"The Voice of the New Due Process Army" ————– Musings on Events in U.S. Immigration Court, Immigration Law, Sports, Music, Politics, and Other Random Topics by Retired United States Immigration Judge (Arlington, Virginia) and former Chairman of the Board of Immigration Appeals Paul Wickham Schmidt and Dr. Alicia Triche, expert brief writer, practical scholar, emeritus Editor-in-Chief of The Green Card (FBA), and 2022 Federal Bar Association Immigration Section Lawyer of the Year. She is a/k/a “Delta Ondine,” a blues-based alt-rock singer-songwriter, who performs regularly in Memphis, where she hosts her own Blues Brunch series, and will soon be recording her first full, professional album. Stay tuned! 🎶 To see our complete professional bios, just click on the link below.
I am delighted to announce some exciting changes coming to this blog. As “Courtsiders” know, I have been “on sabbatical” since this May, with reduced postings, while my wife Cathy and I focus on travel and other, perhaps less uplifting, aspects of proceeding through our retirement years. I decided that I can no longer devote the time, energy, and “emotional involvement” (a/k/a “Gonzo Journalism”) to operating Courtside as a “daily” with new blog content every day (or almost every day). I have also “upped” my postings on Linkedin, which I have found to be an “easier” platform for my “quick thoughts.”
At the same time, I don’t want the “Voice of Courtside” and particularly the “online archives” of more than 5,500 blog posts, some of which are personal recollections and anecdotal immigration history that will otherwise “disappear” when I do, to be lost to posterity.
Happily, my friend, noted immigration law maven, and distinguished “practical scholar” Dr. Alicia Triche has come to the rescue by agreeing to join me as “Co-Editor” of Courtside! We aspire to keep the blog operating in a new and somewhat different way that would not become an undue burden on the time of either of us.
Our general goal is for Alicia to contribute several more in-depth, analytical “thought pieces” on immigration law each month, while I would contribute occasional posts “as the spirit moves me.” We would also encourage contributions from others featuring “practical scholarship” that might help or inspire other members of our “New Due Process Army” and/or analyze trends that do not otherwise get covered in the “Mainstream Media.” Additionally, we are hoping by “combining our contacts” to solicit more “feature content” by other experts in the field. So, please let us know if you have contributions you think would be helpful to Courtside’s readers.
Dr. Alicia Triche Superlawyer, Co-Editor, immigrationcourtside.com Memphis, TN
Here is Alicia’s (a/k/a “Delta Ondine”) detailed biography:
Dr. Alicia Triche is a nationally recognized US immigration attorney who has practiced removal defense is a wide range of contexts throughout her storied legal career. Her most notable victory is Zometa-Orellana v. Garland, 19 F.4th 970 (6th Cir. 2021), the ground-breaking Sixth Circuit case involving domestic violence-based refugee protection. In May, 2022, the Federal Bar Association’s Immigration Law Section named her “Lawyer of the Year.”
Triche is currently based in Memphis, Tennessee, where she maintains a boutique practice focused solely on legal research and writing for her own clients and fellow attorneys. In recent years, she provided briefing in two (rare) resounding Fifth Circuit victories: Lopez-Ventura v. Sessions, 907 F.3d 306 (5th Cir. 2018) and Aben v. Garland, 113 F.4th 457 (5th Cir. 2024).
The “Dr.” part of Triche consists of a 2013 Oxford D.Phil. in international refugee law. At Oxford, she served on the executive editorial board of the Oxford Commonwealth Law Journal, the department’s flagship graduate legal publication. For several years, she also served as editor-in-chief of the “Green Card,” the official newsletter of the FBA’s immigration law section.
When her D.Phil was completed, Dr. Triche found herself living in Memphis, Tennessee, where she had happened to obtain a part-time job as a non-profit attorney/adjunct clinical professor. In a twist-of-fate, the Delta Blues called out to her. Instead of (as originally planned) pursuing legal academia, she became “Delta Ondine,” a blues-based alt-rock singer-songwriter. Ondine performs regularly in Memphis, where she hosts her own Blues Brunch series, and she will soon be recording her first full, professional album.
Building a Diverse Team: Key Approaches to Recruit Immigrants Successfully
By Diane Harrison
Expanding your recruitment strategy to include immigrants in today’s dynamic business environment can substantially benefit your small business. Embracing a globally diverse talent pool enriches your team’s cultural dynamics and enhances innovation and problem-solving capabilities. This ImmigrationCourtside.com article explores various effective strategies to engage and recruit immigrants, helping your business thrive in a competitive market by leveraging a broader range of skills and perspectives.
Visa Sponsorship
Offering visa sponsorship opportunities can significantly enhance your talent pool. This initiative not only broadens your recruitment horizons but also positions your business as a preferred employer among ambitious professionals globally. By simplifying the complex visa process for potential hires, you create a direct pathway for skilled immigrants. Your commitment to facilitating their relocation and employment can set your company apart as an employer of choice. This strategic approach underscores your dedication to building a dynamic and diverse team.
Bridge Building with Support Groups
Engaging with local immigrant support groups is a proactive step toward tapping into a diverse workforce. These organizations are often the first point of contact for newcomers seeking employment. Collaborating with them can provide you with access to a skilled and ready-to-work demographic. This partnership not only enriches your recruitment resources but also enhances your reputation within the community as a supportive and inclusive employer.
ESL Partnerships
Partnering with institutions that offer English as a Second Language (ESL) programs can be a strategic recruitment move. These institutions are frequented by individuals eager to integrate into the workforce and community. By establishing a referral system with these programs, you gain access to a group of potential employees who are actively improving their language skills, which is often a strong indicator of their dedication and drive to succeed. This collaboration also helps you tap into a pool of motivated individuals seeking to advance their careers.
Multilingual Recruitment Advertising
Advertising job openings in multiple languages ensures that your vacancies reach a wider, more diverse audience. This approach not only increases the visibility of your postings but also demonstrates your business’s commitment to diversity and inclusion. A multilingual strategy helps break down language barriers and makes your business approachable to individuals from various linguistic backgrounds. It also ensures that you do not miss out on skilled talent due to language constraints.
Training for Diverse Teams
Developing detailed training documents for new staff members is essential for equipping them with the tools needed for success. By converting these materials into PDF format, you ensure that the original quality and formatting remain intact, which is crucial for consistent training delivery. Once created, PDF files are also secure and available for useacross various platforms, enhancing accessibility for all employees. Utilizing a PDF creator, you can build these files from the ground up or modify existing documents, tailoring them to specific training needs.
Inclusive Workplace Culture
Showcasing your business as a welcoming and inclusive employer is crucial in attracting and retaining a diverse workforce. Highlighting your company’s commitment to diversitythrough your company’s mission, culture, and everyday practices can resonate deeply with immigrant candidates. Such a reputation makes your company not just a place to work, but a community to belong to. This perception significantly enhances your attractiveness as an employer.
Immigrant-Centric Job Platforms
Posting vacancies on job platforms that cater specifically to immigrant communities can direct your recruitment efforts to targeted groups. These platforms are often the go-to resources for immigrants seeking employment opportunities that are sensitive to their unique needs and circumstances. Utilizing these specialized platforms can increase the effectiveness of your recruitment strategy and draw in a focused pool of applicants. This targeted approach helps streamline your recruitment process and enhances your chances of finding the right fit for your business needs.
