Thousands march to demand US immigration reform

By Paula Bustamante (AFP) – 1 day ago LOS ANGELES —

Thousands of immigrants poured into the streets of Los Angeles on Sunday to
demand that President Barack Obama fulfill his campaign promise to legalize
millions of undocumented immigrants."

Legalization or no re-election!" chanted the demonstrators participating in
protest on May Day protest, a holiday mostly ignored in the United States.

Most were immigrants from Central America and Mexico demanding the immigration
reform Obama has promised for some of the estimated 11 million illegal
immigrants in the United States to gain legal status.

Organizers said 10,000 immigrants protested downtown, while the Los Angeles
Police Department put the crowd's numbers at 3,500.

Though leaders of the pro-immigration reform movement advocate for immigrant
rights, they have largely stopped short of asking the Hispanic community to vote
against the president and his fellow Democrats in the 2012 elections after
Hispanics played a significant role in bringing Obama to the White House.

"We all known that it is the Republicans who are blocking immigration reform and
that a Republican administration would simply stall all our requests, so we
cannot threaten right now that we will vote against Obama," said Javier
Rodriguez of the March 25 Coalition.

But Alfredo Gutierrez, a former Democratic state senator from Arizona, said
Obama could not be counted on to enact the promised reforms.

"We should deny our votes to Obama, a man who clearly is not sincere about his
intentions," he told AFP.

"We will not get anything from Obama. We just need his to stop the systematic
deportation of children, students and parents, because it is destroying our
community."

Maricarmen, an undocumented Mexican-born woman who has lived in the United
States for 10 years, blamed "American double standards."

"We work hard. They say we don't have papers but we are employed and we pay
taxes, just like any other citizen here."

She said she wanted to get legalized so she could travel to Mexico to visit her
family. "I live here to work and because I need to do so, I'm not robbing
anybody," added the woman who only gave her first name, adding that she was
working as a cashier at a supermarket.

In the fiscal year that ended September 30 alone, the United States deported a
over 392,000 unauthorized immigrants, a record.

Thousands more protesters marched in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in support of
immigrant and worker rights, according to estimates provided by local media.

Milwaukee saw its congenial political culture change after Governor Scott Walker
introduced a proposal in February to strip unions of collective bargaining
power.

The bill sparked huge protests and led 14 Democratic state senators to flee to
neighboring Illinois in a futile attempt to stop its passage.

Opponents of the changes say the measures seek to kill public sector unions,
which tend to back Democrats.

"This is an aggressive attack on the basic democratic process and a
consolidation of corporate power," said Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive
director of the Milwaukee-based Voces de la Frontera, a group tasked with
rallying labor membership among the region's growing Hispanic population.


Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved.

More »


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jnayil0PUWQ80tvaB1oJ_49REn6w?\
docId=CNG.5531a5fdacd2913af0d710c9a6a041f8.901

AFP: Thousands march to demand US immigration reform

Rights Groups: U.S. Government Targeting Muslims via U.S. Immigration System

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

AALDEF and the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at NYU School of Law
Call for Immigration Reform, Transparency, Rights Protections

New York, NY...The U.S. government's aggressive use of the immigration system in
its counterterrorism efforts discriminates against Muslims and violates
international human rights law, according to a Briefing Paper on the issue
released today by AALDEF and the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice
(CHRGJ) at NYU School of Law. 

The Briefing Paper, Under the Radar: Muslims Deported, Detained, and Denied on
Unsubstantiated Terrorism Allegations, exposes the many ways in which U.S.
officials take advantage of the lax standards and lack of transparency that mark
the immigration system as particularly ripe for abuse.

"The U.S. government is deporting, detaining, and denying benefits to Muslim
immigrants on the basis of innuendo, religious and cultural affiliations, or
political beliefs," said CHRGJ Faculty Director, Smita Narula.

"These practices violate fundamental human rights and American values and have
had profoundly devastating impacts on Muslim families and communities in the
United States."

The Briefing Paper includes a number of case studies that suggest extremely
problematic patterns of the U.S. government's targeting of Muslims through the
immigration system. 

The Briefing Paper details how the U.S. government is:

* Making unsubstantiated terrorism-related allegations against Muslim immigrants
without bringing official charges in cases involving ordinary immigration
violations.

* Subjecting Muslim immigrants to detention in cases involving minor violations
that, ordinarily, do not entail detention.

* Imposing flimsy immigration charges--such as false statement charges for
failure to disclose tenuous ties to Muslim charitable organizations--in a manner
that targets Muslim immigrants for religious and political activities and
affiliations.

* Applying overbroad statutory language of the terrorism bar provisions of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to remove, bar, and detain Muslims.

* Relying on vulnerable immigration status to coerce Muslim immigrants to become
informants for federal law enforcement officials.

"President Obama recently reiterated that the U.S. is not at war with Islam. 
However, we have a long way to go before Muslim immigrants are treated with the
fairness and dignity that is owed to all immigrant communities in the United
States," said Sameer Ahmed, AALDEF Attorney/Skadden Fellow. 

"It is time for our government to live up to its rhetoric and make needed
reforms to the immigration system in order to prevent these widespread abuses."


***About CHRGJThe Center for Human Rights and Global Justice (CHRGJ) at New York
University School of Law was established in 2002 to bring together the law
school's teaching, research, clinical, internship, and publishing activities
around issues of international human rights law. 

Through its litigation, advocacy, and research work, CHRGJ plays a critical role
in identifying, denouncing, and fighting human rights abuses in several key
areas of focus, including: Business and Human Rights; Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights; Caste Discrimination; Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism;
Extrajudicial Executions; and Transitional Justice. 

Philip Alston and Ryan Goodman are the Center's Faculty Chairs; Smita Narula and
Margaret Satterthwaite are Faculty Directors; Jayne Huckerby is Research
Director; and Veerle Opgenhaffen is Senior Program Director.

The International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC)--a project of the Center--is
directed by Professor Smita Narula.  Amna Akbar is Senior Research Scholar and
Advocacy Fellow.  The Briefing Paper was jointly researched and authored by
CHRGJ and AALDEF, and by IHRC 2010-2011 members Caroline Burrell and Kibum Kim.

About AALDEF

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF), founded in 1974,
is a national organization that protects and promotes the civil rights of Asian
Americans.  By combining litigation, advocacy, education, and organizing, AALDEF
works with Asian American communities across the country to secure human rights
for all. 

SEARCH       NEWS   05.04.11

Rights Groups: U.S. Government Targeting Muslims via U.S. Immigration System
04.26.11 Al Falah Center Sues Bridgewater Township to Allow Mosque 04.20.11 EEOC
Lawsuit Filed Today Reinforces Indian Guestworkers' Claims of Abuse After
Hurricane Katrina    BLOGPUBLICATIONSLITIGATION DOCKET    DONATE   VOLUNTEER
Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) 99 Hudson St, 12th Fl
New York, NY 10013 tel: 212 966 5932 fax: 212 966 4303 email: info@...

http://aaldef.org/press-releases/press-release/rights-groups-us-government-targe\
ting-muslims-via-us-immigration-system.html



###

Courtesy:

National Institute for Latino Policy (NiLP)
101 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10013
800-590-2516
info@...
www.latinopolicy.org      

***

Hispanic Caucus calls on Obama to freeze controversial immigration enforcement
program

By Lee Romney

Los Angeles Times 
(May 5, 2011) 

The Congressional Hispanic Caucus on Thursday asked President Obama to freeze
the controversial immigration enforcement program known as Secure Communities --
one day after the state of Illinois attempted to terminate its participation
agreement and pull out altogether. 

The actions are the latest in mounting attempts to pressure Immigration and
Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security, its parent, to
examine the program.

Launched in 2008, Secure Communities purports to target "convicted serious
criminals" here illegally for deportation but has ensnared many undocumented
immigrants who were arrested but never charged with a crime or charged with
minor offenses. 

Meanwhile, a California bill is moving through the Legislature that would demand
that the state modify its agreement and, if ICE refuses, withdraw altogether as
Illinois did. 

But questions remain over whether federal officials will allow either Illinois
or California to end their participation. 

After telling local and state governments repeatedly that the program was
voluntary, Homeland Security officials now contend that participation is
mandatory and that local and state buy-in is not required. 

Under the Secure Communities program, fingerprint data collected at local jails
and sent to the FBI for criminal background checks is forwarded to ICE for
immigration scans.

Federal officials said Thursday that they will continue to run immigration
checks on Illinois' data despite that state's efforts to withdraw. 

But in a statement released Thursday, ICE Press Secretary Barbara Gonzalez said
the agency "is conducting a top to bottom statistical analysis of Secure
Communities data to identify any irregularities that could indicate misconduct
in particular jurisdictions so that we can immediately initiate corrective
actions."

Gonzalez said ICE is "also exploring ways to address concerns with the program
so that it continues to focus on individuals who have broken criminal laws." 

ICE Director John Morton planned to travel to Springfield, Ill., Friday to meet
with officials there, she said. In seeking the freeze on the program -- and
backing Illinois' attempt to pull out -- members of the Hispanic Caucus on
Thursday expressed support for Obama's efforts to "strengthen national security
and public safety," but said, "neither of these goals are served or advanced by
the [Secure Communities] policy in its current form." 

"Evidence reveals not only a striking dissonance between the program's stated
purpose of removing dangerous criminals and its actual effect; it also suggests
that [Secure Communities] may endanger the public, particularly among
communities of color," the letter continued. 

Illinois and California are among 41 states that have signed "memorandums of
agreements" - complete with termination clauses - to launch the program in local
jurisdictions.

All California counties have been "activated." 

Most local governments and states have endorsed the notion of prioritizing
serious convicted criminals for deportation, but a number have expressed
concerns with the program in recent months since ICE data revealed that more
than half of those targeted for deportation were arrested but never charged with
a crime, or charged with minor infractions. 

As a result, some local law enforcement leaders say that the program is
discouraging crime victims or witnesses in immigrant communities from
cooperating with police investigations. 

San Francisco and Santa Clara counties are among those that have sought
unsuccessfully to opt out of Secure Communities.

Washington state has also refused to sign up and Washington, D.C., terminated
its contract -- a move that ICE later said it allowed only as a courtesy. 

Backers of the identification program say it replaces ad hoc enforcement efforts
and point out that it has led to the largest ever number of deportations of
convicted serious criminals. 

On Wednesday, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn notified ICE officials that his state
"will play no role in Secure Communities, either actively or as a pass-through
for information."

In activating the agreement's  termination clause, the letters from Quinn and
Illinois State Police Director Hiram Grau said, "No new counties in Illinois can
be activated, and those counties that were previously activated for their
information to pass through ISP to ICE, must be deactivated and removed from the
Secure Communities program." 

But the move is unlikely to settle the matter, casting more confusion over a
program that has been plagued by miscommunication.

U.S. Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) last week demanded an investigation into what
she called intentional efforts by ICE and Homeland Security officials to mislead
local and state governments as well as members of Congress about whether Secure
Communities was voluntary and who it would target. 

The Department of Homeland Security now asserts that the states' "memorandums of
agreement" are merely educational and that the program will be implemented
nationwide by 2013 regardless of opposition.

No local or state buy-in is needed, they say, because Secure Communities is an
"information sharing program between two federal agencies." 

The outcome could impact California, where a pending bill would require
modifications to its agreement with ICE to apply the program only to those
individuals convicted of serious crimes.  The bill also contains protections for
juveniles and domestic violence victims and would make local participation
optional. If ICE declines the modifications, the bill calls for termination of
the agreement. 

Like the backers of the California bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano
(D-San Francisco), Illinois officials believe their agreement - which contains
similar termination and modification clauses - is a binding contract and that
their withdrawal is legally valid. 

"They cannot make law by fiat, and they can't rule by decree," Chris Newman,
legal director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said of ICE.
"Courts and Congress determine scope of their enforcement authority." 
Newman added that "contracts are contracts, not courtesies."





###

U.S. Warns Schools Against Checking Immigration Status

***

Courtesy:


National Institute for Latino Policy (NiLP)
101 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10013
800-590-2516
info@...
www.latinopolicy.org  

***

U.S. Warns Schools Against Checking Immigration Status

By Kirk Semple

New York Times (May 6, 2011) 

Federal officials issued a memorandum to the nation's school districts on Friday
saying it was against the law for education officials to seek information that
might reveal the immigration status of children applying for enrollment. 

Civil liberties advocates and others have complained in recent months that many
school districts are seeking children's immigration papers as a prerequisite for
enrollment. Some state and local officials have also considered bills to require
prospective students to reveal their citizenship or immigration status. "We have
become aware of student enrollment practices that may chill or discourage the
participation, or lead to the exclusion, of students based on their or their
parents' or guardians' actual or perceived citizenship or immigration status,"
said the memo, from Justice and Education Department officials. "These practices
contravene federal law." The letter cited a 1982 Supreme Court decision that
recognized the right of all children, regardless of immigration status, to
attend public school as long as they met the age and residency requirements set
by state law. "The undocumented or noncitizen status of a student (or his or her
parent or guardian) is irrelevant to that student's entitlement to an elementary
and secondary public school education," said the memo, signed by Thomas E.
Perez, assistant attorney general for the civil rights division of the Justice
Department; Russlynn H. Ali, assistant secretary for civil rights in the
Education Department; and Charles P. Rose, that department's general counsel. 

