Protest briefly shuts ICE jail
By Gloria Rubac
Houston

Published Jun 29, 2007 10:51 PM

Just after dawn on June 4, two young Houston activists shut down the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention center in Houston for three hours. They chained and locked themselves to the only two gates that allow vehicles into and out of the jail.

Ashley Turner, shown here, and Ben Browning
U-locked themselves to the gates of the
detention center in solidarity with immigrants.
Photos: Houston Indymedia
Ashley Turner and Ben Browning used bike locks and chains to attach themselves to the automatic rolling gates in front of the jail, which holds 950 people. Not only could the shift not change, but none of the vans bringing in people rounded up in early morning raids could enter either.

A phalanx of Houston cops joined the ICE cops and finally told the two activists they had five minutes to get off the property. One of the dozens of people joining in the protest and supporting the civil disobedience told the cops they had five minutes to release all the people in the detention center. The standoff began.

It took three fire trucks and dozens of police and firefighters over two hours to figure out how to get the bike locks off. Turner and Browning were led to the cop cars as their supporters cheered. They were bonded out and now face a misdemeanor charge of trespassing and a felony charge of possession of a criminal instrument.

A newly formed group, Houston Sin Fronteras, which Turner and Browning are working with, has called for another demonstration in front of the ICE Detention Center on the Fourth of July at 8 a.m. to show solidarity with all those incarcerated while U.S. authorities profess to celebrate freedom and independence.

A statement released by participants after the arrests linked this action to others happening around the world during the G8 summit:

“This week the leaders of the richest and most powerful eight countries in the world are meeting in Germany for the Group of 8 (G8) conference. During the G8 gathering these leaders will continue to strategize and promote the economic and political policy of neoliberal ‘globalization.’ These eight nations, which compose 65 percent of the global economy, have pushed for an economic system which impacts the whole world, making the rich richer, and impoverishing millions.

“Today, June 4th, the Dissent! Network in Europe has called for a Global Day of Action for freedom of movement and equal rights for all!

“We here in Houston, Texas, USA, have heard this call to action and share the same concerns as our brothers and sisters in Europe and all over the world who are taking action today in solidarity with migrants and refugees of the global economy.”

For updates, see www.houston.indymedia.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Articles copyright 1995-2007 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php

Felony charges dropped against Houston Sin Fronteras - The Struggle Continues

From the Houstom IMC open publishing newswire:

On July 3, a Harris County grand jury no-billed Ashley Turner and Ben Browning for the charge of Manufacture of a Criminal Device. Grand jury members tend to be retired citizens with conservative values, but this one still found no probable cause to uphold the District Attorney's charge that the activists altered the U-locks they used to lock their necks to the privately run detention center's entrance and exit gates.

The Sin Fronteras defense committee expected the fight against the felony charges to last as long as six months, and the early dismissal likely means they won't pursue a civil rights case for malicious prosecution. They still need to raise $4,000 in legal fees, and have a hearing regarding their misdemeanor charge on July 24. The pending charge could land them in jail for 6 months and they face up to a $2,000 each in fines. [read the full report] [Gran Jurado Elimina cargos contra Activistas de "Houston Sin Fronteras"]

The two called for an end to immigration raids during their direct action, which prevented buses with tinted windows from leaving the facility for several hours on June 4. They still face Class B misdemeanor criminal trespass charges.

Houston City Council member MJ Khan called them heroes during this week's public comment session. Their attorney and civil rights advocate, Randall Kallinen, asked the council to look into police harassment of activists exercising their right to freedom of speech, and into conditions at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility operated by Corrections Corporation of America. No members addressed his request.

The Sin Fronteras defense committee expected the fight against the felony charges to last as long as six months, and the early dismissal likely means they won't pursue a civil rights case for malicious prosecution. They still need to raise $4,000 in legal fees, and have a hearing regarding their misdemeanor charge on July 24. The pending charge could land them in jail for 6 months and they face up to a $2,000 each in fines.

Turner and Browning will likely use a necessity defense against the trespass charge, arguing that they had to put their bodies on the line in order to slow down and expose immigrant raids, detention and deportation amid rising xenophobic sentiment and failed comprehensive immigration reform.

Gran Jurado Elimina cargos contra Activistas de "Houston Sin Fronteras"

by x Tuesday, Jul. 03, 2007 at 7:48 PM

El periodico El Dia,periodico diario reporta la decision del Gran Jurado del condado de Harris de abolir el cargo de poseer un instrumento criminal por parte de los miembros de "Houston Sin Fronteras" en su protesta del 4 de junio e las oricinas del Centro de Procesamiento de Houston ,carcel privada donde son llevados inmigrantes detenidos por la pinche migra

Carlos Muñoz
DIARIO EL DÍA

HOUSTON, TX.- Dos activistas que se amarraron al portón de entrada del Centro de Procesamiento de Houston habían sido acusados por la Fiscalía del condado de Harris de felonía, pero un Gran Jurado decidió eliminar los cargos criminales, por lo que ahora los dos jóvenes solamente enfrentan cargos de delitos menores.

Ashley Turner y Benjamin Browning tenían un noble motivo para poner sus vidas en riesgo colocándose un candado de bicicleta al cuello y luego se lo conectaron al portón del estacionamiento principal de este centro el pasado 4 de junio. “Queríamos llamar la atención, que la gente, la prensa se diera cuenta en las condiciones que estos centros operan”, dijo Ashley Turner, de 18 años de edad. En las últimas semanas, Turner, junto a Browning y varios miembros de su grupo “Houston Sin Fronteras”, anduvieron buscando fondos para poder pagar los gastos de corte, proceso, y abogados, que alcanza los 6.000 dólares.

