• Article Categories

  • CLC Events
  • CLC In The News
  • Director's Column
  • Ethics In Action
  • Good News Goods
  • Good News Goods Updates
  • In The News
  • ISAAC Updates
  • Living the Christian Life
  • Public Policy Updates
  • Religious Liberty
  • Substance Abuse Updates
  • TBOWH Updates
  • Texas Hope 2010
  • Uncategorized

• CLC Links

  • BGCT
  • CLC Staff
  • CLC Web Site
  • Texas Baptist Offering for World Hunger

• Recent Posts

  • In The News – July 2010
  • Good News Goods – July 2010
  • TBOWH Updates – July 2010
  • Public Policy Update – July 2010
  • A Word From Suzii – Religion and Foreign Policy, the world is on the doorstep

• Recent Comments

  • jane lowrimore on Living the Christian Life – A little hope goes a long way
  • David tamez on Responsible Dialogue On Immigration
  • TOM on Historical Framework for Current Immigration Debate
  • jane lowrimore on Living the Christian Life – Clean Energy Economy
  • jane lowrimore on Living the Christian Life – Clean Energy Economy

• Archives

  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
• Search for:

It has been an exciting six months for the ISAAC Project.  In February, I attended a training seminar offered in Washington, D.C. by the Catholic Legal Immigration Network.  It centered on building capacity and positioning networks such as ISAAC so that they can reach out more efficiently to the immigrant community and to the agencies affiliated with them.

It was at this seminar that I learned about different grants offered by the Federal Government through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.  One in particular about integration services for legal permanent residents seemed within the reach of the ISAAC Project.  After a few months of hard work, the grant was written and submitted.  It would not have been possible without the help, expertise and the many talents of Suzii Paynter, Charlotte Bumbulis, Anne Olson and Julie Valentine.

The grant is in the amount of $100,000, and, if granted, will serve the population of south San Antonio and surrounding areas through ESL classes for eligible legal permanent residents.  It will also be used to start a federally recognized and accredited immigration service agency there, which is named Proyecto ELIM and is sponsored and hosted by Baptist University of the Américas.  This agency will submit its application for federal recognition and accreditation at the end of June.  It will be an affiliate of the ISAAC Project.

One of the goals of the ISAAC Project is to build relationships with interfaith coalitions and other groups outside Texas doing immigration ministry centers.  This goal has begun to unfold as Comunidade Evangelica de Miami, an Evangelical church that serves the Brazilian population, recently joined the ISAAC Network.  Diana Pinto, a passionate lady with experience as an immigration law clerk at a Miami law firm, will lead the Immigration Service and Christian Aid Center.  This is a milestone for the ISAAC Project and the first step in the process of creating a national network.

Another interfaith organization has recently joined the ISAAC Network:  the Christian Community Development Ministries for Korean Churches, based in Dallas, Texas, will be requesting federal recognition and accreditation for the Dallas Immigration Services Center.  This effort will be led by Pastor Samuel Song.

A recent development for the ISAAC Project has been the creation of an advisory board.  Seven people committed to Kingdom work from all over Texas will contribute their vision and passion for immigration ministry to ISAAC.  The first meeting of the board will take place during Convención in San Antonio, on June 28.

Developments in the area of immigration at the national level, such as the recent measures signed into law in Arizona, are cause for concern.  But there may be a silver lining:  as State governments and municipalities toughen their stance on undocumented immigrants, the issue comes back to the forefront of political dialogue.  It is there that it justly belongs.  These developments will hopefully make our political leaders get back to the table, dialogue and find the consensus needed to work toward a much needed comprehensive immigration reform.

Our prayers are with them as the ISAAC Project positions itself to better serve communities all across the nation when our broken immigration system is finally repaired, and hopefully, sooner than everyone expects.

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Immigration Change
Our borders are national and therefore immigration law and enforcement is primarily a federal responsibility.  Individual states as the closest neighbors along the US border have special interests of their own. Passage of recent  Arizona laws have brought attention to a continuing array of unproductive proposed resolutions.

