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

Recent Blogs Posts

  1. Trump Unleashes Twitter Tirade Against DACA and Mexico, as W. H. Photo Shows Most Interns are as White as Trump's Immigration Agenda. Roger Algase

    Update, April 2 at 3:22 pm:

    According to the latest story in The Guardian about Trump's Twitter Tirades against Dreamers and other Mexican/Central American immigrants, Trump is now claiming that, because of them,"our country is being stolen".

    The racial implications of this and other similar anti-immigrant epithets coming from the president are too obvious and frequent to be ignored by the media any longer. This latest statement is an obvious dog whistle to Trump's white nationalist base that America's "white identity" is being taken away by brown-skinned immigrants, both legal and illegal.

    Such is the foundation of White House immigration policy in the Donald Trump Era.

    Update, April 1 at 9:57 pm:

    For a more complete story about the details of the venom which Trump let loose against Dreamers and Mexican immigrants while on his way to worship on Easter Sunday see, The Guardian:

    Easter tirade: Trump attacks Nafta and says 'No more Daca deal'

    The following comment has been revised and updated as of April 1 at 2:53 pm:

    In his own unique version of the "Easter Spirit of goodwill", Donald Trump lashed out at DACA and Mexican immigrants in general on the morning of April 1 in a tirade of tweets, vowing that there would be no DACA deal and threatening to cancel NAFTA over Mexico's alleged failure to stop "caravans" of illegal immigrants from coming to the United States.

    According to multiple news reports, Trump has been accompanied on his trip to Mar-a-Lago by top immigration adviser, Stephen Miller, who has been widely accused of having white supremacist sympathies and associations. Trump also reportedly had his usual heavy dose of watching Fox News, which no one would claim to be a supporter of immigration from non-white parts of the world, before issuing his anti-Mexican twitter rants.

    One might ask what has happened to the Donald Trump who recently expressed "Love" for the Dreamers and who, according to some of his supporters, is really their "best friend". But this would be a useless question.

    Not entirely by coincidence, the White House has also released a photo of its latest interns, showing only 5 non-white interns out of a total of 91.

    Given Trump's abundant record of venomous attacks on immigrants of color from many parts of the world both as candidate and president; and, in addition to terminating TPS and DACA legal status for hundreds of thousands of non-white immigrants who are already in the US, his push to change the legal immigration system to eliminate family and diversity visas which have helped millions of legal immigrants from Latin America, Asia and Africa to come to the US over the past decades, this latest White House photo could well be looked at as a template for Trump's continuing whites-only agenda for legal immigration.

    For more about the deep roots in America's immigration history of Trump's efforts to skew the legal immigration system in order to Make America White Again, see, (January 18):

    The scary ideology behind Trump's immigration instincts

    Well worth reading and reflecting on in the light of Trump's latest Easter outburst against immigrants of color.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 04-02-2018 at 02:22 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. Attention, Visa Applicants: Big Brother Donald is Watching You on Social Media. He Also Wants to Defy Congress on Border Wall Spending. Roger Algase

    Update, March 31, 10:45 am:

    In yet another example of the apparent instinct toward dictatorship which has very arguably characterized the Trump presidency, and in which immigration policy has been a major factor (see the two latest examples below), Trump launched another attack against the Washington Post, which has been one of his strongest media critics on immigration, in an early morning Saturday, March 31 tweet.

    In the tweet, sent on his way to the golf course, Trump claimed that the Post should "register" as a "lobbyist" for Amazon, whose owner, Jeff Bezos, also owns that paper. Trump also accused Amazon of scamming the US Post Office to the tune of $2.6 billion by paying unreasonably law shipping rates.

    Threats to punish media which are critical of the regime, and attempts to hurt or destroy the businesses of regime opponents, are a common feature of banana republics and other dictatorships. They have no place in a free and democratic society.

    Trump's latest attacks on the Washington Post, hardly his first one on a free and independent press since launching his presidential campaign and taking office as president, have not yet reached the level of jailing and allegedly poisoning independent journalists, as is the case with Vladimir Putin, whose relationship with Trump and/or Trump's associates is still under investigation by Robert Mueller (someone else whom Trump would obviously like to remove as an obstacle to his ambitions as soon as possible).

    But Trump's relentless attacks and threats against opposing media and journalists who disagree with his policies on immigration, among other issues, are moving in the same direction as Putin's.

