Author Archives: monica

Smith EEVS Bill Hurts Jobs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Tuesday, June 14, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]

Bill Would Push Hundreds of Thousands of Americans Out of Work, Force Millions of Others to Stand in Government Lines to Fix Their Record

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) today introduced the Legal Workforce Act (H.R. 2164), legislation that would force every employer in the country to use a flawed Internet-based tool, patterned on E-Verify, to verify workers’ eligibility to be employed in the U.S. The legislation would prevent hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens and lawfully authorized workers from getting jobs and force millions more to either stand in government office lines to remedy their records or risk losing employment.

Though the program is designed to push undocumented immigrants out of the workforce, its most serious flaw is that it categorically fails to achieve its stated purpose: it does not detect 54 percent of unauthorized workers who are put through the system. Below is a statement by Tyler Moran, policy director of the National Immigration Law Center and a national expert on electronic employment verification systems:

“Lamar Smith has introduced legislation that would serve as an economic poison pill, threatening our already fragile economy. According to the most conservative estimates, Smith’s bill would push hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens and other lawfully authorized workers, many of them breadwinners for their families, out of their jobs and into unemployment lines. This isn’t the economic stimulus our country needs.

“Smith, whose real agenda is to place as many immigrants as possible into the deportation pipeline, is disguising this proposal as a means of stimulating the economy. His rhetoric ignores our country’s dependence on the eight million unauthorized workers currently here, many of whom do vital jobs that keep the country running. Furthermore, his bill would simply push these workers and their employers into the cash economy, resulting in billions of dollars of lost tax revenue.

“Instead of working with his colleagues across the aisle to rebuild our economy or fix our broken immigration system, Smith has chosen to force employers to use a fatally flawed system that he knows does not work and will only serve to advance his anti-immigrant agenda. It’s time for Smith to abandon his radical ideology and focus instead on restarting our sputtering economy.”

General summary of H.R. 2164. (PDF)

Detailed summary of H.R. 2164 (table format). (PDF)

Ley de Fuerza Laboral Legal. (PDF)

Statement of Tyler Moran, Policy Director, National Immigration Law Center, to the House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement, Hearing on H.R. 2164, the Legal Workforce Act, June 15, 2011. (PDF)

To watch and listen to the hearing, go to http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/hear_06152011.html. Click on the “Watch Video Webcast” icon under “Hearing Documentation.” Fast-forward to minute 28:40 (when hearing starts) or to minute 1:13:24 (when Ms. Moran begins her testimony).

# # #

Alabama Wins Race to the Bottom

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 9, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]

Alabama Wins Race to the Bottom

LOS ANGELES — Alabama Governor Bentley today signed into law what may be the harshest state-level, anti-immigrant measure to date. Inspired by Arizona’s notorious racial profiling law, SB 1070, the new Alabama law imposes a draconian immigration enforcement scheme that will subject immigrants and people of color to scrutiny in every aspect of their lives, including when renting homes, taking their children to school, and even entering into contracts. The law would hinder schools from fulfilling the vital task of educating our youth and require them instead to verify the immigration status of children in attendance, as well as their parents, and report the information to state authorities. The law also criminalizes basic, daily interactions between U.S. citizens and other lawfully present individuals and undocumented immigrants. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

“Today, Alabama effectively turned state workers, peace officers, and school teachers into de facto immigration agents. Immigrants and people of color will be subjected to additional, unconstitutional scrutiny when they take their children to school or interact with local law enforcement officers. Friends and family members of undocumented immigrants will face criminal charges simply for driving them to church or to the grocery store.

“By passing HB 86, Alabama’s legislators have deemed an entire class of people not worthy of the most fundamental rights, which were carefully prescribed to all people by our Founding Fathers. This law effectively makes immigrants the latest group of people to suffer a legalization of discriminatory behavior against them, and threatens to turn back the clock on our hard-won civil rights.

“Americans – regardless of the way they look or sound, or where they were born – deserve nothing less than to see this egregious affront to our basic liberties taken to court. We will join our colleagues from other civil rights organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Southern Poverty Law Center, to ensure that Alabama joins Arizona, Utah, Indiana, and Georgia in a legal battle over this unconstitutional law that flies in the face of American values and undermines our basic concept of freedom.

“We are confident that the federal court will strike down Alabama’s law as unconstitutional. We will continue to support the efforts of Alabamans and people across the country who are continuing the state’s rich organizing tradition to challenge this unjust law.”

