusing him, among other things, of advocating Social Security benefits for illegal immigrants.
'I said to myself, nobody's going to believe I want to give Social Security checks to people who are here illegally,' Dreier recalls. Then he polled voters and found that people not only believed the allegation but had resolved 'to never vote for David Dreier again.' He won with 54 percent of the vote, a lower proportion than previous years, and has since taken a prominent role in advocating the Sensenbrenner measures, although he also supports guest-worker programs.
ritics of the House restrictions, including many Senate Republicans, say the curbs would trample states' rights and lead to more unlicensed drivers while ignoring what they believe to be the crux of the problem: the millions of undocumented people already entrenched in the workforce.
'There's a reality out there that few recognize,' said Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho), author of the Senate farmworker measure. 'They're all here, and they're necessary.' Congress is addressing half the problem, Craig says, 'if we do all the right things to protect our borders without parallel effort to create a legal workforce.'
His allies on the issue of guest workers include labor groups, the Catholic Church, the Chamber of Commerce and prominent free-market conservatives such as Grover Norquist. Two possible 2008 GOP presidential contenders -- Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Chuck Hagel (Neb.) -- are writing immigration plans that focus on guest workers. McCain's co-author is Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass).
House Republicans who support tighter rules say they are counting on a silent but determined 'bite-your-lip caucus' to keep the focus on security. 'Plenty of people feel the same way we do but are just remaining quiet,' said Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a Sensenbrenner ally who travels the country calling for stricter immigration rules. 'We're the ones on the offensive,' Tancredo said. 'Our agenda is advancing.'
NOTE: The Pew Hispanic Center report is online at: http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/44.pdf
Democrats Demand Immediate Immigration Reform
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com, March 22, 2005
In a letter to President George W. Bush and Mexican President Vincente Fox, congressional Democrats are demanding immigration reform that is 'realistic, humane and fair.'
The letter, signed by House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, and leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, was dated March 21 -- the same day a private research group announced that the illegal aliens continue flooding into this country, despite supposedly tighter homeland security.
According to the Pew Hispanic Center, a private research group that analyzed government data, about 485,000 illegal aliens come into this country every year, a trend that is expected to continue; and there were some 10.3 million undocumented immigrants living here in 2004.
'It is crucial that our federal government know who is crossing our borders and living in this country,' the letter said.
'To accomplish this goal, we believe the United States needs immigration laws that take our security into consideration and, at the same time, are realistic, humane, and fair. We believe there should be effective and efficient enforcement of these laws.'
Points to consider
In the letter, the congressional leaders offered a statement of principles for Presidents Bush and Fox to consider.
Those principles include family reunification; earned access to legalization; border safety and protection; an enhanced temporary worker program; respect for civil liberties and constitutional rights of immigrants and visitors; and support to legislative initiatives regarding immigrant student adjustment.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said President Bush 'has talked for years about immigration reform but his allies in Congress have not acted.' He said Congress must make reform a reality this year.
Likewise, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is faulting President Bush for failing to act on immigration reform. She said he must deliver the immigration reform he promised.
'Instead of progress on immigration reform, congressional Republicans, often with President Bush's support, have passed harmful anti-immigrant legislation that jeopardizes our national security and is contrary to the mutual interests of our two countries,' Pelosi said.
'Democrats believe in comprehensive immigration reform that reunites families, provides earned legalization to hard working immigrants, and strengthens our borders,' Pelosi added.
Grace Flores Napolitano, chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said national security must be the nation's top priority. But, she added, 'We must remember that the vast majority of immigrants are people with dignity who are willing to work hard and contribute to our nation. They deserve basic rights and protections and the benefits of a seamless immigration process.'
In his State of the Union Address two months ago, President Bush called America's immigration system 'outdated -- unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country.'
Bush said immigration laws should not 'punish hardworking people who want only to provide for their families, and deny businesses willing workers, and invite chaos at our border.'
President Bush has called for a temporary guest-worker program that would allow illegal aliens to fill jobs Americans won't take.
Critics call it an amnesty program, but President Bush says it is not. Such a program 'tells us who is entering and leaving our country,' he said in his 2005 State of the Union Address, while at the same time closing the border to drug dealers and terrorists.
US Backs Out of Vienna Convention Protocol Relating to Capital Cases
The United States is pulling out of the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The protocol requires signatories to let the International Court of Justice (ICJ) make the final decision when their citizens say they have been illegally denied the right to see a home-country diplomat when jailed abroad. The United States proposed the protocol in 1963 and ratified it in 1969.
The United States originally backed the measure as a way to protect its citizens abroad, and was the first country to use it before the ICJ, or World Court, successfully suing Iran for taking 52 hostages in Tehran in 1979. Other countries, however, have successfully complained before the World Court that the US was not adhering to the procedures that go along with the protocol, and their citizens were sentenced to death by U.S. states without receiving access to diplomats from their home countries, according to the Washington Post.
The decision of the United States does not affect the rest of the Vienna Convention, which requires its 166 signatories to inform foreigners of their right to see a home-country diplomat when detained overseas. According to some legal analysts, withdrawal from the protocol means that the United States will not be obligated to the decisions of the World Court. Others are saying this decision will weaken protections for U.S. citizens abroad.
State Department officials told the Post that fewer than 30 percent of the signatories to the Vienna Convention had agreed to the protocol. Among those that had not done so are Spain, Brazil and Canada.
Guest-Worker Debate Heats Up In Senate
By Sergio Bustos
The Tucson (AZ) Citizen, March 14, 2005
WASHINGTON -- A Senate bill embodying President Bush's conception of a guest-worker program is expected to take shape when a Senate subcommittee begins hearings today on border security and failed immigration laws.