Xochitl Hinojosa, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said it was the first time
her agency had issued guidance to school districts on the 1982 decision. The
Education Department did not return calls seeking comment. Civil liberties
advocates, who had been asking President Obama's administration to clarify the
law, hailed the memo. "We're gratified that the Department of Justice has seen
fit to do the right thing, to clarify any ambiguities," said Donna Lieberman,
executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, calling the guidance
"a really big deal." Last year, Ms. Lieberman's group found that 139 districts
in New York State - about 20 percent of the total - were requiring children's
immigration papers as a prerequisite to enrollment, or asking parents for
information that only lawful immigrants could provide. While the group did not
find any cases in which children had been turned away for lack of immigration
paperwork, it warned that the requirements could deter illegal immigrant
families from enrolling children for fear that their status might be reported to
federal authorities. After months of pressure from the civil liberties group,
the state's Education Department sent school districts a memo strongly
recommending that they not ask for information that might reveal the immigration
status of enrolling students. State education officials in Maryland, New Jersey,
Illinois and Nebraska have taken steps in recent years to halt similar
practices, immigrant advocates said. Despite the New York memo, some school
districts there continued to press for the right to ask about immigration
status, said Udi Ofer, advocacy director of the New York Civil Liberties
Union. In Arizona, state lawmakers have considered a bill that would require the
state's Education Department to determine the number of public school students
who are unable to prove lawful presence in the United States, officials said.
Last year, a legislative committee in Oklahoma favored a bill to require public
schools to determine, at the time of enrollment, whether a child was born
outside the United States.




###

Forwarded message [edited]

***

The following new articles have been added to Bender's Immigration Bulletin:

Visit http://www.bibdaily.com to read the details.

NEW ARTICLES

***
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Feds: All kids entitled to school

"The U.S. Department of Education sent a letter to districts around the country
Friday, reminding them that all students — legal or not — are entitled to a
public education. The letter comes amid reports that schools may be checking the
immigration status of students trying to enroll, and reminds districts they are
federally prohibited from barring elementary or secondary students on the basis
of citizenship status."

AP, May 6, 2011.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

U.S. Warns Schools Against Checking Immigration Status

"Federal officials issued a memorandum to the nation’s school districts on
Friday saying it was against the law for education officials to seek information
that might reveal the immigration status of children applying for enrollment."

NYT, May 6, 2011.

::


DOJ, Education: Plyler still the law

"Under Federal law, State and local educational agencies (hereinafter
“districts”) are required to provide all children with equal access to public
education at the elementary and secondary level. Recently, we have become aware
of student enrollment practices that may chill or discourage the participation,
or lead to the exclusion, of students based on their or their parents’ or
guardians’ actual or perceived citizenship or immigration status. These
practices contravene Federal law. Both the United States Department of Justice
and the United States Department of Education (Departments) write to remind you
of the Federal obligation to provide equal educational opportunities to all
children residing within your district and to offer our assistance in ensuring
that you comply with the law."

Departments of Justice & Education,

May 6, 2011.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

IJ Gives Immigrant in Same-Sex Marriage a Reprieve From Deportation

"An immigration judge in Newark on Friday suspended the deportation of a
Venezuelan man who is married to an American man, responding to an unusual
signal this week from the Obama administration that it is exploring legal
avenues for recognizing same-sex marriages in immigration cases."

Julia Preston, NYT, May 7, 2011.


:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

DOJ, Education: Plyler still the law

"Under Federal law, State and local educational agencies (hereinafter
“districts”) are required to provide all children with equal access to public
education at the elementary and secondary level. Recently, we have become aware
of student enrollment practices that may chill or discourage the participation,
or lead to the exclusion, of students based on their or their parents’ or
guardians’ actual or perceived citizenship or immigration status. These
practices contravene Federal law. Both the United States Department of Justice
and the United States Department of Education (Departments) write to remind you
of the Federal obligation to provide equal educational opportunities to all
children residing within your district and to offer our assistance in ensuring
that you comply with the law."

Departments of Justice & Education,

May 6, 2011.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::      

Sincerely,

Daniel M. Kowalski

EditorClick here to send e-mail to the Editor

"LexisNexis...it's how you know."

To be removed from this list  click here

N.Y. / REGION

New Call in Albany to Quit U.S. Immigration Program

By KIRK SEMPLE

Published: May 10, 2011

A group of 38 state lawmakers sent a letter to Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo on Monday
urging him to remove New York from a national program that has been a
cornerstone of the Obama administration's immigration enforcement efforts.

The letter comes about two months after another group of elected officials in
the state, including 19 New York City Council members, sent a similar letter to
Mr. Cuomo - part of a growing national chorus of hostility to the enforcement
initiative, which has begun in most states and in some New York counties.

Under the program, called Secure Communities, the fingerprints of everyone
booked into a local or county jail are automatically sent to the Department of
Homeland Security and compared with prints in the agency's databases.

If officials discover that a suspect is in the country illegally, or is a
noncitizen immigrant with a criminal record, they may seek to deport the person.

Last week, Gov. Pat Quinn of Illinois said he was pulling his state out of the
program; it was the first time a state had sought to withdraw entirely.

Mr. Quinn and other opponents complain that Secure Communities has strayed from
its stated goal of ensnaring convicted criminals, particularly those found
guilty of the most serious offenses, and that it is instead sweeping up many
immigrants charged with low-level crimes or guilty only of being in the country
illegally.

In their letter, the New York legislators applauded Mr. Quinn's action, adding,
"Given New York's immigrant heritage and our leadership role in the nation, we
firmly believe that our state, too, must immediately end this destructive
program."

A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo said on Monday that the governor and his staff were
still reviewing the program.

The Bush administration began Secure Communities in 2008, intending to have it
fully in place around the country by 2013.

In May 2010, Gov. David A. Paterson signed agreements to cooperate, and by
Monday, 24 of the 62 counties in New York had been added to the program. They
include Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester, Rockland, Putnam, Orange and Dutchess
Counties. They do not include New York City's five boroughs.

The new data-sharing system has contributed to a surge in deportations.

Opponents worry that it could deter illegal immigrants from coming forward as
witnesses to help law enforcement officers fight crime.

In March, a group of lawyers and immigrant advocates analyzed data from
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, an arm of the Department of Homeland
Security, and concluded that about one in four people deported under Secure
Communities had not been convicted of a crime.

In some jurisdictions, more than half of deportees were not convicted criminals,
the advocates said. New York's counties began joining the system on Jan. 11.

Through the end of February, about 80 percent of the immigrants detained as a
result of Secure Communities had no criminal record, advocates said.

