Over the next several weeks, the Senate Judiciary Committee will consider Comprehensive Immigration Reform (S744), which would include a mandatory E-Verify system.  E-Verify is an internet-based program accessed by employers when processing new hires.  It compares information from an Employee’s Eligibility Verification Form I-9 to data from U.S. government records.  The potential for E-Verify to become compulsory is quite controversial for several reasons – namely its disregard for personal privacy, the unnecessary obstacles it imposes to employment, and the fundamental change that it would signify in the relationship between U.S. government and U.S. citizen.

While allegedly created to target undocumented individuals, E-Verify would negatively affect documented U.S. citizens as well.  Every job applicant would have to face an E-Verify background check, and unless the system is 100% accurate 100% of the time, these background checks will become a nightmare.  Chris Calabrese, Senior Legislative Counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union explains:

 When you make a giant list of everybody who’s able to work in the United States, that list has to be completely accurate, because if there are mistakes in it, the result is those mistakes – those mistaken people can’t work.

These citizens will be required to petition the government to correct the mistake, creating a bureaucratic nightmare that will likely stall their job hunting process by weeks (if not longer).  Calabrese calls this the “prove yourself to work” system that will hurt ordinary citizens.  This signifies a fundamental shift in relationship between government and populace – no longer are we innocent until proven guilty. We are now guilty until proven worthy of a job.  Gone will be the days of applying for a job, waiting on a quick background check, and becoming employed – now all citizens will have to wait for I-9s to be verified against a massive list of personal information housed by the government.

(more…)

In Alameda County, the local Board of Supervisors recently voted 3-1 in passing a proposal requesting Sheriff Greg Ahern to withdraw from the federal Secure Communities program. Implemented in 2008, the voluntary Secure Communities program is an immigration policy operated by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is directed towards the deportation of immigrants convicted of violent and dangerous crimes.

The Secure Communities policy implements a process through which state and local police may coordinate with federal agencies in the enforcement of immigration programs. The initial process begins when individuals are arrested, as law enforcement oft fingerprints those detained in violation of criminal offenses.  This fingerprint data is then electronically transferred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), who alternatively collects and stores such information in their organizational databases. Subsequently, the FBI then sends such fingerprint information to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), so that ICE may assess whether the individual in question can be subject to removal from the country.

In Alameda County alone, this policy has already led to the deportation of over 2,000 residents since its adoption. As such, the Secure Communities policy has been subject to significant criticisms, particularly regarding its overbreadth, as the program can produce negative consequences for immigrants who have never violated criminal statutes. Supervisor Richard Valle, who originally drafted the resolution states:

The underlying tone in Secure Communities denies people the due process and very democracy that we are here to defend.

As another proponent of the new resolution, Supervisor Wilma Chan, iterates a similar argument, and elaborates:

There’s nothing in this ICE hold that really helps because under the current system, immigrants just like anybody else who commit crimes are still going through the system. If they committed a felony, they are going to serve time in jail. Our job in Alameda County is not to do the job of [Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

This recent resolution possesses numerous similarities with a previous policy in Berkeley, California, where the City Council voted unanimously against continued support for the Secure Communities program. Nadia Kayyali, legal fellow at the Bill of Rights Defense Committee (BORDC), provides significant insights into the pushback against Safe Communities, and examines both the ineffectiveness and inaccuracies of the program:

It decreases community safety as police become equated with immigration enforcement, thus leading to a lack of willingness to call the police or assist in community policing or investigations. The federal government has stated that S-comm is aimed at “criminals” but according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) own numbers, 79% of deportees under S-Comm had no criminal records, or had been picked up for low-level offenses such as traffic violations. In California alone, almost 80,000 deportations have taken place.

As Supervisor Chan stated, local communities should not be delegated the task and jobs of the federal immigration officials. While the passing of this resolution is undoubtedly commendable, it remains incomplete and more work will be necessary in transforming this symbolic resolution into a complete victory. 

Wednesday, April 10 marked a significant day of action for immigration reform. Begun by the Alliance for Citizenship, thousands of people rallied at the capital in Washington DC and at over 50  other events across the country to urge their legislators to take action.

The events hoped to encourage faster action from Congress. A bipartisan group of eight senators has been preparing a proposal to reform the immigration system, and, advocates hope, give a path to citizenship for the reported 11 million people who have entered the US illegally. The 844-page  bill was introduced to the Senate on April 17, a week after the marches. The event’s website calls for people to “educate, march, rally, pray, and knock on the doors of Congress until President Obama signs commonsense immigration reform that includes a realistic path to citizenship.”

Events took place across the country, including rallies, marches, press conferences, phone banks, town hall meetings, concerts, voter registration drives, vigils, and an “Undocumented Coming Out Day” in San Diego. Many demonstrators shared personal stories about how the flawed immigration system has impacted their families and communities. A small sampling of events includes:

Washington DC

There were tens of thousands of supporters in Washington DC. People filled five blocks of the Washington Mall. Although there was a strong showing from Latino groups, there were attendees that have immigrated from diverse parts of the world, including many from Asian countries. Community groups attended from more than 30 US states; many traveled by overnight by bus to be there. It was the largest mobilization for immigration reform in seven years.