See NILC’s latest map showing the status of Arizona-inspired legislation across the country.

# # #

NILC Asks Court to Block H.B. 87

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 8, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]
Elizabeth Beresford, ACLU national, (212) 519-7808 or 549-2666; [email protected]
Azadeh Shahshahani, ACLU of Georgia, (404) 574-0851; [email protected]
Marion Steinfels, Southern Poverty Law Center, (334) 956-8417; [email protected]
Sin Yen Ling, Asian Law Caucus, (415) 896-1701; [email protected]

NILC Asks Court to Block H.B. 87

ATLANTA — The National Immigration Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union and a coalition of civil rights organizations today asked a federal court to block implementation of Georgia’s draconian new anti-immigrant law. The law, inspired by Arizona’s S.B. 1070 and scheduled to go into effect July 1, authorizes police to demand “papers” demonstrating citizenship or immigration status during routine encounters, criminalizes Georgians who interact with undocumented individuals, and denies individuals without specific identification access to state facilities and services.

In a motion requesting a preliminary injunction, the groups charge that Georgia’s discriminatory law unlawfully interferes with federal power and authority over immigration matters, in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution; authorizes unreasonable seizures and arrests, in violation of the Fourth Amendment; restricts the constitutional right to travel freely throughout the United States; and violates the separation of powers principles in the Georgia Constitution. The motion asks the court to prevent the law from going into effect pending a final ruling on its constitutionality.

Although the vast majority of states have declined to follow Arizona’s lead by enacting laws such as S.B. 1070, three have done so: Utah, Indiana, and Georgia. An even more restrictive law was passed last week by the Alabama legislature. The main provisions of Arizona’s law have been blocked by the federal courts. After an ACLU and NILC lawsuit, a federal district court last month put Utah’s law on hold pending further review. Last month the ACLU and NILC also filed a legal challenge to Indiana’s law, which is scheduled to go into effect on July 1.

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

The following quotes can be attributed to members of the coalition, as listed below.

Linton Joaquin, general counsel of NILC
“Unless this law is blocked, countless Georgians — native-born and immigrant alike — will suffer grave constitutional rights violations, be subject to racial profiling or criminalized because of their interactions with their neighbors and family. These people should not be subject to these irreparable harms simply because an unconstitutional law is on the books.”

Omar Jadwat, staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project
“HB 87 undermines basic principles of fairness, equality and liberty by criminalizing basic acts of human decency and creating a ‘show me your papers’ policing system in the state of Georgia. We are confident that the court will recognize the clear danger the law poses to the civil rights and civil liberties of all Georgians and will prevent the law from taking effect.”

Debbie Seagraves, executive director of ACLU of Georgia
“It is imperative that our clients who are engaged in charitable work know that they can continue their work without facing fines or jail time. If this law goes into effect, they cannot be sure that they will not be punished for following their religious mandates.”

Sin Yen Ling, senior staff attorney with the Asian Law Caucus
“Asian and Latino communities in Georgia will be disproportionately impacted if HB 87 is permitted to go into effect on July 1st. The court must grant the injunction to prevent Georgia from engaging in racial profiling of immigrant communities.”

Mary Bauer, legal director of the Southern Poverty Law Center
“If allowed to take effect, this law will threaten the rights of citizens and noncitizens alike by encouraging racial profiling. It undermines our core American values of fairness and equality.”

The preliminary injunction motion was filed today in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of civil rights, labor, social justice and faith-based organizations, including Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, Service Employees International Union, the Southern Regional Joint Board of Workers United, Alterna, Coalition of Latino Leaders, Task Force for the Homeless, DreamActivist.org, Instituto de Mexico, Coalition for the People’s Agenda, and the Asian American Legal Advocacy Center; individually named plaintiffs who would be subject to harassment or arrest under the law; and a class of similarly situated people.

Attorneys on the case include Jadwat, Andre Segura, Cecillia D. Wang, and Kate Desormeau of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project; Elora Mukherjee of the ACLU Racial Justice Program; Joaquin, Karen C. Tumlin, Nora A. Preciado, Melissa S. Keaney, Tanya Broder, and Jonathan Blazer of the National Immigration Law Center; Bauer, Andrew H. Turner, Samuel Brooke, Naomi Tsu, Michelle R. Lapointe, and Daniel Werner of the Southern Poverty Law Center; Chara Fisher Jackson and Azadeh N. Shahshahani of the ACLU of Georgia; Ling of the Asian Law Caucus; R. Keegan Federal, Jr. of Federal & Hassan, LLP.; Charles H. Kuck and Danielle M. Conley of Kuck Immigration Partners, LLC; and G. Brian Spears.

See the Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (PDF)

See the Brief in Support of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (PDF)

# # #

NILC Files Lawsuit Challenging Georgia Law

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 2, 2011

Law Would Turn Georgia into Police State and Invite Racial Profiling, Groups Say

ATLANTA — The National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the American Civil Liberties Union, and a coalition of other civil rights groups filed a class action lawsuit today challenging Georgia’s discriminatory anti-immigrant law passed last month and inspired by Arizona’s notorious SB 1070.

The Georgia law authorizes police to demand “papers” demonstrating citizenship or immigration status during traffic stops, criminalizes Georgians who interact daily with undocumented individuals, and makes it unjustifiably difficult for individuals without specific identification documents to access state facilities and services. The lawsuit charges that the extreme law endangers public safety, invites the racial profiling of Latinos, Asians and others who appear foreign to an officer, and interferes with federal law.

Along with the ACLU and NILC, the coalition filing the lawsuit includes the ACLU of Georgia, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Asian Law Caucus.

“Georgia’s HB 87 is out of step with fundamental values and the rule of law,” said Karen Tumlin, managing attorney with NILC. “It gives Georgians a reason to fear that they may be stripped of their constitutional rights simply because of the way they look or sound. Laws that promote this kind of barebones discrimination are out of step with history and cannot be allowed to stand. We are confident that the court will agree that unconstitutional attempts to drive a wedge between Georgian communities should not be allowed.”

Georgia is the third state to have enacted laws emulating Arizona’s controversial and costly SB 1070, even though the Arizona law was blocked by the courts. Utah and Indiana passed similar laws earlier this year. After an ACLU and NILC lawsuit, a federal district court last month put Utah’s law on hold pending further review. The ACLU and NILC also filed a legal challenge to Indiana’s law.

“Georgia’s law is fundamentally un-American: we are not a ‘show me your papers’ country, nor one that believes in making certain people ‘untouchables’ that others should be afraid to assist, house, or transport,” said Omar Jadwat, staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “The courts have blocked Arizona and Utah’s laws from going into effect. Georgia should be prepared for the same outcome.”

The lawsuit charges that Georgia’s law, HB 87, is unconstitutional because it unlawfully interferes with federal power and authority over immigration matters in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution; authorizes and requires unreasonable seizures and arrests in violation of the Fourth Amendment; restricts the constitutional right to travel freely throughout the United States; and violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution by unlawfully discriminating against people who hold certain kinds of identity documents.

“This extreme law criminalizes everyday folks who have daily interactions with undocumented individuals in their community, making people of faith and others vulnerable to arrest and detention while conducting acts of charity and kindness,” said Debbie Seagraves, executive director of the ACLU of Georgia.

One of the plaintiffs in the case, Paul J. Edwards, is a devout Christian and a board member of a local faith group, who strongly believes in helping all individuals in his community regardless of their immigration status. As part of his religious commitment, Edwards transports people, including those who are undocumented, to places of worship and to locations that provide medical assistance. Under the Georgia law, Mr. Edwards would be subject to criminal liability for assisting, transporting, and harboring these undocumented individuals.

“This law undermines our core American values of fairness and equality,” said Mary Bauer, legal director of the Southern Poverty Law Center. “By perpetuating the hate rhetoric that has become commonplace among many elected officials, this law threatens the rights of citizens and noncitizens alike by encouraging racial profiling. Sadly, too, it places Georgia on the wrong side of history.”

Another plaintiff, Paul Bridges, is a long-time supporter of the Republican Party and is the mayor of Uvalda, Georgia, a town of approximately 600 people in Montgomery County. Because Mr. Bridges speaks Spanish and is a well-known presence in the community, he often assists with interpretation in schools, doctors’ offices, court and other settings. He also provides transportation to undocumented individuals so they can go to church, the grocery store, doctors’ appointments, and soccer tournaments in nearby towns. If the Georgia law goes into effect, Mr. Bridges and the undocumented individuals traveling with him will be at risk of criminal prosecution.

“Georgia is home to one of the fastest growing Asian populations,” said Sin Yen Ling, senior staff attorney with the Asian Law Caucus. “This law encourages racial profiling of Asian Americans and immigrants, and must be struck down.”

