In the news this morning: Immigration in the Florida primary, Napolitano calls for reforms, Russell Pearce back in elected office, more

The Florida Primary and Immigration – Council on Foreign Relations An analysis of why immigration, while it’s not the top issue among Latino voters, will matter in today’s Florida primary election.

In Florida, a changing Latino mosaic reshapes politics – Chicago Tribune On how “the candidates’ focus on the fiercely anti-Castro Cuban-American community in South Florida may be overlooking a changing Latino vote.”

Homeland Security Chief Janet Napolitano Calls for Immigration Overhaul – Fox News Latino Among other things Napolitano, who has bee criticized by some for embracing tough enforcement measures, “specifically criticized Congress for failing to pass the so-called DREAM Act last year.”

Latina Candidate Barred Over English Proficiency Files Appeal – Fox News Latino Alejandrina Cabrera was barred from running for city office in Arizona due to her English proficiency. Now she is appealing to the state’s Supreme Court.

Russell Pearce, Ousted Arizona Immigration Law Architect, Elected To Republican Leadership Slot – Huffington Post Former state senator Pearce, the legislator behind SB 1070, wasn’t out of work long after losing a recall election. He’s now been elected first vice chairman of the Arizona Republican Party.

No transplant for dying dad who is illegal immigrant – San Jose Mercury News Hospital administrators at UC San Francisco Medical Center are declining a kidney transplant for Jesus Navarro from his wife, saying that because of his immigration status, it’s uncertain if he’ll be able to receive appropriate follow-up care.

NSEERS and ‘special registration’ are gone, but long-term effects continue

Last spring, Homeland Security announced that it was officially ending what was perhaps the most controversial immigration-national security program implemented in the immediate wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The National Security Entry-Exit Registration System, or NSEERS, focused on non-citizen men from 25 Muslim-majority countries with the goal of collecting their fingerprints, photographs, and monitoring their whereabouts. 

In the beginning, those who met the criteria had to participate in a “special registration” that required reporting to immigration officials for questioning, some having to travel long distances to do so. This provision was suspended in 2003 amid much public and political criticism. But of the 83,519 men interviewed under special registration between September 2002 and September 2003, according to Homeland Security statistics, 13,799 landed in deportation proceedings.

With the entire program now gone, NSEERS-related deportation cases that remain in the system have been the focus of renewed attention lately, especially as the Obama administration begins reviewing some 300,000 deportation cases to screen out “low-priority” immigrants who may qualify to stay. KPCC intern Yasmin Nouh highlights one of these:

Photo by fazen/Flickr (Creative Commons)

Hadi Zayed Zaidi is an aspiring student of industrial design and one of nearly 84,000 registrants with the now-defunct National Security Exit and Entry Registration System, known as NSEERS.

Zaidi, who was born in Pakistan and arrived in the U.S. at age four, registered with NSEERS after his 16th birthday in early 2003. Like most registrants, he had no terrorist ties. But Zaidi and his family had overstayed their visas.

He, his father, and his older brother, all of whom registered, were placed in deportation proceedings. His father was eventually able to stay legally; his brother’s deportation order remains outstanding. Zaidi faced imminent removal until earlier this month, when he was released from detention with orders to check in regularly with immigration officials. Last week he was granted a temporary stay of removal, although he can still be taken into custody.

Zaidi’s case is not uncommon. According to DHS, out of the nearly 84,000 registrants with NSEERS, around 14,000 were ordered deported and almost 3,000 were detained. But though the program has since been terminated, deportation cases initiated under NSEERS remain open.

It’s typical for cases like Hadi’s to continue even if they were initiated under the NSEERS program, says Arnoop Parsad, an immigration attorney at the Asian Law Caucus.

“There have been no steps to rescind the removal orders that were issued under NSEERS,” Parsad said. “The long-term effects are that you still have thousands and thousands who have either been deported or are facing bars. Once you’ve been ordered deported, it’s very difficult to gain status to live in the United States and so they’re left in a limbo status. They can’t work or marry a U.S. citizen or have children in the U.S.”

The long-defunct special registration provision of NSEERS “continues to cause fear in the Muslim community even a decade later,” Parsad said.

This was at the core of a report released last May by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund and New York University School of Law, which used case studies to illustrate the long-term effects of NSEERS, suggesting that Muslims continue to be targets of discriminatory immigration practices as a result of the program’s legacy. From the report:

Most of those charged with ordinary immigration violations and detained by ICE are provided a bond hearing and released after demonstrating that they are not a danger, threat to national security, or flight risk. However, lawyers report a recurring phenomenon in which Muslim non-citizens charged with minor immigration violations are detained in situations in which it is otherwise customary to release individuals.

Last June, the Obama administration welcomed what’s sometimes referred to as the Morton Memorandum, issued by John Morton, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The memo allows immigration officials to cancel deportation proceedings for an undocumented immigrant classified as a “low priority” for removal. Some factors that qualify someone as low-priority are if he or she entered the U.S. at a young age, attended school in the U.S., has a history of military service, has immediate family living in the U.S. or is of the elderly or the ill.

Attorney Parsad says Zaidi meets the conditions outlined the memo. Zaidi’s mother, Aida Zaidi, says the family plans to reopen his appeal in hopes that he can stay permanently.

“He’s entitled to a green card,” Zaidi said of her son. “My grandmother is a U.S. citizen. His younger brother is a U.S. born citizen. The first cousin is a U.S. Marine. His youngest uncle is a U.S. Army veteran. My first cousin is in the U.S. Air Force. If they just did more background checking, they will see that we have far more ties here than in Pakistan.”

What is a ‘wetbook?’ Ask a ‘librotraficante’ (Video)

Not sure whether to add these terms to the evolving cultural mashup dictionary, but Texas writer Tony Diaz got creative with his displeasure upon learning that the Tucson Unified School District would be discontinuing its Mexican American Studies program recently – and as part of that, also striking several book titles from the program’s extensive classroom reading list.

While district officials have said the books aren’t “banned” in that they can still be found in school libraries, nixed classroom volumes have been boxed up, among them the textbooks “Rethinking Columbus: The Next 500 Years” and “Occupied America: A History of Chicanos.”

But as on the border, illicit demand creates contraband supply, right? Enter Diaz’s funny-angry book smuggler, whose “librotraficante” carries, yes, “wetbooks,” packing them into his black SUV in as a rooster with terrific timing crows in the background.

(And it goes without saying, but the opinions he expresses are his own.)

Q: What does it cost to deport someone? A: More than you might think

Immigration enforcement isn’t usually argued in terms of dollars and cents, so a peek at the cost spreadsheet is always interesting, especially in an election year when talk of enforcement takes a prominent role on the campaign trail.

Business Insider has compiled a breakdown of the estimated cost of a single deportation as talk of deporting undocumented immigrants continues to make waves in the run-up to the 2012 election, with President Obama carrying out a record number of removals, Republican candidate Newt Romney talking about deporting criminals but not “grandmothers,” and rival Mitt Romney hoping people will “self-deport” if tougher laws make their lives miserable enough.

The breakdown is based not on a $12,500 per person estimate cited by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official before Congress last year, but on a higher estimate – $23,480 per person – from a non-governmental report in 2010. Here’s how Business Insider breaks down the cost – click on the links below for the details:


1. Apprehension: $18,310

2. Detention: $3,355

3. Legal Proceedings: $817

4. Transportation: $1,000

Read more at: www.businessinsider.com

In the news this morning: Immigration not only issue for Latino voters, Kansas seeks waiver for undocumented workers, more

For Hispanics, it’s not just about immigration – Miami Herald From the opinion piece: “Overlooked amid the loud immigration debate: Every major poll shows Hispanics are most concerned about jobs.”

Kansas Seeks Waiver for Undocumented Workers to Solve Farm Crisis – Fox News Latino In hopes of solving a labor shortage, the state’s agriculture secretary plans to seek a federal waiver that would let dairies and feedlots in Kansas hire undocumented workers.

Obama Campaign: GOP Rhetoric ‘Sealed Political Fate’ With Hispanics – ABC News A memo to reporters from campaign officials reads regarding the president’s GOP rivals: “Their extreme rhetoric on immigration during the televised debates has rejected our history as a nation of immigrants and alienated millions of Hispanic voters nationally.”

Newt Courts Latino Voters, But Do His Policies Match His Rhetoric? – Talking Points Memo Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has taken a more lenient stance on immigration than rival Mitt Romney, but there are questions as to how far he’d really go.

Police chief retiring in Conn. town hit by scandal – The Associated Press The police chief in Hartford, Conn., where four police officers have been charged with harassing Latinos and using excessive force, will now be retiring from office.

Posts of the week: Lunar New Year superstitions, ‘self-deportation,’ Obama’s immigration talk, @MexicanMitt and more

Photo by stumptownpanda/Flickr (Creative Commons)

If you want to live long, eat some noodles.

For anyone who might have missed some of the more popular posts this week, or who wants to read them again, I’m trying this little experiment: At the end of each week, I’ll be highlighting a few of the week’s top posts in a short roundup. So without further ado, here’s this week’s selection:

Monday

Drop that knife! A few superstitions for Lunar New Year KPCC’s Kim Bui shares some of the superstitions surrounding Lunar New Year, among them ensuring that the first person who visits you that day is a lucky individual, that you don’t use a knife (it’ll cut your luck!), that you don’t yell and that you do eat noodles, which help ensure longevity.

Tuesday

Romney’s “self-deportation” is not a new concept – does it work? The “self-deportation” that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney spoke of during Monday night’s debate in Florida refers to what some term “attrition through enforcement,” i.e. making life difficult enough for undocumented immigrants that they leave the country by choice. But data suggests that in spite of crackdowns at the federal level and in the states, there has not been a measurable exodus.

Wednesday

Obama’s immigration reform talk: More yawns than cheers? A compilation of media and other reactions to President Obama’s brief mention of immigration reform during Tuesday night’s State of the Union address, including proposed legislation that would provide legal status for undocumented college students.

Is @MexicanMitt a pocho? A peek behind the Twitter parody Cartoonist and Pocho.com funny man Lalo Alcaraz reveals – sort of – that he’s “a hundred percent” behind a Mitt Romney Twitter parody that seizes on the Republican presidential candidate’s Mexican roots. Unlike the typically reserved Romney, his vaquero alter-ego punctuates sentences with utterances like “Ajuua!!” The post links to audio from Alcaraz’s interview with KPCC’s Patt Morrison.

Thursday

Why doesn’t Mitt Romney consider himself Mexican American? In an interview this week with Univision’s Jorge Ramos, Romney said that while his father was born in Mexico, he would find it “disingenuous” to identify himself as Mexican American. There are some interesting historical factors behind Romney’s identity, including the Mexican laws in effect at the time his paternal ancestors moved to Mexico from the U.S. in the 19th century.

Friday

The GOP’s fight for Latino voters in Florida Audio and part of a transcript from an insightful segment on KPCC’s AirTalk, in which Republican political analyst Hector Barajas and Democratic strategist Roger Salazar joined host Larry Mantle and me to discuss the GOP presidential candidates’ attempts to reach Latino voters ahead of next Tuesday’s primary election, what isn’t working, and whether anything might.

A military-only version of the Dream Act?

Remember how GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich suggested that he’d back a version of the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act that didn’t have a college component? Taking a cue from Gingrich, a Florida Republican Congressman has now introduced just that, a House bill that proposes conditional legal status for undocumented young people who enlist in the military. Going to college, however, would not be an option.

Rep. David Rivera told the Miami Herald that such a bill would stand a greater change of approval than the existing Dream Act, which is the most recent version of a measure that’s been proposed several times in the last decade. That bill proposes granting conditional legal status to young people who arrived in the U.S. before age 16 if they attend college or join the military.

The biggest push for the long-proposed Dream Act has come from college students. But its military component has always been less well received, with critics fearing it could drive some youths for whom college is not an option into the military out of desperation for a green card. From the Herald story:


Inspired by Monday night’s Republican presidential debate over immigration, Rep. David Rivera, R-Miami, filed a bill that would give young people who serve in the military – not college students – a path to U.S. citizenship.

“If somebody is willing to die for America, then certainly they deserve a chance at life in America,” Rivera said.

…He said that he did add some measures to his legislation that might sway skeptics, including a provision that requires applicants to have been in the country not only since they before they turned 16, but for five consecutive years.

His own bill doesn’t ensure automatic residency, Rivera said. Applicants would need to meet a set of preliminary criteria to be considered for the program, and once accepted, demonstrate good moral conduct and a record of service in the United States military to then be eligible for legal status.

Read more at: www.miamiherald.com

Readers sound off on Obama and immigration, and then some

Screen shot from YouTube.com

A post following up on Tuesday’s State of the Union address titled “Obama’s immigration talk: More yawns than cheers?” has drawn several comments from readers, some directly addressing the president’s brief mention of immigration reform, some not.

In his address Tuesday, President Obama spoke of the need for comprehensive immigration reform, suggesting that if the Dream Act – proposed legislation that would grant conditional legal status to qualifying young people – were to reach his desk, “I will sign it right away.” But this component of his speech wasn’t anything new to those who follow immigration issues, and that was one of the themes of the next day’s reactions in media and elsewhere, samples of which I posted.

In reaction to the post, Skv wrote:

What about thousands of people who came to this country legally, paying taxes and are waiting for their turn to become legal residents. I’m one of them. I came here as a student legally, got a job legally, paying my share of taxes, doing my bit to the community I live in and am waiting for my turn to obtain permanent legal status for the past 7 years.

Is there any closure to our problems? It is rather sad to see that people who are illegal in this country are given importance than people who are here legally.

Hope replied:

Sorry Skv…I came here legally as student and never had a chance to get my resident till I felt in love with my current wife. We applied for my green card but we’ve been fighting with Immigration for 2 years because THEY believe our marriage is not BONA FIDE! I’ve been here for 14 years and when I tried to get my residence in a legal way that’s when my life and my wife’s become a nightmare! THIS IMMIGRATION IS BROKEN AND IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED!

At this point my suggestion is …come here legally or illegally – the currently Immigration will give you hard time whether you are legal or not!

Pedro Rita wrote:

Indeed. I am here 14 years also, legally working doing my own volunteer program for over 30 kids with disabilities totally free, with a PHD wife that just finished her studies and 3 Americans kids. I am waiting for my approved green card for over 5 years and looks like I will have to wait for 2 or more years until I get it.

My work creates 15 jobs for Americans and if I leave they all immediately will be out of work. Some bill must be approved to help us with this backlog, even something allowing using the old visas (350.000) from 2002 to 2006 that were not used. We need anything to help us out.

Sue88 wrote:

The legal immigrants who helped elect Obama came here legally for the most part. Why do they want people who commit crimes, work under the table, steal jobs from them  to get special consideration when everyone else plays by the rules?????

Prado4587 (who posts this often) replied:
Because Americans demand and consume the goods and services produced by workers who come or stay here illegally to produce the goods and services that we demand and consume. A lot of illegal immigrants left during the recession and after as Americans eased back their demand and consumption of these goods and services like construction. Unless we cut back on demand and consumption permanently, which will be hard when the economy picks up, or increase the number of immigration visas which is woefully too low to meet supply and demand, we’re going to have illegal aliens in the U.S.
Oiwhfljxcn replied to this conversation:
Do you think Sue, when you buy something and the price of the service isnt enough to pay more than 8 dollars/hour for the workers, you are playing by the rule? You generate illegal immigration because you dont pay enough what your fellow Americans are willing to work for. And I dont blame them for that. … Till you dont pay a decent price dont say you are playing by the rule.

Obama’s immigration policies have caused him to lose ground with Latino voters. The administration has made policy changes lately that will benefit some immigrants, including ongoing reviews of deportation cases and a proposed administrative tweak that would let undocumented green card seekers to apply for a special waiver in the U.S. instead of abroad, but broader reforms have yet to occur. Meanwhile, the administration has moved ahead with tough enforcement-based programs, like the controversial Secure Communities fingerprint-sharing program, and has carried out a record number of deportations.

Still, polls have continued to show Latino voters favoring the president over Republican rivals who have had an even tougher time courting Latinos, with immigration also a stumbling block.