May 1, 2010 Rally in support of immigration reform.
PIERCE'S IMMIGRATION LAW E-NEWSLETTER is free. It is published by the Law Offices of Curtis Pierce, Certified Specialist, Immigration & Nationality Law, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization. 523 W. 6th St., Ste. 348, Los Angeles, CA 90014. (213) 327-0044. Email: curtis.pierce@cpvisa.com
US May Challenge Arizona Immigration According to Attorney General Eric Holder
Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano were critical on April 17, 2010 of Arizona's new law on immigration and Holder said the federal government may challenge it.
Napolitano said the new state law could siphon federal money and staff from hunting down dangerous immigrants.
The critical comments by the nation's top law enforcement official and the Cabinet secretary responsible for preventing terrorist attacks on U.S. soil came four days after Arizona's governor signed a law designed to crack down on illegal aliens.
Arizona's new law is subject to potential abuse, Holder told a news conference. The law -- which takes effect this summer - allows police to question anyone about their immigration status if they have reason to suspect they are in the country illegally, and makes it a state crime if they are.
The Justice Department and the Homeland Security Department are reviewing the state law.
A number of options are under consideration including "the possibility of a court challenge," Holder said in response to questions on the Arizona law posed during a news conference on another topic.
Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Napolitano said the office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement fears it will have to use its stretched resources to deal with those arrested under Arizona's new law.
"We have some deep concerns with the law .. it will detract from and siphon resources that we need to concentrate on those in the country illegally, those who have committed the most serious crimes," Napolitano said.
President Barack Obama has instructed the Justice Department to examine the Arizona law that he said last week threatens to "undermine basic notions of fairness." He also is pressing anew for national immigration legislation, saying, "If we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country."
CBS News
April 17, 2010
Victor Nieblas for AILA Secretary Endorsed by Law Offices of Curtis Pierce
Victor Nieblas of Law Office of Victor D. Nieblas is running for AILA Secretary. AILA members should be aware that they will receive an electronic ballot on May 21, 2010. Victor Nieblas's name will appear on the ballot for AILA Secretary. The voting period is open until the Annual Conference. However, the vast majority of votes will occur within the first 5 days. For more information on attorney Nieblas and his candidacy in his own words, see his You Tube Video.
SB1070: The Constitutionality of Arizona's New Immigration Law
An Opinion by Kris W. Kobach, University of Missiour Law School
Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona signed a law — SB 1070 — that prohibits the harboring of illegal aliens and makes it a state crime for an alien to commit certain federal immigration crimes. It also requires police officers who, in the course of a traffic stop or other law-enforcement action, come to a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal alien verify the person’s immigration status with the federal government.
Predictably, groups that favor relaxed enforcement of immigration laws, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, insist the law is unconstitutional. Less predictably, President Obama declared it “misguided” and said the Justice Department would take a look.
Presumably, the government lawyers who do so will actually read the law, something its critics don’t seem to have done. The arguments we’ve heard against it either misrepresent its text or are otherwise inaccurate. As someone who helped draft the statute, I will rebut the major criticisms individually: It is unfair to demand that aliens carry their documents with them. It is true that the Arizona law makes it a misdemeanor for an alien to fail to carry certain documents. “Now, suddenly, if you don’t have your papers ... you’re going to be harassed,” the president said. “That’s not the right way to go.” But since 1940, it has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep such registration documents with them. The Arizona law simply adds a state penalty to what was already a federal crime. Moreover, as anyone who has traveled abroad knows, other nations have similar documentation requirements.
“Reasonable suspicion” is a meaningless term that will permit police misconduct. Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words. The Arizona law didn’t invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the “totality of circumstances” that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.
For example, the Arizona law is most likely to come into play after a traffic stop. A police officer pulls a minivan over for speeding. A dozen passengers are crammed in. None has identification. The highway is a known alien-smuggling corridor. The driver is acting evasively. Those factors combine to create reasonable suspicion that the occupants are not in the country legally.
The law will allow police to engage in racial profiling. Actually, Section 2 provides that a law enforcement official “may not solely consider race, color or national origin” in making any stops or determining immigration status. In addition, all normal Fourth Amendment protections against profiling will continue to apply. In fact, the Arizona law actually reduces the likelihood of race-based harassment by compelling police officers to contact the federal government as soon as is practicable when they suspect a person is an illegal alien, as opposed to letting them make arrests on their own assessment.
