Ala. GOP leaders have 2nd thoughts on immigration

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — Alabama Republicans who pushed through the nation's toughest law against illegal immigrants are having second thoughts amid a backlash from big business, fueled by the embarrassing traffic stops of two foreign employees tied to the state's prized Honda and Mercedes plants.

The Republican attorney general is calling for some of the strictest parts of it to be repealed.

Some Republican lawmakers say they now want to make changes in the law that was pushed quickly through the legislature.

Gov. Robert Bentley, who signed the law, said he's contacting foreign executives to tell them they and their companies are still welcome in Alabama.

"We are not anti-foreign companies. We are very pro-foreign companies," he said.

Luther Strange, the attorney general who's defending the law in court, this week recommended repealing sections that make it a crime for an illegal immigrant to fail to carry registration documents and that require public schools to collect information on the immigration status of students. Both sections have been put on hold temporarily by a federal court.

Two foreign workers for Honda and Mercedes were recently stopped by police for failing to carry proof of legal residency. The cases were quickly dropped, but not without lots of international attention that Alabama officials didn't want.

One of the groups challenging the law in court said the auto workers' cases turned public opinion.

"Suddenly the reality of what the state has done hit people in the face," said Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Before 2011, Republicans tried repeatedly to pass an immigration law but were always stopped by the dominant Democrats. That changed when Alabama voters elected a Republican legislative super majority — the first since Reconstruction. The result was a law described by critics and supporters as the toughest and most comprehensive in the nation.

It requires a check of legal residency when conducting everyday transactions such as buying a car license, enrolling a child in school, getting a job or renewing a business license. After the U.S. Justice Department and other groups challenged the law, the federal courts put some portions on hold, but major provisions took effect in late September.

Alabama suddenly found itself at the center of the nation's immigration debate, ahead of other states with tough laws, including Arizona, Georgia and South Carolina.

Within Alabama, much of the debate is within the business community that helped fund Republicans' new strength.

The Birmingham Business Alliance this week called for revisions in the law, expressing worry that it's tainting Alabama's image around the world. The group also said complying with the law is a burden for businesses and local governments, but did not offer specific changes.

James T. McManus, chairman of the Alliance and CEO of one of the state's largest businesses, the Energen Corp., said revisions "are needed to ensure that momentum remains strong in our competitive economic development efforts."

In Thomasville, a town of 4,700 about 80 miles southwest of Montgomery, Mayor Sheldon Day worries about recruiting industries.

He said about 25 foreign companies have visited the town to consider possible plant sites since Thomasville recruited a Canadian steel company in July 2010.

"Up until a few months ago, nobody raised the immigration issue," he said. But in the last few months, it's been brought up regularly. Day suspects competing states are portraying Alabama as hostile to foreigners even though he says that is not the truth. Based on the questions he gets from industrial prospects, he also believes competing states are recounting stories from Alabama's civil rights past.

"It's bringing back old images from 40 or 50 year ago," he said.

The governor says he's declined many national TV interviews about the law because he doesn't want to fuel comparisons with what he sees as Alabama's long gone past. "It's going to take us a long time to outlive those stereotypes that are out there among people that Alabama is living in the '50s and '60s," Bentley said.

The Republican sponsors of the immigration legislation promoted it as a jobs bill that would run off illegal immigrants and open up employment for legal residents. That was an easy political sale in a state suffering from nearly 10 percent unemployment. Even some Democrats voted for the law.

Since the law took effect, Alabama's unemployment rate has dropped a half percentage point. Economists and state officials who compile the statistics say it's too early to say whether to credit the immigration law.

But one of the sponsors, Republican Sen. Scott Beason of Gardendale, said neighboring states without a similar law haven't seen the same drop. "There is nothing else to attribute it to," he said.

If there has been any damage, he said it's the fault of inaccurate portrayals in the news media. He said the media ought to be reporting: "This law establishes a safer, more secure environment for people to come here and invest their money."

Republican House Speaker Mike Hubbard of Auburn said no industrial recruiters have complained to him about the law, and he will only support "tweaks" that make it more effective without weakening it.

Some Democratic Party leaders have called for repeal, but the party is now so weak in Alabama that the real debate is among Republicans.

The governor says the law is "very complicated" and needs to be simplified. He hasn't recommended any specifics, but he says Alabama won't abandon its goal of ensuring that only legal residents get jobs.

