USA Green Card Immigration Blog

Immigration officials arrest more than 3,100 – Boston.com.

Dems face tricky immigration choice – TheHill.com.

Democrats face a politically tricky choice over whether to pursue a compromise with Republicans on immigration reform that was recently floated by Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.

The Republican presidential contenders are willing to grant illegal immigrants legal status if they came to the country at a young age and served in the military.

It’s a tough election-year call for Democrats for several reasons.

Immigration reform has been a winning issue for them as staunch GOP opposition has driven Hispanic voters to support Democratic candidates in recent cycles.

Hispanic voters helped Democrats win tough Senate races in Colorado and Nevada in 2010. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) bolstered his standing among Hispanic voters by claiming immigration reform as one of his highest priorities.

During his State of the Union address last month, President Obama called for Congress to resurrect the DREAM Act, even though lawmakers say there is virtually no chance of it passing the GOP-controlled House.

Striking a compromise would allow Republicans to earn some points with Hispanic voters and lessen pressure on Republican lawmakers to support more comprehensive immigration reform.

Walking away from possible common ground, however, could leave Democrats open to criticism that they missed a chance to make incremental progress.

At a debate in Florida last week, Romney and Gingrich said they could support a scaled-down version of the DREAM Act.

The DREAM Act, which Democrats have tried unsuccessfully to pass the last several years, would grant legal status to illegal immigrants who crossed the border at a young age if they meet certain conditions. The legislation, which has previously gotten a few Republican votes, has been criticized by many in the GOP for granting “amnesty.”

Romney and Gingrich, the two front-runners for the 2012 GOP nomination, say they could support it only if it were scaled back.

“I wouldn’t sign the DREAM Act as it currently exists, but I would sign the DREAM Act if it were focused on military service,” Romney said.

That clarification came soon after Romney had vowed to veto the DREAM Act, triggering criticism from prominent Hispanic Republicans. During the presidential debates, Romney hammered Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) for signing into law a version of the DREAM Act in the Lone Star State.

Gingrich and Romney would lop off part of the DREAM Act that would grant legal residency to alien minors who came to the country at age 15 or younger, live in the country for at least five years and complete at least two years of higher education.

Some Democrats are unsure whether they will embrace the Gingrich-Romney approach.

“I think it’s a step in the right direction,” said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act.

“If you are willing to accept that military service is the kind of bona fide that credentials a young person to take advantage of college benefits, I’d want to explore what other kinds of service might also qualify with them before I wrote off drawing the line there. I’ll do a bit more exploring but it’s a good start,” Whitehouse added.

Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), a leading Democratic voice on immigration reform, said he would prefer to pass the DREAM Act in its entirety, but would not rule out a compromise.

“My belief is we should try to pass the whole DREAM Act. As for what compromise might come about, that’s down the road,” said Schumer.

Other Democrats reject out of hand the GOP proposal to rewrite the DREAM Act.

“I don’t support that,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the lead Senate sponsor of the DREAM Act. “That will literally mean that those who came to this country at an innocent situation early in life have only one way to become legal, and that’s to join the military. I want men and women to join the military out of a sense of duty and patriotism, rather than to feel they are desperate and have no other place to turn.”

The day after the GOP presidential debate in Tampa, Fla., Rep. David Rivera (R-Fla.) introduced the Adjusted Residency for Military Service (ARMS) Act, which followed the outlines set by Romney and Gingrich.

Rivera said he first talked to Gingrich about the bill in November.

He said Democrats should support it because it’s the only immigration reform proposal that has a chance of passing Congress this year.

“Any Democrats who take a reasonable approach to immigration reform understand the realities we’re facing in the 112th Congress. If we want to do something to help young people in this Congress, this is the only option,” said Rivera, who has endorsed Gingrich.

“If Democrats want to take an all-or-nothing approach, there will be nothing. If someone is willing to die for America, we can give them a chance,” he said.

“I’m comfortable with that [the Romney-Gingrich position] and I think most Republicans are,” said Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who backs Romney and is seen as a possible running mate.

Even if the Romney-Gingrich compromise passed the Senate, it’s unlikely it would pass the House because most Republicans in the lower chamber say the top priority on immigration is securing the borders.

Politically, the scenario of House GOP leaders breaking from their White House nominee would play well for Democrats just months before the election.

