Articles Posted in Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Today in a town hall-style meeting in Washington DC designed to showcase his health reform law for the Latino community, President Barack Obama told those who attended that he was powerless to stop mass expulsions of illegal immigrants, which has prompted one Latino advocacy group to brand him “deporter in chief.” The president said Congress is forcing him to enforce existing immigration laws while balking at passing a comprehensive bill that would offer illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. “I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do,” Mr. Obama said. “The reason why these deportations are taking place is that Congress said ‘you have to enforce these laws’. I cannot ignore those laws any more than I can ignore any of the other laws that are on the books.”

To mitigate Congress’ lack of action on immigration reform, Mr. Obama said he ordered government agents to give priority to deportations of those involved in illegal activity and gangs — and even used executive power to shield undocumented young people with illegal status who have known no home other than the United States. “What I have done is to use my prosecutorial discretion,” Mr. Obama said.

The National Council of La Raza, America’s largest Latino advocacy organization, week broke with the president over the deportation issue. “Any day now, this administration will reach the two million mark for deportations,” said NCLR CEO Janet Murguia. “It is a staggering number that far outstrips that of any of (Obama’s) predecessors, and it leaves behind a wake of devastation for families across America. We respectfully disagree with the president on his inability to stop unnecessary deportations. He does have the power to stop this.”

More than 500 leaders for the networks of young immigrants, frustrated with House Republicans’ failure to move on immigration this year so far, have decided to turn their protests on President Obama in an effort to pressure him to act unilaterally to stop deportations.

Months of lobbying, rallies and sit-in demonstrations have not brought any movement in the House on a pathway to citizenship for immigrants here illegally. The youths who gathered in Phoenix last week for an annual congress of the network, United We Dream, have voiced severe disappointment by Republicans and Democrats who seem to not be moving over political reasons more than a true desire to reform immigration. Pointing to Mr. Obama’s promise earlier this year to use his own powers when Congress would not move on this agenda, they now demand that he take executive action to increase protections for immigrants without papers.

“The community we work with is telling us that these deportations are ripping our families apart; this has to stop,” said Cristina Jiménez, the managing director of the network, the largest organization of immigrants who grew up in this country without legal status after coming as children and who call themselves Dreamers. “And we know the president has the power to do it.”

Recent hearings in the House of Representatives are showing us that the focus is not on solving the issues to pass immigration reform but focused on past problems that have been debated about before. In one House hearing before the Homeland Security committee, Secretary Jeh Johnson laid out his vision for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Among the questions the Secretary took from committee members were inquiries about deportation priorities and immigrants who overstay their visas. At the same time, the House Judiciary committee held a hearing about the president’s constitutional duties and the use of executive power in his administration. The real question is why are our House members focused on enforcing current immigration policies when the dialogue should be on immigration reform?

It is clear that many Representatives are concerned about border security more than anything. In fact, at the House hearing with Sec. Johnson, he fielded questions about whether the administration was deporting immigrants who fit the department’s stated priorities, including putting resources toward finding immigrants who overstay their visas. “If in the category of visa overstays there are those people [who are national security threats], then we need to go after those people,” Johnson said. Some House members claimed the administration wasn’t deporting enough immigrants, while Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) expressed concern that too many immigrants are being removed because of minor driving offenses and not violent crimes. These comments show how the focus is still on the current policies being implemented and less on how the changes to our policies will affect these concerns.

With the debate over the President’s constitutional authority to unilaterally implement immigration policy going on, House members assert that his broad authority is still limited. Rep. Tom Rice (R-SC) asserted that while the president has prosecutorial discretion, “he does not have the authority to exempt a specified class of up to 1.76 million individuals.” Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) explained that DACA is decided on a case-by-case basis as every individual application is examined before DACA is granted.

Reactions to the release of the House GOP leadership’s principles for immigration reform  tended more toward cautious praise for releasing something as a starting point, but with serious doubts about the shortcomings of the actual policy proposals. Because these principles are guidelines—without specific  detail—“cautious optimism” is probably the healthiest approach to take in understanding what the document means for reform. Summarizing what the document says doesn’t take long; understanding its nuances, particularly its omissions and departures from the past, requires a bit more digging. In reality, this new document should not be read as an unwavering set of principles, but rather  as a list of expectations and strategic choices. The first half, dealing with enforcement contains no real surprises, but the second half is full of them.