Strange, the attorney general, says his recommended changes "don't weaken the law, they just make it easier to defend."

Beason, however, said Strange's proposals would weaken the law by repealing two sections that allow private citizens to sue state and local officials to enforce it. Beason said that's needed because some officials are already saying they won't follow the law.

Other Republicans say the law is causing unnecessary problems for legal residents. Senate Republican Whip Gerald Dial of Lineville said legislators hear complaints from people about digging out documents to prove their legal residency when renewing professional licenses and buying car tags.

"I made some mistakes in voting for this bill, and I want to step up and fix them," he said.

Read more »

Alabama GOP Rethinks Immigration Law

Phillip Rawls of the Associated Press is reporting that Alabama Republicans, who pushed through the nation's toughest law against illegal immigrants, are having second thoughts amid a backlash from big business. The backlash is being fueled by the embarrassing traffic stops of two foreign employees tied to the state's prized Honda and Mercedes plants.

Luther Strange, the Republican attorney general, is calling for some of the strictest parts of the law to be repealed, namely the sections that make it a crime for an illegal immigrant to fail to carry registration documents and that require public schools to collect information on the immigration status of students. Both sections have been put on hold temporarily by a federal court.

Rawls writes:

Gov. Robert Bentley, who signed the law, said he's contacting foreign executives to tell them they and their companies are still welcome in Alabama.

"We are not anti-foreign companies. We are very pro-foreign companies," he said.

Is that funk band Cameo we hear playing in the background? Strange, pun intended, and Bentley are talking out of the sides of their necks. Let's revisit this quagmire: When hardworking American citizens argue against the strict law, the Alabama GOP moves forward with enacting it. When foreign companies with foreign interests argue against the controversial law, the Alabama GOP rethinks the law and decides to repeal some of the more heinous parts of it.

We're not rocket scientists, but that logic doesn't quite add up. What does add up? The Alabama GOP disposing of laws that they claimed were necessary in order to continue doing business with foreigners, who they don't really want in this country unless there is money to be had. On another note, just where were these foreign executives when the GOP was pushing this xenophobic law through at lightning speed?

Read more »

Gingrich defends state's immigration law, Perry seeks momentum during Upstate visits

Newt Gingrich brought his rapidly ascending campaign to Greenville on Thursday, declaring that as president he would end the government’s legal action against South Carolina’s immigration law.

Rick Perry also brought his hopes to town, declaring his campaign still was on the march.

The 2012 Iowa caucuses are less than four weeks away — South Carolina’s primary is six weeks out — and the two Republicans reached out to local voters, one in the unaccustomed role as frontrunner and the other looking for a comeback.

Gingrich told a gathering of business and community leaders that on the day he’s inaugurated, he will sign an executive order dropping lawsuits against South Carolina, Alabama and Arizona “because I think the federal government should be stopping illegal immigration, not stopping the states from enforcing the laws.”

Gingrich also said U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from Seneca, will introduce a measure, possibly as a constitutional amendment, to address “birth tourism,” referring to people who come to the U.S. on a tourist visa to have children, who then can be considered Americans.

“That’s clearly not what the 14th Amendment (to the U.S. Constitution) implied, and I think it’s inaccurate to interpret that way,” Gingrich said, referring to the provision that persons born or naturalized in the United States are U.S. citizens.

A spokesman confirmed Graham is examining two approaches, including a constitutional amendment. The other would seek a new Supreme Court interpretation of a century-old case.

“We’re still working on the i’s and t’s of it, but we are going to be introducing something,” said Kevin Bishop, Graham’s spokesman.

Last year, in an interview on Fox News, Graham said he might introduce an amendment to address birthright citizenship. It brought a barrage of criticism from supporters and detractors alike who interpreted it as a reversal of his stated positions on immigration reform.

South Carolina’s immigration law, which takes effect Jan. 1 and borrowed some portions from Arizona’s measure, would require that law enforcement officers, upon “reasonable suspicion” that a person might be in the country illegally, check his or her immigration status.
However, officers couldn’t stop or arrest a person merely on that suspicion.

The U.S. Justice Department sued the state in federal court in Charleston, contending certain provisions of South Carolina’s immigration law are unconstitutional and interfere with the federal government’s authority to set and enforce immigration policy.

Federal officials argue that the Constitution and the federal immigration laws “do not permit the development of a patchwork of disparate state and local immigration policies throughout the country.”

