By PAUL McENROE
Minneapolis Star Tribune
28 October 2011
AUSTIN, Minn. - It was after 1 a.m. when the policeman arrived at Patricia Sanchez's house, and he understood in a glance why she had dialed 911. Her face was streaked with scratches and her neck bore the red imprint of a man's hand.
"You're lucky to be alive," he said. He arrested her husband for domestic violence with intent to strangle and told the young woman to get an order for protection as soon as the courthouse opened.
The next morning, before returning to work at her packinghouse job, Sanchez stood at a court clerk's window, filling out a piece of paper supposedly strong enough to stop abuse.
While Sanchez waited at the courthouse, though, police were at her home, searching for evidence that her husband was an illegal immigrant. Rummaging through drawers and bedding, an officer noticed a framed photograph on the living room wall. It depicted a woman identified as Lisa Salazar in her white work uniform and hard hat, honored as Quality Pork Processors' Employee of the Month.
Except that Salazar looked exactly like Patricia Sanchez. Police also found documents suggesting Sanchez had committed identity fraud to get work and receive benefits for her children.
A week later, Sanchez sat bewildered in the Mower County jail, facing immigration charges and the threat of deportation back to Mexico. The victim had become a suspect.
The frightening June night in 2009 transformed Sanchez's life -- and now it has thrust Mower County into the vanguard of a national struggle over illegal immigration, policing and crime.
Today, after more than a year of soul-searching over law and justice, Mower County has a striking new policy: Illegal immigrants who become victims of violent crime will not be charged with document offenses, giving them immunity to aid the prosecution of more serious, violent felonies.
In Austin, a storied meatpacking town of 24,700 near the Iowa border, the issue has been pushed to the fore by an unlikely voice: Jeremy Clinefelter, the tough-minded assistant prosecutor who helped deport Sanchez's husband and then charged her with felony fraud.
"It didn't feel right morally," Clinefelter said. "We're prosecutors. But more that, we're here to be fair and just."
Mower County may be unique in the Upper Midwest, according to Rice County Attorney Paul Beaumaster, president of the Minnesota County Attorneys Association. But its new approach, he said, could have wider repercussions by removing a form of blackmail used against illegal immigrants.
"The abuser says, 'You can't go to the police, or I'm going to tell them you're here illegally,' " Beaumaster said. "It's a legitimate use of prosecutorial discretion in assuring that a defendant doesn't get to use our immigration laws as a weapon."
Since Congress created a program called Secure Communities in 2007, local police and prosecutors across the country have been playing an ever-larger role in enforcing federal immigration law. Tens of thousands of illegal immigrants have been arrested and deported, often in a process that started with a routine traffic stop or a set of fingerprints taken at a county jail.
But one question keeps arising: How can police and prosecutors build trust in growing ethnic communities when illegal immigrants who are otherwise law-abiding fear they will face arrest and deportation if they step forward to report crime?
Secure Communities places a priority on catching dangerous illegal immigrants convicted of violent felonies, yet federal documents show that one-fourth of the immigrants deported under the act had no criminal convictions.
At least five states have dropped out of the program in the past year, amid concerns about the potential for abusive and counterproductive tactics.
In Minnesota, however, some influential lawmakers are eager to have the state participate, even though that's not mandatory until 2013.
Sen. Julianne Ortman, R-Chanhassen, who pressed the legislation last spring, says the issue has been unfairly politicized. "I agree we should have amnesty programs for victims and witnesses who report crimes," she said. "But if we're going to house them in our jails or in our custody, we want to find out whether they're here illegally."
But civil liberties lawyers -- and some prominent lawmen -- disagree.
"You're going to put the community in an adversarial position with their police," says John Harrington, a state senator and former St. Paul police chief. "You're taking out the people who are in the best position to tell us about dangerous people in our community."
He soon found that, geographically and emotionally, Austin sat at the center of an immigration wave roiling southern Minnesota. The big meatpacking plants across the state's southern tier required an endless supply of workers willing to do grueling, dangerous jobs for modest wages. People willing to travel thousands of miles from the Texas-Mexico border for low wages satisfied it.
But there was a hidden cost to the boom. Austin had hundreds of residents with two, sometimes three, different names. They had purchased stolen IDs from brokers along the Mexican border or once they arrived in the Midwest. That meant there were also hundreds of victims of identity theft somewhere -- crime victims who suffered because of immigrants seeking work.
From 2000 to 2009, the Hispanic population in Mower County more than doubled, to nearly 3,500, part of a larger immigration wave statewide. Clinefelter's stolen-identity caseload was running at 50 to 70 files per year by 2005, most of them illegal immigrants. He'd become the office expert on document crimes.
As a teenager, Patricia Sanchez had risked her life crossing the Mexican border and the treacherous Sonoran Desert to get to the United States for a better life. Now, in the summer of 2009, she found herself in a Sherburne County jail cell leased by federal immigration authorities. Her sister in California had taken the children.
"People at immigration see us as criminals," she recalled. "I told them: 'I came here to work. I don't use drugs, I don't drink. I am not a bad person."
Meanwhile, her case had been taken up by a St. Paul attorney, former Ramsey County District Judge Alberto Miera. He argued that the police had conducted an illegal search of Sanchez's purse and wanted the fraud case dismissed.
Finally, the attorneys agreed to go to trial on a charge of simple forgery, still a felony. A judge found Sanchez guilty. She received a year's stay, marked down to a misdemeanor if she obeyed the law.
Then, satisfied with a finding of guilt, Clinefelter and Nelsen took a step on Sanchez's behalf -- the crucial step that could save her from deportation. They supported her application for a special visa granted to victims of domestic violence, a document known as a U-Visa. It worked.
By that fall, Sanchez was released from federal custody, reunited with her children, and back at work on the cutting line at Quality Pork.
http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/immigrant-protect102811/immigrant-protect102811/
Showing posts with label Secure Communities Program. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Secure Communities Program. Show all posts
Friday, October 28, 2011
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
ICE freezes mistrust
Phila. police have a special relationship with immigration crackdown.
By Tom Ferrick Jr.
METROPOLIS
Sep. 13, 2011
Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey has a smart new plan to combat crime that puts Philadelphia police in closer contact with their communities - walking the beat, getting familiar with the neighborhood. It makes sense, except in heavily Latino areas of town.
In those neighborhoods, especially in the Mexican community in South Philadelphia, people cringe when they see the police, and they fear contact with them. Any attempt by the police to gain their trust is doomed.
Why? Because the Police Department has chosen to have a special relationship with the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency - ICE, for short - has been on a tear here and nationally in rounding up illegal immigrants and deporting them. Under the Secure Communities program, the number of deportations has risen dramatically during the Obama administration.
On paper, Secure Communities makes sense. ICE is supposed to target undocumented immigrants with criminal records. Who can disagree with that? Why let Dominican drug dealers or Mexican gang members stay in the country?
In reality, there is a major gap between the stated goals of Secure Communities and its practice. In Philadelphia particularly, the program - which says it targets sharks - has ended up mostly capturing minnows.
Only one out of five illegal immigrants rounded up by ICE agents in Philadelphia in the last two years had been convicted of so-called Level 1 crimes, the most serious offenses (such as murder, kidnapping, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and national security violations). The majority were people who had not been convicted of any crime.
How could this be? Because in Philadelphia, the Police Department allows ICE access to its computer system, which records information about arrests in real time. Officially, it is called the Preliminary Arraignment System (PARS).
To use one example, if a Mexican kid is arrested for being drunk and disorderly, ICE agents know it immediately - often before his parents. We've heard tales of young men arrested on suspicion of theft, with no official charges leveled, being whisked away by ICE and deported to Mexico.
In this particular case, the young man was 25 and had lived in the United States since he was 2. To him, Mexico was a foreign country.
We revealed what was happening with ICE, PARS, and the police in a Metropolis story in June called "The Deportation Machine." (To read it, go to: http://bit.ly/n5bj8L)
Immigrant activists had hoped that the city would end its special relationship with ICE. Most other police jurisdictions do not give ICE agents access to their real-time data. In fact, a number of police departments and local and state officials are unhappy with the whole Secure Communities program, saying it puts them at odds with their local immigrant communities and makes policing more difficult.
Recently, in response to these complaints - and with one eye on reelection - the Obama administration has pulled the throttle back on Secure Communities.
Not in Philadelphia. In this city, as the Spanish-language weekly Al Día has reported, the local officials renewed their contract with ICE to continue to use PARS.
Let's be clear here. This issue is not about where you stand on immigration. ICE has a job to do and if it does capture sharks - people with serious convictions either here or in their home country - they should be deported.
But it shouldn't be the job of the Philadelphia police to de facto become surrogate ICE agents - any more than we should ask ICE agents to combat crime on the streets. Both are enforcement agencies, but each has a different mission.
So far, the Nutter administration has given lip service to critics of the relationship between ICE and the police. The mayor says soothing things about the need for broad immigration reform. Still, he approved renewal of the contract.
That makes him, along with Ramsey, part of the problem.
So, if you are a police officer, don't be surprised if Latinos walk the other way when you walk your beat. Instead of seeing you as a protector of their community, they see you as an arm of ICE.
They fear and distrust you - and the city has earned that distrust.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/129698323.html
By Tom Ferrick Jr.
METROPOLIS
Sep. 13, 2011
Police Commissioner Charles H. Ramsey has a smart new plan to combat crime that puts Philadelphia police in closer contact with their communities - walking the beat, getting familiar with the neighborhood. It makes sense, except in heavily Latino areas of town.
In those neighborhoods, especially in the Mexican community in South Philadelphia, people cringe when they see the police, and they fear contact with them. Any attempt by the police to gain their trust is doomed.
Why? Because the Police Department has chosen to have a special relationship with the federal agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency - ICE, for short - has been on a tear here and nationally in rounding up illegal immigrants and deporting them. Under the Secure Communities program, the number of deportations has risen dramatically during the Obama administration.
On paper, Secure Communities makes sense. ICE is supposed to target undocumented immigrants with criminal records. Who can disagree with that? Why let Dominican drug dealers or Mexican gang members stay in the country?
In reality, there is a major gap between the stated goals of Secure Communities and its practice. In Philadelphia particularly, the program - which says it targets sharks - has ended up mostly capturing minnows.
Only one out of five illegal immigrants rounded up by ICE agents in Philadelphia in the last two years had been convicted of so-called Level 1 crimes, the most serious offenses (such as murder, kidnapping, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and national security violations). The majority were people who had not been convicted of any crime.
How could this be? Because in Philadelphia, the Police Department allows ICE access to its computer system, which records information about arrests in real time. Officially, it is called the Preliminary Arraignment System (PARS).
To use one example, if a Mexican kid is arrested for being drunk and disorderly, ICE agents know it immediately - often before his parents. We've heard tales of young men arrested on suspicion of theft, with no official charges leveled, being whisked away by ICE and deported to Mexico.
In this particular case, the young man was 25 and had lived in the United States since he was 2. To him, Mexico was a foreign country.
We revealed what was happening with ICE, PARS, and the police in a Metropolis story in June called "The Deportation Machine." (To read it, go to: http://bit.ly/n5bj8L)
Immigrant activists had hoped that the city would end its special relationship with ICE. Most other police jurisdictions do not give ICE agents access to their real-time data. In fact, a number of police departments and local and state officials are unhappy with the whole Secure Communities program, saying it puts them at odds with their local immigrant communities and makes policing more difficult.
Recently, in response to these complaints - and with one eye on reelection - the Obama administration has pulled the throttle back on Secure Communities.
Not in Philadelphia. In this city, as the Spanish-language weekly Al Día has reported, the local officials renewed their contract with ICE to continue to use PARS.
Let's be clear here. This issue is not about where you stand on immigration. ICE has a job to do and if it does capture sharks - people with serious convictions either here or in their home country - they should be deported.
But it shouldn't be the job of the Philadelphia police to de facto become surrogate ICE agents - any more than we should ask ICE agents to combat crime on the streets. Both are enforcement agencies, but each has a different mission.
So far, the Nutter administration has given lip service to critics of the relationship between ICE and the police. The mayor says soothing things about the need for broad immigration reform. Still, he approved renewal of the contract.
That makes him, along with Ramsey, part of the problem.
So, if you are a police officer, don't be surprised if Latinos walk the other way when you walk your beat. Instead of seeing you as a protector of their community, they see you as an arm of ICE.
They fear and distrust you - and the city has earned that distrust.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/129698323.html
Friday, September 9, 2011
Immigration Shift Hasn't Trickled Down to Border Patrol
By Julian Aguilar
The Texas Tribune
7 September 2011
When Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced in June it was urging prosecutors to use discretion when placing illegal immigrants in deportation proceedings, skeptics urged caution. We’ve heard this before, they claimed.
People like Roxann Lara give them one more reason to say they were right.
Lara, originally from Delicias, Chihuahua, is five months pregnant and the mother of two U.S. citizen children. She is in the country illegally because she overstayed a visa. Her attorney says she’s the “poster child” for leniency under the June directive.
Instead, Lara was detained and processed by immigration authorities in Anthony, N.M., last week after she admitted to having expired documents when local police and U.S. Border Patrol agents came to the door looking for her sister.
It means the “left hand isn’t aware of what the right hand is doing,” said Carlos Spector, Lara’s El Paso-based attorney. "I think it’s important to note that this [directive] has not reached the lowest levels of ICE... because [Border Patrol agents] are still picking up pregnant women."
In the June directive, ICE Director John Morton told prosecutors to evaluate several factors when determining which illegal immigrants to place in deportation proceedings, part of a plan to concentrate ICE’s finite resources on removing the most dangerous criminal aliens. These factors included the immigrant’s health, their children’s immigration status, how long they had been in the country, and whether or not they were “low profile” — the government’s term for non-violent, non-essential deportees. That memo was followed last month by an announcement that the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE and Customs and Border Protection, would review the cases of the 300,000 people currently in deportation proceedings to determine if any should be released and subsequently allowed to apply for work authorization.
Lara was released from detention, but not until she was hospitalized after becoming panic stricken and physically ill during her stay. She says an agent threatened to deport her to Ciudad Juárez, where drug cartel violence is widespread.
“He said, ‘We have to go get your kids.’ I said ‘No, do what you want with me but leave my kids alone,’” a sobbing Lara told the Tribune by telephone from El Paso. “I told him I was sick and he said it didn’t matter to him.”
Spector said despite Lara's release, she has been issued a notice to appear before a judge. He said he intends to ask the judge to dismiss the case based on the Morton memo.
“The new policy says they shouldn’t pick up pregnant women or sick people," Spector said. "What we want to see and ask is, what does the Border Patrol think of the Morton memo?”
When asked if the Border Patrol has amended it’s policies since the Morton memo was issued, a spokesman for the U.S. Border Patrol El Paso sector told the Tribune agents are required to detain anyone who is unauthorized to be in the country. They can't give out warnings the way police officers can, he said; the immigration courts are the ones that ultimately make the decisions.
In Lara's case, Agent Ramiro Cordero said, Border Patrol "did exactly what we were supposed to do. If the courts grant that person some type of legal document, then the system works." Cordero added that the Morton memo was directed at federal prosecutors, who are overseen by ICE. U.S. Border Patrol, he said, is under the purview of Customs and Border Protection.
"Until there is policy and guidance from DHS, we still do what we have to do," he said.
“Not a revolutionary concept”
By the government’s own admission, internal policy changes can be slow-going. The agency's plan for reviewing deportation cases is still being crafted, so no individual cases have been closed, according to a Department of Homeland Security spokesman who asked not to be identified.
Immigration policy experts say they’re not surprised that there hasn’t been an immediate and sweeping change in policy. The Morton memo doesn’t reinvent the system, they say.
“Prosecutorial discretion is not new. It’s not a revolutionary concept," said Muzaffar Chishti, an attorney and director of the Migration Policy Institute at the New York University School of Law. "In an immigration context there have been guidelines about discretion for a very long time.”
A prosecutorial discretion memo issued in November 2000 by then-Immigration and Naturalization Services Commissioner Doris Meissner, now a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, said the agency had finite resources, and prosecuting all immigration cases was “not possible.” It instructed prosecutors to consider immigrants' criminal history, immigration history, cooperation with authorities, military service and humanitarian concerns, like conditions in the peron's home country and their health.
But when the Morton memo was issued in June, it still caused an uproar among Republican hardliners like U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, who called it “backdoor amnesty” and introduced a still-pending bill to dilute the administration’s immigration enforcement powers.