While Obama administration officials have said that states can technically opt
out of the program, refusal to participate would be costly. Federal officials
have warned that any state that declines to share fingerprints through the
program will lose access to the criminal databases of other states and the
federal government, seriously hampering crime-fighting efforts.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=786835&f=22

NYT: Albany Lawmakers Protest Givin



###

The Black President and the Brown Vote

Wed, 05/11/2011 - 12:05 — Bruce A. Dixon   ​Latino vote | ​anti-immigrant
hysteria   Printer-friendly version

by BAR managing editor

Bruce A. Dixon

Can Barack Obama be re-elected without the overwhelming majorities he received
in Latino communities across the country?

The short answer is probably not. Detentions, deportations, raids, profiling and
mass roundups of immigrants are at an all time high.

The border wall that Obama originally campaigned against has been built with his
endorsement, and generous federal contracts to jail detained immigrants have
rescued the private prison industry.

What happened, Latino activists are asking, to the president's commitments to
fairness, human rights and a path to citizenship?

And what will happen to the Latino vote in 2012?

The Black President and the Brown Vote

by BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon   

In 2008, President Obama got a full two-thirds of the Latino vote, a greater
slice than of any ethnic group apart from African Americans.

The brown vote for Obama was decisive in Florida, Nevada, New Mexico and
Colorado and topped 70% in California, Illinois and New Jersey.

Can the president count on that kind of overwhelming support in 2012?

With deportations and family separations at an all time high, and no end in
sight, some Latino activists think not.

“We can't hide from it, even if we wanted to,” Roberto Lovato, writer and
co-founder of Presente.Org, the nation's premiere on-line Latino advocacy group
told Black Agenda Report. “Just about every Latino family contains
undocumented people, along with citizens and adults registered to vote. They
know. They can see that deportations are at an all time high. The number of
these brutal family separations where children and old people are left behind
has never been greater. They see this in their own families and the families of
friends and neighbors. The level of actual fear people live in, in their homes,
on the street or at the job has never been more intense than it is right now.”

In the generation since the Freedom Movement ended, black politicians and the
black church have appropriated its mantle and symbols to market black candidates
in black constituencies for every office from city council to president as the
heirs and fulillers of Dr. King's Dream.

Hence candidate Obama didn't even have to make black America any promises.

Black voters bit the marketing, made up the promises in their own heads, and
flocked to the polls in record numbers.

But along with the slick marketing and the slippery language of “comprehensive
immigration reform” Barack Obama did make a handful of specific commitments to
Latinos. He promised a road to citizenship for the millions of undocumented,
along with a more just and fair immigration regime. He hasn't delivered.

“The fact is that on immigration issues,” Lovato continued, “Barack Obama
has been the worst US president of modern times. Supporting him again, for many
Latinos is a proposition that flies in the face of our own dignity and
self-respect.”

Without overwhelming majorities in brown constituencies, re-electing Barack
Obama will be difficult indeed.

White support for the president is dropping, and even African American support
is softening.

Latino support for the president, according to an authoritative February 2011
survey by Latino Decisions and impreMe, is around 70%.

But that number, they caution, “...does not translate into automatic votes for
2012...” The second part of that poll reveals that while Republicans are
gaining no ground in Latino communities, only 43% of Latino voters are certain
they will support Barack Obama next year.

The White House knows it's in deep trouble.

“My sources in DC tell me that when the Congressional Hispanic Caucus called
for the President Obama to use his executive authority to suspend or alter the
so-called “Secure Communities” program under which hundreds of workplace
raids and countless incidents of profiling, indiscriminate roundups, detentions
and deportations have occurred, the White House responded by working the phones,
calling up key House Democrats and cautioning them to keep their distance from
the caucus on this.

“The president is running around the country, showing up at town hall meetings
claiming that federal policies are only deporting criminals, but everybody knows
it's not true. At one meeting a young woman, a college student stood up and
pulled out her own deportation order to show the president. The president is
convening panels of Latino celebrities, asking them to spread the word about the
good work he's doing for our people. But it's not working, not as well as he
needs it to.

There is a solid and growing base of people and organizations in our communities
who just aren't buying it.

“There are moves to silence critics of the administration on this, to deny
them access to publication and broadcast, to cut funding and such. But I think
those efforts will fail. The number of imprisoned, brutally separated and
terrorized families and communities is just so great that Latinos even in
unions, in community groups and such that normally constitute the informal
infrastructure of the Democratic party can't ignore them.

“At some point the White House will either have to try to divide us, or step
to the table and negotiate. When that happens, the two minimum demands, neither
of which Obama needs Republican support to meet, will be to stop the
deportations of DREAM Act students, and to cut off funding for the “Secure
Communities Act. Maybe we'll even get to remove the many punitive elements of
so-called “comprehensive immigration reform” as well. We just have to stand
against this White House, and Latinos are showing some backbone, I'm an
optimist, I think we can.”

We think Lovato has a point. President Obama, in his El Paso speech earlier this
week dishonestly laid the blame for the wave of deportations and terror
exclusively on Republicans. He talked about undocumented workers “jumping to
the front of the line.” The president might have taken a moment to explain to
the “what do you not understand about illegal” chorus of white America that
the federal government, in the 19th and early 20th centuries removed all
barriers to and actively solicited European immigration, with the oft-stated
goal of making this a white republic. The famed American “melting pot” was
intended, in those days, to exclude everybody who wasn't white. So much for the
“our ancestors came here legally” nonsense. Time to get over all that. But
in the color-blind America of the 21st century, this remains forgotten and
forbidden history.

Lovato adds that many Latinos have carefully studied the struggle of African
Americans, both before and since the Freedom Movement of a generation ago. Let's
hope they don't make some of the mistakes black America is making today, like
unconditionally supporting an administration that does virtually nothing for
them. They have little to lose. When that happens, black people will have a
lesson to learn from Latinos.

Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, and based in Marietta
GA, where he is also a state committee member of the GA Green Party. He can be
reached at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com.




###

INS Raid at Odessa Construction Site 5/17/11

CBS7 NewsMay 17, 2011

Ector County - Midland County

Sheriff Gary Painter tells CBS 7 there were 39 arrests of illegal immigrants at
the construction site.

Several other workers were asked by authorities for their proper documentation,
and our source tells us, they were working legally and not detained.

Ector County - Odessa authorities and INS officials are involved in a situation
at an apartment complex on Fraudree Road.

A construction worker tells us that he showed up on the scene around 8:30 a.m.
He said that the Border Patrol, Sheriff's and the OPD were there rounding up
employees.

The witness tells us they were looking for illegal immigrants. He also said he
saw several workers in handcuffs.

Our crew tell us that Homeland Security has arrived and authorities are still
working the scene.

Stay tuned to CBS7 and CBS7.com for more information.

If you have pictures or video, you can upload them to our street team here at
CBS7.com or our facebook page by clicking here.