The American Civil Liberties Union and a coalition of civil rights groups also have filed a federal lawsuit against South Carolina’s law, charging that it is unconstitutional, that it invites racial profiling and that it interferes with federal law.

At the Global Trade Park in Greenville, Gingrich said his immigration policy centers on controlling the U.S. border, creating a new visa program, establishing “earned legality” for the millions of people who are in the U.S. outside the law and quick deportation of criminals and gang members.

He also would ensure that every new citizen and every young American learn American history, Gingrich said.

“I have a very aggressive position on immigration,” he said. “I think that we should have absolute control of the border by Jan. 1, 2014, and I’m prepared to put in the resources and I’m prepared to change the law to enable us to get the whole thing completed.”

Perry has defended a law he signed allowing children of illegal immigrants in Texas to pay in-state tuition rates for state colleges. As a border-state governor, he also opposes a border fence to block illegal immigration.

Until now, Perry had stressed his state’s record in job creation. His pivot to social issues — including a sharp critique on gay rights — shows he is looking to his party’s most conservative base to find new momentum.

“There’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military but our kids can’t openly celebrate Christmas or pray in school,” Perry says in his new TV ad.
Gingrich, long consigned to the fringes of South Carolina conservatives’ hunt for a change agent, is riding a wave of support that includes tea party factions six weeks before South Carolina’s primary that Gingrich says he must win.

A new Winthrop University poll pegged Gingrich’s support at 38 percent among likely voters, well ahead of Mitt Romney’s 21 percent and 9 percent for Perry.

Campaigning in Greenville, Perry greeted diners at an Orchard Park restaurant to press forward with his campaign.

He said he isn’t going down without a fight.

With a huge new television ad campaign targeting social conservatives, the presidential hopeful signaled Wednesday he intends to try to resuscitate his faltering candidacy in Iowa, which holds kickoff caucuses in less than four weeks. It’s a tall order for Perry, who entered the race to great fanfare in August only to see his popularity plummet throughout the fall.

“We’re sitting in a good place at this particular point in time,” Perry told CNN. “Obviously, we’re going to be in South Carolina a good bit over the course of the next two weeks. But Iowa is the real focus.”

Illustrating that, Perry’s campaign has launched a $1.2 million ad buy in the caucus state leading up to the Jan. 3 contest. The campaign plans to spend more than $650,000 this week alone on a commercial showcasing his Christian faith.

Gingrich’s popularity is flourishing, despite political baggage and questions about his conservatism, in part because of how he talks in packed venues across the state, say some conservative activists and political experts.

“Our country’s in real trouble and we need change,” said John Symons, former executive vice president of the Mauldin-based Bi-Lo grocery chain and now a local businessman.

“We need a very intelligent leader. We need an experienced leader. We need someone who can change the direction of the United States of America. I think we have that candidate in Newt Gingrich.”

Greenville Mayor Knox White welcomed Gingrich at the trade park but stopped short of a direct endorsement, telling the crowd, “Like you, I’m here to hear him and to assess what he has to say.”

White called the former U.S. House speaker “one of the transformative leaders of the latter part of the 20th century and the 21st century now.”

Gingrich’s leadership on hallmark legislation reforming welfare and to balance the federal budget proves he’s “not afraid of big ideas and doing big things,” White said.

“It’s big ideas that have transformed Greenville and made it is what it is today,” White said.

In August, Perry campaigned with White at his side along Main Street.

For 55 minutes Thursday, in a speech and question-and-answer period, Gingrich extolled the virtues of shrinking the government and bolstering the economy.

Not everyone seemed convinced of his approach.

Vivian Wong, the trade park’s founder, accompanied Gingrich and told GreenvilleOnline.com that she hoped “to give everybody a chance to hear him.”

Asked if she was endorsing Gingrich or supporting his candidacy, Wong said, “I will let you know later.”

Read more »

Kenney’s Anti-Immigrant Mean Streak Continues As He Targets 6500 Immigrants For Citizenship Fraud

Saturday, December 10th, 2011

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney’s anti-immigrant mean streak isn’t just directed at immigrants who became citizens but his department has also been working on cases of those who are not yet citizens. Kenney claims nearly 4,400 people with permanent resident status who are known to be implicated in residence fraud have been flagged for additional scrutiny should they attempt to enter Canada or obtain citizenship. There is nothing wrong with cracking down on immigration and citizenship fraud but the Conservatives as usual go gung-ho in targeting immigrants and this comes across as actions of a government bent on attacking and vilifying immigrants. This seems like overzealousness given that since 1867, Canada has only revoked the citizenship status of 66 people but under the Stephen Harper Conservatives thousands of immigrants are on the chopping block.

By R. Paul Dhillon

SURREY — Immigration Minister Jason Kenney’s anti-immigrant mean streak continues as he targets an additonal 6500 people for citizenship after already stripping 1800 of citizenship earlier.

On Friday, Kenney announced that the Conservative government is now investigating 6,500 people from more than 100 countries for fraudulently attempting to gain citizenship or maintain permanent resident status.

“Canadian citizenship is not for sale,” the always boastful Kenney boasted. “Canadians are generous people, but have no tolerance or patience for people who don’t play by the rules and who lie or cheat to become a Canadian citizen. The Government will apply the full strength of Canadian law to those who have obtained citizenship fraudulently.”

In July, Kenney announced that Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) was beginning the process to revoke the citizenship of up to 1,800 citizens who he claimed obtained it fraudulently; that number has now risen to more than 2,100.

Kenney’s mean streak isn’t just directed at immigrants who became citizens but his department has also been working on cases of those who are not yet citizens. Nearly 4,400 people with permanent resident status who are known to be implicated in residence fraud have been flagged for additional scrutiny should they attempt to enter Canada or obtain citizenship. The majority of these individuals are outside the country.

There is nothing wrong with cracking down on immigration and citizenship fraud but the Conservatives as usual go gung-ho in targeting immigrants and this comes across as actions of a government bent on attacking and vilifying immigrants. This seems like overzealousness given that since 1867, Canada has only revoked the citizenship status of 66 people but under the Stephen Harper Conservatives thousands of immigrants are on the chopping block.

According to Kenney, in typical cases, permanent residents will use the services of an unscrupulous immigration consultant to establish evidence of residence in Canada while living abroad most, if not all, of the time. This fraud is perpetrated so that individuals can maintain their permanent residence status and later apply for citizenship. A family of five may pay upwards of $25,000 over four or more years to create the illusion of residence in Canada.

“My department is working closely with the Canada Border Services Agency, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and Canadian offices abroad to prevent people who are suspected of non-compliance with the permanent residence requirement from being admitted to Canada without proving they meet the requirements and take enforcement action when necessary,” Kenney added.

Critics say Kenney as usual being high handed in this witch hunt given that under the Conservatives immigration reforms it’s taking a long time for people to become citizens

Immigration lawyers say even a simple citizenship application can take a year to process and suggested the crackdown needed to be supplemented with pragmatism.

To date, of the 4,400 permanent residents who have been flagged, nearly 1,400 people have withdrawn or abandoned their citizenship application because of new scrutiny.

Permanent residents must acquire three years of residence out of four years to apply for Canadian citizenship. To retain their status as permanent residents, they must be physically present in Canada for two years out of five.

“I encourage anyone who has information regarding citizenship fraud to call our tip line to report it,” Kenney urged.

He’s asking Canadians to spy on their immigrant neighbours and report cases involving false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances in the citizenship process – for example, pretending to be present in Canada to meet the residence requirements for obtaining citizenship. They can report by calling the citizenship fraud tip line at CIC’s Call Centre at 1-888-242-2100 (in Canada only, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. local time, Monday through Friday). Tips may also be reported by e-mail at Citizenship-fraud-tips@cic.gc.ca. Those overseas can contact the nearest Canadian visa office.

All other fraud types related to immigration should be reported to the CBSA’s Border Watch Tip Line at 1 888-502-9060. Tips accepted by the Border Watch Tip Line include, but are not limited to, suspicious cross-border activity, marriages of convenience, misrepresentation in any temporary or permanent immigration application, or the whereabouts of any person wanted on an immigration warrant.

Kenney’s department has been cracking down on the actions of crooked consultants – consultants are calling it a witch hunt and so are many immigrants – during the immigration process. Bill C-35, originally introduced as the Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, came into force on June 30, 2011. The Act imposes penalties on unauthorized representatives who provide, or offer to provide, advice or representation for a fee at any stage of an immigration application or proceeding.

Read more »

Immigrant Activist Group Says “Jason Kenney Hates Your Grandparents”

Saturday, December 10th, 2011

The People v. Kenney Campaign sent out this notice where they criticize the always boastful immigration minister of telling lies that Canada is accepting a record number of immigrants.

Minister Jason Kenney is yet again falsely saying that Canada is accepting a record number of migrants. He made a recent announcement about increasing the number of parents and grandparents visas to 25,000 in 2012.

What Kenney failed to mention was that it was actually under the Conservative government that immigration quotas were drastically dropping in the first place. According to a Toronto Star report, family class immigration has dropped by 10,000 people – which is 15% – under the Conservatives. This past year Jason Kenney made the backlog crisis of over 165,000 people worse by slashing sponsorship visas by 25%, while collecting millions of dollars in profit in sponsorship fees.

As of November 2011, Ottawa has also completely stopped accepting applications for immigration sponsorships of parents and grandparents until 2014. Instead parents and grandparents can apply for the “Parent and Grandparent (of the Rich 1%) Super Visa” which requires a minimum income and sets the dangerous two-tier precedent of requiring family members to provide private Canadian health-care insurance. Kenney also announced that the quota for spouses and children will be reduced by 4,000 per year. Our lives and our family’s well-being is just a numbers game for him.

Kenney is known as the ‘Minister of Censorship and Deportation’ because he is one of the most unjust immigration ministers. Deportations have increased, the number of skilled worker visas has decreased by about 20%, and the quota allotted for live-in caregivers to become permanent residents has been slashed by half. Instead, Kenney has increased the number of temporary workers who have no rights of residency and are constantly exploited for their labour. By shutting the door to refugees, family sponsorships, and skilled workers, Canada is ensuring that migrants are being recruited primarily as indentured labour for big business.

Without any value for the dignity of migrants or community kinship, Kenney’s model is Permanent Temporariness: of migrant worker programs and now a temporary family reunification program. The reality is that Canada depends on the stolen labour of migrants – as dangerous and low-wage labour in the formal economy and unpaid labour in the domestic sphere. We cannot allow divisive, racist, and false ideas of migrants ‘stealing our jobs and resources’ to let the Harper government off the hook for prioritizing the slashing of critical public services, bailing out banks and subsidizing corporations, destroying Indigenous lands and the environment, and sinking billions into prisons and the military. Join with people across the country rejecting Kenney and Harper’s agenda!

Read more »

Gov. defends immigration law

MONTGOMERY, AL (WSFA) -

Governor Robert Bentley reiterated his support for the immigration law today.

In a brief public appearance outside the Alabama Capitol, Governor Bentley declared, "We are not repealing it."

Earlier in the day, the governor had released a statement with the Speaker of the House Mike Hubbard and President Pro-Tempore of the Senate Del Marsh saying the law will not be repealed but that they were open to changes that wouldn't weaken it.

However when the governor was pressed by a reporter about possible changes to the law, Governor Bentley said, "There were unintended consequences."

The governor did not say what specifically in the law had led to the unintended consequences but said the immigration law, as with any piece of legislation, from time to time requires additional examination and possibly even revision.

"You know you just need to go back and look at it and you just say you know, if things are not working the way that we want it to, we need to change it" Gov. Bentley said.

Governor Bentley was explicit and said Friday's statement wasn't related to proposed changes made by Attorney Luther Strange on Dec.1 in a memo to lawmakers.

Attorney General Strange had proposed changing and deleting language from the law as well as even repealing certain sections. In particular Strange recommended repealing the section that required local law enforcement to hold someone who is in the country illegally until federal authorities arrive. Strange argued in his memo that the provision didn't align with Alabama law.

He also recommended repealing the sections requiring public schools to check the citizenship status of newly enrolled students and the one requiring that everyone carry registration papers or documents that can prove citizenship.

Federal judges have blocked those two sections from going into effect.

Gov. Bentley said "Many of the things that he has talked about really overlap with some of the things that we had already discussed and we had been working on this really for months ever since we started to enforce this law."

The governor said he will consider the changes Strange has proposed. He also remarked that Strange has a stake in the immigration debate since he will be the one defending the law in court.
Posted: Dec 10, 2011 5:49 AM PST

Bentley said he understood that Strange made his suggestions in order to make the law more defensible in court.

The governor also used Friday's announcement as another opportunity to attempt to reassure international companies in Alabama, as well as those considering Alabama as a location, that the state is open for business.

"We want companies especially international companies to understand that things have not changed" Gov. Bentley said. "We're going to still continue to recruit industry from other countries and we want them to know that they are going to continue to be welcome."

The governor said he has not heard from any company that they have decided against locating in Alabama because of its immigration law.

Read more »

City of Gatineau publishes 'statement of values' for immigrants

By Arthur Weinreb
Dec 6, 2011

Gatineau - Although the Quebec city published the guide in October, a controversy is now brewing over some of what newcomers to Quebec are being told. To some, it is reminiscent of what happened in Herouxville in 2007.
The guide lists 16 points that newly arrived immigrants to Canada who settle in Gatineau should adhere to. By following these guidelines, the city hopes the newcomers will be better able to adapt to their new home. The statement of values is supported by Quebec's Ministry of Immigration and Cultural Communities on the basis it is necessary for recent immigrants to understand Quebec's core values.
Gatineau, located just across the river from Ottawa, is the fourth largest city in Quebec. According to its website, the population in 2006 was 242,124. As a percentage of the population, immigrants comprised 8.7% of the population in 2006, compared to just 5.6% in 1991.
Some of the points are far from controversial. Immigrants are told they must learn French even though they live in close proximity to Ontario. The newcomers are also told that men and women have equal rights in La Belle Province.
Some points are less neutral. New immigrants are informed that bribing public officials is unacceptable. They are also told that punctuality is important and they should arrive at appointments a few minutes early. And as Quebec is a secular province, newcomers are told it is better not to display their religion in public.
Other points in the document have really raised the ire of critics. One of the points that is controversial is contained in the point that outlines how violence against women and children is unacceptable in the province. Besides indicating that physical and sexual violence is wrong, newcomers are also warned not to "willfully starve" their children.
Recent immigrants are also warned about using certain spices that cause body odour and strong cooking smells emanating from their homes. These smells, they are told, can prevent them from adapting to their new home. Statements such as these have been described as "infantile" and "paternalistic' by critics.
Regarding advising immigrants to feed their children and not starve them, Daniel Weinstock, a professor of ethics at the Universite de Montreal, was quoted as saying,

Imagine a Quebecker going abroad and being told, 'By the way, you might not know this, but if your team loses a hockey game, it's not okay to burn peoples' cars.'

Comparisons are being made between Gatineau's statement of values and the code of conduct that was released by the Quebec village of Herouxville in 2007. Aimed primarily at Muslims, newcomers to the tiny village were told it was not acceptable to stone women in public, female circumcision was wrong, and that faces should not be covered in public, except on Halloween. Some of these statements were removed after complaints were received.
But the statement of values does have supporters in Quebec. Carmelo Marchese, who works with Quebec newcomers and is an immigrant himself, said that immigrants need to learn these values in order to adjust. If some paragraphs are seen as offensive it is because they are being taken out of context.

Read more »

It's Time to Protect Women and Children in Immigration Detention From Rape

Posted: 12/ 6/11 04:25 PM ET

"The doors were locked, there were no cars on the road, and there was nothing I could do. I just shut up. I was crying, and he talked to me as if I were nothing. I thought he was going to kill me."

These haunting words are how Kimberly, a domestic violence victim from South America, described how she was sexually assaulted by a security guard while in the custody of immigration officials at the Don T. Hutto detention facility in Texas. Ironically, she faced this violence on the day she had been released from the detention center, having won her petition to seek asylum in the U.S. based on fear of persecution in her home country.

On the car ride to the airport for her flight out of Texas, Kimberly was repeatedly groped and then mocked by the guard, her driver. For months afterwards she couldn't sleep and lay awake, afraid that the man would find her.

Despite Department of Homeland Security officials' statements that sexual abuse is not a serious issue in their facilities and that they have sufficient standards in place to protect detainees from abuse, data recently obtained by the ACLU makes it undeniably clear that Kimberly's case was not an isolated incident, and that the guard who abused her -- and several other women at Hutto -- is not a lone bad apple.

After filing a Freedom of Information Act request related to Kimberly's court case, the ACLU found that almost 200 incidents of sexual abuse of detained immigrants have been reported to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) since 2007. Alleged sexual abuse of immigration detainees has occurred at jails, ICE processing centers and private detention facilities across the country. Perpetrators have included local police and ICE employees, as well as contract guards and fellow detainees.

As the ACLU has emphasized, these reported cases are most likely just "the tip of the iceberg." Many immigrants are traumatized by what has happened to them, and are afraid to report abuse by the same authority that has the power to deport them. Others are deported before they get the chance to report the abuse. And other still, don't know who to go to or how to file a complaint when they have been raped in detention.

The Women's Refugee Commission has long advocated for government reform around this issue, and our visits to detention facilities over the years have confirmed that sexual abuse of immigration detainees is a problem U.S. officials desperately need to address. Victims have told me they had no idea how to report abuse and so it went unreported until they were transferred or released. Staff at some ICE detention facilities have told us that if penetration is not confirmed by a doctor, they do not consider the case sexual assault. ICE officials often tell us that they comply with federal prison standards; but when pressed on what this means in practice, they do not know.

In 2003, Congress unanimously passed the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), setting a zero tolerance policy for sexual assault in prisons and specifically citing the vulnerability of immigrant detainees. But recent action by the Department of Justice (DOJ) puts this policy at risk. A February 2011 DOJ document stated that, "Protection from sexual abuse should not depend on where an individual is incarcerated: It must be universal." But their definition of "universal" is in fact limited. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claims that the PREA standards do not apply to them. Draft regulations issued by the DOJ specifically exclude detained immigrants in DHS custody from the protection afforded to other prison inmates, including those convicted of violent crimes. By exempting immigration facilities from the same standards that are enforced at criminal facilities, the Justice Department is effectively saying that those serving criminal sentences should be protected from sexual assault, but immigrants held in civil custody don't have to be.

PREA should be extended to Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) facilities that house immigrant children as well. Unaccompanied minors who arrive in the U.S. after fleeing trafficking, domestic violence, conflict or poverty need special protection, as they are the most vulnerable group of all -- but they are also excluded from the current draft regulations. At the privately run Texas Shelter Care Facility in Nixon, Texas, a staff member was convicted of sexual assault after repeatedly abusing several children. The facility was eventually closed and the company's federal contract was terminated, but only after the abuse was ignored for over a year. My colleagues and I documented this incident and other cases of abuse of unaccompanied minors in our 2009 report, Halfway Home: Unnaccompanied Children in Immigration Custody. Yet, DHHS lacks a clear, universal policy specifically addressing sexual assault of unaccompanied children in immigration custody.

ICE has issued its own set of standards for the treatment of immigration detainees at its facilities, but these are not legally binding and lack many of the protections in the PREA standards. ICE's standards simply state that sexual abuse will not be tolerated, without making provisions for reporting and addressing abuse, ensuring coordination and oversight across detention facilities or mandating preventative requirements such as staff training and extensive background checks. Our research and monitoring, and the nearly 200 reported cases of abuse, make it clear that the ICE standards are ineffective. Without a way to implement and enforce these standards, the abuse is bound to continue.
The Women's Refugee Commission has long argued that the standards mandated by PREA were intended to apply to everyone who is in detention in the United States. These standards declare that the tolerance of rape and sexual abuse in prison settings is "incompatible with American values." It is time that we apply these values to our treatment of immigrants as well.

Take action now by telling President Obama and other U.S. officials to protect immigration detainees in U.S. custody from sexual abuse.

Read more »

Most undocumented immigrants have lived in U.S. over 10 years: study

Immigration dropping to levels not seen in decades

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Tuesday, December 6 2011, 8:03 AM
Almost two-thirds of the estimated 10.2 million adult undocumented immigrants in the U.S. have lived here for at least 10 years, according to a study released this week by the Pew Hispanic Center.

About half of them have children under 18 years old.

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich's proposal to regularize the status of some undocumented immigrants drew fire from rivals Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann, who said the plan would provide incentive for illegal immigration.

But the Pew study provides the latest evidence of an unprecedented drop in illegal immigration, particularly from Mexico, which seems to have more to do with changing economic conditions than government policy.

"The rising share of unauthorized immigrants who have been in the U.S. for a long duration reflects the fact that the sharpest growth in this population occurred during the late 1990s and early 2000s — and that the inflow has slowed down significantly in recent years, as the U.S. economy has sputtered and border enforcement has tightened," the study states.

Arrests at the U.S.-Mexico border — another key measure of illegal immigration flows — dropped this year to levels not seen since the 1970s, even as the number of Border Patrol officers there has doubled since 2004.

The Border Patrol arrested 327,577 people illegally crossing into the U.S. from Mexico in fiscal year 2011, a 25% drop from the previous year, The Washington Post reports.

"We have reached the point where the balance between Mexicans moving to the United States and those returning to Mexico is essentially zero," Jeffrey Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center told The Washington Post.

The New York Times reported in July that Mexican immigration to the U.S. has slowed due for a variety of reasons, including more economic opportunity for potential migrants at home, rising violence along the border and the prolonged U.S. economic slump.

Read more »

Illegal Immigration: Gaps Between and Within Parties

Public Split Over In-State Tuition for Illegal Immigrants

Overview

The public continues to support tough measures to crack down on illegal immigration, but also a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally. A plurality (43%) says the priority should be better border security and enforcement, as well as creating a way for illegal immigrants to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Fewer say the priority should only be better security and stronger enforcement of immigration laws (29%), or only creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the U.S. (24%). These opinions have not changed substantially over the past year.

Americans are evenly split over whether illegal immigrants who graduate from high school in their state should be eligible for in-state college tuition: 48% say they should be eligible for the in-state tuition rate, while 46% say they should not.

The national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Nov. 9-14 among 2,001 adults finds continuing partisan differences over immigration policy. More than twice as many Republicans as Democrats say the priority for dealing with illegal immigration should only be better border security and stricter law enforcement (47% vs. 22%).

Yet there also are divisions within both parties’ coalitions over the overall priority for U.S. immigration policy and whether illegal immigrants should be eligible for in-state tuition.

There is a substantial age gap over immigration policies in opinions among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. A majority (57%) of Republicans and GOP leaners 65 and older say border security and stricter enforcement alone should be the priority for immigration policy, while 24% favor a dual approach that would include a path to citizenship.

Among Republicans and GOP leaners younger than 30, 42% say the focus should be on tougher border security and enforcement along with a path to citizenship, while 30% say the priority should only be on better border security and stricter enforcement.

Republicans and Republican leaners who agree with the Tea Party are more likely than those who do not to say that better border security and stronger enforcement of immigration laws should be the priority (52% vs. 36%).

There also are differences among Democrats and independents who lean Democratic. About half of Hispanic Democrats and Democratic leaners (52%) say the priority should be to create a way for illegal immigrants already in the U.S. to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Only about a quarter of non-Hispanic whites (27%) and African Americans (24%) agree.

Liberal Democrats and Democratic leaners favor a path to citizenship over stronger enforcement by more than two-to-one (37% vs. 15%) while conservative Democrats are divided (30% prioritize security and enforcement, 28% path to citizenship).
Public Split Over In-State Tuition for Illegal Immigrants

Nearly half of the public (48%) thinks an illegal immigrant who went to high school in their state and is accepted to a public college should be eligible for the in-state tuition rate, while 46% disagree.

About three-quarters of Hispanics (77%) say illegal immigrants should be eligible for in-state tuition, compared with 66% of non-Hispanic blacks and just 40% of non-Hispanic whites .

Most Republicans (63%) say illegal immigrants should not be eligible for in-state college tuition. By contrast, 56% of Democrats say they should be eligible. About half of independents (51%) favor in-state tuition for illegal immigrants while 44% are opposed.

About six-in-ten of those younger than 30 (61%) favor allowing illegal immigrants to be eligible for in-state tuition, compared with 38% of those 65 and older. And while there are no significant educational differences in these views, 58% of those with family incomes of less than $30,000 support this proposal, compared with 45% of those in households earning at least $75,000 a year.
 
The internal divisions in both parties over immigration policy priorities are generally reflected in opinions about in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants.

Republicans and Republican leaners are divided by age and income. Two-thirds (68%) of Republicans 65 and older say illegal immigrants should not be eligible for in-state college tuition; just 24% say they should be eligible. Republicans under 30 are divided (48% say they should be eligible, 48% say they should not). Republicans with higher family incomes are more opposed to this proposal than are those with family incomes of less than $30,000.

Nearly three-quarters of Republicans who agree with the Tea Party (74%) say illegal immigrants should not be eligible for in-state tuition. Among Republicans who do not agree with the Tea Party movement, fewer (52%) oppose in-state tuition for illegal immigrants.

Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, fully 82% of Hispanics think an illegal immigrant should be eligible for in-state tuition. Smaller majorities of non-Hispanic blacks (65%) and whites (51%) agree. Two-thirds (66%) of Democrats younger than 30 favor in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, compared with 54% of those 50 and older.

Read more »