President Obama recorded a videotaped message to address the crowd, promising his support. “I have always pledged to be your partner as we work to fix our broken immigration system, and that’s a commitment that I reaffirm today,” the president said. Other speakers included the president of the NAACP, members of Congress, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Cornel West and Puerto Rican singer Olga Tanon.

“The angst and trepidation in our communities is unprecedented,” said Reverend Samuel Rodriguez. “This is our Selma,” he said, comparing the immigration-reform movement to the civil rights movement.

California

In San Francisco, a large crowd marched through downtown from Senator Feinstein’s office to the Federal Building and courthouse for a rally. “The path to citizenship should not be a 10 or 15 year path!” declared one organizer. Speakers included the city Board of Supervisor’s John Avalos.

Several hundred people also gathered outside of the Los Angeles  and San Diego offices of US Senator Dianne Feinstein. San Diego City Council voted unanimously the day before to approve a resolution calling for comprehensive immigration reform and a legal path to citizenship. Marchers held red and orange paper flowers to represent the many people deported every day. “We are here because of our ancestors, our future generations and those who are detained,” said Rev. Deborah Lee of the Interfaith Coalition for Immigrant Rights in Northern California.

Other events took place in Oakland, San Jose, Berkeley, and in other cities.

Georgia

More than 1,500 people rallied in Atlanta. The event was coordinated by the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights with more than 40 other civil and immigrant right groups.

New York

There were several rallies in New York City and the rest of New York state. In Manhattan, supporters gathered outside Senator Charles Schumer’s office with flowers, mariachis, and 700 postcards with pro-reform messages. “The right time to embrace a united nation is now,” said organizer Lucia Gomez. Five hundred members of the group Make the Road also traveled to the rally in Washington.

North Carolina

In Charlotte, coalition groups including the Latin American Coalition, United 4 the Dream, Familias Unidas, OneNC, and Action NC led a march through downtown. About 1,000 people were in attendance. “We’re trying to stress to the senators and representatives that the reform needs to include something for mixed-status families,” said Armando Bellmas of the Latin American Coalition.

With the congressional immigration bill being introduced just a week after these events, it seems these voices, documented or not, are finally being heard.

Last week, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) executed a crackdown operation throughout Connecticut, resulting in the arrest of at least 27 individuals.  The arrests began on a day of immigration reform rallies organized by the Connecticut Immigrant Rights Alliance (CIRA).

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials denied any intentional coincidence with CIRA’s immigration events.

Carried out by ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations unit, supposedly after months of preparation, sudden news of the arrests chilled Connecticut’s immigrant community.  Together with the threat of Secure Communities (S-Comm) turning local police stations into automated documentation checkpoints, immigrant communities also face dragnet operations.  Denying lack of discretion, ICE spokesperson Ross Feinstein describes the recent ‘probe’ as:

part of an on-going enforcement action targeting at-large, criminal aliens and others who pose threats to the community.

ICE submits a similar justification for S-Comm, which purports to bolster community safety, but enables biased policing and indiscriminate enforcement.  Additionally, just as ICE obscures data regarding individuals’ apparent criminality, officials mostly refused to reveal the convictions prompting the Connecticut immigration roundup.

Feinstein did admit that one individual arrested in New Haven had multiple Driving Under the Influence (DUI) convictions, while another was convicted of narcotics sales and second-degree assault.  However, does conducting arrests for crimes like these actually require such a massive operation? ICE’s silence on the convictions of 25 other individuals raises further questions as to the legitimacy of the sweep.

Criticizing ICE’s tasteless tactics, New Haven immigration attorney Glenn Formica, who currently represents some of the individuals arrested, states:

I don’t think they have to go door to door. If somebody gets a letter from ICE saying, ‘Appear in Hartford,’ they will show up. Most people are not going to run. A guy with three DUIs, I don’t think you need to go to his house and arrest him. I think you can send him a letter and he will get a lawyer and show up.

Although Connecticut’s local ICE offices received Formica’s commendation for treating arrestees humanely, the system of deportation creates severe burdens for impacted families.  Children and spouses, documented and otherwise, could be left to live without support, with no available recourse for their suffering.  Furthermore, as a consequence of intimidation tactics, entire communities cannot trust and fear the authorities charged with preserving peace and protecting the public.

