Texas Immigration Lawyer & Attorney : Kraft & Associates Law Firm : Visas, Green Card, Citizenship, Deportation : Dallas, Texas

The Des Moines Register is reporting today that U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has made the largest raid in Iowa history at a meat packing plant in Postville, Iowa. Here are excerpts:

Postville, Ia. – At least 300 people were arrested today at the Agriprocessors, Inc. meat packing plant, federal officials said.

The operation, which targeted people who illegally used other persons Social Security numbers and were in the U.S. illegally, was the largest of its kind in Iowa, said Claude Arnold, a special agent with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Agents with ICE have received information about immigration violations at the plant over the past two years, according to a federal search warrant made public today. Authorities said they will release more details at another press conference tomorrow morning in Cedar Rapids.

Postville, on the border of Allamakee and Clayton counties, is a community of more than 2,500 people that includes natives of German and Norwegian heritage and newcomers who include Hasidic Jews from New York, plus immigrants from Mexico, Russian, Ukraine and many other countries.

The Agriprocessors plant, known as the nation’s largest kosher slaughterhouse, is northeast Iowa’s largest employer.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As reported in today's Dallas Morning News, the growth of the Latino population in the United States and in Texas is continuing at a rapid pace. Here are excerpts:

The percentage of Hispanics in Texas and the nation grew again last year, continuing a trend that has endured throughout the decade, new statistics show.

Today, the U.S. Census will release population estimates showing that Hispanics in the U.S. numbered 45.5 million in 2007, an increase of 1.4 million during the yearlong period beginning in July 2006. In Texas, the number of Hispanics has grown to make up 36 percent of the state's population, up from 32 percent in 2000.

Among the census' other findings:

• Hispanics made up 15.1 percent of the 301 million U.S. residents in 2007, compared to 12.5 percent eight years ago.

• In terms of births and migration into the United States, Hispanics arrived in numbers three times those of non-Hispanic whites.

• Since the last census, Texas has added 1.9 million Hispanics, or five of every eight new Texans.

Moreover, experts say, the trend won't end soon: The median age of non-Hispanic whites in Texas last year was nearly 40 years old, compared to about 27 for Hispanics. The disparity in most other states was larger.

Also, as immigrants learn English, they'll assimilate in terms of American culture and friends, and marry non-Hispanics, the experts said.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I don't know if his plan is to keep other citizens of Texas out of Brownsville or to keep Brownsville residents out of the rest of Texas, but Congressman Tom Tancredo made a very strange statement in Brownsville yesterday. Here's the story from the Channel 5 TV station in Weslaco:

BROWNSVILLE - A Colorado Congressman is under fire this morning for making a controversial statement to some Brownsville landowners.

Republican Tom Tancredo supports the border wall. The U.S. representative attended the hearing in Brownsville yesterday.

During the hearing, he told the Brownsville landowners, "I suggest that you build this fence around the northern part of your city..." implying that all of Brownsville should be on the Mexican side of the wall.

Right now NEWSCHANNEL 5 is working to get clarification from Congressman Tancredo.

• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks

The Dallas Morning News reports today that immigration agents raided several companies across the country, and arrested quite a few people for identity theft. Especially hard-hit was a Pilgrim's Pride plant in East Texas. Here are excerpts from the story:

Federal immigration officials on Wednesday arrested more than 280 workers employed at Pilgrim's Pride poultry plants in five states, including Texas, on suspicion of committing identity theft. The crackdown is part of a widening criminal investigation involving workers at the world's largest poultry processor.

"This case is a good example of our efforts to prosecute identity theft that harms credit and the good name of U.S. citizens," said Julie Myers, assistant secretary for the U.S. Homeland Security Department, in a telephone interview from Washington, D.C.

"We have cooperated fully with the government," said Ray Atkinson, a Pilgrim's Pride spokesman, at corporate headquarters in Pittsburg, Texas.

Pilgrim's Pride also participates in a federal government program to voluntarily check Social Security numbers against workers' names in two government databases, Mr. Atkinson said. The program is known as E-Verify. It has been criticized as error-prone and because it can't detect workers who are using authentic Social Security numbers connected to a U.S. citizen or a legal permanent resident.

"Unfortunately, it does not detect ID theft situations," Mr. Atkinson said of E-Verify.

Identity fraud is a felony under federal law, and a growing problem as federal immigration efforts have intensified and workers in the U.S. illegally have looked for ways to avoid detection. Some U.S. citizens, and legal residents, rent or share their Social Security numbers, making detection even more arduous.

In Houston, Dallas and Washington, D.C., advocates for those detained denounced the law enforcement round-ups. Douglas Rivlin of the National Immigration Forum noted the U.S. arrival on Tuesday of Roman Catholic Pope Benedict XVI and the pontiff's message to President Bush on immigration.

"At the same moment that Pope Benedict XVI was admonishing President Bush that the U.S. must treat immigrants with dignity and humanity, the Bush administration was rounding up immigrant workers in raids in at least five states across the country," Mr. Rivlin said in a prepared statement. "What a black eye for the president and for the United States."

Pilgrim's Pride officials have been activists for a comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws. An attempt at such reform failed last year in Congress. It would have provided a path to citizenship for some of the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants, a guest worker program and toughened enforcement against employers.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Dallas Morning News today reports that 28 separate federal laws or regulations were waived in order for Homeland Security to build the Texas-Mexico border fence. It looks like the waivers will be appealed to the Supreme Court. Here are exerpts:

The U.S. Supreme Court may get a chance to join the fractious debate over building fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.

A legal challenge by two environmental groups seeking to limit enhanced Department of Homeland Security powers to suspend more than 30 laws to build the fence is gathering support in Congress.

But at least one constitutional expert said that although the legal challenge underscores the broad array of powers Congress has delegated to Homeland Security, "environmentalists face an uphill battle."

"There is a legitimate legal gripe here, in that there are serious questions about how much power Congress can delegate to other branches of government," said Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law authority at George Washington University Law School.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced the waiver of about three dozen environmental laws to expedite construction of the border fence in Texas and Arizona on April 1.

"This blanket waiver of laws like the Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act is a clear and disturbing abuse of the secretary's discretion," said U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce committee. "Congress' efforts to seek justification for this waiver from DHS have been stonewalled, which leads me to believe none exists."

Congress also denied oversight by federal appeals courts to any challenges, except for a request to the Supreme Court to review.

In his announcement of the most recent waivers, Mr. Chertoff said that Homeland Security remains committed to environmental responsibility and that the agency "is neither compromising its commitment to responsible environmental stewardship nor its commitment to solicit and respond to the needs of state, local and tribal governments, other agencies of the federal government and local residents."

He stressed that his agency will continue to work closely with the Department of Interior and other federal and state resources management agencies to ensure that impact to the environment and cultural and historic artifacts is properly analyzed and minimized.

But the size and scope of the use of waivers to clear the path for construction of the border fence is virtually unprecedented, Dr. Turley said.

More troubling, he added, is the apparent dismissal of due process as "endless debate or protracted litigation."

Mr. Chertoff has said the waivers are necessary because "criminal activity at the border does not stop for endless debate or protracted litigation."

But Dr. Turley said Congress has in recent years "become almost waiver happy."

"They see it as a form of no-cost legislating," he said. "But there is no evidence Congress considered the implications of giving Homeland Security such broad waiver power."

There are indications that Congress may be trying to regain some of the authority it gave away.

Hidalgo Couny: Laws in suspension:

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff waived the following laws for construction of the border fence in Hidalgo County, Texas: 1. National Environmental Policy Act 2. Endangered Species Act 3. Federal Water Pollution Control Act 4. National Historic Preservation Act 5. Migratory Bird Treaty Act 6. Clean Air Act 7. Archaeological Resources Protection Act 8. Safe Drinking Water Act 9. Noise Control Act 10. Solid Waste Disposal Act 11. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 12. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 13. Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act 14. Antiquities Act 15. Historic Sites, Buildings and Antiquities Act 16. Farmland Protection Policy Act 17. Coastal Zone Management Act 18. Federal Land Policy and Management Act 19. National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act 20. Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 21. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 22. Administrative Procedure Act 23. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 24. Eagle Protection Repatriation Act 25. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 26. American Indian Religious Freedom Act 27. Religious Freedom Restoration Act 28. Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 SOURCE: Federal Register Online

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here's a troubling bit of news from today's Dallas Morning News: Violence against U.S. Border Patrol agents is up 47 percent for the first six months of the fiscal year, as surveillance toughens along the 2,000-mile stretch of U.S.-Mexico border, David Aguilar, the nation's top Border Patrol official, said Tuesday.

"As we continue to gain control of our borders, we fully expected the violence to go up," said Mr. Aguilar, in Dallas for a quarterly gathering of about 50 sector chiefs and other leaders.

In the past six months, there have been nearly 500 incidents against Border Patrol agents, as varied as rock-throwing, physical assaults and gunfire. Smugglers "frankly thought they owned" the border region, and could operate with impunity, Mr. Aguilar said.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I posted recently about the Bush administration getting a waiver to bypass environmental regulations so work could proceed on the Texas-Mexico border fence. The Dallas Morning News published an article yesterday about two wildlife preserves that may disappear if the border fence is built. Here are excerpts:

Two nature preserves almost certainly will close after the announcement last week that the federal government would waive environmental protection laws for a fence along the border.

"We'll have to close," said Anne Brown, executive director and vice president of Audubon Texas. "Basically, you've moved the border."

The Sabal Palm Audubon Center and most of the Nature Conservancy's Lennox Foundation Southmost Preserve would end up in the no-man's land between the fence and Mexico.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff announced Tuesday that he would bypass more than 30 environmental laws and regulations to build the section of the fence, designed to stop illegal immigration and smuggling.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Well, this is one way to do it. I've written a lot on this blog about the resistance Texas landowners are showing toward the building of a new fence along the Texas-Mexico border. Now comes word today that the Bush administration will plow ahead with the fence regardless of any opposition by landowners, by laws, or by regulations. Here are excerpts from a story today in the Dallas Morning News:

The Bush administration will use its authority to bypass more than 30 laws and regulations in an effort to finish building 670 miles of fence along the southwest U.S. border by the end of this year, federal officials said Tuesday.

Invoking the two legal waivers -- which Congress authorized -- will cut through bureaucratic red tape and sidestep environmental laws that currently stand in the way of the Homeland Security Department building 267 miles of fencing in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, according to officials familiar with the plan. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly about it.

As of March 17, there were 309 miles of fencing in place, leaving 361 to be completed by the end of the year to meet the department's goal. Of those, 267 miles are being held up by federal, state and local laws and regulations, the officials said.

One waiver will address the construction of a 22-mile levee barrier in Hidalgo County, Texas. The other waiver will cover 30 miles of fencing and technology deployment on environmentally sensitive ground in San Diego, southern Arizona and the Rio Grande; and 215 miles in California, Arizona and Texas that face other legal impediments due to administrative processes. For instance, building in some areas requires assessments and studies that -- if conducted -- could not be completed in time to finish the fence by the end of the year.

Residents and property owners along the U.S.-Mexico border have complained about the construction of fencing. In South Texas, where opposition has been widespread, land owners refused to give the government access to property along the fence route. The government has since sued more than 50 property owners in South Texas to gain access to the land.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch, entangled in litigation about the city's attempts to regulate illegal immigration at the municipal level, may have made an inadvertent error by asking for the legal status of tenants while enjoined from doing so by a federal court order.

Here are excerpts from a story today in the Dallas Morning News:

Farmers Branch acknowledged Monday that the city asked 11 apartment complexes to check whether prospective tenants were in the country legally, even though a federal judge has blocked enforcement of the city's ban on rentals to illegal immigrants.

City Manager Gary Greer called the situation, involving an annual application for a rental license, inadvertent and an "unfortunate error."

Management of seven of the 11 complexes signed the form, though two crossed out the improper language, Mr. Greer said.

It wasn't known whether anyone had been turned away from an apartment, though Mr. Greer said: "To my knowledge, there is not anyone that is carrying this out. We will be checking into that, to be sure they understand that they don't have to. ...

"I'm doing everything I can do right now to make sure it never happens again."

