Broken families

Tough enforcement of immigration law has the painful side effect of deporting parents of U.S.-born kids

By Kelly Brewington
Sun reporter
January 26, 2008

After years of struggle, Adela had finally found stability. With a renewed religious faith, her once-rocky marriage to Rigoberto had become strong.

Most of all, they had reason to celebrate: their infant Moises, by virtue of being born in the United States, possessed American citizenship, a privilege unattainable to the Honduran couple because they had entered the country illegally.

But chaos struck during a trip to Toys "R" Us on a frigid day last February. Police pulled over the Baltimore County family's truck for a traffic violation. Her husband was handcuffed. A month later, he was deported. Adela and her sons never saw him again.

"It is hard, but I stay here for my children," said Adela, 32, who declined to give her last name for fear of being deported. "But I'm scared."

Moises is among the nation's 3.4 million children living a precarious family dynamic - American citizens with at least one parent who is an undocumented immigrant. They account for about two-thirds of the 5 million children in illegal immigrant families, according to 2006 figures from the Pew Hispanic Center.

Known as "mixed-status" families, they present the toughest of challenges for politicians, policymakers and activists battling over immigration reform.

Some foes of illegal immigration call children like Moises "anchor babies," their births calculated by parents seeking the benefits for their children that the U.S. offers. Advocates for immigrants point to such families as case studies in the nation's broken immigration system, a structure so flawed that even U.S.-born children suffer.

Political pressure on federal immigration and customs officials to toughen enforcement has resulted in a surge in workplace raids and arrests. Advocates warn that a swelling number of immigrant families will be thrown into chaos and, ultimately, separated by borders.

Immigrant advocates say tales of deported parents seeking to reunite with their families are increasingly common.

"It really speaks to the lengths that families will go through to be together," said Miriam Calderon, associate director of the policy analysis center of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino advocacy organization.

Families left behind face numerous hardships, said Calderon, whose organization commissioned a report with the nonpartisan Urban Institute in Washington to study deportation's effect on children. The study, released in October, interviewed families in three communities where immigration officials had arrested hundreds in workplace raids over one year.

Communities panicked, families lost their breadwinners and children were stigmatized at school, researchers found.

"These were big shows of force," said Randy Capps, senior research associate at the Urban Institute. "They didn't just stop with the big raid at the plant, but these smaller raids continued and sort of kept the families living in fear. ... In the most extreme cases, people basically hid in their homes for weeks."

Although Rigoberto was not snagged in a raid, Adela faced challenges because the family bills and the lease on their house were all in her husband's name. A shaken Adela found herself raising a fussy infant and a rebellious teenager on her own. Worse, she worried that authorities would take her next.

Immigration and customs officials deported 237,255 people in 2007, up from 204,980 in 2006. While the agency targets immigrants who have committed crimes, it has pushed to reduce a huge case backlog and conduct more workplace sweeps.

The strategies have heightened the sense of vulnerability among immigrants, both legal and illegal. A little more than half of all Latino adults worry that a family member or close friend could be deported, according to a survey released recently by the Pew Hispanic Center.

Church leaders, educators and immigrant advocates have complained of immigration officers' tactics, including the detention of breastfeeding mothers after raids. Immigration officials responded by broadening the use of ankle bracelets for women who would otherwise be detained during the deportation process. Still, others argue that undocumented immigrants must be sent back to their country of origin, regardless of the circumstances.

"There is no good solution; this is what happens when you ignore immigration law. You end up creating these dilemmas," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington think tank that supports tighter controls on immigration. "That said, the activist groups' solution - letting the illegal parents stay - isn't much of a solution at all. It tells the illegal immigrant, once they have a kid they get a free pass."

The solution, Krikorian said, must be comprehensive: strengthening immigration laws, cracking down on employers who hire illegal workers, forbidding immigrants from gaining driver's licenses and "making it as difficult as possible to be an illegal alien."

"The goal is to create a new environment so that businesses and illegal immigrants expect that the party is over and start changing their behaviors," Krikorian said.

But for Miguel Diaz, whose wife, Fidelia, was deported to El Salvador last year, life is complex.

At 5 a.m. one day last January, gun-wielding immigration officers arrested Fidelia at the couple's Windsor Mills home, startling their two U.S.-born children, Edwin, 13, and Cynthia, 8.

"My children were crying. I could see on the officers' faces - they knew it was wrong," Diaz said. "It is anti-human. I said, 'You are dividing my family, why are you doing this?'"

Diaz, 42, a labor union organizer originally from El Salvador, is a legal permanent resident. But Fidelia was not. Diaz said her application for political asylum had been rejected years ago, but she defied orders to leave, marrying Diaz and having two children. Diaz later applied for his wife to become a legal resident, hoping to "fix the situation."

"You don't know the feeling when you are afraid all the time. You can't travel, you are afraid that someone will stop you at any time," he said. "We wanted to straighten things out, no matter what."

Now, Diaz has reapplied for Fidelia, a process that could take 10 years.

"Every day they ask, 'When is Mommy coming back?' It's a mess," Diaz said. "A family is a mother and a father and the little ones. I don't understand my life without her."

Diaz's cousin and her children have moved in with him, and together they split household duties. But it has been difficult.

"Christmas was so hard for us," he said.

Taking the family to El Salvador, a country rife with corruption and poverty, is not an option, Diaz said. Yet, his children miss their mother.

"My question is," said Diaz, "does the punishment fit the crime?"

Another family is dealing with a more tragic outcome.

Adela, the Baltimore County mother, recalled that after her husband was sent back to Honduras, she vowed to pack up the couple's home and return to their native country with Moises and son Jeffrey, 15.

But Rigoberto reasoned that the children deserved a better life away from the grinding poverty the couple had known in Central America.

On May 29, Rigoberto called from Honduras to tell his wife he would set out the next day on the perilous journey through the Mexican desert to return to his family. They prayed together and exchanged I-love-you's.

It was last time Adela heard from her husband.

On Dec. 19, the day before Moises' first birthday, Adela received a call from the Honduran consulate in Houston. Rigoberto had been found on a Texas ranch, dead from dehydration, his Bible in hand. An official asked Adela if she would like the body sent back to Honduras. It would cost $3,800.

"I was crying and crying," said Adela in Spanish. "I believed that God would not allow this to happen. But I leave it in his hands, so he can tell me what to do now."

kelly.brewington@baltsun.com

Study questions how many U.S. citizens get ensnared in wrongful deportation

Marisa Taylor
McClatchy Newspapers
January 26, 2008

FLORENCE, Ariz. — Thomas Warziniack was born in Minnesota and grew up in Georgia, but immigration authorities pronounced him an illegal immigrant from Russia.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has held Warziniack for weeks in an Arizona detention facility with the aim of deporting him to a country he's never seen. His jailers shrugged off Warziniack's claims that he was a U.S. citizen, even though they could have retrieved his Minnesota birth certificate in minutes and even though a Colorado court had concluded that he was a U.S. citizen a year before it shipped him to Arizona.

On Thursday, Warziniack finally became a free man. Immigration officials released him after his family, who learned about his predicament from McClatchy, produced a birth certificate and after a U.S. senator demanded his release.

"The immigration agents told me they never make mistakes," Warziniack said in an earlier phone interview from jail. "All I know is that somebody dropped the ball."

The story of how immigration officials decided that a small-town drifter with a Southern accent was an illegal Russian immigrant illustrates how the federal government mistakenly detains and sometimes deports American citizens.

U.S. citizens who are mistakenly jailed by immigration authorities can get caught up in a nightmarish bureaucratic tangle in which they're simply not believed.

By the numbers

A study by the Vera Institute of Justice, a New York nonprofit organization, in 2006 identified 125 people in immigration detention centers across the nation who immigration lawyers believed had valid U.S. citizenship claims. Vera initially focused on six facilities where most of the cases surfaced. The organization broadened its analysis to 12 sites and plans to track the outcome of all cases involving citizens.

Nina Siulc, the lead researcher, said she thinks that many more U.S. citizens probably are being erroneously detained or deported every year because her assessment looked at only a small number of those in custody. Each year, about 280,000 people are held on immigration violations at 15 federal detention centers and more than 400 state and local contract facilities nationwide.
Officials with ICE, the federal agency that oversees deportations, maintain that such cases are isolated because agents are required to obtain sufficient evidence that someone is an illegal immigrant before making an arrest. However, they don't track the number of U.S. citizens who are detained or deported.

"We don't want to detain or deport U.S. citizens," said Ernestine Fobbs, an ICE spokeswoman. "It's just not something we do."

While immigration advocates agree that the agents generally release detainees before deportation in clear-cut cases, they said that ICE sometimes ignores valid assertions of citizenship in the rush to ship out more illegal immigrants.

Proving citizenship is especially difficult for the poor, mentally ill, disabled or anyone who has trouble getting a copy of his or her birth certificate while behind bars.

Pedro Guzman, a mentally disabled U.S. citizen who was born in Los Angeles, was serving a 120-day sentence for trespassing last year when he was shipped off to Mexico. Guzman was found three months later trying to return home. Although federal government attorneys have acknowledged that Guzman was a citizen, ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice said Thursday that her agency still questions the validity of his birth certificate.

Last March, ICE agents in San Francisco detained Kebin Reyes, a 6-year-old boy who was born in the United States, for 10 hours after his father was picked up in a sweep. His father says he wasn't permitted to call relatives who could care for his son, although ICE denies turning down the request.

Chances for mistakes

The number of U.S. citizens who are swept up in the immigration system is a small fraction of the number of illegal immigrants who are deported, but in the last several years immigration lawyers report seeing more detainees who turn out to be U.S. citizens. The attorneys said the chances of mistakes are growing as immigration agents step up sweeps in the country and state and local prisons with less experience in immigration matters screen more criminals on behalf of ICE.

Okla. Immigration Law Blamed for Death

Associated Press – 19 hours ago
By JUSTIN JUOZAPAVICIUS

TULSA, Okla. (AP) — Edgar Castorena had diarrhea for 10 days and counting, and the illegal immigrant parents of the 2-month-old didn't know what to do about it.

They were afraid they would be deported under a new Oklahoma law if they took him to a major hospital. By the time they took him to a clinic, it was too late.

A ruptured intestine that might have been treatable instead killed the U.S.-born infant, making him a poster child for opponents of House Bill 1804 months before it was enacted as the Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act of 2007.

"The sad part of it was the child didn't have to die if House Bill 1804 didn't ever come around," said Laurie Paul, who runs the clinic where Edgar was finally taken. "It was a total tragedy because the bill was there to create the myths and untruths and the fear."

The law, billed by its backers as the nation's toughest legislation against illegal immigration, took effect Nov. 1. It bars illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs or state assistance and makes it a felony to harbor or transport illegal immigrants.

A final portion of the law goes into effect July 1, requiring private companies to verify the employment eligibility of all new hires.

While it's difficult to characterize which state has the toughest immigration-related law, Oklahoma's goes beyond most because it includes the clause about harboring and transporting illegal immigrants, said Ann Morse, program director for the National Conference of State Legislatures' Immigrant Policy Project.

"What I think these laws may have are unintended consequences on the general public," Morse said recently. "How does the law get implemented? Who is the target?"

The crackdown has caused thousands of Hispanics to flee for neighboring states, with as many as 25,000 leaving northeastern Oklahoma alone, according to the Greater Tulsa Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

The law's fallout also can be seen in the struggling businesses, worker shortages and widespread fear among immigrants who say they are afraid to drive to church or the market because police might pick them up.

"I feel like I'm in some kind of Nazi country where if they see your color, you'll be stopped," said Maria Sanchez, a 22-year-old student who is looking to leave Oklahoma rather than risk waiting the seven years it will take to get her papers. "I can't work, I can't study, I can't go out, there's no point of me staying here."

Civil rights leaders call the law xenophobic and redundant, and say other states will wrongly look to Oklahoma to push their own anti-illegal immigrant legislation. Business and church leaders also have been vocal opponents.

"Oklahoma was settled by immigrants ... which means that diverse is normal in Oklahoma," said the Rev. Miguel Rivera, president of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders. "It's difficult for us to understand a state which is so Christian, that to have all this animosity toward immigrants is completely outrageous."

Supporters — described by Dan Howard, the founder of an anti-illegal immigration Web site, as "good, American, God-fearing people of the heartland that bleed red, white and blue" — say the law is necessary because of Washington's bungled immigration policy. They also believe the law has helped deter crime and punishes the companies that make money on the backs of illegal labor.

The bill's Republican author, state Rep. Randy Terrill, said similar versions have been introduced or are under consideration in more than a dozen states. Last year, more than 1,500 pieces of immigration-related legislation were introduced across the country, with 244 becoming law in 46 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

"More than half the nation will soon be modeling Oklahoma's bill," said Terrill, who plans to introduce a companion piece this year that would make English the state's official language, order schools to report how many illegal children are enrolled and require people or businesses who transport, hire or rent to illegal immigrants to forfeit property.

Terrill said there's no correlation between his bill and Edgar's death, noting that the child died in July, months before the law took effect, and that the law provides an exception for emergency medical care.

"To the extent that these illegal alien parents deprived their own child needed and necessary medical care because of their ignorance of the law, then they should be in prison, frankly," Terrill said.

Edgar's parents are believed to have gone underground following the boy's death, returning either to Mexico or going to stay with family in Arkansas, according to interviews with people in Tulsa's Latino community.

Far from the halls of the state Capitol, fear leads illegal immigrants to develop elaborate emergency plans for their children in case the youngsters should find their parents missing.

Irene Maldonado, 24, has been designated as the one to call in case her sister-in-law gets deported. Meanwhile, she worries if her husband, Jose, will come home on weekends from the construction jobs he works throughout the state.

She has legal residency, he doesn't.

"I don't know if he has less fear, or he's trying to be the macho guy," she said.

Illegal immigrant Maria Saldivar, 44, searches for what little factory work she can to support her three children. Past employers now ask for papers.

"Every time I look for a job, it's always the same thing," Saldivar said in Spanish through a translator. "There was more work for me to do before."

Even workers with proper paperwork are leaving for jobs in neighboring states rather than split up their families.

"My guy who runs my framing crew, he had 70 workers, and as of Nov. 1, he lost 35 of them," said Caleb McCaleb, who runs a homebuilding company in Edmond. "My painter has lost 30 percent of his work force, my landscaper has lost 25 percent of his work force."

Some in Terrill's own party doubt the wisdom of his legislation.

"We've removed not only those here illegally and working, but those who are here legally," said state Sen. Harry Coates, a Republican who voted against 1804 and wants to repeal portions of the bill. "I'm not the smartest person in the world, but I understand economics."

Vicente Ruiz, a 47-year-old legal immigrant who runs his own electrical contracting business, put it more bluntly: "It's all about making money, and if everybody moves away, the whole state is going to suffer."

Should Mexico Get More Green Cards?

By EUNICE MOSCOSO
Cox News Service
Thursday, January 17, 2008

WASHINGTON — In 2006, the United States issued about 2,500 permanent immigrant visas for low-skilled workers. Mexico got 418.

Meanwhile, millions of Mexicans are working without permission in farming, construction, landscaping and other industries throughout the United States.

Some experts say that greatly increasing permanent residency visas, or "green cards," to Mexico would help relieve some of the nation's illegal immigration problem. Mexico has the same cap as every other country for certain green card categories, including employment-based visas, at about 25,000.

Douglas Massey, a sociology professor at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, thinks it is "pitiful" that Mexico — a country of 108 million people that shares a 2,000-mile border with the United States — has the same cap as Botswana, a country of 1.8 million people in southern Africa.

He contends that Mexico should get special consideration as the number two trading partner of the United States, a fellow member of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and neighboring country. NAFTA did include one temporary visa program for professional workers.

"Somehow you want to create this integrated North American economy and there's going to be all this stuff moving back and forth across the borders, but no people, " he said. "It just doesn't work. It goes against history, it goes against logic and it goes against contemporary economic realities."

Massey thinks the number of immigrant visas for Mexico should be hiked to 100,000 and that the United States should start a temporary worker program with Canada and Mexico to bring in another 300,000 annually — on two-year visas.

There is precedent in the United States to focus on specific countries with immigration agreements. For example, Cubans who land on U.S. soil are given immediate political asylum. In addition, the United States and Mexico operated a large temporary worker program between World War II and 1964, where millions of Mexicans called "braceros" were imported to fill labor shortages. The program, however, was plagued by worker abuses.

Doris Meissner, a senior fellow at the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute, said that current U.S. immigration policy is outdated and a "mis-match" with economic reality. Meissner is a former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which was divided up into various agencies within the Department of Homeland Security.

Meissner said that revisiting the visa rules would reduce illegal immigration.

"We've got to make changes. The longer that we don't, the more we will have an outraged public and less and less political ability to make sensible changes," she said. "Illegal immigration is by and large a response to labor market needs."

Meissner said, however, that the 25,000 per-country limit on all nations was designed to promote equity between countries after a long history of discriminating against certain nationalities. It will be difficult to change.

Other countries, such as the Philippines or Ireland, could claim that they have a long historic relationship with the United States and should get special treatment as well, she said.

Meanwhile, Mexicans are the largest group of illegal immigrants in the United States. About 6.5 million Mexicans lived illegally in the country in 2006, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

The 25,000 visa limit does not include certain categories of family-sponsored immigration, including spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, which is the way that thousands of immigrants obtain permanent residency each year. In 2006, 1.2 million immigrants obtained a green card to live permanently in the United States. Of those, 63 percent were family-sponsored, according to the Office of Immigration Statistics at the Department of Homeland Security. Many of the immigrants who obtained green cards were already in the United States under temporary visas, refugee status, or other permits. Mexicans received 173,000 green cards last year, mostly for family members of U.S. citizens, according to the Office of Immigration Statistics.

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that advocates stronger immigration controls, said that raising the cap on certain categories of green cards for Mexicans would only boost immigration levels that are already too high.

"There would be more spouses or minor children or parents who would come in," he said.

He said changing the cap would also anger many other countries and groups that represent various nationalities of immigrants.

"It's politically impossible," Krikorian said.

Massey agreed that substantially increasing Mexican visas would be difficult, but the chances could improve if a Democrat wins the White House.

The leading Democratic presidential candidates have all said that they support an immigration overhaul that includes a temporary worker program and a path to citizenship for current illegal immigrants. Republican candidates, with the exception of Arizona Sen. John McCain, have taken a harder line on the issue, focusing on enforcement efforts and denouncing legalization plans as "amnesty."

McCain supports a plan for current illegal immigrants to have a path to citizenship, but says enforcement must come first.


On the Web:

Migration Policy Institute: www.migrationpolicy.org

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: www.uscis.gov

Angela Vega, right, gives Marvin Guevara Galo a hand as he applies for one of the new New Haven identification cards at City Hall in New Haven, Conn., in this July 24, 2007, file photo. Federal authorities informed the nation's top immigration official last summer about New Haven's identification card program for illegal immigrants a day before conducting a raid that critics claim was retaliatory, according to an e-mail obtained by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Bob Child)

Critics: Immigration Raid Retaliatory

By JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN – 1 day ago
Associated Press

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) — An e-mail sent by local immigration officials to their agency head the day after the city adopted an ID program for illegal immigrants suggests that the timing of a raid soon thereafter was not coincidental, the city's mayor said.

Regional Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers told agency Director Julie Myers in a June 5 e-mail that New Haven's Board of Aldermen had voted 25-1 the previous night to make the city the nation's first to offer illegal immigrants ID cards. City officials said the cards would help immigrants better integrate into mainstream culture by allowing them access to bank accounts and other services.

On June 6, ICE agents swept through the city and detained an estimated 30 illegal immigrants. Critics contend that the raid was retaliation for the city's adoption of the ID program — a charge the agency has steadfastly denied.

In the e-mail to Myers, obtained by The Associated Press through a federal Freedom of Information Act request, agents wrote that because of the recent vote, the raid would likely draw significant news coverage.

"They self-evidently were following what was happening in New Haven," Mayor John DeStefano said. "And at some level it had to have been a factor in their thinking to proceed with the raid. Otherwise why else would they have noted it?"

Yale law professor Michael Wishnie, who is representing those detained free of charge, said that while the e-mail to Myers doesn't prove retaliation, "it does suggest an awareness that doing the raid on June 6 would likely draw attention and they wanted to be prepared to respond to that expected attention. It certainly casts doubt on the statements that the raid had nothing to do with the ID program."

ICE officials have denied accusations that the raid was retaliatory, saying the raid was planned months in advance and that its timing was coincidental. Planning for the raid began in April, and it was initially to have been conducted in May, but records included with the e-mail show the date was pushed back until June for logistical reasons.

"This is something we typically do is to pass on information," said Paula Grenier, an agency spokeswoman.

But DeStefano pointed out that debate over the ID program also lasted months.

Flor Crisostomo (left), and Elvira Arellano hold hands during a prayer before heading for Washington D.C. to lobby in May 15, 2006. (Tribune file photo by Abel Uribe / May 15, 2006)

Church where illegal immigrant took sanctuary for a year to host another woman

By SOPHIA TAREEN | Associated Press Writer
7:55 AM CST, January 27, 2008

CHICAGO - Leaders of a Chicago church where an illegal immigrant from Mexico took sanctuary for a year before being deported say they plan to house another immigration activist who is set on defying a deportation order.

Flor Crisostomo, 28, an illegal immigrant who came to the U.S. in 2001, was slated to report to federal immigration officials on Monday, but the head of Adalberto United Methodist Church said she will seek refuge at the church in the same way as immigration activist Elvira Arellano, who was deported to Mexico last August.

"She wanted to continue the struggle," the Rev. Walter Coleman said of Crisostomo. "That's what the church is for, to provide space where the truth can be told. She brings out the truth of the situation in a different way than Elvira did."

Crisostomo's attorney, Chris Bergin, planned to submit a letter to immigration officials Monday, outlining his client's decision to stay in the United States illegally.

Crisostomo, who declined requests to speak with reporters until Monday, immigrated without papers to Chicago from Oaxaca in Mexico seven years ago. She took a job with IFCO Systems, a manufacturer of crates and pallets, and was arrested during raids on company sites nationwide in 2006.

Her three children, two boys and a girl, live in Mexico with their maternal grandmother; Crisostomo is unmarried.

"I am taking a stand of civil disobedience ..." she said in prepared remarks to be read Monday, which were sent to The Associated Press. "I believe with all my heart that the United States and Mexico must end the system of undocumented labor."

Crisostomo, who has been an immigration activist in the Chicago area and fasted with Arellano in protest of immigration policies, said she could not support her family if she returned to Mexico.

Immigration activists such as Coleman claim that by living at the church -- apart from her three children -- Crisostomo brings attention to how they believe immigration policies in the U.S. need attention.

Activists from the church and the Chicago immigration rights group Centro Sin Fronteras claim that economic situations have deteriorated in Mexico because of NAFTA and other U.S. policies, creating dire situations that cause illegal immigration.

"The current policies are driving people further and further underground," Coleman said. "That's the reason she came in the first place. She's saying that you need to fix the system here."

Gail Montenegro, a spokeswoman for the U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Chicago, declined to comment on Crisostomo's specific case.

"ICE officers are sworn to enforce the nation's immigration laws and will do so at appropriate times and places," she said.

Adalberto United Methodist Church, located in the heavily Latino Humboldt Park neighborhood, was home to immigration activist Elvira Arellano, and her U.S. citizen son, Saul, for one year. Arellano left the church last August and was arrested in Los Angeles after giving a speech and deported to Mexico shortly thereafter.

Arellano was initially arrested in 1997 after crossing the border into the United States. She was sent back to Mexico but soon returned. She was arrested again years later and convicted of working as a cleaning woman at O'Hare International Airport under a false Social Security number.

She took refuge at the church in 2006, claiming that if she was deported, her son would also be effectively deported and deprived of his rights as a U.S. citizen. She said her situation illustrated the plight of millions of illegal immigrants.


Get chicagotribune.com news by e-mail. Sign up for Daywatch.

Immigrant-rights group reaches out to blacks

BY DAVE MARCUS | dave.marcus@newsday.com
7:09 PM EST, January 27, 2008

Long Island immigrant-rights groups are taking their cause to a place that has sometimes been unwelcome territory: African-American churches and neighborhoods.

The effort, called the "Truth About Immigration Campaign," will enlist African-American pastors and activists to argue that immigrants across the state are being scapegoated for problems such as crime, stagnant wages and a shortage of affordable housing.

Launching tomorrow, the campaign will target many others in addition to African-Americans. Priests, rabbis and other prominent community members also will use a PowerPoint presentation to urge New Yorkers to work together to solve problems. In turn, those leaders hope to train scores of other presenters -- from members of veterans' associations to bridge clubs.

Among other things, the campaign will connect two groups that are sometimes wary of each other, African-Americans and Hispanic immigrants.

"When we cast everybody into the same pot and call them names, often we are marginalizing immigrants who have been here for a long time, working and serving our communities," said one of the participants, the Rev. Marvin Dozier, pastor of Unity Baptist Church in Mattituck. "Immigrants who came in recently -- even illegally or without papers -- also are working hard taking care of their families."

Groups that feel besieged by newcomers often become resentful, said another participant, Grace Blake, president of the National Coalition of 100 Black Women. "The truth is that what whites did when blacks came in to neighborhoods years ago, blacks are now doing to Latinos."

Organizers say that a partnership between blacks and Hispanics can calm tensions that have increased between the two groups as the population of immigrants from Central and South America has surged in the past decade. Hispanics have become the area's largest minority group.

Luis Valenzuela, executive director of the Long Island Immigrant Alliance, said that immigrants and blacks sometimes vie for the same affordable housing.

"I think people have legitimate concerns," he said. "We all acknowledge there is a housing crisis here, and immigration serves as a distraction from looking at the real issues and practical solutions."

Worries about a tightening job market add to the unease, said Michael Zweig, director of Stony Brook University's Center for Study of Working Class Life, who is not involved in the campaign. "There is a tension between the newcomers and all native-born Americans, whether they're white or black," he said.

The campaign is being run by the New York Immigration Coalition, with the help of the American Jewish Committee, the Long Island Organizing Network and others. "We're forming a broad coalition because working together is the best defense against bigotry," said Caroline Levy, director of AJC's Long Island chapter.

More articles

Help a family on Long Island. Donate to Newsday Charities.

Copyright © 2008, Newsday Inc.

IMMIGRATION FILM TAKES HOME TOP SUNDANCE PRIZE

Movie & Entertainment News provided by World Entertainment News Network (www.wenn.com)
2008-01-28 00:11:50 -

Controversial immigration movie FROZEN RIVER has won the top prize at the Sundance Film Festival.

The movie, which was written and directed by first-time filmmaker Courtney Hunt and is about smuggling immigrants into the U.S., took home the Utah event's grand jury award for Best Dramatic Film on Saturday (26Jan08).

Jury member Quentin Tarantino described Frozen River as "one of the most exciting thrillers I am going to see this year".

Elsewhere, the Hurricane Katrina-themed Trouble The Water won the grand jury prize for Best U.S. Documentary, while the audience award for

Best Drama went to Jonathan Levine's The Wackness.

The audience prize for Best U.S. Documentary was awarded to environmental movie Fields Of Fuel, and Best Director was picked up by Lance Hammer for Ballast.

Sundance Honors Immigration Drama

By THE NEW YORK TIMES
Published: January 28, 2008

“Frozen River,” a first feature about a struggling single mother in upstate New York who joins a Mohawk widow in smuggling Chinese migrants from Canada into the United States, won the grand jury prize for best American drama on Saturday at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah, The Associated Press reported.

Quentin Tarantino, one of the jurors, described the film, starring Melissa Leo, above right, and Misty Upham, above left, as “a wonderful depiction of poverty in America.” Trade papers reported that Sony Pictures Classics had bought the film, adapted by Courtney Hunt from her 2004 short of the same title, for under $1 million.

“Trouble in the Water,” a film by Tia Lessin and Carl Deal about a New Orleans couple’s survival through Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, won the grand jury award in the American documentary category. The audience award for favorite American drama was won by “The Wackness,” starring Ben Kingsley as a psychiatrist who trades therapy for marijuana.

Sacramento landscape company owner Kimberly Rhodes, right, with workers Eugunio Mendoza, left, and Daryl Goddard at a project in the Pocket area on Thursday, disagrees with a plan that would force U.S. employers to fire suspected illegal immigrants based on Social Security data discrepancies.
Randall Benton / rbenton@sacbee.com

Odd allies oppose 'no-match' plan

Use of Social Security data to fire suspected illegal immigrants fought by business-labor group.

By Susan Ferriss - sferriss@sacbee.com
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A4

Kimberly Rhodes is a Sacramento landscaper who usually votes Republican, and Sharon Cornu is a Democrat and prominent Bay Area labor organizer.

They're partners in an unusual alliance, trying to kill a Bush administration plan that would use Social Security data to force U.S. employers to fire suspected illegal immigrants.

Federal judges in San Francisco sided last fall with the labor-business alliance, temporarily freezing the plan by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which is responsible for immigration enforcement. By March, Homeland Security intends to unveil a second version of the plan that it hopes will pass legal muster. The idea is to pressure employers to fire any workers who can't explain discrepancies between their names and Social Security numbers.

Seventy percent of Social Security discrepancies involve U.S. citizens and stem from database errors – one reason the plan should not be considered a solution to tracking down illegal immigrants, Rhodes, Cornu and the federal judges agreed.

"I've never been so disappointed in my government before in my life," said Rhodes, who runs Rhodes Landscape Design Inc. Because so many false documents look authentic, she feels that business people can't be sure they haven't hired an illegal immigrant. She disagrees with calls to resolve the problem now with "enforcement only" measures.

If Homeland Security's "no-match" plan goes forward and mass numbers of employees are fired, Rhodes predicts mass closures of small businesses in California.

"This isn't just me. It's the California economy," Rhodes said. "We already could be in a recession."

She's waiting anxiously to see what the government proposes next. Homeland Security isn't revealing what might be different about its second plan. The agency has filed an appeal with 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, hoping to convince that court its original plan was legally sound.

In the meantime, Rhodes said, she's searching for a presidential candidate she feels will tackle illegal immigration without pushing to eject all undocumented workers.

Cornu is the secretary-treasurer of the Alameda County Central Labor Council, which joined the American Civil Liberties Union, the AFL-CIO and six other national and Bay Area unions to file the lawsuit last year against Homeland Security's plan.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce later joined the suit along with trade groups representing roofers, farmers, restaurateurs and landscapers, including the Sacramento-based California Landscape Contractors Association. Rhodes serves on that group's immigration task force.

In anticipation that Homeland Security's plan might eventually go through, Cornu said the Central Labor Council began training its leaders this month on workers' rights and immigration law.

"We didn't have to explain to our members much why we were taking on the Bush administration," Cornu said.

Like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Cornu's federation favors offering an avenue to legal residency for undocumented workers who already are here.

Unions also oppose Homeland Security's plan because they believe employers may dismiss legal workers out of panic – or fire immigrant workers who are not compliant, Cornu said.

Businesses, she said, have used immigration rules before to exploit immigrant workers. She said the owner of an Alameda hotel last year requested an audit of its own employee records during a drive to increase wages. Immigration officials detained some workers involved in the campaign.

Since 1994, the Social Security Administration, as a courtesy, has advised employers of discrepancies between employees' names and Social Security numbers by periodically mailing out so-called "no-match" letters.

Social Security tells employers they should not fire these workers.

Rhodes said she has filled out and returned the required paperwork when she has received the advisories.

"I never heard another word from them," she said. Business went on, employees kept working.

Homeland Security now wants to convert "no-match" letters into an indirect immigration enforcement tool by attaching its own instructions to employers, warning them that they could face prosecution if they don't dismiss workers who can't explain a discrepancy within 90 days. So far, Congress has refused to grant Homeland Security's request for access to lists of employers who receive confidential "no-match" letters. The prohibition would limit the agency's ability to follow through on threats to prosecute employers.

The Social Security Administration is waiting, meanwhile, to mail out an estimated 140,000 "no-match" letters affecting an estimated 8 million employees.

Last summer, when he announced the "no-match" plan, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the Bush administration was disappointed Congress failed to create a program to allow more legal guest workers to fill labor shortages. "But until the laws change," he said, "we are enforcing the laws as they are to the utmost of our ability, using every tool that we have in the toolbox."

In December, Chertoff issued a statement calling critics of the "no-match" plan "employers who would rather close their eyes to cheap and profitable labor than obey the laws of our country."

That makes business people like Rhodes angry. She's always asked to see workers' documents and recorded identification information on special forms she's required to keep.

If some of her workers are secretly undocumented, she said, she'd like a system that would give those she's trained – and cares about – a chance to stay. And she supports a more foolproof system to check documents in the future.

"Every time I hear this about how businesses want cheap labor, I think, 'That's not me. I don't pay minimum wage,' " she said.

Rhodes pays workers $10.50 an hour to start, with regular increases in pay, an option for Kaiser health insurance and a 401(k) plan. She said she's tried, with little success, to hire U.S.-born workers. Most have left after a short time on the job, one to study for a master's degree in landscape design.

"Business people like me are chicken about speaking out," she said. "But I'm ready to speak out. I feel like standing on a corner with a sign in my hand."

State of the Union Excerpts

By The Associated Press – 2 hours ago

Excerpts from the prepared text of President Bush's final State of the Union address Monday, as released by the White House.

On Congress:

"The actions of the 110th Congress will affect the security and prosperity of our nation long after this session has ended. In this election year, let us show our fellow Americans that we recognize our responsibilities and are determined to meet them. And let us show them that Republicans and Democrats can compete for votes and cooperate for results at the same time."

___

On trusting and empowering the American people:

"From expanding opportunity to protecting our country, we have made good progress. Yet we have unfinished business before us, and the American people expect us to get it done. In the work ahead, we must be guided by the philosophy that made our nation great. As Americans, we believe in the power of individuals to determine their destiny and shape the course of history. So in all we do, we must trust in the ability of free people to make wise decisions, and empower them to improve their lives and their futures."

___

On the economy:

"To build a prosperous future, we must trust people with their own money and empower them to grow our economy. As we meet tonight, our economy is undergoing a period of uncertainty. And at kitchen tables across our country, there is concern about our economic future. In the long run, Americans can be confident about our economic growth."

___

On earmarks:

"The people's trust in their government is undermined by congressional earmarks."

___

On housing:

"We must trust Americans with the responsibility of homeownership and empower them to weather turbulent times in the housing market."

___

On No Child Left Behind:

"On education, we must trust students to learn if given the chance and empower parents to demand results from our schools. In neighborhoods across our country, there are boys and girls with dreams — and a decent education is their only hope of achieving them. Six years ago, we came together to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, and today no one can deny its results. Now we must work together to increase accountability, add flexibility for states and districts, reduce the number of high school dropouts, and provide extra help for struggling schools. Members of Congress: The No Child Left Behind Act is a bipartisan achievement. It is succeeding. And we owe it to America's children, their parents and their teachers to strengthen this good law."

___

On trade:

"On trade, we must trust American workers to compete with anyone in the world and empower them by opening up new markets overseas. Today, our economic growth increasingly depends on our ability to sell American goods, crops and services all over the world. These agreements will level the playing field. They will give us better access to nearly 100 million customers. And they will support good jobs for the finest workers in the world: those whose products say 'Made in the USA.'

"If we fail to pass this (Colombia free trade) agreement, we will embolden the purveyors of false populism in our hemisphere. So we must come together, pass this agreement and show our neighbors in the region that democracy leads to a better life."

___

On energy security:

"To build a future of energy security, we must trust in the creative genius of American researchers and entrepreneurs and empower them to pioneer a new generation of clean energy technology. Our security, our prosperity and our environment all require reducing our dependence on oil."

___

On climate change:

"Let us create a new international clean technology fund, which will help developing nations like India and China make greater use of clean energy sources. And let us complete an international agreement that has the potential to slow, stop and eventually reverse the growth of greenhouse gases. This agreement will be effective only if it includes commitments by every major economy and gives none a free ride."

___

On entitlement reform:

"Every member in this chamber knows that spending on entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is growing faster than we can afford. Now I ask members of Congress to offer your proposals and come up with a bipartisan solution to save these vital programs for our children and grandchildren."

___

On immigration:

"Illegal immigration is complicated, but it can be resolved. And it must be resolved in a way that upholds both our laws and our highest ideals."

___

On the escalation of troop strength in Iraq:

"Our foreign policy is based on a clear premise: We trust that people, when given the chance, will choose a future of freedom and peace. In the last seven years, we have witnessed stirring moments in the history of liberty and these images of liberty have inspired us. In the past seven years, we have also seen images that have sobered us (and) serve as a grim reminder: The advance of liberty is opposed by terrorists and extremists — evil men who despise freedom, despise America and aim to subject millions to their violent rule.

"The Iraqi people quickly realized that something dramatic had happened. Those who had worried that America was preparing to abandon them instead saw our forces moving into neighborhoods, clearing out the terrorists and staying behind to ensure the enemy did not return. While the enemy is still dangerous and more work remains, the American and Iraqi surges have achieved results few of us could have imagined just one year ago.

"Some may deny the surge is working, but among the terrorists there is no doubt. Al-Qaida is on the run in Iraq, and this enemy will be defeated."

___

On 2008 objectives in Iraq:

"Our enemies in Iraq have been hit hard. They are not yet defeated, and we can still expect tough fighting ahead. Our objective in the coming year is to sustain and build on the gains we made in 2007, while transitioning to the next phase of our strategy. American troops are shifting from leading operations to partnering with Iraqi forces and, eventually, to a protective overwatch mission."

___

On this generation's response to the war on terror:

"We must do the difficult work today, so that years from now people will look back and say that this generation rose to