What's different about the agency's current policy, Chishti said, is that the government has stated it will review pending cases, not just use new standards for future ones. But he said it’s unclear how these policies will be implemented at the local level.
“The most critical part of this policy is going to be how they monitor it in the field,” Chishti said. “How are you going to notify people... and what is the accountability if an officer chooses not to exercise the discretion on the basis of the guidelines?"
Lara’s case indicates that, at least in certain Border Patrol sectors, the jury is still out.
http://www.texastribune.org/immigration-in-texas/immigration/despite-policy-shift-deportations-proceedings-cont/
The Texas Tribune
7 September 2011
When Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced in June it was urging prosecutors to use discretion when placing illegal immigrants in deportation proceedings, skeptics urged caution. We’ve heard this before, they claimed.
People like Roxann Lara give them one more reason to say they were right.
Lara, originally from Delicias, Chihuahua, is five months pregnant and the mother of two U.S. citizen children. She is in the country illegally because she overstayed a visa. Her attorney says she’s the “poster child” for leniency under the June directive.
Instead, Lara was detained and processed by immigration authorities in Anthony, N.M., last week after she admitted to having expired documents when local police and U.S. Border Patrol agents came to the door looking for her sister.
It means the “left hand isn’t aware of what the right hand is doing,” said Carlos Spector, Lara’s El Paso-based attorney. "I think it’s important to note that this [directive] has not reached the lowest levels of ICE... because [Border Patrol agents] are still picking up pregnant women."
In the June directive, ICE Director John Morton told prosecutors to evaluate several factors when determining which illegal immigrants to place in deportation proceedings, part of a plan to concentrate ICE’s finite resources on removing the most dangerous criminal aliens. These factors included the immigrant’s health, their children’s immigration status, how long they had been in the country, and whether or not they were “low profile” — the government’s term for non-violent, non-essential deportees. That memo was followed last month by an announcement that the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE and Customs and Border Protection, would review the cases of the 300,000 people currently in deportation proceedings to determine if any should be released and subsequently allowed to apply for work authorization.
Lara was released from detention, but not until she was hospitalized after becoming panic stricken and physically ill during her stay. She says an agent threatened to deport her to Ciudad Juárez, where drug cartel violence is widespread.
“He said, ‘We have to go get your kids.’ I said ‘No, do what you want with me but leave my kids alone,’” a sobbing Lara told the Tribune by telephone from El Paso. “I told him I was sick and he said it didn’t matter to him.”
Spector said despite Lara's release, she has been issued a notice to appear before a judge. He said he intends to ask the judge to dismiss the case based on the Morton memo.
“The new policy says they shouldn’t pick up pregnant women or sick people," Spector said. "What we want to see and ask is, what does the Border Patrol think of the Morton memo?”
When asked if the Border Patrol has amended it’s policies since the Morton memo was issued, a spokesman for the U.S. Border Patrol El Paso sector told the Tribune agents are required to detain anyone who is unauthorized to be in the country. They can't give out warnings the way police officers can, he said; the immigration courts are the ones that ultimately make the decisions.
In Lara's case, Agent Ramiro Cordero said, Border Patrol "did exactly what we were supposed to do. If the courts grant that person some type of legal document, then the system works." Cordero added that the Morton memo was directed at federal prosecutors, who are overseen by ICE. U.S. Border Patrol, he said, is under the purview of Customs and Border Protection.
"Until there is policy and guidance from DHS, we still do what we have to do," he said.
“Not a revolutionary concept”
By the government’s own admission, internal policy changes can be slow-going. The agency's plan for reviewing deportation cases is still being crafted, so no individual cases have been closed, according to a Department of Homeland Security spokesman who asked not to be identified.
Immigration policy experts say they’re not surprised that there hasn’t been an immediate and sweeping change in policy. The Morton memo doesn’t reinvent the system, they say.
“Prosecutorial discretion is not new. It’s not a revolutionary concept," said Muzaffar Chishti, an attorney and director of the Migration Policy Institute at the New York University School of Law. "In an immigration context there have been guidelines about discretion for a very long time.”
A prosecutorial discretion memo issued in November 2000 by then-Immigration and Naturalization Services Commissioner Doris Meissner, now a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, said the agency had finite resources, and prosecuting all immigration cases was “not possible.” It instructed prosecutors to consider immigrants' criminal history, immigration history, cooperation with authorities, military service and humanitarian concerns, like conditions in the peron's home country and their health.
But when the Morton memo was issued in June, it still caused an uproar among Republican hardliners like U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, who called it “backdoor amnesty” and introduced a still-pending bill to dilute the administration’s immigration enforcement powers.
What's different about the agency's current policy, Chishti said, is that the government has stated it will review pending cases, not just use new standards for future ones. But he said it’s unclear how these policies will be implemented at the local level.
“The most critical part of this policy is going to be how they monitor it in the field,” Chishti said. “How are you going to notify people... and what is the accountability if an officer chooses not to exercise the discretion on the basis of the guidelines?"
Lara’s case indicates that, at least in certain Border Patrol sectors, the jury is still out.
http://www.texastribune.org/immigration-in-texas/immigration/despite-policy-shift-deportations-proceedings-cont/
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Mexican farm workers in Vermont fear Secure Communities program
By LISA RATHKE
Bennington Banner
Monday September 5, 2011
MONTPELIER (AP) -- A federal program intended to identify and deport illegal immigrants is raising fears in Vermont, where Mexican farmhands, many without immigration papers, are a staple of the $560 million dairy industry.
Opponents say aggressive enforcement of the Secure Communities initiative could harm the state's struggling dairy industry and turn many of the 1,200 to 1,500 migrant workers into prisoners of the farms where they work, afraid to venture out because it could lead to arrest and deportation.
"It's not going to do us any good. It can only do us potential harm," said Clark Hinsdale, a dairy farmer and president of the Vermont Farm Bureau.
The program requires state and local law enforcement officials to send criminal suspects' fingerprints to the FBI, where they are run through a database to determine the person's immigration status.
Massachusetts and Illinois are among a handful of states that have defied a U.S. Homeland Security mandate to participate in the program, saying they should not be required to enforce federal laws.
Advocates for the workers say it hurts public safety because immigrants will be afraid to report crimes to police out of fear of deportation.
Over Lopez, 21, has gathered 70 signatures from fellow farm workers who want Vermont to reject the program. The VT Migrant Farmworker Solidarity Project also is seeking signatures from farmers and the public.
"I also want the people of Vermont, the governor and Vermont representatives to tell Obama to fulfill his unfulfilled promises to the Latino community that helped elect him by stopping this unjust program that is tearing apart our communities and work for comprehensive and just immigration reform," he said in a written statement.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said last week that the department would focus on deporting illegal immigrants who are criminals or pose a threat to national security or public safety. The move came amid protests from immigrant communities that the Obama administration is too centered on deporting illegal immigrants who have no prior offense or who have been picked up for traffic violations or other minor offenses.
The Department of Homeland Security says Secure Communities is an information sharing program that is focused on criminal offenders.
Between October 2008 and October 2010, the number of convicted criminals that Immigration and Customs Enforcement removed from the United States increased 71 percent, while the number of immigrants removed without criminal convictions dropped by 23 percent. The Secure Communities program is an attributing factor, the department said.
The program is a basic component of immigration enforcement, said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, which supports it and advocates for tougher immigration laws.
He said the program targets people who've already been arrested for a crime.
"This is not stopping people while they're taking their kids to the ice cream store and asking for their driver's license like the Arizona law opponents were saying," he said. "This is people arrested, booked, their fingerprints are taken."
Some local police agencies in Vermont have taken a hands-off approach, focusing on criminal activity and not immigration status.
"What it means is that they're supposed to be pursuing a federal priority which may be a federal priority in Arizona but it's not a priority in Vermont," Hinsdale said of the federal program.
Many farmers struggle to find workers in rural areas to milk cows and do other hard work and have come to rely on farm workers from Mexico. Because their business is year-round, dairy farms aren't eligible for foreign workers under the H2A temporary visa worker programs used by crop farmers, although Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy has pushed for a change.
"These workers are quality workers, they're valued and they're liked in the farm community," Hinsdale said.
But state Sen. Vincent Illuzzi, who represents the farming community of Orleans County, said he's heard complaints from workers who said they were laid off because a farm wanted to hire less expensive Mexican workers.
Leahy thinks the initiative in practice captures more immigrants than the criminals it purports to target, resulting in a significant number of people with low-level prior offenses being put into deportation proceedings, Carle said.
"In Vermont who this would affect are some of the hardest working people working in some of our most core industries -- like our dairy industry -- and many of our other agriculture industries, and so we think it's a flawed program that should be stopped, and we need real immigration reform," said James Haslam, executive director of the Vermont Workers' Center.
http://www.benningtonbanner.com/business/ci_18831834
Bennington Banner
Monday September 5, 2011
MONTPELIER (AP) -- A federal program intended to identify and deport illegal immigrants is raising fears in Vermont, where Mexican farmhands, many without immigration papers, are a staple of the $560 million dairy industry.
Opponents say aggressive enforcement of the Secure Communities initiative could harm the state's struggling dairy industry and turn many of the 1,200 to 1,500 migrant workers into prisoners of the farms where they work, afraid to venture out because it could lead to arrest and deportation.
"It's not going to do us any good. It can only do us potential harm," said Clark Hinsdale, a dairy farmer and president of the Vermont Farm Bureau.
The program requires state and local law enforcement officials to send criminal suspects' fingerprints to the FBI, where they are run through a database to determine the person's immigration status.
Massachusetts and Illinois are among a handful of states that have defied a U.S. Homeland Security mandate to participate in the program, saying they should not be required to enforce federal laws.
Advocates for the workers say it hurts public safety because immigrants will be afraid to report crimes to police out of fear of deportation.
Over Lopez, 21, has gathered 70 signatures from fellow farm workers who want Vermont to reject the program. The VT Migrant Farmworker Solidarity Project also is seeking signatures from farmers and the public.
"I also want the people of Vermont, the governor and Vermont representatives to tell Obama to fulfill his unfulfilled promises to the Latino community that helped elect him by stopping this unjust program that is tearing apart our communities and work for comprehensive and just immigration reform," he said in a written statement.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said last week that the department would focus on deporting illegal immigrants who are criminals or pose a threat to national security or public safety. The move came amid protests from immigrant communities that the Obama administration is too centered on deporting illegal immigrants who have no prior offense or who have been picked up for traffic violations or other minor offenses.
The Department of Homeland Security says Secure Communities is an information sharing program that is focused on criminal offenders.
Between October 2008 and October 2010, the number of convicted criminals that Immigration and Customs Enforcement removed from the United States increased 71 percent, while the number of immigrants removed without criminal convictions dropped by 23 percent. The Secure Communities program is an attributing factor, the department said.
The program is a basic component of immigration enforcement, said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, which supports it and advocates for tougher immigration laws.
He said the program targets people who've already been arrested for a crime.
"This is not stopping people while they're taking their kids to the ice cream store and asking for their driver's license like the Arizona law opponents were saying," he said. "This is people arrested, booked, their fingerprints are taken."
Some local police agencies in Vermont have taken a hands-off approach, focusing on criminal activity and not immigration status.
"What it means is that they're supposed to be pursuing a federal priority which may be a federal priority in Arizona but it's not a priority in Vermont," Hinsdale said of the federal program.
Many farmers struggle to find workers in rural areas to milk cows and do other hard work and have come to rely on farm workers from Mexico. Because their business is year-round, dairy farms aren't eligible for foreign workers under the H2A temporary visa worker programs used by crop farmers, although Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy has pushed for a change.
"These workers are quality workers, they're valued and they're liked in the farm community," Hinsdale said.
But state Sen. Vincent Illuzzi, who represents the farming community of Orleans County, said he's heard complaints from workers who said they were laid off because a farm wanted to hire less expensive Mexican workers.
Leahy thinks the initiative in practice captures more immigrants than the criminals it purports to target, resulting in a significant number of people with low-level prior offenses being put into deportation proceedings, Carle said.
"In Vermont who this would affect are some of the hardest working people working in some of our most core industries -- like our dairy industry -- and many of our other agriculture industries, and so we think it's a flawed program that should be stopped, and we need real immigration reform," said James Haslam, executive director of the Vermont Workers' Center.
http://www.benningtonbanner.com/business/ci_18831834
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Bay Area forum condemns Secure Communities immigration program
The deportation program that was intended to target 'serious convicted criminals' is also sweeping up people with minor offenses or who were never convicted. A state bill aims to let counties opt out.
By Lee Romney
The Los Angeles Times
August 28, 2011
More than 200 people crammed into a meeting room Saturday in this city's heavily Latino Fruitvale District to condemn Secure Communities, the federal deportation program that was billed as targeting "serious convicted criminals" but has ensnared many who committed minor offenses or were never convicted of the crimes on which they were arrested.
Joined by a handful of Bay Area elected leaders, the largely Spanish-speaking crowd called on Gov. Jerry Brown and Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris to take a stance against the program. Forum leaders also sought support for a bill sponsored by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) that would attempt to make Secure Communities optional for California counties, limit its scope to convicted felons and offer protections to crime victims.
"We're here to say we'll work with you until this program changes," Ammiano's district director, Kimberly Alvarenga, told the cheering crowd.
Weeping, a 29-year-old San Francisco woman spoke of her husband's April arrest after a dust-up at an Oakland event prompted security guards to turn him over to police. Although the painter from Mexico City was never charged, he is now in deportation proceedings, his wife told the crowd, using the alias "Ivone."
"The kids are crying inconsolably and don't know what to do," she said of their daughters, age 4 and 7.
The event comes as controversy plagues Secure Communities nationwide. Immigration and Customs Enforcement data show that 55% of those targeted for deportation under the program committed minor offenses or, like Ivone's husband, were arrested but never charged or convicted.
Under Secure Communities — created to focus limited federal resources on immigrants who posed threats — fingerprints forwarded by local jails to the FBI for criminal checks are shared with ICE. Opponents say the program has eroded immigrant communities' trust in police.
Furthermore, while local governments were told when the program was launched in 2008 that participation would be optional, ICE gradually altered its message and now says it never was. Illinois, New York and Massachusetts have said they want out. But on Aug. 5, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton announced that the agency had voided signed agreements with the states that had appeared to give them a say in participation.
The federal stance raises questions about whether Ammiano's bill would have impact if it became law. But backers of the bill say they are looking for legal avenues that could give counties control over the program. San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey, for example, has declined to hold certain low-level offenders for ICE.
Opponents also are reviewing the legality of ICE's voiding of the state agreements, and whether ICE is entitled to use local fingerprint data without permission.
Federal officials have offered recent concessions. Immigration prosecutors now have more discretion over whom they push to deport. And the Obama administration, which supports Secure Communities, announced this month that it will review all 300,000 people facing deportation to prioritize serious criminals over students and families.
Brown signed California's agreement with ICE in 2009 when he was attorney general but has since been silent on the program. "Our stance … is that, as a result of the federal government's policy, we do not have the option to opt out of it," Brown spokeswoman Elizabeth Ashford said in an email Saturday.
Harris expressed concerns that the program has "strayed far beyond" the goal of getting "serious criminals off the streets," saying in a statement that it is "critical to public safety that victims and witnesses of crime can step forward and report crime without fear of reprisal."
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
By Lee Romney
The Los Angeles Times
August 28, 2011
More than 200 people crammed into a meeting room Saturday in this city's heavily Latino Fruitvale District to condemn Secure Communities, the federal deportation program that was billed as targeting "serious convicted criminals" but has ensnared many who committed minor offenses or were never convicted of the crimes on which they were arrested.
Joined by a handful of Bay Area elected leaders, the largely Spanish-speaking crowd called on Gov. Jerry Brown and Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris to take a stance against the program. Forum leaders also sought support for a bill sponsored by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) that would attempt to make Secure Communities optional for California counties, limit its scope to convicted felons and offer protections to crime victims.
"We're here to say we'll work with you until this program changes," Ammiano's district director, Kimberly Alvarenga, told the cheering crowd.
Weeping, a 29-year-old San Francisco woman spoke of her husband's April arrest after a dust-up at an Oakland event prompted security guards to turn him over to police. Although the painter from Mexico City was never charged, he is now in deportation proceedings, his wife told the crowd, using the alias "Ivone."
"The kids are crying inconsolably and don't know what to do," she said of their daughters, age 4 and 7.
