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

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




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

View RSS Feed

All Blog Entries

  1. On Immigration Policy, Partisan Differences but Also Some Common Ground

    by , 08-25-2016 at 09:07 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    Media contact: Bridget Johnson, 202-419-4372, bjohnson@pewresearch.org

    On Immigration Policy, Partisan Differences but Also Some Common Ground
    Relatively few express negative views of undocumented immigrants

    WASHINGTON, D.C. (August 25, 2016) – The public is divided over many aspects of U.S. immigration policy. However, when asked about the priorities for policy toward illegal immigration, a new Pew Research Center survey finds more Americans say better border security and a path to citizenship should be given equal priority than favor either approach individually.

    The national survey, conducted August 9-16 among 2,010 adults, also finds that a large majority (76%) says that undocumented immigrants are as hard-working and honest as are U.S. citizens, while 67% say they are no more likely than citizens to commit serious crimes. The survey also finds continued public opposition to building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border: 61% oppose this proposal, which is little changed from earlier this year.

    Overall, 29% of the public prioritizes “creating a way for immigrants already here illegally to become citizens if they meet certain requirements,” while 24% say the focus should be on “better border security and stronger enforcement of immigration laws.” However, when given the option, a 45% plurality says that both should be given equal priority.



    Voters who support Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton differ substantially over immigration policy. Trump supporters overwhelmingly favor building a wall along the US.-Mexican border; 79% support this proposal, while just 18% are opposed. Clinton backers oppose a wall by nearly nine-to-one (88% to 10%).

    Trump supporters also are more critical of undocumented immigrants than are Clinton backers. However, just 35% of Trump supporters say undocumented immigrants fill jobs U.S. citizens would like to have, and 33% say they are not as hardworking and honest as citizens.

    But half of all Trump supporters say undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. are more likely than American citizens to commit serious crimes – and this figure rises to 59% of those who support Trump strongly. Among Clinton supporters, just 13% say undocumented immigrants are more likely to commit serious crimes and there are no significant differences based on strength of support.

    Read the report: http://www.people-press.org/2016/08/...-common-ground

    For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact Bridget Johnson at bjohnson@pewresearch.org or 202-419-4372.

    Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, its primary funder. Subscribe to our daily and weekly email newsletters or follow us on our Fact Tank blog.

    Updated 08-25-2016 at 09:11 AM by MKolken

  2. Could Trump's Wall And Muslim Ban Go The Way Of Mass Deportation? Roger Algase

    Update, August 25, 2:00 pm.

    Here are Trump's actual words on the August 24 Hannity show as reported in The Hill. that are reportedly causing so much anxiety to anti-immigrant hardliners such as Ann Coulter, Jeff Sessions, et al:

    See:

    http://www.thehill.com/blogs/ballot-...work-with-them


    "No citizenship. Let me go a step further - they'll pay back taxes, they have to pay taxes, there's no amnesty, as such, there's no amnesty but we work with them...

    But when I go through and I meet thousands and thousands of people on this subject and I've had very strong people on this subject come up to me, really great, great people come up to me, and they've said, 'Mr. Trump, I love you, but to take a person who's been here for 15 or 20 years and throw them and their family out, it's so tough, Mr. Trump'...

    There could certainly be a softening [of immigration laws] because we're not looking to hurt people."


    My original post appears below.

    Donald Trump's anti-immigrant supporters may be starting to panic over his apparent backtracking on mass deportation of 12 million mainly Latino and Asian immigrants. Columnist Ann Coulter and Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), neither of whom have exactly been noted for complimentary or welcoming remarks about Latino immigrants, are issuing dire warnings, and Sen. Jeff Sessions, (R. Ala.) is also said to be concerned, according to the latest reports in The Hill.

    (Links to be provided.)

    According to the same publication, even Trump's main primary opponent, Sen Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) is disappointed in the Don for questioning the hard right line that every single unauthorized man woman and child in the US should be kicked out.

    (Link will also be provided.)

    Who will be next to jump from Trump's ship - David Duke?