The hearings before the Senate Judiciary immigration subcommittee initially will take a law-and-order approach to illegal immigration, but Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a former state attorney general who chairs the subcommittee, strongly believes that fortifying the border alone won't solve the problem.
'Border security and immigration reform are pieces of the same puzzle,' he told Gannett News Service in an interview at his Senate office. 'We cannot have true border security unless we also deal with the economic reasons why people will risk everything to come to the United States to work.'
Coming from a border state, Cornyn is no stranger to immigration matters. And he's made his opinions known since joining the Senate in 2002.
He introduced a bill a few months later that would have allowed qualified foreign-born citizens to live and work in the United States for up to three years.
The bill, the Border Security and Immigration Reform Act, sparked a flurry of similar bills. Cornyn's proposal, along with others, died in rancorous debate over immigration reform.
This year, however, Cornyn's bill is likely to get the backing of the Bush administration because it mirrors the president's goal of 'matching willing foreign workers with willing American employers.' Cornyn plans to reintroduce the bill after the Senate hearings.
Bush has not endorsed any plan, but he has urged Congress to craft legislation that would create a guest-worker program open to illegal immigrants.
Those who follow the immigration debate closely here say Cornyn will play a crucial role as the debate over immigration reform unfolds in Congress because he comes from the president's home state and has a good relationship with him.
'I think he will act as the point man for the Bush administration,' said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a group that opposes a guest-worker program. 'We agree that protecting the border is vital, but that doesn't mean you have to let everyone else into the country legally.'
Cornyn comprehends the complexity of the immigration debate, said Judy Golub, senior director at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, a group that supports less restrictive immigration laws.
'He gets the entire picture,' she said. 'He understands the need to repair our dysfunctional immigration laws so that we have a workable immigration system.'
If history is any indication, Cornyn won't shy away from a fight. As a rookie senator in 2003, he blasted colleagues and outside groups on the Senate floor for doing 'too little to reform a system that cries out for change.'
'Special interest groups dominate the discourse, employing the potent but morally repugnant rhetoric of fear,' he said. 'We can no longer afford to deny both the sheer number of undocumented immigrants in our country and the extent of our economy's dependence on the labor they provide.'
In persuading other lawmakers to go along with the president's plan, Cornyn will have to deal with defiant Democrats and equally reluctant Republicans.
Most Democrats want to allow the country's 8 million to 10 million illegal immigrants to earn permanent legal status by proving they hold a job and pay taxes. Many Republicans oppose anything that would provide any kind of legal status to those who broke the law entering the country.
'We must talk to each other and not past each other,' Cornyn said. 'It's time to have a real conversation with the American people about this issue.'
Alan Greenspan Supports Immigration
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan recently spoke on
immigration in response to a question from the House of
Representative Financial Services Committee:
"I think that immigration has been very important to the success of
this country and I fully support it. I'm not sure I would want to
give the reason that we're creating immigration to support our
Social Security system. I think we ought to do it on the grounds
that it is good for the country but not because it helps the
Social Security fund -- because that then suggests that if we
find other means to solve the Social Security problem that we
shouldn't be expanding immigration and I would not support
that."
[Back to Top]
Feds aim to slash long wait for visas
By Sergio Bustos
The Arizona Republic (Phoenix), February 22, 2005
WASHINGTON -- Avtar Arora has been trying to get a green card for his India-born son, but the U.S. immigration system has kept them apart for nearly nine years.
And, immigration officials recently told Arora, a naturalized U.S. citizen who lives in Glendale, that his 32-year-old son, Gautam, may not get permission to move to the United States until 2008.
'It's just so frustrating,' Arora said. 'This process makes no sense.'
Arora is not alone. At last count, more than 615,000 foreigners with relatives in the United States were awaiting approval for a green card, which permits a foreigner to permanently live and work in the United States and eventually become a U.S. citizen.
But lengthy security checks as part of the war on terrorism, the yearly cap on visas and a backlog of applications have forced many immigrant families to wait years to be reunited with relatives abroad.
The Bush administration has taken notice. Last spring, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency charged with serving newcomers, launched an aggressive campaign to reduce the backlog for immigration applications, including green-card requests. The backlog had climbed to 6 million in 2003, prompting an outcry.
Today, immigration officials say they have reduced the backlog to 4.7 million applications, but that includes applicants who face delays because of the limit on visas made available annually. The wait for green-card applications to just begin processing has dropped to 11 months from 20 months over the past year. But applicants from some countries still must wait years because of a limited number of family-based visas issued.
Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Eduardo Aguirre said the administration's goal is to reduce the wait for any immigration application to no more than six months by the end of next year.
'We want to restore public confidence in the integrity of America's immigration services,' he said.
But even Aguirre, a Cuban immigrant, acknowledges the reputation of the agency, formerly part of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, has a long way to go.
'We are delivering quality services, but I'm not sure the public believes it,' he said.
many critics
Winning the public's confidence won't be easy.
The system's critics say foreigners seeking to legally enter the United States must contend with a hostile agency searching for ways to keep them out. At the same time, they note, undocumented immigrants who cross the Southwestern border or overstay a temporary visa remain here with little fear of deportation because authorities lack the manpower and motivation to prosecute them.
In addition, Congress and the Bush administration lack the political will to aggressively pursue undocumented immigrants. The critics point to President Bush's proposed guest-worker program, which would immediately benefit the country's 8 million to 10 million undocumented immigrants.