Immigrant-Tailored Job Fairs
Organizing job fairs specifically tailored for immigrants can provide a personalized recruitment experience for potential hires. These events offer a platform for direct interaction with candidates and allow you to present your business as an actively engaging and supportive employer. Tailored job fairs not only help assess potential hires in real time but also build a positive image of your business within immigrant communities. It’s an effective way to showcase your commitment to diversity and inclusion while meeting potential candidates face-to-face.
Adopting a thoughtful approach to recruiting immigrants can transform your small business’s potential, making it more resilient and adaptive to global market trends. As you implement these strategies, your business will not only grow in its operational capacity but also stand out as a leader in cultural inclusivity and diversity. This commitment to broadening your hiring practices will serve as a cornerstone for sustained growth and success.
**********************
As always, Diane, thanks for inspiring and advising us on practical strategies for building a bold, strong, powerful future for America!🇺🇸
Here’s a report on the night’s activities from AYUDAS’s amazing Executive Director Paula Fitzgerald:
Dear Friends,
I hope you enjoyed our screening of The Courtroom as much as I did. The panel discussion connected us back to Ayuda’s mission and the greatest challenges our clients face as they navigate the legal system in an unfamiliar language.
I want to give a big thanks some special supporters who make this evening possible:
A special thank you to Georgetown University’s Community Engagement Manager and Ayuda’s Advisory Board Member, Erick Castro, for coordinating this reception and film screening, as well as Georgetown University for hosting this event in their new Capitol Campus building.
We’re honored to have had Waterwell Productions with us, specifically Co-Founder & Board Chair Arian Moayed and Managing Director Sarah Scafidi. Thank you for sharing this powerful story with Ayuda’s community.
Thank you to the Honorable Paul Schmidt for helping us bring The Courtroom to DC and sharing your connection to the film.
A moment of appreciation for our stellar panelists, Edgar and Marilyn, and wonderful moderator, Sandra. Thank you all for closing out the evening with an engaging conversation.
A warm round of applause to each of you for joining us. It was truly a delightful evening and I’m so glad to have had the opportunity to connect with many of you.
Are you interested in learning more about Ayuda’s advocacy program? Email us at advocacy@ayuda.com. Are you interested in volunteering? Check out our volunteer portal for current opportunities. Are you interested in making a gift to support Ayuda’s mission? Visit our website or email us atdevelopment@ayuda.com.
AYUDA/GEORGETOWN “THE COURTROOM”
Warm regards,
Paula Fitzgerald
**********************************************
Here’s the text of my opening remarks:
Ayuda’s Film Screening of The Courtroom – Opening Remarks by Paul Wickham Schmidt
Georgetown University, McCourt School of Public Policy
September 18, 2024
Good evening and welcome everyone! Thanks for coming out to support Georgetown’s partnership with Ayuda.
My name is Paul Wickham Schmidt, and I’ve been given the privilege to introduce this powerful film, The Courtroom. Before I introduce a special guest, who is no stranger to the film and silver screen, I would like to share why this story is so important to me. My experience has landed me in an interesting corner of many of tonight’s themes and key players in making this event possible.
I was appointed as a federal immigration judge and served for 21 years, at both the trial and appellate levels. During my time as an adjunct professor at Georgetown Law, I’ve written extensively about immigration law. And, I’m currently a proud Advisory Board member for Ayuda, an organization that I truly care about and has deep roots in this community.
In fact, Ayuda helped all of us during my tenure in the “Legacy” Arlington Immigration Court with their superior pro bono representation. You will witness this evening the critical, life-saving and future-determining, role played by great legal representation in Immigration Court.
And, if you don’t already know, you will be astounded to learn that in Immigration Court individuals, including infants and toddlers, face trial for their lives without the right to appointed counsel! I want you to imagine how this case might have come out if this individual had been required to represent herself throughout her various legal proceedings. Yet, that is the predicament in which far, far too many individuals now find themselves.
I just read a TRAC Syracuse report that fewer than 15% of those ordered deported in Immigration Court in August 2024 were represented. I find that appalling! It’s actually a regressive trend since I left the bench. That’s why the role played by organizations like Ayuda and the teaching function of the CALS Asylum Clinic here at Georgetown Law are so completely essential to American Justice at what I call the “retail level.”
Now, I’m not here to read my resume. Instead, I will share why The Courtroom holds so much significance for us. The late film critic Roger Ebert once said, “the movies are like a machine that generates empathy.” The classic legal dramas like “12 Angry Men,” or “To Kill A Mockingbird,” for example, give us great insight into the devastating experience of being tried for a crime one did not commit.
But never had I seen a filmmaker put the empathy machine to work in Immigration Court. That is, until I learned about The Courtroom from my friend and colleague retired Immigration Judge Jeffrey S. Chase of New York. He actually served as an informal advisor on the production and played an important “cameo role” in the earlier award-winning stage versions of The Courtroom, as did other of our retired judicial colleagues.
Many of us will be fortunate enough never to have to endure a removal proceeding as a subject ourselves. We will never understand what it’s like to face the fear of being separated from our children, our families, our jobs, and our communities: In the words of the Supreme Court “all that makes life worth living!” (Ng Fung Ho v. White | 259 U.S. 276 (1922)).
The film you’re about to watch tells one woman’s story confronting these terrors, with the utmost compassion. The “script” is a verbatim transcript of an actual immigration case, brought to life by the great actors, directors, and producers at Waterwell.
When the credits roll, I hope you’ll remember that The Courtroom is much more than a story. It’s real-life drama, “living theater” as I used to describe it to my Georgetown Law students – and right now, more than 3 million immigrants undergoing deportation proceedings are living it, along with their families, friends, co-workers, and other community members whom they interact with on a daily basis.
It’s with great honor that I get the opportunity to introduce our next speaker. He’s an actor, director, and the screenplay writer of our feature presentation. He has received two Tony Award nominations and two Primetime Emmy Award nominations, and you might recognize him from Marvel Cinematic Universe. Please give a warm round of applause for Waterwell Co-Founder, Arian Moayed!
Arian, I really, really appreciate your taking time out of your hectic schedule to be with us tonight for this important D.C. Area premiere!
Starting a business in your local community offers a unique opportunity to establish a foothold in a familiar market while contributing to economic growth and diversity. This endeavor requires careful planning and strategic execution. By understanding the dynamics of your local economy and tapping into the needs of the community, you can create a successful enterprise that not only meets financial goals but also strengthens your connections with the place you call home. ImmigrationCourtside.com offers these tips.
Define Your Unique Value
Before you take the plunge, it’s crucial to identify what sets your business apart. Pinpoint the unique value proposition of your local business by understanding what you offer that competitors don’t. This differentiation could be anything from unique products, superior service, or a novel approach to solving customer problems. Emphasizing these unique aspects in all your communications will solidify your brand in the local marketplace.
Know Your Competition
Conducting a thorough competitive analysis is key to understanding where your business stands in the local market. Analyze competitors to grasp their strengths and weaknesses and identify gaps your business can fill. This step will shape your strategies and help you carve out a niche in the community. Keeping a close watch on competitive movements can also inform your strategic decisions.
Craft a Comprehensive Business Plan
A well-constructed business plan not only outlines your company’s mission but also specifies the operational framework and the strategies for offering your services. It delineates the required capital to initiate and maintain your business, alongside precise financial forecasts. This comprehensive plan not only facilitates the acquisition of investments but also directs your strategic choices as the market evolves. Regular revisions to this plan ensure it remains relevant and continues to guide your business towards long-term success.
Explore Local Funding Options
Funding is the fuel for your business engine. Explore various funding sources such as local grants, loans, and potential investors. Local economic development programs can offer both financial assistance and valuable advice to help you get started on the right foot. Understanding all available financial avenues can significantly enhance your startup’s viability.
