vi·sa /ˈvizə/ noun, 1. an endorsement made by an authorized representative of one country permitting the passport holder entry into or transit through the country making the endorsement. vi·sion /ˈvɪʒən/ –noun 1. the act or power of anticipating that which will or may come to be."
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Victory: Immigrant Meat Packers Not Criminals!
The Supreme Court unanimously decided today to overrule the Bush Adminstration’s tactics to criminalize the immigrant workers it prosecuted on charges of aggravated identity theft during the May 12, 2008 Postville raid on the basis that the government must prove knowledge as an element of aggravated identity theft.
The Court said that it is possible to prove knowldege where a defendant digs through someones’ trash to find discarded credit card receipts, and equivalent evidence should be used to prove knowledge in cases of aggravated identity theft even though the government claimed that it would be too hard to prove a defendant knew the identification belonged to someone else.
The Postville, Iowa kosher meatpacking plant was raided by ICE, the enforcement arm of the DHS, who were on the hunt for unauthorized workers. They found their booty, and arrested nearly 400 immigrants who were working with false work authorization, mostly from Guatemala. At hearings, which were often conducted “en mass,” the accused immigrants were counseled by attorneys who encouraged plea agreements through a scripted speech, who explained that aggravated identity theft carries a minimum two years in prison, and encouraged the Postville defendants to plead guilty to lesser charges. The defendants were not counseled by immigration attorneys when they accepted the guilty pleas.
Ignacio Flores-Figueroa’s case came before the Supreme court, the government had charged him with misusing immigration documents and of aggravated identity theft, even though the government did not prove that the Postville worker had actual knowledge that the social security number belonged to someone else. According to today’s ruling, the government must establish that the individual charged must have known that the identification belonged to another person.
I hope that this decision signals a turning point in the trends and direction of our country to move toward comprehensive immigration reform to create policies that decriminalize immigrants, and more importantly provide pathways to legality for all those hiding in the shadows of our workforce.
Tags: E-Verify, Postville, raids
Same sex partner of 23 years deported because marriage is not recognized
Lesbian Mom to Be Deported by U.S.
available at http://carnalnation.com/content/4810/4/lesbian-mom-be-deported-us?h
On Friday, April 2, Shirley Tan of San Mateo, CA, is scheduled to be deported back to the Philippines, leaving behind her life partner, Jaylynn “Jay” Mercado, and their twin 12-year-old sons. Tan and Mercado were married in San Francisco in 2004, but their marriage was voided by the state. Even if their marriage were still valid on the state level, the federal Defense of Marriage Act would prevent Mercado from sponsoring her partner of 23 years. If Tan and Mercado were opposite sex, Tan could legally stay in the country.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced the Uniting American Families Act into Congress last month. The bill would allow Americans in a same-sex relationship to sponsor their “permanent partners” for legal residency in the United States. Last week, the White House issued a statement about the Uniting American Families Act, saying “[President Obama] thinks Americans with partners from other countries should not be faced with a painful choice between staying with their partner or staying in their country.”
Approximately 37,000 couples in the U.S. face circumstances similar to those of Tan and Mercado. It is doubtful that any legislation will be passed before the Friday deadline for Tan’s deportation. Immigration Equality Executive Director Rachel B. Tiven said, “We are hopeful their members of Congress will introduce a private bill that would spare their twin boys and the boys’ grandmother from having the country they love tear their family apart.”
I’m going to update with an explanation of the changes affecting H-1B petitioners.
April 2006 - Undocumented workers and supporters protest a bill which would criminalize undocumented workers
USCIS announced today in a press release on the headlines of the USCIS.gov website that “The Bratton Corp., a construction products supplier from Kansas City, Mo., employing about 200 people in Kansas City and Pasadena, Calif., is the 100,000th employer to participate in E-Verify.”
Congrats Bratton! It’s interesting to see the marketing tools that the government is employing to hype up E-Verify. Although I write about and research the shortcomings and dangers of an electronic verification system which could negatively affect human resources departments and employees on a grand scale, I do think that the program has its virtues. If employers have a reliable, quick, and easy way to verify the identity and authorization of their employees, and are held accountable for staffing unauthorized workers, they are more likely to comply. That said, I am frusterated that DHS has invested so much in designing this well-structured verification program without devising an equally well-structured program to address the heart of the problem: creating pathways for the 12 million shadow immmigrants to integrate legally into our workforce.
Even if every employer in the US is enrolled in E-Verify, there will always be an underground workforce of unauthorized workers unless Congress addresses them directly.