The event comes as controversy plagues Secure Communities nationwide. Immigration and Customs Enforcement data show that 55% of those targeted for deportation under the program committed minor offenses or, like Ivone's husband, were arrested but never charged or convicted.
Under Secure Communities — created to focus limited federal resources on immigrants who posed threats — fingerprints forwarded by local jails to the FBI for criminal checks are shared with ICE. Opponents say the program has eroded immigrant communities' trust in police.
Furthermore, while local governments were told when the program was launched in 2008 that participation would be optional, ICE gradually altered its message and now says it never was. Illinois, New York and Massachusetts have said they want out. But on Aug. 5, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton announced that the agency had voided signed agreements with the states that had appeared to give them a say in participation.
The federal stance raises questions about whether Ammiano's bill would have impact if it became law. But backers of the bill say they are looking for legal avenues that could give counties control over the program. San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey, for example, has declined to hold certain low-level offenders for ICE.
Opponents also are reviewing the legality of ICE's voiding of the state agreements, and whether ICE is entitled to use local fingerprint data without permission.
Federal officials have offered recent concessions. Immigration prosecutors now have more discretion over whom they push to deport. And the Obama administration, which supports Secure Communities, announced this month that it will review all 300,000 people facing deportation to prioritize serious criminals over students and families.
Brown signed California's agreement with ICE in 2009 when he was attorney general but has since been silent on the program. "Our stance … is that, as a result of the federal government's policy, we do not have the option to opt out of it," Brown spokeswoman Elizabeth Ashford said in an email Saturday.
Harris expressed concerns that the program has "strayed far beyond" the goal of getting "serious criminals off the streets," saying in a statement that it is "critical to public safety that victims and witnesses of crime can step forward and report crime without fear of reprisal."
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Immigration Audits Drive Illegal Workers Underground
By MIRIAM JORDAN
The Wall Street Journal
August 16, 2011
MINNEAPOLIS—In 2009, Alba and Eugenio were making almost twice the federal minimum wage, plus benefits, cleaning a skyscraper for a national janitorial company. With two toddlers, the Mexican couple enjoyed relative prosperity in a tidy one-bedroom duplex in a working-class neighborhood here.
Late that year, federal agents audited employee records of ABM Industries Inc., forcing it to shed all the illegal workers on its payrolls in the Twin Cities. Among them was the couple, undocumented immigrants who had worked at ABM for more than a decade.
Shortly after, Alba and Eugenio, who declined to have their surname published, landed at a small janitorial concern, scrubbing car dealerships for about half the pay, without benefits. Earlier this year that employer, too, was hit by an immigration audit. In late February, Alba and Eugenio were let go.
Today, the couple is struggling to make ends meet, working part-time and often relying on handouts from food banks to feed their family.
The journey from prosperity to the economic margins followed by Alba and Eugenio is an increasingly common path for thousands of undocumented workers pushed out of their jobs by the federal government's audits of U.S. businesses, according to immigration experts, business owners and unions.
The audits, started by the Obama administration in 2009, put the onus on business to police workers, requiring companies to turn over employee records to federal agents. If the papers aren't in order, the workers are quietly let go without penalty while the companies are punished.
The audits, conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, a unit of the Department of Homeland Security, were initially hailed by some immigrant advocates as more humane because they eliminate deportation raids, the norm during the Bush administration.
But it has become increasingly clear that the policy is pushing undocumented workers deeper underground, delivering them to the hands of unscrupulous employers, depressing wages and depriving federal, state and local coffers of taxes, according to unions, companies and immigrant advocates.
Indeed, the audits draw flak from both proponents and opponents of an immigration overhaul. Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), a leading voice among foes of giving illegal immigrants amnesty, deems audits ineffectual because they don't result in deportation.
"This means the illegal immigrant can walk down the street to the next employer and take a job that could go to an unemployed, legal worker," said Rep. Smith, who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
Many employers say the administration is depriving them of foreign workers who do jobs Americans refuse, even during an economic downturn, without proposing immigration reform that would supply a stable, legal labor force.
"All the audits do is keep employers in certain industries awake at night, while driving immigrants into work environments and arrangements that are indefensible," said Bill Blazar, a senior vice president of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.
Audits hit national burrito chain Chipotle Mexican Grill last year and garment maker American Apparel in 2009, among thousands of other employers. This year, ICE said it has audited more than 2,300 companies who employ tens of thousands of workers—in construction, agriculture, food processing, restaurant and critical-infrastructure sectors—from upstate New York and Alabama to Texas and Washington.
The audits are an answer to calls by many members of Congress to strictly enforce current immigration laws before considering wholesale reform of the country's immigration system. Like his predecessor, President Barack Obama favors an immigration overhaul that would put illegal immigrants on the path to legalization.
The administration began targeting employers because they are the "magnet" for illegal immigration since they provide jobs that lure the undocumented workers, according to ICE chief John Morton.
ICE doesn't disclose the names of the audited companies, and it said it also doesn't keep tabs on how many workers lose their jobs. As of Aug. 6, ICE said 2,393 companies were being audited, the largest number in a single fiscal year.
It's impossible to track where workers hit by audits end up. But immigration experts say Minnesota offers a microcosm for how many immigrants respond.
Before the recession, millions of Latin Americans snuck across the Mexican border to take jobs in construction, cleaning and other blue-collar work. Alba and Eugenio were part of that wave, making the journey to Minneapolis in the late 1990s after hearing jobs were plentiful and the cost of living relatively low.
They settled in the burgeoning Latino enclave around East Lake Street, a commercial corridor dotted with orange, yellow and pastel buildings that are home to "taquerias," and other businesses that cater to the Spanish-speaking community. They would eventually have two children in the U.S. and send them to the local public school.
Both Alba and Eugenio got jobs at ABM, a publicly traded building-services contractor. For nine years, Alba was on a bathroom crew, swabbing toilets and wiping sinks in a 56-story tower designed by the famed architect I.M. Pei.
Alba made $7.75 an hour, above the federal minimum wage at the time. She worked eight-hour shifts five days a week and was entitled to paid vacation and sick days. She received paid maternity leave when she had each child. "Each January, my salary inched up a few cents," she says.
Wages for Eugenio, who is currently 37 and also worked in the Capella Tower, also climbed each year.
In October 2008, Eugenio was promoted to shift supervisor, at an hourly rate of $14.42, according to his last pay stub, which also shows Medicare, Social Security and tax deductions. The following month, the couple secured a bank loan and bought a 2005 blue Ford Explorer for $17,000.
By January 2009, the month President Obama took office, Alba had been promoted to vacuuming and emptying waste baskets for $12.97 an hour.
The family's monthly expenses at the time included $565 for rent, $200 for gas and $50 for cellphone usage. The family dined at buffets on the weekends and Alba signed up for English lessons. Their children, Alexander, 6, and Narely, 8, wore crisp new clothes. The couple was sending $100 to $200 a month to relatives in Mexico.
"We had job security and never imagined what was coming," said Alba, 28 years old.
In February 2009, ICE took the new White House administration by surprise when it raided an engine factory of Yamato Engine Specialists Ltd., in Bellingham, Wash., arresting more than two dozen undocumented workers. Yamato paid a $100,000 fine. The operation outraged some immigrant advocates who had expected a softer approach to work site enforcement from the new president.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano ordered an internal review of the raid and on April 30 announced that ICE would follow a new approach "to target the root cause of illegal immigration." ICE later initiated audits of 654 companies.
The new strategy was showcased in Los Angeles that summer when ICE audited American Apparel. No agents stormed the premises. ICE delivered a written notice advising the company to turn over employee records—including federal I-9 worker eligibility forms—and warning it of potential fines. The clothing maker lost about 1,500 workers, more than a quarter of its work force, and paid about $35,000 in fines, said Peter Schey, the attorney who represented the company during the audit for what he said were "paperwork violations."
Under federal law, employers are obligated to ensure their workers are eligible to work in the U.S. However, many complain that workers present fake documents and companies don't have the ability to patrol them. They also fear discrimination suits for demanding additional documents from workers they suspect are in the country illegally.
Later that summer, ICE sent an audit notice to ABM in the Twin Cities. Anxious workers huddled in the halls of the skyscrapers as word spread that "la migra," the Spanish term used to refer to immigration agents, was targeting their employer.
The workers feared being arrested and separated from their children. "This was unchartered territory—the first big I-9 audit" in Minnesota, recalls John Keller, executive director of the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota.
A few weeks later, ICE notified ABM that a number of workers' I-9 documents were suspect and asked that the workers provide different documentation, such as a valid social security number and driver's license, an ABM spokesman said.
"Our policy is full compliance with the law and we cooperated with the administration in this matter," the spokesman said.
By late October, 1,250 undocumented workers at ABM, including Alba and Eugenio, had been let go or left, union officials say.
ABM, which employs nearly 100,000 nationwide, paid $108,000 in civil penalties, according to ICE, which declined to elaborate. It was able to replace all the undocumented workers, the spokesman said.
The effects of the audit reverberated through the East Lake Street immigrant enclave. Alba and Eugenio's neighbor, Marta, and her husband, lost their jobs at ABM and then lost their three-bedroom house, where they had lived for 12 years, to foreclosure. Marta's husband eventually got a job as a dishwasher making $8 per hour.
Nearby, Brenda, the daughter of another ABM employee who lost her job, dropped out of high school so she could get a full-time cleaning job to help pay bills, including the mortgage on the powder-blue house that her parents had bought in 2006.
"When my mom got fired, that's when all the problems started," said Brenda, 20, who had planned to attend college and become a police officer.
In November, Alba and Eugenio landed jobs at ROC Inc. for a net sum of $155 each per week to wash a Chevrolet dealership six nights a week in the St. Paul suburb of Roseville. Pay stubs don't show an hourly rate. The couple say they didn't receive benefits or paid time off.
ROC didn't give them an auto scrubber, a machine customarily used to wash large areas. Mike Chmielewski, the dealership's finance manager, confirms the couple swept and mopped the 10,000-square-foot area themselves. "They were very hardworking," he said. "They had personal pride in doing the job well."
People familiar with the company say that ROC, which has contracts with dealers selling major car brands, paid wages that dipped below the federal minimum wage.
To supplement their income, Eugenio found part-time work parking cars for an auto-rental company at the airport, earning minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. He had no fixed hours. Alba said she began visiting the food pantries of community organizations for staples like rice, beans, canned corn and sugar.
Late last year, Chipotle in the Twin Cities, hit by an audit, dismissed hundreds of workers. In January, ICE audited ROC, which immediately placed ads for workers in the local newspaper.
An ICE spokesperson said the agency doesn't comment on investigations.
In a statement, ROC said it complied with ICE's request for information and hasn't received further contact from the agency. "ROC Inc. follows all laws and regulations regarding state and federal employment practices," said Peter Mogren, CFO of ROC. He declined to answer specific questions.
Alba said she and her husband learned about the audit in February. "We were distraught," she said. The company told them to take time off until immigration reported back the results of the audit, Alba said.
Mr. Chmielewski, the Chevy dealership manager, said the worker who replaced Alba and Eugenio was an American man who "had no pride in his work."
With complaints mounting, ROC fired many of the new workers and hired subcontractors to supply cleaning crews, according to people close to the company. Such a practice, which is common in the industry, enables companies to use workers who don't appear on the payroll.
In April a subcontractor called Alba and Eugenio and soon they were back cleaning the Chevy dealership, where managers said they were delighted when the couple returned. A month later, however, the subcontractor told the couple he couldn't employ them because of the ICE investigation of ROC, the couple said.
Alba found part-time work cleaning hotel rooms for $10.33 an hour. Eugenio recently found a landscaping job that pays $11 an hour.
With their children's future in mind, the couple says they plan to remain living in the East Lake Street enclave. Still, this summer they've sent the kids to Mexico to stay with relatives. "That way we can work," Alba said.
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A1
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
The Wall Street Journal
August 16, 2011
MINNEAPOLIS—In 2009, Alba and Eugenio were making almost twice the federal minimum wage, plus benefits, cleaning a skyscraper for a national janitorial company. With two toddlers, the Mexican couple enjoyed relative prosperity in a tidy one-bedroom duplex in a working-class neighborhood here.
Late that year, federal agents audited employee records of ABM Industries Inc., forcing it to shed all the illegal workers on its payrolls in the Twin Cities. Among them was the couple, undocumented immigrants who had worked at ABM for more than a decade.
Shortly after, Alba and Eugenio, who declined to have their surname published, landed at a small janitorial concern, scrubbing car dealerships for about half the pay, without benefits. Earlier this year that employer, too, was hit by an immigration audit. In late February, Alba and Eugenio were let go.
Today, the couple is struggling to make ends meet, working part-time and often relying on handouts from food banks to feed their family.
The journey from prosperity to the economic margins followed by Alba and Eugenio is an increasingly common path for thousands of undocumented workers pushed out of their jobs by the federal government's audits of U.S. businesses, according to immigration experts, business owners and unions.
The audits, started by the Obama administration in 2009, put the onus on business to police workers, requiring companies to turn over employee records to federal agents. If the papers aren't in order, the workers are quietly let go without penalty while the companies are punished.
The audits, conducted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, a unit of the Department of Homeland Security, were initially hailed by some immigrant advocates as more humane because they eliminate deportation raids, the norm during the Bush administration.
But it has become increasingly clear that the policy is pushing undocumented workers deeper underground, delivering them to the hands of unscrupulous employers, depressing wages and depriving federal, state and local coffers of taxes, according to unions, companies and immigrant advocates.
Indeed, the audits draw flak from both proponents and opponents of an immigration overhaul. Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), a leading voice among foes of giving illegal immigrants amnesty, deems audits ineffectual because they don't result in deportation.
"This means the illegal immigrant can walk down the street to the next employer and take a job that could go to an unemployed, legal worker," said Rep. Smith, who is chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
Many employers say the administration is depriving them of foreign workers who do jobs Americans refuse, even during an economic downturn, without proposing immigration reform that would supply a stable, legal labor force.
"All the audits do is keep employers in certain industries awake at night, while driving immigrants into work environments and arrangements that are indefensible," said Bill Blazar, a senior vice president of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.
Audits hit national burrito chain Chipotle Mexican Grill last year and garment maker American Apparel in 2009, among thousands of other employers. This year, ICE said it has audited more than 2,300 companies who employ tens of thousands of workers—in construction, agriculture, food processing, restaurant and critical-infrastructure sectors—from upstate New York and Alabama to Texas and Washington.
The audits are an answer to calls by many members of Congress to strictly enforce current immigration laws before considering wholesale reform of the country's immigration system. Like his predecessor, President Barack Obama favors an immigration overhaul that would put illegal immigrants on the path to legalization.
The administration began targeting employers because they are the "magnet" for illegal immigration since they provide jobs that lure the undocumented workers, according to ICE chief John Morton.
ICE doesn't disclose the names of the audited companies, and it said it also doesn't keep tabs on how many workers lose their jobs. As of Aug. 6, ICE said 2,393 companies were being audited, the largest number in a single fiscal year.
It's impossible to track where workers hit by audits end up. But immigration experts say Minnesota offers a microcosm for how many immigrants respond.
Before the recession, millions of Latin Americans snuck across the Mexican border to take jobs in construction, cleaning and other blue-collar work. Alba and Eugenio were part of that wave, making the journey to Minneapolis in the late 1990s after hearing jobs were plentiful and the cost of living relatively low.
They settled in the burgeoning Latino enclave around East Lake Street, a commercial corridor dotted with orange, yellow and pastel buildings that are home to "taquerias," and other businesses that cater to the Spanish-speaking community. They would eventually have two children in the U.S. and send them to the local public school.
Both Alba and Eugenio got jobs at ABM, a publicly traded building-services contractor. For nine years, Alba was on a bathroom crew, swabbing toilets and wiping sinks in a 56-story tower designed by the famed architect I.M. Pei.
Alba made $7.75 an hour, above the federal minimum wage at the time. She worked eight-hour shifts five days a week and was entitled to paid vacation and sick days. She received paid maternity leave when she had each child. "Each January, my salary inched up a few cents," she says.
Wages for Eugenio, who is currently 37 and also worked in the Capella Tower, also climbed each year.
In October 2008, Eugenio was promoted to shift supervisor, at an hourly rate of $14.42, according to his last pay stub, which also shows Medicare, Social Security and tax deductions. The following month, the couple secured a bank loan and bought a 2005 blue Ford Explorer for $17,000.
By January 2009, the month President Obama took office, Alba had been promoted to vacuuming and emptying waste baskets for $12.97 an hour.
