Attorney General Ashcroft today defended his plan for local police enforcement of immigration laws saying "properly trained local police officers and deputies should be on the watch for those not in this country legally." In today's Featured Article, Jose Latour, who is a Republican, says "this time, the Attorney General's really taken the cake and pretty much anyone with even a fundamental understanding of the U.S. constitution is in an uproar."
In today's issue of the Daily, there is ofcourse much else - the Border Security Bill goes to President Bush for signing into law - various Representatives took to the floor of the House to make statements on immigration - we cover three administrative appeals at the Department of Labor - help wanted for an immigration attorney - five letters, and more.
We wish to thank those of our readers who wrote to us offering help after our recent hacking incident. Many wrote just to express support. To each of you, our heartfelt thanks.
200,000 Attorney Searches per Year!
Approximately 200,000 searches are made each year for immigration attorneys on ILW.COM. That's almost 400 searches per year per attorney listed in our lawyer directory. Which means that if you are listed with ILW.COM, then your listing will be searched once each day throughout the year. You need only one client a year to make a profit on your listing! For a personal discussion on listing your practice in our directory, please send an e-mail with your phone number to firstname.lastname@example.org. Alternatively, if you prefer to list yourself on-line, please click here: http://www.ilw.com/membership/.
Immigrant Advocates Band Together to Condemn Ashcroft's Ugliest Proposal Yet
Jose Latour writes "this time, the Attorney General's really taken the cake and pretty much anyone with even a fundamental understanding of the U.S. constitution is in an uproar ... turning our society into a snitch-based system where everyone must look over their shoulder will reduce us to a system which is repulsive to our national values. Want to see how such a system works? Visit Cuba, where each block has designated "observers" whose responsibility it is to see who is hanging with who and to report it to the government."
Attorney listings on ILW.COM are searched 200,000 times/year! Each attorney listed is searched an average of once each day! Just one new client will pay for the entire year's fee! Click here for more info: http://www.ilw.com/membership/
Immigration Law News
Rep. Pallone Says USDA Termination Of J-1 Visa Program Does America Injustice
In remarks in the House of Representatives, Rep. Pallone (D-NJ) said that terminating the J-1 visa waiver program at the Department of Agriculture "and
preventing qualified physicians from serving communities in America that lack sufficient health care does our country a great injustice."
Rep. Tancredo Criticizes Multiculturalism
In remarks in the House of Representatives, Rep. Tancredo (R-CO) said "we worship at the alter of multiculturalism and
we believe and we teach children that whatever culture that was
prevalent in the land from which they came is a culture that is better
than the one to which they have arrived, the one they are living in
today. We teach them that any culture is better than the United States,
that any country is better, that any society is better, that all we are
as a Nation are people with a heritage that is not worthy of great
merit or praise."
Final Debate On Border Security Bill
In the final debate on the Border Security Bill which now goes to President Bush for signing into law, Rep. Jackson-Lee (D-TX) said "as I rise to support this legislation, let me be very clear and
be very cautious that it is important that we in this country separate
out legitimate and focused immigration policy from the concept of
ferreting out terrorists."
Rep. Frank Praises Immigrant
In remarks in the House of Representatives, Rep. Frank (D-MA) praised a Portugese immigrant for his leadership.
Employer Pays H-2A Penalty
In the Matter of Loomis Livestock (Office of Adminstrative Law Judges, Department of Labor), the employer consented to pay $4,000 for violations of the H2A regulations.
Employer Withdraws Appeal Against Wage And Hour
In the Matter of Adminstrator, Wage and Hour v. Greater Southeast Community Hospital (Office of Administrative Law Judges, Department of Labor), the employer withdrew its appeal stating that outstanding issues had been resolved.
Employer Withdraws Review Of Alleged Stonewalling Of H-2A Applications By Regional Administrator
In the Matter of Berry-Taishan Farm (Office of Adminstrative Law Judges, Department of Labor), the employer withdrew its request for expedited de novo review of alleged stonewalling of H-2A applications by the Regional Administrator.
Keep on top of the latest in immigration law! Attend ILW.COM seminars! You can attend ILW.COM phone seminars from the convenience of your office! For more info on the seminars currently available, please click here: http://www.ilw.com/seminars/
Congress Passes Border Security Bill
The Washington Post reports the House of Representatives, by a vote of 411 to 0 finally passed the Border Security Bill which now goes to President Bush for signing into law.
Ashcroft Defends Local Police Enforcement Of Immigration Laws
A news item in the Arizona Daily Star quotes Attorney General Ashcroft saying "properly trained local police officers and deputies should be on the watch for those not in this country legally."
How to Get and Keep Corporate Clients? Use ILW's Case Tracking! Each case takes only a few minutes from start to finish! Serious practitioners find this modern technology a "must have." For more info, send e-mail to: email@example.com, include your phone #.
Immigration CLE Seminar
Year 2002 Immigration Law Update - Practicing Immigration Law in New York and Beyond Post September 2001: A Brave New World. Announcing a May 21-22, 2002, New York State Bar Association Continuing Legal Education Seminar. No area of practice has been more impacted by the events of September 11, 2001 than that of immigration and nationality law. We are pleased to present our traditionally popular, two-day program on the state of immigration law as critical issues relating to this practice continue to evolve on a day-to-day basis. 9/11 continues to significantly impact the practice of immigration law, the rights of legal immigrants and the way the power of the U.S. government is used to remove people from the United States. Attorneys are impacted by issues relating to national security and attorney-client privilege, access to clients and privacy and due process rights. In addition, policy, legislation, regulations and procedure relating to the H-1B program and all other components of "legal" immigration to the United States have changed the landscape. How immigration and nationality law will be enforced in this millennium is an important subject of review as Congress looks to restructure the Immigration and Naturalization Service itself. This program is designed to give the practitioner guidance and perspective with regard to all of these developments. The program's first day provides an update on late-breaking issues in the legislative and regulatory arenas and then deals with issues encountered in defense of aliens, in removal proceedings and what you need to know including procedures, cancellation of removal and other remedies and related issues. The program also reviews refugee and asylum law, and issues relating to documentation while in the United States for students and other visa holders, special security concerns and their impact on consular processing and admission to the United States. The program's second day focuses primarily on how to obtain immigration benefits and issues relating to the workplace. Ethics, liability and malpractice issues will be covered as well as projected trends in the practice given the after effects of September 11th. To register or for more information contact NYSBA's CLE Registrar at 1-800-582-2452 or at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Help Wanted - Employment Based Immigration Attorney
Tindall and Foster, P.C., an established immigration-only practice in Austin, Texas is seeking an experienced immigration attorney. The successful candidate is expected to possess 2-5 years experience in employment based immigration law, with demonstrable Labor Certification experience. Tindall & Foster, P.C. has been practicing immigration law since 1973. The Firm has offices in Austin and Houston and continues to expand. Please review www.tindallfoster.com and www.Austin360.com for background. 401(K), profit-sharing, medical and dental. Salary commensurate with experience. Experienced candidates may submit resumes and salary histories to Robert Loughran at email@example.com.
For information on advertising in the classifieds please click here
For a listing of current immigration events please click here
For services/products of use in your law practice please click here
Letters to the Editor
The Department of Labor recently published its proposed rules overhauling the entire Labor Certification process which will allow individuals to receive an approved application within 21 days. Today it may take years to receive an approval from the Dept. of Labor especially since there were thousands of application filed by illegals and visa overstays seeking protection under the April 30, 2001 245(i) deadline.
It seems that if this proposed rule becomes promulgated it will allow individuals to receive their residency in a year or so. There will not only be a rush to file an LC case there will be an inundation of fraudulent cases seeking to take advantage of this processing time. In an effort to reduce the backlogs and streamline the system the Department of Labor has over-simplified the process and has opened the door to abuse. If a case is denied, file another as the first only took 21 days! Also, there are talks that the I-140 visa petition (stage 2 for most Labor Certifications) will be available for premium processing where an approval can return in less than 2 weeks.
Why bother with a non-immigrant visa extension when you can be a resident in about a year or less. As we tighten our borders and make it more difficult to obtain a student or tourist visa does it make any sense to create a new avenue for abuse, especially one that will give the new "resident" much more protection under the law than a temporary visa holder?
I live in Charlotte, North Carolina, an area with a very large immigrant population. I do not want the immigrants, even the illegal ones, forced out of the United States. I only want them to pay their fair share for the privilege of living here.
I work for a construction firm and have learned Spanish in an effort to support our non-English speaking employees. I have seen every form of bogus identification known to man and heard of probably every possible way to obtain illegal identification. I have heard the men calculate how many hours they can work combined with how many dependents they have so they don't have to pay taxes on a paycheck. I cannot do anything about it, though, because it is hearsay and to report them would be discriminatory, and I have to respect the civil rights of someone who is here illegally.
I pay a small fortune in taxes each week. If all of us received our full pay but had to write that check to the government every payday, there'd be a revolution in America inside a month. I put myself through college working at a Burger King and babysitting. I work hard, and I pay dearly for the rights and privileges I enjoy. Yet the least experienced, least educated workers are bring home far more than I every week! I recently saw the paycheck of an Hispanic immigrant, and he only pays an average of $10.00 a week in federal income tax! This is wrong, as wrong as the uninsured drivers and unpaid emergency room charges we contend with.