There is much rhetoric about the necessity of securing our borders and creating a zero-tolerance policy for people who violate our laws in the future. These standards endorse the use of an electronic work site verification program and the full implementation of an entry/exit registration program for tracking arrivals and departures to and from the U.S. They emphasize the necessity of enforcement of laws first, before turning to any more positive reforms. Ultimately, the enforcement section of the document merely repeats the idea that we must be able to measure enforcement successes and thwart efforts to get around the law.

The second half of the GOP stance is far more interesting, as it emphasizes rewarding hard work and merit, and puts a premium on outcomes. The authors declare that the legal immigration system needs to be reformed to avoid an over reliance on family ties or luck; instead, they prioritize rewarding foreign students who can contribute to the economy and meeting the needs of employers. Similarly, temporary work programs, particularly in agriculture, have to provide realistic and predictable means of entry to the U.S., without harming the interests of native-born workers. It is striking how the emphasis on finding a way to use the immigration system to improve the economy is an acknowledgment of the importance of immigration that has been lacking in the past.

Like many other immigrants, Mery Martinez has no legal status in the United States, no health insurance and no money. Sadly, Ms. Martinez does have leukemia, and has been struggling to find treatment for the disease, first in New York and more recently in Philadelphia. A hospital emergency room rejected her on New Year’s Day because she had not yet qualified for the state assistance that could have paid for the medical attention she needed.

With rising anxiety, and a rash that she attributed to her illness, Ms. Martinez walked into a clinic last week run by Puentes de Salud, a nonprofit group of doctors, nurses and medical students that provides primary care to Philadelphia’s undocumented, uninsured and impoverished Latino immigrants.

In a consulting room provided by the University of Pennsylvania’s medical school, Ms. Martinez, 38, who is from Honduras, was examined, given a flu shot and advised on how to navigate the health system by Spanish-speaking volunteer doctors and nurses who run the clinic two evenings a week.

Puentes de Salud, which in English means “bridges of health,” was founded to provide low-cost but quality health care and social services to the growing Latino population in South Philadelphia and began treating patients in 2006. A co-founder, Dr. Steve Larson, said the organization distinguished itself from other community-health groups by addressing the underlying causes of illness, like poor nutrition, illiteracy or urban violence.

“It’s not about me writing prescriptions,” said Dr. Larson, 53, a professor of emergency medicine at the University of Pennsylvania who said he began to develop his approach to community medicine while working in rural Nicaragua in the early 1990s. “This is an underground health system.”
While Puentes operates openly in partnership with community organizations, hospitals, universities and governmental institutions, many of the patients — like Ms. Martinez — live in fear of immigration officials.

The new federal health care law does not provide assistance to illegal immigrants, who are generally ineligible for Medicaid, cannot get federal subsidies for private insurance and cannot use the new insurance exchanges to buy unsubsidized insurance with their own money.

Under the federal Affordable Care Act, such immigrants are exempt from the requirement to have insurance. They remain eligible for certain types of emergency care under Medicaid if they have low incomes and meet other criteria, and they may receive care from free and charitable clinics in some places.

Continue reading

Today, we celebrate the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a man whose dream of equality and human rights changed the course of history. His legacy will be remembered this week by people of all colors and creeds who still believe in the American dream and who continue to fight for equality, civil rights and the basic human dignity they deserve.

In remembering the fight Dr. King made for equal rights among all persons of any race, the similarities of his struggle and the immigration fight are easy to see. Rev. Harvey Clemons, Jr. of the Pleasant Hills Baptist Church is quoted saying, “Immigration is about human dignity and the nobility of parents of different tribes and nations facing the risk of coming to a foreign land, a land of opportunity, to work for a better tomorrow for their children…Dr. King invoked the truth, the truth being that all humans ought to be treated with a certain dignity. It would be natural for us to look to him as an example for fighting for a just cause.”

Similarly, Rev. Al Sharpton, also an outspoken advocate in the fight to end racial profiling, noted that defending civil rights should be an “everybody issue”: “We need to stop comparing disparities and start finding solutions. It is imperative for the African American community to stand together with the Latino community and for the Latino community to stand with the Asian community. You cannot have human rights for some—we need it for all. We must stand together with all our brothers and sisters against this national outrage.”

