ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Recent Blogs Posts

  1. Overturning Roe v. Wade Could be The Worst Event for US Immigration in More Than a Century. Birthright Citizenship Might be Next to go. Roger Algase

    The following comment has been updated and slightly expanded as of July 3 at 8:40 am:

    ​As the Donald Trump administration hurtles on course toward remaking every aspect of American life in his radical right wing image by gaining total control over the US Supreme Court, immigrants and immigration advocates may be tempted to be complacent over the coming inevitable demise of Roe v. Wade, which Trump confirmed in a July 2 interview on what is now the official state news channel, Fox News (just as the Voelkischer Beobachter newspaper was the official government organ in National Socialist Germany or Pravda was in Soviet Russia).

    At first glance, one might ask, what would reverting back to the days when state and local police in every part of America occupied their time hunting down and throwing people in jail for providing abortion services to women have to do with immigration policy? Why should immigration advocates care if half the population of the US suddenly, by 5-4 judicial fiat, becomes deprived once again of control over their own bodies and reproductive rights?

    One can ask the same thing about other issues where the rights to basic dignity and equality before the law of large segments of our population will now be on the Supreme Court's chopping block - such as same sex marriage and gay rights in general, for example.

    Will America also go back to the days when the same state and local police who will, without any serious question, soon be back in the business of arresting and jailing abortion providers in many states, may also once again go back to locking up people for engaging in same sex relations, as was the law in America up until as recently as only 15 years ago, before Lawrence v. Texas (2003) was decided?

    But again, why should immigrants or immigrant advocates be concerned about what happens to women or gay people? Don't immigrants have enough worries trying to get their young, in some cases, only breastfeeding, children out of ICE's cages and back into the arms of their parents in Donald Trump's America?

    And also, the rights of women or of LGBT people might not as obviously be tied up with the issue of racial discrimination, which has been at the care of the immigration issue from the enactment of the first Chinese exclusion law in 1882 up until Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions led the most recent brown skinned 4 year old child away in shackles as part of their "zero tolerance" policy for for immigrants who do not happen to come from "Countries like Norway" only a week or so before this writing.

    But no one can seriously think that under a Supreme Court which can and absolutely will overturn Roe v. Wade, precedents protecting racial equality will be any safer. If the Court can overturn abortion rights, what is there to stop it from overturning the 1967 decision in Loving v. Virginia, which outlawed state laws against interracial marriage, or even the landmark 1954 Brown v. Board of Education School desegregation decision itself?

    Still, immigration supporters might argue, while these decisions involve critically important issues of racial justice and equality in an era when non-white immigration, both legal and unauthorized, is under fierce and concerted attack from the federal government for the first time in more than 50 years, still, these issues are not directly related to immigration. They mainly involve the rights of US citizens.

    So why shouldn't immigration advocates and supporters stick to their knitting and not bother with these other issues? Or to quote the 2nd - 3rd century AD early Christian writer Tertullian: Quid ergo Athenis et Hierosolymis? ("What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?")

    Indeed, what, one might ask, do abortion, LGBT rights or even protecting Americans against racial segregation, have to do with immigration?

    The answer is that these issues have everything to do with immigration.

    A Supreme Court which is capable of overturning Roe v. Wade, as Trump's Court will unquestionably do without the slightest doubt or hesitation, might very arguably not hesitate to overturn the 1898 Supreme Court Wong Kim Ark decision protecting the right to US citizenship at birth for every child born in the United States, regardless of race. color or ancestry.

    During his campaign, Trump, as part of his strategy of vilification and scapegoating of Latino and other non-white immigrants. made a promise to eliminate birthright citizenship as one of the central features of his agenda.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...mp-republicans

    It would be the height of foolishness to think that either he or his white supremacist supporters have forgotten this promise. See: 66 Am U. L. Rev 1383 (2017)

    http://www.aulawreview.org/birthrigh...u-s-exclusion/

    And if birthright citizenship goes, that obviously means the end of immigration in the United States as we know it. It also means the end of the United States itself, as a country that upholds or has even the slightest concern for basic human rights. See:

    Katherine Culliton-Gonzalez:

    Born in the Americas: Birthright Citizenship and Human Rights

    25 Harvard Human Rights Journal 127 (2012)

    It would also mean the end of the United States as a society where everyone is equal before the law, and it would transform this country into a racially tiered nation resembling apartheid South Africa where the benefits of citizenship are reserved mainly for white people of European ancestry, while American born people of Latin American, Asian, African and Middle Eastern ancestry become pariahs, without any rights or legal status - much as the Jews who were stripped of German citizenship by the Nuremberg Laws in became in that country after 1936 - or black slaves were considered to be in America when Dred Scott v. Sandford was the law of the land.

