ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
© 1995-
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal


  1. In 2007 Hillary Clinton Sounded Much Different on Immigration

    by , 09-16-2016 at 09:52 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)

    Here is video from an Iowa town hall in 2007. Hillary Clinton was asked by a member of the audience about her positions on denying driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants and border security.

    Her response included a list of priorities.

    Priority 1. "First you've got to toughen border security." More personnel and technology.

    Priority 2. "Crack down on employers who employ undocumented workers." She called for much tougher sanctions and penalties.

    Priority 3. Help communities get more "financial aid" to help deal with the consequences of a broken immigration system. She stressed that local communities shouldn't have to pay for healthcare, education, and law enforcement required as a result of a broken Federal immigration system.

    Priority 4. Help countries "to the South" create more jobs for their citizens.

    Priority 5. Get people to come out of the shadows by giving them sanctions, penalties, and fines. She said "I want to know who is in this country. I want to keep track of them." She then illustrated her point by comparing the undocumented population to 9-11 terrorists.

    Mrs. Clinton was adamant that people with ANY conviction should be deported without due process. She stated "if they ever committed a crime either in the country they came from or in this country deport them immediately no questions asked." This sounded like a one strike policy. She didn't specify what kind of crime or if the recency of the violation would result in automatic deportation without due process. Mind you, the definition of "criminal alien" under the Obama administration, of which Mrs. Clinton was an integral part of, includes people with traffic tickets, and nonviolent or victim-less crimes.

    The tenets of Mrs. Clinton's reform plan were for the undocumented population to pay fines, back taxes, and try to learn English. There was no path to citizenship, only a path to legalization after a long, long wait. In this regard, she said "they have to wait in line... And maybe in 10 or 15 years they can get legalization... I think that is the ONLY answer."

    Sounds enticing huh?

    Point being, in 2016 if Hillary would have run for President on this platform she would have been a lock for the Republican nomination.

    Updated 09-16-2016 at 04:25 PM by MKolken

  2. On Immigration Jill Stein Fears Hillary Clinton as Much as Donald Trump

    by , 06-09-2016 at 10:25 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)

    Via Democracy Now:

    "Trump says very scary things—deporting immigrants, massive militarism, you know, ignoring the climate. Hillary, unfortunately, has a track record for doing all of those things," Stein says. "Hillary has supported the deportations of immigrants, opposed the refugees—women and children coming from Honduras, whose refugee crisis she was very much responsible for by giving a thumbs-up to this corporate coup in Honduras that has created the violence from which those refugees are fleeing." Stein goes on to say, "We see these draconian things that Donald Trump is talking about, we actually see Hillary Clinton doing."

    Click here
    to watch the full show.
  3. Is Hillary Clinton the Lesser of Two Evils on Immigration?

    by , 06-07-2016 at 09:05 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    Social justice writer, public education advocate, immigrant rights activist, and US Navy Veteran Robert D. Skeels has published an essay that explores the immigration policies of key Democratic Party leaders including Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Janet Napolitano, and Hillary Rodham Clinton in the context of both neoliberalism and U.S. interventionism in Latin America. The essay is entitled: "Lesser Evil? The Democrats and immigration policy in the era of neoliberalism."

    Skeels' examination of key Democrats, and their roles in imposing draconian immigration enforcement, has resulted in the conclusion that Hillary Clinton's heavy handed record on immigration should give immigration reform activists pause.

    He writes:

    While Clinton frequently modulates her rhetorical positions, it is more than she is generally to the right of most of her fellow Democrats. Instead, she is often to the right of many Republicans on immigration issues. Exemplary is this 2004 newspaper passage: “Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is staking out a position on illegal immigration that is more conservative than President Bush”. This was not a fluke, the self-proclaimed “Goldwater Girl” has consistently held herself out as being tougher than Republicans on immigration and has crafted a message that essentially tars all immigrants as being possible terrorists. Consider the latter part of this passage: “In an interview on WABC radio, she said, ‘I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants,‘ and in an interview on Fox News she accused Bush of not doing enough to ‘protect our borders and ports‘”. Akers Chacón rightly identifies this strategy—one that Clinton has mastered: “the Democratic Party has not only made ‘winning the war on terrorism‘ its clarion call, but it is also responsible for helping to shift the debate to the border.” The unparalleled nexus of domestic law enforcement, barriers, increased border patrol, and so-called “Homeland Security” bound by policies including Secure Communities is something that Clinton has advocated for during her career. Maestas deftly sums this up: “Democrats like the Clintons have championed ‘get tough’ policies that have bolstered bureaucracies and enterprises (private prisons) who have an incentive to maintain the status quo.”