    My earlier comment follows:

    If you are a US visa applicant from anywhere in the world, not just a suspected terror-prone area, Big Brother Donald Trump may soon be watching your social media posts for the past five years, as well as your phone numbers, email addresses and travel history during the same period.

    The Guardian
    reports that under new proposed procedures which have just been published in the Federal Register, Trump's promised "extreme vetting" of visa applicants, with what the ACLU accurately calls its chilling effect on free speech and association, will, if adopted, apply to all visa applicants world wide, not just those from Muslim or other "suspect" countries, as announced by the State Department last May.

    If foreign citizens are subjected to this kind of ideological scrutiny, which, based on Trump's notorious intolerance for any kind of criticism or opposition, will inevitably target visa applicants who have ever made any negative comments concerning him or his policies, can it be very long before the same kind of surveillance and thought control is directed against American citizens as well - if, indeed, this is not happening already?

    Welcome, George Orwell, to the spirit of Donald Trump's America (but just don't bother to apply for permission to come here).

    And in another indication that a quaint but now outmoded doctrine which used to known as the Rule of Law in America has no place in Trump's White House, The Guardian also reports that the president is considering possible attempts to get around clear Congressional restrictions (in the just enacted spending bill) against using federal money to pay for his Mexican border wall by improperly using military funds for this purpose.

    Again, this is an issue which shows the danger that Trump's anti-immigrant agenda presents to America's democracy in general. We have a Constitution which says that Congress, not the president, makes the laws in this country.

    If the president can overturn these laws just on his own as part of his efforts to stop Mexican and other non-white immigrants from coming to the United States, then we may still "have a country", to borrow from Trump's favorite expression that we "won't have a country" if immigrants continue to come in from parts of the world, or with skin color or religions, that he doesn't like.

    But it will not be a country based on the principles of freedom and government by the people that America was founded on and has always stood for throughout its history up to now.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 03-31-2018 at 05:51 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. Deported Veteran Leader Hector Barajas is Coming Home

    by , 03-30-2018 at 08:03 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    Via The San Diego Union-Tribune:

    "Finally, after years of fighting for the rights of deported veterans to return to the U.S., Hector will be able to return home as an American citizen," said Jennie Pasquarella, director of immigrants' rights for the ACLU of California and one of Barajas's attorneys. "Hector, like a true soldier, has fought day in and day out since his deportation on behalf of deported veterans across the globe. He never gave up hope that he would one day return to his home and be reunited with his family."

    Click here for more.
  4. Trump Continues War on Immigrants With Reported Plans to Deny Residency Over Common Tax Benefits and Add Citizenship Question to Census. Roger Algase

    In its latest moves to divide America along racial lines and reduce the number of non-white immigrants, the Trump administration is reportedly considering two proposals which could which could transform the ethnic makeup of America for many years to come and bring the country closer to becoming an avowedly white supremacist society.

    The first action is in a reported proposal to make use of common public benefits, such as the earned income tax credit which many millions of Americans take advantage of without any problems, as grounds for denying permanent residence applications on "public charge" grounds, as initially reported in the Washington Post

    According to this report, one of the proposals being considered by the DHS could even deny immigrants a green card for having too many children!

    The second proposal, reportedly backed by Kris Kobach, the notorious author of anti-immigrant racial profiling "papers please" laws and minority voter suppression laws across the nation, is to include a question about citizenship in the 2020 census form.

    The first proposal could lead to a dramatic reduction in non-white legal immigration, as many hard-working and self-supporting but lower income immigrants from around the world, could find themselves headed, not for green card approval, but for denial and deportation over the issue of using tax deductions and receiving other public benefits which Americans commonly use without any negative consequences.

    America has a long history, going back at least to anti-Irish prejudice in the mid-19th century, of using laws against less well-off immigrants as means of excluding them.

    As City University of New York assistant professor and historian Hidetaka Hirota, author of the book Expelling the Poor, states in a recent interview:

    "Ethnic prejudice really facilitated the formation of state policies that targeted the destitute."

    With regard to the census question, the clear expectation is that many immigrants, both legal and undocumented, may refuse to participate in the census entirely. This could lead to the loss of electoral votes, Congressional seats and federal funding in "blue" states with large immigrant populations which, not coincidentally, voted against Trump in the 2016 election.