The family's monthly expenses at the time included $565 for rent, $200 for gas and $50 for cellphone usage. The family dined at buffets on the weekends and Alba signed up for English lessons. Their children, Alexander, 6, and Narely, 8, wore crisp new clothes. The couple was sending $100 to $200 a month to relatives in Mexico.
"We had job security and never imagined what was coming," said Alba, 28 years old.
In February 2009, ICE took the new White House administration by surprise when it raided an engine factory of Yamato Engine Specialists Ltd., in Bellingham, Wash., arresting more than two dozen undocumented workers. Yamato paid a $100,000 fine. The operation outraged some immigrant advocates who had expected a softer approach to work site enforcement from the new president.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano ordered an internal review of the raid and on April 30 announced that ICE would follow a new approach "to target the root cause of illegal immigration." ICE later initiated audits of 654 companies.
The new strategy was showcased in Los Angeles that summer when ICE audited American Apparel. No agents stormed the premises. ICE delivered a written notice advising the company to turn over employee records—including federal I-9 worker eligibility forms—and warning it of potential fines. The clothing maker lost about 1,500 workers, more than a quarter of its work force, and paid about $35,000 in fines, said Peter Schey, the attorney who represented the company during the audit for what he said were "paperwork violations."
Under federal law, employers are obligated to ensure their workers are eligible to work in the U.S. However, many complain that workers present fake documents and companies don't have the ability to patrol them. They also fear discrimination suits for demanding additional documents from workers they suspect are in the country illegally.
Later that summer, ICE sent an audit notice to ABM in the Twin Cities. Anxious workers huddled in the halls of the skyscrapers as word spread that "la migra," the Spanish term used to refer to immigration agents, was targeting their employer.
The workers feared being arrested and separated from their children. "This was unchartered territory—the first big I-9 audit" in Minnesota, recalls John Keller, executive director of the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota.
A few weeks later, ICE notified ABM that a number of workers' I-9 documents were suspect and asked that the workers provide different documentation, such as a valid social security number and driver's license, an ABM spokesman said.
"Our policy is full compliance with the law and we cooperated with the administration in this matter," the spokesman said.
By late October, 1,250 undocumented workers at ABM, including Alba and Eugenio, had been let go or left, union officials say.
ABM, which employs nearly 100,000 nationwide, paid $108,000 in civil penalties, according to ICE, which declined to elaborate. It was able to replace all the undocumented workers, the spokesman said.
The effects of the audit reverberated through the East Lake Street immigrant enclave. Alba and Eugenio's neighbor, Marta, and her husband, lost their jobs at ABM and then lost their three-bedroom house, where they had lived for 12 years, to foreclosure. Marta's husband eventually got a job as a dishwasher making $8 per hour.
Nearby, Brenda, the daughter of another ABM employee who lost her job, dropped out of high school so she could get a full-time cleaning job to help pay bills, including the mortgage on the powder-blue house that her parents had bought in 2006.
"When my mom got fired, that's when all the problems started," said Brenda, 20, who had planned to attend college and become a police officer.
In November, Alba and Eugenio landed jobs at ROC Inc. for a net sum of $155 each per week to wash a Chevrolet dealership six nights a week in the St. Paul suburb of Roseville. Pay stubs don't show an hourly rate. The couple say they didn't receive benefits or paid time off.
ROC didn't give them an auto scrubber, a machine customarily used to wash large areas. Mike Chmielewski, the dealership's finance manager, confirms the couple swept and mopped the 10,000-square-foot area themselves. "They were very hardworking," he said. "They had personal pride in doing the job well."
People familiar with the company say that ROC, which has contracts with dealers selling major car brands, paid wages that dipped below the federal minimum wage.
To supplement their income, Eugenio found part-time work parking cars for an auto-rental company at the airport, earning minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. He had no fixed hours. Alba said she began visiting the food pantries of community organizations for staples like rice, beans, canned corn and sugar.
Late last year, Chipotle in the Twin Cities, hit by an audit, dismissed hundreds of workers. In January, ICE audited ROC, which immediately placed ads for workers in the local newspaper.
An ICE spokesperson said the agency doesn't comment on investigations.
In a statement, ROC said it complied with ICE's request for information and hasn't received further contact from the agency. "ROC Inc. follows all laws and regulations regarding state and federal employment practices," said Peter Mogren, CFO of ROC. He declined to answer specific questions.
Alba said she and her husband learned about the audit in February. "We were distraught," she said. The company told them to take time off until immigration reported back the results of the audit, Alba said.
Mr. Chmielewski, the Chevy dealership manager, said the worker who replaced Alba and Eugenio was an American man who "had no pride in his work."
With complaints mounting, ROC fired many of the new workers and hired subcontractors to supply cleaning crews, according to people close to the company. Such a practice, which is common in the industry, enables companies to use workers who don't appear on the payroll.
In April a subcontractor called Alba and Eugenio and soon they were back cleaning the Chevy dealership, where managers said they were delighted when the couple returned. A month later, however, the subcontractor told the couple he couldn't employ them because of the ICE investigation of ROC, the couple said.
Alba found part-time work cleaning hotel rooms for $10.33 an hour. Eugenio recently found a landscaping job that pays $11 an hour.
With their children's future in mind, the couple says they plan to remain living in the East Lake Street enclave. Still, this summer they've sent the kids to Mexico to stay with relatives. "That way we can work," Alba said.
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A1
Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
US set to expand deportation program
Agency says governor’s OK is not required
By Maria Sacchetti
The Boston Globe
August 06, 2011
US immigration officials eliminated a major hurdle yesterday to expanding Secure Communities in Massachusetts and nationwide, putting states on notice that the controversial law enforcement program will be fully deployed nationwide by 2013.
John Morton, director of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, terminated what until now was a key step in launching the federal program: having each governor first sign a memorandum of agreement to enroll.
More than 40 governors have signed the memos to activate the program, which is meant to identify illegal immigrants with criminal backgrounds. But the Democratic governors of New York and Illinois disavowed theirs, and Governor Deval Patrick refused to sign it, delaying the program’s expansion in Massachusetts for nearly two years.
The announcement came in a letter from Morton to governors yesterday, stating that their signatures are not “legally necessary.’’
The move changes little in practice; immigration officials had previously said they would move ahead whether or not governors agreed. But eliminating the memos removes the possibility of more public opposition by governors and could make it easier for the program to expand.
US immigration officials launched Secure Communities in 2008, after piloting it in Boston and expanding in more than 40 states, enabling local law enforcement to share fingerprints of suspects arrested with federal immigration officials. The goal is to detain and deport illegal immigrants, particularly those who are violent or dangerous.
Yesterday’s announcement infuriated advocates for immigrants who said the federal agency’s action was ignoring concerns from Governor Patrick and others who say the program is also deporting illegal immigrants who came to the country to work and are not violent criminals.
“This is a message from the federal government to the state of Massachusetts that this program will be crammed down their throats, regardless of their opposition,’’ said B. Loewe, spokesman for the Los Angeles-based National Day Laborer Organizing Network.
Others praised the effort to expand the program and reduce the number of illegal immigrants who may compete for jobs.
“Federal law applies to all the states including Massachusetts,’’ said Steve Kropper, co-chairman of Massachusetts Citizens for Immigration Reform, which favors tougher enforcement of immigration laws. “If Massachusetts is known for being hostile to illegal immigrants, we will reap economic benefits. Dithering about whether to enforce the law is the worst of all paths.’’
The Secure Communities program has sparked concerns from police in Chelsea, Boston and other cities with large immigrant populations that the program is deporting illegal immigrants who are not violent criminals, saying they want to fight crime, not enforce federal immigration law.
In July, Boston Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis threatened to withdraw from the program after the Globe identified three examples of illegal immigrants placed into deportation proceedings after being stopped in Boston for minor traffic violations.
Patrick’s spokesman Alex Goldstein said yesterday that the governor received Morton’s letter, but that he intends to continue opposing the program.
“The governor has made his concerns about the program very clear … and he is going to continue to express those concerns,’’ he said.
Federal officials had hoped to have Secure Communities in half of Massachusetts counties by October 2010, but so far Boston is the only jurisdiction enrolled.
US officials had sent state officials a letter in 2009 urging them to sign the memo to “establish a solid foundation’’ to bring county and police departments online. Patrick waffled on the issue, vowing to sign last year, but ultimately changing his mind under intense public pressure.
Yesterday, a Department of Homeland Security official said in a phone interview that Secure Communities is still operating in activated jurisdictions in Illinois and New York.
He said he hoped local and state police would continue to honor ICE’s requests to hold immigrants who are caught through Secure Communities so that immigration officials can pick them up.
Framingham Police Chief Steven Carl, who has expressed mixed feelings about Secure Communities, said he would continue to cooperate with immigration officials, but said he hoped ICE would continue to focus on violent criminals.
“If the program is being sold to remove the violent offenders from the street, then they should be making a conscious effort to only remove the violent offenders from the street,’’ he said.
The Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition said ICE officials held a brief conference call with advocates for immigrants yesterday to break the news.
The ACLU of Massachusetts said they were reviewing the matter for possible legal violations, calling ICE’s action a “power grab.’’
“We are shocked,’’ said Laura Rótolo, a staff attorney. “Essentially it’s a slap in the face to the states who have been working hard to negotiate these things.’’
http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-06/news/29859412_1_illegal-immigrants-federal-immigration-deportation-program
By Maria Sacchetti
The Boston Globe
August 06, 2011
US immigration officials eliminated a major hurdle yesterday to expanding Secure Communities in Massachusetts and nationwide, putting states on notice that the controversial law enforcement program will be fully deployed nationwide by 2013.
John Morton, director of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, terminated what until now was a key step in launching the federal program: having each governor first sign a memorandum of agreement to enroll.
More than 40 governors have signed the memos to activate the program, which is meant to identify illegal immigrants with criminal backgrounds. But the Democratic governors of New York and Illinois disavowed theirs, and Governor Deval Patrick refused to sign it, delaying the program’s expansion in Massachusetts for nearly two years.
The announcement came in a letter from Morton to governors yesterday, stating that their signatures are not “legally necessary.’’
The move changes little in practice; immigration officials had previously said they would move ahead whether or not governors agreed. But eliminating the memos removes the possibility of more public opposition by governors and could make it easier for the program to expand.
US immigration officials launched Secure Communities in 2008, after piloting it in Boston and expanding in more than 40 states, enabling local law enforcement to share fingerprints of suspects arrested with federal immigration officials. The goal is to detain and deport illegal immigrants, particularly those who are violent or dangerous.
Yesterday’s announcement infuriated advocates for immigrants who said the federal agency’s action was ignoring concerns from Governor Patrick and others who say the program is also deporting illegal immigrants who came to the country to work and are not violent criminals.
“This is a message from the federal government to the state of Massachusetts that this program will be crammed down their throats, regardless of their opposition,’’ said B. Loewe, spokesman for the Los Angeles-based National Day Laborer Organizing Network.
Others praised the effort to expand the program and reduce the number of illegal immigrants who may compete for jobs.
“Federal law applies to all the states including Massachusetts,’’ said Steve Kropper, co-chairman of Massachusetts Citizens for Immigration Reform, which favors tougher enforcement of immigration laws. “If Massachusetts is known for being hostile to illegal immigrants, we will reap economic benefits. Dithering about whether to enforce the law is the worst of all paths.’’
The Secure Communities program has sparked concerns from police in Chelsea, Boston and other cities with large immigrant populations that the program is deporting illegal immigrants who are not violent criminals, saying they want to fight crime, not enforce federal immigration law.
In July, Boston Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis threatened to withdraw from the program after the Globe identified three examples of illegal immigrants placed into deportation proceedings after being stopped in Boston for minor traffic violations.
Patrick’s spokesman Alex Goldstein said yesterday that the governor received Morton’s letter, but that he intends to continue opposing the program.
“The governor has made his concerns about the program very clear … and he is going to continue to express those concerns,’’ he said.
Federal officials had hoped to have Secure Communities in half of Massachusetts counties by October 2010, but so far Boston is the only jurisdiction enrolled.
US officials had sent state officials a letter in 2009 urging them to sign the memo to “establish a solid foundation’’ to bring county and police departments online. Patrick waffled on the issue, vowing to sign last year, but ultimately changing his mind under intense public pressure.
Yesterday, a Department of Homeland Security official said in a phone interview that Secure Communities is still operating in activated jurisdictions in Illinois and New York.
He said he hoped local and state police would continue to honor ICE’s requests to hold immigrants who are caught through Secure Communities so that immigration officials can pick them up.
Framingham Police Chief Steven Carl, who has expressed mixed feelings about Secure Communities, said he would continue to cooperate with immigration officials, but said he hoped ICE would continue to focus on violent criminals.
“If the program is being sold to remove the violent offenders from the street, then they should be making a conscious effort to only remove the violent offenders from the street,’’ he said.
The Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition said ICE officials held a brief conference call with advocates for immigrants yesterday to break the news.
The ACLU of Massachusetts said they were reviewing the matter for possible legal violations, calling ICE’s action a “power grab.’’
“We are shocked,’’ said Laura Rótolo, a staff attorney. “Essentially it’s a slap in the face to the states who have been working hard to negotiate these things.’’
http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-06/news/29859412_1_illegal-immigrants-federal-immigration-deportation-program
Sunday, July 24, 2011
ICE deportations by the numbers
By Leslie Berestein Rojas
89.3 KPCC, Southern California Radio
22 July 2011
The record deportations logged by the Obama administration continue on pace, with more people deported in fiscal year 2010 than ever before. This year promises similar numbers: ICE records through May 23 show that 243,821 people have been deported since last Oct. 1, the start of the 2011 fiscal year.
89.3 KPCC, Southern California Radio
22 July 2011
The record deportations logged by the Obama administration continue on pace, with more people deported in fiscal year 2010 than ever before. This year promises similar numbers: ICE records through May 23 show that 243,821 people have been deported since last Oct. 1, the start of the 2011 fiscal year.
From an agency chart, the ICE removal numbers from recent years:
FY 2010 = 392,862
FY 2009 = 389,834
FY 2008 = 369,221
FY 2007 = 291,060
The average daily population of immigrants in detention rose slightly from 30,295 in FY 2007 to 33,366 in FY 2020, though the average length of stay – for most, the time they are held while awaiting deportation – has decreased.
Despite a federal push to deport more convicted criminals, according to agency stats, 197,090 of those deported in FY 2010 did not have a criminal record – a little more than half. But among those who did, what was it for? According to an Associated Press analysis, a growing number of people have been deported following traffic and DUI arrests. From a story today:
The U.S. deported nearly 393,000 people in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, half of whom were considered criminals. Of those, 27,635 had been arrested for drunken driving, more than double the 10,851 deported after drunken driving arrests in 2008, the last full year of the Bush administration, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement data provided to The Associated Press.
An additional 13,028 were deported last year after being arrested on less serious traffic law violations, nearly three times the 4,527 traffic offenders deported two years earlier, according to the data.
The administration has expanded the use of programs that aim to identify deportable criminals in local jails, including the controversial fingerprint-sharing program known as Secure Communities. Even through these programs, a large number of non-criminals land in the net. Several political and law enforcement leaders have come out against Secure Communities, with three states and two large cities recently announcing plans to withdraw.
http://multiamerican.scpr.org/2011/07/ice-deportations-by-the-numbers/
Saturday, June 25, 2011
"New Haven 30" case prompts change in federal immigration enforcement policy
By Gregory B. Hladky
Fairfield County Weekly
June 22, 2011
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has just issued new guidelines recommending against deportation of undocumented immigrants involved in pending civil rights and labor cases, a policy change that apparently stems from a controversial New Haven case.
The new policy memorandum was issued late last week by ICE Director John Morton and warns that it is “against ICE policy to remove individuals in the midst of a legitimate effort to protect their civil rights or civil liberties.”
The guidelines for federal prosecutors and ICE agents also recommend that particular attention should be given to individuals “who may be in a non-frivolous dispute with an employer, landlord or contractor” to avoid deportion while legitimate cases are underway.
Michael Wishnie, a professor at the Yale Law School, says the ICE policy change follows heavy lobbying pressure from national civil rights groups, labor unions and others that was triggered by efforts last year to deport Washington Colala.
Colala is an undocumented immigrant from Ecuador who has two U.S. born children. He was one of 30 people picked up during controversial ICE raids in New Haven in 2007. He and others in that group filed lawsuits claiming federal agents violated their civil rights during the raids.