Texas  is not likely to copycat Arizona, or any other border state, at least according to Governor Rick Perry who said “ I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas.” This position upholds the state’s long-held tradition of rejecting harsh anti-immigrant policies. “Texas has a rich history with Mexico, our largest trading partner, and we share more than 1,200 miles of border, more than any other state,” Perry said recently. (1)

Border Security a priority for Texas
Governor Perry emphasizes  border security as a primary focus of his leadership. Border security efforts have been robust in the past 15 years – fortification of the U.S.-Mexico border aimed at stemming illegal entry has included a 500 percent increase in Border Patrol equipped with improved mobility, communications and technology.  Current efforts for the Texas border are already underway to implement the recommendation of the Government Accountability Office that 5,000 new officers  are needed, in addition to $5 billion in infrastructure and technology to secure the ports of entry.  Voices from the border areas are also recommending improved southbound inspection facilities, increased southbound inspection personnel, and life-saving interoperable communications as essential aspects of security.(2) “As the debate on immigration reform intensifies, the focus must remain on border security and the federal government’s failure to adequately protect our borders. Securing our border is a federal responsibility, but it is a Texas problem, and it must be addressed before comprehensive immigration reform is discussed.”(3)

In related actions this spring, Phase 1 of the  Spillover Violence Contingency Plan was initiated. At the governor’s direction, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), in coordination with local and federal law enforcement along the Texas-Mexico border, has implemented critical elements of the state’s spillover violence contingency plan.  These steps include increased surveillance of border activity by state and local law enforcement, the Texas Border Security Operations Center, and the Joint Operational and Intelligence Centers to ensure the timely sharing of intelligence information; increased ground, air and maritime patrol presence; and increased intensity of day and night DPS helicopter patrol operations along the Rio Grande River, as well as National Guard helicopters to support aviation missions. Additional resources ready for rapid deployment have been placed on standby, including DPS SWAT Teams and Trooper Strike Teams, as well as Ranger Recon Teams prepared to reposition based on threat.(4)

Time for Immigration Reform
This is not a time for security efforts alone. We have to speak about all the issues that impact security and reform.  There are two overwhelming consensus ideas regarding immigration – 1. the current U.S. immigration system is broken and  2. the jurisdiction for cultural, economic and law enforcement interests are shared formally and informally between the state and federal authorities.

What is meant by “broken”?

• Our immigration system cannot adequately tell us who is here, for how long and why.
• Processes for allowing temporary workers to come and go in and out of the US are inadequate and insecure.
• Families, even those with the best of intentions, bear undue hardship because of inconsistencies in law and policy.
• The system has no dependable set of incentives. Good behavior and dutiful attention are not necessarily rewarded. Deception and  noncompliance are not necessarily punished.
• Even the legal process for applying for entry, entering the US and obtaining citizenship is burdensome, expensive, risky and convoluted.  People seeking to navigate the system in good faith can be easily manipulated by unscrupulous actors.

Unlawful acts are not all equal
Like all other aspects of US law, the application of justice in immigration means that there are levels of distinctions for various infractions of the law. As is commonly invoked  – whether talking about traffic violations or community crimes -  “ let the punishment fit the crime.” Likewise, a foundation of past US immigration law has been that immigration violations in and of themselves are not necessarily criminal acts. Coming and living (even illegally) in the US historically has not been treated as equal to a crime that damages, property or persons. In matters of migration, like in other areas of the law, multiple distinctions of civil and criminal violations are maintained.  Visa overstays for example, are not prosecuted in the same way as smuggling violations. Claiming “one punishment for all” is not as tenable in policy as it is in rhetoric.

Piecemeal solutions for border issues have been proposed, at both federal and state levels, but often they are either only temporary fixes or substantially inadequate. These efforts, sometimes encompassing elements of merit, still are found wanting  – shutting off the border, building a fence, training local law enforcement as immigration officers (“287.g”) , military installation, technology have still resulted in inadequate changes to handle immigration for work and security adequately. States, like Texas, that share a border with Mexico have cultural, economic and law enforcement interests that are often expressed in lawful and productive relationships.