    The author of the above Harvard Human Rights Journal article writes, at pages 128-129:

    "As will be discussed herein, the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted to prevent discrimination against people of color, including immigrants of color...It is no coincidence that birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants is being seriously challenged now that the 2010 Census found that 23% of children in the United States are Hispanic and that many of their parents are immigrants."


    In my next comment, I will look in more detail at the momentous decision in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 (1898) in which the Supreme Court engaged in an extensive analysis of the 14th Amendment's citizenship provisions and issued a decision which has been the law of the land on the issue of birthright citizenship ever since.

    This decision is without doubt the most important one on race and immigration and citizenship since Dred Scott, but one that has received far less attention than it should.

    In the meantime, as the future of immigration - and racial equality for everyone in the US hangs in a precarious balance under Donald Trump's new upcoming Supreme Court, no matter which right wing ideological extremist he may pick to take the place of Justice Anthony Kennedy, I wish all Immigration Daily readers, regardless of nationality or immigration status, a very Happy 4th of July holiday.
    _________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 30 years, Roger has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain work permits and green cards.

    Roger believes that the purpose of immigration law is upholding the basic concepts of racial equality, justice for all people before the law and fundamental human rights on which our nation was founded, and without which America would no longer be a country of democracy and freedom as we know it today.

    Roger's email address is algaselex@gmail.com







    Updated 07-04-2018 at 05:47 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. IER Settles Claim of Discrimination of U.S. Workers by Triple H Services, Landscaping Company

    By: Bruce Buchanan, Sebelist Buchanan Law PLLC



    The Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER), a part of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, reached a settlement agreement with Triple H Services LLC, a landscaping company based in Newland, North Carolina. The agreement resolves an investigation into whether Triple H discriminated against qualified and available U.S. workers based on their citizenship status by preferring to hire temporary workers with H-2B visas, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

    The IER’s investigation found that although Triple H went through the motions of advertising over 450 landscape laborer vacancies in five states, it did so in a manner that misled U.S. workers about the available positions and prevented or deterred some from applying. The IER found Triple H did not consider several qualified U.S. workers who applied for positions in Virginia during the recruitment period, instead it hired H-2B visa workers. In several states where jobs were available, Triple H prematurely closed the online job application process for U.S. worker applicants, filled positions with H-2B visa workers without first advertising the jobs to U.S. workers in the relevant locations, or advertised vacancies in a manner that did not make the postings visible to job seekers using state workforce agency online services.

    The IER concluded that in taking these actions, Triple H effectively denied U.S. workers access to jobs based on its preference for hiring temporary H-2B visa workers to fill the positions. Refusing to consider or hire qualified and available U.S. workers based on their citizenship status violates the INA’s anti-discrimination provision, regardless of whether an employer has complied with other rules governing the use of temporary employment-based visa programs.

    The Justice Department touted this settlement agreement as part of the Division’s Protecting U.S. Workers Initiative, which is aimed at targeting, investigating, and taking enforcement actions against companies that discriminate against U.S. workers in favor of temporary visa workers. Acting Assistant Attorney General John Gore said, “The Department will continue to fight to ensure that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged because of their citizenship status.”

    Under the settlement, Triple H must establish a backpay fund, with a cap of $85,000, to compensate certain individuals who were harmed by its practices; pay $15,600 in civil penalties to the U.S. government; engage in enhanced recruitment activities to attract U.S. workers; revise any existing employment policies so that they prohibit discrimination based on citizenship, immigration status, and national origin in the recruitment and hiring processes; train its Human Resources personnel on their legal obligations to not discriminate by viewing a free online IER webinar presentation; and be subject to departmental monitoring and reporting for a three-year period.