Last November, Colala was ordered by federal authorities to buy a ticket for Ecuador after his appeal of his deportation order was rejected by a federal court.
Wishnie says the group of Yale Law students representing Colala and the others began a campaign to delay his deportation on the grounds that his civil rights case was still pending and he wouldn’t be able to pursue it from Ecuador.
“We sought to mobilize a wide range of stakeholders in support of a more regular policy that would benefit foreign nationals seeking redress in the courts nationwide,” Wishnie said in an email comment about the change in ICE policy.
According to Wishnie, the June 17 memo from Morton “for the first time codifies this important principle” that immigrants with pending civil rights cases like Colala’s shouldn’t be deported before those cases are decided.
The memo also recommends federal officials not take deportation action against undocumented immigrants who may have been picked up by police as a witness to or victim of a crime such as domestic violence or human trafficking.
A federal immigration program known as “Secure Communities” or S-Comm has come under fire from civil rights organizations and others for resulting the deportation of thousands of undocumented immigrants who have come to the attention of local police, often for minor traffic incidents or infractions.
The program was intended to only deport violent or serious criminals, according to federal officials. But the governors of Massachusetts, New York and Illinois have asked to withdraw their states from the program, and activists in Connecticut are urging Gov. Dannel Malloy to follow suit.
Copyright © 2011, Hartford Advocate
Fairfield County Weekly
June 22, 2011
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has just issued new guidelines recommending against deportation of undocumented immigrants involved in pending civil rights and labor cases, a policy change that apparently stems from a controversial New Haven case.
The new policy memorandum was issued late last week by ICE Director John Morton and warns that it is “against ICE policy to remove individuals in the midst of a legitimate effort to protect their civil rights or civil liberties.”
The guidelines for federal prosecutors and ICE agents also recommend that particular attention should be given to individuals “who may be in a non-frivolous dispute with an employer, landlord or contractor” to avoid deportion while legitimate cases are underway.
Michael Wishnie, a professor at the Yale Law School, says the ICE policy change follows heavy lobbying pressure from national civil rights groups, labor unions and others that was triggered by efforts last year to deport Washington Colala.
Colala is an undocumented immigrant from Ecuador who has two U.S. born children. He was one of 30 people picked up during controversial ICE raids in New Haven in 2007. He and others in that group filed lawsuits claiming federal agents violated their civil rights during the raids.
Last November, Colala was ordered by federal authorities to buy a ticket for Ecuador after his appeal of his deportation order was rejected by a federal court.
Wishnie says the group of Yale Law students representing Colala and the others began a campaign to delay his deportation on the grounds that his civil rights case was still pending and he wouldn’t be able to pursue it from Ecuador.
“We sought to mobilize a wide range of stakeholders in support of a more regular policy that would benefit foreign nationals seeking redress in the courts nationwide,” Wishnie said in an email comment about the change in ICE policy.
According to Wishnie, the June 17 memo from Morton “for the first time codifies this important principle” that immigrants with pending civil rights cases like Colala’s shouldn’t be deported before those cases are decided.
The memo also recommends federal officials not take deportation action against undocumented immigrants who may have been picked up by police as a witness to or victim of a crime such as domestic violence or human trafficking.
A federal immigration program known as “Secure Communities” or S-Comm has come under fire from civil rights organizations and others for resulting the deportation of thousands of undocumented immigrants who have come to the attention of local police, often for minor traffic incidents or infractions.
The program was intended to only deport violent or serious criminals, according to federal officials. But the governors of Massachusetts, New York and Illinois have asked to withdraw their states from the program, and activists in Connecticut are urging Gov. Dannel Malloy to follow suit.
Copyright © 2011, Hartford Advocate
Sunday, June 19, 2011
U.S. Pledges to Raise Deportation Threshold
By JULIA PRESTON
The New York Times
June 17, 2011
Moving to repair an immigration enforcement program that has drawn rising opposition from governors and police chiefs, senior immigration officials on Friday announced steps they said would focus the program more closely on deporting immigrants convicted of serious crimes.
In unveiling the changes, John Morton, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the deportation program would continue to expand as planned in order to be operating nationwide by 2013, despite criticism from many police chiefs and from the governors of Illinois, New York and Massachusetts, who sought to withdraw their states.
But in making course corrections to the program, known as Secure Communities, Mr. Morton acknowledged the groundswell of local resistance, including opposition from Latino and immigrant groups, to an effort that is central to President Obama’s approach to controlling illegal immigration. Critics said the program was casting too wide a net and had strayed from its goal of bolstering public safety by expelling illegal immigrants who committed the most dangerous crimes.
In a fix likely to have broad practical effect, Mr. Morton issued a memorandum that greatly expanded the factors immigration authorities can take into account in deciding to defer or cancel deportations. Agents are now formally urged to consider how long an illegal immigrant has been in the United States, or whether the immigrant was brought here illegally as a child and is studying in high school or college.
In practice, the memorandum gives immigration agents authority to postpone or cancel, on a case by case basis, deportations of illegal immigrant students who might have been eligible for legal status under a bill stalled in Congress that is known as the Dream Act.
The authorities are also instructed to give “particular care and consideration” to veterans and active duty members of the military, especially if they have been in combat, and to their close relatives.
Mr. Morton also expanded the authority of federal lawyers who handle cases in immigration courts to dismiss deportation proceedings against immigrants without serious criminal records.
Also on Friday, Mr. Obama extended the deployment of some 1,200 National Guard troops who are backing up immigration agents along the Southwest border.
Under Secure Communities, tens of thousands of immigrants who were here illegally but had not been convicted of any crime were detained by local law enforcement and swept into deportation proceedings. Until now, once immigration agents in the field had started a deportation, government lawyers had little authority to decide which cases were worth pursuing in immigration court. Many immigration violations are civil, not criminal, offenses.
In the Secure Communities program, fingerprints of everyone who is booked into jail are checked against F.B.I. criminal databases, as has long been routine, and also against Department of Homeland Security databases, which record immigration violations. Homeland Security officials report results of fingerprint checks back to the arresting police departments, and federal immigration agents determine whether to detain the immigrants for deportation.
“We believe in this program, we think it’s the right program, and we intend to continue it,” Mr. Morton said on Friday. “But obviously we are listening to the concerns raised by the governors, members of Congress and community groups.”
Mr. Morton also said he would form an advisory commission of police chiefs, sheriffs, state and local prosecutors, immigration agents, and immigrant advocates. The first task of the commission would be to assess, within 45 days, another fix Mr. Morton is considering.
Currently all immigrants who are flagged in a Secure Communities fingerprint check can be detained for deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from the time they are first booked into jail. Mr. Morton said that under his proposal, illegal immigrants who were arrested for minor traffic offenses, like driving without a license, and other minor misdemeanors, would not be detained for deportation until they were convicted of those crimes.
Mr. Morton also issued new guidelines he said would ensure that illegal immigrants detained by the police who were victims of domestic violence and witnesses to crimes would not be deported.
Immigration lawyers praised the new ground rules. “If these standards are applied consistently, it would allow ICE to focus government resources on dangerous criminals and national security risks to make America safer, a goal we all share,” said David Leopold, the outgoing president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
But several community groups rejected the changes as cosmetic tweaks that would do little to slow deportations that they said had separated immigrant families without reducing crime.
“This program is riddled with flaws and the announcement today acknowledges that,” said Chris Newman, general counsel of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. He said the program should be suspended until the Homeland Security inspector general completes a review later this year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/us/18immig.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24
The New York Times
June 17, 2011
Moving to repair an immigration enforcement program that has drawn rising opposition from governors and police chiefs, senior immigration officials on Friday announced steps they said would focus the program more closely on deporting immigrants convicted of serious crimes.
In unveiling the changes, John Morton, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the deportation program would continue to expand as planned in order to be operating nationwide by 2013, despite criticism from many police chiefs and from the governors of Illinois, New York and Massachusetts, who sought to withdraw their states.
But in making course corrections to the program, known as Secure Communities, Mr. Morton acknowledged the groundswell of local resistance, including opposition from Latino and immigrant groups, to an effort that is central to President Obama’s approach to controlling illegal immigration. Critics said the program was casting too wide a net and had strayed from its goal of bolstering public safety by expelling illegal immigrants who committed the most dangerous crimes.
In a fix likely to have broad practical effect, Mr. Morton issued a memorandum that greatly expanded the factors immigration authorities can take into account in deciding to defer or cancel deportations. Agents are now formally urged to consider how long an illegal immigrant has been in the United States, or whether the immigrant was brought here illegally as a child and is studying in high school or college.
In practice, the memorandum gives immigration agents authority to postpone or cancel, on a case by case basis, deportations of illegal immigrant students who might have been eligible for legal status under a bill stalled in Congress that is known as the Dream Act.
The authorities are also instructed to give “particular care and consideration” to veterans and active duty members of the military, especially if they have been in combat, and to their close relatives.
Mr. Morton also expanded the authority of federal lawyers who handle cases in immigration courts to dismiss deportation proceedings against immigrants without serious criminal records.
Also on Friday, Mr. Obama extended the deployment of some 1,200 National Guard troops who are backing up immigration agents along the Southwest border.
Under Secure Communities, tens of thousands of immigrants who were here illegally but had not been convicted of any crime were detained by local law enforcement and swept into deportation proceedings. Until now, once immigration agents in the field had started a deportation, government lawyers had little authority to decide which cases were worth pursuing in immigration court. Many immigration violations are civil, not criminal, offenses.
In the Secure Communities program, fingerprints of everyone who is booked into jail are checked against F.B.I. criminal databases, as has long been routine, and also against Department of Homeland Security databases, which record immigration violations. Homeland Security officials report results of fingerprint checks back to the arresting police departments, and federal immigration agents determine whether to detain the immigrants for deportation.
“We believe in this program, we think it’s the right program, and we intend to continue it,” Mr. Morton said on Friday. “But obviously we are listening to the concerns raised by the governors, members of Congress and community groups.”
Mr. Morton also said he would form an advisory commission of police chiefs, sheriffs, state and local prosecutors, immigration agents, and immigrant advocates. The first task of the commission would be to assess, within 45 days, another fix Mr. Morton is considering.
Currently all immigrants who are flagged in a Secure Communities fingerprint check can be detained for deportation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from the time they are first booked into jail. Mr. Morton said that under his proposal, illegal immigrants who were arrested for minor traffic offenses, like driving without a license, and other minor misdemeanors, would not be detained for deportation until they were convicted of those crimes.
Mr. Morton also issued new guidelines he said would ensure that illegal immigrants detained by the police who were victims of domestic violence and witnesses to crimes would not be deported.
Immigration lawyers praised the new ground rules. “If these standards are applied consistently, it would allow ICE to focus government resources on dangerous criminals and national security risks to make America safer, a goal we all share,” said David Leopold, the outgoing president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.
But several community groups rejected the changes as cosmetic tweaks that would do little to slow deportations that they said had separated immigrant families without reducing crime.
“This program is riddled with flaws and the announcement today acknowledges that,” said Chris Newman, general counsel of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. He said the program should be suspended until the Homeland Security inspector general completes a review later this year.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/18/us/18immig.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha24
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Mayor, Governor oppose federal government
By Andrew Firestone
Somerville News
June 9, 2011
Immigrant rights advocates were vindicated on Monday, June 6, when Governor Deval Patrick announced he would refuse to sign onto the federal Secure Communities program. Secure Communities is a program used to identify and deport violent offenders who turn out to be undocumented. Patrick’s Secretary of Public Safety, Mary Heffernan, wrote a letter to ICE saying that of those almost 800 deported since 2008, only one in four was convicted of a felony crime.
Patrick joins Governors Andrew Cuomo of New York and Pat Quinn of Illinois in their rejection of the memorandum of agreement. Patrick had previously been threatened with legislation that would block federal funds and his own salary if he refused to sign onto the Secure Communities program, which takes biometric data of suspected illegal immigrants for violent crimes and scans them into an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency database. Critics of the program have said it needlessly complicates and exacerbates social tensions while denigrating the immigrant population.
“I know that in my city, ICE conducts raids and warrant-less searches,” said Representative Denise Provost of Somerville. Provost attended a rally organized by Somerville’s own Centro Presente June 1, in the Nurses Hall at the Statehouse. “This kind of thing can only make our community insecure.”
Provost said that top government officials around the country had begun to protest “vague” and “misleading” language used by the Federal Department of Homeland Security, mandating the program be implemented nationwide by 2013. She mentioned a letter by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), asking the nation’s Inspector General Charles Edwards to perform a legal review of this program.
“Having conducted with my legal staff an initial review of the documents that have been made public, I believe that some of these false and misleading statements may have been made intentionally, while others were made recklessly, knowing that the statements were ambiguous and likely to create confusion,” wrote Lofgren. She then urged the Inspector General to conduct a “thorough investigation” into possible criminal violations in drafting the program.
“The statements in question deal primarily with the issue of whether Secure Communities is a mandatory program that all states and localities must participate in or whether localities may be permitted to ‘opt out’ of the program,” wrote Lofgren. This included intentional vagueness on the actual meaning of “opt out” and a refusal to say if it were voluntary.
“It is unacceptable for government officials to essentially lie to local governments, Members of Congress, and the public,” said Lofgren.
Somerville had previously stated that it would not cooperate with the program, with Mayor Joseph Curtatone going so far as to proclaim Somerville’s immigrants universally safe from identification checks, save for a violent crime. The proclamation, made in November, seemed almost a throwback to Somerville’s former status as a sanctuary city.
“I’m pleased with the Governor’s decision,” said Curtatone. “We’re all unified in terms of wanting tighter security and the importance of having tighter security but we also understand as municipal leaders that we need the cooperation of everyone who lives in the city.”
Curtatone echoed the concerns of Provost and state Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough) in his belief that SC would drastically exacerbate criminal activity in poor immigrant communities, due to the fear it creates. “We can’t have this inherent fear of talking to our law enforcement officials. I need their assistance as Mayor to solve issues of public health and public crime.”
“They are a critical component of enhancing community policing and I need to earn their trust. As we think about having more stringent security measures we need to also be understanding how to balance that with our need to get more engagement from all segments of our community without putting a fear in them about being deported,” he said.
Eldridge, who joined Provost in speaking at the rally, said he had grave misgivings over a law that would subject immigrants to profiling and bring out hate in immigration opponents. “This is a program that’s going to create more division in every community in Massachusetts and therefore it doesn’t make sense,” he said. He recalled attending an event where residents were photographing immigrants and threatening to send the pictures to ICE.
The rally also heard from several immigrants, illegal and legal, who said that police had been violating their rights, ransacking their homes on flimsy pretext and imprisoning members of their community, causing widespread terror. These included a tearful plea from a mother of three, who said that the stress of her husband’s arrest and detainment due to not having documents had caused her to have a miscarriage.
Homeland Security officials hit back at Patrick on June 7, saying that they had no ability to stop the program, which would be implemented nationwide by 2013. Homeland Security officials say they will force Massachusetts to join in anyway.
“For me this issue is a theological one, this issue is a moral one,” said Reverend Eddie Johnson of St. James in Cambridge. “When I think of the alien, I think of Leviticus [19:34], where we hear that the alien, who resides with us, shall be with us a citizen, and we are to love the alien as ourselves for we were once aliens,” he said.
“Together I know we will create a better future: the future that God has intended for us all.”
http://www.thesomervillenews.com/archives/15959
Somerville News
June 9, 2011
Immigrant rights advocates were vindicated on Monday, June 6, when Governor Deval Patrick announced he would refuse to sign onto the federal Secure Communities program. Secure Communities is a program used to identify and deport violent offenders who turn out to be undocumented. Patrick’s Secretary of Public Safety, Mary Heffernan, wrote a letter to ICE saying that of those almost 800 deported since 2008, only one in four was convicted of a felony crime.
Patrick joins Governors Andrew Cuomo of New York and Pat Quinn of Illinois in their rejection of the memorandum of agreement. Patrick had previously been threatened with legislation that would block federal funds and his own salary if he refused to sign onto the Secure Communities program, which takes biometric data of suspected illegal immigrants for violent crimes and scans them into an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency database. Critics of the program have said it needlessly complicates and exacerbates social tensions while denigrating the immigrant population.
“I know that in my city, ICE conducts raids and warrant-less searches,” said Representative Denise Provost of Somerville. Provost attended a rally organized by Somerville’s own Centro Presente June 1, in the Nurses Hall at the Statehouse. “This kind of thing can only make our community insecure.”