Photos provided by our street team!

http://www.cbs7.com/news/details.asp?ID=25616

U.S. to investigate Secure Communities deportation program

Homeland Security's inspector general plans a review of the immigration
enforcement program that purports to target 'serious convicted felons' but which
some accuse of racial profiling.​

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose), in seeking an… (J. Scott Applewhite, AP Photo)

May 18, 2011|

By Lee Romney, Los Angeles Times

The Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General plans an
investigation of an immigration enforcement program that purports to target
"serious convicted felons" for deportation but has ensnared many illegal
immigrants who were arrested but not subsequently convicted of crimes or who
committed minor offenses, a letter obtained Wednesday shows.

The letter from acting Inspector General Charles K. Edwards to Rep. Zoe Lofgren
(D-San Jose), who requested an investigation late last month, said the watchdog
agency had already scheduled a review of the program, known as Secure
Communities.
Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency launched the
program in 2008 with plans for mandatory nationwide participation by 2013.

The review, Edwards wrote, aims to "determine the extent to which ICE uses the
program to identify and remove dangerous criminal aliens from the United
States."

It will also examine cost, "the accuracy of ICE's data collection," whether the
program is being applied equitably across communities, and the way ICE officials
portrayed the program to states and counties, which were initially told they
could opt out but were later informed that participation has always been
mandatory.

Under the program, fingerprints routinely sent by local jails to the FBI for
criminal background checks are shared with ICE.

Although local law enforcement does not actively participate, the program has
turned jails in about 1,200 U.S. counties into immigration screening centers.

All 58 California counties are on board, though San Francisco and Santa Clara
sought unsuccessfully to opt out.

Proponents, including Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, say the program is
successfully targeting serious threats to public safety.

According to ICE, about 28,000, or 35%, of the people deported so far had been
convicted of felonies including murder and rape.

An unknown number who appear in ICE data on the program as "noncriminals" or as
having committed only misdemeanors had prior violent felonies here or in their
home countries, or were previously deported and returned illegally, they note.

But opponents contend that by also sweeping up minor offenders or those never
convicted of crimes, the program is dissuading illegal immigrants from
cooperating with law enforcement.

[ To continue reading click on the link below  ]

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/18/nation/la-na-secure-communities-20110519



###

MAY 23, 2011

Katyal Speaks of SG 'Mistakes' in Japanese Internment Cases
In an unusual statement posted on the Justice Department's blog, Acting
Solicitor General Neal Katyal on Friday spoke of the "mistakes" made by a
long-ago predecessor in defending the U.S. government's World War II
Japanese-American internment program before the Supreme Court.

Katyal reviewed evidence unearthed in the 1980s that in 1943 and 1944,
then-Solicitor General Charles Fahy failed to tell the Court of relevant
reports minimizing the danger posed by Japanese-Americans living on the west
coast.

His omissions and misstatements came in the cases of Korematsu v. United States
and Hirabayashi v. United States, in which the Court upheld the internment
program.

The rulings, never overturned, are widely viewed now as embarrassments to the
Court.

"Those decisions still stand today as reminders of the mistakes of that era,"
Katyal wrote in his blog post. "Today, our office takes this history as an
important reminder that the 'special credence' the Solicitor General enjoys
before the Supreme Court requires great responsibility and a duty of absolute
candor in our representations to the Court.
Only then can we fulfill our responsibility to defend the United States and its
Constitution, and to protect the rights of all Americans."

The blog post is titled "Confession of Error: The Solicitor General’s Mistakes
During the Japanese-American Internment Cases." But it is not in the formal
sense a confession of error of the kind that would be filed in an actual case
before a court. Nonetheless, over the weekend, Fred Korematsu's daughter as well
as members of the legal team that fought to overturn his conviction in the 1980s
viewed Katyal's statement as a significant and welcomed step. "I always wondered
if in my lifetime we would get from the Department of Justice a statement
acknowledging that Fahy failed to uphold his oath," said Korematsu's daughter
Karen in a phone interview. "I'm sorry my father is not here to read it. But I
am glad the record is starting to be told." Her father died in 2005, and in 2009
she co-founded the Fred T. Korematsu Institute for Civil Rights and Education in
his name.

"It's very nice, and long overdue," said Peter Irons, the University of
California San Diego political scientist who in 1981 discovered the documents
that showed Fahy misled the high court.

"It's as close to a confession of error from the government as we are likely to
get."

Donald Tamaki of Minami Tamaki in San Francisco, who also aided in Korematsu's
appeal, called Katyal's statement "another nail in the coffin" of the wartime
prosecution of Korematsu for the crime of being in an area where persons of
Japanese ancestry were excluded. 

"I wish my parents were alive to hear it," said Tamaki, several of whose family
members were uprooted by the program. Katyal indicated in his statement that it
was timed to coincide with Asian-Pacific American Heritage Month, which is May.

Katyal is scheduled to speak Tuesday, along with Attorney General Eric Holder
Jr., at an event marking the occasion in the department's Great Hall. Katyal,
who declined to elaborate on the blog post, is expected to leave the department
sometime later this year, assuming that the Senate confirms Donald Verrilli as
the next SG.

Following the discovery of documents contradicting SG Fahy's argument before the
wartime Supreme Court, lawyers for Korematsu and Gordon Hirabayashi filed writs
of coram nobis, a rarely invoked process for reversing mistaken court decisions
caused by fraud or other errors, when no other relief is available.

In granting Korematsu's writ in 1984, Judge Marilyn Patel of the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California spoke of "critical contradictory
evidence known to the government and knowingly concealed from the courts."

She also noted the existence of memoranda between Justice Department officials
discussing the obligation to give the courts an honest account of the
conflicting evidence about the threat posed by Japanese Americans and whether an
internment program was justified.

Not presenting the full picture "might approximate the suppression of evidence,"
one official warned. "The information was critical to the court's
determination," Patel wrote. "The judicial process is seriously impaired when
the government's law enforcement officers violate their ethical obligations to
the court." The government dropped its opposition to overturning the conviction,
but never explicitly acknowledged its misleading statements.

Hirabayashi's conviction was also vacated, and in a 1987 decision affirming that
action, the U.S., Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit rebuked the solicitor
general for misleading the courts. The appeals panel said the government's
argument that the Supreme Court would have reached the same decision even if
Fahy had been forthright "ignores the traditionally special relationship between
the Supreme Court and the solicitor general which ... commands special credence
from the Court."

Katyal referred to that statement in his blog post, adding that "The court
thought it unlikely that the Supreme Court would have ruled the same way had the
Solicitor General exhibited complete candor." Fahy, who went on to serve as a
judge on the D.C. Circuit, died in 1979 before his defense of the internment
program was discredited.

Hirabayashi is a retired sociologist who taught at the University of Alberta in
Canada. Korematsu was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1998. At the
web site of the Korematsu Institute, Katyal's statement was heralded as
"unprecedented."