Estos jóvenes andan ofreciendo dulces tradicionales para cubrír dichos gastos. “Un abogado nos dijo que podemos ganar el caso, y que para eso necesitaba 5.000 dólares. Pero fue necesario lo que hicimos, de dar ese paso hacia adelante, y de una u otra manera también parar las redadas”, expresó muy seguro Benjamin Browning, quien no se lamenta de los cargos impuestos en su contra y de su amiga ese día. “Fácilmente se pueden ignorar estos abusos de los derechos humanos. Es tiempo de que la gente que tiene el privilegio en los EE.UU. de no ser afectados por inmigración, de hacer algo por esa gente,” dijo Browning.

Problemas sustanciales

Un juez federal reconoció recientemente que existen problemas sustanciales en el cuidado proporcionado a los niños recluidos en los centros administrados por la misma compañía que controla el centro de detención de Houston. Ayer lunes, el cargo por poseer un instrumento criminal fue abolido por el Gran Jurado del Condado Harris, por lo que la disputa para Benjamin Browning y Ashley Turner con la justicia se aliviana un poco. Benjamin se refiere a los candados de bicicleta que usaron durante dicha protesta. “Es un alivio para nosotros, es una muestra a lo que yo decía anteriormente: que la policía sólo nos quería castigar por lo que habiamos hecho, sólo quisieron inventar cargos en nuestra contra”, dijo Benjamin, quien todavía tiene pendiente el cargo por meterse a la propiedad privada. “Si nos hallan culpables de ese cargo podemos pasar hasta seis meses en prisión,” señaló el joven.

Browning, un joven anglo de 22 años de edad, reconoce que su única inspiración para hacer lo que hizo ese 4 de junio son sus amigos con los que trabaja. “Tengo mejor relación humana con gente de México, de Guatemala que con gente que se ha dedicado a la creación de todas estas leyes que sólo quieren dividirnos”, señaló Browning, quién se desempeña como repartidor de pizzas.

Por su lado, el abogado defensor de estos dos protestantes, Randall Kallinen, se siente muy seguro de salír airoso en este caso. “La Policía de Houston sólo quería actuar maliciosamente contra ellos, el cargo más serio ha sido anulado, y mañana (hoy) iremos con el alcalde Bill White para saber si existe o no algún privilegio con este centro; si hay o no preferencia hacia algunos oficiales de la Policía de Houston que allí trabajan”, dijo Kallinen, quien nos informó que la próxima visita a la corte será este 24 de julio.

Si usted desea ayudar a este grupo de activistas, visite su página de internet: http://www.myspace.com/houstonsinfronteras.

www.eldianet.com/Noticias/tabid/56/Default.aspx#top

Jul 6, 5:39 AM EDT

Poll: Few confident of border security

By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The public has little faith the government is adequately screening visitors to the country or could cope with an outbreak of an infectious disease, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.

Only one in five surveyed said the government is doing enough to scrutinize people crossing the border into the U.S., the poll found. Just two in five expressed confidence the government is ready for an epidemic.

The poll was taken while the Senate debated an immigration bill, supported by President Bush, that ultimately collapsed. The questioning also coincided with widespread news coverage of the government's clumsy efforts to track down and isolate an Atlanta lawyer believed to have a dangerous strain of tuberculosis. He was later found to have a less serious strain of the disease.

"There's definitely a lot of things they could do to step it up," said Chris Bowles, 24, of Long Beach, Calif., a manager for a security company and one of those surveyed. "Most of our border security and screeners from the government, they seem to muck up a lot of things the government gets involved in."

The pervasive sense of futility about government security efforts comes less than two years after the plodding federal response to Hurricane Katrina, which flooded New Orleans and devastated the Gulf Coast. Analysts have said Katrina left many people questioning whether the government would come to the rescue in the next major national emergency.

"There was no plan, there was just chaos," Robert Vasil, 62, a retired school administrator from Parma, Ohio.

Russ Knocke, spokesman for the Homeland Security Department, said the survey shows people want tighter identification requirements at the border, as the Bush administration has sought, at a time when terrorists remain eager to attack.

He said the government has made great progress in preparing for potential disease outbreaks or bioterrorism attacks. But, he added, "We're the first to admit there's more distance to go."

Skepticism about the government's ability to screen people at the borders was expressed most sharply in the poll by older people, whites, the lesser educated and rural residents.

Some of the harshest critics were people the administration normally would consider allies: Eight in 10 conservatives said the government does not do enough to check visitors, compared with six in 10 liberals. In addition, 87 percent of Republicans were dissatisfied, compared with 73 percent of Democrats.

"I hate to see our security compromised to the degree it has been compromised by this administration," said Robert Broyles, 60, an architect from Lewiston, Idaho. He said he twice has voted for George W. Bush.

Many conservatives and Republicans were the chief opponents of the immigration bill, a compromise between Bush and Senate leaders. It included steps for letting many of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. gain legal status.

A low level of confidence in the government's ability to handle an epidemic was spread more evenly through the population. It ran higher among rural residents, Democrats and independent voters, and liberals and moderates. About two-thirds of Democrats and independents said they were not confident about the government's performance, as did about half of Republicans.

"Truthfully, I think that would be handled more on the local level," Vickie Shuder, 59, a nurse from Syracuse, Ind., said of government efforts to control an epidemic. "We're the ones in the pit."

The survey indicates that people's attitudes toward the government's competence in responding to emergencies may be eroding.

In April 2006, an AP-Ipsos survey found a smaller percentage - 52 percent - saying they were not confident the government would be able to manage an outbreak of bird flu among humans.

The AP-Ipsos poll was conducted June 4-6. It involved telephone interviews with 1,000 randomly chose adults and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

---

AP Manager of News Surveys Trevor Tompson and AP News Survey Specialist Dennis Junius contributed to this report.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Feds could step up raids of illegal immigrants

By BECKY W. EVANS
Standard-Times staff writer
June 29, 2007 6:00 AM

The U.S. Congress's failure to overhaul the nation's immigration laws could increase federal raids around the country, local advocates on both sides of the immigration debate said Thursday.

In a 53-46 vote, the Senate blocked the second attempt at comprehensive immigration reform this session.

Related Stories
Analysis: GOP puts the hurt on Bush initiativesAnalysis: Bush beset by increasing GOP defections, including on immigration and IraqSenate blocks immigration bill "I think we're going to see "¦ more workplace raids, more terrorized communities and more insecurity on the streets," said Corinn Williams, executive director of the Community Economic Development Center in New Bedford.

Ms. Williams, who supported the Senate bill, is working to help families affected by the Bianco raid, in which Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents netted 361 illegal workers.

With immigration reform likely stalled until after the 2008 elections, Bianco workers awaiting court hearings face a greater risk of deportation, said Ondine Galvez Sniffin, an immigration attorney with Catholic Social Services.

"I'm concerned as always for the future of the families in New Bedford," Ms. Sniffin said. "This does make deportation more likely for all of them. But it kind of puts them in the same situation as they were before Congress even initiated this debate, so we will just keep on going and do the best we can."

The Senate's refusal to grant "amnesty" to Bianco workers and other illegal immigrants will make U.S. citizens "demand that the existing laws be enforced," said Shawmut Diner owner Phil Paleologos, who opposes illegal immigration. "It sends a very strong message to those people who are here illegally that they have committed a felony and that this nation is not going to stand for this anymore."

The former conservative talk-radio host said he expects to see a federal crackdown on both illegal workers and the employers who hire them.

Following the vote, New Bedford Mayor Scott W. Lang criticized Congress for dragging its feet.

"The longer this plays out, the much more likely we'll get New Bedford results with ICE actions," he said. "We can't wait. We need some sort of remedy."

WBSM-AM host Ken Pittman, an opponent of the bill, said he expects more illegal immigrants to come to New Bedford and other parts of Massachusetts because Gov. Deval Patrick has shown he is sympathetic to illegal workers.

"This is now a preferred destination," he said.

If more illegal immigrants come to New Bedford, they will hide deep in the shadows, said Helena Marques, executive director of the Immigrant Assistance Center in New Bedford and a supporter of the bill.

Since the Bianco raid, illegal workers fear New Bedford is a targeted city. Some have left the area and those who remain are wary of leaving their homes for fear of being arrested, she said.

Ms. Marques expects to see more violence against New Bedford's illegal workers now that the door to legal citizenship has been closed to them.

"I really feel we will see more and more of them getting assaulted and robbed and leaving the area," she said.

Even if local police continue to encourage victims to report crimes against them, she said few will feel safe enough to do so.

Both Mr. Pittman and Ms. Marques said the government needs to go after employers who hire illegal workers.

"The way to get rid of the carrot is if you fine these employers that are after making an enormous profit" by paying illegal workers low wages with no benefits, said Mr. Pittman, adding that such employers should face mandatory prison sentences.

"Until we start punishing employers nothing is going to happen," Ms. Marques said.

When news of the Senate's defeat of the immigration bill broke yesterday, Dominga Mendez was not watching the coverage on Spanish television. She said through an interpreter that she stopped following the bill's progress because it seemed to be going nowhere and she was tired of getting her hopes dashed.

The mother of three was recently reunited with her husband, Hector, who spent three months in a Texas prison following the Bianco raid.

Rhode Island immigration attorney John Garan, who is representing Mr. Mendez, said his client is one of several Bianco employees who may escape deportation because they have other legal options. He would not elaborate on what those options might be.

The Guatemalan family is struggling to hang on to its New Bedford apartment without a paycheck from Mr. Mendez, who is barred from working while he awaits his deportation hearing in Boston.

Ms. Mendez is putting her faith in God, not in the reform of the U.S. immigration system.

"When God put this land here, He didn't put borders," she said. "God is going to help us and the others."

Contact Becky W. Evans at

revans@s-t.com

The Senate Drops the Immigration Debate: What does this mean for immigrant and border communities?

On Thursday, June 28th the U.S. Senate voted 46-53 to defeat comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate. Without an immigration reform bill coming out of the Senate, the House of Representatives is not likely to take the risk of debating the politically contentious issue of immigration. The general consensus is that a small group of anti-immigrant Senators effectively threw a road block in the negotiation process while other Senators were afraid of losing votes for their party and/or their own positions in the coming election year.

Advocacy groups and community organizations across the country are reacting to this news. Some are cheering while others are despondent. Within Border Action Network, we reflected on the events and processes that led us to this point and where we will go next.

First, we are not surprised by the failure of the Senate to produce a final bill. The Senate bill was a far departure from our principles. We had already reconciled the fact that the STRIVE Act in the House of Representatives was not a perfect bill, but it met enough of our principles that we could support it and work to improve it in the coming years. From the outset the Senate bill, however, was a far more punitive and limited than even the STRIVE Act. With almost every passing day, the Senate bill became worse: it shifted our immigration system from family-unity to a merit-based point system and provided very few visas at a high cost with no access to permanent residency and limited permanent residency for the undocumented already in the U.S., among other problems. Border Action Network was initially hopeful that if the Senate bill passed we could continue to work with members of the House of Representatives to craft a better bill. Yet in the last few weeks members of the House made statements that sounded less optimistic that they could produce anything better than the Senate bill. With all of these and other conditions and processes in play, we began to expect the Senate bill would die.

Second, we should not feel demoralized. On the contrary, we made enormous gains and victories this year. Since March in southern Arizona alone:

Border communities took unprecedented national leadership by developing and promoting the “Guidelines for Alternative Border Enforcement Policies and Practices.” Five of the 40-plus recommendations were included in both the House and Senate bills!

13,500 postcards were signed and delivered to Senators Kyl and McCain by southern Arizonans in 2 1⁄2 months. This is an unprecedented outpour that exceeded our original goal of 10,000 in four months!

More than 500 immigrant leaders from more than 23 states met with 120 Congressional offices in Washington D.C. in March. We shared our personal experiences and presented concrete recommendations for the types of policy we want to see.

Thirty businesses and more than a dozen ice cream and mobile food vendors in Tucson installed immigration reform “action kits” at their registers for clients to get involved;
Hundreds upon hundreds of phone calls were made within the last two weeks to members of the Senate urging them to keep the debate moving forward and to support just and dignified reforms;

Public service announcements produced by Border Action Network members urging community participation in the immigration reform debate ran on nearly every Spanish-language radio station in southern Arizona.

Educational community forums brought out four hundred and seven hundred mostly immigrant families who wanted to learn about the proposals and processes;

The US-Mexico Border and Immigration Task Force comprised of local elected officials, law enforcement, business and faith leaders, academics, attorneys and human rights organizations from AZ, NM and TX came together to promote a new vision of the border as part of comprehensive immigration reform and advocated extensively with members of Congress and the Administration officials.

Families across southern Arizona now know the structure of U.S. government, how a bill becomes a law, strategies and tactics to impact policy makers and how to develop principles that enable us to effectively analyze policy proposals. These are skills, tools and experiences that will help be even more effective tomorrow and in future struggles.

The other critical point that was made very clear by Border Action leaders as we reflected on what the Senate vote meant to us, is that one vote in Congress does not make or break our movement for human rights in the United States. Our struggle as a human rights organization led by immigrant communities is one to transform our communities and this country into one that recognizes and upholds the basic human dignity of immigrant communities and all people. Yes, we have prioritized the struggle for legalization and civil rights, but we know that even with a good immigration reform bill our struggle will not be over. In fact, this vision for the type of society we want to create enables us to see the forest through the trees and keep in perspective the implications of one vote in Congress.

For twenty years we have endured failing border and immigration policies. We can not expect that one single bill in Congress will resolve all of these years of pain, suffering, family separation and fear. The change that is needed to counter the damage that has been done requires more than just legislation. We must continue to build the knowledge within our communities that we have rights and that we must know how to defend them and insist in them. We must reclaim the dignity that is denied by racism, raids and other attacks. We must organize ourselves to create new communities wherein we find the strength and security to be individuals, families united by common goals. We must build relationships with other groups, interests and sectors in our society to find the common ground that we both share.

Of course, we will continue to push for comprehensive immigration reform. There is no doubt that it will continue to be a priority for our communities and our country. But we will not give our power and our vision away to policymakers in D.C. –there are many ways of effecting change and one vote in Congress will never derail us from our vision of dignity, justice and equality.

Make a contribution to support immigrants organizing for human and civil rights.

PO Box 384
Tucson, AZ 85702
(520) 623-4944
Fax: (520) 792-2097
BAN@borderaction.org

Barrio residents question agent's story on shooting

By Louie Gilot / El Paso Times
Article Launched: 07/06/2007 12:00:00 AM MDT

What exactly happened inside an El Paso drainage tunnel in which an undocumented immigrant was shot and wounded by a Border Patrol agent Tuesday is becoming a contentious issue in the community.

Border Patrol officials said that while the investigation into the shooting goes on, they had no reason to disbelieve the agent's version that he was approached by a 32-year-old immigrant man from Chihuahua City and reacted in self-defense.

"The agent perceived a threat against himself," Border Patrol spokesman Doug Mosier said.

The agent had gone into a manhole with a flashlight to investigate an immigrant sighting at Hill and Ninth streets, officials said.

The immigrant was wounded in an arm and is recovering at Thomason Hospital, officials said.

Officials of the Mexican Consulate in El Paso interviewed the wounded man Wednesday but would not disclose the man's version of events because the investigation continues. They said Thursday that the man had family and a work history in Denver and was headed there after spending time in Mexico.

Immigrants' advocates and some residents of the Segundo Barrio said Thursday that they are concerned for their safety and doubt the self-defense stand.