'I'm better off telling my son to come here illegally,' Arora said. 'I feel foolish following the letter of the law.'
Tougher than before
Obtaining U.S. residency is much harder than it used to be. Applicants must be sponsored by an employer or relative in the United States or may qualify as a refugee by proving they have a 'well-founded fear of persecution' in their homelands.
But family-based visas are capped at 480,000 annually, employment visas at 140,000. The number of refugees admitted is decided by the president and Congress, which set the limit at 70,000 in 2004 .
Adding to the backlog problem are immigrants from a handful of countries that flood immigration authorities with green-card applications. Foreigners from China, Mexico, the Philippines and India tend to wait the longest after applying through a family member because demand is so great.
Immigration advocates blame the long waits on the limited family-based visas available and on lack of funding for the agency, which relies on application fees to pay processing costs.
And they say the war on terrorism has only worsened the backlog of applications.
'Legal permanent residents often wait up to 20 years to reunite with their spouses and children,' said Judy Golub, spokeswoman for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, which has long fought to ease restrictions on immigrants. 'Such long separations make no sense in our pro-family nation and reflect poorly on us.'
Federal officials acknowledge the application process has been slowed by extensive background checks since the 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Every day, the agency conducts 140,000 national security checks on individuals applying for permanent and temporary visas.
'We need to make sure the right applicant receives the right benefit in the right amount of time and that we prevent the wrong applicant from having access to our benefits,' said agency director Aguirre.
In Arizona, Arora said, his experience with the system has left him demoralized.
He came to the United States in 1995 with his wife, Rita, after employment as a supervisor with the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi for 21 years, working closely with journalists, diplomats and U.S. officials. He ultimately was offered a permanent visa to relocate to the United States.
In 1996, he filed a petition to bring his son into the United States, but he was forced to reapply in 2002 because he had since become a U.S. citizen and his son had gotten married. That meant, under immigration rules, that his filing status and his son's filing status had changed, sending them to the back of the line. That setback led to more delays.
Arora, frustrated, asked his son to move to Canada to be closer to the family. Gautam now lives in Vancouver, British Columbia, with his wife and 4-year-old daughter.
'We have played by the rules and have gotten nowhere,' Arora said.
Crossing Over: Bush's Other Battle
By Holly Bailey and Daren Briscoe
Newsweek, February 7, 2005
Rep. Tom Tancredo was stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic on his way to the Capitol one Friday morning in April 2002 when his cell phone rang. Though the caller ID read unidentified, Tancredo had no trouble recognizing the voice on the other end of the line: it was White House adviser Karl Rove, and he was seething. The congressman had been quoted in that morning's Washington Times attacking George W. Bush's immigration plan, which he warned could be an 'open door' for illegal immigrants and a national-security risk. As Tancredo remembers it, Rove screamed at him for more than 20 minutes, accusing him of disloyalty to his party and the president in the wake of 9/11. The conversation grew so heated that Tancredo had to pull over. As the congressman recalls, Rove ended the call with a warning that Tancredo should 'never darken the steps of the White House again.' (The White House disputes Rove's comment.)
Three years later, Tancredo may still be Bush's feistiest GOP critic on immigration, but he's hardly the only one. Head of the 71-member Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, Tancredo is backed by an increasingly restive band of House Republicans who view Bush's plan as a backdoor amnesty scheme that would reward lawbreakers. But the president hasn't given up the idea. Just a week after Election Day, Rove told reporters that immigration reform--namely a temporary guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants--was a vital part of Bush's political mandate. After all, reform would help cement his 'compassionate conservative' legacy. 'Family values do not end at the Rio Grande river,' Bush said last week. Rove also sees reform as a way of making inroads with the Hispanic voters who are key to his strategy of creating a permanent GOP majority. For members of Congress already nervous about Bush's bold second-term agenda--especially Social Security--immigration is just one more fissure in a united Republican front. 'Nobody's re-election hinges on passing it,' says one Senate GOP aide. 'Many fear they won't be re-elected if they do pass it.'
Bush has always been sentimental about immigrant success stories. He made immigration a centerpiece of his 2000 campaign and, soon after his election, proposed a guest-worker program. But it was eclipsed after 9/11 when border security became a bigger concern. Then last January, Bush unveiled a new version that would have let some 10 million undocumented aliens work for up to three years.
Businesses liked the idea. But it was a dud in Red States like Arizona and Utah hit hard by illegal workers. In November, House Republicans blocked Bush's intelligence-reform bill until he agreed they could attach some of their key immigration changes--including rules making it tougher for immigrants to get driver's licenses or obtain asylum--to the first bill of the new Congress. Now some lawmakers worry the White House might back out of the deal. At a private Republican retreat last Friday at the Greenbrier resort in West Virginia, Bush told the group he opposed blanket amnesty, but said they needed to 'look at the reality' of the situation. 'You have a number of people coming here from Mexico and South America looking to feed their family,' Bush said, promising more specifics in this week's State of the Union address.
Some of Bush's listeners weren't satisfied. 'We don't know what he will do, what he will support,' said Georgia Rep. Jack Kingston. Bush will also have to tangle with Democrats, who want to add worker protections like minimum wage and health benefits. Bush's old critic Tancredo isn't backing down, either. He now charges Bush is just backing immigration reform to gin up Hispanic support for a 2008 presidential bid by his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. That's the kind of talk that's likely to keep Tancredo off the White House guest list for a long time to come.
States Balk At License Bill As It Heads To U.S. Senate
It will be impossible for states to comply with stringent mandates for state-issued driver's licenses specified in an immigration bill that cleared the U.S. House of Representatives last week, state officials say.
