Immig Blog/Notes (www.sarponglaw.com)

The Law Office of James S. Sarpong, LLC is a Denver, Colorado based US Immigration Law Firm that has several office locations throughout the Front Range and the Denver Metro Area, and provides immigration law services to clients throughout the United States (U.S.) and the world, including Arizona Phoenix, Mesa, Tucson, California Anaheim, Bakersfield, Fremont, Fresno, Glendale, Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Modesto, Oakland, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Ana, San Jose, Sacramento, Stockton, Colorado Aurora, Colorado Springs, Denver, District of Columbia Washington, Florida Fort Lauderdale, Hialeah, Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, St. Petersburg, Tampa, Georgia Atlanta, Columbus, Illinois Chicago, Iowa Des Moines, Kansas Kansas City, Wichita, Maryland Baltimore, Massachusetts Boston, Springfield, Worchester, Michigan Detroit, Grand Rapids, Warren, Missouri Kansas City, St. Louis, Nebraska Lincoln, Omaha, Nevada Las Vegas, New Jersey Jersey City, Newark, New Mexico Albuquerque, New York Buffalo, New York, Rochester, Syracuse, Yonkers, Oklahoma Oklahoma City, Tulsa, Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Texas Amarillo, Arlington, Austin, Corpus Christi, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Garland, Houston, Irving, Lubbock, San Antonio, Utah Salt Lake City, Virginia Arlington, Chesapeake, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, and Virginia Beach.

Tired of restrictionists introducing “get tough” anti-immigration legislation in their states, state legislators are pushing back with progressive immigration policies of their own. On a telebriefing yesterday sponsored by the Progressive States Network and the National Immigration Law Center, state legislators from Arizona, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Utah discussed what they are actively doing to push back on the recent uptick in statewide anti-immigrant legislation. From public education campaigns to health, wage protection and enforcement legislation, these state leaders are fed up with the status quo.

With less than a month until SB1070’s enactment date (July 29), Arizona State Rep. Kyrsten Sinema is on a campaign to educate local police about the economic and legal realities of enforcing SB1070. While some claim that the Arizona law will help crack down on border violence, Rep. Sinema wants others to realize that SB1070 does nothing to address violent crimes but instead impedes local law enforcement’s ability to keep communities safe.

SB1070 is a very difficult issue to address in Arizona because the perception of many people in the state is that SB1070 addresses border violence. Some individuals have expressed initial support for it, but once folks understand that border violence is not actually addressed whatsoever by this legislation, we see support begin to drop.

What we’re working towards in Arizona—in anticipation of the law’s implementation—is to help law enforcement understand the jeopardy they are placed in—being faced with law suits if they enforce the law and lawsuits if they don’t enforce the law. We’re really seeking to try to find opportunities to help others in the country avoid SB1070-like measures and try to stop copycat legislation across the country. Instead, we want to focus on the kinds of measures that actually help interdict the criminal activity we see happening in border regions.

State Sen. Joe Bolkcom of Iowa is trying to leverage state wage enforcement legislation to address the rampant exploitation of all Iowa workers by unscrupulous employers. According to Sen. Bolkcom, the current wage protection laws in Iowa are weak.

We have focused on expanding and improving wage/hour enforcement law. This legislation really targets those employers who would take advantage of any Iowa worker—including newcomers. Essentially, it’s a zero tolerance law for unscrupulous employers that protects every worker and ensures that we don’t become a state where people are taken advantage of—whether they’re new to the state or have been long-term Iowa workers. Essentially our approach to fighting off really bad anti-immigrant legislation is to say that all Iowa workers deserve protections from wage theft, from law-breaking employers. It’s the best way to strengthen workers, their families and Iowa’s communities.

State Sen. Luz Robles of Utah has prioritized quality, accessible and affordable health care for all children in Utah. After President Obama signed the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (SCHIP) back in 2009, Sen. Robles continues those efforts by introducing health amendments to benefit legal immigrant children.

It’s always more cost effective to provide adequate coverage to these children than it is to be dealing with children who are uninsured for that five year period. That’s our message throughout the session. It’s important for us to have all the children in Utah covered.