A new report from the American Immigration Council explains the journeys of three places—Detroit, Michigan; St. Louis, Missouri; and rural communities in Iowa—to implement strategies for future economic success that depend in part upon immigration. Despite tepid federal efforts at reform, such places are embarking on exciting ventures, such as Global Detroit and the St. Louis Mosaic Project, to attract immigrants to their communities, support new and existing immigrant entrepreneurs, and create synergy between immigrants and native-born citizens. This trend recognizes the growing significance of immigration as an economic factor, but it is also a major rethinking of how individuals and communities accept and welcome newcomers and encourage their successful integration.

Immigrant businesses large and small help to revitalize neighborhoods, add a boost to the local economy, and create more jobs for the local population. Yet, while many cities recognize the need to attract and grow their human capital, their efforts are often at odds with an inefficient federal immigration system. City and regional leaders recognize their recruitment and development efforts cannot fully succeed if the federal immigration system is outmoded and ineffective. In the absence of immigration reform, their efforts, no matter how visionary, may be impeded.

At the national level, policymakers should enact comprehensive immigration reform that modernizes the U.S. immigration system, creating the necessary legal pathways that work for entrepreneurs, innovators, students, families, businesses, employers, and all types of workers. Immigration reform, in addition to recognizing that immigrant entrepreneurs and innovators come through all immigration pathways—family, employment, refugee, and others—should also ensure better recognition of foreign-earned credentials in licensed professions so that skilled immigrants’ talent isn’t wasted in the places in which they already reside.

Continue reading

With some of Speaker of the House John Boehner’s recent statements regarding immigration reform, we are reminded of what many have worked hard to try and accomplish within the immigration system. There are many goals and hopes that people have for 2014. Some of these goals and hopes include:

– A decrease in deportations of people who overstay or are not here legally and have spouses and children in the U.S. so they may not be torn apart from their families.

– Passing immigration reform so there is a process in place to help those who have no status in the U.S. get on the road to eventually achieving their dreams of becoming U.S. citizens.

After years of waiting, the California Supreme Court finally made a decision that allows undocumented immigrants to be admitted to the State Bar. Sergio Garcia passed the California State Bar Exam on his first try in 2009, but when his application to be admitted to the bar was denied, it was the beginning of a long battle that has ultimately ended in his favor.

The California’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday that no state law or public policy should stop Garcia or others like him from obtaining a law license in the state. Immigration officials would be unlikely to pursue sanctions against an undocumented immigrant who had been living in the United States for years, had been educated in this country and whose sole unlawful conduct was his presence in this country, the court said in a unanimous ruling written by Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye.

“Under these circumstances, we conclude that the fact that an undocumented immigrant’s presence in this country violates federal statutes is not itself a sufficient or persuasive basis for denying undocumented immigrants, as a class, admission to the State Bar,” the court ruled.

Sergio Garcia’s case is unique because, while it is admitted that he is an undocumented alien in the U.S., he has an approved immigrant visa petition filed by his father back in 1995. Unfortunately, after 19 years of waiting so far, a green card is still unavailable to him. The California Supreme Court’s ruling said, “Because the current backlog of persons of Mexican origin who are seeking immigrant visas is so large, as of the date of this opinion — more than 19 years after Garcia’s visa petition was filed — a visa number still has not become available for Garcia,”
The matter ended up in the California state court system, and Garcia earned the support of California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who wrote in a 2012 brief: “Admitting Garcia to the bar would be consistent with state and federal policy that encourages immigrants, both documented and undocumented, to contribute to society.”

The state bar argued that Garcia had met all of California’s requirements for a law license.

“With today’s ruling, the California Supreme Court reaffirms the Committee of Bar Examiners’ finding as not a political decision but rather one grounded in the law,” California State Bar President Luis J. Rodriguez said in a written statement Thursday.

Continue reading

As we celebrate the Holidays and gather with our families we must think of the good things in our life.

As we look around the world today – at the conflicts, the destruction of the environment, the human and animal suffering – it almost seems absurd to say that our wish is for a more peaceful, healthier and happier world. Yet this is the world we all yearn for. And I find that with the image of such a world in my mind and in my heart, it is easier to take action, every day, to move things in the right direction.

So let’s wish for a world where all people are treated with dignity, respect and equality – no matter who you are or who you love.