The bill, which experts predict will encounter resistance in the U.S. Senate, would preempt plans for more flexible driver's license standards passed by Congress late last year as part of landmark legislation overhauling intelligence agencies.
It explicitly bars federal agencies from accepting as valid forms of identification licenses issued in states that grant them to illegal immigrants.
Ten states -- Hawaii, Illinois, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin -- currently do not require license applicants to show they are lawfully present in the United States, in effect granting licenses to illegal immigrants.
Temporary workers and other foreigners with pending legal immigration claims would be eligible only for temporary driver's licenses or identification cards, similar to a driver’s certificate for guest workers unveiled in Tennessee last year.
The House-passed bill has been dubbed the “Real ID Act” by its chief proponent, Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), who says the more rigid standards are needed to keep driver's licenses out of the hands of terrorists.
But Cheye Calvo, who tracks the issue for the National Conference of State Legislatures, criticized a requirement that states verify all documents, such as birth certificates, used to obtain a license and said the bill would shift to states the responsibility to enforce immigration law. He said already overburdened state motor vehicle divisions are ill-equipped to do this.
“It’s actually telling states to do things that are simply impossible, that are not doable,” Calvo said. “Immigration status is a federal responsibility. It should not be our job to confirm a status bestowed by federal officials.”
Calvo said the measure infringes on states’ rights and could translate into billions of dollars in unfunded mandates as states struggle to enforce the requirements.
Both NCSL and the National Governors Association grudgingly accepted the less stringent standards included in last year's intelligence overhaul bill, in large part because that legislation included a negotiated rule-making process that gave states a seat at the table.
Without a framework allowing state input as the standards are devised and implemented, the result will be less effective, Calvo said.
“States are the experts; we’ve been doing this for almost 100 years,” he said. “So it’s critical that the standards reflect reality, that they reflect the way the process works.”
The intelligence overhaul marked the first time the federal government has mandated identification standards for driver's licenses, birth certificates and other forms of state-issued ID, and state officials say those standards – given the chance – will work.
“While governors and motor vehicle administrators share your concern for increasing the security and integrity of the driver’s license and state identification process, we firmly believe that the driver’s license and ID card provisions of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 offer the best course for meeting those goals,” NGA Executive Director Raymond Scheppach and Linda Lewis, president of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, said in a Feb. 8 letter urging House leaders to reject the immigration bill.
Since the 2001 terrorist attacks, in which four of the 19 hijackers used valid state-issued driver's licenses to board the airplanes they later crashed, driver's licenses have been viewed as a homeland-security tool and not just a way to regulate who’s allowed on the nation’s roadways. Nearly every state has made some effort to secure its licenses.
In 2004 alone, 25 state legislatures considered 46 bills relating to licensing illegal immigrants, according to the National Immigration Law Center, a policy analysis group that advocates on behalf of low-income immigrants.
Some states, such as Florida, considered but did not adopt temporary licensing programs similar to Tennessee’s - the first of its kind in the nation. In Tennessee, the Division of Motor Vehicles as of July began issuing driving certificates stamped with “not valid for ID” to temporary and undocumented immigrants as part of an effort to strengthen the state's licensing laws.
To force the Senate to consider the “Real ID” measure, House leaders might attach it to a must-pass bill, such as a supplemental war spending proposal. The bill, which easily passed the House 261-161 last week, also garnered support from the White House.
[Back to Top]
Rupert Murdoch Extols Immigration
Immigration Daily is pleased to bring to our readers a pro-immigration op-ed by Rupert Murdoch. Mr. Murdoch is the head of News Corp, one of the largest media companies in the world, involved in the production and distribution of newspapers, films, television, satellite, and cable TV. We commend Mr. Murdoch for taking the time to write and express his pro-immigration views (we encourage other successful immigrants to follow his lead). Some excerpts: "In my book, anyone who comes here and gives an honest day's work for an honest day's pay is not only putting himself closer to the American Dream, he's helping the rest of us get there too."
"As Ronald Reagan said at the Statue of Liberty, "While we applaud those immigrants who stand out, whose contributions are easily discerned, we know that America's heroes are also those whose names are remembered by only a few."
"Maybe this is more clear to businessmen because of what we see every day. My company, News Corporation, is a multinational company based in America. Our diversity is based on talent, cooperation and ability. Frankly it doesn't bother me in the least that millions of people are attracted to our shores. What we should worry about is the day they no longer find these shores attractive. In an era when too many of our pundits declare that the American Dream is a fraud, it is America's immigrants who remind us--by dint of their success--that the Dream is alive, and well within reach of anyone willing to work for it."
"... as President Bush realizes, we'll never fix the problem of illegal immigration simply by throwing up walls and trying to make all of us police them. We've tried that for a decade or so now, and it's been a flop. What we need to do first is to make it easier for those who seek honest work to do so without having to disobey our laws. Fundamentally that means recognizing that an economy as powerful as ours is always going to have a demand for more workers."
State Dept. Official Indicted On Visa Fraud Charges
A U.S. Department of State official was indicted on fraud and bribery charges for allegedly issuing visas to foreign nationals in exchange for cash. Piotr Parlej was arraigned Thursday in U.S. District Court in Washington and pleaded not guilty to visa fraud, bribery and conspiracy charges, which were outlined in a 13-count indictment handed down by a federal grand jury Wednesday.
He is accused of fraudulently issuing visas for money while working at the U.S. Embassy in Armenia.
Theft or fraudulent issue of U.S. visas has become one of the most dangerous crimes since Sept. 11, 2001, for fear the papers could admit a terrorist into the country.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Alan Kay ordered Parlej to remain in jail while he weighs the prosecution's argument that the defendant is likely to leave the country if freed on bond. The judge is expected to rule on the bond status Monday.
'Mr. Parlej poses a serious risk of flight ... he has the knowledge and the means to flee,' Assistant U.S. Attorney Brenda J. Johnson told the judge. 'This man is a world traveler, well educated and fluent in at least three languages.'
Prosecutors also noted he has very few ties to the United States and none in the Washington region, with the exception of a friend in Gaithersburg with whom Parlej said he has been residing.
Parlej left his native Poland 15 years ago, eventually moving to the United States, where he gained citizenship. He has worked at the U.S. Embassy in Armenia as a consular associate for at least the past two years, but State Department officials declined to detail his exact length of service.
As a U.S. consular, Parlej's duties included interviewing visa applicants and, if the necessary qualifications were met, issuing visas.
The indictment alleges Parlej issued unwarranted visas to six foreign nationals in Armenia for as much as $10,000 on each occasion.
'He was abusing his position as a trusted employee of the State Department,' Johnson said.
The State Department's Diplomatic Security Service led the investigation and, upon informing Parlej of the allegations, urged him to come back to the United States. He returned to the Washington region, where he was arrested Wednesday.
'The people of the United States have a right to have immigration rules applied fairly and properly,' said U.S. Attorney Kenneth Wainstein in a statement Thursday. 'A United States consular official who violates those rules for personal financial gain undermines the integrity of our visa application and review process, and erodes public trust in our consular officials around the world.'
If convicted, Parlej faces between five and 15 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each count. A status hearing is set for Feb. 18.
Tuition Law For Illegal Immigrants Challenged
By Juan Castillo
The Austin (TX) American-Statesman, February 1, 2005
Almost four years after Texas became the first state to make in-state college tuition rates and financial aid available to immigrant children regardless of their legal status, a lawsuit filed in Kansas threatens Texas' law as well.
Gov. Rick Perry enacted House Bill 1403 in 2001, and supporters hailed it as a compassionate way to help immigrants attend college.
By fall 2003, nearly 4,800 students had taken advantage of the law at state institutions in Texas. Seven other states, including Kansas, passed similar laws.
But the Washington-based Federation for American Immigration Reform, which opposes illegal immigration, sued in July, challenging Kansas' law on behalf of about two dozen out-of-state students and their parents.
The lawsuit argues that the Kansas statute violates a 1996 federal law barring states from giving public benefits to immigrants who are in the country illegally. It contends that the state is violating another 1996 law forbidding states from granting undocumented immigrants residence status so they can qualify for in-state tuition.
Because the Kansas and Texas laws are similar — both require students to live in the state at least three years before graduating from high school, and to declare an intention to seek legal resident status as soon as eligible — an adverse ruling could undercut Texas' program.
'This would set a legal precedent,' said federation media director Ira Mehlman. 'Under federal law, any benefit a state makes available to an illegal alien must also be made to any legal resident of the United States, irrespective of whether they are residents of that particular state.'
But immigrant advocate groups monitoring the case say Kansas, Texas and other states are not violating federal law because the requirements they set for in-state tuition apply to all students, whether in the country illegally or not.
'This is good policy because it behooves us to educate those who have already integrated into our communities, who are part of our communities, who want to contribute both to our local and federal economy,'' said Melissa Lazarin with the National Council of La Raza in Washington.
Kris Kobach, the federation's attorney, said he expects a judge to rule in the case this month or early March.
'We're very concerned about what kind of effect this is going to have,' Marisol Pérez, an attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said recently.
The legal challenge is at the heart of a national debate about immigration and, specifically, what to do about educating the country's growing immigrant children population.
An estimated 1.5 million undocumented children live in the United States, many who came not by choice.
Pérez, who spoke at last week's Texas Association of Chicanos in Higher Education conference in Austin, said the federation is well-funded and is seeking to capitalize on an anti-immigrant climate. The Kansas case, she said, is 'certainly having a chilling effect with the immigrant communities.'
At their meeting, the Chicano educators and administrators also rallied behind federal legislation known as the Dream Act. The measure, which has bipartisan support and has been introduced every year since 2001, would allow some undocumented students to apply for legal residency, which could lead to citizenship.
An estimated 65,000 immigrants without legal status, who have lived in the country for at least five years, graduate from U.S. high schools each year. For most, college is unaffordable. But even if it were, the students cannot legally hold jobs in the United States.
Lazarin said La Raza is working with Congress to reintroduce the Dream Act.
Mehlman said the federation still opposes the legislation because members think it provides amnesty in addition to a taxpayer-subsidized higher education. He said proponents argue that those the Dream Act would help are in a quandary not of their making.
'But it is the parents who put them in that position by knowingly breaking the law,' Mehlman said. 'We all end up suffering for mistakes our parents make. . . . But we hold the parents responsible in our society.'
A new student group at the University of Texas, Jovenes Immigrantes por un Futuro Mejor (Immigrant Youth for a Better Future), will press for passage of the Dream Act 'because we already have students who are graduating (from college) and there is no prospect for them getting work authorization anytime soon,' said Alejandra Rincón, immigrant students college coordinator with the Austin school district.
Republicans Squaring Off Over Bush Plan On Immigration
WASHINGTON -- The battle within the Republican Party over immigration policy was joined Wednesday as President Bush vigorously promoted his proposal for a guest worker program and conservatives in Congress introduced an alternative proposal to tighten immigration restrictions.