    This settlement is the second in the last week related to discrimination against U.S. workers. For answers to many other questions related to the IER and immigration compliance, I invite you to read The I-9 and E-Verify Handbook, a book that I co-authored with Greg Siskind, and is available at http://www.amazon.com/dp/0997083379.
  3. ICE Raising Awareness of Female Genital Mutilation at Airports

    by , 07-02-2018 at 10:10 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    For Immediate Release
    July 02, 2018

    CONTACT:
    Deborah Hamilton, Hamilton Strategies, Media@HailtonStrategies.com,
    610.584.1096, ext. 102, or Patrick Benner, ext. 104


    ICE Raising Awareness of Female Genital Mutilation at Nation’s Busiest Airports
    #EndFGMToday Applauds ICE’s Efforts to Protect 200 Million Girls and Women Worldwide Who Are Subjected to This Brutal—and Illegal—Practice

    WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is working to combat the global and domestic scourge of female genital mutilation (FGM) by offering awareness programs at the nation’s largest and busiest airports.

    According to ICE, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) special agents along with U.S. Customs and Border Protection, have conducted awareness and training events at Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport,Washington’s Dulles International Airport and Newark International Airport over the past several weeks. A similar initiative took place at New York’s JFK airport in 2017.

    The national #EndFGMToday initiative and its leader, international child advocate and attorney Elizabeth Yore, is applauding ICE’s efforts.

    “If ICE is committed to conducting these awareness events in the busiest airports during the summer months, we know that what we’ve thought all along is true,” Yore said. “Thousands of little girls are at risk to have their genitals mutilated, either right here in the U.S. or taken to other countries to have the physically and emotionally scarring procedure known as ‘vacation cutting’ forced upon them. If FGM wasn't a major problem in the U.S., why would this dedicated department conduct training at four major airports where perpetrators are potentially shuttling girls in and out of the country?”

    The ICE FGM events have the goal to bring awareness to the illegal practice of female genital mutilation and to educate people about the serious penalties that exist under U.S. law for engaging in this horrific practice.

    The outreach efforts at the airports were an extension of Operation Limelight USA, a pilot program designed by HSI’s Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Center to bring awareness to FGM and deter its practice. The program is a U.S.-based version of the United Kingdom’s Operation Limelight at Heathrow Airport. HSI aims to continue expanding outreach at additional international departure points to areas where FGM is commonly practiced to ensure travelers are aware that it is a crime under U.S. law.

    “Removing or cutting the genital organs of a female child is a federal crime regardless of whether it’s done inside the U.S. or the child is transported outside the country for that purpose,” said HSI Atlanta Special Agent in Charge Nick Annan in an ICE statement. “FGM is irreversible and HSI, along with its law enforcement partners, will seek prosecution of anyone subject to U.S. law it finds attempting to engage in its illegal practice.”

    As part of Operation Limelight USA, special agents who complete FGM-related training speak to passengers flying to or from high-risk countries, offer informational brochures and identify potential victims and violators of FGM. These discussions both educate passengers on the consequences of involvement in FGM and provide passengers with a means to refer cases or receive victim assistance.

    ICE reports that FGM provides no health benefits and, in fact, can cause severe health effects—significant bleeding and acute pain, as well as life-long consequences of chronic infection, childbirth complications, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and even death. The airport events were held at the beginning of summer vacation when girls may be sent from the United States to other countries to undergo FGM, or “vacation cutting,” as Yore also noted.

    ICE asks that anyone with information about victims or perpetrators of female genital mutilation call the toll-free ICE tip line at (866) 347-2423 or complete the ICE online tip form.

    According to a 2016 estimation by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), around 200 million women living today have undergone this procedure. Yore added that FGM is recognized by both the World Health Organization and the U.N. as a human rights violation, and the Centers for Disease Control estimates that 513,000 girls and women are at risk of FGM in the United States.

    Learn more about FGM at www.EndFGMToday.com or on social media at #EndFGMToday.

    Updated 07-02-2018 at 10:27 AM by MKolken

  4. Letters of the Week: July 2 - July 6

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: