ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Find a Lawyer                          More Options

State:

Home Page


Advanced search

Immigration Daily

Archives

Classifieds

RSS feed

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Find a lawyer

Seminars

Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise

Resources

Greg Siskind

Hammond Law Firm

Joel Stewart

SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily

 

About ILW.COM

Non-profit

Link to us

Share this page

Bookmark this page

Print this page

del.icio.us Add to del.icio.us

Find a Lawyer
State:

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-2008
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

ILW.COM Homepage    discuss.ilw.com    discuss.ilw.com    Immigration Discussion    immigration articles thread
Page 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 25
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
5-star Rating (2 Votes) Rate It!  Login/Join 
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD | NYT, February 16, 2008

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

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

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

The police may decide to recommend checking by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The change includes having the police notify the immigration agency about people who are detained but not arrested who officers have “reasonable basis” to believe are illegal immigrants.

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

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

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

At a news conference on Friday, Mr. Gordon and the four lawyers on a commission that recommended the changes tried to emphasize that the program would be closely monitored. Police officers, they said, would not become immigration agents and would not stop people at random and ask their legal status.

“We are doing what every city in this country should be doing but doesn’t,” Mr. Gordon said.

He added that the policy drew “a bright line between what should and should not be the role of the Phoenix Police Department.”

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

Mr. Gordon had faced criticism that the current policy was in effect helping make Phoenix a sanctuary for illegal immigrants. The city is 200 miles from Mexico and is the largest in a state with the heaviest influx of illegal immigrants.

An illegal immigrant killed a police officer last fall, and the police union and others stepped calls to change the policy. Judicial Watch, a conservative-leaning legal group in Washington, began preparing a suit and looked into a recall of Mr. Gordon.

Police Chief Jack F. Harris, who has been outspoken in warning of the dangers of major police involvement in immigration enforcement, said he endorsed the policy, would write regulations for it and put it into place within three months.

Christopher J. Farrell, director of investigations with Judicial Watch, called the change a “public relations feel-good piece” that “split the baby.” The main problem, Mr. Farrell said, is that it continues to restrict officers from contacting the immigration agency, which Judicial Watch believes violates federal law.

Antonio D. Bustamante, a member of Los Abogados, a Hispanic legal group in Phoenix, said the policy changed “only because of xenophobia” and people “who hate the undocumented without understanding the huge contribution they make to the city and the economy.”


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
Washington Times on Greg Siskind's hypothetical Immi Scenario

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Found this link to a Washington Times article in Siskind's Blog)


http://video1.washingtontimes.com/dinan/2008/02/mccain_...on_could_give_d.html

Dems could see immigration silver lining in McCain


Could McCain's nomination mean an immigration deal this year?

Greg Siskind has come up with a scenario that argues Democrats should be tempted, now that John McCain is the likely Republican nominee, is to rush an immigration bill through this year.
"Do you think the GOP is going to allow their rank-and-file members to attack their nominee day in day out over the immigration issue? If they do, the results could be disastrous as McCain will be going around the country trying to unite a very fractured party that is already pretty suspicious of his conservative bona fides. Can you imagine one Republican after another having to come to the microphone to denounce the McCain-Kennedy bill (and that's what Reid and Pelosi need to call it every chance they get)? And then McCain being dogged by reporters asking about it multiple times each day?"
In his scenario, immigration could also be the tail that wags the dog — a way for Democrats to distract from their own intraparty presidential battle, particularly if the Clinton-Obama race goes all the way to a convention.

"[T]hrowing the immigration 'grenade' and stirring up the immigration storm in the GOP may make the Democrats bickering look pretty tame," he writes, adding that that would put pressure on Republican leaders to cut a deal on Democrats' terms to keep their own fight under wraps. Siskind says bringing back the bill this year "would have virtually no drawbacks" for Democrats.

It's an intriguing scenario, though it doesn't strike me as working out as easily as he puts it. In the first place, McCain has had to shift somewhat, embracing both an enforcement-first position that his own campaign manager says is now the consensus of the party. It would be impossible for McCain to back away from that now.

Second, it wasn't just Republicans that killed the bill. More than a dozen Democratic senators were happy to have a chance to vote against it, and on the House side, plenty of conservative-leaning Democrats will be begging their leaders not to go Siskind's recommended route.

Still, given that McCain has said he still supports the bill he wrote with Sen. Ted Kennedy — yet also says that bill is dead — Democrats must be at least a little tempted to prove him wrong and bring it back, just to see what he does.

— Stephen Dinan, national political reporter, The Washington Times



Posted on February 15, 2008 6:37 PM | 1 blog reaction | Digg It

Comments (4)

Who wants to pay more taxes? I don't mind paying for the military, but do mind paying for lazy people who are just waiting for government to give them food and money. They should stop making excuse not to work. Even just for tax issue, I will not go with Democrats. But if Huckabee gets the GOP nod, I will stay home.

Posted by Aiko | February 16, 2008 1:43 AM



Bring back the bill that everyone in government agreed on and the voters didn't. Yeah, good strategic move. Maryland voted out its incumbents, lets hope this will start a revolt against the deaf arrogance that is bureaucratic Washington.

Posted by Larry Stone | February 16, 2008 12:14 PM



I think it would be a great temptation for Pelosi and Reid, but it would be a disaster to ram that issue down the throats of the blue Dogs. The immigration bill was probably the only issue since 9-11 that nearly united the country. 80+% against it is the thing that draws the attention of politicians running for office. I can't think of any other subject that had such a strong showing by the public.
McCain can side step the issue by calling for the fence to be completed first then address the comprehensive bill (amnisty) after the election. He can appear stateman like and mature. It would also be the Democrats bringing it up for political points and putting a spotlight on the negtives about their congressional management. It would also put Obama in a fix since blacks opposed the bill as much as whites.
The other issue, quite simply, is this election is turning into the McGovernites verses the the Republicans. Immigration is a strong wedge issue that will ripple through the election and can fire up the conservative base to go after congressional and senate seats. The conservatives KNOW they beat the bill in Congress and it will highlight the fact that they can contain McCain very well if they control the House of Representatives.
On the surface, this is a Republican problem and a far-left wet dream. In reality, this could be a nightmare for mainstream democrats.


Posted by James Barends | February 16, 2008 1:29 PM



Democrats came up with an inane bill so that CIR would die this year. What they want is to wait until after the 2008 election and hope for Democrat in office. And if a Republican wins, then they have rolled the dice and tried, and at least they can prevent Bush from getting an immigration bill signed.
Anti-immigrant conservatives who don't realize this don't really understand CIR.
Siskend, as is typical of immigration lawyers who are clueless drolls, doesn't understand this as well.


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
NYT Editorial, Feb 17

Three bits of news from the first two months of 2008 highlight the galling inconsistency and inadequacy of the federal government’s system for turning immigrants into citizens.

The first is that the wait for citizenship and green cards is up — way up. Citizenship and Immigration Services reported in January that the average time to process a citizenship application had risen to 18 months, from seven, and that green cards would now take a year, instead of six months or less.

It was a sorry moment for the agency, which jacked up its fees last year with a promise to use the new money to end vast paperwork backlogs. The opposite happened: the agency is drowning in applications from people who filed before the increase to avoid being gouged.

The second was the news last week that the agency had finally taken a baby step toward clearing its green-card backlogs by easing a rule on background checks by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The F.B.I. will still do full checks on every applicant, comparing fingerprints against a criminal database and names against lists of criminals and terrorists. It’s just that those who have had to wait more than six months for a green card because of one last, unfinished piece of an application — a “name check” of people who have ever been mentioned in criminal investigations, even peripherally — will get their cards.

The move is sensible, and long overdue. The understaffed agency has faced mounting pressure to act. An increasing number of immigrants, after waiting years for name checks, have sued and won, with federal judges ordering the government to do its job.

The third development is the surge in businesses using E-Verify, the federal system for checking employees’ immigration status. As more states and localities have adopted harsh campaigns to purge undocumented immigrants, E-Verify has taken on a larger role, with 52,000 employers now using it, compared with 14,000 a year ago. President Bush’s new budget includes $100 million to expand E-Verify, which the citizenship agency calls “a cornerstone” of “long-term immigration reform.”

You can tell a country’s priorities from what works and where the money goes. With billions for border and workplace enforcement, the government has been rushing to impose ever more sophisticated and intrusive means to keep immigrants out. Yet it continues to tolerate a creaky, corrosively inept system for welcoming immigrants in — an underperforming bureaucracy that takes their money and makes them wait, with a chronic indolence that is just another form of hostility.


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
2bricks


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of Rough Neighbor
Posted Hide Post
quote:
... President Bush’s new budget includes $100 million to expand E-Verify, which the citizenship agency calls “a cornerstone” of “long-term immigration reform.” ...


There's a special budget to help identify those that employers CAN'T legally hire.

Where's the budget to help make available for employers those that they CAN legally hire?

Silence...?






________________________________________________________________________
"Our task now is not to fix the blame for the past, but to fix the course for the future." JFK
 
Posts: 2080 | Registered: 01-16-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
lol


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of Sprint_girl07
Posted Hide Post
Sorry Mike, I know this is close to home for you, but it is an interesting story...



U.S. immigration law drives husband, wife apart
U.S. man's Mexican wife forced to leave country

Daniel Gonzá***
The Arizona Republic
Feb. 17, 2008 12:34 AM

EL NACIMIENTO, Mexico - The bathroom situation in the village was worse than Mike Brown imagined. No running water to flush the toilet. Heating water on the stove to bathe. And the flimsy curtain over the doorway provided little privacy.

At first Brown didn't think he would last the full two weeks living in this rustic ranching village made up of 100 or so small adobe, brick and stick houses in the western Mexican state of Sinaloa. The trip alone from Mesa was hard enough. Twenty hours in his pickup, the last 15 miles a bone-rattling drive up a winding, rutted road into the mountains where men with automatic weapons have been known to rob travelers.

But he was determined to make the best of it. He had no choice.


It was the Christmas holidays. Brown was visiting his wife, Virginia Carrillo, and son, Bryan. Their separation began in September the day the family applied for legal status for Carrillo, Brown's illegal-immigrant wife.

They hoped Carrillo would qualify for a green card based on her marriage and child to Brown. Instead, Carrillo was barred from returning to the U.S. for 10 years.

Now, the family is forced to live separately on opposite sides of the U.S.-Mexican border.

Brown, 44, lives in Mesa. Carrillo, 29, lives in Mexico, staying with her parents in the village where she grew up. She is raising Bryan, a U.S. citizen who turned 3 in December.

As the Browns' case shows, the days when illegal immigrants could marry U.S. citizens and easily get green cards are long over. In 1996, Congress passed a law that made it much tougher for illegal immigrants who marry U.S. citizens to acquire legal status, part of an effort to crack down on illegal immigration and sham marriages.

To apply, illegal immigrants must now leave the country first. But once they do, they risk being barred from re-entering the U.S. for up to 10 years unless they can prove that the separation would create an extreme hardship for the U.S. citizen spouse.

More than a decade after the law went into effect, Americans remain largely unaware of the tougher rules, which even when followed can have disastrous results, as the Browns discovered.

"Just getting through these four months has been difficult," Brown said, sitting at the kitchen table in El Nacimiento, a plate of machaca and eggs getting cold in front of him. "I can't begin to think that it could be 10 years until we reunite."

Couple met at work
Brown and Carrillo met at Boeing in October 2001. He helps test equipment on Apache military helicopters. She was a janitor working for Aramark at Boeing. Carrillo caught Brown's eye one day while he was working out in the company gym and she was vacuuming.

"I remember he walked over and unplugged the vacuum cleaner," Carrillo said.

Brown's playfulness was enough to start a conversation. What's your name? Are you married? Do you have any children? How old are you?

Carrillo gave Brown her phone number.

"I thought he was funny and simpatico," she said.

One question Brown didn't ask was whether Carrillo was in the country illegally. In the wake of 9/11, illegal immigration had taken on an even higher profile, and Arizona had become the new gateway for illegal immigration from Mexico. Brown wondered if Carrillo might have crossed the border illegally. He asked a co-worker about it. The co-worker assured him she must have papers because Boeing is a defense contractor and people who work there have to pass a government security check before they are hired.

A year passed before Brown mustered the courage to ask Carrillo out. Their first date was a day trip to Flagstaff. Driving into town, Brown stopped at the Barnes & Noble bookstore and bought two Spanish-English dictionaries, one for him and one for her.

"That's how we communicated," Brown said.

One day, while the couple was still dating, Carrillo confided something to Brown: She was in the U.S. illegally. Brown was surprised at first. But he didn't think it was a big deal.

"I never really cared," Brown said. "That really wasn't important to me."

The couple dated for a year and a half before getting married on Valentine's Day 2004, a small wedding held at a chapel on Broadway Road in Mesa. Afterward, the couple drove to Las Vegas for a four-day honeymoon at the Stratosphere.

"We went out to eat and walked around the different casinos," Brown said. "One night we walked from the Stratosphere to the other end of the strip and took a cab back."

A few weeks later, Carrillo found out she was pregnant. Carrillo had bad morning sickness, so she quit her job at Aramark. A few months later, immigration agents arrested nine illegal immigrants working at Boeing for Aramark and another company. The arrests were part of the Department of Homeland Security's crackdown on illegal immigrants working at defense locations.

The raid frightened Carrillo. Several of the people deported were her co-workers. For months she worried that immigration agents would come to her house and arrest her, too.

Immigrant trek
Carrillo had come to Arizona in September 2001. She paid a man she knew from El Nacimiento $600 to smuggle her across the border and get her to Mesa. Two older sisters and a brother were already living there, all but one illegally. Carrillo recalls crossing the border near Sasabe and walking through the desert for seven hours until the group reached a road, where another smuggler drove them to Mesa.

El Nacimiento is like a lot of rural towns in Mexico. There are hardly any men left. All but the very young and old have made the trek north looking for work al otro lado, on the other side.

Most of the undocumented immigrants from El Nacimiento and the surrounding villages have settled in the same area near Horne and Broadway in central Mesa.

Carrillo tapped into that network as soon as she arrived, getting jobs taking care of children and cleaning houses. Later she bought a fake green card and other bogus documents on the street, which helped get her the janitor's job with Aramark working at Boeing.

After the marriage in 2004, she talked about getting her green card. Brown thought it was a good idea. He made an appointment to see an immigration lawyer.

"My wife is the one who wanted to go," Brown said. "She just didn't want to live in the shadows anymore. She wanted to be able to drive. She wanted to be able to work, and she couldn't do any of these things."

The lawyer's name was Carroll Clark. Brown picked Clark's name out of the phonebook because his practice was nearby in Mesa.

Clark told them the sobering news. The only way Carrillo could get a green card was to return to Mexico and wait 10 years.

"I was shocked," Brown said.

The couple decided to go forward with the paperwork. Clark told them immigration reform allowing illegal immigrants to earn legal status was gaining steam in Congress. Getting in the pipeline early might speed their case should the reforms pass, Clark told them, according to the Browns. Clark could not be reached for comment.

The couple had another reason to be hopeful. One of Carrillo's sisters in California also had married a U.S. citizen. Carrillo's sister was able to get around the 10-year bar by returning to Mexico and applying for a waiver. That took only six months.

By the summer of 2007, the immigration-reform bill the Browns were hoping would pass in Congress had petered out. By then the couple had switched lawyers after Clark dropped their case. The couple found out later that he had been disbarred.

Their new lawyer, Jose Bracamonte, counseled against Carrillo leaving the country to apply for a green card. An illegal immigrant who entered the U.S. lawfully with a visa and then overstayed could get a green card by marrying U.S. citizens. But not Carrillo. As their first lawyer had told them, because Carrillo had entered illegally and remained unlawfully for more than a year, she faced the 10-year bar under the tougher rules passed by Congress in 1996.

The only way around the 10-year wait was to go to the U.S. consulate in Juarez, Mexico, and apply for a waiver. To receive the waiver, an illegal immigrant must convince officials at the consulate that the separation will create an extreme hardship for the U.S. citizen spouse. At first, the chance of getting a waiver was pretty high. But in recent years, Bracamonte told them, proving hardship had become more difficult as the U.S. clamped down on illegal immigration.

"I told them there was a low probability of success," Bracamonte said. "My experience is that the chances are 50-50. . . . It's very arbitrary."

The couple decided to take the chance. They believed Carrillo would qualify for the waiver because their son was a U.S. citizen, and barring Carrillo from re-entering the U.S. would split apart their family.

"We were looking at the bright side," Brown said. "We had never heard of anyone getting hit like that before. We were prepared for her to stay for six months or even a year. There was going to be some sort of penalty, and we were willing to pay that."

Bracamonte later said Brown was naive. "Michael suffers from an exaggerated notion of American justice."

Carrillo got an appointment to go to the U.S. consulate in Juarez to apply for the waiver. Juarez is across the border from El Paso, Texas. On Sept. 6, 2007, she went inside the consulate while Brown was told to wait across the street. Hours later Carrillo came back carrying a piece of paper. She was in tears. A U.S. State Department official had checked off two boxes. The first said Carrillo had been barred from re-entering the U.S. for 10 years because she had been living illegally in the country for more than a year.

The second box stated that Carrillo had admitted she had left the country and come back illegally more than once. Therefore, she was not eligible for a waiver.