Posted by Tony Mauro on May 23, 2011 at 07:54 AM in Justice Department ,
Politics and Government , Supreme Court   | Permalink     Digg This  | Save to
del.icio.us       TRACKBACK  TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d94869e201538ea4e0ed970b


###

The following new articles have been added to Bender's Immigration Bulletin:

Visit http://www.bibdaily.com to read the details.

NEW ARTICLES

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Esequiel Hernández Jr. - 14 years later

Every year on or about May 20th I remind readers:

"In 1997, U.S. Marines patrolling the Texas-Mexican border as part of the war on
drugs shot and killed Esequiel Hernández, Jr.

Mistaken for a drug runner, the 18 year old was, in fact, a U.S. citizen tending
his family's goats with a .22 rifle.

He became the first American killed by U.S. military forces on native soil since
the 1970 Kent State shootings."

This PBS DVD is a must-view for all who care about our border policies.

http://www.pbs.org/pov/ballad/

POV - The Ballad of Esequiel Hernández | PBS





###


###

...Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville, countered that nearly 70 percent of
people who have been referred for deportation under the program have either
committed minor offenses or have not been charged at all. He cited the case of
Isaura Garcia, a Los Angeles County woman who faced deportation after she
reported being physically abused by her boyfriend.

Immigration officials eventually suspended the deportation hearings after an
outcry, but Alejo said the case "sent a chilling message across the immigrant
community."

Ammiano called the program a "farce," saying it leads to racial profiling.
"There is no shame in protecting people who are vulnerable," he said. "Who is it
that is cleaning your house but cannot sleep there, who is paying taxes but
can't stay in our country, who is fighting in Afghanistan but is being
dehumanized?"
...

***

Immigration program opt-out OKd by Assembly

Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Staff Writer

San Francisco Chronicle

May 26, 2011 04:00 AM

Copyright San Francisco Chronicle. All rights


(05-26) 17:06 PDT Sacramento -- The California Assembly approved a bill Thursday
to allow
counties to opt out of a federal program to combat illegal immigration that
opponents say rips families apart, leads to racial profiling and erodes trust
between law enforcement and immigrants. Under the Secure Communities program,
initiated by President Obama, the fingerprints of anyone booked into a county
jail are automatically cross-checked against immigration databases. If a person
is determined to be undocumented, local authorities hand them over to federal
officials for possible deportation. Several law enforcement authorities and
other public officials have criticized the program, saying it jeopardizes
relations with immigrant communities and separates people who have not been
convicted of crimes from their families. Opponents have cited instances in which
illegal immigrants were deported after they were booked on nothing more than
traffic violations. The measure by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco,
seeks to allow counties to opt out of the program.

Two Bay Area counties - San Francisco and Santa Clara - have formally sought
permission from the federal government to do so. Several other cities and
counties in California have passed resolutions supporting the bill, AB1081, or
are considering doing so. Elsewhere, Illinois has said it will withdraw from the
program, and Maryland and Massachusetts are studying whether to do so.

* Contract changes *

Under Ammiano's measure, the state would be required to renegotiate its contract
with the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement
division so counties could opt out.  It is not clear how federal officials would
react. Last month, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told The
Chronicle that local communities cannot opt in or out of Secure Communities.
Nevertheless, Thursday's 43-22 vote in favor of the measure is a big win for
Latino advocates and other supporters, including San Francisco Sheriff Mike
Hennessey, who said the federal program violates "hard-earned trust" between law
enforcement and immigrants. The bill now heads to the state Senate for
consideration. Gov. Jerry Brown has not said whether he will sign the measure.

* Heated debate *

During a heated floor debate on the bill Thursday, Republican opponents said
supporters were violating their oath of office by refusing to uphold federal
immigration laws and accused them of wanting to protect dangerous and violent
criminals.  Assemblyman Luis Alejo, D-Watsonville, countered that nearly 70
percent of people who have been referred for deportation under the program have
either committed minor offenses or have not been charged at all. He cited the
case of Isaura Garcia, a Los Angeles County woman who faced deportation after
she reported being physically abused by her boyfriend. Immigration officials
eventually suspended the deportation hearings after an outcry, but Alejo said
the case "sent a chilling message across the immigrant community."  Ammiano
called the program a "farce," saying it leads to racial profiling. "There is no
shame in protecting people who are vulnerable," he said. "Who is it that is
cleaning your house but cannot sleep there, who is paying taxes but can't stay
in our country, who is fighting in Afghanistan but is being dehumanized?"

* San Francisco case *

In speaking against the bill, Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, R-Twin Peaks (San
Bernardino County), cited the case of Tony Bologna, 48, and his sons Michael,
20, and Matthew, 16, who were shot to death in San Francisco in June 2008. The
alleged gunman, Edwin Ramos, is undocumented and, despite being convicted of two
felonies as a juvenile, San Francisco officials did not turn him over to
immigration officials.  Donnelly blamed San Francisco's "sanctuary city" law for
the killings. At the time Ramos committed his juvenile offenses, city officials
interpreted the law as barring them from referring underage felons to federal
officials for deportation. "Shame on San Francisco and shame on anyone who would
invite and protect dangerous criminals - we're not talking about ordinary people
pulled over for traffic violations," Donnelly said. "I would urge a no vote, and
I would ask one thing: I would invite you to sit in the living room of (widow)
Danielle Bologna, whose family was slaughtered by an illegal alien drug thug who
was put back on the street by San Francisco's sanctuary city policy."

* Angry reaction *

Ammiano reacted angrily, saying that the Bologna family has specifically asked
not be used in the Secure Communities debate and noting that immigration
officials were informed of Ramos' immigration status months before the Bolognas
were slain.  "That assailant was reported to ICE and you know what happened? ICE
didn't act because they were probably out busting a crossing guard or a mom on
her way to work," Ammiano said.

E-mail Marisa Lagos at mlagos@....

This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/27/MNP51JLJH0.DTL

***
***

Will California opt out of Secure Communities, and can it? | Multi-American

http://multiamerican.scpr.org/2011/05/can-california-opt-out-of-secure-communiti\
es/

***

Will California opt out of Secure Communities, and can it?       ​ ​   ​  
​ ​

Art by José Luís Agapito/Flickr (Creative Commons)

The California Assembly passed a bill 43-22 today that challenges the
embattled federal immigration enforcement program known as Secure Communities.

If the bill becomes law, it would allow the state to renegotiate its contract
with the Homeland Security department, allowing local jurisdictions to opt out
of what is now a mandatory fingerprint-sharing program. The state could choose
to opt out altogether as well.

The bill, which now goes on to the senate, has been dubbed the Transparency and
Responsibility Using State Tools Act, or “TRUST Act.”

The text of the California bill was posted on Multi-American late last month.

