Blocked Arizona immigration law may reduce chances of real reform | Sahil Kapur

guardian.co.uk

Republicans, enraged by Obama’s blocking of the Arizona immigration law, may stonewall future immigration reforms

In a partial and last-minute victory for opponents of the new Arizona immigration law, a federal judge on Wednesday blocked its most controversial components just hours before the crackdown was set to go into effect.

The decision, which Arizona is expected to appeal, serves as a boost to the Obama administration’s lawsuit challenging the measure as unconstitutional. It also raises the stakes of a showdown poised to influence the course of the national immigration debate. Whatever the outcome, it seems, this will dampen already grim prospects for reform and politically benefit Republicans in the short run.

US District Judge Susan Bolton placed holds on provisions requiring Arizona police to demand residency papers from individuals based on suspicions, and delayed implementation of clauses making it illegal not to carry documentation at all times. Bolton declared that the measure “burdens lawfully present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked”.

Echoing the justice department’s argument that the task of enforcing immigration laws belongs to the federal government, Bolton added that the statutes “would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose”.

The SB 1070 measure’s enactment in April by Governor Jan Brewer set off a firestorm of criticism from civil rights groups, which argued that it unfairly targets Hispanics and people of colour legally in the United States, reigniting an explosive national debate on US immigration policy.

The law polls well nationally – partly because Americans are desperate for an immigration overhaul, and support action on the part of states amid Washington inaction – and has become an issue in the November midterm elections.

The immediate impact of the ruling will be to tame the copycat laws percolating in legislatures of at least five states. At the same time, it will infuriate and galvanise Republicans, who strongly back the Arizona crackdown, in the midst of an already harsh election climate for Democrats.

A legal victory for Barack Obama could inject new fire into GOP efforts at stonewalling immigration reform, as they will likely use it to claim Democrats aren’t serious about controlling the border. Republicans, some of whose votes are necessary to pass a bill, have unanimously refused to consider broad reforms until after border issues are dealt with; Democrats argue that enforcement must be viewed as one aspect of a comprehensive effort.

The seemingly irresolvable issue of how to deal with existing illegal immigration further complicates reform prospects. Republicans appear immutably opposed to any kind of legalisation program, while omitting such a program is a nonstarter for too many Democrats.

Another obstacle for reformers is that Republicans have succeeded in making sure border security dominates the debate, while Democrats have done a poor job conveying that the immigration system’s problems run much deeper, and that fixing them requires a wholesome approach. Democrats also seldom emphasised the broad public support for offering undocumented workers a path to citizenship. According to a new CNN poll, 81% support such a programme; 19% are opposed.

The stalemate encompasses even less controversial, piecemeal provisions such as the Dream Act, which would grant legal permanent residency to children who entered the country illegally with their parents, on the condition that they go to college or join the military. Some Democrats also worry that passing popular provisions on their own would sap the energy for comprehensive reform.

Meanwhile, a drawn-out court battle over the Arizona law, which might reach the supreme court, would intensify Republican opposition to reform and simply leave both sides to yell at each other and point fingers in the interim. For Democrats, the short-term diagnosis just isn’t good, through little fault of their own.

Obama has taken an uncharacteristically forceful stance on the crackdown, declaring that it “threaten[s] to undermine basic notions of fairness”. The delicate politics of the issue are inextricably linked to the Hispanic community, by far the fastest growing demographic in the US, which fiercely opposes the Arizona measure and views immigration reform as a top priority.

In the short run, Republicans stand to gain from drawing attention to the Arizona fight. But alienating Latino voters will ultimately spell political disaster for the GOP, which already fairs poorly among non-white voters, in a country where minorities are on their way to constituting a majority. For Democrats, fighting against the Arizona law paints a much more pleasant picture in the long term than it does in the foreseeable future.

FOXNews.com – Fox News Poll: 72 Percent Say Government Not Enforcing Immigration Laws.

A national art project for children is being hosted by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) throughout the United States. Children are invited to create images that would portray the theme, “We Are America.” The pictures drawn by children are expected to answer the question, “People have come from all over the world to become Americans. Why does that make us great?”

The National Children’s Art Project will be hosted by USCIS in collaboration with public libraries and other community-based organizations that work for America’s immigrant communities in this summer. Submissions for the art project will be displayed in USCIS offices throughout the country. In the 2010 commemoration of the National Day of Service and Remembrance (September 11,2010) the children participants will be recognized.