Plan Your Workforce
Staffing is more than just filling positions; it’s about building a team that will grow with your business. Plan your staffing needs from the outset, focusing on hiring individuals who align with your business culture and training them to meet the demands of their roles effectively. Investing in quality staff training ensures your team can deliver exceptional service from the start. Additionally, implementing a proactive approach to employee wellness can foster a positive work environment and reduce turnover.
Establish Your Brand and Online Presence
In today’s digital age, a strong brand identity and a robust online presence are indispensable. Develop a branding strategy that reflects the ethos of your local business and creates a lasting impression. Simultaneously, leverage digital tools to build a professional website and engage with customers on social media platforms. Ensuring your online presence mirrors the quality and values of your in-person experience can set you apart from the competition.
Leverage Technology for Efficiency
Implementing the right technology solutions can dramatically streamline your operations and enhance the customer experience. Whether it’s point-of-sale systems, customer relationship management software, or e-commerce platforms, the right tech can help you operate more efficiently and effectively. Staying updated with the latest technological advancements can continually improve your operational efficiency. Adopting technology that integrates seamlessly into your existing processes can yield significant productivity gains.
Network and Build Community Ties
Finally, networking with other local businesses and community organizations can open doors to numerous opportunities. From partnerships and joint ventures to local community events, these connections can provide critical support and visibility for your new business. Engaging actively with your community not only boosts your business but also contributes to your local economy’s health. Building strong relationships within the community can also lead to valuable mentorships and collaborations that can propel your business forward.
Starting a local business is a meaningful way to contribute to your community while achieving your entrepreneurial goals. As you take the steps necessary to launch and grow your venture, remember that success comes from careful planning, persistence, and strong community relationships. By staying focused on the needs of your local market and building lasting connections, your business will be well-positioned to thrive and make a lasting impact in the community.
For more observations from retired United States Immigration Judge Paul Wickham Schmidt, visit ImmigrationCourtside.com today!
Launching a home business is particularly promising for immigrants seeking financial stability with the flexibility of self-employment. A solid plan, understanding of local laws, and effective time management are crucial elements in this endeavor. This guide, courtesy of Immigrationcourtside.com, outlines essential steps to help you confidently establish and grow your business.
Craft a Comprehensive Business Plan
A robust business plan is the cornerstone of any successful venture. Start by clearly defining your business goals, target audience, and the unique value your product or service offers. Conduct thorough market research to understand your competitors and identify opportunities. Outline your marketing strategy, operational plan, and financial projections. A well-drafted business plan not only serves as a roadmap for your business but also helps in securing funding if needed.
Navigate Local Regulations
Understanding and complying with local regulations is crucial. Research the specific permits and licensesrequired for your business type and location. Ensure you comply with zoning laws, especially if you plan to operate from home. Tax regulations can be complex, so consider consulting with a local accountant familiar with small business needs. Being fully compliant from the start will help you avoid legal issues and establish credibility with customers.
Clarify Your Business Idea
Before diving into operations, ensure your business idea is clear and focused. Define what makes your product or service unique and why customers should choose you over competitors. Conduct surveys or focus groups to gather feedback on your concept. Refine your offerings based on this feedback to meet market demands effectively. A well-defined business idea will guide your marketing efforts and help you attract and retain customers.
Master Time Management
Effective time management is essential for balancing your business with personal commitments. Start by creating a daily schedule that allocates specific time blocks for different tasks. Prioritize activities that directly impact your business growth, such as marketing and customer service. Use productivity techniques like the Pomodoro Technique to maintain focus. Regularly review your schedule to ensure it aligns with your business goals and make adjustments as necessary.
Seek Strategic Partnerships for Growth
Strategically partnering with another business can propel your home business to new heights. Consider drafting a memorandum of understanding when forming such partnerships; this informal, non-binding document outlines the intentions and actions of both parties, ensuring clarity and a solid groundwork for collaboration. Often referred to as a letter of intent, it serves to align efforts and expectations while preventing misunderstandings. When you’re ready, you can go here and start building connections that can transform your business.
Keep Your Knowledge Up-to-Date
Staying informed about industry trends and best practices is vital for long-term success. Subscribe to relevant industry newsletters, attend webinars, and participate in local business associations. Continuous learning helps you adapt to market changes and implement innovative strategies. Engage with online forums and communities to exchange ideas and gain insights from fellow entrepreneurs. This proactive approach keeps your business competitive and resilient.
Establish an Online Presence
In today’s digital age, having a strong online presence is non-negotiable. Start by creating a professional website that showcases your products or services, provides contact information, and includes customer testimonials. Utilize social media platforms to reach a broader audience and engage with potential customers. Regularly update your online content to keep it relevant and interesting. An effective online presence not only enhances visibility but also builds trust and credibility with your audience.
Launching a home business as an immigrant requires careful planning, adherence to regulations, and strategic efforts to grow and sustain your venture. By following these essential steps, you can create a solid foundation for your business, manage your time efficiently, and stay ahead in a competitive market.
*********************
As always, Diane, thanks for your outstanding and timely contributions.
Banking Made Easy: A Guide for Immigrants Opening Their First Account
By Diane Harrison
Starting fresh in a new country comes with a host of challenges, and managing finances is often at the top of the list. For immigrants, opening a bank account is a crucial step in establishing stability and accessing essential services. This process, while straightforward, can be daunting without the right information. In this guide, we will walk you through the necessary steps, to make opening a bank account as an immigrant smooth and hassle-free.
Research Bank Options
Begin by exploring different banks and their account offerings, focusing on those with services tailored for immigrants. Some banks offer special programs designed to meet newcomers’ unique needs, such as lower fees or easier access to credit. This initial research will help you identify immigrant-friendly banks that provide the most beneficial services. Taking the time to compare these options ensures you choose a bank that aligns with your financial needs and long-term goals.
Understand Bank Requirements
Learning about the requirements for opening a bank account is vital. Banks often require identification documents, proof of address, and sometimes a minimum initial deposit. Understanding these requirements beforehand can streamline the account opening process. Being well-prepared with the necessary documents can save you time and help avoid any potential setbacks. Make sure to ask each bank specifically about their requirements as they can vary significantly from one institution to another.
Check Minimum Balance Requirements
Checking for minimum balance requirements is crucial. Some banks may charge fees if your balance falls below a certain amount. Understanding these requirements helps avoid unexpected charges. Additionally, consider the bank’s fee structure, including monthly maintenance fees, transaction fees, and costs for sending money abroad. This knowledge helps manage your account effectively and avoid unnecessary expenses. Being informed about all fees ensures you can choose a bank that fits your financial needs and minimizes costs.
Ask About Remittance Services
As an immigrant, you might need to send money to your home country. Ask about remittance services and the fees associated with international transfers. Different banks offer various services for sending money abroad, and the fees can vary widely. Choosing a bank with reasonable remittance fees and efficient transfer services can save you money and ensure your family back home receives funds promptly. It’s also worth asking about any partnerships the bank has with remittance companies to further reduce costs.
Consult Community Organizations
Consulting with community organizations that work with immigrants can provide valuable advice and recommendations on choosing the right bank. These organizations often have insights into which banks are most accommodating to immigrants and can offer practical tips on managing your finances. They may also provide assistance with understanding banking terms and conditions, helping you make informed decisions. Engaging with these organizations can also connect you with a supportive community of fellow immigrants.
What About a Business Account?
When opening a business bank account as a new small business owner, it’s essential to choose the right type of account, such as checking for daily transactions, savings for reserve funds, and merchant services for processing customer payments. You’ll need to gather specific documents, including your business formation documents (like LLC or incorporation papers), your Employer Identification Number (EIN), and personal identification like a passport or driver’s license. Comparing multiple banks will help you find the best fit for your business’s financial needs and growth plans.
Choose Convenient Locations and Good Service
Finally, choose a bank with convenient locations and good customer service. Having a branch nearby can make it easier to access banking services and resolve any issues quickly. Good customer service is essential, especially if you are still learning the local language or banking systems. Friendly and helpful bank staff can make your banking experience smoother and more pleasant. Prioritizing convenience and service quality will help ensure your banking needs are met effectively.
Opening a bank account as an immigrant may initially seem overwhelming, but it is essential for achieving financial independence. By thoroughly researching your options, understanding all requirements, and seeking advice from community organizations, you can find a bank that meets your needs. These steps will help you build a secure financial foundation, making it easier to manage your finances and achieve your personal and professional goals.
Well, friends, since “inception” on December 22, 2016:
Neatly 7 1/2 years elapsed;
Three different Administrations;
5,526 posts (including this one);
1,152 comments;
43 “Pages;”
403 subscribers;
Over 1,000,000 “views” (estimated);
More than 140,400 “blocks” by my hard-working “spam catcher!”
It’s time for me to take a break from Courtside to “rest, refresh, and refocus” as they say in the “sabbatical business.” After all, I’ve been “retired” since June 30, 2016, going on eight years!
To mark the occasion, here’s a “reprint” of one of my favorites from that first month, December 2016:
“Immigration advocates have repeatedly criticized the Obama administration for its increased reliance on detention facilities, particularly for Central American families, who they argue should be treated as refugees fleeing violent home countries rather than as priorities for deportation.
They also say that the growing number of apprehended migrants on the border, as reflected in the new Homeland Security figures, indicate that home raids and detentions of families from Central America isn’t working as a deterrent.”
****************************
The “enforcement only” approach to forced migration from Central America has been an extraordinarily expensive total failure. But, the misguided attempt to “prioritize” cases of families seeking refuge from violence has been a major contributing factor in creating docket disfunction (“Aimless Docket Reshuffling”) in the United States Immigration Courts.
And, as a result, cases ready for trial that should have been heard as scheduled in Immigration Court have been “orbited” to the end of the docket where it is doubtful they ever will be reached. When political officials, who don’t understand the Immigration Court and are not committed to its due process mission, order the rearrangement of existing dockets without input from the trial judges, lawyers, court administrators, and members of the public who are most affected, only bad things can happen. And, they have!
PWS
12/31/16
*****************
True today as it was then!
🇺🇸 Thanks for reading and engaging, best wishes and, of course, “Due Process Forever!”
Professor Benitez’s colleague Professor Paulina Vera reports on LinkedIn:
Finally don’t have to keep this a secret anymore! I nominated Professor Benitez because he’s the best boss and mentor and he deserves all the recognition for his contributions to clinical education and immigration law. I’m glad AILA agreed!
Since choice of law is dependent on venue in Immigration Court proceedings, the controlling circuit law is not affected by a change in the administrative control court and will only change upon the granting of a motion to change venue. Matter of Garcia, 28 I&N Dec. 693 (BIA 2023), followed.
“In a decision dated October 24, 2023, the Immigration Judge denied the respondent’s application for deferral of removal under the regulations implementing the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). The respondent, a native and citizen of Morocco, has appealed that decision. The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) has not responded to the appeal. Because we agree with the respondent that additional fact-finding and analysis are needed and the Immigration Judge misapplied choice of law precedent, we will remand these proceedings for the entry of a new decision. … The record reflects that the respondent has been detained at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center (“Moshannon”) in Philipsburg, Pennsylvania, throughout these proceedings. The proceedings commenced with the filing of a Notice to Appear (“NTA”) on April 18, 2023, at the Cleveland, Ohio Immigration Court, which is within the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. … After the respondent’s individual hearing on October 20, 2023, the Immigration Judge applied Third Circuit law and denied deferral of removal under CAT. … The respondent argues that the Immigration Judge erroneously applied Third Circuit law rather than Sixth Circuit law. We review this issue de novo. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii) (2020). For the reasons discussed below, we agree with the respondent that the Immigration Judge applied the incorrect circuit’s law. … On remand, the Immigration Judge should reevaluate the respondent’s claim under Sixth Circuit law and apply relevant Board precedent, with consideration to the respondent’s appellate arguments concerning the respondent’s gender identity and sexual orientation. See Matter of C-G-T-, 28 I&N Dec. 740, 745 (BIA 2023) (explaining that “when considering future harm, adjudicators should not expect a respondent to hide” the respondent’s sexual orientation).”
Great job, Jennifer! Once again, it’s worth asking ourselves how successful arguments of this kind could ever be made by an unrepresented respondent. If, as is painfully obvious to even a casual observer, the answer is “they couldn’t,” then where is the due process in an overloaded, corner-cutting court system where lack of representation is actually on the increase, despite truly heroic efforts by the private and pro bono bars?
I also find the last sentence of the above summary very helpful. While it certainly states the correct rule regarding sexual orientation cases, my sense is that this part of the Matter of C-G-T- precedent is often ignored at the Immigration Court level and not always corrected by the BIA on appeal. So, it’s certainly worth re-emphasizing!
The BIA’s opinion was written by Appellate Immigration Judge Gorman for a panel that also included Appellate Immigration Judge Greer and Temporary Appellate IJ Crossett.
(CNN) — Some of Sebastian Corral’s memories have faded. But the 91-year-old remembers his 1953 arrival in the US as if it were yesterday.
How workers like him were forced to strip naked and sprayed with insecticide.
How their hands were inspected to make sure they were qualified for the hard labor that awaited them.
How unwelcome he and so many others felt even though they’d been invited across the border by the US government.
“You felt humiliated. You felt like you were nothing, even though you’d come to work and lift yourself up,” Corral told CNN in a recent interview via Zoom from his home in Vado, New Mexico.
Memories of those first moments in America came rushing back for Corral this month during a dramatically different visit to the place where he took his first steps in the country more than 70 years ago.
This time, officials were unveiling plaques designating the former Rio Vista Bracero Reception Center in Socorro, Texas, as a National Historic Landmark. And Corral was a guest of honor.
. . . .
Today, he describes the long journey that began at Rio Vista with pride:
“I came as a bracero. After being a bracero, then I was illegal for some years. After being illegal, then I was a permanent resident. Now I am a citizen.”
In some ways, Rio Vista wasn’t like Corral remembered when he returned this month. The buildings were more worn-down — some “pure ruins,” Corral says. But what Corral noticed most wasn’t the buildings; it was how differently he felt being there.
“I was not the same person as before,” he says.
So much had changed since those first days when he was a young man waiting for a rancher to arrive at Rio Vista with work.
He’d harvested cotton, and driven tractors, and picked beets and cucumbers as a bracero. He’d lived in New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming and Texas during his years in the program. Once, an El Paso restaurant had refused to serve him because he was Mexican. He’d been an undocumented immigrant for decades. He’d washed dishes and prepped food in a Los Angeles restaurant. He’d worked at dairy farms in California. He’d become a legal resident after President Reagan signed a law granting him and millions of others amnesty. He’d finally brought his wife and children to the US after years of separation. He’d saved enough money to buy land for all of them to build homes nearby. He’d had 14 grandchildren and 17 great-grandchildren.