The Arizona law is a misdirected attempt at a partial fix. It will require local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if there’s reason to suspect they’re in the country illegally, making it a crime for them to lack registration documents. The law also makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally.  “I fully recognize and support a state’s right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas,” Perry said in a written statement.”For example, some aspects of the law turn law enforcement officers into immigration officials by requiring them to determine immigration status during any lawful contact with a suspected alien, taking them away from their existing law enforcement duties, which are critical to keeping citizens safe.” (5)   Progress along the Texas border is attributed to the focus  on law enforcement infrastructure, security, articulation of law enforcement jurisdiction , vulnerabilities of southbound and northbound border traffic , and any shift away from these strategic and hard won balances would certainly promote chaos, distrust and cross-agency confusion.

Comprehensive Immigration Reform
It is entirely possible to protect our borders while establishing a viable, humane, and realistic immigration system, one that is consistent with our American values and increases national security while protecting the livelihood of Americans. Given the frustration felt by many state efforts, support comprehensive immigration reform legislation is building. Most discussions include  the following elements:

• Border enforcement and protection initiatives that are consistent with humanitarian values while allowing the authorities to enforce the law and implement American immigration policy;
• Reforms in our family-based immigration system that reduce the waiting time for separated families to be safely reunited and maintain the constitutionally guaranteed rights of birthright citizenship and the ability of immigrants to earn naturalization;
• An opportunity for all immigrant workers and their families already in the U.S. to come out of the shadows and pursue the option of an earned path towards permanent legal status and citizenship upon satisfaction of specific criteria;
• A viable guest worker program that creates legal avenues for workers and their families to enter our country and work in a safe, legal, and orderly manner with their rights and due process fully protected and provides an option for workers to gain permanent status independent of an employer sponsor; and
• A framework to examine and ascertain solutions to the root causes of migration, such as economic disparities between sending and receiving nations.

Immigration is a defining feature of America’s history and will continue to be an important issue for America’s future but we need changes to our immigration system to address numerous problems. Many immigrants have applied legitimately for the right to live in this country with their family members, but must wait for many years for final approval due to backlogs in the system. Undocumented children are raised here but are unable to attend college or work legally.  Individuals are risking their lives and literally dying to come to the United States.  Families face inhumane waits of up to twenty years to lawfully reunify with family members. We have a growing black market characterized by widespread use of false documents, increasingly violent smuggling cartels, and exploitation of undocumented workers.

What needs to be fixed?
A comprehensive approach to immigration reform is required to address the complex and outmoded immigration system that currently exists.  There are an inadequate number of visas for employers to hire the foreign workers necessary for jobs that they cannot find native-born Americans to fill.  The shortage of legal, documented agricultural and other workers in Texas and the U.S. has become a growing crisis.  There is discussion regarding proposed legislation to provide short-term relief for this labor shortage through a one-time earned adjustment of status, or increasing the number of visas allowed from Mexico; and longer-term relief through major reform of the H-2A guest worker program. Although a challenging task, the effective implementation of a 2 stage earned legal status program is a viable adjustment that would create an incentive for employer accountability. With an eye for the national security interest of the U.S, policy makers stress that it is vital to know who is working in food production and to have an effective means of monitoring these essential workers, and this legislation potentially provides that capability.

Current law has created numerous barriers for legitimate refugees abroad and seekers of asylum in the U.S. to receive the protection they deserve.  Additionally, approximately eleven million “undocumented” immigrants currently live in the United States,(6)  and more than three million U.S. citizen children live in families headed by an undocumented immigrant.(7)

Because many immigrants do not currently have a means by which to receive lawful status in the United States, they go undetected by living in the shadows.  If they could apply for current lawful status, they would be much more likely to come forward, and the government could better target the small number of potential criminals and terrorists. There is no need to  condone any violations of the law, such as living in the United States illegally, but to recognize that our complex and inadequate immigration system has made it nearly impossible for many of the hard-working people that our country needs, to enter or remain in the country legally and/or reunite with family members.