At a news conference, President Bush said again that he considered his guest worker proposal 'a priority' even though Senate Republicans left it off their list of top goals. 'A program that enables people to come into our country in a legal way to work for a period of time, for jobs that Americans won't do, will help make it easier for us to secure our borders,' Mr. Bush said, adding: 'I know there is a compassionate, humane way to deal with this issue. I want to remind people that family values do not end at the Rio Grande border.'
Party conservatives, however, have strenuously opposed a guest worker plan since Mr. Bush introduced the idea in 2001, even staging a losing revolt over its inclusion in the party platform at the 2004 Republican convention. Many conservatives call the president's ideas 'amnesty' - a term Mr. Bush disputes - because his plan includes ways for currently illegal immigrants to obtain temporary worker permits.
On Wednesday afternoon, Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, again introduced a measure to block illegal immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses.
At a news conference, he said the committee would not consider other immigration proposals, implicitly including the president's, until his own measure passed. A similar measure was removed from a bill to enact the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission last year. Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, is expected to introduce a driver's license restriction this year.
Mr. Sensenbrenner said his bill was primarily directed at border security, distinguishing it from other changes in immigration policy. 'Immigrants are not terrorists, except a few of them,' he said. 'The legislation that was introduced today is designed to get the bad apples out of the barrel before the barrel was spoiled.'
He said a group of House Republicans had written a letter to Mr. Bush urging him to provide full financing for provisions in last year's antiterrorism bill doubling the number of border patrol agents and tripling the number of beds for detaining illegal immigrants over the next five years. The Department of Homeland Security said recently that it was planning a smaller increase in financing, drawing the ire of advocates of tighter immigration laws.
Asked about the president's proposal, Mr. Sensenbrenner said his committee was 'going to be plenty busy with other priorities, a lot of which are the priorities of the White House.'
In an interview, Representative Chris Cannon, a Utah Republican who supports the president's plan, said a guest worker program would not amount to an amnesty because it would include a monetary penalty for currently illegal immigrants. 'The people who want to kick them all out are not reasonable people,' he said.
But Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado and chairman of the Congressional immigration caucus, vowed to defeat any program that in his view would reward lawbreakers, even questioning the president's motives. 'Could it be just the corporate interests, the money interests that rely so heavily on cheap labor?' he asked.
Permanent Residency Raises Questions
By Jeff Nachtigal
TechsUnite.org, January 26, 2005
When Texas Instruments employee Joseph Valley walked into the company’s law offices and asked for the job descriptions for new H-1B visa positions, they told him he was the first employee to request to see them.
Not long after, he was fired.
In August of 2003, Valley was given a scathing, out-of-the-ordinary performance review and terminated for 'using TI strictly private information inappropriately,” he says.
Valley, who worked for Texas Instruments for 10 years, believes that with the company’s increased use of foreign immigrant workers at its Dallas headquarters is making it hard for American workers to find work.
He points to periods over the last four years when the company offered early retirement plans or announced reduction-in-force measures, and then filed applications to hire hundreds of foreign H-1B visa workers, as evidence that Texas Instruments has made little effort to recruit American workers.
The job descriptions that Valley wanted to see, known as Labor Condition Applications in Department of Labor parlance, are required to be made publicly available when a company submits a request for additional H-1B work visas. The requirement is in place to give American workers fair opportunity to compete for the jobs.
Texas Instruments filed an LCA to hire a Test Engineer the day he was terminated, according to Valley.
In September 2004, Valley filed a complaint with the Department of Labor concerning Texas Instruments’ practice of beginning the permanent residency application process for H-1B visa employees within three months of their arriving in the U.S. He has also filed a wrongful termination suit against the company citing national origin discrimination.
“This is an unfair labor practice and immigration fraud,” said Valley, who wrote software to test semiconductor products, as a test engineer in the group that designed and tested chips for projectors and TVs. “TI should not be offering permanent residency to temporary, non-immigrant workers, especially when the unemployment rate is so high.”
Worker advocates and union leaders are concerned that the thousands of permanent residencies, or green cards, being granted annually, along with the annual allotment of H-1B visas, has resulted in a unreasonably tough job market for U.S. workers in a period of high unemployment.
Department of Labor actions suggest that these concerns may be valid.
The Wage and Hour division of the Department of Labor is currently investigating Valley’s complaint. If evidence of criminal activity is found, the case will be forwarded to the Office of the Inspector General, which investigates fraud.
A Department of Labor investigator familiar with the case described Texas Instruments’ actions as “brazen” and suggested that their actions could merit a criminal investigation.
Texas Instruments Director of Government and Media Relations Dan Larson confirmed that the permanent residency application process begins right away for H-1B employees hired by Texas Instruments.
“The idea is not to let them go,” Larson said.
“Electrical engineering is the key training we look for at TI,” Larson said, citing graduation rate statistics for electrical engineering that show a decline of nearly 50 percent since 1987. “The number of people graduating from American universities has gone down. At the same time, the number that is increasing is foreign national’s, who are prime candidates for H-1B status.”
Larson emphasized that Texas Instruments hires any candidate who is qualified
Therein lies the disconnect over the use of an increasingly foreign national high-tech workforce: High-tech workers, employed and unemployed, say they are well qualified for jobs if given the chance; they say they are shut out of jobs because companies prefer to hire foreign nationals who may be willing to work for less than the prevailing wage, or take a steep pay cut from their skill level in order to work in the U.S.
Industry representatives say hiring foreign workers is necessary because there is a shortage of qualified U.S. workers.