Tags: E-Verify
Avoiding Liablity for Employing Unauthorized Workers
I was reading about the August 15, 2007 DHS Final Rule which was published about Social Security No-Match letters giving employers guidance on their obligations to respond in order to benefit from the “safe harbor” provisions limiting (or eliminating) an employer’s liablity. According to the Rule, once an employer receives a Social Security No-Match letter stating that a discrepancy exists between the employee’s name and social security number provided on a W-2 form and the information that the SSA has in its database, the DHS argued that a “reasonable person” should infer a workers unauthorized status, and employer can be held liable for employing unauthorized workers. However, if the employer follows the procedures outlined in the Rule, the employer receives ”Safe Harbor” which relieves the employer from that liablity. Once the employer recieves the letter, it must
a) check its records within 5 days to determine whether it was the result of a clerical error, and if so it must correct the records, notify the agencies of the error, and verify that the corrected information matches the Agencies records. Employers must resolve the discrepancy within 30 days of receipt of the letter.
b) if the employer cannot resolve the discrepancy, it must notify the employee, and confirm that the employer’s information is correct. If the information is incorrect, the employer must contact the Agency and correct the inforamtion. If there is no discrepancy and the information submitted by the employer, the employer must direct the employee to contact the Agency to correct the discrepancy. 30 days is also the reasonable timefram to remedy the discrepancy.
If the No-match issue isn’t resolved within 90 days of receipt, the employer may complete a new Form I-9 (with certain restrictions). If the employer determines that the employee is unauthorized, DHS will not infer constructive knowledge by the employer because it followed the designated procedures in response to the No-Match letter, and has “safe harbor.”
After the Final Rule was published on August 15, 2007, a lawsuit was filed by the US Chamber of Commerce, the National Roofing Contractors Association, AFLCIO, the ACLU, and other business organizations challenging some aspects of the Rule because inaccuracies in the SSA database could result in the termination of lawful workers and impact small businesses. A temporary restraining order was issued based on the irreparable harm that would result if the Rule were to go into effect, and the liklihood of the Plaintiffs’ success in the suit.
Here’s the part I thought was really cool about this lawsuit against DHS:
On November 23, 2007 DHS requested the court to delay proceedings so that it could reissue a revised rule to correct the disputed Rule. The revised rule (issued March 21, 2008) clarified the timerframe that an employer was required to notify the affected worker to five days after conducting its own internal records review. On October 28, 2008 the DHS issued a Supplemental final no match Rule which eliminated the five buisness day notification requirement. I need to find out what happened on November 21, 2008.
I posted this to explain the content of the disputed No-Match rule, understand why it is so controversial, and express my fascination with the idea that we can sue government agencies when they issue regulations that harm people or businesses (and that the agencies actually have to listen to the Courts!!). Pretty cool!
Tags: democracy, DHS, employment compliance, No-Match, rulemaking
LPRs Prepare your Fingers!
On Thursday, December 18, 2008, Department of Homeland Security issued a final rule that will subject US VISIT requirements to nearly all immigrants, including Lawful Permanent Residents. The rule was introduced on August 31, 2004 when DHS issued an interim rule, and was finalized after receiving comments to the interim rule. The Final Rule takes effect January 18, 2008.
Currently, all “international visitors” including those travelling on a non-immigrant visa or visa waiver travelers, are required to submit biometrics at the visa issuing post (consulate) or port of entry. Biometrics are fingerscans, photographs, or other biometric identifiers taken at the port of entry. After January 18, 2009, LPR’s and nearly all other aliens will also be subject to the US VISIT requirements.
Exceptions:
- Canadian citizens seeking short-term admission for business or pleasure under B visas
- Individuals traveling on A and G visas
The following individuals were exempt in the 2004 Rule and are still exempt:
- Visitors admitted on an A-1, A-2, C-3, G-1, G-2, G-3, G-4, NATO-1, NATO-2, NATO-3, NATO-4, NATO-5, or NATO-6 visa
- Children under the age of 14
- Persons over the age of 79
- Classes of visitors the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security jointly determine shall be exempt
- An individual visitor the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Director of Central Intelligence Agency jointly determine shall be exempt
- Taiwan officials who hold E-1 visas and members of their immediate families who hold E-1 visas.
Helpful Links:
The Final Rule published in the Federal Register
DHS Announcement of Final Rule
AILA Response Regarding Concerns about Final Rule
Tags: Final Ruling
World War II Veteran
Immigrants have always played a significant role in the US Military. Green Card holders enter the military by the thousands every year, and are targeted during recruitment campaigns when enrollment by US citizens is low. Japanese Americans fought for the US during World War II, and Arab-Americans fought for the US in the Gulf War, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
With great thanks to every soldier, citizen and immigrant, who risked their life and limb for the US. Regardless of its religious source, this quote is universal and one which I’ve always held close to my heart:
לא ישא גוי אל גוי חרבלא ילמדו עוד מלחמה-Lo yisa goy el goy cherev. Lo yil m’du od milchama.
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation Nor ever again shall they train for war. Isaiah 2:4
Tags: war
Feivel Mousekewitz
I remember watching Steven Spielberg’s An American Tail when it first came out in the theaters. I was about 8 years old, and other than sitting in my grandparents’ bed begging them to tell me about “the olden days,” it was my first glimpse into the immigrant experience. I was captivated by Feivel’s story, and by the stark contrast between the fantasy and reality of America for those seeking and expecting a new life.