Provost said that top government officials around the country had begun to protest “vague” and “misleading” language used by the Federal Department of Homeland Security, mandating the program be implemented nationwide by 2013. She mentioned a letter by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), asking the nation’s Inspector General Charles Edwards to perform a legal review of this program.
“Having conducted with my legal staff an initial review of the documents that have been made public, I believe that some of these false and misleading statements may have been made intentionally, while others were made recklessly, knowing that the statements were ambiguous and likely to create confusion,” wrote Lofgren. She then urged the Inspector General to conduct a “thorough investigation” into possible criminal violations in drafting the program.
“The statements in question deal primarily with the issue of whether Secure Communities is a mandatory program that all states and localities must participate in or whether localities may be permitted to ‘opt out’ of the program,” wrote Lofgren. This included intentional vagueness on the actual meaning of “opt out” and a refusal to say if it were voluntary.
“It is unacceptable for government officials to essentially lie to local governments, Members of Congress, and the public,” said Lofgren.
Somerville had previously stated that it would not cooperate with the program, with Mayor Joseph Curtatone going so far as to proclaim Somerville’s immigrants universally safe from identification checks, save for a violent crime. The proclamation, made in November, seemed almost a throwback to Somerville’s former status as a sanctuary city.
“I’m pleased with the Governor’s decision,” said Curtatone. “We’re all unified in terms of wanting tighter security and the importance of having tighter security but we also understand as municipal leaders that we need the cooperation of everyone who lives in the city.”
Curtatone echoed the concerns of Provost and state Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough) in his belief that SC would drastically exacerbate criminal activity in poor immigrant communities, due to the fear it creates. “We can’t have this inherent fear of talking to our law enforcement officials. I need their assistance as Mayor to solve issues of public health and public crime.”
“They are a critical component of enhancing community policing and I need to earn their trust. As we think about having more stringent security measures we need to also be understanding how to balance that with our need to get more engagement from all segments of our community without putting a fear in them about being deported,” he said.
Eldridge, who joined Provost in speaking at the rally, said he had grave misgivings over a law that would subject immigrants to profiling and bring out hate in immigration opponents. “This is a program that’s going to create more division in every community in Massachusetts and therefore it doesn’t make sense,” he said. He recalled attending an event where residents were photographing immigrants and threatening to send the pictures to ICE.
The rally also heard from several immigrants, illegal and legal, who said that police had been violating their rights, ransacking their homes on flimsy pretext and imprisoning members of their community, causing widespread terror. These included a tearful plea from a mother of three, who said that the stress of her husband’s arrest and detainment due to not having documents had caused her to have a miscarriage.
Homeland Security officials hit back at Patrick on June 7, saying that they had no ability to stop the program, which would be implemented nationwide by 2013. Homeland Security officials say they will force Massachusetts to join in anyway.
“For me this issue is a theological one, this issue is a moral one,” said Reverend Eddie Johnson of St. James in Cambridge. “When I think of the alien, I think of Leviticus [19:34], where we hear that the alien, who resides with us, shall be with us a citizen, and we are to love the alien as ourselves for we were once aliens,” he said.
“Together I know we will create a better future: the future that God has intended for us all.”
http://www.thesomervillenews.com/archives/15959
Friday, June 3, 2011
First priority is deportations
By Ruben Navarrette Jr.
The San Francisco Chronicle
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
How in the world was the Obama administration able to round up and deport nearly 1 million people over the past 2 1/2 years?
Two words: Secure Communities. When first unveiled in 2008, the program was marketed to local governments and law enforcement agencies as an effective tool to allow U.S. immigration officials to identify and deport illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes who were already in jail. And, in a point that has caused controversy, local and state officials were led to believe that participation in the program was voluntary.
It turns out, almost none of this is true. Many of the illegal immigrants who have been deported under the program were not hardened criminals or even criminals at all. (Being in the United States without proper documents is not a crime but a civil violation.) The catch of the day might include anyone from a drunk driver to a shoplifter to a battered wife hauled in along with her spouse after a domestic quarrel.
What a mess. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, has requested an investigation into who is being deported under Secure Communities and whether federal officials misled local governments into thinking that participation was voluntary. The Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security recently announced plans to conduct an inquiry into the program. And the California Assembly recently passed a bill requiring the state to renegotiate its agreement with ICE so that only convicted felons would be handed over and participation by the counties would be optional; if passed by the state Senate, the bill would go to Gov. Jerry Brown for his signature.
I called John Morton, director of ICE.
"It is designed to go after criminal offenders," Morton said. "And that's exactly what it does. And it's why we think it's good policy and it's a good program."
Yet, I pointed out, not everyone who winds up in the clutches of Secure Communities committed a crime.
"The vast majority of people identified and removed through Secure Communities - over 70 percent - are people who are here unlawfully and have a criminal conviction," he said.
But those convictions could go back a decade or two. Are those the folks this program was designed to protect us from?
"We do identify and remove certain non-criminals," Morton acknowledged. As many as a third of the "non-criminals" removed under Secure Communities were previous deportees who came back, he insisted.
"What would you have the agency do when presented with someone who has been previously removed from the country and they've illegally re-entered again?" Morton asked.
That's easy. Deport that person. What troubles me is that this administration cares so much about appearances that it can't admit what it is doing and why. It should just be honest about the fact that its real goal is to rack up as many deportations as possible.
And if Secure Communities helps meet that objective, then the administration will defend the concept with its last breath. Not because the program is right or just, but because it's useful.
This article appeared on page A - 16 of the San Francisco Chronicle
The San Francisco Chronicle
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
How in the world was the Obama administration able to round up and deport nearly 1 million people over the past 2 1/2 years?
Two words: Secure Communities. When first unveiled in 2008, the program was marketed to local governments and law enforcement agencies as an effective tool to allow U.S. immigration officials to identify and deport illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes who were already in jail. And, in a point that has caused controversy, local and state officials were led to believe that participation in the program was voluntary.
It turns out, almost none of this is true. Many of the illegal immigrants who have been deported under the program were not hardened criminals or even criminals at all. (Being in the United States without proper documents is not a crime but a civil violation.) The catch of the day might include anyone from a drunk driver to a shoplifter to a battered wife hauled in along with her spouse after a domestic quarrel.
What a mess. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, has requested an investigation into who is being deported under Secure Communities and whether federal officials misled local governments into thinking that participation was voluntary. The Office of Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security recently announced plans to conduct an inquiry into the program. And the California Assembly recently passed a bill requiring the state to renegotiate its agreement with ICE so that only convicted felons would be handed over and participation by the counties would be optional; if passed by the state Senate, the bill would go to Gov. Jerry Brown for his signature.
I called John Morton, director of ICE.
"It is designed to go after criminal offenders," Morton said. "And that's exactly what it does. And it's why we think it's good policy and it's a good program."
Yet, I pointed out, not everyone who winds up in the clutches of Secure Communities committed a crime.
"The vast majority of people identified and removed through Secure Communities - over 70 percent - are people who are here unlawfully and have a criminal conviction," he said.
But those convictions could go back a decade or two. Are those the folks this program was designed to protect us from?
"We do identify and remove certain non-criminals," Morton acknowledged. As many as a third of the "non-criminals" removed under Secure Communities were previous deportees who came back, he insisted.
"What would you have the agency do when presented with someone who has been previously removed from the country and they've illegally re-entered again?" Morton asked.
That's easy. Deport that person. What troubles me is that this administration cares so much about appearances that it can't admit what it is doing and why. It should just be honest about the fact that its real goal is to rack up as many deportations as possible.
And if Secure Communities helps meet that objective, then the administration will defend the concept with its last breath. Not because the program is right or just, but because it's useful.
This article appeared on page A - 16 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Friday, May 27, 2011
Fewer deportations put 287(g) immigration program at risk; Immigrants’ fear, economy drive decline, critics say
Written by Brian Haas
The Tennessean
May 26, 2011
The number of immigrants detained in Nashville’s deportation program has been nearly halved. Federal dollars earned by the program have been cut by almost two-thirds.
Davidson County Sheriff Daron Hall, whose 287(g) immigration program has been the subject of years of complaints, said its days are numbered if the declines continue.
“If we continue to trend this way… clearly our resources in the Sheriff’s Office could be better used in areas like mental health,” Hall said. “That’s what we would hope, which would be able to focus in a direct way in other areas.”
Deportation proceedings of jailed Nashville immigrants have dropped 40 percent since 2008 to fewer than 1,500 last year, with federal funding dropping more. Hall said the decline signals success, that immigrants deported for even the most minor crimes don’t return. But critics say a troubled economy and a cautious immigrant community are more likely to blame for the drop.
“The fact that it slows doesn’t suggest to me that the program is working any better or worse,” said Katharine Donato, professor and chair of Vanderbilt University’s Department of Sociology. “The program, yes, has been effective, it’s led to thousands of deportations. But if the population locally isn’t growing at the rate it once was, let’s say two years ago, of course you’re going to get a slowdown.”
Dropping numbers
Davidson County joined the 287(g) program in 2007, which allows deputies to screen and interview inmates to determine whether they are U.S. citizens. Suspected illegal immigrants are then turned over to immigration officials for possible deportation proceedings.
Hall has come under consistent criticism from advocates who say that far too many minor offenders are deported when the program was designed to target dangerous criminals.
Though the number of immigrants caught in the program has declined, a Tennessean analysis of 287(g) data shows that the top five charges immigrants faced in 2010 continued to be traffic or minor crimes. Driving without a license, DUI, implied consent violations, failing to show up to court and misdemeanor warrants made up 56 percent of the charges filed, higher than in prior years.
Hall has countered that he doesn’t determine who is arrested for what charge or who ends up deported.
“When we started we were adamant that we wanted to screen all people,” Hall said. “Everyone who is criminally arrested, taken off the streets of Nashville.”
That isn’t a surprise to immigration attorney Elliott Ozment. Ozment is suing Hall on behalf of two legal immigrants caught up in the 287(g) program, one of whom was held for days.
“I have never seen any evidence of him backing off that policy. If he has, I’m certainly not aware of it,” he said. “The sheriff still hasn’t straightened out the priorities of the 287(g) program.”
Cutting back
Attorney Gregg Ramos, who was on Hall’s 287(g) advisory board before it was dissolved, suspects some of the decline can be attributed to immigrants afraid to be driving Nashville’s streets out of fear of being deported.
“I know people are still scared to come out. They get stopped for playing their music too loud, they get stopped for a tail light allegedly out, they get stopped for tinted windows that are maybe too dark,” Ramos said. “Parents are afraid to engage in their children’s education.”
Donato said the decline can largely be traced to an overall drop in immigration from Latin American countries because of the lagging U.S. economy and a lackluster job market. Immigration from some smaller countries, such as El Salvador, has completely dried up, she said.
“Migration has slowed from Mexico and Latin America related to the economy. It hasn’t disappeared, but it has slowed,” she said.
Whatever the reason, Hall has already scaled back his 287(g) program. He started out with 15 detention deputies and a supervisor. Today, he’s cut back to 12 employees and is already mulling over what it would take to shrink the team even more. And he’s convinced that each cut is another sign of success.
“I think it’s pretty simple,” Hall said. “What’s wrong with ‘It’s worked?’ ”
Additional Facts
Drop in numbers
Number of immigrants held at the Davidson County jail for removal
2007 2,224
2008 2,506
2009 2,068
2010 1,474
2011 465*
*Through May 23, 2011, at 3:15 p.m. SOURCE: Davidson County Sheriff’s Office
Most common charges
Most common charges filed against suspected illegal immigrants held in the 287(g) program in 2010:
Driving without a license: 24.76%
Driving under the influence: 14.69%
Implied consent violation: 8.20%
Failure to be booked: 5.41%
Misdemeanor capias: 3.23%
FUNDS CUT
Federal money received by the Davidson County Sheriff’s Office for holding immigrants under the 287(g) removal program.
2007-08 $1,045,845
2008-09 $659,642
2009-10 $368,867
2010-11 to date $254,797
(Projected to be $360,000)
SOURCE: Davidson County Sheriff’s Office
The Tennessean
May 26, 2011
The number of immigrants detained in Nashville’s deportation program has been nearly halved. Federal dollars earned by the program have been cut by almost two-thirds.
Davidson County Sheriff Daron Hall, whose 287(g) immigration program has been the subject of years of complaints, said its days are numbered if the declines continue.
“If we continue to trend this way… clearly our resources in the Sheriff’s Office could be better used in areas like mental health,” Hall said. “That’s what we would hope, which would be able to focus in a direct way in other areas.”
Deportation proceedings of jailed Nashville immigrants have dropped 40 percent since 2008 to fewer than 1,500 last year, with federal funding dropping more. Hall said the decline signals success, that immigrants deported for even the most minor crimes don’t return. But critics say a troubled economy and a cautious immigrant community are more likely to blame for the drop.
“The fact that it slows doesn’t suggest to me that the program is working any better or worse,” said Katharine Donato, professor and chair of Vanderbilt University’s Department of Sociology. “The program, yes, has been effective, it’s led to thousands of deportations. But if the population locally isn’t growing at the rate it once was, let’s say two years ago, of course you’re going to get a slowdown.”
Dropping numbers
Davidson County joined the 287(g) program in 2007, which allows deputies to screen and interview inmates to determine whether they are U.S. citizens. Suspected illegal immigrants are then turned over to immigration officials for possible deportation proceedings.
Hall has come under consistent criticism from advocates who say that far too many minor offenders are deported when the program was designed to target dangerous criminals.
Though the number of immigrants caught in the program has declined, a Tennessean analysis of 287(g) data shows that the top five charges immigrants faced in 2010 continued to be traffic or minor crimes. Driving without a license, DUI, implied consent violations, failing to show up to court and misdemeanor warrants made up 56 percent of the charges filed, higher than in prior years.
Hall has countered that he doesn’t determine who is arrested for what charge or who ends up deported.
“When we started we were adamant that we wanted to screen all people,” Hall said. “Everyone who is criminally arrested, taken off the streets of Nashville.”
That isn’t a surprise to immigration attorney Elliott Ozment. Ozment is suing Hall on behalf of two legal immigrants caught up in the 287(g) program, one of whom was held for days.
“I have never seen any evidence of him backing off that policy. If he has, I’m certainly not aware of it,” he said. “The sheriff still hasn’t straightened out the priorities of the 287(g) program.”
Cutting back
Attorney Gregg Ramos, who was on Hall’s 287(g) advisory board before it was dissolved, suspects some of the decline can be attributed to immigrants afraid to be driving Nashville’s streets out of fear of being deported.
“I know people are still scared to come out. They get stopped for playing their music too loud, they get stopped for a tail light allegedly out, they get stopped for tinted windows that are maybe too dark,” Ramos said. “Parents are afraid to engage in their children’s education.”
Donato said the decline can largely be traced to an overall drop in immigration from Latin American countries because of the lagging U.S. economy and a lackluster job market. Immigration from some smaller countries, such as El Salvador, has completely dried up, she said.
“Migration has slowed from Mexico and Latin America related to the economy. It hasn’t disappeared, but it has slowed,” she said.
Whatever the reason, Hall has already scaled back his 287(g) program. He started out with 15 detention deputies and a supervisor. Today, he’s cut back to 12 employees and is already mulling over what it would take to shrink the team even more. And he’s convinced that each cut is another sign of success.
“I think it’s pretty simple,” Hall said. “What’s wrong with ‘It’s worked?’ ”
Additional Facts
Drop in numbers
Number of immigrants held at the Davidson County jail for removal
2007 2,224
2008 2,506
2009 2,068
2010 1,474
2011 465*
*Through May 23, 2011, at 3:15 p.m. SOURCE: Davidson County Sheriff’s Office
Most common charges
Most common charges filed against suspected illegal immigrants held in the 287(g) program in 2010:
Driving without a license: 24.76%
Driving under the influence: 14.69%
Implied consent violation: 8.20%
Failure to be booked: 5.41%
Misdemeanor capias: 3.23%
FUNDS CUT
Federal money received by the Davidson County Sheriff’s Office for holding immigrants under the 287(g) removal program.
2007-08 $1,045,845
2008-09 $659,642
2009-10 $368,867
2010-11 to date $254,797
(Projected to be $360,000)
SOURCE: Davidson County Sheriff’s Office
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Sheriff's office won't resist deportation program
Some law officers nationwide say illegal immigrant effort is flawed.
By PATRICK MALONE
Chieftain.Com
Thursday, May 26, 2011
DENVER — A tide of backlash nationally against the federal Secure Communities program has not deterred the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office from plans to participate in it.