A recent report published by the Office of the Inspector General lists foreign labor certification as a “significant concern,” which may “result in the unlawful admission of foreign nationals and economic hardship for domestic workers.”
The report, dated Sept. 30, 2004, concludes that, “More broadly… our investigations continue to identify fraud against these programs by immigration attorneys and labor brokers.”
A General Accounting Office study in October of 2003 also raised questions about the effects of H-1B visas on the labor force in this country.
While the GAO study did not definitively answer the question of whether H-1B workers earned less than U.S.-based workers in comparable jobs, it suggested that, “Allowing unemployed H-1B workers to remain in the United States may have implications for the labor force competition faced by U.S. workers.
“Although some employers acknowledged that H-1B workers might work for lower wages than their U.S. counterparts, the extent to which wage is a factor in employment decisions is unknown.”
Microsoft, Intel, IBM and Oracle are among the top 10 companies requesting permanent residency for H-1B workers, according to the Department of Labor. In 2004, Microsoft requested permanent status for 1,203 workers; 529 of the applications were certified. The software company led applicants in both categories.
(Poultry processing companies occupied a high percentage of the top applicants for permanent residency; Carolina Turkeys and Mountaire Farms rank just behind Microsoft in number of workers granted permanent status.)
The Department of Labor maintains a database of companies requesting permanent residency. Records for H-1B visa requests are not made public.
Hundreds of permanent residencies are granted each year and tens of thousands of H-1B visas …quot; the current cap is set at 65,000, plus an exemption for 20,000 graduate students …quot; are allotted annually, there has been a steady siphoning off of job opportunities for U.S. workers.
The University of Illinois at Chicago’s Center for Urban Economic Development found that over 17,000 high-tech jobs were lost in the Dallas area during a three-year period ending in 2004, detailed in the study America’s High Tech Bust. Likewise, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) recently testified at a U.S.-China Commission on Trade that their members are experiencing the first decline in job placement and salary in 31 years due to global “inshoring” instead of offshoring.
Joseph Valley now works as a real estate agent in Plano, Texas. The real estate market is down this winter, he says. But Valley has kept busy on other fronts, primarily drumming up support for investigations in Texas Instruments and other companies that play fast with the H-1B regulations at the expense of American workers.
Valley is skeptical that any real changes to the H-1B issue will be enacted through legislative channels. He favors direct action by filing complaints and prompting investigations anywhere a worker sees shady corporate practices taking place.
“If we try the judicial branch we might get somewhere,” he said.
When he worked with Texas Instruments, Valley said some of his co-workers, who were working with H-1B visas, confided to him their concerns about being paid less than the prevailing wage in their positions. Valley has set up a Web site to encourage H-1B visa workers to file complaints and sue for back pay.
Ultimately, he’d like to be working on a level playing field that gives him a fair shot at getting a job.
“I’ve got a master’s degree in computer science, and I can’t get a job,” said Valley. “And that pretty sad.”
EDITOR’S NOTE: The Department of Labor OIG report is online at:
http://www.oig.dol.gov/public/reports/oa/2004/06-04-004-03-321.pdf
Senator John Cornyn Set To Tackle Immigration Reform
WASHINGTON -- Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, named Wednesday to lead the Senate Judiciary subcommittee that oversees immigration, said he wants to balance cries for tighter border controls with the reality that immigrants are a vital part of the American fabric.
'I don't think America has the stomach to deport 10 million people, including 6 million who are part of our workforce,' he said. 'So the question is, what do we do, and doing nothing is not an option.'
President Bush has put immigration reform high on his agenda. But those who want to cut immigration have stymied plans that he and Mr. Cornyn have offered to create guest-worker programs. Mr. Cornyn's plan would have let people – including illegal immigrants – stay in the United States for three years. Advocates and anti-immigrant groups balked. He says he'll try again.
'I start from the premise that you really can't have strengthened border security, strengthened homeland security, without immigration reform,' Mr. Cornyn said.
One approach, he said, is to encourage job growth in Mexico and other nations to cut demand. 'Otherwise, we'll be swamped,' he said.
Mr. Cornyn had been chairman of the Constitution subcommittee. He replaces Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., who left the immigration panel to lead the Senate Agriculture Committee.
Angela Kelley of the National Immigration Forum called it a 'hopeful sign' that Mr. Cornyn – a border-state Republican who shares the president's view that immigration is vital – will play a larger role on the issue.
'He understands the contributions and the sacrifices that immigrants make,' she said.
The Department of Labor publishes its long-awaited final regulation implementing the PERM permanent labor certification program. Significant changes are made from the proposed rule. (69 FR 77325, 12/27/04). Will become effective March 28, 2005.
NEW YORK -- The law to revamp U.S. intelligence services was passed at the 11th hour in the last Congress partly because of a deal that deleted many contentious anti-immigration provisos. But the sponsor of those sections says he will reintroduce them as ”must pass” legislation ”on the first day of the 109th Congress in January.”
With Republican President George W Bush, many human rights groups, most Democrats and a number of civil libertarian conservatives arrayed against the measures, such an act is destined to trigger a fierce battle on Capitol Hill.
”These common-sense provisions are aimed at preventing another 9/11-type attack by plugging holes in our homeland security efforts. We must address these vulnerabilities very soon because we know America's enemies diligently probe our vulnerabilities to carry out their deadly intentions,” said their sponsor, Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner, the powerful chairman of the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.
Most media coverage of the last session's immigration proposals focused on such issues as proposed uniform security standards for drivers' licenses and border security, such as closing the five-km hole in the U.S.-Mexico border fence near San Diego, California.