The lawsuit was filed today in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of civil rights, labor, social justice and faith-based organizations, including Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, Service Employees International Union, the Southern Regional Joint Board of Workers United, Alterna, Coalition of Latino Leaders, Task Force for the Homeless, DreamActivist.org, Instituto de Mexico, Coalition for the People’s Agenda, and the Asian American Legal Advocacy Center; individually named plaintiffs who would be subject to harassment or arrest under the law; and a class of similarly situated people.

Attorneys on the case include Jadwat, Andre Segura, Elora Mukherjee, Cecillia D. Wang, and Kate Desormeau of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project; Tumlin, Linton Joaquin, Nora A. Preciado, Melissa S. Keaney, Tanya Broder, and Jonathan Blazer of the National Immigration Law Center; Bauer, Andrew H. Turner, Samuel Brooke, Naomi Tsu, Michelle R. Lapointe, and Daniel Werner of the Southern Poverty Law Center; Chara Fisher Jackson and Azadeh N. Shahshahani of the ACLU of Georgia; G. Brian Spears; Ling of the Asian Law Caucus; R. Keegan Federal, Jr. of Federal & Hassan, LLP.; and Charles H. Kuck and Danielle M. Conley of Kuck Immigration Partners, LLC.

View copy of the complaint. (PDF)

###

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Employment Law

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 26, 2011

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Employment Law in Narrow Ruling

WASHINGTON, DC — The U.S. Supreme Court today upheld a 2007 Arizona law on employer sanctions and verification, finding that the Arizona law was expressly authorized by a provision of federal law. The decision does not apply to or address other state or local immigration laws, such as Arizona law SB 1070.

The Arizona law addressed in today’s decision imposes licensing penalties on businesses that have knowingly employed workers who are not lawfully authorized to work in the U.S., but only if the federal government confirms the lack of employment authorization. It also requires Arizona employers to participate in the federal E-Verify program. The challenge was brought by a broad coalition of civil rights and business groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Arizona, MALDEF, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the law firm of Altshuler Berzon, and the United States Chamber of Commerce.

The following quotes can be attributed as stated:

Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project:
“Today’s decision is a narrow one that only upholds Arizona’s specific law on employment verification. The decision has nothing to do with SB 1070 or any other state or local immigration laws. We are disappointed with today’s decision, and believe it does not reflect what Congress intended.”

Linton Joaquin, NILC’s general counsel:
“We’re deeply disappointed that the Court has allowed this law, which has proven to have serious economic ramifications for Arizona’s workers and employers, to remain in effect. However, the ruling does not grant states the right to enforce immigration law — the issue at the heart of current legal challenges to SB 1070, Arizona’s racial profiling law. State legislators considering this decision a free pass to enact and implement legislation targeting immigrants are gravely mistaken.”

Attorneys representing the plaintiffs Valle del Sol, Chicanos por la Causa and Somos America include Omar Jadwat, Lucas Guttentag and Jennifer Chang Newell of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project; Daniel Pochoda of the ACLU of Arizona; Jonathan Weissglass and Stephen Berzon of Altshuler Berzon LLP; Valenzuela Dixon of MALDEF; and Joaquin and Karen C. Tumlin of NILC.

The decision is available at www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-115.pdf.

# # #

NILC Files Lawsuit Challenging Indiana’s Draconian Law

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, May 25, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]
Elizabeth Beresford, (917) 498-9697 or (212) 549-2666; [email protected]
Ken Falk, ACLU of Indiana, (317) 635-4059 x104; [email protected]

NILC Files Lawsuit Challenging Indiana’s Draconian Law

INDIANAPOLIS – The National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, the ACLU, and the law firm of Lewis & Kappes, P.C., filed a class action lawsuit today challenging a discriminatory Indiana law inspired by Arizona’s notorious SB 1070. The lawsuit charges the law authorizes police to make warrantless arrests of individuals based on assumed immigration status and criminalizes the mere use or acceptance of the commonly used consular ID card. The groups charge that the law will lead to racial profiling and trample upon the rights of all Indiana residents.

“Indiana has created a law that not only tramples on the constitutional rights of Hoosiers, but also improperly involves Indiana in areas that are clearly of federal, not state, concerns,” said Ken Falk, legal director of the ACLU of Indiana.