Children who are aged between 5 and 12 years as of September 11, 2010 can get the submission form for the National Children’s Art Project from the nearest USCIS office. Submission forms can also be downloaded from USCIS.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services requires children to submit their artwork on an 8.5 x 11 or 11 x 17 inch paper. Children can use any medium, including crayons, paint, color pencils, or collage to create their artwork. Accompanying the drawing should be a short paragraph of about 2-3 sentences describing the theme, “We Are America” and answering the question posed. USCIS will accept the entries from June 12, 2010 to August 16, 2010.

A completely overhauled web interface, especially for employers using the E-Verify Program has been released by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) after a year’s efforts. The web interface has been redesigned in order to facilitate the employers to have a more organized access to the E-Verify Program.

According to the Director of USCIS, Alejandro Mayorkas, the redesign is one of the ongoing efforts towards enhancing the E-Verify Program. He also said that the new web interface incorporates a new section expanded for customer support in addition to providing employers with a streamlined access to the program. He further added that the E-Verify system redesign corresponds to the USCIS.gov redesign that was launched in September, 2009, proving the efficiency and transparency of USCIS services.

More than 200 pages have been re-constructed to keep the user at ease. The navigation tools have been improved to ensure ease-of-use, significantly reduce errors, and allow immediate verification of those employers who are enrolling in E-Verify Program against commercial data.

In addition, the redesigned E-Verify web interface also includes a new home page with a new “case alerts” feature, enhanced case management, and organized tutorials. In order to make certain that only valid companies enroll in the E-Verify Program and protect their privacy, the new interface masks Social Security numbers.

E-Verify’s commitment to security, customer service, efficiency, and accuracy is evident in the redesigned E-Verify web interface. USCIS’s customer focus and its intention to maximize public’s trust on the program have also been emphasized through the redesign.

The updated tutorial has to be completed by all the current E-verify users. Upon completion, which takes about 20 minutes, the tutorial serves as a guide to the redesigned E-Verify web interface.
USCIS is partnership with the Social Security Administration operates the E-Verify Program. The employment eligibility of the newly hired employees can be verified by the employers through this web-based program.

Arizona immigration law heads to court, with $1.2 million war chest – CSMonitor.com.

First of seven lawsuits against tough Arizona immigration law is heard Thursday in federal court in Phoenix. Money from private donors across the US has flowed into a defense fund for the statute.

By Lourdes Medrano, Contributor / July 15, 2010

Tucson, Ariz.

As Arizona heads to court Thursday to defend its tough new immigration law in the first of several legal challenges, it has the backing of many Americans who have opened their wallets to show support for the border state.

Contributions to Gov. Jan Brewer’s special legal defense fund now top $1 million, mostly in website donations of less than $100 pouring in from all over the country. Arizona, California, Texas, and Florida are the states with the most online donors.

As of Tuesday, website contributions totaled $1,104934.63 from 23,955 donors, according to the governor’s office. Additional mail-in donations totaled $93,084, with contributions still coming in, says Tasya Peterson, a Brewer spokeswoman. The average donation is about $46.

The Republican governor set up the fund by executive order in late May to help the state defend its right to enforce the law, which requires local and state authorities to determine the status of suspects they believe to be in the country illegally. The law, which the governor signed in April, has spawned economic boycotts and seven lawsuits – including one by the US Department of Justice filed July 6 – that seek to stop law, known locally as Senate Bill 1070, from going into effect July 29.

The financial contributions surged after the Obama administration its suit, reflecting opinion polls that show strong support for Arizona. In a Christian Science Monitor/TIPP poll released Monday, 51 percent of Americans favor the state’s immigration law. Thirty four percent support the federal government’s case against the state.

Phoenix resident Carlie Murphy, a retiree who has lived in Arizona for five years, says she contributed $20 because the state is trying to address what the federal government has neglected. “Our federal government has not fulfilled its responsibility for a long, long time when it comes to illegal immigration.”

Jeanne Kurucz and her husband, Andrew, of Garden Grove, Calif., donated $25 because they don’t think the federal government should be suing Arizona. “We stand behind Jan Brewer and we think that the government should close the borders,” Ms. Kurucz says.

Brewer and her backers say Arizona had to act because the federal government has failed to secure the border, but critics say the law will encourage racial profiling and is unconstitutional because enforcing immigration laws is a federal duty, not a state responsibility.

