No announcement yet.

Blogging: Reform, What Could Stop Thee? Let Me Count The Ways By Roger Algase


  • Blogging: Reform, What Could Stop Thee? Let Me Count The Ways By Roger Algase

    Bloggings on Immigration Law

    by Roger Algase

    Bloggings: Reform, What Could Stop Thee? Let Me Count The Ways. By Roger Algase

    With my apologies to Elizabeth Barrett Browning for the heading, this comment will look at some of the main obstacles to passage of immigration reform, current and recent, and offer a few off the cuff thoughts on which, if any, of them may have a serious chance of derailing the Senate Gang of Eight's CIR bill. I do not claim *to offer a comprehensive, detailed analysis of this issue, but will only make a few brief observations.

    First, there was Boston. As soon as it developed that the bombing suspects were Chechen Muslims who were born in and had family connections to a dangerous and violent part of the world, the aha! gotcha! signal went up among right wing immigrant-haters, who tried to use the deaths of four innocent people (one of whom was a student from China) and the horrible injuries to so many others as an excuse to delay or block CIR.*

    Now, a month after the bombing, it is safe to say that this terrible insult to the victims of the Marathon attack, namely using their suffering and the grief of their families as an excuse to continue deporting 11 million Latino, Asian and other unauthorized immigrants, mainly of color, didn't work.

    Next, there is Benghazi. This is not the place to go into the details about this unfortunate event which lead to the deaths of the US ambassador and three other American diplomats, something which is still under investigation, but it is clear to virtually everyone who is not working for Fox News that, as far as discrediting President Obama (Or Hillary Clinton), there is no there, there (as Gertrude Stein is supposed to have said about Oakland CA).

    The people who are promoting the Benghazi witchhunt are by and large the same people who have been pushing the idea that President Obama is a socialist, "illegal alien", terrorist-loving, America-hating Muslim who wants to turn this country into a Communist (or Fascist) dictatorship ever since he was elected to his first term.*

    No one claims that Benghazi has anything to do with immigration, but the president is for reform, so any attempt to smear or discredit him will (the right wing hopes) rebound against any initiative he supports, including CIR.

    Since not even the right wing withchunters have attempted to tie the attack at the US consulate into anything to do with visas, it is a safe prediction that, as an obstacle to CIR, Benghazi will sooner or later go the way of Boston.

    This brings us to the alleged scandals that are suddenly gripping the administration, one right after another. See Politico, May 14, West Wing schooled on scandal. These include the IRS "special scrutiny" of Tea Party groups applying for tax deductions (as if anyone seriously thinks that these groups were not political to the core, and as if the IRS had never investigated the NAACP or audited liberal groups under Republican presidents).*

    The scandal accusations also include alleged Justice Department harassment of the AP, as well as sexual assault claims against the military (See Washington Post, May 14).

    The cumulative effect of these allegations may be to try to create a circus -style atmosphere of investigations during the coming months, possibly leading to the biggest circus of all, politically motivated but completely groundless impeachment charges against the president.

    What a boon that would be to the anti-immigrant lobby - to bury CIR underneath a political and media impeachment firestorm that would distract the country from everything else.

    A future comment will discuss what may, arguably, be more substantial obstacles to immigration reform. These are the evident reluctance in the House to move ahead on reform (See Politico, May 14, House immigration group at impasse) ,and, most serious of all, the endemic racism in the "conservative" wing of the Republican party which is fueling opposition to reform, even at the price of destroying the GOP. To be continued.

    About The Author

    Roger Algase is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. He has been practicing business immigration law in New York City for more than 20 years.

    The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone and should not be imputed to ILW.COM.

    • nena77
      nena77 commented
      Editing a comment
      I think you need to apologize to more than just Elizabeth Barrett Browning. I just wonder how many plagues Pharoah is going to endure before he leads his administration to take some responsibility for numerous shenanigans this country has been subjected to. I am grateful he finally did something for our Dreamers...but he barely chipped the ice and that was only because he was losing an election. We need fair immigration reform but, neither party really cares what happens as long as they get what they want. It is really about who comes out with the best political hand. We do not need to impeach Obama. We need to vote everyone out of DC and start over. It is sad to see our government cannot work together for the good of the people. SAD
    Posting comments is disabled.





There are no tags yet.

Latest Articles


  • Article: Birthright Citizenship Is Not A Legal Assumption; It
    Last week on Fox News, Tucker Carlson said,
    08-21-2018, 01:24 PM
  • Blogging: Trump's "National Security" Abuses: First, Muslim Ban; Next, Security Clearance Revocation.. By Roger Algase
    Trump's "National Security" Abuses: First, Muslim Ban; Next, Security Clearance Revocation. Trashing Immigrant Rights Endangers Freedom of All Americans.

    CNN reports on August 21 that 175 former US officials have denounced Donald Trump for revoking the security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan for speaking out in opposition to Trump.

    Presidential use of "national security"
    08-21-2018, 12:54 PM
  • Article: The EB-5 Immigration Program and the Investors Process By H. Ronald Klasko

    If you are having difficulty viewing this document please click here.

    08-20-2018, 08:15 AM
  • Article: Immigration Judges’ Union Fights for Judicial Independence By Karolina Walters
    Immigration Judges’ Union Fights for Judicial Independence by Karolina Walters The National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ), the union that represents the nation’s immigration judges, is challenging the government’s decision to remove an immigration judge from a well-known case and replace him with a judge who immediately ordered the immigrant in the case deported. NAIJ’s grievance addresses the treatment of one immigration judge, but its resolution will have implications for judicial independence throughout the entire immigration court system. The grievance was filed on behalf of Philadelphia-based immigration judge Steven A. Morley, who was presiding over the case of Mr. Reynaldo Castro-Tum. Castro-Tum’s case rose to national importance earlier this year when Attorney General Jeff Sessions chose to refer the case to himself to reconsider the Board of Immigration Appeals’ previous decision in the case. In reconsidering the decision, Sessions effectively eliminated judges’ use of administrative closure, a docket management tool. Sessions sent Castro-Tum’s case back to Judge Morley, noting that the immigration court order Castro-Tum removed if he did not appear at his next hearing. Castro-Tum did not appear at the next hearing. However, Judge Morley continued the case to resolve whether Castro-Tum received adequate notice of the hearing. Due process requires, at a minimum, that an individual be given notice of proceedings and an opportunity to be heard by a judge. But before the next hearing could take place, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) replaced Judge Morley with an Assistant Chief Immigration Judge who ordered Castro-Tum removed when he did not appear at court again. In their grievance, NAIJ asserts that the decision to remove Judge Morley from Castro-Tum’s case and reassign many other cases from his docket resulted in unacceptable interference with judicial independence. The grievance specifically claims that EOIR’s actions violate immigration judges’ authority under the regulations to exerci...
    08-17-2018, 11:12 AM
  • Article: Indirect Refoulement: Why the US Cannot Create a Safe Third Country Agreement with Mexico By Sophia Genovese
    Indirect Refoulement: Why the US Cannot Create a Safe Third Country Agreement with Mexico by Sophia Genovese The Trump Administration is seeking to create and implement a safe third country agreement with Mexico . Under this agreement, asylum seekers arriving at the US border who have travelled through Mexico would be denied the ability to file their asylum claims in the US. Such an agreement would trample on the rights of asylum-seekers, violating both international and US asylum law. In particular, the US would be violating the international principle of non-refoulement , which provides that no State “shall expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his [or her] life or freedom would be threatened,” where Mexico has a proven track record of being anything but safe for asylum seekers . The US has also codified Article 33(1) of the Refugee Convention into Section 208(a)(2)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) which provides that it will not return an asylum seeker to his or her country of origin, but may, at the determination of the Attorney General, remove the asylum seeker to a “safe third country… where the [asylum seeker] would have access to a full and fair procedure for determining a claim to asylum or equivalent temporary protection.” Although Mexican officials have not yet indicated whether they would sign a safe third country agreement with the US, asylum advocates should proactively seek to prevent such a devastating policy with a country that lacks adequate asylum protections. As reported by Human Rights First and Amnesty International , 75 percent of asylum seekers apprehended and detained by the National Institute of Migration (INM), the Mexican immigration enforcement agency, were not informed of their right to seek asylum. Even if asylum seekers are able to make their claims, only 30% of the asylum proceedings are ever concluded , and even fewer are granted, leaving many bona fide asylum seekers stranded without a resolution. The treatment of unaccompanied minors’ asylum claims in Mexico are even more dismal. Of the 35,000 minors apprehended by the INM in the first half of 2016, only 138 were able to apply for asylum , of which only 77 were granted protection. Beyond the failing asylum system in Mexico, asylum seekers are also in extreme danger of kidnapping, murder, rape, trafficking, and other crimes by INM officers and civilians. A safe third country agreement with Mexico would violate the United States’ international obligations under the 1967 Optional Protocol to the Refugee Convention, to which we are a signatory, which adopts by incorporation the obligations outlined in the 1951 Refugee Convention, to which the US is not a signatory. Take the example of an asylum-seeker, Mrs. H, who is fleeing politically-motivated violence in Honduras. Her husband, Mr. H, was a vocal political activist who opposed the National Party and members of the Honduran government. Mr. H began to receive death threats due to his political beliefs and reported such threats to the authorities. The authorities, however, di...
    08-16-2018, 02:32 PM
  • Article: Flawed Statistics Undermine USCIS/ICE/SEVP’s Restriction of D/S for Unlawful Presence By Eugene Goldstein, Esq.

    Flawed Statistics Undermine USCIS/ICE/SEVP’s Restriction of D/S for Unlawful Presence


    On August 9, 2018 USCIS published a “Policy Memorandum” restricting the 20-year-old calculation of Duration of Status (D/S) for F-1, J-1 and M-1 entrants (and their derivative families).

    USCIS also published an announcement (hereinafter “announcement”) “USCIS Issues Revised Guidance on Unlawful Presence for Students and Exchange Visitors , and a general discussion “Unlawful Presence and Bars to Admissibility” ...

    08-15-2018, 12:57 PM