    It is still not clear why Trump is now making suggestions, as he repotedly did on the Sean Hannity show (link also t o be provided) that unauthorized immigrants who have been in the US for many years, are otherwise law abiding, and who are willing to pay back taxes might be granted relief from deportation (link also will be provided).

    What is causing this apparent about-face on Trump's part (if it is one)? Did someone tell him that Latinos are a rapidly growing part of America's population and, yes, they do vote? (Mitt Romney could have told him that.)

    Anf if Trump is really changing his tune and selling out his white supremacist or other far right wing supporters, what might be next to go under Trump's bus?

    The Wall? The Muslim ban? Changing the 14th amendment to render millions of US-born Latino and Asian children illegal and very possibly stateless at birth?

    Oh, no, Donald! How could you? Say it ain't so!


    Is Desperado Donald, who seems to be struggling in the polls, even despite Hillary Clinton's very latest alleged scandal of the week, finally launching his own immigration reality show?


    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 08-25-2016 at 01:01 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. IMMIGRANTS ARE “IMPERATIVE” TO CURE US HEALTHCARE STAFFING SHORTAGES

    by , 08-24-2016 at 02:38 PM (Chris Musillo on Nurse and Allied Health Immigration)
    by Chris Musillo

    A new report by the Institute for Immigration Research declares that immigrant labor plays an “outsized and imperative role in the US healthcare system. The Advance Healthcare Network reports that the IIR reports these figures of the population are immigrant labor:

    28% of physicians and surgeons
    40% of medical scientists in pharmaceutical research and development
    50% of medical scientists in biotechnology in states with a strong biotechnology sector
    22% of nursing, psychiatric and home health aides
    15% of registered nurses

    This is in spite of the fact that only 13% of the US population is foreign-born. The IIR is funded by George Mason University.

    The AHN write-up quotes Monica Gomez Isaac, executive director of George Mason’s IIR. Ms. Isaac is very positive about the contributions that immigrants make in these fields, but she is incorrect in this quote:

    “In the instance of nurses, the lack of an international standard for qualifying registered nurses is absent. The varying degrees of training based on the standards of individual nations make it complex to recruit and fill nursing shortages.”

    This is untrue for two reasons. First, there is an international standard for qualifying nurses. All US nurses must pass the NCLEX-RN Exam, which is offered all around the world. Second, the training standards are not the reason for the lack of foreign-born nurses. Between 15-20,000 internationally-trained RNs are registering to take the NCLEX-RN exam every year. In the mid-2000s, that number was even higher.

    The problem is the immigrant visa retrogression. A fully-qualified nurse from the Philippines takes 3-5 to get her immigrant visa. A fully-qualified Indian nurse takes 10+ years. If the US Congress would update the immigration laws to allow in more nurses, the bottleneck would fade.


    Please read the Musillo Unkenholt Healthcare and Immigration Law Blog at www.musillo.com and www.ilw.com. You can also visit us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
  4. The Not-So-Dead-Hand of a Pre-Trump Era Republican Anti-Immigrant Law. Roger Algase

    In September, 1996, almost two decades before Donald Trump began unleashing the anti-immigrant tirades that have led to his nomination as the Republican presidential candidate, a Republican-controlled Congress passed a draconian anti-immigrant law in a late night session, without discussion or debate, by attaching it to a veto-proof military appropriations bill shortly before that year's presidential election.

    The bill was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, the husband of this year's Democratic presidential candidate. This law, which Donald Trump had nothing to do with and cannot be held responsible for, is known as the Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act (IIRIRA). It is still very much in force today.

    This comment will not discuss all of the many features of this law which were meant to curtail immigrants rights and to make legal status in the US harder to obtain, while imposing new and drastic punishment on immigrants who did not have such status. This would take a whole series of comments much longer than this one.

    This law was widely regarded as a "backlash" against the "browning" of America resulting from the 1965 immigration reform act abolishing the whites-only immigration quotas that had been in place for more than 40 years before, since the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924, see:

    Catherine Tactaquin,

    http://www.ids.ac.uk/ids/civsoc/final/usa/USA3.doc

    I will provide only two examples of how the not-so-dead-hand of this 20th century law is making life harder for immigrants in the 21st century.