---

(1) Texas Gov: Arizona Immigration Law ‘Not Right’ for Texas, Associated Press , April 29, 2010.
(2) Testimony of Monica Weisberg-Stewart Chairman of the Texas Border Coalition Committee on Immigration and Land Ports of Entry Before the Joint Meeting of the Texas House Committee on Border and Intergovernmental Affairs and the Texas House Committee on Public Safety April 29, 2010.
(3) Texas Gov: Arizona Immigration Law ‘Not Right’ for Texas, Associated Press , April 29, 2010.
(4) Gov. Perry Orders Activation of 1st Phase, Spillover Violence Contingency Plan, March 16 2010
(5) Texas Gov: Arizona Immigration Law ‘Not Right’ for Texas, Associated Press, April 29, 2010.
(6) http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/44.pdf, stating that as of March 2005, there were nearly 11 million undocumented individuals in the U.S.
(7) http://pewhispanic.org/files/reports/46.pdf

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Alien
Refers to immigrants (legal and undocumented) in many laws

Undocumented Immigrants or Illegal Aliens – (2 categories)

EWI (Entries Without Inspection) – crossed the border illegally
Overstays – came in legally, but did not leave when their visa expired (25-40% of those undocumented)

Legal Immigrants –
Some are permanent of long term statuses – they can reside in the U.S. indefinitely as long as they do not commit a crime.  (AKA – “lawful permanent residents” or “refugees” or “asylees”)

Some are temporary or transitional statuses – they can be indefinite in length (the spouse, child or fiancé of a U.S. citizen) or one getting renewal at set intervals.

Nonimmigrant
An alien legally in the U.S. for some specific purpose for a set period of time (ex: students, tourists, diplomats, guest workers).  There are 70 nonimmigrant visa categories.

Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services
(Formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Services – INS)
A division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Green Card
Granted to immigrants who have been approved to live in the U.S. permanently (lawful permanent residents)

Who’s eligible for citizenship?

1. Persons who have been lawful permanent residents (green card holders) for five years.
2. Persons who have been lawful permanent residents for three years, have been married to a U.S. citizen for those three years, and continue to be married to that U.S. citizen.
3. Persons who are lawful permanent resident children of U. S. citizen parents.
4. Persons who have a qualifying military service.
5. Persons under the age of 18 may automatically become citizens when their parents are naturalized.
6. Any person born in the U. S. (minus some exceptions regarding diplomats.)

What are the penalties for violating immigration laws?
Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:

• Assists an alien s/he should reasonable know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or
• Encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or agent for an employer in any way, or knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.

Penalties upon conviction include:

• Criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime. Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor.
• Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property.

Showing Hospitality to the Least of These; Leigh Jackson; 2004; Christian Life Commission (BGCT)

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Few issues have the ability to divide us in such an intense manner as an immigration debate. We have watched as groups have taken to the streets protesting or supporting the recent Arizona Immigration Laws. We have watched as groups have gathered to advocate or oppose Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation. Then we watched as commentators and observers berated either the protestors or the advocates as criminals and the ruin of this great nation.

In our “sound-byte” culture we fall back on slogans attempting to scale down the debate to one of its many, infinitely complex features. The decisions that will be made in our nation in the coming months will have both present and far-reaching consequences economically, politically, and culturally in ways that we cannot possibly understand fully. In light of this it behooves each one of us to gain a more complete understanding of what the issues are and what is being said about them.

There are three major themes that we as Americans use as filters for understanding the immigration debate.

America’s Changing Face – Is there too much difference?

This approach sees immigration as a looming identity crisis. At the present rate of immigration there are too many differences to assimilate. This increasing diversity threatens to break the bonds of unity—the common ideals of language and democracy—that define our political institution. Also, concerns over terrorism and national security concerns create uncertainty about newcomers. Immigration should be slowed to allow time for immigrants to assimilate into American culture.

There are valid cultural concerns here, but there are tradeoffs. Although it is true that many first-generation immigrants cling to their home countries, it is also true that their children (who are US citizens) continue to adopt America’s eclectic culture and keep our country vibrant and adaptable. America of all nations is the world leader in assimilation, especially for second and third generations, who even while expressing cultural identity, are leading proponents and defenders of the American Dream.

A Nation of Immigrants – Remembering America’s Heritage

In this view, virtually open immigration has been the backbone of America’s strength. Combining diverse cultures yields a uniquely strong and rich society and, overall, immigrants offer far more to American society than they take from it. Especially in a new global neighborhood, immigration is essential to a prosperous future and America must continue to welcome newcomers despite the costs and challenges. The American education system gives access to immigrants towards  highly successful and productive lives; this will continue to generate innovation and leadership of the global future.

This too has its drawbacks. Without limits, the lifeboat, which is America, could capsize drowning us all. Caring for and educating all of these newcomers costs American taxpayers.

“Just showing up” was all it took in the not so distant American past; this is no longer a viable method of accepting newcomers. Newcomers that enter by a legal method are always preferred, but current limits on certain classes of visas, which allow for valid workers, prohibits many willing workers from entering and working legally and temporarily in the US.(1)

A Matter of Priorities – Putting Economics First

This final paradigm argues that immigrants strain the public purse, compete for jobs, and exceed our carrying capacity. In this view, the nation would benefit economically by sending certain classes of immigrants out of the country, severely restricting the number of newcomers, and by looking more closely at how their arrival affects the well-being of those who are already here. Americans in low-wage jobs suffer and can possibly even lose their jobs to those who would be willing to work for less.

This causes immediate problems, however, in that immigrants begin to get blamed for problems they do not cause, and it does not recognize that immigrants are a critical part of our economy working jobs that many established Americans would refuse to work. What may seem like an economic solution now, however, may carry the seeds of hardship as the aging US workforce is faced with low replacement figures. Younger workers are not replacing the current workforce; as the baby-boomers age out (77 million are expected to retire by 2030), the US needs an infusion of younger workers to sustain our economy.(2)

For most of us, we can identify with all these themes in some way, but not necessarily as a consensus. These ideas about immigration create tension within us not just among us. Biblical and Christian ideas can also create tension when thinking about immigration. When asked about our citizenship today, most of us would answer with great pride, that we are citizens of the United States of America. We also claim that as believers our primary citizenship is that of the Kingdom of God, and as such we are a people set apart. Through the eyes of Christian calling and when we are on mission, we see each other as more than American, Chinese, Indian, or Mexican, for we are all created in the image of God and God sent his Son to reconcile all of us to Himself regardless of what passport we hold.

There is no denying that the Biblical story is filled with migration. Throughout Israel’s history from her slavery in Egypt to her exile in Babylon, God’s chosen people were strangers in a foreign land, much like we are today, for it is not this world to which we belong. In Leviticus 19:33,34 through Moses, God is laying out His laws for holiness and justice, and instructs the people, “Do not mistreat foreigners who are living in your land. Treat them as you would a fellow Israelite, and love them as you love yourselves. Remember that you were once foreigners in the land of Egypt. I am the lord your God.”

Attempting to sum up an appropriate Christian response to the issues raised by immigration through a quick reference to scripture may seem yet another extension of ’sound-byte’ culture, but as believers, our mandate is not ultimately political, economic, or cultural.

Should we view justice merely as an issue of legality? Is justice either fairness or fair process, or is reconciliation its end? Is justice linked to our treatment of the “lesser of these”? These are valid and difficult questions whose answers have practical consequences. If we strive to unite families that have been torn apart due to immigration law we definitely would be fulfilling our call to the “ministry of reconciliation”, but would handing out visas to family members over those who have made good faith attempts to enter the country legally be fair process? Can we say that accommodating people who broke the law for whatever reason is justice, or should our concern lie merely with defending the Biblical call to look after the orphans, widows and aliens in our midst?

These are all questions with which we must wrestle. The debate is complex, vitally important, and has now become urgent.

---

(1) http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1271.html#1

(2) Welcoming The Stranger: Justice, Compassion & Truth in the Immigration Debate, Matthew Sorens and Jenny Hwang, pgs. 118-119

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

The United States is a country of new beginnings.  For hundreds of years, America has been defined as a place of refuge for the persecuted, a nation of immigrants.  But now, as Americans, we must learn to reconcile the conflicts between our history, our current economic realities, and the need to protect the interests of American citizens.

The History of Immigration in the U.S.

Throughout American history, immigration has spawned much debate.  In colonial America, Ben Franklin worried that an influx of German immigrants would squash the predominant British culture.  During the mid to late 1800s, some Americans viewed the Irish as drunkard and lazy, and later, believed that Italians, Poles, and Russian Jews would not be able to assimilate to American culture.

By the end of the 19th century, Congress passed the first immigrant exclusion laws, restricting first criminals and prostitutes, and soon after, Japanese, Chinese and other Asian immigrants as well.  Regardless of the new laws, however, immigration reached a record high of 1.3 million people in 1907.

In 1965, Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Act amendments that ended quotas, and for the first time, initiated the concept of family-sponsored immigration.

In 1987, Congress enacted the Immigration Reform Control Act (IRCA).  Among other provisions, the IRCA authorized two programs to identify and legalize illegal or undocumented immigrants who could document both entry into the United States prior to January 1, 1982, and “continued physical presence” in the U.S. since the passage of IRCA.  Also included in the IRCA was a prohibition on employers on the hiring of undocumented workers and tough enforcement measures, including sanctions, if they did; however, for the last 20 years, these sanctions have not been fully enforced.(1)

The immigration system of laws set up 20 years ago have not been consistently enforced, the bureaucracy of INS has not functioned efficiently or effectively and the rules of immigration themselves are sometimes capricious and illogical. Along with this level of dysfunction, both entry and status violations are misdemeanors as are the illegal actions of employers resulting in a confusion regarding penalty in breaking these laws.

Current Law

Today, immigrants make up nearly 10% of the population, and the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that nearly 900,000 new immigrants enter the country each year.

Current U.S. law grants immigrant visas for three reasons: family-sponsored immigration, preferential job skills, and humanitarian refuge.  Almost three-fourths of immigrants entering the country now arrive as family-sponsored immigrants, and Congress passed federal immigration law in 1990, almost doubling the number of job-related visas.  Today, 140,000 especially skilled workers enter the country each year, and many American businesses wish to raise the cap for both skilled and unskilled laborers.  Finally, people come to the United States to escape persecution.  In 1992, the United States took in almost 120,000 refugees; however, after September 11, 2001, the U.S. decreased the number of refugees allowed in the country.  By 2002, only 35,000 refugees legally entered the United States.(2)

---

(1) National Issues Forums “The New Challenges of American Immigration: What Should We Do?”, 2003
(2) National Immigration Law Center: Comprehensive Immigration Reform Update

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

What about the rule of law?

Libby Grammer Garrett has a well written article entitled On immigration: Do Baptists believe the Bible.  In the article, she gives the example of Lidiana, an undocumented immigrant, who married a legal resident. Her husband petitioned for her to remain in the country legally:

But in the meantime, her marriage became abusive, and Lidiana was forced to leave her husband. He withdrew the papers he had filed for her, making her ineligible to obtain legal status. Her only option to regularize her status was using novel legal arguments from a skilled attorney, but she still faced the possibility that the petition could be rejected. If rejected, she would be put in deportation proceedings, leaving her children with no mother and no income to support them in the only home they have ever known.

Ms. Garrett then argues that Baptists must respond more Biblically and choose to either “view them [illegal aliens] through the lens of our Kingdom citizenship — or our national xenophobia.” This provoked a comment from “Robber”:

So where exactly does the rule of law fit in with your thesis?… I don’t want them here because they entered the country illegally; and if they don’t have respect for our laws then what else might they do when they’re here? What you present is a sad story. If I were her neighbor, I would do what I could to help her. Make sure she was clothed, and fed. But it wouldn’t change the fact that she was here illegally; and she should return to Mexico. I’m having trouble making ends meet right now, but that doesn’t give me a right to break into my rich neighbor’s house and take money or food — no matter how desperately I might need it. It’s a matter of law (emphasis added)…

I would make this reply to Robber. It fits in perfectly. The fact scenario states that Lidiana did enter illegally but then attempted to adjust her status to that of a legal resident. She was trying to follow the law and the law allowed her to apply for an adjustment. Immigration law is not written on a postage stamp. The law, to which Robber so sacredly upholds, has many variables and alternative courses of actions for illegal aliens depending on the circumstances. That was what Lidiana was doing. So if Robber is upset that Lidiana had the option to apply for a chance to stay legally, then Robber’s quarrel is with the law and not Lidiana.