Some state lawmakers oppose the extreme law, saying it will increase law enforcement costs and deter both employers and employees from coming to the state. Indiana University has also expressed concerns that the law will discourage enrollment and academic participation, noting that the institution hosts thousands of foreign national students, faculty members and visitors each school year.

“By cutting off the use of secure foreign photo identification, the law has effectively denied foreign visitors, scholars and immigrants in general the ability to engage in important commercial activity,” said Linton Joaquin, general counsel of the National Immigration Law Center. “These secure forms of official identification, which can be used by a visiting professor to open a bank account or by a foreign national to provide proof of identification in a wide variety of settings, are vital to both immigrants and society. This provision, like the rest of the law, is misguided and will undoubtedly have unintended social and economic consequences.”

Immigration bills inspired by Arizona’s SB 1070 have been introduced across the country this legislative season, but Indiana is only the third state to pass the controversial legislation this year. The state becomes one of only four, along with Arizona, Utah and Georgia, to enact draconian state-based immigration laws. The ACLU, NILC and a coalition of civil rights groups filed lawsuits in Arizona and Utah. The most troubling provisions of SB 1070 have been blocked by a federal appellate court, and the Utah law has been blocked by the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, pending further review.

The lawsuit charges that the Indiana law is unconstitutional in that it unlawfully interferes with federal power and authority over immigration matters in violation of the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and authorizes unreasonable seizures and arrests in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

“Indiana has unwisely chosen to follow down Arizona’s unconstitutional path,” said Andre Segura, staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “This law marginalizes entire communities by criminalizing commonly accepted forms of identification. The law also undermines our most cherished constitutional safeguards by putting Indiana residents at risk of unlawful warrantless arrests without any suspicion of wrongdoing, much less criminal activity.”

The lawsuit was filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on behalf of three individual plaintiffs who would be subject to harassment or arrest under the law.

Attorneys on the case include Falk, Jan P. Mensz and Gavin M. Rose of ACLU of Indiana; Segura, Lee Gelernt, Omar C. Jadwat, Cecillia D. Wang and Katherine Desormeau of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project; Joaquin, Karen C. Tumlin and Shiu-Ming Cheer of NILC; and Angela D. Adams of Lewis & Kappes, P.C.

See the complaint.

# # #

Hoosiers Head Down the Wrong Path

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Friday, May 13, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]

Draconian New Laws Will Lead to Constitutional Violations, Racial Profiling

LOS ANGELES, Calif. — The same day that the Utah “papers please” anti-immigrant law was put on hold by a federal court, Indiana earned the dubious distinction of becoming the third state to adopt a sweeping and draconian anti-immigrant law. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

“Despite vociferous outcry from the immigrant, business, and faith communities, Governor Mitch Daniels has chosen to go down the same divisive path as Utah and Arizona by signing both SB 590 and HB 1402, which will lead to constitutional violations and restrict access to an affordable education for children who have grown up in Indiana. Although Governor Daniels may score immediate political points for engaging in such divisive tactics, history shows that such actions will be to his ultimate peril.

“Law enforcement, business, and community leaders have unequivocally stated that laws such as SB 590 that effectively serve to target the immigrant community are a risk to public safety and economic security alike. Furthermore, signing divisive legislation into law sends a dangerous message that the color of one’s skin is an acceptable predictor of whether a person is lawfully residing in the United States. Such actions cannot and should not be tolerated.

“We stand with likeminded Indianans and people everywhere who abhor injustice to denounce such attempts to target communities of color, and will use all available resources to counter these divisive and costly activities.”

# # #

Georgia Gov. Signs Racial Profiling Legislation

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Friday, May 13, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]

Arizona Copycat Legislation Will Target Communities of Color, Trample Upon Civil Rights

LOS ANGELES, Calif. — Ignoring denouncements from civil rights leaders and boycott threats, Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia today signed into law HB 87, which parrots key portions of Arizona’s racial profiling law. Georgia now joins Utah and Arizona in having enacted extreme, unconstitutional immigration enforcement legislation. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

“Despite the best efforts of Georgia’s civil rights, faith and business communities, Governor Deal, by signing a discriminatory law targeting those who may look or sound ‘foreign,’ added Georgia to the list of states that, like Arizona and Utah, have placed themselves on the wrong side of history. This is a sad day for Georgia and for all of those who believe that skin color should not be a predictor of one’s right to be in the United States. By signing this legally unsound bill, Deal has signaled to visitors and Georgians alike that a ‘papers, please’ society should replace constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

“Governor Deal’s misguided actions will have both legal and economic consequences: Arizona’s draconian anti-immigrant law, SB 1070, has been roundly rejected by the two federal courts that have reviewed it. Georgia’s law suffers from the same constitutional — and moral — flaws. Moreover, as Arizonans have painfully learned, the stigma associated with SB 1070 has cost millions of dollars in lost tourism revenue. In today’s economy, revenue the state and its businesses will now lose could have been better invested in Georgia’s local communities.