"We are not convinced that the argument that they (agents) were defending themselves is a good argument," Fernando Garcia, executive director of the Border Network for Human Rights, said at a news conference Thursday.

"We believe this was not an isolated event. Something is happening out there. It's something we haven't seen in years, this aggressiveness with which the agents are confronting migrants," he said.

"We do recognize we have a problem of criminal organizations. These are not nice organizations, but we don't believe the immigrants are the ones attacking enforcement agents. They are just (caught) in the middle of these two forces."

The shooting is the fourth this year by Border Patrol agents in the area and the second in less than a week.

At the same time, assaults against Border Patrol agents have increased to 59 so far this year from 45 at the same time last year, according to Border Patrol statistics.

Segundo Barrio residents who saw the aftermath of Tuesday's shooting have described to their neighbors seeing the wounded migrant halfway out of the manhole, leading some residents to think -- erroneously -- that the shooting took place above ground.

Downtown resident Eva Castorena said she heard the story from an elderly woman who said she saw the shooting on her street.

"There's fear and distrust in the community," she said. "One of the residents could be mistaken for an undocumented (immigrant) and shot. It's not safe for us."

About 300 families from the El Paso area and Southern New Mexico have signed a petition circulated by the Border Network asking for a thorough investigation and a review of Border Patrol lethal-force protocols, Border Network officials said.

The group is also organizing a protest scheduled for July 28, officials said.

In addition to the Border Patrol, the district attorney's office is investigating the shooting and will present findings to a grand jury, officials said.

The other eight immigrants found in the tunnel Tuesday are considered witnesses, except for an 11-year-old boy and two 17-year-old boys who were returned to their families, Mexican consular officials said.

Border Patrol officials said the immigrants entered the tunnel from an opening in the dry riverbed.

Louie Gilot may be reached at lgilot@elpasotimes.com; 546-6131.

deleteTheBorder.org
chaparral's blog

Camps for Immigrants' Children - Family Values Anyone?

Below is an article about the likely encampment of the children of many undocumented immigrant parents who have been deported recently.

We live in a country where those in power have promoted what they call family values. "Family values", my ***. This country has only valued white families (i say this as someone who is white). It can be easily argued that "family values" has been used only to control people's sexual and reproductive rights when they have a history of and continued participation in dividing families.

Take indian schools for example. Not only did the u.s. government physically take native american children away from their families, they did a number of other things to "kill the indian, save the man" (or woman?). Although i have never personally heard anyone white express any regret over that (besides people i associate with), perhaps we'd hear, just like slavery, that that is in the past. Not only was it acceptable a lot more recently than slavery, there are also other things that occur that are against family values. Like the poisoning of people via placing toxic facilities on their land which often result in health problems and high rates of miscarriage.

I could also mention all the examples of efforts to curb the fertility of women of color, such as the forced sterilization of many women, the testing of unapproved unsafe birth control on women, etc. such as on puerto rican women.

There is also the example of some separation of family during the japanese internment. And then as recently as a couple years ago, families were separated in the aftermath of hurricane katrina. These are very anti-family actions- if in some cases only consequences of negligence.

These things happen in high proportions in communities of color. It is no surprise then, that the parents deported out of the u.s. would not be re-united with their kids. And it's also no surprise that someone will be profiting from keeping them encamped. Is it anyone affiliated with the private prison business? Or militarization of the border? Perhaps we'll find out...


Immigrant children being shipped to 'orphan camps,' source claims


By Bill Conroy,
Posted on Wed Jun 27th, 2007 at 11:27:46 PM EST


As the immigration reform legislation reaches a critical circuit in the U.S. Senate, it is not inappropriate to raise an important question that all Senators must consider when they vote.

Over the past year, there have been numerous federal operations, carried out by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), where thousands of immigrants have been rounded up in surprise workplace raids — a number of them likely not even reported in the national press.

In many of those cases, the children of the immigrants, a number of them U.S. citizens, were at school or in daycare when the raids came down.

Their parents were whisked off to immigration detention centers around the country and many have since been deported back to their native countries.

But what has happened to the children — again, some certainly born in the United States and legally U.S. citizens? The mainstream press doesn’t seem to have connected all those dots — nor have most of our political leaders.

Check out this March 2007 story from the Washington Post:

NEW BEDFORD, Mass -- During her two years working in a garment factory alongside hundreds of other immigrants, there were few assurances in Marta Escoto's uncertain life. One of them was the promise she made to her children -- I will always take care of you.

It was a promise she was unable to keep this month. Escoto and at least 360 other illegal immigrants were taken into custody here March 6 after a raid by federal agents on the Michael Bianco Inc. factory — a military contractor 60 miles south of Boston. Many of them, including Escoto, 38, were women whose detention [she was shipped to Texas] separated them from their children, some of whom were stranded at day-care centers, schools, or friends' or relatives' homes.

… With dozens of children like Escoto's left without parents, the raid immediately sparked a public outcry here. The Massachusetts Department of Social Services dispatched two teams of 18 social workers to ask detainees in Texas how their children were being cared for.

… Under public pressure, immigration officials began to send single parents home, or if they had arrested both parents, to release one. But as of late last week, New Bedford school officials said the children of at least six arrested immigrants remained in the care of someone other than their parents, and many more were missing one parent. …


Turning Japanese?

So what ultimately has happened to these kids – and the hundreds, if not thousands, of others like them around the country? What happens when the temporary caretakers, for financial or other reasons, can no longer watch over the children — again, a number of them U.S. citizens?

Well, one source, whom we cannot name, has told Narco News that something is afoot that the U.S. government is keeping very tight-lipped about at this point.

That source says school officials in San Antonio, Texas, have been told to prepare for the arrival of a number of Spanish-only and limited-English speakers who will soon be shipped in from around the country to be warehoused, under a private contract, in San Antonio. The school system has been made aware of this because they will have to provide educational services to these children.

The source, who is in a position to know of such things, also says these are the children of immigrants who have been swept up in federal raids. Their parents are now either in federal detention somewhere in the country or already deported.

It is not clear at this time whether San Antonio will be the only holding area for these anti-immigrant “orphans,” the source says. But even one detention center for children — again, a number of them potentially U.S. citizens — is a black mark on the conscience of the nation, if we do still care about human rights.

Now please take this information for what it is — a well-qualified lead on what could well be a very under-the-radar program being undertaken by the federal government to deal with the byproduct of its failed immigration policy.

Narco News, at this point, has not been able to independently verify the source’s information.

However, one former high-ranking official with the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees ICE, who attempted to look into the source’s claims told Narco News:

The impression I got was that HQ is keeping that operation and others very quiet.

But regardless of whether this particular lead turns out to be on the mark, every U.S. Senator in a position to now affect immigration reform has to ask themselves a hard question before they cast their vote: Where are the children being warehoused?

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

INTRODUCTION TO IMMIGRATION IN THE UNITED STATES

Indeed, with the exception of Native Americans, everyone in our nation is either an immigrant, or the descendent of voluntary or involuntary immigrants.

—The Rights of Immigrants Briefing Paper, Immigrants’
Rights Project, American Civil Liberties Union

General Overview Since the founding of this country, immigrants from every continent have settled in the United States. In the early years, immigrants came largely from the British Isles and Northern and Southern Europe. Some came as forced immigrants—indentured servants from Europe, enslaved peoples from Africa, and contract laborers from China and Japan. Others came voluntarily, seeking new opportunities and change. During the Mexican-American War in 1846-47, Mexico lost nearly one-third of its territory to the United States, and native Latinos found themselves immigrants and foreigners in what was once their own land. More recently, people from Asia, Central America, and the Caribbean have fled war and economic stagnation to seek greater stability in the United States. Since the waning years of the Cold War, political and religious refugees from the former Soviet Union countries have arrived seeking relief from persecution.

Although many immigrants who came of their own will sought an escape from political, economic, and societal turmoil, many also chose to immigrate to realize the opportunities and promises America held. In A Different Mirror, Ronald Takaki gives an account of a young Japanese man who, after calculating the equivalence of the annual savings of a laborer in America to a governor’s income in Japan, pleaded with his parents, "By all means let me go to America." In Russia, Takaki tells how "the cry ‘To America!’ roared like wild-fire." Similarly, Mexican immigrants choosing America as a home in the early twentieth century also often sought opportunity and additional means to support their families.

Immigrants of all descents, regardless of their reasons for immigrating, have contributed to the rapid economic development and growth of the United States. In the 1800s these immigrants accepted jobs in industries that did not have a sufficient workforce from which to draw. Irish, Japanese, Latino, and Chinese immigrants laid the rails and ties that built a continental railroad, one of the symbols of America’s industrial success. Others were responsible for unprecedented contributions to various fields of study and played numerous roles in influencing America’s cultural landscape. One of the most well-known of these immigrants is Albert Einstein, but others include social activist Marcus Garvey, inventor Alexander Graham Bell, labor leader Mary Harris "Mother" Jones, and songwriter Irving Berlin, to name a few.

Likewise, immigrants settling in the United States today arrive for differing reasons and continue to contribute to further growth. Many people often assume that contemporary immigrants pose a burden on the economy and decrease opportunity in the labor market. In reality, immigrants create new jobs and income streams through forming new businesses, paying taxes, and increasing labor productivity. Immigrants pay significantly more in taxes each year than they receive in governmental welfare assistance. Further, immigrants and their children contribute leadership and advancement in the political sphere, in academics and the arts, and in science and technology. Consider statesman Henry Kissinger, Surgeon General Antonia Novello, astronaut Ellen Ochoa, ballet dancer Mikail Baryshnikov, film director Alfred Hitchcock, social scientist Kurt Lewin, writer Amy Tan, and educator Jaime Escalante.

Just as contributors and leaders in the development of the United States are descendants of former immigrants, descendants of indigenous Americans, or immigrants themselves, children entering U.S. schools today will also play such roles in the nation’s future. Currently, one in 15 schoolchildren is born outside of the United States, and one in seven speaks a language other than English at home. The present system, however, is failing to successfully meet the needs of a significant portion of this population; whereas one-tenth of non-Latino White children leave school without a diploma, two-thirds of all immigrant students ultimately find themselves in this same situation.

These outcomes, as well as immigrant students’ wide diversity of experiences, require that educators develop skills and knowledge necessary to ensure student success in new school settings. Educators are responsible for becoming aware of and countering particular stereotypes that immigrant youth may face during and after school hours. They must develop and use assessments that both reflect high expectations and evaluate progress on an individual basis. They must develop skills in cross-cultural understanding and communication in order to create effective, nurturing learning environments. If today’s youth are to succeed, learning environments must meet the individual needs of each student, including those who may be grappling with the acquisition of unfamiliar cultural practices. They must simultaneously build upon each student’s respective strengths, knowledge, and cultural identity.

Historical Overview Over the course of United States history, the descendants of former immigrants have reacted with mixed emotions both to contemporary immigrants and to the formation of national immigration policies. From the time America established national independence to the late 19th century, immigration patterns were relatively unrestricted by national laws. Immigrants during this period came largely from Northern Europe and were in many ways encouraged to settle in the rapidly expanding nation.

While immigration rates remained low during the beginning of the 19th century, rates grew significantly during the 1830s and 1840s. These decades brought a majority of immigrants from Ireland and Germany. The immigrant population, approximately four million in 1790, grew to an estimated 32 million by 1860.


Alien and Sedition Acts Although national policies did not exclude particular immigrant groups on the basis of national origin during these early years, this period was not without resistance to newly arriving individuals and groups. In 1798, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, authorizing the President to arbitrarily exclude or deport foreigners presumed a threat to political stability. These acts also allowed for the prosecution of anyone openly denouncing the American government. In the 1840s, Protestant laborers, hostile to immigrant Irish Catholics, set fire to a convent in Boston and staged riots in several northeastern cities. As the turn of the century approached, immigration rates again rose and the immigration population began to change as the source countries of immigrants shifted. A majority of immigrants during this period settled in America from Southern and Eastern Europe—Italy, Greece, Poland, Hungary, and Russia—while immigration rates from Ireland, England, Germany, and Scandinavia simultaneously declined.

Chinese Exclusion Act Concurrent and marked changes also occurred in United States immigration policy during these final years of the 19th century. In 1882, the first policy excluding immigration of an entire population on the basis of national origin was signed into law. The Chinese Exclusion Act sought to suspend immigration by Chinese laborers for 10 years and ultimately led to a permanent ban in 1902.

The turn of the century was characterized by rapid urbanization and industrialization as well as by a substantial increase in overall population. By 1907, the immigration rate peaked as approximately 1.3 million immigrants entered the United States and in that one year accounted for a 3 percent increase in the U.S. labor force. During this year, the U.S. government also entered into an agreement with Japan that effectively excluded Japanese laborers from immigrating or traveling to the continental United States. Immigration of Japanese laborers to Hawaii, however, was not precluded by this agreement.

Public attention began to focus on perceived differences between "old" and "new" immigrants, including differences in poverty levels, crime rates, and cultural characteristics. A federal study was published reporting sharp contrasts between these two immigrant populations. The findings contributed to a government movement to "Americanize" newer immigrants, primarily Eastern and Southern Europeans. The U.S. Bureau of Americanization urged that employers require English-language instruction for foreign-born workers. Many states banned schooling in native languages, and some prohibited foreign language programs of any kind in the elementary grades.


Johnson- Reed Act By 1924, the desire to preserve what was perceived to be American culture, as well as the racial composition of the country at that time, prompted the enactment of the Johnson-Reed Act. As a result, a national quota system was devised that would determine the percentage of foreigners allowed to immigrate on the basis of their country of origin. Britain was allotted 50 percent of the allowable number of slots; Asian immigration, in contrast, was prohibited almost entirely in this system. The numbers of newly arriving immigrants dropped dramatically during the period following the implementation of the 1924 law and continued to decline through the late 1940s. First-generation immigrants represented 3.3 percent of the total U.S. population in the 1920s, but only .7 percent during the 1940s. National quotas were maintained throughout this period, and even refugee status could not alter this path as the United States government turned away thousands of European Jews fleeing Nazi persecution during World War II. The war also affected the government’s reaction to, and treatment of, certain Americans living within the United States. In 1942, 120,000 Americans of Japanese descent, citizens and noncitizens alike, were faced with the confiscation of their homes and businesses and forced internment in camps, where they remained throughout the duration of the war.

Internal Security Act The 1950s continued the pattern of quotas while two additional government policies were enacted that served to target and exclude two particular immigrant groups. The Internal Security Act both restricted entry and permitted deportation of noncitizens either belonging to the U.S. Communist Party or whose future activities presumably could be "subversive to the national security." An Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) program known as "Operation Wetback" sought to identify Mexicans residing within U.S. borders and arrange for their subsequent deportation.

Immigration Reform Act, 1965 Not until 1965 was this system of national quotas dismantled as each country, regardless of race or ethnicity, was allotted an annual quota of 20,000 under a ceiling total of 170,000. This 1965 law, known as the Immigration Reform Act, opened the United States to residents of underdeveloped regions and allowed the diversification of the ethnic, cultural, and linguistic profiles of many American communities.

Immigration Reform and Control Act, 1986 During the 1980s, intense public debate preceded the enactment of a new law that served to place emphasis on a particular group of immigrants: immigrants residing in the United States without proper documentation. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was intended to both curb the rates of immigration by undocumented foreigners and reduce the number of undocumented immigrants already present in the United States. Specifically, the law mandated employee sanctions against those aware of employing undocumented workers and called for a legalization program that would grant amnesty to undocumented immigrants meeting certain eligibility requirements.

Immigration Act, 1990 In the wake of this law, additional laws were enacted—some laws continuing a cycle of restrictions for undocumented immigrants, other laws contributing to an effort to compensate for exclusionary provisions of past legislation. This law also sought to strengthen the entry of immigrants with desirable job skills and financial resources. Before, immigration was based more or less on family relationships. The Immigration Act of 1990 raised the ceiling of the total number of immigrants per year to 675,000 and attempted to revise the grounds by which immigrants were either prohibited from entry or deported. However, one of the most recent laws, enacted in 1996, once again targeted undocumented immigrants and carried implications suggesting an unprecedented impact on this population.

Current Immigration Policy and Law Developments in national immigration policies over the past century have reflected shifts in the political climate of the time as well as reactions to demographic changes in the population residing within U.S. borders. Current immigration laws also reflect such shifts as well as renewed trends toward exclusion of selected groups of immigrants.

Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, 1996 On September 30, 1996, the Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), characterized in one Oregon newspaper as issuing "the harshest immigration controls in a generation," was signed into law. The act aims primarily to prevent and remedy patterns of illegal immigration, although various provisions also create new restrictions for documented or "legal" immigrants and their families.

In a 1996 press release, the American Civil Liberties Union stated, "if fully implemented, [this] immigration bill will deny protection to refugees, [deny] the courts the power to stop illegal INS actions, and…will undermine the rights of all workers." The IIRIRA seeks to prohibit illegal immigration through the tightening of U.S. borders, new methods for screening and verifying documented status, and strict guidelines concerning deportation of immigrants residing illegally in the United States. Specifically, the bill calls for an expedient and substantial increase in the number of border patrol agents. New border crossing identification cards are to be issued prior to the year 2000 to track the entry and exit of certain travelers born outside the United States. New "summary removal procedures" significantly alter the rights of those suspected of illegal immigrant status by granting INS officers the authority to deport immigrants without any judicial involvement. Even refugees seeking asylum, who are technically considered the only exception to this provision, are being denied access to the United States as a result of decreased reliance on judicial oversight and review.

This legislation affects documented immigrants by imposing greater restrictions on the process that enables family members residing in other countries to relocate and join family members residing legally within the United States. A legal immigrant must now demonstrate sufficient income to support additional family members and must earn at minimum an income 125 percent above the federal poverty level. As a result of recent welfare laws, many legal immigrants are also faced with the loss of government benefits until the time they are able to attain citizenship status. The chart on the following page summarizes by decade major actions affecting U.S. immigration.


Major Actions Affecting Immigration Policy
By Decade: 1790-1990
Decade Percent Immigrant Population Major Actions
1790 N/A Naturalization authorized for "free white persons" who swear loyalty to the Constitution
The Alien and Sedition Acts allow deportation of dangerous foreigners
1880 8.3 The Chinese Exclusion Act suspends entry of Chinese laborers
1890 4.9 Exclusions include polygamists, those with contagious diseases, and those convicted of morals crimes.
1900 9.6 Adoption of ability to speak and understand English requirement
Permanent ban of Chinese immigrants
"Gentlemen’s Agreement" with Japan: United States doesn’t ban Japanese immigration; Japan pledges not to issue passports to Japanese Laborers
Executive Order bans Japanese migration from Hawaii to mainland.
1910 5.4 Congress enacts literacy requirement for all new immigrants; designates Asia as a "barred zone" (except Japan and the Philippines)
1920 3.3 National-origin quota system instituted, in effect favoring Northern Europeans
Johnson-Reed Act bases quotas on ethnic makeup of U.S. population
1940 .7 Token quota (105) created for Chinese to appease war-time ally
1950 1.4 Internal Security Act bars admission to those considered dangerous to the welfare or safety of United States.
McCarran-Walter Act sets up minimum annual quotas for all countries, allowing for the immigration of new groups; ability to read, write, speak, and understand English now required
1960 1.6 Racial criteria finally eliminated from laws; each country receives an annual quota regardless of ethnicity
1980 2.9 Immigration Reform and Control Act provides amnesty for millions of undocumented residents; employers sanctioned for first time
1990 2.3 Immigration Act of 1990 raises limit for legal immigration to 700,000/year; in 1996, border enforcement toughened and asylum made more difficult; citizenship required for most immigrants to receive public benefits

Additional Information for this chart from "Immigration Facts," by James Crawford, 1997, National Immigration Forum. Available online at http://www.immigrationforum.org/chronolo.htm.


Proposition 187 Because of the nature of these new laws and frequent changes in policy mandates, national immigration advocacy organizations note augmented fear, uncertainty, and confusion in many immigrant communities. Proposition 187, passed in 1994 by California voters, called for a complete prohibition of education, health, and social services to undocumented immigrants. Though voted into law, the measure was blocked by a court injunction and, in November 1997, deemed unconstitutional by a federal court judge. A bill denying education services to undocumented immigrant children was also recently proposed by the U.S. Congress, but never passed.

It is in this climate of uncertainty and renewed anti-immigrant sentiment that educators must carry out their commitment to provide high-quality, equitable education for all students. Improving Education for Immigrant Students seeks to help educators understand and overcome this negative climate. It serves as a beginning point for increasing our understanding of the immigrant experience and for better serving the immigrant students entering our schools.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This document's URL is: http://www.nwrel.org/cnorse/booklets/immigration/2.html

Home | Up & Coming | Programs & Projects: Equity Center | People | Products & Publications | Topics

© 2001 Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory

Date of Last Update: 9/6/01
Email Webmaster
Tel. 503.275.9500