The city's voters overwhelmingly approved a measure last May to require apartments to obtain proof of legal status before renting to anyone.

But lawsuits challenged the constitutionality of the measure, and U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay issued a preliminary injunction barring enforcement until the legal issues can be resolved. The case hasn't yet reached trial.

Apartment complexes' licenses to rent units expire at the end of each calendar year, and they must submit a new application. The city sent a proper license application to every complex in November. It asked applicants to acknowledge that they had received a copy of the apartment ordinances and would abide by them.

But early this month, when resending applications to complexes that still hadn't renewed their licenses, the city inadvertently used the wrong form, Mr. Greer said. That version specifically mentioned a provision that requires landlords to verify that prospective renters are in the country legally.

Mr. Greer said the application form had been drafted in fall 2006, after the council first approved an ordinance banning apartment rentals to illegal immigrants. At the time, there were no lawsuits and no injunctions in place.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Despite a 2002 promise from President Bush to put citizenship applications for immigrant members of the military on a fast track, some are finding themselves waiting months, or even years, because of bureaucratic backlogs. One, Sgt. Kendell K. Frederick of the Army, who had tried three times to file for citizenship, was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq as he returned from submitting fingerprints for his application.

About 7,200 service members or people who have been recently discharged have citizenship applications pending, but neither the Department of Defense nor Citizenship and Immigration Services keeps track of how long they have been waiting. Immigration lawyers and politicians say they have received a significant number of complaints about delays because of background checks, misplaced paperwork, confusion about deployments and other problems.

The long waits are part of a broader problem plaguing the immigration service, which was flooded with 2.5 million applications for citizenship and visas last summer -- twice as many as the previous year -- in the face of 66 percent fee increases that took effect July 30. Officials have estimated that it will take an average of 18 months to process citizenship applications from legal immigrants through 2010, up from seven months last year.

But service members and veterans are supposed to go to the head of the line. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, President Bush signed an executive order allowing noncitizens on active duty to file for citizenship right away, instead of having to first complete three years in the military. The federal government has since taken several steps to speed up the process, including training military officers to help service members fill out forms, assigning special teams to handle the paperwork, and allowing citizenship tests, interviews and ceremonies to take place overseas.

At the same time, post-9/11 security measures, including tougher guidelines for background checks that are part of the naturalization process, have slowed things down.

Over all, 312,000 citizenship or green card applications are pending name checks, including 140,000 that have been waiting more than six months, immigration officials said. This month, immigration authorities eased background-check requirements for green cards, saying that if applicants had been waiting more than six months, they could be approved without an F.B.I. check, and approvals could be revoked later "in the unlikely event" that troubling information was found.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Associated Press is reporting today that the government  will increase the fines levied against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. The increase will be 25 percent, and is the first incrase in nearly a decade. Excerpt from the article:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency responsible for investigating illegal hirings, has stepped up its enforcement of the employer sanctions law in the past year, leading to a dozen major busts. Currently, fines range from $2,000 to $10,000 depending on the offense. The agency says some penalties could include at least six months in jail.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Today USCIS issued a press release explaining the recent decision to forego certain aspects of the FBI background checks. Here is the press release:

Federal Litigation Removed as Sole Basis to Expedite Check

WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is no longer routinely requesting the FBI to expedite a name check when the only reason for the request is that a mandamus (or other federal court petition) is filed in the case.

USCIS may continue to request an expedited FBI name check if the case meets one of the other approved criteria, including:

1. Military deployment,
2. Age-out cases not covered under the Child Status Protection Act, and applications affected by sunset provisions such as diversity visas,
3. Significant and compelling reasons, such as critical medical conditions, and
4. Loss of social security benefits or other subsistence at the discretion of the USCIS District Director.

The FBI name check is an invaluable part of the security screening process, ensuring that our immigration system is not used as a vehicle to harm our nation or its citizens. USCIS also requests an FBI name check to screen out people who seek immigration benefits improperly or fraudulently and ensure that only eligible applicants receive benefits.

Information about the FBI name check is available on the USCIS website at http://www.uscis.gov or by calling the USCIS National Customer Service Center toll free at 1-800-375-5283.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Phoenix is the latest city to try to do what the federal government refuses to do -- resolve the nation's perceived illegal immigration problems. Phoenix police will now start asking all people arrested in that city whether they are in the U.S. legally. Here are excerpts from an article in the New York Times:

The police in this city at the center of the immigration debate will soon ask all people arrested whether they are in the United States legally and will in certain cases report the information to the federal authorities, Mayor Phil Gordon announced on Friday.

People stopped for civil traffic violations like speeding will not be questioned, nor will crime victims or witnesses.

All those arrested on criminal charges like drunken driving and murder will be asked by officers whether they are in the United States legally.

The police may decide to recommend checking by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The change includes having the police notify the immigration agency about people who are detained but not arrested who officers have “reasonable basis” to believe are illegal immigrants.

A conservative legal group said the policy did not go far enough.

Civil rights advocates suggested that people who appeared to be Latino or spoke with accents would be more likely to be checked than others.

Hispanics make up 34 percent of Phoenix, the nation’s fifth-largest city, with 1.5 million residents.

The program departs from a policy that is more than 10 years old that bars officers from asking people about their legal status in most cases. It also sets Phoenix apart from most other big cities with large immigrant populations, including New York and Los Angeles. The police in those cities generally avoid such questions over fears that they would lead to racial profiling and discourage immigrants from cooperating with the police.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Chicago Tribune ran an interesting article about the effect of Oklahoma's anti-immigrant laws on that state's economy. Obviously there are two points of view to this situation, but this article points out some of the unintended financial consequences for Oklahoma. Here are excerpts:

The splintered trees, downed branches and piles of wood still littering nearly every neighborhood of this sprawling city two months after a devastating ice storm stand as a testament to something more than the ferocity of nature.

The debris is also a sign of the effectiveness ofOklahoma's new law intended to drive illegal immigrants out of the state -- the strictest such statute in the nation.

The branches are still here, many of the law's critics say, because the undocumented workers who would have cleaned them up are not.

"You really have to work hard at it to destroy our state's economy, but we found a way," said state Sen. Harry Coates, the only Republican in the state Legislature to vote against the immigration law. "We ran off the workforce."

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Dallas Morning News today has a very interesting story about Oklahoma's tough anti-illegal-immigrant laws, and how those laws may provide templates for other states to follow. The article also notes several downsides of the tough laws, and emphasizes that while such laws might work in Oklahoma, a state with an estimated 7% Hispanic population, the situation would be much different in Texas, with an estimated 36% Hispanic population. Here are excerpts:

Welcome to the nation's laboratory for a crackdown on illegal immigration. Last year, Oklahoma's Legislature passed, by huge margins, the nation's toughest law on illegal immigrants, making it a felony to harbor, transport, shelter or conceal undocumented immigrants.

This summer, the same law also will allow U.S. citizens to sue employers if they think they were fired in favor of illegal workers. Employers in the state say they already see the results: "A total lack of workers," said Doug Forrest, a Tulsa site-preparation contractor and golf course builder. "This is potentially sending our state into a recession."

Proponents of the law don't see such economic harm.

Meanwhile, some Texas lawmakers are already promising bills that mirror Oklahoma's House Bill 1804.

State Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, said the Oklahoma measure has proved that even as Congress deadlocks on immigration, a state can protect itself against what he calls threats to public health and safety posed by a porous border.

"You don't have to round up 20 million illegal aliens," Mr. Berman said. "Stop the two free benefits you're giving them - free health care and a free education - and they'll go back across the Rio Grande."

In December, Oklahoma Treasurer Scott Meacham said "some short-run pain" to that state's economy might occur, if reports of temporary labor shortages in construction, agriculture and oilfield services industries proved severe and long-lasting.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several Oklahoma business groups recently sued to overturn the law, saying it improperly steps on federal government turf.

Only one group has tried to track the law's effects on population. The Greater Tulsa Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, after checking with schools, churches, and bus lines with service to Mexico, estimated that between 15,000 and 25,000 illegal immigrants have left Tulsa County since the law was passed.

Several Christian denominations have said they'll continue to urge parishioners to aid strangers, even though the law threatens those who transport or shelter "aliens" with at least one year in prison and/or at least a $1,000 fine.

In November, messengers to the annual meeting of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma passed a resolution saying the law "will not change their ministry to any people," according to the Southern Baptist group's Web site.

Last year, the Oklahoma Legislature passed a law that:

•Restricts illegal immigrants' access to driver's licenses and ID cards.

•Cuts off several forms of public assistance for illegal immigrants. Emergency medical care, disaster aid and certain immunizations are exempted.

•Makes it harder for illegal immigrants to pay in-state college tuition.

•Encourages state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law.

•Makes it a felony to harbor, transport, conceal or shelter illegal immigrants.

•Requires state and local governments to use a federal database that allows them to check potential employees' work eligibility.

•Starting this summer, private employers and government contractors will have to verify employment eligibility of all new hires. Employers who don't could be sued.

This year, Oklahoma lawmakers are considering bills that would:

•Designate English as the state's official language.

•Let law enforcement seize the property of those who transport, hire or rent to illegal immigrants.

•Make public schools report how many illegal-immigrant children are enrolled.

•Repeal last year's law.

•Repeal all of last year's law, except for its ban on most public benefits.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The March 2008 Visa Bulletin is available at the State Department, but still shows no availability of visas for employment-based second-preference for citizens of India. 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Citizenship and Immigration Services has come up with a means of expediting certain green card applications. While it makes good sense to me, many people are objecting to the new procedure based on national security concerns. In a nutshell, CIS is proposing to approve applications if they have been pending more than six months and are awaiting only the FBI background check. The reason for the change is that some FBI checks are taking literally years to complete. Here are excerpts from an article about this in the New York Times:

Searching for ways to reduce a huge backlog of visa applications, immigration authorities have eased requirements for background checks by the F.B.I. of immigrants seeking to become permanent United States residents, federal officials said Monday.

If an immigrant's application for a residence visa has been in the system for more than six months and the only missing piece is a name check by the F.B.I., immigration officers will now be allowed to approve the application, according to a memorandum posted Monday on the Web site of the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency.

The memorandum states that "in the unlikely event" that the F.B.I. name check turns up negative information about an immigrant after a residence visa has been granted, the authorities can cancel the visa and begin deportation proceedings.

Under the new policy, which was first reported by the McClatchy news service, immigrants applying for the permanent visas, which are known as green cards, will still be required to complete two other security checks: an F.B.I. criminal fingerprint check and a search in a federal criminal and anti-terrorist database known as Interagency Border Inspection Services.

The policy is intended to speed processing for tens of thousands of immigrants with no criminal records who are living in the United States and have been waiting for years for green cards because their names turned up matches in the F.B.I's records. Often an immigrant's name hits a match, immigration lawyers said, because the F.B.I. files include a vast range of names, including those of people mentioned in criminal investigations, even if they had no role in a crime. F.B.I. agents must investigate each name match by manual searches of voluminous records.

Some critics said the agency would be cutting security corners and bending federal law.

"They are knowingly granting a benefit to a person who may be a national security threat or a serious criminal," said Rosemary Jenks, director of government relations for NumbersUSA, an organization that favors reduced immigration.

"These are people who are asking permission to stay in this country permanently," Ms. Jenks said, "and we have a right to make sure we know who they are. If it takes a few extra months, so be it."

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As reported in the Houston Chronicle yesterday, a proposed regulation from the Labor Department could have the effect of reducing wages paid to legal immigrant farm workers. Here are excerpts from the story:

The Labor Department planned Wednesday to propose changes to the foreign agriculture worker program, among them how the base wages for H2-A visa holders are determined. Streamlining the hiring process for H2-A visa holders could help turn employers away from hiring illegal workers, officials said.

Right now, the base pay for H2-A agriculture workers is set by the Agriculture Department's Farm Labor Survey and varies by state. Within a state, the pay is the same regardless of what job a worker performs.

However, the Labor Department wants to use the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Occupational Employment Survey, which would allow officials to consider what workers do and their skill levels. It also would allow officials to divide the country into more than 530 areas and to pay wages appropriate to each area.

Under the H-2A program, farmers may apply to bring in foreign workers if they can show the supply of U.S. workers is inadequate. The new regulations, which were to be proposed by the Labor and Homeland Security departments, would be the first changes to the H-2A visa system in 20 years.

More than half of U.S. farm workers admit on Labor Department surveys that they are not legally authorized to work. Some groups believe it's actually about 70 percent.

Employers consider the H2-A program burdensome and many hire undocumented workers rather than use it. Critics say employers don't like the program's wage, housing and other requirements. Labor officials plan to make the application process easier for employers wanting foreign farm workers.

The H-2A system requires that above-average wages -- called the adverse effect wage rate -- be paid to those workers.

In 2007, the highest adverse effect wage rate was $10.32 in Hawaii and the lowest was $8.27 in Arizona. In North Carolina, where the largest number of H-2A visas are issued, the adverse effect wage rate was $9.02.

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks

The Dallas Morning News reports today that tougher anti-immigrant laws in nearby states are encouraging immigrants (legal and illegal) to move to Texas. Depending on your point of view, this is either bad for Texas taxpayers or good for Texas businesses. We're getting a lot of new labor into the Texas market, but for those who believe immigrants are a drain on state-provided services, it's not a positive development. I'm not one of those people, so I welcome the new residents. Here are excerpts:

Illegal immigrants are coming into Texas, but not from where most people think.

The rush is coming from Oklahoma, Arizona and other states, places that have recently passed tough new anti-illegal immigrant laws.

The Oklahoma statute, which took effect in November, makes it a crime to transport, harbor or hire illegal immigrants. Effective Jan. 1, the Arizona law suspends the business license of employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. On a second offense, the license is revoked.

In Tulsa, Okla., the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce has estimated that 15,000 to 25,000 illegal immigrants have left the area. One builder estimated that 30 percent of the Hispanic workforce left Tulsa.

"There's been a tremendous impact in Oklahoma City," said David Castillo, the executive director of the Greater Oklahoma City Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. "We've had several companies close shop and leave the state. Banks have called us and say they're closing 30 accounts per week."

Enrique Hubbard, Mexico's consul general in Dallas, said a dozen Mexican families from Oklahoma have applied for consular documents listing their new homes in the Dallas area. He expects more to arrive because jobs are available in North Texas.

Texas' reputation as a welcoming destination has experts predicting more immigrants will come to Houston and other cities in the state. Texas has not passed any statewide law targeting the employment of undocumented workers.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Here's the latest update on the "border war" between Texas landowners and the federal government. The government is trying to get access to the private land in order to do surveying in advance of building a border fence or wall that would cut off many landowners from their primary water source - the Rio Grande. From the Dallas Morning News:

A federal judge has ordered Cameron County property owners to open their land to the government for border fence surveying, but not before he denied the government the right to take the land without a hearing.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville ordered 10 landowners to comply with the government's request for access to their land for 180 days. Two others were near settlements with the government.

But Judge Hanen's order revealed he had denied a request from the federal government for a swift and private order like the one it received in a similar case in Eagle Pass. In filing its suit, the Justice Department asked Judge Hanen to rule immediately without participation from the landowners, a legal maneuver that is allowed in eminent domain cases.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

USCIS has released the latest application and receipting update:

USCIS Application and Receipting Update

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) advises customers that processing of fee payments and entry of cases into our tracking system remains behind schedule due to the tremendous increase in the number of applications filed. As a result, applicants are experiencing delays in receiving notices of receipt. USCIS is working hard to deal with the increased volume.

• Date Received in Mailroom - USCIS will honor the actual date that an application was received in our mailroom; this date will be indicated on the receipt (in the Received Date box) when Form I-797, Notice of Action, is mailed. You can see a sample Form I-797 under "Related Links" on this page. If your case is affected by the receipt delay, arrival of your receipt may take up to 12 weeks for adjustment-of-status applications and 15 weeks for naturalization and other applications.
• Weekly updates on Receipting - Until this situation is resolved, USCIS will provide these weekly updates on progress in issuing receipt notices to our customers. Additional information is available in Frequently Asked Questions, located under "Related Links" on this page.
• Applications Received Prior to Posted Receipting Dates - If your application was received by USCIS before the posted dates below and you still have no receipt, please contact USCIS Customer Service toll-free at 1-800-375-5283.

We appreciate your understanding.

IMPORTANT:

Contact Customer Service toll-free at 1-800-375-5283 for:

Change of Address - If you have submitted your application and are changing your address, but have not yet received your receipt. (If you have a receipt, you can report your change of address from our website, using USCIS' Change of Address Online.)

Unusual Delay - If you have not received a receipt within the timeframe indicated below for the Service Center where you filed your application.

As of January 4, 2008, USCIS had completed initial data entry and issued receipt notices for applications and petitions except for I-130s (Petition for Alien Relative) which are being receipted at the Chicago Lockbox facility, as noted below:

Chicago Lockbox (as of 1/18/08)

Form Number               Date Received

I-130                                 11/13/2007

All Other Forms                Current

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

An article in the Houston Chronicle and a press release by the Department of Homeland Security both warn of border crossing delays to be caused by the new rules regarding identification requirements, effective January 31, 2008. Congress is wanting to delay the effective date of requiring passports, but Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is warning against that. Here are excerpts from the Chronicle article and from the DHS press release:

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff on Thursday said the Bush administration would press forward with plans to require passports for anyone crossing into the U.S. from Mexico or Canada -- despite a move by Congress that delays the mandate until June 2009.

"I want to get as close as possible to getting this implemented as I can during this president's term in office," Chertoff said, during a meeting with Hearst Corp. executives at the Hearst Tower in New York City.

At issue is the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative's requirement that travelers entering the U.S. by land or sea show passports or other approved documents to border officials.

The passport requirement became law in 2004 and was originally set to take effect this Jan. 1. But Congress has delayed the rule several times at the behest of border-state lawmakers who say the requirements are too cumbersome and would mean major changes for people accustomed to easily crossing the U.S.-Canada border to shop and work.

As part of a massive spending bill approved Wednesday -- and expected to be signed into law by President Bush -- members of Congress delayed the passport requirement until June 1, 2009, at the earliest.

Chertoff on Thursday lashed out at the lawmakers who pushed for the postponement and said they were more concerned about the bottom line of businesses than in keeping the nation's borders secure.

Critics in Congress, including Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., and Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., have complained that the passport requirement will cause major headaches for residents who live along the U.S.-Canada border and are accustomed to easily traveling between the two countries.

The Department of Homeland Security also is moving ahead with plans, effective next Jan. 31, that require U.S. travelers to show proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate, and government-issued ID to enter the country, rather than relying on travelers' own statements that they are U.S. citizens.

Chertoff defended the passport requirement, saying it would streamline the assortment of documents that are now presented to border inspectors.

"It is impossible to expect our border inspectors to be able to verify that all of these different kinds of ID are genuine," Chertoff said. "The way to correct it is to reduce the number of documents (that can be used as identification at the border) and ultimately require that they have certain security features."

"Delaying this documentation requirement is keeping the door to illegal immigrants open," Chertoff said. "It is a little silly to spend a lot of money building a fence when you're kicking the door wide open and saying anybody can come in if they can wave a piece of paper that they can (easily counterfeit)."

DHS Ends Oral Declarations at Borders, Reminds Travelers of New Procedures on January 31

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Testimony before Congress this week on "Naturalization Delays, Causes, Consequences and Solutions" by Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, contained bad news for applicants. Under the section titled "Where Does this Take Us?" Director Gonzalez said this:

This surge will have a serious impact on application processing times for the next couple of years. As a result, based on our response plan, most customers will wait much longer to have their applications completed. As we have reported, the average processing time for naturalization applications has increased from the current average of seven months or less to approximately 18 months. Family-based adjustment-of-status applications increased from the current average of six months or less to 12 months. Our two-year response plan will help us accomplish reducing processing times to six months by the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2010.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

CNN has written about the continuing saga of the Texas-Mexico border fence and the property owners denying the government access to their lands. This article discuss land owned by Eloisa Tamez. Here are excerpts:

Michael Chertoff, the Secretary of Homeland Security, said the fence will not be stopped by opponents like Tamez.

"Can we simply abandon an enterprise because it is a problem for a particular individual?" Chertoff told CNN. "I don't think I can accept that."

Chertoff believes a fence would curb the steady stream of illegal immigrants making their way across the border and lessen the flow of drugs. He also argues it will increase the safety of Border Patrol agents who have faced increasing violence.

The government wants to build 700 miles of fence along the Mexican border, including 370 miles of it by the end of this year. About 70 miles of fence is to be built in the Rio Grande Valley by year's end, if the government gets its way.

The Border Patrol has stepped up its efforts in the Rio Grande Valley with more lights, and sensors to pick up movement. A levee built along the river has a muddy road on top used by Border Patrol vehicles to patrol the area.

Richard Cortez, the mayor of the border town of McAllen, Texas, believes hiring more Border Patrol agents, deepening the Rio Grande River, and clearing its banks of tall vegetation would provide better border protection than the fence.

Cortez calls the fence "a multibillion dollar speed bump," which will slow, but not stop, illegal immigration.

"It is a false sense of security," he says. "America will not be safe. America will continue to waste resources on something that is not going to work."

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Conservative columnist Linda Chavez has an interesting opinion piece in today's Dallas Morning News. She writes about the recently-passed immigration enforcement law in Arizona and reflects that the lack of use of the law indicates that citizens of Arizona understand they are better off with illegal immigrants than without them. Here are excerpts:

Arizona has been ground zero in the fight against illegal immigration - but a funny thing happened earlier this month when a new anti-illegal-immigrant state law went into effect. Nothing.

The law, one of the toughest in the nation, requires jurisdictions to investigate complaints by ordinary citizens against local businesses that may be employing illegal immigrants. But apparently most Arizonans have better things to worry about.

A new study by the conservative think tank Americas Majority Foundation ( www.amermaj.com) suggests a possible explanation why more Arizonans aren't rushing to run off illegal workers. It turns out that Arizonans may be better off - not worse - because of the presence of so many immigrants in the population.

States with the highest percentage of immigrants or the largest recent influx of immigrants - 19 "high immigrant jurisdictions" in all - are wealthier and have better employment numbers, and most boast better crime figures than those with fewer immigrants.

These statistics don't mean that illegal immigration is not a problem for many jurisdictions. Illegal immigrants do impose costs, including increased health care and education expenses. Ironically, one of the growing costs is for incarcerating illegal immigrants picked up in raids or for offenses that usually don't justify jail time.

These increases are a direct result of efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. And if states like Arizona decide to vigorously enforce their new laws, we can expect to see these costs go up without much, if any, offset in savings to those jurisdictions.

The immigration debate is likely to continue undeterred by the facts the Americas Majority Foundation has pulled together. But the overwhelming majority of Americans - two-thirds to three-fourths, according to most polls - have no wish to see most long-term illegal residents rounded up and sent home.

What they do want is a more concerted effort to secure the borders so the numbers don't keep increasing. Once we get this election year behind us, maybe the sound of silence emanating even from places like Arizona will finally be heard.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This information is excerpted from the U.S. government's Social Security Administration Web site, and explains to non-citizens how they can legally obtain Social Security numbers. For more detailed information visit the SSA Web site.

How do I apply for a Social Security number and card?
In general, only noncitizens who have permission to work from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can apply for a Social Security number. To apply for a Social Security number:

Complete an Application For A Social Security Card (Form SS-5); and show us original documents proving your: Immigration status; Work eligibility; Age; and Identity. Then, take your completed application and original documents to your local Social Security office.

Immigration status
To prove your U.S. immigration status, you must show us the current U.S. immigration document, I-94, Arrival/Departure Record, issued to you when you arrived in the United States. If you are an F-1 or M-1 student, you also must show us your I-20, Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status. If you are a J-1 or J-2 exchange visitor, you must show us your DS-2019, Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor Status.

Work eligibility
For most foreign workers, we only need to see your I-94, Arrival/Departure Record. Some foreign workers also must show their work permits from DHS (I-766 or I-688B). International students must present further documentation. For more information, see International Students And Social Security Numbers (Publication No. 05-10181).

What can you do if you need a number for tax purposes?
If you need a number for tax purposes and you are not authorized to work in the U.S., you can apply for an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Visit IRS in person or call the IRS toll-free number, 1-800-TAXFORM (1-800-829-3676), and request Form W-7, Application For An Individual Taxpayer Identification Number.

Do you need a number for other government services?
Lawfully admitted noncitizens can get many benefits and services without having a Social Security number. You do not need a number to purchase savings bonds, conduct business with a bank, register for school or apply for educational tests, obtain private health insurance, apply for school lunch programs or apply for subsidized housing.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The following information is available on the Department of State's Web site.

Implemented on January 23, 2007, all individuals traveling by air between the United States and Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, and the Caribbean region are required to present a passport or other valid travel document to enter or re-enter the United States.

Beginning JANUARY 31, 2008, U.S. and Canadian citizens traveling by land and sea will need to present either a government-issued photo ID, such as a driver's license, plus proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate or passport.

Please note the passport requirement does not apply to U.S. citizens traveling to or returning directly from a U.S. territory.  U.S. territories include:

* American Samoa
* Guam
* Northern Mariana Islands
* Puerto Rico
* Swains Island
* U.S. Virgin Islands

Due to the increase in passport applications, the effective dates of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative have been amended.  At a later date, to be determined, the departments will implement the full requirements of the land and sea phase of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. The proposed rules require U.S. citizens entering the United States at sea or land ports of entry to have either a U.S. passport; a U.S. passport card; a trusted traveler card such as NEXUS, FAST, or SENTRI; a valid Merchant Mariner Document (MMD) when traveling in conjunction with official maritime business; or a valid U.S. Military identification card when traveling on official orders.  The expected date of implementation is Summer of 2008.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

From the February 2008 Visa Bulletin comes this sad and disappointing notice:

INDIA EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE HAS BECOME "UNAVAILABLE"
   
Despite two retrogressions of the India Employment Second preference cut-off date, demand for numbers by CIS Offices for adjustment of status cases has remained extremely high in recent months.  As a result the annual limit for the India Employment Second preference category has been reached, and the category has become "unavailable" effective immediately.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This is the latest information from USCIS about the current filing backlog:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) advises customers that processing of fee payments and entry of cases into our tracking system remains behind schedule due to the tremendous increase in the number of applications filed. As a result, applicants are experiencing delays in receiving notices of receipt. USCIS is working hard to deal with the increased volume.

• Date Received in Mailroom - USCIS will honor the actual date that an application was received in our mailroom; this date will be indicated on the receipt (in the Received Date box) when Form I-797, Notice of Action, is mailed. You can see a sample Form I-797 under "Related Links" on this page. If your case is affected by the receipt delay, arrival of your receipt may take up to 12 weeks for adjustment-of-status applications and 15 weeks for naturalization and other applications.
• Weekly updates on Receipting - Until this situation is resolved, USCIS will provide these weekly updates on progress in issuing receipt notices to our customers. Additional information is available in Frequently Asked Questions, located under "Related Links" on this page.
• Applications Received Prior to Posted Receipting Dates - If your application was received by USCIS before the posted dates below and you still have no receipt, please contact USCIS Customer Service toll-free at 1-800-375-5283.

We appreciate your understanding.

IMPORTANT:

Contact Customer Service toll-free at 1-800-375-5283 for:

Change of Address - If you have submitted your application and are changing your address, but have not yet received your receipt. (If you have a receipt, you can report your change of address from our website, using USCIS' Change of Address Online.)

Unusual Delay - If you have not received a receipt within the timeframe indicated below for the Service Center where you filed your application.

As of December 31, 2007, USCIS has completed initial data entry and issued receipt notices for applications and petitions received on or before the dates indicated:

California Service Center

Form Number               Date Received

I-130*                              8/30/2007

All Other Forms             Current

*All I-130s received after the indicated date have been forwarded to USCIS Chicago Lockbox for data entry.

Nebraska Service Center

Form Number               Date Received

All Forms                        Current

Texas Service Center

Form Number               Date Received

N-400                             12/7/2007
All Other Forms              Current

Vermont Service Center

Form Number               Date Received

I-130*                                7/29/2007
N-400                             12/4/2007
All Other Forms              Current

*All I-130s received after the indicated date have been forwarded to USCIS Chicago Lockbox for data entry.

Chicago Lockbox (as of 1/8/08)

Form Number               Date Received

I-130                                 10/10/2007

All Other Forms                Current

Los Angeles Lockbox

Form Number               Date Received

All Forms                         Current

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Unfortunately for those employers who can't find U.S. citizen workers for non-agricultural temporary employment, the government has announced that the quota has already been reached for H-2B workers for the second half of fiscal year 2008. This means that no one else will be allowed to apply for jobs in the United States if the starting date of employment is before October 1, 2008.

This is further evidence that the artificial caps for H-1B and H-2B visas are long overdue for increases. The caps haven't changed in many years, despite the growth in the U.S. economy. Any employers hoping for worker visas for jobs beginning after October 1, 2008, better get ready to start the process.

Here is the announcement from USCIS:

--U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that it has received a sufficient number of petitions to reach the congressionally mandated H-2B cap for the second half of Fiscal Year 2008 (FY2008). USCIS is hereby notifying the public that January 2, 2008 is the "final receipt date" for new H-2B worker petitions requesting employment start dates prior to October 1, 2008. The "final receipt date" is the date on which USCIS determines that it has received enough cap-subject petitions to reach the limit of 33,000 H-2B workers for the second half of FY2008.

The cap was reached with existing totals for that day. USCIS will reject petitions for new H-2B workers seeking employment start dates prior to October 1, 2008 that arrive after January 2, 2008. USCIS will apply a computer-generated random selection process to all petitions which are subject to the cap and were received on January 2, 2008. USCIS will use this process to select the number of petitions needed to meet the cap. USCIS will reject, and return the fee, for all cap-subject petitions not randomly selected. Petitions for workers who are currently in H-2B status do not count towards the congressionally mandated bi-annual H-2B cap. USCIS will continue to process petitions filed to:

1. Extend the stay of a current H-2B worker in the United States;
2. Change the terms of employment for current H-2B workers and extend their stay; or
3. Allow current H-2B workers to change or add employers and extend their stay.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Washington Post reports today on the exceptional prominence of immigration in the campaigns of the Republican presidential hopefuls. Here are excerpts:

The imagery of the mailings is designed to pack a wallop: a Mexican flag fluttering above the Stars and Stripes, the Statue of Liberty presiding over a "Welcome Illegal Aliens" doormat, a Social Security card emblazoned with the name "Juan Doe," a U.S. passport proclaiming, "Only one candidate has a plan to STAMP out illegal immigration."

As Republican presidential candidates troll for votes, they have flooded mailboxes in Iowa and New Hampshire with such loaded images. Their campaigns have filled the airwaves, packed their Web sites and taunted their adversaries, proclaiming their concern over porous borders and accusing opponents of insufficient vigilance.

No issue has dominated the Republican presidential nomination fight the way illegal immigration has. Under consistent attack for inconsistent conservatism, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has turned to the issue again and again to shore up his conservative credentials. Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, running as the law-and-order candidate, has been forced onto the defensive by immigration policies in his city.

And just days after he delivered a passionate defense of the humanity of undocumented children in a Republican debate, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee presented one of the most punitive immigration platforms seen in this campaign season, rejecting legislation to provide the children of illegal immigrants a path to citizenship if they finish high school, attend two years of college or join the military.

The strategy poses a real risk. As the rhetoric and the policy proposals have grown increasingly strident, the eventual nominee's ability to win Latino support in swing states such as Colorado, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico may be coming increasingly into question.

Latino and other minority groups see racial codes in many of the words the Republican candidates have used -- for instance, "illegals" rather than "illegal immigrants." And hovering around the campaigns are far more strident figures and organizations. Immigration groups were taken aback when Huckabee accepted the endorsement of Jim Gilchrist, the founder of the border-security Minuteman Project, calling it "providential."

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Dallas Morning News came up with a surprise today -- the newspaper has named as Texan of the Year for 2007, the "Illegal Immigrant." This followed a long countdown, in which the paper named various Texans who figured prominently in news stories this year. The News ran a lengthy article about the Texan of the Year, and I recommend reading it. Here are the first few paragraphs:

He is at the heart of a great culture war in Texas - and the nation, credited with bringing us prosperity and blamed for abusing our resources. How should we deal with this stranger among us? He breaks the law by his very presence. He hustles to do hard work many Americans won't, at least not at the low wages he accepts. The American consumer economy depends on him. America as we have known it for generations may not survive him.

We can't seem to live with him and his family, and if we can live without him, nobody's figured out how.

He's the Illegal Immigrant, and he's the 2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year - for better or for worse. Given the public mood, there seems to be little middle ground in debate over illegal immigrants. Spectacular fights over their presence broke out across Texas this year, adding to the national pressure cooker as only Texas can.

To their champions, illegal immigrants are decent, hardworking people who, like generations of European immigrants before them, just want to do better for their families and who contribute to America's prosperity. They must endure hatred and abuse by those of us who want the benefits of cheap labor but not the presence of illegal immigrants.

Especially here in Texas, his strong back and willing heart help form the cornerstone of our daily lives, in ways that many of us do not, or will not, see. The illegal immigrant is the waiter serving margaritas at our restaurant table, the cook preparing our enchiladas. He works grueling hours at a meatpacking plant, carving up carcasses of cattle for our barbecue (he also picks the lettuce for our burgers). He builds our houses and cuts our grass. She cleans our homes and takes care of our children.

Yet to those who want them sent home, illegal immigrants are essentially lawbreakers who violate the nation's borders. They use public resources - schools, hospitals - to which they aren't entitled and expect to be served in a foreign language. They're rapidly changing Texas neighborhoods, cities and culture, and not always for the better. Those who object get tagged as racists.

Whatever and whoever else the illegal immigrant is, everybody has felt the tidal wave of his presence. According to an analysis of government data by the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, Texas' immigrant population has jumped a whopping 32.7 percent since 2000, a period in which immigration to the United States has exceeded, in sheer numbers, all previous historical eras. Half the immigrants in the state - 7 percent of all Texans - are estimated to be here illegally.

Though many would agree that the status quo cannot be sustained - more illegal immigrants arrive each year than legal ones, a sure sign that the system is a joke - neither Texas nor the nation seemed nearer in 2007 to resolving this complex crisis. We can't deport 12 million people who already live here, but we can't leave our back door open indefinitely. Compromise comes hard because the issue is tangled up with the most basic aspects of everyday life, down to the core of what it means to be American.

This essay cannot put a name or a face to an illegal immigrant, because that would subject him to possible deportation. Because he lives underground, the illegal immigrant becomes, in our rancorous debate, less a complex human being and more a blank screen upon which both sides can project their hopes and fears.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

From the Brownsville Herald comes a story about a recent USCIS proposal to require holders of old green cards with no expiration dates to turn them in and get a newer version. The stated reason for the proposal is to allow USCIS to get current personal contact information on these green card holders.

The problem for green card holders will be that this will give USCIS an opportunity to run criminal background checks, and if any minor infractions of the law are found, the green card holder could be subject to deportation. It's going to be a very tricky matter. Here are excerpts from the article:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) is considering a proposal to eliminate hundreds of thousands of green cards that were issued between 1979 and 1989.

The cards, which were issued without expiration dates, would be upgraded to store personal information electronically.

Officials at CIS say that the new cards would be more difficult to counterfeit. Like cards issued after 1989, they will expire every ten years.

"The photos on the old cards are more than 18 years old," said Sharon Rummery, a spokesperson for CIS, "and the security features are not as good." She explained that the new card includes holograms of U.S. presidents, which are difficult to duplicate.

CIS is currently reviewing comments that have been submitted in response to the proposal. As of now, there is no timeline for implementation.

If the proposal, which was issued on Aug. 22, moves forward, legal permanent residents would have 120 days to apply for new cards. Failure to comply with this would be a misdemeanor, which could result in $100 fine and/or imprisonment of up to 30 days.

Immigration attorney