And just two years ago, he’d finally become a US citizen after decades of knowing he was American, nearly 70 years after his first arrival in the United States.
All of this went through Corral’s mind as he revisited Rio Vista on May 11. And in the mix of emotions that hit him, he felt anger at some points, but also, contentment.
Some of the buildings around him were in ruins as they awaited renovation. But Corral was standing in the Rio Vista courtyard with generations of his family beside him.
And he saw something else: the life that he built.
********************
Read the complete story at the link.
The thing that stands out time after time: The strength, character, and triumph of individual immigrants over laws and actions often intended to exploit, dehumanize, and/or discourage them!
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson and more pay tribute to Bill Walton
NBA legends, current players and members of the basketball community react to the Hall of Famer’s death on Monday.
Updated on May 28, 2024 7:45 AM
Bill Walton (1952-2024)
Members of the NBA 75th Anniversary Team took to social media to honor the legendary Bill Walton (left) on Monday.
Hall of Fame center Bill Walton, a two-time champion at UCLA and in the NBA, a former No.1 overall pick, and one of the biggest personalities of the game, died on May 27 after a prolonged battle with cancer. He was 71 years old. Walton played 10 seasons in the NBA with the Portland Trail Blazers, LA Clippers and the Boston Celtics, averaging 13.3 points, 10.5 rebounds and 3.4 assists. He earned Finals MVP after leading the Blazers to the 1977 championship and won another title with the Celtics in 1986. A two-time All-Star, Walton won the league’s Most Valuable Player award in 1978.
Walton retired from the NBA after the 1987-88 season. He turned to broadcasting where he became one of the most entertaining and eccentric color commentators for NCAA and NBA telecasts.
A beloved member of the NBA family, legends, current players and other members of the basketball community took to social media to pay tribute to Walton’s career and his many off-the-court contributions.
************************
Walton was a zany presence, but his guts and talent were undeniable. He was one of the dominant college players of my younger days as a fan when UCLA under the legendary coach John Wooden was the undisputed “King of the Court” in NCAA basketball.
You can read the heartfelt tributes from his contemporaries at the above link.
Even in death, Walton leaves a “positive spin” that we’re much in need of these days.
The 1924 Immigration Act vilified, dehumanized, and barred many of those immigrants who have made America great, like Italian Americans being demeaned in this cartoon. Yet, some descendants of those unfairly targeted appear oblivious to the mistakes of the past and willing to inflict the same immoral lies, harm, and suffering on today’s migrants. IMAGE: Public RealmEduardo Porter Columnist and Editorial Board Member Washington Post PHOTO: WashPost
“I think that we have sufficient stock in America now for us to shut the door.”
That sounds like Donald Trump, right? Maybe on one of his campaign stops? It certainly fits the mood of the country. This year, immigration became voters’ “most important problem” in Gallup polling for the first time since Central Americans flocked to the border in 2019. More than half of Americans perceive immigrants crossing the border illegally as a “critical threat.”
Yet the sentiment expressed above is almost exactly 100 years old. It was uttered by Sen. Ellison DuRant Smith, a South Carolina Democrat, on April 9, 1924. And it helped set the stage for a historic change in U.S. immigration law, which imposed strict national quotas for newcomers that would shape the United States’ ethnic makeup for decades to come.
. . . .
The renewed backlash against immigration has little to offer the American project, though. Closing the door to new Americans would be hardly desirable, a blow to one of the nation’s greatest sources of dynamism. Raw data confirms how immigrants are adding to the nation’s economic growth, even while helping keep a lid on inflation.
Anyway, that horse left the stable. The United States is full of immigrants from, in Trump’s memorable words, “s—hole countries.” The project to set this in reverse is a fool’s errand. The 1924 Johnson-Reed immigration law might have succeeded in curtailing immigration. But the restrictions did not hold. From Presidents Johnson to Trump, efforts to circle the wagons around some ancestral White American identity failed.
We are extremely lucky it did. Contra Sen. Ellison DuRant Smith’s 100-year old prescriptions, the nation owes what greatness it has to the many different women and men it has drawn from around the world to build their futures. This requires a different conversation — one that doesn’t feature mass expulsions and concentration camps but focuses on constructing a new shared American identity that fits everyone, including the many more immigrants who will arrive from the Global South for years to come.
*******************************
Gordon F. Sander Journalist and Historian PHOTO: www.gordonsander.com
Gordon F. Sander, journalist and historian, also writes in WashPost, perhaps somewhat less optimistically, but with the same historical truth in the face of current political lies and gross misrepresentations:
Johnson and Reed were in a triumphant mood on the eve of their bill’s enactment. “America of the melting pot will no longer be necessary,” Reed wrote in the Times. He remarked on the new law’s impact: “It will mean a more homogenous nation, more self-reliant, more independent and more closely knit by common properties and common faith.”
The law immediately had its intended effect. In 1921, more than 200,000 Italians arrived at Ellis Island. In 1925, following the bill’s enactment, barely 6,000 Italians were permitted entry.
But there were less intended consequences, too, including on U.S. foreign relations. Although Reed insisted there was nothing personal about the act’s exclusion of Japanese people, the Japanese government took strong exception, leading to an increase in tensions between the two countries. There were riots in Tokyo. The road to Pearl Harbor was laid.
During the 1930s, after the eugenics-driven Nazis seized control of Germany, the quotas established by the act helped close the door to European Jews and others fleeing fascism.
At the same time, the law also inspired a small but determined group of opponents led by Rep. Emanuel Celler (D-N.Y.), who were committed to overturning it. Celler’s half-century-long campaign finally paid off in 1965 at the Statue of Liberty when, as Celler looked on, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Immigration and Nationality Act, which ended national origin quotas.
But with anti-immigration sentiment on the rise and quotas once again on the table, it’s clear that a century after its enactment, the ghost of Johnson-Reed isn’t completely gone.
Gordon F. Sander is a journalist and historian based in Riga, Latvia. He is the author of “The Frank Family That Survived: A 20th Century Odyssey” and other books
***********************
Many thanks to my friend and immigration maven Deb Sanders for alerting me to the Sander article. I strongly urge everyone to read both pieces at the links above.
Perhaps the most poignant comment I’ve received about these articles is from American educator, expert, author, and “practical scholar” Susan Gzesh:
And because of the 1924 Act, my grandparents lost dozens of their siblings, parents, aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews to the Holocaust in the 1940s because Eastern European Jewish immigration to the US had been cut off. They would have been capable of sponsoring more family to come to the US in the late 1920s and 30s, but there was no quota for them.
I have no words to describe my feelings about so-called experts who would praise the 1924 Act. I know that Asian Americans must feel similarly to my sentiments.
Well said, Susan!
Susan Gzesh American scholar, educator, expert, author PHOTO: U. Of Chicago
I’ll leave it at that, for you to ponder the next time you hear Trump, DeSantis, Abbott, and the like fear-monger about the bogus “invasion,” spout “replacement theory,” and extoll the virtues of extralegal cruelties and dehumanization inflicted upon “the other” — typically the most vulnerable who areseeking our legal protection and appealing to our senses of justice and human dignity! And, also you can consider this when the so called “mainstream media” pander to these lies by uncritically presenting them as “the other side,” thereby echoing “alternative facts!”
It’s also worth remembering this when you hear Biden, Harris, Schumer, Murphy, and other weak-kneed Dem politicos who should know better adopt Trumpist White Nationalist proposals and falsely present them as “realistic compromises” — as opposed to what they really are —tragic acts of political and moral cowardice!
Eventually, as both of the above articles point out, America largely persevered and prospered over its demons of racism, anti-Catholicism, and anti-immigrant nationalism. But, it would be wrong to view this “long arc” analysis as “zeroing out” the sins and horrors of our past.
Susan Gzesh’s relatives died, some horribly and painfully, before their time. That can’t be changed by future progress. Nor can the children they might have had or the achievements they never got to make to our nation and the world be resurrected.
As Susan mentions, the 1924 Act also reinforced long-standing racism and xenophobia against Asian Americans that led to the irreversible harm inflicted by the internment of Japanese American citizens, continuing Chinese Exclusion, and a host of state laws targeting the Asian population and making their lives miserable. Belated recognition of the wrongfulness and immorality of these reprehensible laws and actions does nothing for their past victims.
Many Irish, Italian, and other Catholics and their cherished institutions died, lost property, or were permanently displaced by widespread anti-Catholic riots brought on and fanned by the very type of biased and ignorant thinking that undergirded Johnson-Reed. They can’t be brought back to life and their property restored just by a “magic wave of the historical wand.”
U.S. citizens of Mexican-American heritage were deported and dispossessed, some from property their ancestors had owned long before there was even a United States. Apologizing to their descendants and acknowledging our mistakes as a nation won’t eliminate the injustices done them — ones that they took to their graves!
Despite the “lessons of the Holocaust,” America continues to struggle with anti-Semitism and anti-Islamic phobias and indifference to human suffering beyond our borders.
And, of course, the poisonous adverse impacts of slavery on our nation and our African-American compatriots continue to haunt and influence us despite disingenuous claims to the contrary.
Dan Kowalski Online Editor of the LexisNexis Immigration Law Community (ILC)Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase Jeffrey S. Chase Blog Coordinator & Chief Spokesperson, Round Table of Former Immigration Judges
My friends immigration experts Dan Kowalski and Hon. Jeffrey Chase also had some “choice words” for the “false scholars” who extol the fabricated “benefits” of White Nationalism and racism embodied in “laws” that contravened the very meaning of “with liberty and justice for all” — something to reflect upon this Memorial Day. See https://dankowalski.substack.com/p/true-colors.
Thank you, Dan! In memory of my Gzesh, Wolfson, Kronenberg, and Kissilove relatives who were victims of the Holocaust – after their U.S.-based relatives failed to get visas for them.
Heed the lessons of history, enshrine tolerance, honor diversity, and “improve on past performance!”We have a choice as to whether or not to repeat the mistakes of the past — to regress to a darker age or move forward to a brighter future for all!Make the right one!
Immigration law and policy are very complex, and truly boring for everyone except those who have to deal with them. But we live in an instant gratification, fast food culture. Immigration is a Hot Topic, folks want a Solution Now, so journalists naturally write about it…some better than others.
David Leonhardt, a senior writer at the New York Times, is a smart fellow who has won awards. But his “wheelhouse,” as the kids say, is mostly business and economics. I wish he (and/or his editors…where were they?) had consulted a panel of experts before hitting “send” on this piece.
Thanks for reading Dan’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Pledge your support
Now, I’m not an expert, but I did practice immigration law for almost 40 years, and today my social media feeds and email listservs are burning up with negative reactions to Leonhardt’s piece from true immigration experts.
Responding to every one of the problems in the piece would make this post too long, and would put you to sleep rather quickly, so I’ll touch on just a few highlights that really chapped my professional hide.
First, Leonhardt said, “Biden … changed the definition of asylum to include fear of gang violence.” That is simply false. The definition of who qualifies for asylum is based on the “refugee” definition, is fixed by statute, and only Congress can change that. Congress did NOT make any such change, and neither Biden nor any president could. Fear of gang violence as a basis for an asylum claim is a continuing subject of litigation at the Board of Immigration Appeals and in the federal courts, but the statute remains unchanged.
Second, Leonhardt states that Biden could have issued executive orders to mitigate the situation at the border. Oh, but “Yes, federal judges might block some of these policies… .” Maybe because they are illegal orders? No matter, “sending a message” is more important than legality.
Third, on the matter of admission into the U.S. via “parole,” Leonhardt implies that Biden expanded the use of parole beyond its “case-by-case” legal limits. Maybe Leonhardt did not know that “parole was … used to resettle over 360,000 Indochinese refugees between 1975 and mid-1980” and that “[b]etween 1962 and the end of May 1979, over 690,000 Cuban nationals were paroled into the country, “the largest number of refugees from a single nationality ever accepted into the United States.” ” – Amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Clark v. Martinez.
Finally, the overall thrust of Leonhardt’s piece seems to be that the border is a “problem” that can and should be “solved” by some combination of legal and physical deterrents. This is a misperception common to educated elites as well as regular folks, and it is based on an ignorance of the full panoply of historical, economic, geographic and political forces that combine to make true border “control” a fantasy. Go to the border, look at the miles of desert, mountain and river and you will conclude that border walls are nothing more than a contractor’s financial wet dream. Talk to a woman from Central America who has risked everything to come here and you will conclude that no laws, no walls, no “message” would have deterred her.
I usually ignore much of what the MSM publishes about immigration, but the Times and Leonhardt carry a certain weight, so here I am, typing away. You’re welcome.
[The Comments are open, so fire away!]
Thanks for reading Dan’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Pledge your support
***************
Professor Karen Musalo Director, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Hastings Law
Here’s the letter that Professor Karen Musalo, Director of the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies at Hastings Law wrote to the NYT:
Before David Leonhardt writes another piece on immigration, he should make sure he has his facts straight. He erroneously claims Biden “changed the definition of asylum to include fear of gang violence.” Biden did no such thing. What his Justice Department did was overturn a Trump-era ruling attempting to foreclose asylum claims by victims of domestic and gang violence, regardless of their legal merits. That decision was widely criticized, including on your pages in an op-ed I co-authored with Jane Fonda. Attorney General Garland rightfully vacated it, leaving the issue to be resolved by regulations [which to date have not been issued].
Leonhardt is incorrect in his assertion that more “aggressive” moves will mitigate challenges at the border, or score points with voters who overwhelmingly opposecruel and exclusionary policies. The Senate bill touted as a step in the right direction would have codified failed policies that only create more chaos.
Executive actions reportedly under consideration would similarly exacerbate operational challenges and inevitably get tied up in litigation.
And yes, Republicans’ sabotage of the bill was “transparently cynical.” Just as cynical, however, was the president’s choice to back anti-immigrant legislation he knew was doomed. In their attempts to out-Trump Trump, the president and his allies have betrayed their values and the voters who put them in office.
Karen Musalo
San Francisco, CA
*******************
Thanks, Dan and Karen! Turning Leonhardt loose on a subject he’s obviously unqualified to write about — “stunning ignorance” in the words of one world-renowned expert — is nothing short of journalistic malpractice on the part of the NYT!
Immigration is a serious topic with life or death implications for migrants and the future of our nation. It deserves serious, informed, professional journalism by experts who are familiar with the plight of forced migrants and the actual legal requirements for asylum and due process as well as the realities of the border and the anti-immigrant absurdities of our dysfunctional Immigration Courts and non-legally-compliant asylum adjudication system.
There are lots of well-qualified folks around who could inform the public. Needless to say Leonhardt is not one of them. Unhappily, few “mainstream media” journalists have the necessary creds. That’s one reason the toxic national debate is so dominated by right wing White Nationalist media spreading lies and myths with little critical pushback from the “MSM.”
Rachel Siegel Economics Reporter Washington Post PHOTO: WashPost
Ironically, the same day’s Washington Post had an article by Rachel Siegel about how robust immigration of all types has saved the U.S. economy and how many economists believe Trump’s mindless, restrictionist, and likely illegal nativist policies could slow growth, devastate the U.S. workforce, and exacerbate inflation! https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/05/20/trump-immigration-undocumented-economy/. At the same time, he would create chaos and waste billions in public funds.
Recently, I publisheda number of articles by experts debunking many of the very anti-immigrant myths that Leonhardt disingenuously repeats or enables:
In one of many bad moments, Leonhardt uncritically “parrots” the oft-debunked fiction that changes in U.S. immigration policies and “deterrents” like walls, detention, and racially-driven cruelty are primary long-term “drivers” of forced human migration. Undoubtedly, in the complex interrelated world of migration, such policies do have some fairly marginal, largely short-term effects, causing changes in migration paths, adjustments in smuggling methods, changes in smuggling fees, more deaths and unreported irregular entries (when enforcement “gimmicks” are irresponsibly expanded), and enough “statistical variance” to allow proponents of these futile policies to falsely claim “victory” before the system reverts to a new “equilibrium.”
But the truth is inescapable, even if inconvenient for Leonhardt and other dilettantes: Human migration is a complex worldwide phenomenon driven by forces beyond the ability of any single nation, even one as powerful and influential as the U.S., to control by harsh deterrence and restriction, no matter how cruel, deadly, and wasteful.See, e.g., https://immigrationcourtside.com/wp-admin/about.php (“Migrants will continue to flee bombs, look for better-paying jobs and accept extraordinary risks as the price of providing a better life for their children. . . .No wall, sheriff or headscarf law would have prevented [forced migrants] from leaving their homes.”).
As cogently stated by Robert McKee Irwin, an immigration scholar at U.C. Davis:
Leonhardt also suggests, quite incorrectly, that Biden’s (limited) attempts to increase pathways for legal immigration and return to the rule of law at the border somehow benefitted and encouraged smugglers and cartels. NOTHING could be more wrong-headed!
It is Trump and his restrictionist allies and enablers who have been a huge boon for human smugglers! As legal pathways are eliminated or unreasonably restricted, the entire “protection” system falls into the hands of smugglers and other trans-border criminal organizations who become “the only game in town” for those seeking protection! Smuggling prices go up and the risks to migrants increase, even as profit margins for the smugglers skyrocket! Equally bad, law enforcement is diverted from real criminals to playing a bogus “numbers game” at the expense of those who seek only to have their life-determining claims heard fairly, timely, and humanely in accordance with the rule of law!
If our country builds a fair, timely, and humane system for considering asylum claims, something that succeeding Administrations have shamefully eschewed, the majority of asylum applicants will use it, which at the same time would allow border law enforcement to focus on real security issues rather than contrived ones. Similarly, more realistic and robust paths for legal immigration, both temporary and long term, will reduce the pressure and incentives for irregular migration. These measures would also tap into the truth about migration being ignored by politicos of both parties:
These [restrictionist] political reactions fail to grapple with a hard truth: in the long run, new migration is nearly always a boon to host countries. In acting as entrepreneurs and innovators, and by providing inexpensive labor, immigrants overwhelmingly repay in long-term economic contributions what they use in short-term social services, studies show. But to maximize that future good, governments must act -rationally to establish humane policies and adequately fund an immigration system equipped to handle an influx of newcomers.
Notably, the Biden parole program criticized by Leonhardt not only has been upheld in Federal Court, but has generally been praised and recognized by experts as a great, largely under appreciated, success in both creating an orderly process and reducing border pressures while benefitting American families and fueling our economy. See, e.g., https://www.fwd.us/news/chnv-parole/. (I’ll admit to not initially being a “fan,” but hey, results matter so I’ve come around). The most legitimate criticism is that it has been too limited both in terms of numbers and nationality restrictions!
Bad journalism promoting myths like those spouted by Leonhard misleads the public and enables politicos to get away with policies that are not only illegal, but often harm and even kill the very vulnerable migrants we are supposed to be protecting, or at the very least treating with fairness, respect, and human dignity. America and the migrants who still (against the odds) see us as a beacon of hope in a cruel world deserve better from the NYT!
Judge Lister also has a plan to donate patented “healthy, sustainable textile technology” developed during the pandemic that could be used to create good jobs in Mexico and other countries beyond our borders.
Professor Michele Pistone at Villanova Law has developed a “scalable” online training course (“VIISTA Villanova”) that is currently being used to graduate more highly-qualified non-lawyer “Accredited Representatives” to close the burgeoning and critical representation gap in Immigration Court, thus “delivering due process with efficiency.” She believes that with more funding, this program could be “ramped up” to produce 10,000 new Accredited Representatives annually! See, e.g., https://www1.villanova.edu/university/professional-studies/academics/professional-education/viista.html.
With so many brilliant, informed, and involved experts out here, with creative positive ideas for improving immigrant justice and restoring the rule of law, it is very disappointing that the NYT and Leonhardt have chosen to uncritically recycle and repeat cruel, failed, legally problematic proposals by irresponsible politicos that would make things worse. Rather, the media should be consulting the experts actually involved in immigration at the “grass roots level” and pressing politicos on both sides of the aisle and the Administration as to why they aren’t concentrating and investing in humane potential solutions rather than deadly and discredited “deterrence through cruelty!”
As Erica Bryant of the Vera Institute of Justice, someone who, unlike Leonhardt, is actually qualified to write about migration, stated in an article I recently republished:
This November, and beyond, voters need to reject lies that demonize immigrants and demand policies that treat each person with dignity and fairness, no matter where they were born.
Obviously, neither Leonhardt nor the NYT editors got the message. They should!
Thanks again, Dan and Karen, for being the first to speak out and challenge Leonhardt’s dangerous, misleading, and highly irresponsible nativist nonsense!
🚩 Federal court knocks down key part of Florida’s anti-immigrant law temporarily – a massive win for immigrants’ rights against anti-immigrant state laws!
Today, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit challenging the main provision of Florida’s anti-immigrant law SB1718. This means this part of the law is temporarily stopped while the full case continues to get litigated.
Spearheaded by anti-immigrant Governor Ron DeSantis, SB1718 has attacked immigrants in Florida in a multitude of ways, including the provision at issue in this lawsuit, which made it a crime to transport anyone into Florida who had not been “inspected” by the US government.
This had the effect of the state of Florida, through state criminal law, unlawfully enforcing federal immigration law, which hundreds of years of case law makes clear is a matter reserved for the federal government. The district court judge agreed (finding the Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their conflict- and field-preemption claims).
Congratulations to the ACLU, SPLC, AIC, and AIJ who have led litigation on this case as well as my colleagues Immigration Impact Lab Senior Attorneys F. Evan Benz and Daniel J. Melo and AILA’s amicus committee for writing an excellent amicus brief in support of the lawsuit.
What can you do?
1. Spread the word. Help educate others about the importance of fighting for immigrants’ rights.
2. Celebrate. As we see more and more states seek to pass anti-immigrant laws at the state level following Florida and Texas’ lead, this decision is a milestone moment in advocates’ efforts to fight back. 🎉
Thanks, Adina, and way to go NDPA Team! The case is Farmworker Association of Florida v. Moody, No. 23-cv-22655 (Southern District of Florida, May 22, 2024). Expect Florida to appeal to the 11th Circuit, so, unfortunately, this isn’t the end of the matter.
Here’s a link to the decision by U.S. District Judge Roy K. Altman (Trump appointee):
Even as the national (non) debate on immigration deteriorates into lies, myths, and hate, there are still victories to be won by great, motivated lawyers dedicated to defending individual rights and the rule of law against political scofflaws like DeSantis and his nativist ilk!
As critical elections approach, voters are being bombarded with harmful myths, misrepresentations, and outright lies about people who are immigrants. More than 45 million people living in the United States were born elsewhere. Despite their proven contributions to communities nationwide, people seeking office call them “invaders” and make campaign promises for the “largest domestic deportation operation in history.” Inflammatory talking points about “border security” and the “migrant crisis” come from candidates across the political spectrum.
What is missing from this rhetoric is simple: the truth. The United States has failed to align its immigration laws and practices with 21st-century realities, leaving a system that is cruel, dysfunctional, and widely criticized. Bringing the country’s approach to immigration in line with the needs of the moment and building an immigration system that is both functional and humane will require serious effort. False information distracts from the solutions that we know work.
Here’s the truth.
It is perfectly legal to request asylum. People who come to the United States border to ask for help are not breaking the law.
Asylum is a form of protection that allows people to remain in the United States and avoid deportation back to a country where they fear persecution or harm because of their identity, religion, or political beliefs. Under both U.S. and international law, people who face danger in their homelands have the right to go to other nations to seek safety and to have their requests for asylum considered.
Asking for asylum is not a “free ticket” into the United States.
Applying for asylum is a long and complex process. Asylum cases completed in fiscal year 2019 or later took an average of 5.2 years to resolve, according to unpublished analysis of government data conducted by Vera. Currently-pending removal cases have been on the docket for an average of 1.9 years. Dangerous conditions around the world have forced record numbers of people to flee their homes and seek safety. This increase in need, exacerbated by a decades-long lack of investment in infrastructure and capacity to humanely process asylum claims, has created an enormous backlog in processing requests. Vera’s unpublished analysis of government data showed that, as of January 31, 2024, there were 3,353,199 cases pending removal proceedings in the United States.
Undocumented people have far lower crime rates than U.S. citizens.
Political candidates often falsely link undocumented people to crime in the United States. Yet an extensive study of crimes in all 50 states and Washington, DC, from 1990 to 2014, found that undocumented immigration does not increase violent crime. A study of arrests in Texas found that, relative to undocumented people, U.S.-born citizens are more than twice as likely to be arrested for violent crimes, 2.5 times more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and more than four times more likely to be arrested for property crimes. Another study in Texas found that the criminal conviction rate for undocumented immigrants was 45 percent below that of native-born Texans. Immigrants of any legal status are typically found to be less involved in violence than native-born Americans.
Undocumented people pay taxes and help prop up social security by paying into the system—without receiving benefits.
Undocumented people pay an estimated $31 billion dollars in federal, state, and local taxes each year, including billions of dollars into a social security system from which they can draw very few, if any, benefits. The Social Security Administration (SSA) itself estimated that it collected $13 billion in payroll taxes in 2010 from workers without documentation, while only disbursing about $1 billion in payment attributable to unauthorized work. In a 2013 report, SSA estimated that “earnings by unauthorized immigrants result in a net positive effect on Social Security financial status generally. . . . We estimate that future years will experience a continuation of this positive impact on the trust funds.”
Virtually no fentanyl has been seized from people seeking asylum.
Fentanyl overdoses are increasing in the United States, and real solutions will require investments in treatment and preventative health care infrastructure. Instead, far too many politicians seek cheap political points by falsely blaming people seeking asylum at the southern border for this serious problem. In fact, virtually no fentanyl has been seized from people seeking asylum. In 2023, 93 percent of fentanyl seizures occurred at official border crossings or legal checkpoints. Nearly all of these seizures involved people permitted to cross the border, and more than 70 percent were U.S. citizens.
People with pending immigration cases show up to their court hearings.
Evidence clearly shows that, over the past two decades, most immigrants have shown up for the immigration court hearings that determine whether they have legal standing to remain in the United States. They do not slip into the country and disappear, as some political leaders claim. In fact, those who attend immigration court outside detention, on what are known as “non-detained” dockets, almost always continue to appear for their hearings when they are able to secure legal representation. There is no need to confine people in costly and inhumane immigration prisons.
Not all people at risk of deportation cross the border without documentation. Visa holders, long-term permanent residents, and even U.S. citizens are at risk.
While the spotlight often shines on people who cross the southern border without documentation, there are many ways that people can face the threat of deportation in the United States. Indeed, there are 22 million people in the United States who are at risk of being separated from their families and sent to countries where they may face danger. Tens of thousands of children who were adopted from outside the United States, for example, do not have documentation and are vulnerable to deportation because their complex citizenship paperwork was improperly filed. Additionally, more than one million people were brought to the United States as children by parents who entered the country without documentation or overstayed their visas. And, in 2022, more than 850,000 people from countries around the world overstayed their visas, making their continued presence in the United States unauthorized. Lawful permanent residents, current visa holders, and even U.S. citizens have been subjected to the risk of deportation and forced to defend their right to remain home with their families and in their communities.
Many people at risk of deportation actually have a legal right to remain in the United States—but are deported anyway.
Unlike in criminal court, people facing deportation in immigration court are not entitled to an attorney if they cannot afford one. Immigration attorneys can cost thousands of dollars, making them unaffordable for many. As a result, people seeking asylum, longtime legal residents, parents of U.S. citizens, and even small children are forced to appear in immigration court without an attorney to protect their rights. This makes it much more likely that they will be deported, even if they could have established a legal right to stay in the United States. The Fairness to Freedom Act, which was introduced in Congress last year and would establish a right to federally funded attorneys for all people facing deportation, would help fix this injustice.
Immigrants participate in the labor force and start businesses at higher rates than the native-born population.
One in six people in the United States workforce are immigrants. In fact, immigrants participate in the labor force at a higher rate than the U.S.-born population. Immigrants are also more likely to start businesses than native-born U.S. citizens. Furthermore, millions of people in the United States are employed by immigrant-founded and immigrant-owned companies.
People in the United States view immigration as a positive that benefits the country, and they support protections for people fleeing danger.
The majority of the public believes that immigration brings benefits to the United States, including economic growth and enriching culture and values. Nearly three-quarters of people polled said that people immigrate to the United States for jobs and to improve their lives, and more than half say that the ability to immigrate is a “human right.” Multiple polls show that the majority of people in the United States support protections for people who are trying to escape persecution and torture in their homelands. According to one Pew Research Center poll, 72 percent believe that accepting civilians trying to escape war and violence should be an important goal of U.S. immigration policy.
The United States has much work ahead to reform its dysfunctional and often cruel immigration system. This November, and beyond, voters need to reject lies that demonize immigrants and demand policies that treat each person with dignity and fairness, no matter where they were born.
**************************
Erica’s “spot on” last sentence is certainly worth repeating:
This November, and beyond, voters need to reject lies that demonize immigrants and demand policies that treat each person with dignity and fairness, no matter where they were born.
While migrants might be the “easy target” of politicos and nativists, because they are vulnerable and “the usual scapegoats” for problems created or fostered by those very politicos and nativists themselves, in the end we ALL are the targets of those who want to inflict gratuitous cruelty while destroying our precious democracy.
As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Each of us has a vested interest in “not looking the other way” while our fellow humans unfairly are stripped of their rights and humanity with “harmful myths, misrepresentations, and outright lies.” YOU could be “next on the list!”