Two sheriffs from other states expressed doubts Wednesday about participating in the program because they worry it is snaring low-level offenders and deporting people whose criminal cases have not been adjudicated.
They join the governor of Illinois and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus in questioning whether Secure Communities is accomplishing its objectives or doing more harm than good.
The Pueblo sheriff’s office sees little difference between Secure Communities and its current practice of providing inmates’ fingerprints to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, which in turn forwards them to federal agencies, according to Capt. Dave Lucero.
He said the fingerprint comparison does little to affect the jail. Of the 606 inmates held there on Wednesday, just two were being detained on immigration holds.
Secure Communities creates a computer pipeline for jails to send fingerprints of people booked there to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the FBI.
The program’s aim is to target for deportation those who have committed the most serious crimes, such as rape, murder and felony drug offenses. But the Los Angeles Times reported last week that only about 35 percent of those who have been deported to date fit that description.
One-fourth of the deportations associated with Secure Communities so far have involved people awaiting resolution of their cases who have not been convicted, according to Bridget Kessler of Benjamin Cardoza School of Law.
“It’s a flawed program,” said Sheriff Patrick Perez of Kane County, Ill., where Gov. Patrick Quinn recently terminated the state’s participation in Secure Communities over concerns that it was not catching its intended targets and was eroding trust between law enforcement and the immigrant community.
Perez praised Quinn’s decision.
“People have been deported for minor traffic violations or no criminal activity at all,” Perez said.
Earlier this month the Congressional Hispanic Caucus submitted a letter to President Barack Obama urging an immediate freeze of Secure Communities in order to review whether it is truly prioritizing serious offenders for deportation, or simply casting a dragnet.
ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok emphasized the scope of Secure Communities is limited to those in the country illegally who have been arrested for violating state laws.
“Secure Communities has been deployed quickly to support the administration’s efforts to prioritize criminal aliens for removal, and DHS is committed to working with all partners to address questions about the program,” Rusnok said.
He said ICE is reviewing statistics to assure Secure Communities is not a vehicle for misconduct, and if any is found corrective actions will be taken.
Sheriff Ed Prieto of Yolo County, Calif., acknowledged that many people, including some in his own command staff, have no objections to deporting anyone who is discovered to be in the country illegally. But he is instructing his department to notify ICE only of prisoners in the country illegally who are known to have committed serious offenses.
In a conference call with reporters, Perez and Prieto also voiced confusion over whether participation in the program is mandatory and what the consequences might be if they reject joining.
They said early correspondence with the DHS and ICE suggested participation was voluntary, but since then those agencies have made it abundantly clear that every jurisdiction in the nation is expected to be on board by 2013. Rusnok said the only aspect of the program that jails can block is a return report from ICE about whether anyone in a jail is subject to deportation. But refusing to accept those results has no bearing on whether ICE — which has the ultimate authority to do so — will deport inmates from a jail.
Gov. Bill Ritter approved Colorado’s participation in the program shortly before he left office. Denver, Arapahoe and El Paso counties currently are Colorado’s pilot jurisdictions for Secure Communities. Pueblo County also will join to comply with the mandate.
“It’s not up to us to dictate their policies,” said Lucero of the Pueblo sheriff's office. “They make the rules. We just follow them.”
http://www.chieftain.com/news/local/sheriff-s-office-won-t-resist-deportation-program/article_aacb74b4-875b-11e0-92ed-001cc4c002e0.html
By PATRICK MALONE
Chieftain.Com
Thursday, May 26, 2011
DENVER — A tide of backlash nationally against the federal Secure Communities program has not deterred the Pueblo County Sheriff’s Office from plans to participate in it.
Two sheriffs from other states expressed doubts Wednesday about participating in the program because they worry it is snaring low-level offenders and deporting people whose criminal cases have not been adjudicated.
They join the governor of Illinois and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus in questioning whether Secure Communities is accomplishing its objectives or doing more harm than good.
The Pueblo sheriff’s office sees little difference between Secure Communities and its current practice of providing inmates’ fingerprints to the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, which in turn forwards them to federal agencies, according to Capt. Dave Lucero.
He said the fingerprint comparison does little to affect the jail. Of the 606 inmates held there on Wednesday, just two were being detained on immigration holds.
Secure Communities creates a computer pipeline for jails to send fingerprints of people booked there to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the FBI.
The program’s aim is to target for deportation those who have committed the most serious crimes, such as rape, murder and felony drug offenses. But the Los Angeles Times reported last week that only about 35 percent of those who have been deported to date fit that description.
One-fourth of the deportations associated with Secure Communities so far have involved people awaiting resolution of their cases who have not been convicted, according to Bridget Kessler of Benjamin Cardoza School of Law.
“It’s a flawed program,” said Sheriff Patrick Perez of Kane County, Ill., where Gov. Patrick Quinn recently terminated the state’s participation in Secure Communities over concerns that it was not catching its intended targets and was eroding trust between law enforcement and the immigrant community.
Perez praised Quinn’s decision.
“People have been deported for minor traffic violations or no criminal activity at all,” Perez said.
Earlier this month the Congressional Hispanic Caucus submitted a letter to President Barack Obama urging an immediate freeze of Secure Communities in order to review whether it is truly prioritizing serious offenders for deportation, or simply casting a dragnet.
ICE spokesman Carl Rusnok emphasized the scope of Secure Communities is limited to those in the country illegally who have been arrested for violating state laws.
“Secure Communities has been deployed quickly to support the administration’s efforts to prioritize criminal aliens for removal, and DHS is committed to working with all partners to address questions about the program,” Rusnok said.
He said ICE is reviewing statistics to assure Secure Communities is not a vehicle for misconduct, and if any is found corrective actions will be taken.
Sheriff Ed Prieto of Yolo County, Calif., acknowledged that many people, including some in his own command staff, have no objections to deporting anyone who is discovered to be in the country illegally. But he is instructing his department to notify ICE only of prisoners in the country illegally who are known to have committed serious offenses.
In a conference call with reporters, Perez and Prieto also voiced confusion over whether participation in the program is mandatory and what the consequences might be if they reject joining.
They said early correspondence with the DHS and ICE suggested participation was voluntary, but since then those agencies have made it abundantly clear that every jurisdiction in the nation is expected to be on board by 2013. Rusnok said the only aspect of the program that jails can block is a return report from ICE about whether anyone in a jail is subject to deportation. But refusing to accept those results has no bearing on whether ICE — which has the ultimate authority to do so — will deport inmates from a jail.
Gov. Bill Ritter approved Colorado’s participation in the program shortly before he left office. Denver, Arapahoe and El Paso counties currently are Colorado’s pilot jurisdictions for Secure Communities. Pueblo County also will join to comply with the mandate.
“It’s not up to us to dictate their policies,” said Lucero of the Pueblo sheriff's office. “They make the rules. We just follow them.”
http://www.chieftain.com/news/local/sheriff-s-office-won-t-resist-deportation-program/article_aacb74b4-875b-11e0-92ed-001cc4c002e0.html
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Government Starts Inquiry Into Program Leading to More Deportations
By Ruxandra Guidi
KPBS
May 23, 2011
SAN DIEGO — Secure Communities was launched in 2008, with plans for mandatory nationwide participation by 2013. It requires local jails around the country to share detainees' fingerprints with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Twelve-hundred counties nationwide were assigned the program without the ability to opt out, as part of a federal effort to increase deportations.
"A major concern around this program is whether or not it's doing what it says it's doing," said Britney Nystrom, Director of Policy at the National Immigration Forum in Washington, a think tank that has criticized the program from the start. "Its priority should have been identifying and removing individuals who pose a threat to national security or a risk to public safety."
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-California) requested an investigation into Secure Communities late last month. According to ICE, about 28,000, or 35 percent, of those who have been deported so far under the program have been convicted of serious felonies like murder and rape.
"What is concerning is that the numbers that have been released about this program, contain many individuals who are identified and ultimately removed as a result of Secure Communities and who have no conviction whatsoever," said Nystrom.
Throughout the country, a majority of deportees had minor convictions such as driving offenses, low level property crimes or immigration related offenses.
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/may/23/government-starts-inquiry-program-leading-more-dep/
KPBS
May 23, 2011
SAN DIEGO — Secure Communities was launched in 2008, with plans for mandatory nationwide participation by 2013. It requires local jails around the country to share detainees' fingerprints with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Twelve-hundred counties nationwide were assigned the program without the ability to opt out, as part of a federal effort to increase deportations.
"A major concern around this program is whether or not it's doing what it says it's doing," said Britney Nystrom, Director of Policy at the National Immigration Forum in Washington, a think tank that has criticized the program from the start. "Its priority should have been identifying and removing individuals who pose a threat to national security or a risk to public safety."
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-California) requested an investigation into Secure Communities late last month. According to ICE, about 28,000, or 35 percent, of those who have been deported so far under the program have been convicted of serious felonies like murder and rape.
"What is concerning is that the numbers that have been released about this program, contain many individuals who are identified and ultimately removed as a result of Secure Communities and who have no conviction whatsoever," said Nystrom.
Throughout the country, a majority of deportees had minor convictions such as driving offenses, low level property crimes or immigration related offenses.
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/may/23/government-starts-inquiry-program-leading-more-dep/
Saturday, May 21, 2011
ICE Halts Deportation At ACLU’s Request
By Judicial Watch
May 19, 2011
In the latest collusion between the Obama Administration and the leftwing American Civil Liberties Union, Homeland Security officials have suspended the scheduled deportation of an illegal immigrant at the ACLU’s request.
The move is part of a bigger plan to perhaps eliminate the federal program (Secure Communities) that identified the illegal alien in the first place. The influential open borders movement—which includes the ACLU—has aggressively pressured the administration to nix Secure Communities, which requires local authorities to check the fingerprints of arrestees against a federal database. The idea is to deport dangerous criminals, many of whom have fallen through the cracks over the years.
But immigrant rights advocates insist the program is racist, has led to the removal of hard-working immigrants who contribute to society and has tragically separated families. They want the Obama Administration to get rid of it and that could very well happen as the president panders for votes in 2012. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General announced this week that it’s planning an investigation of Secure Communities.
The probe will determine the extent to which the program is used to identify and remove dangerous criminal aliens from the United States, according to a news report of the inspector general’s plans. The IG will also examine cost and the accuracy of the data collection and determine if Secure Communities is being applied “equitably across communities.”
Those who dare to read between the lines can probably see where this is going. The illegal immigrant whose deportation was abruptly halted by the government headlined an ACLU-sponsored press conference decrying Secure Communities. She was arrested earlier this year in Los Angeles after a domestic violence dispute and was identified as an illegal alien when the county jail forwarded her fingerprints to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
At the ACLU’s behest ICE conducted a “comprehensive review” of the illegal immigrant’s case and determined to “terminate the removal proceedings against her,” according to an agency statement published in a local newspaper. Immigration advocates used the case as an opportunity to chastise Secure Communities as a “destructive program” that endangers public safety because immigrants won’t cooperate with police out of fear of being deported.
Interestingly, the elected sheriff who operates jails in Los Angeles and patrols a huge chunk of the sprawling county insists that Secure Communities works. In a piece published this week by the state’s largest newspaper, L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca writes that many serious criminals have been deported. Prior to implementing Secure Communities a “growing number of criminal illegal immigrants who were taken into custody” were eventually released back into the community, according to Baca who has been sheriff since 1998.
In the piece Baca offers several examples of violent illegal aliens who were removed from the U.S. thanks to Secure Communities. Among them is a felon who lived in the area despite three drug-trafficking convictions and six deportations and another who had been previously removed after getting convicted for killing a child in the late 1990s.
Back to the unscrupulous collaboration between the Obama Administration and the ACLU; earlier this year Judicial Watch uncovered documents from the Department of Justice that show the agency worked hand-in-hand with the ACLU in mounting their respective legal challenges to Arizona’s immigration control law.
http://www.themoralliberal.com/2011/05/19/ice-halts-deportation-at-aclu%E2%80%99s-request/
May 19, 2011
In the latest collusion between the Obama Administration and the leftwing American Civil Liberties Union, Homeland Security officials have suspended the scheduled deportation of an illegal immigrant at the ACLU’s request.
The move is part of a bigger plan to perhaps eliminate the federal program (Secure Communities) that identified the illegal alien in the first place. The influential open borders movement—which includes the ACLU—has aggressively pressured the administration to nix Secure Communities, which requires local authorities to check the fingerprints of arrestees against a federal database. The idea is to deport dangerous criminals, many of whom have fallen through the cracks over the years.
But immigrant rights advocates insist the program is racist, has led to the removal of hard-working immigrants who contribute to society and has tragically separated families. They want the Obama Administration to get rid of it and that could very well happen as the president panders for votes in 2012. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General announced this week that it’s planning an investigation of Secure Communities.
The probe will determine the extent to which the program is used to identify and remove dangerous criminal aliens from the United States, according to a news report of the inspector general’s plans. The IG will also examine cost and the accuracy of the data collection and determine if Secure Communities is being applied “equitably across communities.”
Those who dare to read between the lines can probably see where this is going. The illegal immigrant whose deportation was abruptly halted by the government headlined an ACLU-sponsored press conference decrying Secure Communities. She was arrested earlier this year in Los Angeles after a domestic violence dispute and was identified as an illegal alien when the county jail forwarded her fingerprints to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
At the ACLU’s behest ICE conducted a “comprehensive review” of the illegal immigrant’s case and determined to “terminate the removal proceedings against her,” according to an agency statement published in a local newspaper. Immigration advocates used the case as an opportunity to chastise Secure Communities as a “destructive program” that endangers public safety because immigrants won’t cooperate with police out of fear of being deported.
Interestingly, the elected sheriff who operates jails in Los Angeles and patrols a huge chunk of the sprawling county insists that Secure Communities works. In a piece published this week by the state’s largest newspaper, L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca writes that many serious criminals have been deported. Prior to implementing Secure Communities a “growing number of criminal illegal immigrants who were taken into custody” were eventually released back into the community, according to Baca who has been sheriff since 1998.
In the piece Baca offers several examples of violent illegal aliens who were removed from the U.S. thanks to Secure Communities. Among them is a felon who lived in the area despite three drug-trafficking convictions and six deportations and another who had been previously removed after getting convicted for killing a child in the late 1990s.
Back to the unscrupulous collaboration between the Obama Administration and the ACLU; earlier this year Judicial Watch uncovered documents from the Department of Justice that show the agency worked hand-in-hand with the ACLU in mounting their respective legal challenges to Arizona’s immigration control law.
http://www.themoralliberal.com/2011/05/19/ice-halts-deportation-at-aclu%E2%80%99s-request/
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Lee Baca: Let us deport the bad guys; Critics are wrong: The Secure Communities program works
By Lee Baca
The Los Angeles Times
May 16, 2011
Consider the following case: In January, a local police agency arrested a man for driving with a suspended license. A subsequent fingerprint screening revealed that he was also a convicted felon illegally in the United States from Mexico. His record included three prior drug trafficking convictions and six deportations in 11 years.
Or consider this one: Recently, a 32-year-old man was booked into the Los Angeles County Jail on DUI charges. His fingerprints revealed not only that he was in the United States illegally but that he had previously been deported after his conviction for killing a child in 1997.
Both men were identified through the Secure Communities program. Under the program, local law enforcement agencies send the fingerprints of those they arrest to the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, where they are cross-checked against Department of Justice records to identify criminal aliens. The program enables law enforcement agencies to identify criminals who are here illegally and allows the federal government to target those who have committed serious crimes for deportation so they no longer pose a threat to our communities.
In Los Angeles County, the Sheriff's Department also participates with ICE in a program known as 287g. Since 2006, that program has identified more than 20,000 criminal illegal immigrants here.
In both programs, it is not the Sheriff's Department that instigates deportation proceedings: That is the role of the federal government. We provide information; ICE decides whether to act on it.
Both programs have drawn fire recently from groups concerned that they infringe on civil rights and that people arrested but not ultimately charged could end up being deported. The groups have expressed concern that the programs might lead to racial profiling or intimidate law-abiding residents who would be reluctant to cooperate with law enforcement to solve crimes. In San Francisco, the sheriff has vowed to release low-level offenders back into the community at the end of their terms, even if ICE has placed a hold on them.
These concerns are misplaced, and they put communities at risk. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, working in conjunction with the Board of Supervisors, implemented the 287g program years ago, and we were also early adopters of Secure Communities; we have not had significant problems.