Steven Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C., an organization that favors less immigration, said Carrillo got what she deserved.

"If you want immigration laws to be meaningful, then people have to pay serious penalties for violating those laws year after year," Camarota said.

The problem, he said, is that immigration penalties were rarely fully enforced, which is one reason why the nation's illegal-immigrant population has mushroomed to 12 million people. So when the penalties are enforced, people are shocked, Camarota said.

A study published by the center in 2003 showed that fewer than 12,000 illegal immigrants had received either three- or 10-year bars during the first four years after the 1996 law took effect.

Data from the State Department suggests that more people are being barred under the tougher rules. The State Department barred 13,209 people from re-entering the U.S. for 10 years in 2006, the most recent year data was available. The State Department issued 3,049 waivers that year. A State Department official attributed the increase in people being barred to an increase in applications for permanent resident visas, or green cards. But immigration lawyers say a recent crackdown on illegal immigrants is also a factor.

Carl Shusterman is an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles who used to prosecute illegal immigrants for the former Immigration and Naturalization Service. He thinks the 10-year bar is overly harsh. It also hasn't stemmed illegal immigration as intended.

He would prefer the government imposed fines in cases such as Carrillo's, "which to me sounds a lot more reasonable than breaking up their families."

Distant home
After Carrillo was told she couldn't return to the U.S. for 10 years, the family took a bus to Hermosillo because their pickup had been stolen during the consulate appointment in Juarez. In Hermosillo, Brown and Carrillo had to go separate ways. Carrillo and Bryan rode a bus to El Nacimiento. Brown flew back to Phoenix, alone.

"When this happened, there was no question who Bryan would go with - with his mother," Brown said.

The change from Mesa to Mexico was hard for Bryan. He woke up crying every night calling for his dad. And the first week, he got sick with the stomach flu and had a high fever. Carrillo had to take him to the hospital in Choix, an hour away, on a rickety old school bus.

The readjustment was also hard for Carrillo. Living in Mesa, she had a washing machine and lots of other appliances. In El Nacimiento, she washes clothes by hand on a stone in the back of the house.

Carrillo thinks she has been treated unjustly by the U.S. government, even though she crossed the border illegally. She said she worked hard in the U.S. and never got in trouble with the law.

"It's not right," Carrillo said. "I'm not a bad person."

Brown and Carrillo are now contesting the decision. Bracamonte, the couple's lawyer, wrote a letter asking the State Department to reconsider the decision making Carrillo ineligible for a waiver. Brown also wrote to Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl asking for help.

Carrillo claims she misunderstood the official when asked about leaving and re-entering the U.S. She thought the official was asking whether Carrillo had ever left the state, not the country.

"I said yes because I had visited my sister in California," Carrillo said.

Carrillo could try sneaking back into the country illegally. But tighter border security has made crossing the desert increasingly deadly. And if she were caught by the Border Patrol, she could go to prison for violating the 10-year bar.

Brown has had trouble coping with the separation. He stayed in his house in Mesa with the lights off for days after Carrillo and Bryan stayed in Mexico. He started overeating and gained 10 pounds the first three weeks. He has sought emotional help from a counselor at work.

"A lot of it was just depression, deep depression," Brown said.

Bracamonte doubts the State Department will reopen the couple's case. He said their case should serve as a cautionary tale.

"What I'm seeing is thousands of spouses of U.S. citizens locked into illegal status because the only solution requires a 10-year separation from their family," Bracamonte said. "Most people are not going to choose that. It's inhumane."

Brown tries to see his family once a month. In October and November, he met Carrillo and Bryan for a weekend in Nogales, on the Mexican side of the border. And Bryan came to stay with him in Mesa for two weeks during Thanksgiving.

And then there was the two-week trip during the holidays to El Nacimiento, his first trip to Carrillo's house.

Brown got used to the bathroom situation after a few days. And by the end of the trip, he didn't want to leave.

The hardest part was saying bye to Bryan. As Brown loaded up his pickup, Bryan spun around in the dirt on his new all-terrain tricycle, a Christmas gift from Brown. Then all of a sudden Bryan realized what was happening. He got off the trike and ran to his dad.

"Home, home," Bryan kept saying, pointing at the pickup.

Brown picked up the boy. "No, Bryan," he said. "This is your home now."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
God Bless America - God Bless Immigrants - God Bless Poor Misguided Souls Too Smile
Mr S.U.
 
Posts: 7556 | Registered: 06-06-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
By Amy Taxin
The Orange County Register
Advertisement


NEW 10:30 a.m. SANTA ANA, Calif. -- Anna walks down the street. She proves she knows the rules she must follow in the U.S. immigration system and does good deeds for her community by donating blood and tutoring. But the Polish character in an online video game could lose her green card because of a drug conviction and is trying to make her case to stay.

The game, developed by New York-based human rights group Breakthrough, critically examines the U.S. immigration system and how newcomers on visas and green cards navigate its web of rules. Called “ICED,” for “I can end deportation,” the game, which was released online Monday, has five characters from different countries who try to avoid immigration officers and stay out of detention while seeking a path to U.S. citizenship.

“The video game emerged out of a desire to try and create something that was experiential — that enabled people to walk in the shoes of an immigrant,” said Mallika Dutt, Breakthrough’s executive director. “Our point is not to say we don’t have to come up with a fair solution to deal with the undocumented issue, but to remind everybody immigration policy is a bigger conversation about what kind of America we want to live in.”

The developers of “ICED” relied on research and feedback from immigration attorneys, detainees and New York City high school students to build the game. They did not consult with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which oversees U.S. detention and removal policies.

ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice said creating a video game about deportation should not be taken lightly, adding that many immigrants detained by ICE came to the United States illegally. “Anyone who has seen the pitch for that realizes this game is pure fiction,” Kice said. “The way it depicts the issue — it trivializes the issue, and it trivializes all the people affected.”

“ICED” isn’t the first game put out by a nonprofit group trying to shed light on a social or political issue or garner support for its cause. Organizers say the online game “Darfur is Dying,” in which players are refugees trying to survive in the conflict-torn region of Sudan, has been played 3 million times in the past two years by about 1.5 million people. The U.S. Army uses a video game in its recruiting efforts to give young people an idea of what joining might feel like.

“There’s probably not a lot of reading kids have done about immigration before,” said Suzanne Seggerman, co-founder of Games for Change, a nonprofit that promotes video games as a medium for social change. “They’re not watching newscasts. How else are you going to reach them? You’ve got to reach them on their own turf.”

Answering questions correctly

In “ICED,” players walking in the city must answer questions about the immigration system correctly to avoid being sent to a dreary detention center — also a scene in the game. One “ICED” character is an undocumented immigrant brought to the U.S. as a child on a now-expired visa; the other four are trying to keep their legal status.

The game, in which players get quizzed on immigration and make choices for their characters, is a stark contrast to a widely protested game that circulated online a few years ago in which players tried to shoot migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.

One critical factor for the success of a game such as “ICED” is an element of fun to hook players, said Adam Rote, a professor of digital arts at Chapman University. While video games can be educational, they need to reel in players through well-developed and convincing characters, open-ended outcomes and a degree of unpredictability, he said.

“Obviously, for a good movie, you have to have a good script. With a game, it has to be fun,” Rote said. “If it is a social issue, it has to have a fun aspect for people to pick it up.”

Heidi Boisvert, one of the game’s designers at Breakthrough, said “ICED” was meant to be a mix of fun and learning. The game, which can be downloaded free, will be distributed to schools in New York and immigrants’ rights groups, including several in Southern California.

Horacio Arroyo, an organizer at the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, said he plans to host a game night for the 100 high school and college students in the organization’s after-school programs so they can play and discuss the game.

Arroyo said he likes “ICED” in part because players meander through a 3-D city scene and don’t just answer questions. “It is very interactive. There’s an actual environment of the game,” he said. “It is really exciting."


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
Australia to allow more migrants to ease skills shortage Reuters, Feb 16

SYDNEY - Australia said on Sunday it was relaxing its migration program to allow more skilled workers into the country where the jobless rate is at a three-decade low and most companies face a labor shortage.

The new centre-left Labor government said it was expanding the skilled migration program by 6,000 in 2007-08, bringing the total number of visas to 108,500.

"Employer-sponsored visas are the highest priority because they put a migrant worker directly into a skilled job," Chris Evans, Immigration and Citizenship minister, said in a statement.

The government will also expand the working holiday visa program for young people, a move which is expected to benefit the tourism and construction industries.

Australia is a nation of migrants, with nearly one-in-four of the country's 21 million people born overseas. The booming economy, which has been growing at more than 4 percent annually, is facing a huge shortage of skilled labor, pushing up wages and stoking inflationary pressures.