State Sen. Daylin Leach of Pennsylvania has introduced an advanced community policing bill which essentially bars local law enforcement from enforcing federal immigration laws.

Local police are supposed to stop street crime, which becomes more difficult to do if people in the neighborhood you’re policing or patrolling don’t trust you because they fear you’re going investigating their immigration status. They’re less likely to cooperate with you or give you the tips you need. In fact, a number of police chiefs have made that point that the obligation contained in the Arizona law would undermine their ability to do what they have historically been charged to do.

These are just a few examples of how frustrated state legislators are pushing back on anti-immigration legislation and restrictionists in their states. Although immigration advocates anxiously await the Department of Justice’s soon-to-be-filed federal lawsuit against SB1070, anti-immigration measures in other states unfortunately show no sign of slowing. One can only hope that as the economic, political and legal consequences of anti-immigration laws begin to unfold, that communities—and the legislators who represent them—begin to understand the costly damages these measures will have down the road.

Even as Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) remains hard at work to find the wrong solution for a mythical problem, she seems to have time to spread information and make statements so ludicrous that calling them falsehoods seems too lenient. At a Republican gubernatorial primary debate last week, Brewer criticized her opponent’s statement that many undocumented immigrants “are just trying to feed their family…they just want to work,” by calling majority of undocumented immigrants “drug mules.”

During the debate, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer stated:

We are a nation of laws. And they are coming across our border illegally. And the majority of them in my opinion and I think in the opinion of law enforcement is that they are not coming here to work. They are coming here and they’re bringing drugs. And they’re doing drop houses and they’re extorting people and they’re terrorizing the families. That is the truth, Matt. That is the truth…

To be clear, Brewer stated that the majority of immigrants are coming here to bring drugs, extort people, and terrorize families. The statement was so absurd and patently false that she attempted to walk it back in a later press release, but then proceeded to make it worse. Brewer released a press statement which lacked a single apologetic word, choosing to simply re-word her previous statement. Even noted border-hawk Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) disagreed with her statement (while supporting her actions in general). Brewer’s lack of remorse is almost as troubling as her penchant for ignoring reality.

E.J. Montini of the Arizona Republic had a more level-headed response: go talk to the Phoenix police department about what should be done.

Brewer correctly points out that Arizona has a problem with drug smuggling, drop houses, kidnapping and extortion. There is a special unit within the Phoenix Police Department fighting those crimes. For a column a while back I asked a Phoenix police spokesman what living in the world’s so-called “kidnapping capital” means for the average Phoenix resident.

He said, “We’re talking about drop houses where people who have used coyotes to get into the country may be held for ransom. And we’re talking about the kidnapping of smugglers and associates. I have no fear that my kids or grandkids will be victims. Or that E.J. Montini will be a victim.”

Even T.J. Bonner of the National Border Patrol Council commented that Brewer’s claims were “clearly not the case.” According to CNN:

Bonner said that some undocumented immigrants caught by border patrol agents have drugs on them, and that they sometimes blame pressure from the drug cartels. But, he said, those claims have little credibility because drug smugglers are typically transporting much larger quantities of drugs. And besides, he said, if what Brewer said were true, there would be many more prosecutions for drug smuggling. Brewer’s comments, Bonner said, don’t “comport with reality — that’s the nicest way to put it.”

Despite Brewer’s ignorant comments, the facts show that not only do immigrants commit fewer crimes than citizens, but that crime rates have been falling in Arizona for years. It is sad, but perhaps unsurprising, that Brewer would make these comments in the wake of signing SB 1070, Arizona’s harsh new immigration law. It’s bad enough that Brewer ignored these facts when signing SB 1070 into law, but it’s worse that she continues to do so.

Today, President Obama delivered his first major immigration speech at American University urging Republicans to put bipartisan and election politics aside and help Democrats fix our broken immigration system once and for all. With an audience of law enforcement, elected officials, and evangelical, business, labor, and community leaders, the President provided a framework for understanding the depth and complexity of the immigration issue—laying out the fundamental problems with our immigration system while highlighting the critical role immigrants have and continue to play in strengthening America. The President then asked Republican leadership to join his Administration’s efforts to step up, take responsibility and pass an immigration reform bill.

In today’s speech, the President made it clear that this Administration is ready to move forward. Action is needed, but he needs Republicans support.

Our task then is to make our national laws actually work – to shape a system that reflects our values as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And that means being honest about the problem, and getting past the false debates that divide the country rather than bring it together.

The question now is whether we will have the courage and the political will to pass a bill through Congress, to finally get it done… I’m ready to move forward; the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward; and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward. But the fact is, without bipartisan support, as we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem. Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes. That is the political and mathematical reality. The only way to reduce the risk that this effort will again falter because of politics is if members of both parties are willing to take responsibility for solving this problem once and for all.

I believe we can put politics aside and finally have an immigration system that’s accountable. I believe we can appeal not to people’s fears but to their hopes, to their highest ideals, because that’s who we are as Americans.

Today’s speech follows back to back White House meetings this week with immigration advocates, faith groups, labor leaders and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. The speech also follows the President’s request for $600 million in additional border security spending to fund 1,000 additional Border Patrol agents, 160 additional ICE agents, and improved infrastructure along the Southwest Border. Although the President mentioned Arizona’s harsh immigration law, he did not comment on Department of Justice’s forthcoming legal challenge. The President did, however, reiterate that fixing the border alone is not a long term solution to our immigration problems.

Although today’s speech contained no new policy initiatives or a congressional timetable for reform, the President certainly made the case for why immigration is such an important issue. Now that the stage is set for a renewed and heightened reform effort, immigration advocates are waiting for the President to turn his words into action and show the same leadership moving immigration reform legislation forward that he showed today.

By COLLEEN LONG (AP) -

 NEW YORK – A man was convicted Monday of murder as a hate crime during his retrial on charges that he beat an Ecuadorean immigrant with an aluminum baseball bat after mistaking him and his brother for a gay couple.

 Jurors deliberated for about seven hours before convicting Keith Phoenix in the death of Jose Sucuzhanay. He also was convicted of attempted assault as a hate crime in the attack on Romel Sucuzhanay.

 The trial started about six weeks after the mistrial was declared on May 11 when a juror refused to deliberate.

 The brothers were walking home from a bar after a party at a Brooklyn church on Dec. 7, 2008. Romel Sucuzhanay had put his coat around his brother to keep him warm and was helping him walk because he was drunk.

 Meanwhile, Hakim Scott, 26 and Phoenix, 30, also leaving a party, pulled up in a sport utility vehicle. They began yelling anti-gay and anti-Hispanic slurs, according to Assistant District Attorney Josh Hanshaft.

 Jose Sucuzhanay became upset and tried to kick the wheel of the SUV, and Scott got out and smashed the beer bottle on his head, then chased Romel Sucuzhanay down the block with it, according to trial testimony. Phoenix grabbed a bat from the back of the SUV and attacked Jose Sucuzhanay, cracking his skull with the bat, according to testimony.

 The two drove away in the SUV and were captured about 20 minutes later on surveillance footage crossing the Triborough Bridge – since renamed the Robert F. Kennedy Bridge – into the Bronx. Prosecutors ended their closing arguments Monday by showing the footage of Phoenix on the bridge, smiling.

 Scott was convicted in May of manslaughter but acquitted of a more serious murder charge, and the jury found his actions were not a hate crime. He faces 25 years in prison and is awaiting sentencing.

 The two men were initially tried together with separate juries because they had implicated each other.

 Phoenix is facing 25 years to life in prison. His sentencing was set for Aug. 5. Both men will be sentenced by Judge Patricia DiMango.

 Phoenix’s attorney, Philip Smallman, had argued that the case was about a fight that escalated, not a premeditated attack.

 Smallman said Monday that it was Scott who started the fight, not Phoenix, and the evidence against his client, especially in the case of Romel, was weak.

 ”The bulk of the activity was attributed to the co-defendant,” he said. “My client wasn’t the first person out of the automobile. He didn’t start the fight.”

 Smallman said he would appeal.

 ”The jury has spoken and that’s the beauty of the system that we have,” he said.

 The victims’ brother said Phoenix showed no remorse.

 ”I cannot understand how a person could kill another person and be laughing, enjoying 20 minutes later,” Diego Sucuzhanay told reporters after the two-week trial. “That kind of reaction – it can be seen only in a person that’s full of hate.”

 The attack came about a month after another Ecuadorean immigrant, Marcelo Lucero, was stabbed to death in Patchogue, on Long Island. Jeffrey Conroy, 19, was convicted of manslaughter as a hate crime in that case last month. Six other teens pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentencing.

Immigrants, Latinos, and Asians are a Growing Economic Force  

 in Kentucky and West Virginia

 July 2, 2010

 Washington D.C. – The Immigration Policy Center has compiled research which shows that immigrants, Latinos, and Asians are important contributors to the economy, labor force, and tax base in both Kentucky and West Virginia. Immigrants and their children in particular are a growing economic force as consumers, taxpayers, and entrepreneurs.With the nation working towards economic recovery, Latinos, Asians, and immigrants will continue to play a key role in shaping the economic and political future of the Bluegrass and Mountain States.

Highlights from Kentucky include:

• Immigrants made up 2.8% of Kentucky’s population (or 119,503 people) in 2008.

• The purchasing power of Latinos totaled $2.1 billion and Asian buying power totaled nearly $1.8 billion in Kentucky in 2009.

• If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Kentucky, the state could lose $1.7 billion in economic activity and $756.8 million in gross state product.

Highlights from West Virginia include:    

• Immigrants made up 1.3% of West Virginia’s population (or 23,273 people) in 2008.

• The purchasing power of Latinos totaled $549.6 million and Asian buying power totaled $567.7 million in West Virginia in 2009.

• If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from West Virginia, the state could lose $26.6 million in economic activity and $11.8 million in gross state product.

There is no denying the contributions immigrants, Latinos, and Asians make in Kentucky and West Virginia and the important role they will play in the states’ economic futures. For more data on their contributions to the Bluegrass and Mountain States, view the IPC fact sheets in their entirety:

• New Americans in the Bluegrass State (Kentucky)
• New Americans in the Mountain State (West Virginia)

Read more about immigrant contributions in other states: 

• New Americans in the Yellowhammer State (Alabama)
• New Americans in the Last Frontier (Alaska)
• New Americans in the Grand Canyon State (Arizona)
• New Americans in the Natural State (Arkansas) 
• New Americans in the Golden State (California)
• New Americans in the Centennial State (Colorado)
• New Americans in the Constitution State (Connecticut) 
• New Americans in the Sunshine State (Florida)
• New Americans in the Peach State (Georgia)
• New Americans in the Gem State (Idaho)
• New Americans in the Hawkeye State (Iowa)
• New Americans in the Prairie State (Illinois)
• New Americans in the Hoosier State (Indiana)
• New Americans in the Sunflower State (Kansas)
• New Americans in the Pelican State (Louisiana)
• New Americans in the Pine Tree State (Maine)
• New Americans in the Old Line State (Maryland)
• New Americans in the Great Lakes State (Michigan) 
• New Americans in the North Star State (Minnesota)
• New Americans in the Magnolia State (Mississippi) 
• New Americans in the Show Me State (Missouri)
• New Americans in the Treasure State (Montana)
• New Americans in the Cornhusker State (Nebraska)
• New Americans in the Silver State (Nevada)
• New Americans in the Granite State (New Hampshire)
• New Americans in the Land of Enchantment (New Mexico)
• New Americans in the Garden State (New Jersey)
• New Americans in the Empire State (New York)
• New Americans in the Tar Heel State (North Carolina)
• New Americans in the Buckeye State (Ohio)
• New Americans in the Sooner State (Oklahoma)
• New Americans in the Beaver State (Oregon)
• New Americans in the Keystone State (Pennsylvania)
• New Americans in the Ocean State (Rhode Island)
• New Americans in the Palmetto State (South Carolina)
• New Americans in the Volunteer State (Tennessee)
• New Americans in the Lone Star State (Texas)   
• New Americans in the Beehive State (Utah) 
• New Americans in the Green Mountain State (Vermont)
• New Americans in the Old Dominion State (Virginia) 
• New Americans in the Evergreen State (Washington)
• New Americans in the Badger State (Wisconsin)

By Amanda Lee Myers

June 22, 2010

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062203486.html

“Cinco dolares,” Silvia Arias says when asked the price of car polish at a garage sale that she and two close friends, Minerva Ruiz and Claudia Suriano, are holding. “Five dollars.” Another sale is made.

 The three women planned the sale to raise money to leave Arizona. Though all are longtime residents, viewed as pillars of parental support at the neighborhood elementary school, they’re also illegal immigrants from Mexico. And along with many others, they want to escape a tough new state law whose stated intention is unambiguous: To drive illegal immigrants out of Arizona and to discourage them from coming here.

 There is no official data tracking how many are leaving as a result. “It’s something that’s really tough to get a handle on numerically,” said Bill Schooling, Arizona’s state demographer. “It’s not just the immigration bill. It’s also employer sanctions and the economy. How do you separate out the motivating factors?”

 Still, anecdotal evidence provided by schools and businesses in heavily Hispanic neighborhoods and by healthcare clinics suggests that sizable numbers are departing. Ignacio Rodriguez, associate director for the Phoenix Roman Catholic diocese’s Office of Hispanic Ministries, said churches in the area are also seeing families leave.

 Priests are “seeing some people approach them and ask for a blessing because they’re leaving the state to go back to their country of origin or another state,” he said. “Unless they approach and ask for a sending-off blessing, we wouldn’t have any idea they’re leaving or why.”

 Ruiz and Suriano and their families plan to move this month. Arias and her family are considering leaving, but are waiting to see if the law will go into effect as scheduled July 29, and, if so, how it will be enforced.

 The law requires police investigating another incident or crime to ask people about their immigration status if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” they’re in the country illegally. It also makes being in Arizona illegally a misdemeanor, and it prohibits seeking day-labor work along the state’s streets.

 Ruiz, Suriano and Arias are representative of many families facing what they consider a cruel dilemma. To leave, they must pull their children from school, uproot their lives and look for new jobs and homes elsewhere. But to stay is to be under the scrutiny of the nation’s most stringent immigration laws and the potentially greater threat of being caught, arrested and deported. They also perceive a growing hostility toward Hispanics, in general.

 On the quarter-mile stretch of Phoenix’s Belleview Street where both Ruiz and Suriano live, more than half the apartments and single-family homes have “for rent” signs out front.

 Alan Langston, president of the Arizona Rental Property Owners & Landlords Association, said his group doesn’t track vacancy rates but that his members believe they will be affected by people leaving because of the new law.

 The friends say most of the vacancy signs went up after the new law was signed in late April.

 ”Everyone’s afraid,” Arias says.

 The three friends are key members of a parents’ support group at their children’s school down the street, said Rosemarie Garcia, parent liaison for the Balsz Elementary School District.

 ”They are the paper and glue and the scissors of the whole thing,” Garcia said. “I can run to them for anything.”

 With two of the women leaving and the other thinking about it, Garcia is concerned about the school’s future.

 ”It’ll be like a desert here,” she said. “It’s a gap we’ll have all over the neighborhood, the community, our school.”

 Ruiz, Suriano and Arias met three years ago at cafecitos, or coffee talks, held at the school. Now their families hold barbecues together and their children have sleepovers.

 Arias, 49, and her day laborer husband paid a coyote to come to Arizona 15 years ago from Tepic, Nayarit on Mexico’s central-western coast. Their children, ages 9, 11 and 13, are U.S. citizens.

 ”I don’t want to leave but we don’t know what’s going to happen,” she says.

 Ruiz, 38, and her husband, who builds furniture, came to the U.S. from Los Mochis in the northwestern Mexican state of Sinaloa about six years ago on tourist visas, which expired long ago. Two of their kids, ages 9 and 13, are here illegally, while their 1-year-old was born here. The family is moving to Clovis, N.M., where they have family. “It’s calmer there,” Ruiz says.

 Suriano, 28, and her husband crossed the desert six years ago with their then-toddler. The boy is now 9, and the couple has a 4-year-old who was born here. They’re moving to Albuquerque, where they don’t know anyone but already have lined up an apartment and a carpentry job for him.

 ”I don’t want to go,” Suriano says, wiping away tears. “We’re leaving everything behind. But I’m scared the police will catch me and send me back to Mexico.”

 Some people in the neighborhood are not sympathetic.

 ”Bye-bye, see you later,” says 28-year-old Sarah Williams, who lives two blocks south of Ruiz and Suriano with her 5- and 7-year-old children and her aunt. “They’re taking opportunities from Americans and legal citizens.”

 However, Williams, says she doesn’t support Arizona’s new law because she believes it will lead to racial profiling.

 The law still faces several pending legal challenges. The U.S. Justice Department also is reviewing the statute for possible civil rights violations, with an eye toward a possible court challenge.

 The law’s backers say Congress isn’t doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, and so it’s the state’s duty to step up. They deplore the social costs and violence they say are associated with illegal immigration.

 The law’s critics say it will lead to racial profiling and discrimination against Hispanics, and damage ties between police and minority communities.

 As the debate plays out, dozens of healthcare clinics in central and southern Arizona say many of their Hispanic clients aren’t showing up for scheduled appointments. They say they’re either afraid to leave the house or they’re moving away, said Tara McCollum Plese, a spokeswoman for the Arizona Association of Community Health Centers, which oversees 132 facilities.

 ”Some are actually calling the clinics and asking if it’s safe to come, if they need papers,” since the new law passed, she said.

 Sick people avoiding treatment can become a public health problem, she said. “We’re actually worried about communicable diseases.”

 If enough people stop going to the clinics, she said, some services could be cut, and some clinics, especially in rural areas, could be forced to close.

 Schools may face laying off teachers and cutting programs because of fewer students, educators say.

 Parents pulled 39 children out of Balsz Elementary, which has a 75 percent Hispanic student body, since April 23, the day the law was signed by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer. In the small, five-school district, parents have pulled out 111 children, said district Superintendent Jeffrey Smith, who cites the new law as the leading factor.

 Smith said each student represents roughly $5,000 in annual funding to the district, so a drop of 111 students would represent roughly a $555,000 funding cut.

 Many schools across Arizona have seen a steady decline in Hispanic students in recent years, although some district superintendents say the current drop is more dramatic. Schools attribute the declining numbers to the recession and to the state’s employer-sanctions law, which passed in 2007 and carries license suspensions and revocations for those who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

 Area businesses also say they’re seeing the effects of people leaving the state.

 Steve Salvato, manager at the family-owned World Class Car Wash, just around the corner from Belleview Street, said business is down 30 percent. Salvato said the car wash relies mostly on Hispanic customers and points to the new law for the recent decline in business.

 ”A lot of people have just packed up and moved,” he said, adding that a strip mall across the street used to be bustling on weekends. “Now it’s like a ghost town.”

 A nearby Food City grocery store reports a 20 percent to 30 percent drop in business.

 Back at the garage sale, the three friends have a row of tables strewn with Barbie dolls, bicycle helmets, old movies and a Jane Fonda workout video. A laundry basket is overflowing with children’s toys, and a shopping cart is filled with clothes.

 They are selling off pieces of their lives.

 Their easy banter, mostly in Spanish, quickly turns to tears when they’re asked about their impending separation. Ruiz and Suriano have pleaded with Arias to follow them to New Mexico.

 ”They’re my companions,” Suriano says of the other two women. “We do everything hand-in-hand.”

By Markos Moulitsas

June 22, 2010

http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/markos-moulitas/104869-calif-latinos-arent-fooled

Once promising, the GOP’s designs on the Golden State governor’s mansion and Sen. Barbara Boxer’s seat are now running aground on a serious, self-imposed obstacle – the months of anti-immigrant rhetoric voiced by their candidates in this immigrant-rich state.

 In the governor’s race, former eBay CEO Meg Whitman spent more than $88 million ($71 million of which was her own) to earn her party’s nomination, veering increasingly rightward on immigration to fend off her challengers. “Let me be very clear: I am 100 percent against amnesty, no exceptions,” she said. “[U]ntil we actually do secure the border and actually stop illegal immigration, we can’t talk about any other solutions, and I am 100 percent against amnesty.”

 Reinforcing her harsh views on immigration, Whitman’s campaign chairman is former Gov. Pete Wilson – the architect of the hateful and hated anti-immigrant Proposition 187.

 On the Senate side, former HP CEO Carly Fiorina was even more strident en route to her party’s nomination. Responding to Democratic attacks on the racist Arizona anti-immigrant law, S.B. 1070, Fiorina said she was “outraged” at what she saw as the vilification of Arizona and a law she strongly supported.

 Between 2000 and 2008, Latino turnout in California has grown 85.41 percent, from 1.6 million to just shy of 3 million – over 21 percent of the total, and growing.

 Fiorina doesn’t worry too much about them, as she told Fox News: “When I talk with members of the Latino community … what they say to me is, you know what, this is a question of criminals crossing the border.” Of course, it’s not. Not in the real world, anyway. A bipartisan survey for America’s Voice conducted by Lake Research (D) and Public Opinion Strategies (R) found that while 60 percent of Americans supported Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, with 23 opposing, the numbers were 35-55 percent among Latinos.

  That same poll showed that 52 percent of supporters did so because it sent a message to the federal government. Only 28 percent thought it would actually reduce illegal immigration, and a piddling 12 percent believed the nonsensical notion that raiding dishwashers and crop pickers would somehow affect Mexican drug cartels. Not even the law’s supporters are as deluded as Fiorina.

 Whitman is a little more worried about Latino voters, telling The New York Times that she would “move away from immigration to broaden her appeal” after the primary, while running ads on Spanish-language TV during World Cup broadcasts, claiming, implausibly, that “She respects our community.” Democratic groups won’t let that happen. The California Nurses Association paid to re-air a Whitman primary ad on Spanish-language radio:

 Meg Whitman: Don’t be fooled by misleading ads; my position on immigration is crystal-clear. Illegal immigrants are just that, illegal. I am 100 percent against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Period. As governor, I will crack down on so-called sanctuary cities like San Francisco who thumb their nose at our laws. Illegal immigrants should not expect benefits from the state of California. No driver’s license and no admission to state-funded institutions of higher education. And I’ll create an economic fence to crack down on employers who break the law by using illegal labor.

 Pete Wilson: This is former Gov. Pete Wilson. I know how important it is to stop illegal immigration and I know Meg Whitman. Meg will be tough as nails on illegal immigration. She’ll fight to secure our border and go after sanctuary cities.

 Fiorina has already given up on the Latino vote, and Whitman probably should as well, because the fastest-growing portion of California’s electorate knows exactly what the GOP is selling.

Cite as 25 I&N Dec. 267 (BIA 2010) Interim Decision #3685

File A038 829 033 – Charlotte, North Carolina
Decided June 23, 2010
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals

Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) (2006),
requires mandatory detention of a criminal alien only if he or she is released from non-DHS
custody after the expiration of the Transition Period Custody Rules (“TPCR”) and only
where there has been a post-TPCR release that is directly tied to the basis for detention under sections 236(c)(1)(A)–(D) of the Act. Matter of Saysana, 24 I&N Dec. 602 (BIA 2008), overruled; Matter of Adeniji, 22 I&N Dec. 1102 (BIA 1999), modified.

Border Patrol doubted his papers because he speaks very little English

By SUSAN CARROLL
HOUSTON CHRONICLE

June 23, 2010, 9:33PM

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7077166.html

 Immigration officials are reviewing whether a 19-year-old man deported last week from South Texas is actually a U.S. citizen born in Houston.

Luis Alberto Delgado said he and his older brother were stopped last Thursday by a Jim Wells County Sheriff captain, who called the U.S. Border Patrol.

Despite carrying a birth certificate showing he was born at Houston’s Ben Taub Hospital, a state of Texas ID card and a Social Security card, Delgado said he was taken into Border Patrol custody, questioned for eight hours and pressured into signing paperwork that cleared the way for his removal to Mexico.

Delgado, who returned to Houston three years ago after spending much of his childhood in Mexico, said immigration officials were suspicious because he spoke very little English. He said they kept saying, “No, these papers aren’t yours.”

“What they did to me was discrimination,” Delgado said in a telephone interview from Reynosa. “I don’t understand why they did this.”

“I am an American citizen,” he said.

A U.S. Border Patrol spokesman said that officials do not comment on individual cases. A spokesman for the Texas Department of State Health Services, Chris Van Deusen, confirmed that the state has a birth certificate on file matching the information on one provided to authorities by Delgado. The Houston Chronicle reviewed a certified copy of the birth certificate.

U.S. immigration officials have faced scrutiny in recent years over allegations that they have deported U.S. citizens, including a high-profile case of a mentally disabled Los Angeles man who was lost for months in Mexico in 2007. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., said some cases in the past have been “appalling,” but she was encouraged that Immigration and Customs Enforcement Assistant Secretary John Morton has taken steps to help revise guidelines to prevent such situations.

Isaias Torres, a Houston immigration attorney who took Delgado’s case pro bono, said he contacted immigration officials Monday and said they initially were responsive to concerns that Delgado is a citizen but have not taken steps to return him to the U.S.

“I hope they will move on this quickly,” he said. “We want him back here.”

Stopped by a sheriff

Delgado and his brother, Eduardo Luis Pompa, dropped their niece off in Falfurrias last Thursday afternoon and were about 5 miles outside of Alice when they were stopped by a county sheriff.

Capt. Joe R. Martinez said he pulled Pompa over because the passenger, Delgado, was not wearing a seat belt. Martinez said he asked Pompa for a driver’s license, but he did not have one. He also did not speak English, Martinez said.

Martinez said he asked the Border Patrol for help to identify the brothers.

Martinez said he booked Pompa into the county jail for driving without a license, and the Border Patrol took Delgado into immigration custody. Martinez said Pompa was released from jail after posting bail after jailers were told by federal officials that he is a U.S. citizen.

In the meantime, Delgado was at a South Texas Border Patrol station being questioned by immigration agents about his papers.

He said he was detained from 4 p.m. to midnight and pressured to sign paperwork that resulted in his being sent to Matamoros.

“The official that was holding me told me I had to sign them … or I would have to stay there,” Delgado said.

“I thought if I signed them, they’d let me go free, and I could return to Houston,” he said.

Stranded in Reynosa

Delgado said he never was expressly told by the agent that he would be released from custody in the U.S. if he signed the papers, but he believed that to be true.

Torres said Delgado’s case may have been complicated for the Border Patrol because Delgado’s family used a fake Mexican birth certificate to enroll him in school in Mexico.

He said school officials in Mexico historically give parents of U.S. children a hard time enrolling them in school without a Mexican birth certificate and look the other way if it’s fraudulent.

Still, Torres questioned why Delgado was allowed to pass through the port of entry in Laredo three years ago without incident and why immigration officials didn’t take more time to verify all of his documents. He said Delgado simply didn’t know any better than to sign the immigration paperwork last week, Torres said.

“He’s just a teenager,” Torres said.

When Delgado tried to come back to the U.S. through the port of entry, he said he was told he could face up to 20 years in prison for entering the country after being deported.

Now, Delgado said, he is stranded in Reynosa, trying to understand how he ended up barred from the U.S.

susan.carroll@chron.com