It is difficult to accurately estimate how much legal costs will total, says Paul Senseman, Brewer’s communications director. “It depends on many variables including the outcome of the cases, possible appeals, if new cases are filed, if the federal government continues to sue the state, etc.”

Arizona’s defense rests in the hands of private lawyers. Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat who opposes the law, withdrew from representing the state in court after continuing clashes with Brewer, a Republican. Both are running for governor.

Brewer hired Snell & Wilmer LLC, a corporate law firm based in Phoenix, to defend the state. Chairman John Bouma says attorneys are working long hours on behalf of the state. Adjusted hourly rates for the state’s primary attorneys vary from $225 to $450 per hour, according to the firm’s contract with the state.

Thursday’s lawsuit before US District Judge Susan Bolton was filed by Tucson police officer Martin Escobar. Various organizations, including immigrant-advocacy groups and the ACLU, filed subsequent legal challenges. The Justice Department suit contends that the law interferes with federal authority, and attorneys for both sides will argue that case before Judge Bolton on July 22.

Considering the Tropical Storm Agatha, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has reminded Guatemalans of certain immigration benefits available to them. These immigration benefits are available only on request to eligible Guatemalans. Taking into account the fact that an individual will face difficulties in maintaining his lawful immigrant status when there is a natural disaster, USCIS has decided to lend a helping hand with temporary relief measures for eligible Guatemalan nationals.

A Guatemalan national can request for an extension if his nonimmigrant status is about to expire, provided he complies with certain requirements. Though immigrants under B-1 and B-2 can secure an extension they are not permitted to work in the United States.

Along with the extension application Guatemalan nationals have to provide proof that the Tropical Storm Agatha was the reason for their failure to return to Guatemala before the expiration of their nonimmigrant status. Individuals who were in nonimmigrant status on May 29, 2010 will be allowed to file extension until July 29, 2010, after which they will be dealt on a case-by-case basis.

Guatemalan nationals who have already been granted parole can apply for a re-parole by submitting an expired or unexpired Form I-94, which has an expiration date between May 29, 2010 and July 29, 2010. If the extension is granted, the Guatemalan can file Form I-765 to request for employment authorization. Also, if a Guatemalan’s advance parole authorization expires between May 29, 2010 and July 29, 2010, their advance parole status will automatically be extended by USCIS.
On the other hand, F-1 academic students can apply for employment authorization based on the fact that their family is facing severe economic hardship and is not able to financially support their studies due to the natural disaster.

The processing of certain applications and petitions of Guatemalans will be accelerated by USCIS considering the urge for immediate relief. Form I-131 will be expedited to enable Guatemalan nationals travel quickly during an emergency.

A special children’s citizenship ceremony was hosted recently by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History. This ceremony was held to initiate a week-long commemoration of Flag Day.

About 24 children from 18 different countries were administered the Oath of Allegiance by Alejandro Mayorkas, the Director of USCIS during the Flag Day celebration. During the course of the ceremony the significance of Flag Day was emphasized by USCIS Director. He stated that, “The flag is an important symbol of the principles these young new citizens will carry forward for years to come.”
During the children’s citizenship ceremony, a new children’s art project was also launched. Children aged between 5 and 12 years as of September 11, 2010 from all over the United States are termed eligible to participate in the project and are invited to create an artwork under the theme, “We Are America.” The drawing also needs to be accompanied by a short paragraph depicting the theme and answering the question, “People have come from all over the world to become Americans. Why does that make us great?”

USCIS offices all over the country will showcase the children’s artwork. The participants will be recognized during the commemoration of the National Day of Service and Remembrance on September 11, 2010. USCIS will work on this project in collaboration with public libraries and community-based organizations that assist America’s immigrant communities. Submissions for the project are required to reach the USCIS offices before August 16, 2010.

The weeklong Flag Day celebration was held from June 12 to 18. On June 14, a naturalization ceremony was also included in the celebration at Philadelphia’s Betsy Ross Historical Site where the first “Stars and Stripes” are believed to be sewn. To commemorate Flag Day, USCIS also organized naturalization ceremonies at the Colonial Williamsburg Historical Area in Virginia and the Homestead National Monument of America in Beatrice, Nebraska.

Did Obama break promise to Latinos? – CNN.com.

By Ruben Navarette Jr., Special to CNN

Did Obama break promise to Latinos?

And if so, will it wind up costing Democratic candidates in the November mid-term elections and, for that matter, the president himself when he comes up for re-election in 2012?

The answers are: yes and probably.

Yes, of course, Obama broke his promise to Latinos. And it is probably true that, for doing so, Obama and fellow Democrats will continue to lose Latino suppo

And I’m not the only one saying it.

This week, during an appearance on “John King USA,” Univision anchor Jorge Ramos blamed Obama and congressional Republicans for failing to take action to fix the nation’s broken immigration system. The issue is at the center of Ramos’ new book, “A Country for All: An Immigrant Manifesto.”

Guest host Jessica Yellin showed a video clip of Ramos asking candidate Obama in 2008 if he would commit to reforming the immigration system.

Obama responded, “I cannot guarantee that it’s going to be in the first 100 days. But what I can guarantee is that we will have in the first year an immigration bill that I strongly support and that I’m promoting and that I want to move that forward as quickly as possible.”

That first year came and went, and now we’re 18 months into the Obama administration. There’s no immigration bill in sight. In fact, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, has said that he won’t propose a bill he’s been working on until after the November elections, possibly as late as March 2011.

Yellin asked Ramos what he made of this.

“(Obama) broke his promise,” he said. “It’s that simple, and obviously, he doesn’t have the 60 votes.”

Then, Ramos backed off a bit and, parroting a popular line coming out of the White House, started blaming the GOP.

“Where are the Republicans?” he asked. “Where are the 11 Republicans that voted for immigration reform two years ago? Where is John McCain?”

Indeed. McCain is running for re-election back in Arizona, doing his best impersonation of Wyatt Earp at Tombstone. The Straight Talk Express has become the Pander Mobile. Sure, the Republicans deserve their share of the blame, especially since they’ve tried to oversimplify and demagogue the issue to scare up support.

But let’s not forget which political party controls both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

The many Latinos I’ve been hearing from in the past six months haven’t forgotten.

Although he hails from Chicago, Illinois, a city and state with sizable Latino populations, Obama has spent most of his life in a black and white world.

He knew very little about Latinos before he launched his presidential campaign, and he was forced to try to find a way to speak to them. He seized on the strategy of being a kinder and gentler alternative to Republicans on the immigration debate. He condemned ICE agents who “terrorize” immigrants by snatching parents away from their babies in workplace raids and promising to deliver comprehensive immigration reform in his first year in office.

Now, after a year and a half in office, ICE is still conducting immigration raids, and comprehensive immigration reform isn’t on the table.

More and more of the Latinos I hear from feel as if they’ve been snookered. They see the passion that Obama put into an issue he really cared about — health care — and they resent the fact that when it comes to immigration reform, the president seems to think that words speak louder than actions.

What they resent even more is that they feel teased every time Obama makes yet another major speech promising to deliver something he has no intention of delivering — comprehensive immigration reform.

With the delaying and the teasing, it’s not surprising that Obama’s stock with Latino voters is falling. Obama won two-thirds of the Latino vote in 2008. In January, at the end of his first year, his job approval rating with Latinos stood at 69 percent. In February, it fell to 64 percent. And, in May, according to a recent Gallup poll, it slipped to 57 percent.

Some political observers believe that the recently filed lawsuit by the Department of Justice against the Arizona immigration law is part of the administration’s strategy of rebuilding support with Latinos, about 70 percent of whom oppose the measure.

I hope not. For one thing, that strategy wouldn’t work. Latinos aren’t about to give Obama, a former lecturer on constitutional law, much credit for recognizing the obvious: that the Arizona law is blatantly unconstitutional because it usurps federal authority over immigration law in violation of Article 1, Section 8.

The suit could have gone further and argued, as other lawsuits against the measure have, that the process of implementing the law runs the risk of violating the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment by singling out Latinos as the most likely to resemble illegal immigrants.

Such a law is so odious that the idea that the federal government would challenge it is a given.

After all, the Obama administration isn’t suing Arizona to defend Latinos but to defend the Constitution. So that won’t assuage the concerns of Latinos that the White House doesn’t really care about them or issues that matter to them.

The way to do that is to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Until that happens, words without actions are meaningless.

In fact, every time this administration tries to reassure Latino voters that it is in their corner, the effect is the opposite. It reminds Latinos that, as long as Obama is in the White House, they’re on their own.

It has been announced recently by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that a revised version of Form I-90, Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card has been released on the USCIS website. Dated 08/10/09, the new version incorporates more user-friendly features. Form I-90 can be filed by the applicants either electronically through e-filing or mailed to the USCIS Phoenix Lockbox facility.

In general, Form I-90 is filed by an applicant to request for replacement of permanent resident card. This application cannot be used if the applicant is a conditional resident and his/her status is about to expire. An applicant who attained conditional resident status through marriage to a U.S. citizen or permanent resident is required to file Form I-751.

Until July 28, 2010, the previous versions of Form I-90 will be accepted by USCIS, after which the previous version forms will be rejected. The incorrectly filed applications will be sent back to the applicants directing them to re-file with the revised version of the form.

If the applicant wants to be notified of the application status through an email and/or text message, Form G-1145, E-Notification of Application/Petition Acceptance has to be completed and attached to the first page of his/her application.

The form filing fee structure varies depending on the reason for the request. For instance, in cases where the permanent resident card is lost, stolen, or mutilated, the name or biographic information is changed, expiry date of the card is nearing, or the status has automatically been changed to permanent resident, the applicant will be charged $ 370 (base application fee of $290 + biometric fee of $80).

An applicant filing Form I-90 for the reason that he/she has reached his/her 14th birthday since the issue of the permanent resident card, the base application fee will not be applicable and only $80 will be charged.

Obama: Immigration reform ‘cannot pass without Republican votes’ – The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency.

President Obama today called for a “practical, common sense” immigration system that will help the U.S. economy and maintain America’s immigrant tradition — and he put the pressure on Republicans to get it through Congress.

“Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes,” Obama said in his first major immigration speech as president . “That is the political and mathematical reality.”

Obama said his administration has already taken record-setting actions to strengthen the border, and he urged Congress to approve “a pathway to legal status” for the 11 million or so illegal immigrants who are already in the United States.

Immigration has become “a source of fresh contention” in recent days because of the new Arizona law that gives police greater authority to question people’s citizenship, Obama said. His administration is expected to file a lawsuit against Arizona, but the president did not discuss potential legal action.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the first step on the immigration issue should be “to secure the borders,” and that Obama’s pathway to citizenship amounts to “amnesty” for lawbreakers.

“The President can make progress on this issue, but it will take more than a speech,” the top Senate Republican said. “If he would take amnesty off the table and make a real commitment to border and interior security, he will find strong bipartisan support.”

Speaking to lawmakers, academics, and community leaders gathered at American University, Obama touted his plan by stressing the immeasurable contributions that immigrants have made to the United States, and the frequent discrimination they faced throughout history. “Immigrants have always helped to build and defend this country,” Obama said.

The chances for congressional passage don’t appear great. Like McConnell, congressional Republicans and some Democrats said the government should focus on better law enforcement better moving on to citizenship issues or guest worker programs. In the meantime, lawmakers who are already grappling with new Wall Street regulations and an energy bill must also deal with congressional elections only four months from tomorrow.

Obama said political posturing on an emotional issue has delayed congressional action in years and month past. “Into this breach,” he said, “states like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands.”

Arizona’s crackdown is understandable but “ill-conceived,” Obama said, arguing that an immigration system requires a national approach rather than a “patchwork” of state laws that puts too much of a burden on local law enforcement.

“These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents,” Obama said, “making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.”

McConnell, the Senate GOP leader, criticized Obama for his stand on the Arizona law, saying that “attacks on states filling the breach created by the failure of the federal government won’t secure the border, grow jobs or create solutions for what we all agree is a broken immigration system.”

At points in his speech, Obama criticized both sides of the immigration debate.

Some rights groups all but encourage illegal immigration, Obama said, though at least 11 million people are in fact breaking the law by not going through the citizenship process, and they should be held accountable.

As for critics of “amnesty,” Obama said it’s simply impossible to deport 11 million people. Doing so would disrupt communities and break up families, he added, as many undocumented immigrants have children who are U.S. citizens because they were born here.

The president said he has already taken major steps to better protect the border, proclaiming — twice — that “we have more boots on the ground near the southwest border than at any time in our history.”

As for his pathway to citizenship plan, Obama said it will help create “a younger workforce and a faster growing economy than many of our competitors,” Obama said. “And in an increasingly interconnected world, the diversity of our country is a powerful advantage in global competition.”