Shortly afterward, the governor of Illinois announced plans to withdraw the
state from the program.

His decision was challenged by Department of Homeland Security officials, who
said the department would not allow Illinois law enforcement to opt out of
sharing information with immigration authorities.

If the California bill passes and the state moves to opt out of or modify its
participation in Secure Communities, can it?

The program’s implementation in California was guided by a “memorandum of
understanding,” or MOA, between Homeland Security and the California
Department of Justice dated January 23, 2009.

In the section titled “Modifications and Termination,” the document reads:
This MOA may be modified at any time by mutual written consent of both parties.
This MOA may remain in effect from the date of signing until it is terminated by
either party.

Either party, upon written or oral notice to the other party, may terminate the
MOA at any time.

A termination notice shall be delivered personally or by certified or registered
mail and termination shall take effect 30 days after receipt of such notice.

The same section of the Homeland Security MOA with Illinois State Police,
available online along with other Secure Communities documents, has the same
wording.

Secure Communities allows for the fingerprints of people booked into local jails
to be checked against the Homeland Security department’s immigration records.

If there is a match, immigration authorities are notified.

Some jurisdictions, including San Francisco, have tried to opt out without
success.

Critics say the program alienates immigrant communities and potentially impedes
policing; immigrant advocates have pointed out that while the program is
intended to find deportable criminals, it nets many people without criminal
records, who are deported.

After Homeland Security’s reaction to the Illinois decision, The San Francisco
Bay Guardian published a series of opinions on Secure Communities from legal
scholars, among them Bill Ong Hing, a law professor at the University of San
Francisco who is critical of the program.

Ong Hing noted the MOA language: “The implication of this provision is clear:
the terms of the MOA are negotiable,” he said.

http://multiamerican.scpr.org/2011/05/can-california-opt-out-of-secure-communiti\
es/

Will California opt out of Secure Communities, and can it? | Multi-American





***

***

###

Will California opt out of Secure Communities, and can it? | Multi-American

http://multiamerican.scpr.org/2011/05/can-california-opt-out-of-secure-communiti\
es/

***

Will California opt out of Secure Communities, and can it?       ​ ​   ​  
​ ​

Art by José Luís Agapito/Flickr (Creative Commons)

The California Assembly passed a bill 43-22 today that challenges the
embattled federal immigration enforcement program known as Secure Communities.

If the bill becomes law, it would allow the state to renegotiate its contract
with the Homeland Security department, allowing local jurisdictions to opt out
of what is now a mandatory fingerprint-sharing program. The state could choose
to opt out altogether as well.

The bill, which now goes on to the senate, has been dubbed the Transparency and
Responsibility Using State Tools Act, or “TRUST Act.”

The text of the California bill was posted on Multi-American late last month.

Shortly afterward, the governor of Illinois announced plans to withdraw the
state from the program.

His decision was challenged by Department of Homeland Security officials, who
said the department would not allow Illinois law enforcement to opt out of
sharing information with immigration authorities.

If the California bill passes and the state moves to opt out of or modify its
participation in Secure Communities, can it?

The program’s implementation in California was guided by a “memorandum of
understanding,” or MOA, between Homeland Security and the California
Department of Justice dated January 23, 2009.

In the section titled “Modifications and Termination,” the document reads:
This MOA may be modified at any time by mutual written consent of both parties.
This MOA may remain in effect from the date of signing until it is terminated by
either party.

Either party, upon written or oral notice to the other party, may terminate the
MOA at any time.

A termination notice shall be delivered personally or by certified or registered
mail and termination shall take effect 30 days after receipt of such notice.

The same section of the Homeland Security MOA with Illinois State Police,
available online along with other Secure Communities documents, has the same
wording.

Secure Communities allows for the fingerprints of people booked into local jails
to be checked against the Homeland Security department’s immigration records.

If there is a match, immigration authorities are notified.

Some jurisdictions, including San Francisco, have tried to opt out without
success.

Critics say the program alienates immigrant communities and potentially impedes
policing; immigrant advocates have pointed out that while the program is
intended to find deportable criminals, it nets many people without criminal
records, who are deported.

After Homeland Security’s reaction to the Illinois decision, The San Francisco
Bay Guardian published a series of opinions on Secure Communities from legal
scholars, among them Bill Ong Hing, a law professor at the University of San
Francisco who is critical of the program.

Ong Hing noted the MOA language: “The implication of this provision is clear:
the terms of the MOA are negotiable,” he said.

http://multiamerican.scpr.org/2011/05/can-california-opt-out-of-secure-communiti\
es/

Will California opt out of Secure Communities, and can it? | Multi-American





***

***

http://www.thenation.com/article/161049/arizona-turns-tide-voters-demand-recall-\
russell-pearce

05/31/2011 07:54 PM

Cuomo To Pull New York Out Of Secure Communities Program
By: NY1 News                       

Governor Andrew Cuomo will at least temporarily pull New York out of the federal
Secure Communities program pending a review of the controversial policy, NY1
learned Tuesday.

Cuomo's announcement is expected to come this week. The governor has been under
pressure by some elected officials and civil libertarians to suspend
participation in the program, which federal officials say is designed to improve
public safety by identifying undocumented immigrants who may then face
deportation.

Critics say the program oversteps boundaries, unfairly targets innocent people
and does not achieve its goals.

http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/140092/cuomo-to-pull-new-york-out-of-secu\
re-communities-program

Cuomo To Pull New York Out Of Secure Communities Program - NY1.com



###

------Original Message------
From: Andrea Mercado
Sender: immigrantrights@yahoogroups.com
To: immigrantrights@yahoogroups.com
ReplyTo: immigrantrights-owner@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [immigrantrights] [Action Alert] Assembly to vote on Domestic Workers
Bill of Rights THURSDAY!!! [1 Attachment]
Sent: Jun 1, 2011 15:52

  [Attachment(s) from Andrea Mercado included below]  The CA Domestic Worker
Bill of Rights is finally out of suspense!  We could not have done this without
your support. However, now we need your help to pass the Domestic Workers Bill
of Rights in the Assembly. The VOTE IS HAPPENING THURSDAY, 6/2!

WHAT YOU CAN DO IF YOU HAVE ONLY 5 MINUTES: Please contact the following
legislators, particularly if you live in their districts, and tell them why they
should support the Domestic Worker Bill of Rights: "My name is_________
from__________ and  I'm calling to support AB 889 Domestic Worker Bill of Rights
because I know this bill will create industry standards benefitting both
employers and workers! I urge Assemblymember_______ to vote YES on AB889."
 