Watching the movie again, more than 20 years later (wow!), I was surprised to find that Feivel’s discovery that there are cats in America, his struggle to find his family, and the poverty and fears that defined the immigrant experience nearly moved me to tears, a feeling I distinctly remember from the first time I saw the movie in the theaters as a young child.
I also remember writing a letter to Steven Speilberg after McDonalds offered Feivel Christmas stockings with the Happy Meal to promote the movie. I was upset because Feivel was Jewish, and I felt that a Jewish mouse didn’t belong on a Christmas Stocking because it conveyed a message that assimilating to American life meant that a mouse would sell his heritage and religion for a few extra marketing bucks.
I received a letter back (not from Speilberg) explaining that Feivel represented all immigrants, not only Jewish immigrants. While I still feel that a Christmas stocking probably wasn’t the best choice for a Jewish mouse, today I noticed the Irish and Italian mice who also played major roles in the movie. Although colored with details of Eastern European Jewish immigrants, Feivel’s story contains elements of the immigrant experience that had nothing to do with country of origin, and everything to do with the destination. Feivel’s story is also timeless; immigrants today still face the challenge of reconciling the fantasy of a land ripe with opportunity and the reality of the struggles of learning a new language, finding jobs, raising families in unfamiliar territory without the support of family, and re-defining their dreams to meet reality. All my respect!
My parents are visiting me right now. My mother sits on my left knitting another scarf (I have about 30 of them in my closet which she’s decided I should give away to homeless people on the street this winter). My father sits on my right reading Steve Berry’s “The Templar Legacy.” We just put my father’s ipod on “shuffle.” One of the first songs that came up was a Peter Paul and Mary cover of an old Woodie Guthrie song called “Deportees.” I was surprised to learn that it was written in 1948 in response to a plane crash near Los Gatos, California. The plane carried 4 American crew people, and 28 migrant farm workers who were being deported back to Mexico. Guthrie was struck by the racist disrespect to the 28 farm workers who were listed in a New York Times article about the crash merely as “28 deportees” as if they had no importance, value, or identity. They were then buried in a mass grave in California. All 4 American crew members were named individually. I was especially moved by the lyrics and their origin after hearing the racist comments by McCain supporters this week. I’m not sure America has moved forward in the last 50 years, and after hearing such blatant racism during political rallys this week, it seems as if many Americans are completely unaware of how racism, bigotry, and xenophobia still colors their so-called rational thoughts. In 1948, 28 lives were deemed meaningless by the most prestigious newspaper in the world because they were Mexican farm workers. I am equally frightened by a Journalist who devalued and dehumanized the deaths of the 28 Mexican migrant workers as I am by the characterization of Barack Obama which I saw yesterday on CNN by John McCain’s supporters. The voice these individuals give to the politically active right and the bigotry fueling many of John McCain’s supporters is shameful. And after looking back at history through the story behind Guthrie’s 1948 song, unfortunately very American.
Lyrics by Woody Guthrie
Music by Martin Hoffman
The crops are all in and the peaches are rotting
The oranges are piled in their cresote dumps
They’re flying you back to the Mexico border
To pay all your money to wade back again
My father’s own father, he wanted that river
They took all the money he made in his life
My brothers and sisters come working the fruit trees
And they rode the truck till they took down and died
CHORUS
Good-bye to my Juan, good-bye Rosalita
Adios mis amigos, Jesus y Maris
You won’t have a name when you ride the big air-plane
And all they will call you will be deportees.
Some of us are illega, and others not wanted
Our work contract’s out and we have to move on
But it’s six hundred miles to that Mexican border
They chase us like outlaws, like rustlers, like theives.
We died in your hills, we died in your deserts
We died in your valleys and died on your plains
We died ‘neath your trees and we died in your bushes
Both sides of the river, we died just the same.
CHORUS
A sky plane caught fire over Los Gatos canyon
Like a fireball of lightning, it shook all our hills
Who are all these friends, all scattered like dry leaves?
The radio says they are just deportees.
Is this the best way we can grow our big orchards?
Is this the best way we can grow our good fruit?
To fall like dry leaves to rot on my topsoil
And be called by no name except deportees?
Flight
Last night I was at a dinner where I met an Israeli guy who had an accent that was obviously not Israeli. I asked him where he was born, and how he got to Israel. He told me that he grew up in Iran, and his family moved to Israel during the Iran-Iraq war. He was 15 at the time, and was supposed to go to the Army (which also meant he might never come back). Because of his impending army service, he couldn’t leave with his family, and instead was smuggled out alone, on a journey which took a 45 days by foot and by horse across the border into Turkey. I talked to some of my Persian friends, who told me that this is a pretty “typical” story for young men during that time. I can’t imagine doing that at any age.
Tags: asylum, Immigrant Story, Iran, refugee