    The first example deals with the affidavit of support requirements for family sponsored immigrants that were introduced by IIRIRA. The second will discuss the notorious, draconian 3-10 year bar for so-called "unlawful presence" in the US.

    These comments do not purport to be an exhaustive analysis of these provisions. They will only illustrate, based on examples from my own clients' experiences, the unnecessary and irrational hardships that are being inflicted on immigrants who are otherwise qualified for legal status in the US and who are leading productive, law-abiding lives in America.

    I will not give any details that would identify the clients mentioned below other than to say that none of them are either Latinos or Muslims, the two groups that Donald Trump has singled out for his strongest and most frequent anti-immigrant attacks.

    To be continued in Part 2.
    _____________________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants obtain work visas and green cards.

    Roger's practice is concentrated in work visas through H-1B specialty occupation employment, O-1 extraordinary ability, J-1 training, and green cards through labor certification and opposite sex or same sex marriage. His email address is algaselex@gmail.com


    Updated 08-24-2016 at 08:20 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  5. Sign the Petition to Free Hunger Striking Mothers in Deportation Jail

    by , 08-24-2016 at 05:31 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)

    (Photo credit: Doug Kasputin for The Washington Post)

    A group of Central American mothers and children seeking asylum are being unlawfully and indefinitely detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement at a "family detention" center in Berks, Pennsylvania. Twenty-two of these brave women, who have been detained with their children as young as 2 years old for between 287 days to more than a year, began a hunger strike in an attempt to draw attention to their plight, and 17 of them are entering their third week of the strike (four have been released or promised release, and one has had to stop her hunger strike for health reasons).

    The "Madres Berks" started their hunger strike on August 8, 2016, after Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson officially stated that immigration authorities have been “ensuring the average length of stay at [family detention] facilities is 20 days or less.”

    ICE and the Berks county staff have mistreated these mothers and children seeking refuge over the course of their long imprisonment, including sleep deprivation (shining flashlights in their faces every 15 minutes all night long, every night), dragging mothers and children from their beds in the middle of the night for deportation, and much, much more.


    ICE has been retaliating against the hunger striking mothers, including: interference with the mothers access to legal counsel and medical attention for the children; cutting off the mothers' access to computer and internet, presumably to try to prevent anyone from knowing of their plight; threatening them with deportation; and threatening to take custody of their children away from them.


    What you can do to help:

    (1) Sign and share this petition! Use the hashtags #ShutDownBerks, #EndFamilyDetention and #MadresBerks
    (2) Donate! https://www.crowdrise.com/free-the-f...round-advocate Aldea - the People's Justice Center was established to address legal, medical and social issues surrounding the immigrant community of the greater Reading, Pennsylvania area. Their primary, most immediate project is focused on providing removal defense for every mother and child trapped in family detention in Berks County, Pennsylvania.
    (3) Take action!

    *Contact the President, your U.S. Senators and U.S. Congressional Representatives and ask them to #ShutDownBerks http://www.aila.org/takeaction#/;
    *E-mail Pennsylvania ICE Field Office Director Thomas Decker at thomas.decker@ice.dhs.gov and voice your support for the release of these families;
    *Call the Berks County Commissioners at (610) 478-6136 to demand that Berks county cease operating a prison for immigrant children and families seeking asylum for its own profit;
    *E-mail Ted Dallas (tdallas@pa.gov) from the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services tdallas@pa.gov, in charge of the WELFARE OF CHILDREN in the Commonwealth and ask why they are allowing the refugee prison to remain open even though the license has been revoked;
    *Support Make the Road Pennsylvania http://www.maketheroadpa.org which has been active in this fight; and last, but not least,
    *Send your message of support to the Madres Berks to let them know that they are not alone, and we are supporting them and fighting for their rights and their freedom! https://actionsprout.io/35D460

    The #MadresBerks THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!!! Together we can #ShutDownBerks!

    This petition will be delivered to:

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: