Recent restaurant raids show immigration agency's new strategy - Springfield, IL - The State Journal-Register

Recent restaurant raids show immigration agency's new strategy - Springfield, IL - The State Journal-Register

This article from Springfield, IL discusses the new enforcement strategy for immigration. That is to audit the I-9 files of employers all over the country and to fine the employers and putting the undocumented workers in deportation. This is what restrictionists say they want (although I'm not holding my breath waiting for them to praise the Obama administration). But it also has to be what reformers want because even though it is painful...change is not going to come until more powerful economic interests start to be affected by our antiquated immigration policy.

When popular restaurant chain names start appearing in articles like this with big fines next to their names - that is when you know reform is on the way.

Why don't they just come here legally like my great-grandparents did?

Why? 1. Because it used to be a lot easier to come here "legally"; 2. Because it once was easier to legalize yourself even if you came here illegally; 3. Because it used to be easy to come back legally even if you had been here illegally in the past.

Here is some history of immigration law from the USCIS itself:

Act of March 3, 1875 (18 Statutes-at-Large 477)

Established the policy of direct federal regulation of immigration by prohibiting for the first time entry to undesirable immigrants. Provisions:


a. Excluded criminals and prostitutes from admission.

b. Prohibited the bringing of any Oriental persons without their free and voluntary consent; declared the contracting to supply “coolie” labor a felony.

c. Entrusted the inspection of immigrants to collectors of the ports.
 
Immigration Act of August 3, 1882 (22 Statutes-at-Large 214)

First general immigration law, established a system of central control of immigration through State Boards under the Secretary of the Treasury. Provisions:

a. Broadened restrictions on immigration by adding to the classes of inadmissible aliens, including persons likely to become a public charge.

b. Introduced a tax of 50 cents on each passenger brought to the United States.
 
Immigration Act of March 3, 1903 (32 Statutes-at-Large 1213)

An extensive codification of existing immigration law. Provisions:

a. Added to the list of inadmissible immigrants.

b. First measure to provide for the exclusion of aliens on the grounds of proscribed opinions by excluding “anarchists, or persons who believe in, or advocate, the overthrow by force or violence the government of the United States, or of all government, or of all forms of law, or the assassination of public officials.”

c. Extended to three years after entry the period during which an alien who was inadmissible at the time of entry could be deported.

d. Provided for the deportation of aliens who became public charges within two years after entry from causes existing prior to their landing.

e. Reaffirmed the contract labor law (see the 1885 act).

Immigration Act of May 26, 1924 (43 Statutes-at-Large 153)


The first permanent limitation on immigration, established the “national origins quota system.” In conjunction with the Immigration Act of 1917, governed American immigration policy until 1952 (see the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952).

Provisions:

a. Contained two quota provisions:

1. In effect until June 30, 1927—set the annual quota of any quota nationality at two percent of the number of foreign-born persons of such nationality resident in the continental United States in 1890 (total quota - 164,667).

2. From July 1, 1927 (later postponed to July 1, 1929) to December 31, 1952—used the national origins quota system: the annual quota for any country or nationality had the same relation to 150,000 as the number of inhabitants in the continental United States in 1920 having that national origin had to the total number of inhabitants in the continental United States in 1920.

Preference quota status was established for: unmarried children under 21; parents; spouses of U.S. citizens aged 21 and over; and for quota immigrants aged 21 and over who are skilled in agriculture, together with their wives and dependent children under age 16.

b. Nonquota status was accorded to: wives and unmarried children under 18 of U.S. citizens; natives of Western Hemisphere countries, with their families; nonimmigrants; and certain others. Subsequent amendments eliminated certain elements of this law’s inherent discrimination against women but comprehensive elimination was not achieved until 1952 (see the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952) 
 
c. Established the “consular control system” of immigration by mandating that no alien may be permitted entrance to the United States without an unexpired immigration visa issued by an American consular officer abroad. Thus, the State Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Service shared control of immigration.


d. Introduced the provision that, as a rule, no alien ineligible to become a citizen shall be admitted to the United States as an immigrant. This was aimed primarily at Japanese aliens.

e. Imposed fines on transportation companies who landed aliens in violation of U.S. Immigration laws.

f. Defined the term “immigrant” and designated all other alien entries into the United States as “nonimmigrant” (temporary visitor). Established classes of admission for nonimmigrant entries.
 
======================================================================
RAD~
So in the old days if you showed up and you weren't a criminal or a prostitute (or sadly, Asian) you got in "legally". The US didn't even use visas until after the 1924 law. Similarly, if you were inadmissible but managed to get in you could stay anyway after the three year statute of limitations ran out.
 
In those days there were no real numerical limits on immigrants - when you decided to come to the US - you came to the US. You simply needed to be able to afford the trip and convince the inspector you would be able to support yourself.
 
Now there are seven million people waiting in line for less than 400K available visas. The waiting times are multiple decades for some categories. This doesn't even take into account the ten to twelve million people here already without legal status. Why does it surprise anyone that this system doesn't work and that some people try to go around the law? If your spouse was living in the United States legally and filed paperwork for you and the children to come live legally in the USA in six years - how would that sound? (click the title above to see the report from the National Visa Center in Portsmouth - courtesy of ILW.com)
 
In the 1990s the law changed so that people who were in the United States for one year out of status would be barred from returning legally for 10 years even if they qualified for a visa. After 2001, no new "adjustment of status" paperwork can be filed for people here in the US who entered illegally even if they have approved visa petitions from US citizen relatives and are willing to pay a $1,000.00 penalty fee.
 
So they can't stay and get legal and they can't leave to try to come back legally either. Where does that leave us as a country? With people who have no chance of getting here legally any time soon either waiting at home for years separated from their loved ones or finding an "extralegal" method of getting here and remaining here out of legal status.
 
In doing research on immigration and geneaology, I have noticed that immigrants in the 1790s - 1920s often would come here alone and spend a year or even two working and making a home before sending for the rest of the family. That was a necessary hardship that many families undertook - I cannot remember ever seeing people waiting 5 or 10 years to bring their families to the USA nevermind the 23 years currently forecast for Philippines 4th preference petitions. 
 
So the fact of the matter is...most of our immigrant ancestors would be turned away if they tried to get in here today. This system is not working and needs to be reformed. I believe immigration has historically contributed to the strength and vitality to this country. There do have to be reasonable controls on immigration - but our current system is anything but reasonable.

Shakira on Comprehensive Immigration Reform (that's right, I said Shakira)

From Foreign Policy online by way of Benders Immigration Daily...

Lebanese-Colombian singer and activist Shakira got the red-carpet treatment in Washington today, meeting with President Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden at the White House and then joining World Bank President Robert Zoellick to announce a new $300 million initiative for early childhood development...

And Shakira isn't confining her advocacy to education; she also wants Obama to push forward on immigration reform. White House officials told Shakira that they hope to reach an agreement this year with the Republican Party to legalize undocumented immigrants, her representative said.

Immigration Reform is essential to bringing back the economy

From "TheStreet.com":

"Maybe we simply can't increase the number of high-growth firms," says Dane Stangler, a senior analyst at the Kauffman Foundation and co-author of the report. "But if there are ways to increase it, it's clearly not by what we've done in the past."
"So what would spur entrepreneurial growth in the U.S.? "We always come back to immigration," says Stangler, who says loosening visa restrictions would increase the number of small businesses and boost the economy."

Click the link to read the article.

Raising the Floor for American Workers

From the Immigration Policy Institute Web Page:

According to a new study by UCLA’s Dr. Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda, Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform, legalizing undocumented workers through comprehensive immigration reform would yield $1.5 trillion to the U.S. GDP over a ten year period, generate billions in additional tax revenue and consumer spending and support hundreds of thousands of jobs. The report, which runs several different economic scenarios, finds that enacting a comprehensive immigration reform plan which creates a legalization process for undocumented workers and sets a flexible visa program dependent on U.S. labor demands not only raises the floor for all American workers, but is an economic necessity.



RAD~Readers need to understand that Nativists' irrational fear of "the other" is not only morally objectionable -- it is costing this country a great deal of money!

Senator Chuck Schumer to lead new effort at immigration reform | Irish News | IrishCentral

Senator Chuck Schumer to lead new effort at immigration reform Irish News IrishCentral

A major effort to swing at least five key Republican senators behind immigration reform will be the key task of Senator Charles Schumer of New York, who is leading the effort in the senate to create new legislation.
Tens of thousands of Irish undocumented are among those anxiously awaiting new efforts this year to bring about reform. The last effort to create a bill, called the Kennedy/McCain immigration bill failed when Republicans refused to support it.
However, the new bill, which Senator Schumer and aides to President Obama are working on, will have strong enforcement measures in it in addition to a plan to legalize those here illegally.
President Obama has given a commitment to take up the issue soon after his health care reform bill passes, as is generally expected.
Schumer is counting on Republican Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, who has indicated that he will support a new bill that has strong enforcement measures and ensures that illegal immigration will be much harder after the bill passes.
"Schumer wants to show that legalizing the undocumented is actually good national security policy, as well as making it clear that it will become much harder for new illegals to work here if the new bill is passed" said a source.
Hispanic groups who have major clout with this White House are concerned that the proposed bill leans too far in the enforcement direction.
Among other senators on the Republican side that Schumer hopes will be reachable are Senators Olympia Snow and Susan Collins in Maine, Senator George Voinovich in Ohio and Senator John McCain of Arizona, who sponsored legislation before.
A House bill has already been introduced by Congressman Luis Gutierrez of Illinois, a close supporter of President Obama.

RAD~An update on CIR, and a reminder that immigration policy is not only about the border with Mexico.

Report: Number of immigration cases at record levels in US courts in 2009 - latimes.com

Report: Number of immigration cases at record levels in US courts in 2009 - latimes.com

MARK SHERMAN Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — Immigration prosecutions rose to record levels in 2009 as the Obama administration kept up aggressive enforcement that began under President George W. Bush.Nearly 27,000 people faced serious federal charges relating to immigration in 2009, according to Chief Justice John Roberts' annual year-end report on the judiciary. More than three-fourths were accused of illegally re-entering the United States after having been sent home before.Immigration cases increased by about a fifth over the previous year and made up a third of all new criminal filings in U.S. district courts in the government spending year that ended Sept. 30. The statistics were compiled by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.Wendy Sefsaf, spokeswoman for the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center, said she expects the number of prosecutions to remain high until Congress passes a law that gives the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants a way to remain in the United States legally."Can we really afford to be spending this kind of time and money locking up people who essentially have come here to work?" Sefsaf said.Roberts's brief report, with no commentary on the numbers, broke with a nearly 40-year tradition of chief justices highlighting the needs of the federal judiciary. Instead, Roberts said the courts "are operating soundly" and tacked on a summary of their caseloads.He also noted that increases in fraud, marijuana trafficking and sex crimes cases helped push the number of criminal cases to the highest level since 1932, the year before the repeal of Prohibition.The number of cases excludes less serious crimes that are handled by federal magistrate judges. In 2008, there were nearly 80,000 immigration cases in all, including those dealt with by magistrate judges, according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a private group at Syracuse University.


RAD~Is anyone really surprised that many people return after being deported even if they face likely prosecution? You shouldn't be, often their home, job, spouse and children still remain in the United States? It is fitting that the author mentions prosecutions are now at prohibition levels. When upwards of twelve million people living in the U.S. are in violation of the law and cannot get right with the law except by giving up everything they value - it is a recipe for political and social failure on the scale of prohibition.

FY 2009 Federal Prosecutions Sharply Higher; Surge Driven by Steep Jump in Immigration Filings

FY 2009 Federal Prosecutions Sharply Higher; Surge Driven by Steep Jump in Immigration Filings

RAD ~ It is time for restrictionists like "FAIR" to stop complaining. When criminal prosecutions of immigration violations make up the majority of the federal trial docket (and the Circuit Courts are also flooded with petitions for review of immigration cases) you know it is time for Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

MyrtleBeachOnline.com | 12/20/2009 | Deported adults leave U.S. citizen children behind

MyrtleBeachOnline.com | 12/20/2009 | Deported adults leave U.S. citizen children behind


Here's an all too typical story of how Congress (in an effort to look tough on illegal immigration) made poor public policy by removing discretion from immigration enforcement and immigration judges.

It happens all the time - not just in the immigration context. The war on drugs with its diparate treatment of "crack" cocaine offenders; the federal "three strikes" policy; mandatory federal sentencing guidelines. All of these expressions of Congressional bravado have been revisited over time because of their unfair or self-defeating effects in the real world outside Washington, D.C.

Law enforcement and judges need to have the ability (known as discretion) to decide how to apply and enforce the law under differing circumstances. This article discusses parents who have lived in the United States for close to 30 years raising a family of two U.S. born children (one heading off to college) - there is no discussion of these people being criminals or on welfare or not paying taxes or running up bills at the emergency room. They even have other family who have filed papers to get them legal status more than 10 years ago.

This should be an easy case...where the factors in favor of letting the family stay together outweigh the harms of the violation of the immigration law. Other cases may not be so easy, but the law gives the enforcement officers and the immigration judge's almost no ability to take each such case on its own merits. It's time to rethink that policy as well.

It is time for Congress to stop trying to look like tough guys and to give the people who actually do the work of immigration back the tools they need to do their jobs wisely.

All I want for Christmas is Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR)

Here is a summary (by the Immigration Policy Institute) of the Gutierrez bill on CIR. Of course it is a long way from the introduction of this bill to a completed new immigration law (just look at health reform). But it is a start!

http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/CIR_ASAP_2009_Summary.pdf