    Conversely, it would increase the political power of states with overwhelmingly white populations. Proponents of the citizenship question argue that the census has asked about citizenship in the past, but this has not been the case for a long time, and it has applied only in limited instances.

    Another argument, reportedly supported by Kris Kobach, America's leading expert in minority voter suppression, and recently the driving force behind a federal commission for that purpose which Trump himself had to disband recently as useless, is that asking this question would help enforce the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

    I will leave it to George Orwell to answer that contention. See also, (January 4):

    Of course, these two moves are only the latest in a long list of recent Trump administration attempts to reduce the number of non-white immigrants in the United States and make life harder and more dangerous for those who remain or still manage to obtain legal entry to this country. See: America's Voice, March 29:

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 03-29-2018 at 04:56 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  5. Bay Area Residents Stuck in Immigration Detention File Class Action Lawsuit Against Sessions

    by , 03-28-2018 at 11:39 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    March 27, 2018

    Amalia Wille, Van Der Hout, Brigagliano & Nightingale, LLP, 415-821-8808,
    Law Offices of Matthew H. Green, 520-882-8852,
    Alison Pennington, Centro Legal de la Raza, 510-679-1608,
    ACLU SoCal Communications & Media Advocacy, 213-977-5252,

    SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — Two Bay Area fathers who have been detained for over six months at the Contra Costa West County Detention Facility in Richmond, California sued the federal government today in a class action lawsuit challenging their unlawful and prolonged detention.

    Plaintiffs Esteban Aleman Gonzalez of Antioch and Jose Gutierrez Sanchez of San Lorenzo are represented by Van Der Hout, Brigagliano & Nightingale, LLP, Centro Legal de la Raza, the Law Offices of Matthew H. Green, and the ACLU Foundations of California.

    Aleman Gonzalez and Gutierrez Sanchez were arrested by Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in the Bay Area in the fall of 2017. They are seeking protection in the United States, and asylum officers with the Department of Homeland Security have determined that both men have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture if deported. Because of this determination, the federal government does not have the authority to deport them.

    Nevertheless, the government has kept them in detention and refused to provide bond hearings – proceedings where immigration judges determine whether they can be released back to their families and lives. Both Aleman Gonzalez and Gutierrez Sanchez have young U.S. citizen children and are the primary providers for their families.

    “Esteban and Jose are part of our Bay Area community, and their families, including their children, are suffering while they remain detained,” said Alison Pennington, Senior Staff Attorney at Centro Legal de la Raza. “They are simply asking for the opportunity to show a judge that they should not be detained while they pursue their case. What the government is doing to them and to so many others should shock the conscience.”

    “When immigration judges refuse to provide these bond hearings, they are grossly misinterpreting federal law,” said Amalia Wille, attorney at Van Der Hout, Brigagliano & Nightingale, LLP. “The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has already decided that individuals like Aleman Gonzalez and Gutierrez Sanchez are entitled to bond hearings. Immigration judges are not free to ignore clear binding precedent. Just like all of us, they must follow the law.”
    In February of 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in Jennings v. Rodriguez that federal laws do not authorize bond hearings for certain immigration detainees. The Court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to decide whether due process requires a bond hearing. Plaintiffs argue that this ruling, which dealt with a different group of immigrants detained under different laws, provides support for their case.

    “The Supreme Court’s recent decision strongly supports Esteban and Jose’s claims,” said Michael Kaufman, Sullivan & Cromwell Access to Justice Senior Staff Attorney with the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. “Jennings makes clear that the federal laws at issue here must be interpreted to require a hearing in cases of prolonged incarceration. This is a basic and fundamental due process protection.”

    Attorneys for the plaintiffs estimate the class size numbers in the hundreds. The class is comprised of people detained throughout the Ninth Circuit who have been or will be detained for six months pursuant to a particular immigration statute and denied a prolonged detention hearing before an immigration judge.

    “The federal government’s deportation machine is tearing families apart,” said Matthew H. Green, an immigration attorney representing the proposed class in today’s suit. “I see this every day. Time and time again, my clients are held in a cruel and unnecessary limbo while the government keeps them locked up and withholds their right to a hearing.”

    The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

    The complaint is here:
    This press release is online here:

    Updated 03-28-2018 at 02:04 PM by MKolken

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... 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: