Original story: foxnews.com
The Supreme Court on Thursday blocked President Obama’s immigration executive actions, in a tie decision that delivers a win to states challenging his plan to give a deportation reprieve to millions of illegal immigrants.
The justices' one-sentence opinion on Thursday marks a major setback for the administration, effectively killing the plan for the duration of Obama's presidency. A New Jersey immigration lawyer has been waiting to hear the outcome of this law.
The judgment could have significant political and legal consequences in a presidential election year highlighted by competing rhetoric over immigration. As the ruling was announced, pro-immigration activists filled the sidewalk in front of the court, some crying as the ruling became public. Critics of the policy touted the decision as a strong statement against "executive abuses."
"The Constitution is clear: The president is not permitted to write laws—only Congress is. This is another major victory in our fight to restore the separation of powers," House Speaker Paul Ryan said in a statement, adding that the ruling rendered Obama's actions "null and void."
Obama, though, said the decision “takes us further from the country that we aspire to be.”
He stressed that earlier changes his administration made to immigration policy are not affected, but acknowledged his most recent 2014 changes cannot go forward and additional executive actions are unlikely.
While Obama accepted the ruling, he also made his own full-court press, saying the split decision underscores the importance of the current court vacancy and the appointment of a successor to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, to "break this tie." So far, Senate Republicans have not considered Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland. A Germany immigration lawyer said laws there are different.
"The court's inability to reach a decision in this case is a very clear reminder of why it's so important for the Supreme Court to have a full bench," he said Thursday at the White House.
The 4-4 tie vote sets no national precedent but leaves in place the ruling by the lower court. In this case, the federal appeals court in New Orleans said the Obama administration lacked the authority to shield up to 4 million immigrants from deportation and make them eligible for work permits without approval from Congress.
Texas led 26 Republican-dominated states in challenging the program Obama announced in November 2014. Congressional Republicans also backed the states' lawsuit.
The decision lands in the middle of a heated election season in which immigration is a central issue. Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, won the primaries while railing against Obama administration immigration policies as dangerous.
Democrats have, in turn, called his rhetoric racially divisive while defending the administration's move to expand existing programs that would effectively give temporary legal status to some undocumented residents. A Roseland immigration lawyer said her clients would be effected by the new law.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton countered Ryan's statement saying the decision was "purely procedural" and leaves "no doubt" the programs were within the president's authority. Referencing the 4-4 split on the court, she again urged the Senate to give Obama's nominee to fill the remaining court vacancy a vote.
"Today’s deadlocked decision from the Supreme Court is unacceptable, and show us all just how high the stakes are in this election," Clinton said in a statement.
The immigration case dealt with two separate Obama programs. One would allow undocumented immigrants who are parents of either U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents to live and work in the U.S. without the threat of deportation. The other would expand an existing program to protect from deportation a larger population of immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children.
Obama decided to move forward after Republicans won control of the Senate in the 2014 midterm elections, and the chances for an immigration overhaul, already remote, were further diminished.
The Senate had passed a broad immigration bill with Democratic and Republican support in 2013, but the measure went nowhere in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives.
The states quickly went to court to block the Obama initiatives.
Their lawsuit was heard initially by U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas. Hanen previously had criticized the administration for lax immigration enforcement. Hanen sided with the states, blocking the programs from taking effect. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also ruled for the states, and the Justice Department rushed an appeal to the high court so that it could be heard this term.
Texas officials hailed the decision Thursday.
“The action taken by the President was an unauthorized abuse of presidential power that trampled the Constitution, and the Supreme Court rightly denied the President the ability to grant amnesty contrary to immigration laws," Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement. "Today's ruling is also a victory for all law-abiding Americans—including the millions of immigrants who came to America following the rule of law."
Showing posts with label Immigration Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Immigration Law. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Illegal Immigrant Works in Airport Security for Over 20 Years
Story first appeared in The Associated Press.
For 20 years, co-workers on the security team at one of the nation's busiest airports knew him as Jerry Thomas. His real name has not been disclosed, but the man has been confirmed as a Nigerian who used the name of a murder victim to hide his status as an illegal immigrant.
Though there's no indication of any other intent or transgressions, the revelation came the same day a federal report found that Newark Liberty International Airport mishandled security breaches.
The man worked at the airport, starting in 1992, using the name of Jerry Thomas, who was killed that year in New York City. He was arrested Monday after an anonymous tip at his home in Elizabeth and faced charges including identity theft.
His first hearing was scheduled for late Tuesday morning in state court in Newark.
It wasn't immediately known how Thomas' personal information was acquired. Police in New York also didn't say whether he was a suspect in the July 20, 1992, killing of Thomas in Queens.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates the area's main airports and other transit hubs, said he had entered the United States illegally in 1989 and had worked under several contractors at the airport, most recently FJC Security Services, and supervised about 30 guards. The agency said its investigation found no indication that he used the fake identity for any reason other than to live in the United States.
Port Authority leaders had spoken with FJC officials and will meet with them in the coming days to take every legally permissible step to recheck their security personnel on a regular basis and to protect our customers, employees and facilities.
FJC Security, which received an airport contract in 2003, said it conducted a background check on the guard as had New Jersey state police and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
In all cases, he passed the background checks. During his time with FJC, he had nothing in his record or his performance to indicate a cause for concern or a reason to question the state police and federal government's background checks. In his position as tour supervisor, didn't have access to employees' personal information.
TSA said it was reviewing the Port Authority's procedures for validating employee and contractor documents, according to a Raleigh Immigration Lawyer.
This investigation indicates that the individual's identification documents were presented to the Port Authority for verification about a decade before TSA existed.
The state police spokesman said New Jersey requires security guards to undergo training under the Security Officer Registration Act and be fingerprinted. The fingerprints are run through the state police criminal history database before a guard is certified.
A candidate is disqualified if he or she has a conviction for a fourth-degree offense or higher or a drug offense of any level.
An airport employee who was familiar with the man as Thomas said the private security guards he supervised are responsible for manning TSA security checkpoints after passenger gates close for the evening and before they reopen in the morning. The guards also inspect delivery vehicles for possible unauthorized cargo, he said, speaking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about the matter.
A report released Monday by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General found that only 42 percent of reported security breaches from January 2010 to May 2011 led to corrective action, though it also found TSA had worked to improve its response.
For 20 years, co-workers on the security team at one of the nation's busiest airports knew him as Jerry Thomas. His real name has not been disclosed, but the man has been confirmed as a Nigerian who used the name of a murder victim to hide his status as an illegal immigrant.
Though there's no indication of any other intent or transgressions, the revelation came the same day a federal report found that Newark Liberty International Airport mishandled security breaches.
The man worked at the airport, starting in 1992, using the name of Jerry Thomas, who was killed that year in New York City. He was arrested Monday after an anonymous tip at his home in Elizabeth and faced charges including identity theft.
His first hearing was scheduled for late Tuesday morning in state court in Newark.
It wasn't immediately known how Thomas' personal information was acquired. Police in New York also didn't say whether he was a suspect in the July 20, 1992, killing of Thomas in Queens.
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates the area's main airports and other transit hubs, said he had entered the United States illegally in 1989 and had worked under several contractors at the airport, most recently FJC Security Services, and supervised about 30 guards. The agency said its investigation found no indication that he used the fake identity for any reason other than to live in the United States.
Port Authority leaders had spoken with FJC officials and will meet with them in the coming days to take every legally permissible step to recheck their security personnel on a regular basis and to protect our customers, employees and facilities.
FJC Security, which received an airport contract in 2003, said it conducted a background check on the guard as had New Jersey state police and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
In all cases, he passed the background checks. During his time with FJC, he had nothing in his record or his performance to indicate a cause for concern or a reason to question the state police and federal government's background checks. In his position as tour supervisor, didn't have access to employees' personal information.
TSA said it was reviewing the Port Authority's procedures for validating employee and contractor documents, according to a Raleigh Immigration Lawyer.
This investigation indicates that the individual's identification documents were presented to the Port Authority for verification about a decade before TSA existed.