The unemployment rate has been under 5 percent since 2006 and figures out last week showed it falling to a fresh 33-year low of 4.1 percent in January.

Core inflation in Australia was running at a 16-year high of 3.6 percent last quarter, forcing the central bank to hike interest rates to an 11-year high of 7 percent earlier this month. Markets are expecting one more rate hike in March as it steps up its fight to curb inflation.

Evans said the latest package had the potential to provide thousands of additional workers in the short term and would help address inflationary pressures.


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
Diplomat Accused of Using Status for *** By MATTHEW BARAKAT | Associated Press, Feb 15

ALEXANDRIA, Va. -- A U.S. Foreign Service officer stationed in Brazil and Congo used his status to pressure female visa applicants for ***, according to federal charges unsealed Friday.

Gons G. Nachman, 42, of Alexandria, is charged in U.S. District Court with misuse of his diplomatic passport, making false statements and possessing child ****ography.

Nachman was ordered jailed pending a detention hearing scheduled for Tuesday. Court records reflect that a defense lawyer has not yet been appointed.

According to the affidavit, Nachman made a habit of pressuring and pursuing sexual relationships with attractive female visa applicants while stationed in Rio de Janeiro.

Two applicants interviewed by federal agents said Nachman "persistently pursued these female applicants despite his position as U.S. Vice Consul who was personally handling these still pending immigration visa cases."

One of the women told agents that Nachman "took advantage of her and he instructed her that, if questioned, she should deny knowing him personally."

Nachman admitted to having sexual relationships with two women, according to the affidavit.

The affidavit also says that Nachman helped a woman from the Congo file a false refugee application with the Brazilian government so she could work for Nachman while he was stationed in Rio de Janeiro.

While she was employed by him, the woman said Nachman made her film and photograph his sexual encounters with women, some as young as 15, in late 2006 and early 2007.

Also, agents filed a search warrant for items Nachman had shipped to the Port of Baltimore and found videotapes of Nachman having sexual intercourse with a Congolese girl in 2004, when he was assigned to the Congo. Agents tracked down and interviewed the girl, who said she was 17 at the time the tape was made, according to the affidavit.

One of the tapes depicting the *** acts was labeled "Congo 2004 Sexual Adventures," according to the affidavit.

Court records indicate that Nachman was ordered to stop performing his duties as a Foreign Service officer in September. The State Department's Diplomatic Security Service, which investigated the case, did not immediately respond to phone messages left Friday seeking comment.


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
Illegal emigres defy the image FASTEST GROWING SOURCE? IT'S INDIA By Mike Swift | Mercury News, 02/18

The Bay Area has a piece of the nation's fastest growing group of illegal immigrants. But don't assume you know who they are.

Turning stereotypes on their head, a recent federal analysis of unauthorized immigration says the most rapidly growing source of illegal immigration is India - the same country whose engineers and programmers help power Google and other Silicon Valley companies, whose doctors heal the Bay Area's sick, and whose entrepreneurs and venture capitalists have become a force on both sides of the international date line.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimates that there are 270,000 unauthorized Indian natives in the United States - a 125 percent jump since 2000, the largest percentage increase of any nation with more than 100,000 illegal immigrants in the United States.

The number of undocumented Indians is dwarfed by the estimated 6.6 million illegal residents from Mexico, according to the estimates from homeland security's Office of Immigration Statistics. Yet, considering the high level of education of many Indians, immigration experts say the federal report hints at a new phenomenon: a high-skilled undocumented workforce to go along with the nation's sizable numbers of low-skilled illegal workers.

If trends continue, within three years India would trail only Mexico, El Salvador and Guatemala as a source of illegal immigration. Another national immigration expert, Jeffrey S. Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center, estimates that the number of illegal Indians is even higher, at 400,000 people.

Virtually all entered the United States legally but violated the terms of their visas, say experts who study the nation's much maligned immigration system.

"How do you get in? You come across the border, or you arrive here with a visa," said Lindsay Lowell, policy director for the Institute for the Study of International Migration at Georgetown University. "Indians aren't going to be walking across the border like Mexicans."

Indians are among the most affluent ethnic groups in the United States, with a median household income that is 62 percent higher than the figure for all U.S. households.

Santa Clara County has the largest Indian-born population, and Alameda County ranks fifth, among the nation's 3,141 counties, according to 2006 census data. But there is no way to know what share of Bay Area Indian immigrants are illegal.

The Census Bureau does not ask people about their immigration status, and the Office of Immigration Statistics report did not provide state or local estimates. Of the 2.5 million people of Indian ancestry living in the United States, about 1 million are not U.S. citizens.

Federal officials calculated the number of illegal immigrants by using census estimates of the total number of immigrants from individual countries, compiling the total number of legal immigrants using federal immigration and naturalization records, and then subtracting the number of legal residents from the total immigrant population to determine the number of undocumented people.

It is certainly a minority of the local Indian community, however, and probably a very small one. Half the people of Indian ancestry living in Santa Clara County are already U.S. citizens, either by birth or naturalization, according to census data. Thousands of others are legal permanent residents, or they are here legally on student, tourist or work visas.

Asked about the number of illegal Indians in Silicon Valley, Banjit Singh, an Indian-born taxi driver waiting for a fare at Mineta San Jose International Airport, said, "Here, there is a little bit. But you go to another city or state, like L.A. or New York, there are many illegal people." Drivers need to show proof of citizenship or legal immigration status to get a taxi certificate.

But that doesn't mean the local number is insignificant. Local immigration lawyers say that particularly among Indians, the ups and downs of Silicon Valley's economy since 2001 are one reason why Indians have fallen out of legal status.

"Most are bachelors; the way they get here is they have a job," Gabriel Jack, a San Jose immigration lawyer, said of many of his Indian clients.

"They come here as professionals, most often in the H-1B program, and given the fluctuations of Silicon Valley, the business climate, these guys lose their jobs. They get laid off or they wager their hands on a start-up coming in," Jack said. "The problem with the H-1B program is, you can't have any significant time between jobs" without falling out of legal status.

Indians made up 44 percent of H-1B applicants in the 2005-06 fiscal year, five times the number from second-place China, according to federal data.

Because an immigrant's status can be dependent on the status of a spouse, the break-up of a marriage can also create an illegal immigrant.

Among Indians in the United States, "there has been a rapid increase in the divorce rate. If they are on an H-1, maybe the wife is protected and maybe she isn't," said Navneet Chugh, an immigration lawyer whose firm is based in Silicon Valley and Los Angeles. "The guy is an engineer at HP or Cisco, and he goes home on vacation, and his parents say, 'We have a girl for you.' And they get married, and they come here and have all kinds of problems."

Another source is relatives from India who arrive for a visit on a tourist visa and never go home.

"America is a very attractive country; everybody who comes here wants to stay," said Shah Peerally, a Silicon Valley immigration lawyer. "I can tell you right now, there are nearly 1 billion people in India, of which maybe 800 million want to come here."

The United States has deported slightly less than 500 Indians a year in recent years. In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, "we have substantially expanded our effort to find visa violators," said Virginia Kice, a spokeswoman for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The government, she said, pursues cases based on public safety, rather than focusing on a specific country of origin.

Silicon Valley companies such as Google say they need to recruit the world's best talent to compete - and about one in 12 of Google's U.S. employees, roughly 900 people, are H-1B visa holders. "We have not seen major problems with prospective candidates being out of status," said Adam Kovacevich, a Google spokesman.

But immigration lawyers like Jack say there is such a backlog of people waiting for green cards - the wait is up to seven years for skilled workers from India as of this month - that an immigrant can still be waiting in line when even a six-year H-1B visa expires.

That can result in an illegal, highly educated, Indian immigrant, they said.

Unless Congress reforms the immigration system, "we are going to see this high-skilled, illegal workforce emerging," said Frank D. Bean, director of the Immigration Research Center at the University of California-Irvine. "From a narrow economic point of view, it might work. From a social justice, fairness point of view, it's a time bomb."


......................................................................................................................................
impossibility is a word found only in the dictionary of fools
 
Posts: 3857 | Registered: 05-31-2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Power Member
Picture of mike_2007
Posted Hide Post
Senator vows to target N.J. businesses hiring illegal immigrants By TOM HESTER Jr. | Associated Press, 02/18

TRENTON, N.J.—A New Jersey Senate leader said he will push legislation to punish businesses who knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

Senate Majority Leader Stephen Sweeney said his decision comes after a federal judge upheld an Arizona law that prohibits businesses from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants and yanks the business licenses of those that do.

"Companies that knowingly hire illegals are destroying job opportunities for the working men and women of New Jersey," said Sweeney, D-Gloucester. "The practice has to be stopped."

The Immigration and Naturalization Service in 2003 estimated that New Jersey had 221,000 il