Please keep separating the wheat from the chaff!

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

The Email That Would Not Die.

Like a zombie from a late-night horror movie, misinformation about the state of U.S. immigration seems to have a life of its own.  Back in July 2008, the ISAAC Newsletter debunked an email called, “14 reasons”.  Ostensibly the email asserted “facts” about the costs of immigration and immigrants to the economy.  The problem with the email is that many of the assertions were false, had half-truths or were just made up.  The other day, I received an “updated version” of the email.  After careful review, the only things updated were some introductory paragraphs.  Alas, this email does not seem to die, so this month, we are reprinted our analysis of this email on the ISAAC Blog’s May 11, 2009 posting.  Please remember to keep separating the wheat from the chaff!

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Can you keep a secret? 

A pastor asked me if he was required by federal law to report the presence of an undocumented alien at his church.  As with most complex legal questions, it depends.  There are general duties that the law puts on a private citizen as a matter of social policy.  These are called “affirmative” duties.  For example, Texas Family Code, Chapter 5, Section 261 .101(a) states:

A person having cause to believe that a child’s physical or mental health or welfare has been adversely affected by abuse or neglect by any person shall immediately make a report as provided by this subchapter. (emphasis added).

Failure to report suspected child abuse in Texas is a Class B misdemeanor.  Immigration, on the other hand, is the province of federal law.  Currently, there is no affirmative duty under Federal law that requires a private citizen to report the presence of an illegal alien. 

The situation changes somewhat in the employment context.  All employers are required to verify the immigration status of their employees using Form I-9 (pdf).

Additionally, some employers of non-immigrant visa holders, such as H-2A visas, are required to report employees that abscond or leave their job.  Additionally, states, counties and cities are prohibited from preventing their employees from notifying immigration authorities about undocumented aliens.  See the ISAAC Newsletter on so-called sanctuary cities.  Additionally, those who wish to report undocumented aliens can do so by calling the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).  DHS does not accept anonymous tips or reports via email.

Until next time, consider the facts, examine your sources of information and remember to keep “separating the wheat from the chaff.”
 
We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Are illegal aliens benefiting from the 2009 stimulus package?

On Monday, March 09, 2009, a local classical radio station in Dallas headlined its morning rush-hour report claiming that 300,000 illegal aliens would benefit from the current Senate stimulus bill being debated in Congress.  The source for this information was a report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS).
 
The CIS report claims that 15 percent of construction workers are illegal aliens.  It also estimates that the Senate Stimulus bill under consideration would create 2 million new construction jobs.  “Thus, if no effort is made to bar illegal immigrants from these jobs, it is extremely likely that about 300,000 will go to illegal immigrants,” the report claims.  The report then criticizes the Senate bill for not requiring the use of the “E-Verify” system as its companion House bill has required.

The CIS report has been criticized by the Immigration Policy Center (IPC) as a “stimulus for fear.”  The IPC reports that CIS uses a formula from the Federal Highway Administration that states that for every $1 billion spent on federal highway construction, the result is “10,300 construction oriented jobs.”  IPC argues that CIS has misapplied this formula because it was designed specifically for federal highway construction and not for the many broad initiatives in the 2009 Economic Stimulus.  Additionally, IPC notes that this formula was generated prior to the economic downturn and that the current economic conditions have caused many illegal aliens to return home.  Moreover, the term “construction oriented jobs” is very broad and includes positions not historically held by illegal aliens e.g., managerial and supervisory white-collar positions.  IPC also argues that E-verify is not the “silver bullet” that it is portrayed to be and has many database errors.  You can read their report here: Stimulus for Fear (pdf)

A closer examination reveals that the CIS report chooses its words carefully: “if no effort is made to bar illegal immigrants from these jobs, it is extremely likely that about 300,000 will go to illegal immigrants.”  This is vastly different than reporting as a fact that the “stimulus will benefit 300,000 illegal aliens.”  The fact is no one knows how many undocumented aliens will be working on projects directly or indirectly associated with the 2009 stimulus package.