We did have a serious problem, however, before implementing the programs. We had a growing number of criminal illegal immigrants who were taken into custody and eventually had to be released back onto our streets.
Many other local police agencies have seen the same kind of success we have with the program. About 1,200 state and local law enforcement jurisdictions in 42 states are now participating in the Secure Communities program. Because of this, more than 72,445 aliens convicted of crimes have been identified and deported. That number includes 26,473 criminals convicted of aggravated felonies such as murder, rape, kidnapping or the sexual abuse of children. From October 2008 to October 2010, Secure Communities helped ICE increase by 71% the number of convicted criminals deported.
Arresting officials are not deputized to enforce immigration laws. They are simply doing what they have always done. The only difference is that under Secure Communities, the fingerprints they take during the booking process are run through FBI and Department of Homeland Security databases.
Across the United States, sheriffs and police chiefs have voiced their support for this program. As law enforcers, it is our job to use all available resources to protect citizens and uphold the rule of law. Like members of Congress and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, I see the removal of criminal illegal immigrants as a top priority in securing both the nation and our communities.
Lee Baca has been sheriff of Los Angeles County since 1998.
latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-baca-immigration-20110517,0,7647155.story
latimes.com
The Los Angeles Times
May 16, 2011
Consider the following case: In January, a local police agency arrested a man for driving with a suspended license. A subsequent fingerprint screening revealed that he was also a convicted felon illegally in the United States from Mexico. His record included three prior drug trafficking convictions and six deportations in 11 years.
Or consider this one: Recently, a 32-year-old man was booked into the Los Angeles County Jail on DUI charges. His fingerprints revealed not only that he was in the United States illegally but that he had previously been deported after his conviction for killing a child in 1997.
Both men were identified through the Secure Communities program. Under the program, local law enforcement agencies send the fingerprints of those they arrest to the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, where they are cross-checked against Department of Justice records to identify criminal aliens. The program enables law enforcement agencies to identify criminals who are here illegally and allows the federal government to target those who have committed serious crimes for deportation so they no longer pose a threat to our communities.
In Los Angeles County, the Sheriff's Department also participates with ICE in a program known as 287g. Since 2006, that program has identified more than 20,000 criminal illegal immigrants here.
In both programs, it is not the Sheriff's Department that instigates deportation proceedings: That is the role of the federal government. We provide information; ICE decides whether to act on it.
Both programs have drawn fire recently from groups concerned that they infringe on civil rights and that people arrested but not ultimately charged could end up being deported. The groups have expressed concern that the programs might lead to racial profiling or intimidate law-abiding residents who would be reluctant to cooperate with law enforcement to solve crimes. In San Francisco, the sheriff has vowed to release low-level offenders back into the community at the end of their terms, even if ICE has placed a hold on them.
These concerns are misplaced, and they put communities at risk. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, working in conjunction with the Board of Supervisors, implemented the 287g program years ago, and we were also early adopters of Secure Communities; we have not had significant problems.
We did have a serious problem, however, before implementing the programs. We had a growing number of criminal illegal immigrants who were taken into custody and eventually had to be released back onto our streets.
Many other local police agencies have seen the same kind of success we have with the program. About 1,200 state and local law enforcement jurisdictions in 42 states are now participating in the Secure Communities program. Because of this, more than 72,445 aliens convicted of crimes have been identified and deported. That number includes 26,473 criminals convicted of aggravated felonies such as murder, rape, kidnapping or the sexual abuse of children. From October 2008 to October 2010, Secure Communities helped ICE increase by 71% the number of convicted criminals deported.
Arresting officials are not deputized to enforce immigration laws. They are simply doing what they have always done. The only difference is that under Secure Communities, the fingerprints they take during the booking process are run through FBI and Department of Homeland Security databases.
Across the United States, sheriffs and police chiefs have voiced their support for this program. As law enforcers, it is our job to use all available resources to protect citizens and uphold the rule of law. Like members of Congress and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, I see the removal of criminal illegal immigrants as a top priority in securing both the nation and our communities.
Lee Baca has been sheriff of Los Angeles County since 1998.
latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-baca-immigration-20110517,0,7647155.story
latimes.com
Sunday, May 15, 2011
States Rebel Over Deportations
By MIRIAM JORDAN
The Wall Street Journal
May 14, 2011
Lawmakers and law-enforcement officials in several states are turning against a mandatory federal program that is a cornerstone of the Obama administration's immigration policy.
The Secure Communities initiative is designed to spot and deport illegal immigrants who have been convicted of crimes. Under the program, fingerprints of people booked into a jail are transmitted to a database reviewed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. If found to be in the U.S. illegally, they can face deportation.
Recently, such states as Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and California have raised objections to the program's real-world effects: Although designed to remove criminals from the country, it has led to the deportation of thousands of people without criminal records.
Critics of this approach in Democratic-leaning states say it inhibits immigrants from reporting crimes, undermining public safety, and needlessly breaks up families.
Republicans and groups that favor a crackdown on the 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. support the program. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, for example, believes the program deters some illegal immigrants from committing crimes. "People are more cautious because the program is in existence," he said.
ICE said it was committed to extending the program—which has spread to more than 1,200 jurisdictions in 42 states—to the entire U.S. by 2013. The agency said it has begun to review and adjust Secure Communities in response to the swell of criticism.
Started under President George W. Bush in 2008, the program has led to the deportation of 101,741 illegal immigrants as of March, including 26,473 convicted of serious crimes, such as homicide, rape and drug trafficking. About 45,970 had been convicted of a single felony, such as a property crime, or up to two misdemeanors, such as minor drug offenses. Another 29, 296 of the deportees hadn't been convicted of any crime, however.
Last November, a year after joining the program, Illinois suspended participation in Secure Communities and began a review. Then last week, Gov. Pat Quinn informed ICE, which oversees the program, that his state had decided to quit altogether.
Secure Communities was "supposed to facilitate the removal of individuals convicted of the most serious of crimes who are residing in this country illegally," the governor's office said.
In a letter to immigration authorities reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the governor said that "more than a third" of those deported from the state through the program had never been convicted of a crime. "Due to the conflict between the stated purpose of Secure Communities and the implementation of the program, Illinois state police will no longer participate," he wrote.
Citing Illinois's decision, 38 New York state lawmakers early this week urged Gov. Andrew Cuomo to quit the program. "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," they said in a letter reviewed by the Journal.
The program has been rolled out in 24 of New York's 62 counties. "ICE statistics for New York show that the vast majority (approximately 80%) of those detained by ICE because of Secure Communities were never convicted of a crime," the letter said.
Resistance is growing in California, where a bill before the state Assembly would seek to limit the initiative and allow localities to opt out.
Last week, San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessy said that as of June 1, he would no longer cooperate with ICE to facilitate the deportation of low-level offenders and those who have no criminal record. He said Secure Communities had a chilling effect on immigrants who witness or are victims of crime. "Crimes go unreported—and this affects everyone, citizens and noncitizens alike," he said.
Washington and Minnesota are among the states that have declined to join Secure Communities so far. In Massachusetts, where the program is active on a pilot basis in the Boston area, Gov. Deval Patrick's administration has hosted heated community discussions about it.
Asked about criticism of the program, ICE said, "Secure Communities has been deployed quickly to support the administration's efforts to prioritize criminal aliens for removal." ICE "is committed to working with all partners to address questions about the program," it said.
Resistance to Secure Communities is intensifying just as President Barack Obama tries to build support for an overhaul of immigration laws by showing he is bolstering border security and getting tough on enforcement against illegal immigration.
In a May 5 letter, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus urged Mr. Obama to "freeze the Secure Communities program, effective immediately." Pablo Alvarado, head of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said the program "has come to symbolize the president's broken promises on immigration reform." Mr. Obama won a large share of Hispanic votes in 2008.
Isaura Garcia of Los Angeles said she dialed 911 to report domestic abuse by her partner in February. When police entered her fingerprints in the database linked to ICE, the system determined she was in the U.S. illegally. Though she had no criminal record, she landed in deportation proceedings.
After the American Civil Liberties Union brought her case to light Thursday, ICE said it would ask the immigration court to end removal proceedings against her.
ICE said it was in the "process of finalizing" a new policy that lets it exercise discretion in cases involving victims and witnesses of crime, including domestic violence. It said it didn't keep data on how many of those identified by Secure Communities fell into that category.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a restrictionist group, cautioned against bowing to pressure. "If Obama caves on this program, he loses his last remaining fig leaf to disguise the complete collapse of the system of interior enforcement."
Los Angeles County Sheriff Baca credits Secure Communities with decreasing the proportion of illegal immigrants in his jails to 15% from 24% in the last year. "People are more cautious because the program is in existence," he said, adding that they were more likely to avoid drinking and driving, or committing felonies, because that could lead to their deportation.
"Those who oppose this common-sense program are putting partisan politics ahead of saving Americans lives and reducing illegal immigration," said Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704681904576321404203166580.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The Wall Street Journal
May 14, 2011
Lawmakers and law-enforcement officials in several states are turning against a mandatory federal program that is a cornerstone of the Obama administration's immigration policy.
The Secure Communities initiative is designed to spot and deport illegal immigrants who have been convicted of crimes. Under the program, fingerprints of people booked into a jail are transmitted to a database reviewed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE. If found to be in the U.S. illegally, they can face deportation.
Recently, such states as Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and California have raised objections to the program's real-world effects: Although designed to remove criminals from the country, it has led to the deportation of thousands of people without criminal records.
Critics of this approach in Democratic-leaning states say it inhibits immigrants from reporting crimes, undermining public safety, and needlessly breaks up families.
Republicans and groups that favor a crackdown on the 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. support the program. Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, for example, believes the program deters some illegal immigrants from committing crimes. "People are more cautious because the program is in existence," he said.
ICE said it was committed to extending the program—which has spread to more than 1,200 jurisdictions in 42 states—to the entire U.S. by 2013. The agency said it has begun to review and adjust Secure Communities in response to the swell of criticism.
Started under President George W. Bush in 2008, the program has led to the deportation of 101,741 illegal immigrants as of March, including 26,473 convicted of serious crimes, such as homicide, rape and drug trafficking. About 45,970 had been convicted of a single felony, such as a property crime, or up to two misdemeanors, such as minor drug offenses. Another 29, 296 of the deportees hadn't been convicted of any crime, however.
Last November, a year after joining the program, Illinois suspended participation in Secure Communities and began a review. Then last week, Gov. Pat Quinn informed ICE, which oversees the program, that his state had decided to quit altogether.
Secure Communities was "supposed to facilitate the removal of individuals convicted of the most serious of crimes who are residing in this country illegally," the governor's office said.
In a letter to immigration authorities reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the governor said that "more than a third" of those deported from the state through the program had never been convicted of a crime. "Due to the conflict between the stated purpose of Secure Communities and the implementation of the program, Illinois state police will no longer participate," he wrote.
Citing Illinois's decision, 38 New York state lawmakers early this week urged Gov. Andrew Cuomo to quit the program. "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," they said in a letter reviewed by the Journal.
The program has been rolled out in 24 of New York's 62 counties. "ICE statistics for New York show that the vast majority (approximately 80%) of those detained by ICE because of Secure Communities were never convicted of a crime," the letter said.
Resistance is growing in California, where a bill before the state Assembly would seek to limit the initiative and allow localities to opt out.
Last week, San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessy said that as of June 1, he would no longer cooperate with ICE to facilitate the deportation of low-level offenders and those who have no criminal record. He said Secure Communities had a chilling effect on immigrants who witness or are victims of crime. "Crimes go unreported—and this affects everyone, citizens and noncitizens alike," he said.
Washington and Minnesota are among the states that have declined to join Secure Communities so far. In Massachusetts, where the program is active on a pilot basis in the Boston area, Gov. Deval Patrick's administration has hosted heated community discussions about it.
Asked about criticism of the program, ICE said, "Secure Communities has been deployed quickly to support the administration's efforts to prioritize criminal aliens for removal." ICE "is committed to working with all partners to address questions about the program," it said.
Resistance to Secure Communities is intensifying just as President Barack Obama tries to build support for an overhaul of immigration laws by showing he is bolstering border security and getting tough on enforcement against illegal immigration.
In a May 5 letter, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus urged Mr. Obama to "freeze the Secure Communities program, effective immediately." Pablo Alvarado, head of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said the program "has come to symbolize the president's broken promises on immigration reform." Mr. Obama won a large share of Hispanic votes in 2008.
Isaura Garcia of Los Angeles said she dialed 911 to report domestic abuse by her partner in February. When police entered her fingerprints in the database linked to ICE, the system determined she was in the U.S. illegally. Though she had no criminal record, she landed in deportation proceedings.
After the American Civil Liberties Union brought her case to light Thursday, ICE said it would ask the immigration court to end removal proceedings against her.
ICE said it was in the "process of finalizing" a new policy that lets it exercise discretion in cases involving victims and witnesses of crime, including domestic violence. It said it didn't keep data on how many of those identified by Secure Communities fell into that category.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a restrictionist group, cautioned against bowing to pressure. "If Obama caves on this program, he loses his last remaining fig leaf to disguise the complete collapse of the system of interior enforcement."
Los Angeles County Sheriff Baca credits Secure Communities with decreasing the proportion of illegal immigrants in his jails to 15% from 24% in the last year. "People are more cautious because the program is in existence," he said, adding that they were more likely to avoid drinking and driving, or committing felonies, because that could lead to their deportation.
"Those who oppose this common-sense program are putting partisan politics ahead of saving Americans lives and reducing illegal immigration," said Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704681904576321404203166580.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Kentucky's immigration enforcement program criticized for deporting non-violent offenders
By Valarie Honeycutt Spears and Linda J. Johnson
The Lexington Herald-Leader
May 13, 2011
Since Lexington joined a federal program in October aimed at deporting illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes, 75.6 percent of the 41 people deported have been convicted of a minor crime or no crime at all.
Lexington's percentage of such deportations is well above the national average of 60 percent, according to a Herald-Leader analysis of a report on the program released by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on March 4.
There has been mounting national criticism in recent weeks of ICE's Secure Communities program, leading Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn to abandon the initiative earlier this month.
In a May 4 letter to Marc Rapp, the acting assistant director of Secure Communities, Quinn said his state wants to withdraw because more than "30 percent of those deported from the United States, under the program, have never been convicted of any crime, much less a serious one."
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government spokeswoman Susan Straub said the city has no plans to take similar action.
"We will continue to work with Homeland Security to address the issues involving illegal immigration and have no plans to withdraw from our participation in this Homeland Security initiative," Straub said.
In the program, local law enforcement shares fingerprints of all those arrested in a specific county with the Department of Justice. The fingerprints are then submitted to ICE and checked against U.S. Department of Homeland Security databases to determine a person's immigration status. ICE then determines what, if any, enforcement action to take.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/05/13/3624281/kentuckys-immigration-enforcement.html
The Lexington Herald-Leader
May 13, 2011
Since Lexington joined a federal program in October aimed at deporting illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes, 75.6 percent of the 41 people deported have been convicted of a minor crime or no crime at all.
Lexington's percentage of such deportations is well above the national average of 60 percent, according to a Herald-Leader analysis of a report on the program released by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on March 4.
There has been mounting national criticism in recent weeks of ICE's Secure Communities program, leading Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn to abandon the initiative earlier this month.
In a May 4 letter to Marc Rapp, the acting assistant director of Secure Communities, Quinn said his state wants to withdraw because more than "30 percent of those deported from the United States, under the program, have never been convicted of any crime, much less a serious one."
Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government spokeswoman Susan Straub said the city has no plans to take similar action.
"We will continue to work with Homeland Security to address the issues involving illegal immigration and have no plans to withdraw from our participation in this Homeland Security initiative," Straub said.
In the program, local law enforcement shares fingerprints of all those arrested in a specific county with the Department of Justice. The fingerprints are then submitted to ICE and checked against U.S. Department of Homeland Security databases to determine a person's immigration status. ICE then determines what, if any, enforcement action to take.
http://www.sacbee.com/2011/05/13/3624281/kentuckys-immigration-enforcement.html
Friday, May 6, 2011
Hispanic Caucus calls on Obama to freeze controversial immigration enforcement program
By Lee Romney
The 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.”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/05/hispanic-caucus-calls-on-obama-to-freeze-controversial-immigration-enforcement-program-.html
The 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.”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/05/hispanic-caucus-calls-on-obama-to-freeze-controversial-immigration-enforcement-program-.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)