It is unfair to demand that people carry a driver’s license. Arizona’s law does not require anyone, alien or otherwise, to carry a driver’s license. Rather, it gives any alien with a license a free pass if his immigration status is in doubt. Because Arizona allows only lawful residents to obtain licenses, an officer must presume that someone who produces one is legally in the country.
State governments aren’t allowed to get involved in immigration, which is a federal matter. While it is true that Washington holds primary authority in immigration, the Supreme Court since 1976 has recognized that states may enact laws to discourage illegal immigration without being pre-empted by federal law. As long as Congress hasn’t expressly forbidden the state law in question, the statute doesn’t conflict with federal law and Congress has not displaced all state laws from the field, it is permitted. That’s why Arizona’s 2007 law making it illegal to knowingly employ unauthorized aliens was sustained by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
In sum, the Arizona law hardly creates a police state. It takes a measured, reasonable step to give Arizona police officers another tool when they come into contact with illegal aliens during their normal law enforcement duties.
And it’s very necessary: Arizona is the ground zero of illegal immigration. Phoenix is the hub of human smuggling and the kidnapping capital of America, with more than 240 incidents reported in 2008. It’s no surprise that Arizona’s police associations favored the bill, along with 70 percent of Arizonans.
President Obama and the Beltway crowd feel these problems can be taken care of with “comprehensive immigration reform” — meaning amnesty and a few other new laws. But we already have plenty of federal immigration laws on the books, and the typical illegal alien is guilty of breaking many of them. What we need is for the executive branch to enforce the laws that we already have.
Unfortunately, the Obama administration has scaled back work-site enforcement and otherwise shown it does not consider immigration laws to be a high priority. Is it any wonder the Arizona Legislature, at the front line of the immigration issue, sees things differently?
Kris W. Kobach
New York Times Op-Ed
April 28, 2010
Kris W. Kobach, a law professor at the University of Missouri at Kansas City, was Attorney General John Ashcroft’s chief adviser on immigration law and border security from 2001 to 2003.
Books on Immigration:
"They Take Our Jobs": and 20 Other Myths about Immigration
by Aviva Chomsky
Beacon Press, 2007
Claims that immigrants take Americans' jobs, are a drain on the American economy, contribute to poverty and inequality, destroy the social fabric, challenge American identity, and contribute to a host of social ills by their very existence are openly discussed and debated at all levels of society. Chomsky dismantles twenty of the most common assumptions and beliefs underlying statements like "I'm not against immigration, only illegal immigration" and challenges the misinformation in clear, straightforward prose.
In exposing the myths that underlie today's debate, Chomsky illustrates how the parameters and presumptions of the debate distort how we think—and have been thinking—about immigration. She observes that race, ethnicity, and gender were historically used as reasons to exclude portions of the population from access to rights. Today, Chomsky argues, the dividing line is citizenship. Although resentment against immigrants and attempts to further marginalize them are still apparent today, the notion that non-citizens, too, are created equal is virtually absent from the public sphere. Engaging and fresh, this book will challenge common assumptions about immigrants, immigration, and U.S. history.
PROCESSING TIMES & CASE STATUS
· To view processing times and your case status, click one of the links below to connect to the correct U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services information page.
It is published by the Law Offices of Curtis Pierce, 213-327-0044.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this newsletter is analysis and commentary of a general nature. Nothing in this newsletter applies to a specific case nor does it constitute legal advice.
Schedule appointment: For legal advice on your case, please schedule an appointment with Curtis Pierce, Certified Specialist, Immigration & Nationality Law, The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.
“The only title in our democracy superior to that of President (is) the title of citizen”.
Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis. (In the case Ng Fung Ho v. White, 259 U.S. 276, 284 (1922), Justice Brandeis wrote that deportation can deprive an individual of "life, or of all that makes life worth living.")
In the words of President Kennedy,
the United States is a "nation of immigrants."
IMMIGRATION LAW E-NEWSLETTER curtis f. pierce
Attorney At Law
certified specialist, immigration & nationality law
the state bar of california board of legal specialization
THE PACIFIC CENTER
523 WEST SIXTH STREET, SUITE 348
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90014
TEL (213) 327-0044 FAX (213) 327-0066