Buchanan (San Ramon) 916-319-2015
Galgiani (Tracy) 916-319-2017
Huber (El Dorado Hills) 916-319-2010
Yamada (Davis) 916-319-2008
Beall (San Jose/Santa Clara) 916-319-2024
Chesbro (Sonoma) 916-319-2001
 
WHAT YOU CAN DO IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER 5 MINUTES: Please contact your LOCAL
Assemblymember and ask for their support.  Just click HERE and enter your
zipcode for their contact info.
 ( http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2119/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=695\
1 )
 
AND FINALLY, if you have time left: 
Call and thank Speaker John Perez (916-319-2046) for pushing for the Domestic
Worker Bill of Rights!  "My name is_________ from__________ and  I'm calling to
support AB 889 Domestic Worker Bill of Rights because I know this bill will
create industry standards benefitting both employers and workers and will be of
minimal cost to the state of California. We hope to count on your leadership and
support in passing this bill on the Assembly Floor!" 
 
 
Please forward to your own contacts. 
 
-- Andrea Cristina Mercado Lead Organizer Mujeres Unidas y Activas 3543 18th St
#23 San Francisco, CA 94110 (415) 621 8140  ext. 301
andreacristina@...  

OPINION

EDITORIAL

How a Democracy Works

Published: June 04, 2011

President Obama, who has spent two and a half years not delivering on his
promise to fix immigration, gave a speech in El Paso last month and cloaked his
failure in tough statistics - this many new border agents, that much fencing,
these thousands of deportations. As for the other parts of reform - where
millions of immigrants get right with the law and get on with becoming
Americans, where workers are better protected - he threw up his hands. He said
immigration advocates "wish I could just bypass Congress and change the law
myself. But that's not how a democracy works."

O.K., so maybe it isn't. But there is a lot President Obama can and should do,
using the discretion and authority granted to the executive branch and its
agencies to make the system work better:

***

¶Mr. Obama can bolster public safety by pulling the plug on Secure Communities,
a program that sends fingerprints of everyone booked by state or local police to
Department of Homeland Security databases to be checked for immigration
violations. It was supposed to focus on dangerous felons, but the heavy majority
of those it catches are noncriminals or minor offenders - more than 30 percent
have no convictions for anything.The president should listen to the many law
enforcement professionals and local officials, like the governors of New York
and Illinois, who want nothing to do with Secure Communities. They say it
endangers the public by catching the wrong people and stifling community
cooperation with law enforcement.

***

¶The president can push much harder against the noxious anti-immigrant laws
proliferating in the national free-for-all. The administration sued to stop
Arizona's radical scheme. But Utah, Alabama, Indiana and Georgia are trying to
do the same thing.

***

¶He can grant relief from deportation to young people who would have qualified
for the Dream Act, a filibustered bill that grants legal status to the innocent
undocumented who enter college or the military. He can do the same for workers
who would qualify for the Power Act, a stalled bill that seeks to prevent
employers from using the threat of deportation and immigration raids to
retaliate against employees who press for their rights on the job.

***

¶He can resist Republican lawmakers who want mandatory nationwide use of
E-Verify, a flawed hiring database, which would likely lead to thousands of
Americans losing their job because of data errors. A December report by the
Government Accountability Office warned that E-Verify is plagued by inaccurate
records and vulnerable to identity theft and employer fraud.

***

¶He can order the citizenship agency to keep families intact by making it easier
for illegal immigrants who are immediate relatives of American citizens to fix
their status without having to leave the country. Many already qualify for green
cards but are afraid to risk getting stuck abroad under too-strict laws that
could bar their re-entry.

***

¶He can bolster the civil rights division of the Department of Justice and give
the Department of Labor more tools to strengthen protections for all workers and
the authority to combat labor trafficking.

Such authority now lies with Homeland Security, which means many immigrants are
too frightened to speak up when their rights are abused. As President Obama said
in El Paso, the United States needs to address "the real human toll of a broken
immigration system."

There's work to do, Mr. President.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2011/06/04/opinion/04sat1.xml

NYT: How a Democracy Works




###

ˇYa Basta de Violencia!

Bi-National Event against the Violence in Mexico
When: Saturday, June 11th
Time: 10am-2pm
Where: San Jacinto Plaza (Plaza de Lagartos) downtown El Paso

The El Paso-Juarez community will host Javier Sicilia, the Mexican poet whose
son was murdered, along with other victims from the "War on Drugs" in Mexico on
Saturday June 11th. Please help us get the word out about this important event.
Please attend! Please circulate widely! Every voice counts! This is a way for
the El Paso region to show their support for the victims of the violence, and to
show solidarity with those who oppose the current policies which have resulted
in over 40,000 deaths since the start of the U.S. and Mexico "War on Drugs". 
The event supports the "Marcha Nacional por la Paz con Justicia y Dignidad"
(National March for Peace with Justice and Dignity).
Agenda

10 am – Gathering in San Jacinto Plaza

11am – Receive Javier Sicilia, presentation of/by family's, victims, and people
in exile in El Paso

12pm – Ritual/symbolic act of commitment

1 pm – Close of event
-----

ˇYa basta de violencia!

Evento Bi-Nacional contra la Violencia de México
Cuando: Sábado, 11 de junio
Hora: 10 a.m.- 2 p.m.
Lugar: San Jacinto Plaza (Plaza de Lagartos) en el centro de El Paso

El sábado 11 de junio, la comunidad de Juárez-El Paso recibirá a Javier Sicilia,
el poeta mexicano a quien  asesinaron a su hijo, al igual  que a otras personas
que han sido víctimas de la "guerra contra el narcotráfico" de México.  Por
favor ayuda a difundir la voz sobre este evento de tanta importancia.

ˇPor favor asiste! ˇPor favor circula este evento ampliamente! ˇCada voz cuenta!
Este evento es una forma mediante la cual  la región de El Paso puede demostrar
su apoyo a las víctimas de esta violencia y solidarizarse con quienes se oponen
a las corrientes políticas que han dado como resultado más de 40,000 muertes
desde el principio de la "guerra contra el narcotráfico" que iniciaron EEUU y
México.  Este evento apoya la Marcha Nacional por la Paz con Justicia y
Dignidad.
Agenda
10 a.m. – Reunión en San Jacinto Plaza en el centro de El Paso

11 a.m. – Bienvenida a Javier Sicilia, presentaciones de familiares, víctimas y
personas exiliadas.

12 p.m. – Ritual/Acto simbólico de compromiso

1 p.m. – Clausura del evento

Immigration Program Is Rejected by Third State

"Gov. Deval Patrick of Massachusetts has decided the state will not participate
in a fingerprint-sharing program that is central to the Obama administration’s
immigration enforcement strategy, dealing a new political blow to a program that
has met rising resistance nationwide."

Julia Preston, NYT, June 7, 2011.

***

The following new articles have been added to Bender's Immigration Bulletin:

Visit http://www.bibdaily.com to read the details.

NEW ARTICLES