    Click here to read the entire essay.
  4. Hillary's Send Them Back to Send a Message Deterrence Strategy Has High Human Cost

    by , 05-23-2016 at 09:42 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)

    Remember when Hillary Clinton said you have to send refugee children back to send a message? Turns out that deterrence strategy comes at a high human cost. Who woulda thunkit?

    Via The American Immigration Counsel:

    Yet, a report released today by the American Immigration Council reveals that such a strategy has an extremely high human cost.
    Between February and May, 2016, the American Immigration Council interviewed eight individuals who were deported (or whose partners were deported) from the United States after being detained in family detention facilities. These women (or in two of the cases, their partners) shared their experiences—both describing what has happened to them and their children since returning to their country and recounting the detention and deportation process from the United States.

    First-hand accounts from Central American women and their family members interviewed for this project reveal the dangerous and bleak circumstances of life these women and their children faced upon return to their home countries, as well as serious problems in the deportation process. The testimonies describe how women are living in hiding, fear for their own and their children’s lives, have minimal protection options, and suffer the consequences of state weakness and inability to ensure their safety in the Northern Triangle. The stories presented in the report are those of a fraction of the women and children who navigate a formidable emigration-detention-deportation process in their pursuit of safety. The process and systems through which they passed only contribute to the trauma, violence, and desolation that many Central American families already endured in their home country.

    Day after day, women and children seeking protection in the United States are sent back to the Northern Triangle of Central America (Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador), and, consequently, forced to face the same dire conditions that they fled—or worse. The Northern Triangle is one of the most dangerous regions in the world and in recent years the influence of complex organized criminal groups has grown in the region, driving up murder rates, gender-based violence, and other forms of serious harm. It is also a region devastated by poverty and food insecurity. This precarious socioeconomic context, in turn, contributes to a vicious circle of socio-economic exclusion and violence. As has been previously documented, poverty and inequality are likely to increase this region’s vulnerability to certain types of crime (e.g., gang activity).

    Click here to read the report.

    Updated 05-23-2016 at 09:47 AM by MKolken

  5. The Deportation Force is Already Here

    by , 05-13-2016 at 05:33 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    We don't have to wait for President Trump as the "Deportation Force" is already in action, and anything Trump can do Obama can do better. Unfortunately, most Democrats have had their heads in the sand over the past two terms because they are unwilling to believe that their messiah has lied to them.

    Via Reuters:

    U.S. immigration officials are planning a month-long series of raids in May and June to deport hundreds of Central American mothers and children found to have entered the country illegally, according to sources and an internal document seen by Reuters.

    The operation would likely be the largest deportation sweep targeting immigrant families by the administration of President Barack Obama this year after a similar drive over two days in January that focused on Georgia, Texas, and North Carolina.

    Bernie Sanders issued a statement in response opposing the "painful and inhumane business of locking up and deporting families who have fled horrendous violence in Central America and other countries." He remarked that deporting women and children "back into harm’s way is wrong,” and he urged Obama to use executive authority to extend Temporary Protective Status to individuals from Central America.

    Let's remember where Hillary was on this issue in the height of the crisis in 2014: “They should be sent back as soon as it can be determined who responsible adults in their families are, because there are concerns about whether all of them should be sent back.”

    Here is the bottom line. Obama has been the most destructive President in the history of this country to immigrant communities engaging in widespread human rights violations using a law with Bill Clinton's signature, while implementing inhumane deportation policies that Hillary supported.

    Hillary, now looking to capture the Hispanic electorate, suddenly opposes Obama's deportation force, but curiously remarked that we must "stop the root causes of the violence in Central America" that her own policies as Secretary of State helped to create.

    But then again, Hillary will say anything to get elected.

    Updated 05-15-2016 at 08:35 AM by MKolken

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: