Author Archives: monica

Concerns over E-Verify

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 19, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

E-Verify: Still Too Costly for Workers

WASHINGTON —U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today released a new study about the workability of its voluntary E-Verify program, an Internet-based system that checks whether new employees are eligible to be employed in the U.S. The study, which was conducted by the Westat Corporation, shows that the program has improved since the last time it was studied, but that there continue to be significant reasons to be concerned about its reliability and effect on U.S. workers.

For example, the report shows that employers who fail to follow the program’s rules are a significant cause of workers receiving final notices from E-Verify that they are not authorized to work. The employers either do not inform workers of initial warnings that they may not be authorized to work, or of notices that they need to contact the Social Security Administration to clear up possible mistakes or discrepancies. Moreover, a lack of proper monitoring of employers’ compliance with the program’s rules leaves no incentive for them to follow the rules. When employers using E-Verify fail to follow the program’s rules, citizens and employment-authorized workers suffer.

“The shortcomings of the program, which relies on information stored in government databases, are significant. No one should lose a job because of a computer error,” said Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center.

“As the immigration reform debate moves forward with proposals to require all employers in the U.S. to use E-Verify, we will continue to press for a system that has due process protections so that workers can correct their records without losing wages, or worse, their jobs,” Hincapié added.

In testimony before Congress, NILC has shown how E-Verify would cause jobs losses for U.S. citizens and work-authorized immigrants if its use is made mandatory without the program also incorporating new, significant due process and worker protections. Although USCIS should be commended for improving the program’s accuracy, without commonsense immigration reform and strong due process and worker protections in place, mandatory E-Verify will remain problematic.

# # #

 

Share

Reducing Harm from Georgia’s Anti-Immigrant HB 87

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 19, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, National Immigration Law Center, 213- 400-7822, [email protected]
Isabel Alegria, ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, 415-343-0785 or 646-438-4146,[email protected]
Apreill Hartsfield, Southern Poverty Law Center, 334-782-6624, [email protected]

Coalition Pursues Open Records Requests with Law Enforcement Agencies in 28 Georgia Jurisdictions

Next Steps to Reduce Harm from What Remains of State’s Anti-Immigrant HB 87

ATLANTA — Following the federal district court’s order today in Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. Deal, et al., a coalition of civil rights groups announced the next steps in its effort to dismantle the state’s anti-immigrant law, HB 87. Significant parts of the law have been blocked by the courts, but one provision remains that allows police officers to ask the federal government to verify the immigration status of individuals who are lawfully detained on state-law grounds. It does not allow for stops, arrests, or even extending detention for immigration verification. Today’s order holds that challenges to that provision’s implementation must be brought in other suits, rather than through the original case that the coalition filed before HB 87’s effective date in 2011.

“The Supreme Court has made clear that if a law like this results in police detaining people to investigate their immigration status,” said Linton Joaquin of the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), “it would raise serious constitutional problems. We will continue to monitor to ensure that police implement this law in a constitutional manner.”

“This particular lawsuit has been dismissed, but our commitment to justice in Georgia is as strong as ever,” said Omar Jadwat, supervising attorney, ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “In this case, we permanently struck down HB 87’s central provision that would have made it a crime just to give an immigrant friend a ride to church or to work, and we put narrow limits on the remaining verification provision. Now we’re going to make sure what’s left of this mean-spirited law does not harm the people of Georgia,” Jadwat said. “By filing 28 open records requests in jurisdictions throughout the state, we mean to send a message to law enforcement agencies that we will closely monitor their implementation of the remains of HB 87, and we stand ready to bring additional targeted lawsuits as necessary. Racial profiling and discrimination based on a person’s looks or the language that they speak will not go unnoticed or unopposed in Georgia,” Jadwat said.

Georgia’s anti-immigrant law, HB 87, was inspired by Arizona’s SB 1070. In June 2011, a federal judge blocked much of the law; however, last March a federal appeals court let the immigration status–verification provision go into effect, while making clear that strict limits applied to its implementation.

“Today’s decision ends a chapter in the fight against Georgia’s anti-immigrant laws,” said Naomi Tsu, senior staff attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center. “Through this case, the brave community members who challenged HB 87 succeeded in ensuring that Georgians will not be criminalized for neighborly acts of kindness. Going forward, we will be watching law enforcement and will take action if we see immigration enforcement that violates civil rights.”

The records requests announced today target municipal and county law enforcement agencies in areas around Atlanta and Macon as well as Savannah, along Georgia’s eastern coast.

“There have been indications of rampant racial profiling in metro-Atlanta counties which participate in federal enforcement programs in particular as we documented in our reports onCobb and Gwinnett,” said Azadeh Shahshahani of the ACLU of Georgia. “We were concerned that the implementation of HB 87 would turn the entire state into racial profiling territory, which is what prompted us to file the public records requests.”

The civil rights coalition that filed the original lawsuit includes NILC, the ACLU, the ACLU of Georgia, the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Asian Law Caucus, Federal & Hassan, LLP, Kuck Immigration Partners, LLC, and G. Brian Spears.

For more information about Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. Deal, et al. visitwww.nilc.org/hb87.html.

# # #

 

Share

NILC Against Border Militarization

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 18, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

NILC Stands With Border Communities Against Border Militarization

WASHINGTON, D.C. —This week, human rights groups from across the nation have come together to show Congress the harm that would come from the proposed militarization of the U.S.’s southern border. The National Immigration Law Center (NILC) urges Congress to listen to the concerns of the millions of people who live, work, and attend school along the border, and who would likely face infringements of their civil rights if this proposal were to become law. Here is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, NILC’s executive director

“The proposed $46 billion border ‘surge’ is overkill. This colossal waste of money will damage border communities and their economies while lining the pockets of defense contractors. It is not good policy but rather bad, shameful politics. The proposal was offered to placate those who oppose a commonsense immigration reform that includes a path to legal status and citizenship for those currently without documents.

“Families living along the southwestern border already must endure helicopters overhead, drones, and interference from tens of thousands of Border Patrol agents on a daily basis, and they have strongly objected to proposals to throw an additional $46 billion toward further militarization of their homes, neighborhoods, and communities.

“We need smart and fiscally responsible immigration policy that keeps families together and makes our borders safe from drug cartels and human traffickers without violating the human rights and civil liberties of all people.

“Congress should enact policy that makes common sense, not a policy that turns our southern border into a war zone.”

# # #

 

Share

NILC Applauds Confirmation of Perez as Labor Secretary

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 18, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

NILC Applauds Senate Confirmation of Thomas E. Perez as Labor Secretary

WASHINGTON, D.C. —Thomas E. Perez, a strong defender of working families and the civil and voting rights of all Americans, is President Obama’s next secretary of labor following a 54-46 confirmation vote by the Senate. Perez, who previously served as assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice and as labor secretary for the state of Maryland, assumes the Cabinet position with strong credentials as a guardian of workers. Following the Senate vote, National Immigration Law Center Executive Director Marielena Hincapié issued the following statement“Tom Perez is the right person for the job at the right time. As our nation’s economy and society are expanded and enhanced by our growing diversity, Perez — the first-ever Dominican American to assume a Cabinet-level position — brings his rich cultural and professional background to an important post that affects workers and employers every day.

“Earlier in his career, as Maryland’s labor secretary, Perez proved to be a problem-solver by working with business and labor leaders to ensure workers were paid fair wages. Then, as assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department, he helped form the Fair Lending Unit, which took on predatory lenders who had taken advantage of lower-income and minority mortgage applicants.

“During Perez’s tenure at the Department of Justice, we worked closely with him to fight back against draconian racial profiling laws in Arizona, Alabama, and elsewhere. His commitment to upholding the civil  rights of all people — regardless of where they were born — is unwavering. We know this commitment will follow him to the Department of Labor.

“Immigration reform must be just and fair, and Perez’s outstanding record suggests that is how he will perform as labor secretary.

“Congratulations, Secretary Perez.”

# # #

 

Share

Napolitano to Lead University of California System

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 12, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

Napolitano Heads to the Golden State, Will Lead University of California System

WASHINGTON, D.C. —Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano today announced that she has been nominated to succeed Mark Yudoff as the first woman president of the University of California system. The nomination, which must be confirmed by the University of California regents, would take the secretary to California this August. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the Los Angeles-based National Immigration Law Center:

“Secretary Napolitano undoubtedly will bring a wealth of experience to one of the world’s most prestigious public systems of higher education. She will take the helm of a university system that, through its in-state tuition and tuition assistance polices, has led the way in making it possible for Californians, regardless of where they were born or how much money they have, to fulfill their educational dreams.

“Secretary Napolitano’s departure also provides the Obama administration with a welcome opportunity to move away from the administration’s current practice of deporting members of immigrant families at a record-breaking pace. Under this administration, too many children fear not seeing their parents when they come home from school and far too many have been placed in foster care because their parents have been deported. We hope the new head of the Department of Homeland Security restores some much needed discretion and accountability to a deportation machine that has already wreaked havoc on immigrant families and communities across the country.

“The U.C. system has always rightly recognized that California is at its best when all residents of the Golden State have the tools and opportunities they need to reach their full human potential. We are confident that Secretary Napolitano will follow in President Yudoff’s footsteps and lend a strong voice of support for an immigration system that allows all California’s residents to get on a road to citizenship.”

# # #

 

Share

Immigration Bill Passes Senate

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 27, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

Immigration Reform Clears Major Hurdle
Will It Reach the Finish Line?

WASHINGTON —  In a historic vote presided over by Vice President Biden, the Senate today voted 68-32 to pass S. 744, the bipartisan immigration reform bill. The measure underwent a vigorous markup and amendment process. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

“After more than two decades of prodding and education on the issue, the Senate finally has recognized that our immigration system is broken and has voted to create a road to citizenship for millions, including members of our families and other integral members of our society. Latinos, Asian Americans, immigrants, and friends of immigrants across the country marched in the streets and to voting booths to demand that we be recognized for who we are: a vital component of the fabric of this country.

“Over the last week, this bill — an already bipartisan framework for our immigration system — took an expensive and unnecessary turn to the right. Our strong fiscal, moral, and societal reservations have already been made clear. Of deeper concern is that the House of Representatives has dismissed this overly harsh bill as not ‘strong’ enough.

“Make no mistake: Proposals from the House to spread the spirit and provisions of S.B. 1070, Arizona’s noxious racial profiling law, across the country or to implement the error-ridden E-Verify program without putting due process protections in place for workers will be rejected by advocates and voters.

“We will fight hard to keep the Senate’s direct road to citizenship for DREAMers, to protect due process rights for the most vulnerable members of our immigrant communities, and to ensure that workers who exercise their labor rights are not deported for their actions.”

“We will continue to advocate for policies that ensure that all families, regardless of income level, have the tools they need to contribute fully to our society. If necessary, we will consider opposing legislation that prevents these families from reaching the first rung on the ladder of opportunity. In the rush to score a political win on immigration reform, we must not create policies and exclusions that push working families deeper into poverty. For too many of our working families, the stakes are simply too high.”

NILC’s analysis of S. 744 is available at www.nilc.org/irsenate2013.html#analysis.

# # #:

 

Share

Tucson Police Chief on Immigration Enforcement

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 26, 2013

CONTACT
Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

TUCSON POLICE CHIEF VILLASEÑOR
Congress Should Drop Unfunded Mandates on Law Enforcement

WASHINGTON — Changes proposed to S. 744, the bipartisan Senate immigration reform bill, as well as the SAFE Act, an anti-immigrant bill that could head to the House floor in the coming weeks, would compel law enforcement officers to engage in immigration enforcement activities or risk losing funding. Below is a statement from Roberto Villaseñor, police chief of Tucson, Arizona:

“Legislation that would take laws like SB 1070 and make them law in communities across the nation are not just misguided, they could make all our communities less safe by requiring local law enforcement to assume a responsibility they are not able to meet, and that is inconsistent with their primary mission.

“We remain concerned that Arizona’s SB 1070 threatens law enforcement officers’ delicate ties with Latino and immigrant communities because members of these communities may be afraid to come forward as victims of, or witnesses to, crime.  That’s why reports that legislators in the Senate and the House of Representatives are considering legislation that would expand upon SB 1070’s mandates, essentially turning police officers into immigration agents, are so disturbing.

“The House’s SAFE Act and amendments being considered in the Senate would blur the line between local policing and immigration enforcement, making our job as law enforcement officers more difficult and detracting from public safety as a result.  Law enforcement officers have taken an oath to protect all those who live within our communities, regardless of race, culture, or nation of birth. We don’t need shortsighted laws that tie our hands and prevent us from establishing the trust we need to protect the communities we serve.

“Congress has an historic opportunity to address a broken immigration system by bringing about reasonable immigration reform. They should not squander this opportunity by adding unfunded immigrant detention and deportation mandates to a local law enforcement officer’s already-full plate.”

# # #

     

    Share

    Austin Police Chief on Immigration Enforcement

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    June 25, 2013

    CONTACT
    Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

    AUSTIN POLICE CHIEF
    Congress Should Consider Good Policy, Not Politics, When Dealing with Immigration

    WASHINGTON — Changes proposed to S. 744, the bipartisan Senate immigration reform bill, as well as the SAFE Act, an anti-immigrant bill that could be considered by the House of Representatives in the coming weeks, would compel law enforcement officers to engage in immigration enforcement activities or risk losing funding. Proposed amendments to the Senate bill also would require that civil immigration status information be entered into the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database. Below is a statement from Art Acevedo, police chief of Austin,Texas, and member of the board of directors of the Major Cities Chiefs:

    “Immigration is a federal policy and it demands a national solution. When local police are required to aid in the detection and detention of immigrants who but for their immigration status are otherwise law abiding and productive members of society, we lose the trust and cooperation of the immigrant community, which we rely upon for effective policing. Police departments throughout the United States have worked hard to build community partnerships because that is how we prevent crime and apprehend criminals. We have taken a solemn oath to protect everyone in our community, and that means everyone. Senators who propose that we should engage in immigration enforcement do not realize how this would undermine everything we do to build trust and prevent crime, not to mention the cost of what would amount to an unfunded mandate.

    “My colleagues and I urge Congress to reject proposals that would turn police officers into immigration agents. These proposed tactics are being billed as law enforcement measures, but what they will actually do is create fear instead of trust. Victims and witnesses do not come to the police for help and protection when they fear it will result in deportation. The public we serve should expect protection from their police — not deportation.

    “Immigration enforcement must remain solely a federal responsibility because immigrants will never help their local police to fight crime once they fear we have become immigration officers. For these reasons, I and my colleagues on the Major Cities Chiefs Association oppose the so-called SAFE Act now pending in the House of Representatives as well as similar provisions proposed in the Senate. These measures would force local cops to investigate and detain persons based upon their immigration status and impose many burdensome new requirements that are inappropriate. It’s no surprise that this legislation is opposed by every major city police agency in the nation. I stand with all those cities when I say that the SAFE Act is misguided and would be destructive. This represents a huge step backward at a time when we must move forward together as one community.”

    # # #

     

    Share

    Corker-Hoeven Amendment Blows $46 Billion

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    June 24, 2013

    CONTACT
    Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

    Corker-Hoeven Amendment
    A High Price to Pay

    WASHINGTON — The Senate today agreed to move forward with the bipartisan immigration bill, S. 744, by accepting language that would add 20,000 Border Patrol agents and dedicate billions of dollars to bring surveillance and detection technologies to the southern border. The amendment also strips immigrants of a decade’s worth of their past Social Security earnings. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

    “Today’s vote wasn’t about policy — it was about politics. The Corker-Hoeven amendment will blow an additional $46 billion hole in our federal budget, an expenditure that is as wasteful as it is unconscionable in our current economy.

    “The price of this amendment extends beyond our pocketbooks: millions of U.S. residents along the U.S.-Mexico border will witness an unprecedented militarization of their neighborhoods, even though these communities are among the safest in the nation.

    “For aspiring citizens, this amendment inflicts more undue punishment by denying them the Social Security benefits they earned before these workers got on the road to citizenship. Instead of allowing these immigrants to get on the first rung of the ladder of opportunity, this provision could instead keep many immigrants on the brink of poverty.

    “Today’s vote brings us one step closer toward allowing millions of mothers, fathers, and children to realize their dream of becoming Americans on paper, as well as in their hearts. Aspiring and current citizens alike deserve a better bill, one that recognizes that our country is strongest when we move forward together. We call upon Senate leaders on both sides of the aisle to rise above petty politics and create the kind of immigration policy this country deserves.”

    NILC’s analysis of S. 744, as amended, is available here.

    # # #

     

    Share

    Corker-Hoeven Amendment and Senate Bill

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    June 21, 2013

    CONTACT
    Adela de la Torre, 213-400-7822, [email protected]

    Filing of Corker-Hoeven Amendment to Senate Immigration Reform Bill

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Senators Corker and Hoeven filed an amendment that would alter several aspects of the immigration reform bill currently on the Senate floor. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié of the National Immigration Law Center:

    “The Senate has received an excessive and expensive proposal to militarize the border in exchange for demands from the Latino and immigrants’ rights communities to create a road to citizenship for 11 million immigrants now in the country without documents.

    “The amendment is so expensive, in fact, that Senator Leahy said the border militarization provision ‘reads like a Christmas wish list for Halliburton.’ This sort of expenditure translates not just to wasted taxpayer money, but to a rollback on the American values for due process and equal treatment for millions of Americans living along our border.

    “We are deeply concerned that in their zeal to score a major political win, senators allowed the fundamental freedoms of border communities and aspiring citizens to be trampled.

    “We will analyze the legislation and its impact on low-income immigrant families, but one thing is immediately clear: border and immigrant communities cannot — and should not — tolerate additional efforts to strip immigrants of their basic rights. Latino, Asian-American, and immigrant voters have said time and again that they want a true and direct road to citizenship. We shouldn’t have to sacrifice American good governance, fiscal responsibility, and basic rights in the process.”

    # # #

     

    Share