Until next time, consider the facts, examine your sources of information and remember to keep “separating the wheat from the chaff.”

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Facts about Immigration:

Separating the wheat from chaff (Luke 3:17).
 
Texas In-State Tuition and Illegal Aliens – What’s up?
Texas Tuition law- a brief overview:
Texas state colleges and universities have different tuition requirements for residents and non-residents. Generally, resident tuition aka "in-state" tuition is less expensive than non-resident aka "out-of-state" tuition. Additionally, Texas residency is independent and distinct from federal immigration residency. 

This leads to a curious anomaly:  a person can be a resident of Texas for public higher education tuition purposes but not be authorized to remain in the United States because of federal immigration law. This issue along with a prior definition of what defined a Texas "resident," caused much confusion as to whether an undocumented alien would qualify for in-state tuition at a state college or university.  
 
In 2001, the Texas Legislature passed HB 1403 which attempted to clarify this issue and the new law allowed some undocumented immigrants to qualify for "in-state" tuition at a public college or university. Nevertheless, since immigration law is the province of the U.S. Congress, this new state law could not provide any legal status for undocumented students.

Almost immediately after the law was passed, concerns were raised that the HB 1403 was unconstitutional because it treated certain legal non-residents and U.S. citizens differently. As a result, the Texas Legislature passed SB 1528 in 2005. This new law modified HB 1403 and addressed some of the equal protection concerns that were raised by the legal community. 

According to the current Texas Education Code, a Texas "resident" is someone who established a domicile in Texas "not later than one year before the census date of the academic term in which the person is enrolled in an institution of higher education; and maintained that domicile continuously for the year preceding that census date." A Texas resident could also be someone whose parent met the above criteria. Additionally, a resident is also defined as a person who has graduated from a Texas high school (public or private or received their GED) and resided in Texas for at least three years prior to graduation or receipt of their GED and the year preceding the census date "of the academic term in which the person is enrolled in an institution of higher education." See generally TEX. ED. CODE CHAP. 54A§54.052(a).

An undocumented alien can apply to a public college and be considered a Texas resident if they submit to the college or university:

(A) a statement of the dates and length of time the person has resided in this state, as relevant to establish resident status under this subchapter; and 
(B) if the person is not a citizen or permanent resident of the United States, an affidavit stating that the person will apply to become a permanent resident of the United States as soon as the person becomes eligible to apply.

TEX. ED. CODE CHAP. 54A§54.053. Read a good summary of these changes and the current law… (pdf) 

California litigation: 
A similar but not identical law was challenged in California by a group of Plaintiffs that claimed, among other things, that such "in-state" tuition laws violated the constitutional rights of legal residents and U.S. Citizens. The California state trial court dismissed the case on procedural grounds and the plaintiffs appealed. The California Appeals Court reversed the trial court and sent the case back to the trial court for further proceedings. The Appeals court did not rule on the merits of the case. Read the full opinion… (pdf)

After this California decision, a Texas legislator requested a formal Texas Attorney General Opinion about the Texas in-state tuition law. Read his request here… (pdf)

Attorney General opinions are significant because they are given great weight and authority by agencies and courts when interpreting the law. Read more about Attorney General Opinions…

Some groups have asked the Attorney General not to issue an opinion or if he does, to opine that the Texas law is distinguishable from the California law and that it does not conflict with the Texas or U.S. Constitution. Read more… (pdf)

It is unknown whether the Texas Attorney General will weigh in on this issue. Nevertheless, as of the time of this writing, an undocumented immigrant that meets the residency requirements set out in the Texas Education Code and who submits the required affidavit is entitled to received "in-state" tuition at the public college or university in which he has enrolled.

We value your input and suggestions.
Your comments and recommended resources are welcome in the comments box below.

Next Page →