(more…)

• 4/11, Ben Fox, ABC News, Pentagon Accused of Data Breach in Gitmo Ship Case
• 4/11, Charlie Savage, New York Times, Army Judge Raises Burden in Private’s Trial on Leaks
• 4/10, Mark Weiner, Syracuse (NY) New Times, Obama budget includes $4.7 million for Reaper drone hangar at Fort Drum
• 4/10, Ryan Abbott, Courthouse News Service, FBI Sued for Info on Supersnooping Program
• 4/10, The Associated Press, Fox News, Senate immigration plan would stiffen border security, increase surveillance
• 4/10, Zeke Johnson, Huffington Post, April 11 Day of Action Against Guantánamo

On Friday, March 22, the Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly held a public hearing for the Transparency and Responsibility Using State Tools (TRUST) Act.  Like its California namesake, Connecticut’s TRUST Act restricts local operation of Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Secure Communities (S-Comm) protocols.

Although purported to identify and remove dangerous undocumented criminals, S-Comm neglects human rights, enables profiling and racist policing, violates due process, and chills free expression.

Community members, organizations, and activists flooded Room 2B of the Legislative Office Building to support local immigration reform.  The Judiciary Committee heard heartfelt testimony against unjust detainment and deportation; how parents lose their children, how families live indefinitely without support, and the fear of seeking help when victimized by violence or unfair treatment.

BORDC Legal Fellow Nadia Kayyali submitted written testimony on S-Comm’s dragnet, stating:

[Even] citizens have been detained and deported under S-Comm, and more than one-third (39%) of individuals arrested…report that they have a documented spouse or child, meaning that approximately 88,000 families with documented members have been impacted…

(more…)

In August 2012, the Federal Government began granting Deferred Action to select undocumented youth  in North Carolina and other states.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) has given undocumented immigrants the opportunity to legally reside in the US for a renewable two year period. Additionally, through DACA they’re able to receive a work permit, a driver’s license, and importantly the relief from deportation.

In January of this year, the NC Department of Motor Vehicles (NCDMV) updated its website to communicate that it will not provide driver’s licenses to DACA-eligible undocumented people (DACAmented), because they did not consider a federal government issued work permit a valid form of documentation to receive a driver’s license. For many of these recipients, a license is vital for transportation to go to school, to work, and care for their families that don’t have this privilege of driving.

After countless demands of the DMV to give DACA recipients driver’s licenses, on January 15, the Attorney General Roy Cooper finally made a public statement that DACAmented youth should be able to obtain a North Carolina driver’s license. Everyone expected the DMV to give out regular licenses, but instead they’ve created a new one specifically for DACA recipients.

These new driver’s licenses have a bright pink stripe at the top, has the words ‘Deferred Action’ in the background, ‘LIMITED TERM’ on the right side, and contain in red ‘NO LAWFUL STATUS’ on the bottom. This opened up the door for people to discriminate against undocumented immigrants. Especially for police, which is another way police can abuse their power. When these people are ever asked for their ID by police, they will know they’re not citizens.

(more…)

News broke on March 7 that a man held in solitary confinement for 22 months won a settlement of $15.5 million.  In August 2005, Stephen Slevin had been pulled over in New Mexico and accused of drunk driving a stolen vehicle  (though Slevin explained that a friend had lent him the car for a cross-country road trip). Slevin claims he never saw a judge after being arrested, and when he refused to post a $40,000 bond, he was transferred to a cell in total isolation ”in [a] jail near the Mexican border without explanation.”

Slevin was allegedly severely depressed when he was arrested. Once put into a padded cell without any natural light and in total isolation for 23 hours a day, he was deemed suicidal.  He faced total neglect as his psychological and physical condition deteriorated, developing a facial fungus and an infected tooth that he was forced to remove himself when denied access to a dentist.  His toenails grew so long that they curled under his feet.   He developed bedsores on his legs.

His lawyer, Matt Coyte, explained:

As your insanity builds, some people holler or throw feces out their cell doors…Others rock back and forth under a blanket for a year or more, which is what my client did….

(more…)

Ever since the preliminary efforts by the US government to curb undocumented immigration in the 1980s, such as the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), our nation’s immigration enforcement machinery has steadily become stronger, stricter and much more rigid. With current net undocumented migration from Mexico at or below zero and increased consequences for illegal crossing, new reports show that this level of strict enforcement is wasteful in terms of the federal budget and harmful as it attacks civil liberties of immigrants and citizens alike.

Monumental transformations in immigration law and enforcement since the 1990s have included border control, strict visa requirements, advanced data systems, and detention or deportation of aliens. Moreover, increasing integration of  immigration control systems with criminal investigation mechanisms has also become a pillar of this drive to secure borders and address immigrant influx into the US.

A recent report by the Migration Policy Institute shows that these enforcement mechanisms are supported by a colossal increase in federal spending on immigration control:

The US government spends more on its immigration enforcement agencies than on all its other principal criminal federal law enforcement agencies combined. In FY 2012, spending for CBP, ICE, and US-VISIT reached nearly $18 billion. This amount exceeds by approximately 24 percent total spending for the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Secret Service, US Marshals Service, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), which stood at $14.4 billion in FY 2012.

(more…)