“We join Congressman John Lewis, immigrant leaders, and countless other Georgians in denouncing this misguided and unconstitutional law. Georgia deserves better than ill-conceived legislation that will only divide communities and exacerbate the state’s economic woes.”

# # #

Reintroduction of the DREAM Act

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Wednesday, May 11, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832

Reviving the DREAM

WASHINGTON, DC — Today, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and 32 cosponsors introduced the DREAM Act, legislation that, if passed, would provide undocumented youth who were brought to the U.S. as children a path to citizenship if they attend college for two years or enlist in the military. Representatives Howard Berman (D-CA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) also will introduce similar legislation in the House of Representatives today. This legislation, which has been introduced in every congressional session since 2001, has received widespread support from the business, labor, education, and faith sectors, and enjoys high public approval ratings. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

“Senator Durbin, Representative Berman, Representative Ros-Lehtinen, and the other members of Congress who cosponsored this legislation recognize that passing this bill cannot come quickly enough for the young men and women — and children — whom it affects. Every day, talented young people are caught in the immigration enforcement dragnet and deported. That’s why, a few weeks ago, several senators also sent a letter to President Obama urging him to use his executive authority to make deferred action available on a more systematic basis to DREAM-eligible individuals, and thus to provide these Americans-at-heart a more reliable means of avoiding being deported from the only country they know.

“Last year, after a thrilling win in the House of Representatives, the DREAM Act, like so much other commonsense legislation that had been proposed, fell victim to partisan politics. The loss wasn’t felt only by the children affected by this legislation; it was felt by the entire Latino community, who watched the vote as it was broadcast live by the country’s two largest Spanish-language television networks.

“Yesterday, during a major address on immigration, President Obama reaffirmed his support for this much-needed legislation. Unfortunately, the Department of Homeland Security continues to deport young DREAMers, even though they may be mere months away from having the opportunity to normalize their immigration status. While our greatest hope is that the DREAM Act becomes law, until then, we call on President Obama to use prosecutorial discretion to grant relief to these students. We cannot continue to lose these vital members of our communities. Our economy and society are suffering because of inaction.”

# # #

Action to Reform Immigration System Should Follow

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Tuesday, May 10, 2011

CONTACT:
Adela de la Torre, NILC, (213) 674-2832; [email protected]

Action to Reform Immigration System Should Follow

LOS ANGELES — In a speech in El Paso, Texas, President Obama today reiterated his commitment to reforming the nation’s badly broken immigration system. The president talked about how immigration has helped make this country stronger and more prosperous, and how immigration reform is an “economic imperative.” Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:

“From the heart of one of the nation’s safest cities and busiest border crossings, President Obama reaffirmed his commitment to a comprehensive solution to fix this nation’s outdated and badly broken immigration system. We couldn’t agree more: the status quo of 1,100 deportations per day is no longer acceptable, nor are the extreme and unconstitutional measures currently being explored and implemented by states.

“For too long, our families and communities have been torn apart because politicians have pursued problematic policies in order to ‘look tough’ on immigration. The result has led to major socioeconomic instability for this nation’s immigrant families and for all our communities.

“A few extremist members of Congress have helped fuel an anti-immigrant fervor by proposing economically disastrous and unrealistic proposals, like mandatory electronic employment verification for all businesses in the country. Such proposals are but a veneer to hide their mass-deportation strategy, and threaten to undermine the economic growth we all hope for.

“Worse, frustration at federal inaction has led Utah and Arizona to adopt extremist, unconstitutional measures that threaten fundamental rights for countless people of color. Though the most egregious provisions of the Arizona law have been blocked, and the Utah law has been temporarily delayed, other states, including Georgia, threaten to go down the same divisive and unconstitutional path.”

“Obama’s leadership is needed now more than ever to ensure that humane immigration reform remains on the federal to-do list. He now needs to spur his colleagues in Washington into action on this top economic and social issue, while vigorously defending the U.S. Constitution in response to states like Utah that want to deny civil rights and liberties to its residents.”

# # #