I want the immigrants who are here illegally made legal. Yes, do security screening and prevent another 9/11 if at all possible, but we need to get these people documented and then tax the hell out of them. In Mecklenburg County next year our schools will be dominated by Hispanics, who will outnumber all other ethnic groups. The only issue I have with that is that most of their families pay nothing to support the schools! Illegals now have the right to sue U.S. citizens and receive legal representation in court, all at the taxpayer's expense.
Had enough, America? I hope to high heaven that a congressman, senator or someone with some sense reads this and does something about it. I have written all of my state and federal representatives asking for change, reminding them that we middle class Americans are overtaxed and in need of sweeping changes. Write to your representatives and demand a change. Persist, send the letter again every week until you get a response. Don't back down, and don't let yourself be ignored.
Thank you very much for letting me get this off my chest.
I'd like to offer my "two cents' worth" on a few issues.
Recently Carolyn Ann Killea wrote that another writer was "sadly mistaken" when he said that a U.S. citizen could not be deported. She is mistaken. As far as I know they can't even be required to leave. Deportation is a formal process, requiring hearings, etc., and can be imposed only on aliens illegally in the U.S. If the aliens ordered deported have U.S. citizen children, it is up to the adults to decide where the children will live.
Christine Flowers wrote that ..."Illegal entry from our Northern Border is almost as significant as that flowing from the South." That's incorrect. The number of aliens crossing illegally - and apprehended on - the southern border is many times more than that on the northern border. Ms. Flowers offered no statistics to support her statement.
Sushil Babu recently wrote that INS has proposed rules to limit B-2 visitors to a 30-day period of admission. This is false, but is widely propagated by special interest groups. INS has proposed that the minimum period be limited to 30 days. If the visitor can explain their need, they can be given up to six months. It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask someone why they wish to remain here for 6 months. What still seems silly is that a visitor in the border area, who wishes to visit for a few hours, will automatically be given 30 days, in spite of what they need.
Richard Baer again writes that he wishes to discuss ..."possible solutions to the immigrant problem." His solution still appears to be to admit and/or legalize any aliens who wish to come to the U.S. He doesn't seem to recognize the fact that a majority of us believe that we should reduce legal immigration and should enforce our immigration laws. (The polls were provided, thanks to Ali Alexander.) We could be wrong, but Mr. Baer and those who believe as he does are going to have to convince us. You shouldn't just dismiss those whose points of view are different, particularly when there are a lot of them.
Lastly, Karmel Bowen writes (paraphrasing) that we "haves" (the U.S.) should not be surprised that the "have nots" want to come here. She implied that our standard of living gives some legitimacy to those who would come here, legally or illegally. If, however, we open the flood gates as some have suggested, our standard of living will deteriorate to the point that the magnet that draws the "have nots" will be gone. I guess then that we won't have to have this national guilty conscience about living in this country.
John H. Frecker
Mr. Alexander states that the number of refugee admissions in any given year is relatively low, but I am not sure what, exactly, he is comparing this figure to. Is he referring to the number of illegal immigrants found at any given time in the United States? If that is the thrust of his argument, I would be inclined to agree. If, however, he is trying to say that because the number of refugee admissions is 'only' around 50,000 (not to mention the diversity visas, for which Mexicans and other nationals may not apply) Middle Easterners and other 'non' Hispanics are at a disadvantage, he is incorrect. Again, there is no law to my knowledge which gives preference to Mexicans or, in fact, to any particular nationality on the basis of how they entered this country, with the possible exception of the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966.
I agree that immigration is a topic that must be viewed with compassion, married, of course, to pragmatism. I do not approve of open borders, and I also oppose 245(i) because I feel that it provides an enormous opportunity for fraud. I favor the repeal of the unlawful presence bars, in order to obviate the need for 245(i).
Nonetheless, holding that one group should be penalized for their nationality (Mexicans) while another should receive special consideration (e.g.Middle Easterners) makes no sense, and clearly lacks any semblance of compassion or logic.
Kudos to Ali Alexander. Over the last few months he has consistently provided well written opinions on a range of immigration issues. Irregardless of whether I always agree with his ideas, I recognize his thoughtfulness. Thank you Mr. Alexander for taking the time to share. Please continue to provide your comments.
Grateful in Philly
An Important disclaimer! The information provided on this page is not legal advice.
Transmission of this information is not intended to create, and receipt by you does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers must not act upon any information without first seeking advice from a
qualified attorney. Send Correspondence and articles to firstname.lastname@example.org. Letters and articles may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium. Opinions expressed in letters and articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.