Meanwhile, immigration experts say Pentagon officials have tightened their application processes in recent years.

Gregory Chen, the director of advocacy at the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), said illegal immigrants are currently prohibited from serving in the military.

He said military recruiters now carefully check Social Security numbers to make sure inductees are legal residents, a precaution not always taken in the past.

Chen noted that non-citizens receive expedited processing for citizenship if they serve in the military. He also noted that legal residents can win citizenship posthumously if killed in the line of duty, which can benefit surviving relatives.

“AILA would generally support providing a path to legal status, but this bill is very small in the sense that it will enable very few people to qualify,” he said of Rivera’s legislation.

Chen estimated that the Gingrich-Romney plan would only affect 1,000 people a year.

Rivera disputed that assertion.

“It’s impossible to estimate,” he said.

Cut deportation business ties, protesters tell Mayor Bloomberg.

Facing Our Future: Children in the Aftermath of Immigration Enforcement.

This report examines the consequences of parental arrest, detention, and deportation on 190 children in 85 families in six locations, providing in-depth details on parent-child separations, economic hardships, and children’s well-being. The contentious immigration debates around the country mostly revolve around illegal immigration. Less visible have been the 5.5 million children with unauthorized parents, almost three-quarters of whom are U.S.-born citizens. Over several years, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) intensified enforcement activities through large-scale worksite arrests, home arrests, and arrests by local law enforcement. The report provides recommendations for stakeholders to mitigate the harmful effects of immigration enforcement on children.

Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio — hailed by many as America’s Sheriff – is under attack for cracking down on illegal aliens. The liberal-left politicians, activists and members of the news media are vilifying Sheriff Arpaio for his department’s immigration and crime sweeps in and around Phoenix.On Friday, government officials with the Homeland Security and Justice Departments stated that the veteran lawman’s deputies could no longer make arrests based on a person’s immigration status. However, during an interview on Fox News Channel’s “Your World with Neil Cavuto,” Sheriff Arpaio told viewers that he and his deputies would continue to enforce the law and pointed to Arizona state laws that he would enforce.In response to the federal complaints regarding his activities, Sheriff Arpaio dispatched deputies on a two-day “crime suppression” operation. While heralded by the men and women he serves, Arpaio’s sweeps have been characterized as racial profiling by opponents of immigration enforcement.The nationwide enforcement of immigration law has been under the gun since President Barack Obama took his oath of office. Many political leaders, mostly Democrats, have targeted enforcement agencies and agents over the past few months with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi calling immigration raids “Un-American” and Congressman Luis Guttierez calling Border Patrol agents “The Gestapo.”Attorney General Eric Holder has also threatened Arpaio with a federal investigation of his Sheriff’s Department and its activities as a result of his success at capturing hundreds of criminal aliens.“Nothing has changed,” Arpaio told a Reuters reporter while overseeing an operation in a suburb northwest of Phoenix. “We’re still going to be doing what we’ve been doing tonight and during the last two and a half years. I don’t take orders from anyone.”Sheriff Arpaio first carried out the sweeps after his deputies underwent training offered by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement that gave participating state and local police officers authority to make immigration arrests during the Bush Administration. However, during the Obama Administration deputies have now lost their arrest powers as far as immigration laws on the streets.

via The Reality Check » Blog Archive » “America’s Sheriff” Joe Arpaio vs. Obama Administration.

This is an interesting piece of news from Washington State, where 28 people were jailed for working illegally in a car repair shop.  The normal process for this would be to deport them back to their country of origin (Mexico), leaving parents with the awful decision of whether to leave their US-born children in the US or take them with them.  However, the furor caused locally by the raid and the political sensitivity of the Obama Administration, which is currently in the midst of preparing to introduce immigration reform, led to the Homeland Security chief to order an investigation of the matter.  Supporters of the raid claimed that there was nothing to “investigate” since the US Immigration Customs and Enforcement officers involved in the raid were simply upholding current law.  Because this was the first such raid under the new Obama Administration–and because during his presidential campaign Obama had openly criticized immigration policy because of the frequent unintended result deportation had on families of mixed US and non-US citizen status– the end result for the people jailed was that they received visas to legally work in the United States!  Is this a sign of changes to come in US immigration policy?  Let us know what you think.