But far more worrying to human rights groups and civil libertarians are provisions that relate to tightening asylum regulations.
For example, the legislation would allow immigration judges to determine witness credibility in asylum cases while significantly reducing the opportunity for appeal; stipulate that all terrorism-related grounds for inadmissibility are grounds for deportation; and provide for the ”expedited deportation” of immigrants and visitors, even to countries where they are likely to face prison torture.
Human rights groups have unanimously opposed these provisions.
According to Susan Benesch of Amnesty International USA, the Sensenbrenner proposals ”would prevent refugees from finding safe haven in the United States and erode their chance for due process in presenting their asylum claims.”
”These anti-refugee and anti-immigrant measures were not recommended by the 9-11 Commission for good reason -- they would not improve our national security. On the contrary: they would deny safety to people whose own security is in danger,” she told IPS in an email interview.
Amnesty, she added, ”also opposes the outsourcing of torture -- the United States is bound by the U.N. Convention Against Torture to prevent or punish torture, certainly not to facilitate it.”
The intelligence legislation was based on the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, established to investigate the Sep. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The Sensenbrenner provisions were not part of the commission's recommendations.
Much of the controversy surrounding the congressman's suggestions stems from the widespread round up of primarily Arab and Muslim immigrants and visitors after the 9/11 attacks and again just prior to the 2004 presidential election.
More than 5,000 people were arrested, and many detained for long periods without access to lawyers. None were charged with a terror-related crime, but many were deported, some to countries where they were likely to be arrested again and face torture in detention.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has refused to disclose the names of any of the detainees.
Amnesty's Benesch says her organisation ”would be equally opposed if no Muslims had been rounded up,” because the proposals will work to deny long-established asylum rights.
Mark Dow, author of 'American Gulag: Inside U.S. Immigration Prisons', told IPS, ”even sympathetic observers continue to believe that though the post-911 roundup failed to catch terrorists, it was intended to do so. This ignores the evidence that roundups were at least in part a cover to make it look like the Justice Department was doing something.”
”It is less the case, as is commonly asserted, that roundups of Arabs and Muslims were intended to fight terrorism than that terrorism was used as a pretext to justify the roundups -- a pattern that is in full force today around the country,” he added.
After 9/11 the Immigration and Naturalisation Service (INS) was separated into three agencies, one of which is the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). All are now part of the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
One of the few Sensenbrenner provisions that made it into the final intelligence law increased the numbers of beds in detention facilities. Dow says it is ”unconscionable to give DHS more detention capacity. Instead, Congress should establish a permanent independent oversight system to review the legality and humaneness of all current and future immigration detainee cases, and to monitor the treatment of all detainees.”
In American Gulag, Dow pointed out that immigration law is not part of the U.S. criminal justice system -- which gives government agencies virtually unlimited scope to hold people indefinitely, without charge, without access to attorneys and without public disclosure.
For years, the INS failed to furnish Congress with accurate numbers of asylum-seekers, despite a federal law requiring this data. Thus precise data is difficult to come by. The U.S. Government suggests there are about 22,000 detainees in U.S. immigration prisons at any one time, and that on average several thousand of these will be asylum-seekers.
Other sources have estimated that in 2001, 86,180 people sought asylum in the United States and 68,400 applications were reportedly granted. Yet other sources report that in 2000, there were 48,054 asylum-seekers to the United States, and 47,584 cases in the first nine months of 2001.
Washington sources believe most of the original Sensenbrenner proposals are likely to make it into the new bill. These include:
* ”Expedited removal” -- allowing immigration enforcement officers to deport without a hearing any non-citizen not admitted to the United States by immigration authorities and who has been here for less than five years.
This could result in the summary deportation of people who could face serious harm if deported. According to advocacy group Human Rights First (HRF), ”These provisions place broad uncontrolled power in the hands of immigration officers whose decisions are not subject to formal administrative or judicial review.”
* Summary deportation of battered spouses, children whose unlawful entry into the country was connected to the abuse they suffered, and victims of human trafficking and victims of serious crimes such as rape, torture, trafficking, incest, domestic violence, sexual assault, involuntary servitude, kidnapping and abduction.
* ”Preventing terrorists from obtaining asylum,” a section that, according to HRF, ”is NOT about preventing terrorists from getting asylum. Terrorists are already barred from asylum.”
Instead, the proviso would allow genuine refugees to be denied asylum if they were unable to document relevant conditions in their countries through U.S. State Department reports, could not prove a persecutor's central reason for harming them, or any inconsistencies were noted between statements they made to U.S. government employees and their testimony before an immigration judge.
* Giving adjudicators broad leeway to deny applicants asylum based on factors such as their perceived ”demeanour.”
* Eliminating stays of removal pending judicial review, allowing refugees to be returned to the persecution they fear while their cases are pending in federal court. ”This provision, applicable to ALL immigration cases, would have a particularly devastating impact on refugees and persons facing torture if they are deported,” according to HRF.
While the U.S. media has largely focused on border security issues raised in the proposed bill, asylum policy has come under less scrutiny. However, 'The New York Times' wrote in a Sep. 25, 2004 editorial: ”In jails and prisons across the United States, thousands of people are detained who have never been accused of crimes.”
”The guards treat them like criminals, and the criminals they bunk with often abuse them. They are held for months, sometimes even years, but unlike the criminals, they do not know when their sentences will end. They receive this treatment because they are foreigners who arrived in the United States saying that they were fleeing persecution at home ... They come here chasing America's promised liberty, and they end up in chains.”