The state police spokesman said New Jersey requires security guards to undergo training under the Security Officer Registration Act and be fingerprinted. The fingerprints are run through the state police criminal history database before a guard is certified.
A candidate is disqualified if he or she has a conviction for a fourth-degree offense or higher or a drug offense of any level.
An airport employee who was familiar with the man as Thomas said the private security guards he supervised are responsible for manning TSA security checkpoints after passenger gates close for the evening and before they reopen in the morning. The guards also inspect delivery vehicles for possible unauthorized cargo, he said, speaking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak about the matter.
A report released Monday by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General found that only 42 percent of reported security breaches from January 2010 to May 2011 led to corrective action, though it also found TSA had worked to improve its response.
For more Law News,
visit the Nation of Law blog.
For information on website optimization or for the latest SEO News, visit the SEO Done Right
blog.
For more national and worldwide Business News, visit the Peak News
Room blog.
For more local and state of Michigan Business News, visit
the Michigan Business News blog.
For more Health News, visit the
Healthcare and Medical News blog.
For more Electronics
News, visit the Electronics America blog.
For more Real Estate News,
visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For more Advertising
News, visit the Advertising, Marketing and Media blog.
Monday, May 7, 2012
Arizona Traffic Stops End in Detention for Some
Story first appeared in The Wall Street Journal.
A week after Supreme Court arguments over Arizona's illegal-immigration law, the arrest, detention and subsequent release of an undocumented woman following a traffic stop added a real-world example to the courtroom debate about how the statute could play out.
The woman, who is married to an American soldier and is in the process of legalizing her U.S. residency, was pulled over Tuesday for making an illegal turn, and sent to immigration authorities when she couldn't produce a driver's license or Social Security card requested by a sheriff's deputy. Federal authorities released her late Thursday after she had spent two nights in detention, according to Raleigh Immigration Lawyers.
Arizona's law, enacted in 2010 and tangled up in court ever since, would give local police the power to check the immigration status of anyone they lawfully stop. People who cannot prove they are in the U.S. legally are detained, and federal immigration authorities are notified.
The Obama administration, challenging the Arizona law, argued before a skeptical court that the state exceeded its powers by directing police to enforce immigration law, traditionally the purview of the federal government. Arizona's lawyer and some Justices suggested the state was merely picking up illegal immigrants and turning them over to the federal government, which then could decide what to do with them.
This case shows how hard it is for state law-enforcement officials to determine someone's immigration status. Arizona's lawyer told the Supreme Court that it could be done in 10 or 11 minutes. In this case, it took three days for federal authorities to figure it out, stated Miami Immigration Lawyers.
Following the court hearings, the Obama administration announced illegal immigrants wouldn't be placed in deportation proceedings merely for a traffic violation, part of continuing efforts to devote resources to deporting foreigners who have committed serious crimes. In 2010, it unveiled a policy that put illegal immigrants who are immediate relatives of U.S. military personnel on a faster track to legal permanent residency than other applicants in the U.S. illegally.
The undocumented woman, a resident of Bullhead City, was brought to the U.S. illegally from Mexico at the age of four, according to her and her family's attorney. She grew up in Arizona and married Guillermo Garcia, a U.S. citizen, four years ago.
Her husband is currently in Vilseck, Germany, with the 2nd Cavalry Regiment.
The family's attorney said he filed an application in March based on her marriage to a soldier but hasn't heard back. A spokesman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said the agency doesn't comment on specific cases.
On Tuesday, the woman was on the way to buy supplies for her three-year-old daughter's birthday party when she made an illegal turn. Suspecting she was here illegally, the sheriff's deputy took her into custody and turned her over to a border-patrol agent.
Her husband said he got a call from his family on Tuesday informing him that his wife had been arrested. Up all night, he said he wrote a letter to his congressman and contacted his lawyer. A public information specialist for the Mohave County Sheriff's Office said that is is not relavent that her husband is in the military, she was determined to be an illegal immigrant.
The woman said the border-patrol agent transported her to a station in Blythe, Calif., and then to Yuma, Ariz., where she was offered voluntary, expedited removal to Mexico. She declined the offer. U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued her a notice to appear in court for a removal hearing.
After spending two nights in cells with two other immigrant women, she said, the three were transported Thursday morning to Eloy detention center, a facility several hours away that contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
When he learned she was there, her husband called the facility and explained that he was "within hours of deployment." He said he was told to "call back later." He wasn't allowed to speak with his wife. The next day, he said, an officer told him she would be released.
A spokesman for Customs and Border Protection said the agency doesn't comment on specific cases.
ICE said she was released "after the agency verified that she had no criminal history and is married to an active-duty U.S. service member." It added that it revoked the notice to appear for a deportation hearing.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
A week after Supreme Court arguments over Arizona's illegal-immigration law, the arrest, detention and subsequent release of an undocumented woman following a traffic stop added a real-world example to the courtroom debate about how the statute could play out.
The woman, who is married to an American soldier and is in the process of legalizing her U.S. residency, was pulled over Tuesday for making an illegal turn, and sent to immigration authorities when she couldn't produce a driver's license or Social Security card requested by a sheriff's deputy. Federal authorities released her late Thursday after she had spent two nights in detention, according to Raleigh Immigration Lawyers.
Arizona's law, enacted in 2010 and tangled up in court ever since, would give local police the power to check the immigration status of anyone they lawfully stop. People who cannot prove they are in the U.S. legally are detained, and federal immigration authorities are notified.
The Obama administration, challenging the Arizona law, argued before a skeptical court that the state exceeded its powers by directing police to enforce immigration law, traditionally the purview of the federal government. Arizona's lawyer and some Justices suggested the state was merely picking up illegal immigrants and turning them over to the federal government, which then could decide what to do with them.
This case shows how hard it is for state law-enforcement officials to determine someone's immigration status. Arizona's lawyer told the Supreme Court that it could be done in 10 or 11 minutes. In this case, it took three days for federal authorities to figure it out, stated Miami Immigration Lawyers.
Following the court hearings, the Obama administration announced illegal immigrants wouldn't be placed in deportation proceedings merely for a traffic violation, part of continuing efforts to devote resources to deporting foreigners who have committed serious crimes. In 2010, it unveiled a policy that put illegal immigrants who are immediate relatives of U.S. military personnel on a faster track to legal permanent residency than other applicants in the U.S. illegally.
The undocumented woman, a resident of Bullhead City, was brought to the U.S. illegally from Mexico at the age of four, according to her and her family's attorney. She grew up in Arizona and married Guillermo Garcia, a U.S. citizen, four years ago.
Her husband is currently in Vilseck, Germany, with the 2nd Cavalry Regiment.
The family's attorney said he filed an application in March based on her marriage to a soldier but hasn't heard back. A spokesman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said the agency doesn't comment on specific cases.
On Tuesday, the woman was on the way to buy supplies for her three-year-old daughter's birthday party when she made an illegal turn. Suspecting she was here illegally, the sheriff's deputy took her into custody and turned her over to a border-patrol agent.
Her husband said he got a call from his family on Tuesday informing him that his wife had been arrested. Up all night, he said he wrote a letter to his congressman and contacted his lawyer. A public information specialist for the Mohave County Sheriff's Office said that is is not relavent that her husband is in the military, she was determined to be an illegal immigrant.
The woman said the border-patrol agent transported her to a station in Blythe, Calif., and then to Yuma, Ariz., where she was offered voluntary, expedited removal to Mexico. She declined the offer. U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued her a notice to appear in court for a removal hearing.
After spending two nights in cells with two other immigrant women, she said, the three were transported Thursday morning to Eloy detention center, a facility several hours away that contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
When he learned she was there, her husband called the facility and explained that he was "within hours of deployment." He said he was told to "call back later." He wasn't allowed to speak with his wife. The next day, he said, an officer told him she would be released.
A spokesman for Customs and Border Protection said the agency doesn't comment on specific cases.
ICE said she was released "after the agency verified that she had no criminal history and is married to an active-duty U.S. service member." It added that it revoked the notice to appear for a deportation hearing.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Immigration Laws Dredge Up Old Case
Story first appeared in Reuters.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide how broadly to apply its two-year old ruling that immigrants have a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel and must be told about possible deportation stemming from a guilty plea.
The justices said they would consider whether its March 31, 2010, ruling would apply retroactively to previous convictions or would only to convictions after that date. Raleigh Immigration Lawyers said in their Supreme Court appeal that the issue has profound practical significance.
In its original ruling, the Supreme Court decided by a 7-2 vote that an immigrant's constitutional right to effective counsel was violated when his attorney mistakenly told him he could plead guilty to drug charges without being deported.
Columbus Immigration Lawyers had said at the time the decision could potentially affect thousands of immigrants every year.
Since the decision, U.S. courts of appeals have issued conflicting rulings on whether the high court's ruling applied retroactively. The U.S. Justice Department told the Supreme Court the issue involved a recurring question of substantial importance that warranted review.
The case before the high court involves a woman who was born in Mexico in 1956, came to the United States in the 1970s and now lives in Chicago. She was indicted in 2003 for participating in a scheme to submit fraudulent automobile insurance claims for personal injuries.
She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years of probation and ordered to pay $22,500 in restitution.
In 2009, she sought to overturn her conviction on the ground her trial attorney never informed her that deportation was a potential consequence of her guilty plea. She later said she was entitled to relief under the high court's 2010 ruling.
But a federal appeals court rejected her request. It said the 2010 decision did not announce a new rule that would apply retroactively, but simply applied the existing standard for ineffective assistance of counsel to a new factual scenario.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case during its upcoming term that begins in October, with a decision likely early next year.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on Monday to decide how broadly to apply its two-year old ruling that immigrants have a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel and must be told about possible deportation stemming from a guilty plea.
The justices said they would consider whether its March 31, 2010, ruling would apply retroactively to previous convictions or would only to convictions after that date. Raleigh Immigration Lawyers said in their Supreme Court appeal that the issue has profound practical significance.
In its original ruling, the Supreme Court decided by a 7-2 vote that an immigrant's constitutional right to effective counsel was violated when his attorney mistakenly told him he could plead guilty to drug charges without being deported.
Columbus Immigration Lawyers had said at the time the decision could potentially affect thousands of immigrants every year.
Since the decision, U.S. courts of appeals have issued conflicting rulings on whether the high court's ruling applied retroactively. The U.S. Justice Department told the Supreme Court the issue involved a recurring question of substantial importance that warranted review.
The case before the high court involves a woman who was born in Mexico in 1956, came to the United States in the 1970s and now lives in Chicago. She was indicted in 2003 for participating in a scheme to submit fraudulent automobile insurance claims for personal injuries.
She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to four years of probation and ordered to pay $22,500 in restitution.
In 2009, she sought to overturn her conviction on the ground her trial attorney never informed her that deportation was a potential consequence of her guilty plea. She later said she was entitled to relief under the high court's 2010 ruling.
But a federal appeals court rejected her request. It said the 2010 decision did not announce a new rule that would apply retroactively, but simply applied the existing standard for ineffective assistance of counsel to a new factual scenario.
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case during its upcoming term that begins in October, with a decision likely early next year.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Immigration Rates Still Dropping
Story first appeared in the Sun Journal.
Those who saw mass migration from Mexico as a threat and those who did not all agreed on one thing: It was unstoppable without dramatic action by the federal authorities. They turned out to be wrong about that. The title of a new report from the Pew Hispanic Center, "Net Migration From Mexico Falls to Zero — and Perhaps Less," says it all.
So everyone buckle your seatbelts, if indeed more Mexicans are going back to Mexico than crossing into the United States. It would change a whole bunch of calculations in presidential campaigning. And it would make whatever the Supreme Court says about Arizona's tough immigration law less consequential.
The reason for this changed pattern matters most, and activists on the issue have an interest in pushing their own explanations. The anti-immigrant climate may account for some of it, say Raleigh Immigration Lawyers.
Immigration-control groups link the trend to a weak economy and lack of jobs. That makes it temporary and thus keeps them in business. To see the changes as permanent is wishful thinking by people who just want amnesty.
Which, actually, very few Americans want. While there are those on the far left and the cheap-labor right who just want amnesty, they are a minority according to every reputable poll. Most who want to put illegal immigrants on the path to citizenship also insist that this amnesty be the last. That means it must be paired with serious workplace enforcement.
In any case, this trend is not temporary. Demographers following the plunging birthrates in Mexico have been predicting this day would come for some time. There's now a sharp reduction in the number of 18- to 35-year-old Mexicans — the age group most likely to come here illegally.
While rising unemployment is the immediate trigger for the sharp decline in immigration from Mexico, the drop-off in illegal entrants will probably continue.
The more manageable numbers can only help advance the sort of comprehensive immigration reform that got wedged into America's left-right divide. The lower boil could help Republicans seeking Latino votes in swing states moderate much of their party's no-pity position.
Another factor in stopping the wave of illegal immigration was beefed-up enforcement, the Pew report noted. President Obama was the first president in decades to start seriously going after employers hiring undocumented workers. Rougher state laws undoubtedly played a part, but some are rather ugly. How preferable that Americans trust the federal government to enforce the immigration laws, which is its job, after all.
Could America be close to actually solving one of its vexing problems? Miami Immigration Lawyers feel that smart reform of our immigration laws would do the following: It would protect our native and legal immigrant workers from unfair competition. It would let us devise an immigration program that meets our need for more skilled workers. And it would restore some peace at the border, say Columbus Immigration Lawyers.
Someday, Mexicans and Americans may be able to easily cross into each other's countries for business, visiting, shopping or dinner. If the pressures at the southern border are starting to ease for sure, then that day may come sooner than we thought.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Those who saw mass migration from Mexico as a threat and those who did not all agreed on one thing: It was unstoppable without dramatic action by the federal authorities. They turned out to be wrong about that. The title of a new report from the Pew Hispanic Center, "Net Migration From Mexico Falls to Zero — and Perhaps Less," says it all.
So everyone buckle your seatbelts, if indeed more Mexicans are going back to Mexico than crossing into the United States. It would change a whole bunch of calculations in presidential campaigning. And it would make whatever the Supreme Court says about Arizona's tough immigration law less consequential.
The reason for this changed pattern matters most, and activists on the issue have an interest in pushing their own explanations. The anti-immigrant climate may account for some of it, say Raleigh Immigration Lawyers.
Immigration-control groups link the trend to a weak economy and lack of jobs. That makes it temporary and thus keeps them in business. To see the changes as permanent is wishful thinking by people who just want amnesty.
Which, actually, very few Americans want. While there are those on the far left and the cheap-labor right who just want amnesty, they are a minority according to every reputable poll. Most who want to put illegal immigrants on the path to citizenship also insist that this amnesty be the last. That means it must be paired with serious workplace enforcement.
In any case, this trend is not temporary. Demographers following the plunging birthrates in Mexico have been predicting this day would come for some time. There's now a sharp reduction in the number of 18- to 35-year-old Mexicans — the age group most likely to come here illegally.
While rising unemployment is the immediate trigger for the sharp decline in immigration from Mexico, the drop-off in illegal entrants will probably continue.
The more manageable numbers can only help advance the sort of comprehensive immigration reform that got wedged into America's left-right divide. The lower boil could help Republicans seeking Latino votes in swing states moderate much of their party's no-pity position.
Another factor in stopping the wave of illegal immigration was beefed-up enforcement, the Pew report noted. President Obama was the first president in decades to start seriously going after employers hiring undocumented workers. Rougher state laws undoubtedly played a part, but some are rather ugly. How preferable that Americans trust the federal government to enforce the immigration laws, which is its job, after all.
Could America be close to actually solving one of its vexing problems? Miami Immigration Lawyers feel that smart reform of our immigration laws would do the following: It would protect our native and legal immigrant workers from unfair competition. It would let us devise an immigration program that meets our need for more skilled workers. And it would restore some peace at the border, say Columbus Immigration Lawyers.
Someday, Mexicans and Americans may be able to easily cross into each other's countries for business, visiting, shopping or dinner. If the pressures at the southern border are starting to ease for sure, then that day may come sooner than we thought.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
Number of Illegal Immigrants Drops
Story first appeared in The Detroit News.
The number of Mexican immigrants living illegally in the U.S. has dropped significantly for the first time in decades, a dramatic shift as many illegal workers, already in the U.S. and seeing few job opportunities, return to Mexico.
An analysis of census data from the U.S. and Mexican governments details the movement to and from Mexico, a nation accounting for nearly 60 percent of the illegal immigrants in the U.S. It comes amid renewed debate over U.S. immigration policy as the Supreme Court hears arguments this week on Arizona's tough immigration law. Immigration Lawyers in Raleigh have been following the fluctuating immigration trends for some time.
Roughly 6.1 million unauthorized Mexican immigrants were living in the U.S. last year, down from a peak of nearly 7 million in 2007, according to the Pew Hispanic Center study released Monday. It was the biggest sustained drop in modern history, believed to be surpassed in scale only by losses in the Mexican-born U.S. population during the Great Depression. Raleigh Immigration Lawyers have noticed this drop in cases, and agree with the economic assessment.
Much of the drop in illegal immigrants is due to the persistently weak U.S. economy, which has shrunk construction and service-sector jobs attractive to Mexican workers following the housing bust. But increased deportations, heightened U.S. patrols and violence along the border also have played a role, as well as demographic changes, such as Mexico's declining birth rate.
In all, the Mexican-born population in the U.S. last year — legal and illegal — fell to 12 million, marking an end to an immigration boom dating back to the 1970s, when foreign-born residents from Mexico stood at 760,000. The 2007 peak was 12.6 million.
An immigrant, who has been at a shelter for immigrants in Matamoros, Mexico, across the border from Brownsville, Texas, pointed to stiffer U.S. penalties for repeat offenders as well as brutal criminal groups that control the Mexican side of the border as reasons for the immigration decline. He has been deported four times, and was recently caught after hopping the border fence near Nogales, Ariz. After his last apprehension by U.S. authorities, he was sent to a detention facility in Las Vegas for 2 1/2 months. He fears it could be six months if he's caught again.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
The number of Mexican immigrants living illegally in the U.S. has dropped significantly for the first time in decades, a dramatic shift as many illegal workers, already in the U.S. and seeing few job opportunities, return to Mexico.
An analysis of census data from the U.S. and Mexican governments details the movement to and from Mexico, a nation accounting for nearly 60 percent of the illegal immigrants in the U.S. It comes amid renewed debate over U.S. immigration policy as the Supreme Court hears arguments this week on Arizona's tough immigration law. Immigration Lawyers in Raleigh have been following the fluctuating immigration trends for some time.
Roughly 6.1 million unauthorized Mexican immigrants were living in the U.S. last year, down from a peak of nearly 7 million in 2007, according to the Pew Hispanic Center study released Monday. It was the biggest sustained drop in modern history, believed to be surpassed in scale only by losses in the Mexican-born U.S. population during the Great Depression. Raleigh Immigration Lawyers have noticed this drop in cases, and agree with the economic assessment.
Much of the drop in illegal immigrants is due to the persistently weak U.S. economy, which has shrunk construction and service-sector jobs attractive to Mexican workers following the housing bust. But increased deportations, heightened U.S. patrols and violence along the border also have played a role, as well as demographic changes, such as Mexico's declining birth rate.
In all, the Mexican-born population in the U.S. last year — legal and illegal — fell to 12 million, marking an end to an immigration boom dating back to the 1970s, when foreign-born residents from Mexico stood at 760,000. The 2007 peak was 12.6 million.
An immigrant, who has been at a shelter for immigrants in Matamoros, Mexico, across the border from Brownsville, Texas, pointed to stiffer U.S. penalties for repeat offenders as well as brutal criminal groups that control the Mexican side of the border as reasons for the immigration decline. He has been deported four times, and was recently caught after hopping the border fence near Nogales, Ariz. After his last apprehension by U.S. authorities, he was sent to a detention facility in Las Vegas for 2 1/2 months. He fears it could be six months if he's caught again.
For more law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
