Arc of '72

Sacramento, CA – As the imposition of the scandal-plagued “Secure” Communities or S-Comm deportation program in Massachusetts and New York today spurs fresh controversy, California Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-SF) formally introduced a revamped version of AB 1081, the TRUST Act, to reform California’s participation in the program.

The new incarnation of AB 1081, which captured national attention last year, formally appeared “in print”  late yesterday and will pick up where the previous version left off, in the state Senate. The bill is expected to be heard in the Senate Public Safety committee next month. (Background information below.)

The new TRUST Act seeks to restore community trust in law enforcement and ease S-Comm’s unfair burden on local governments, who are pressured to hold for extra time even survivors of domestic violence for deportation. The bill comes as deportations through the program in California exceeded the grim figure of 70,330 as of March 31 of this year. Nearly seven in ten of those deported did not fall into Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE’s) most serious category.

In a statement, Assemblymember Ammiano commented:

“Despite promises of ‘reform,’ each month, the terrible toll this program is taking on our safety, on our local governments, and on our communities, continues to rise. In just four months S-Comm deportations in California shot up from 63,000 to 70,000. Behind each one of those numbers is a human being. How many more parents, workers, crime victims and witnesses will ICE tear from our communities? Turning police into immigration agents is at the heart of the hateful laws in Alabama, Arizona and elsewhere – and it’s time to say, “enough.” It’s got to stop. The new TRUST Act is a crucial step toward rebuilding trust between police and immigrant communities and restoring some balance to a completely broken system.

The bill:

• Sets a clear, minimum standard for local governments not to submit to ICE’s requests to detain people for deportation unless the individual has a serious or violent felony conviction.
• Guards against profiling and wrongful detention of citizens and crime victims and witnesses. Localities that detain individuals with serious convictions for deportation would develop plans to ensure citizens are not subject to immigration holds, guard against profiling, and ensure crime victims and witnesses are not discouraged from reporting crimes

Despite the federal government’s attempt to force the state of California into participating into the sharing of fingerprints with immigration authorities through S-Comm, ICE’s “detainer” requests are clearly optional under federal law. Courts and ICE itself have confirmed this, and a number of jurisdictions, including Santa Clara County, Cook Co, and New York City have limited their responses to detainer requests. A similar proposal is advancing in Washington, DC.

A steady stream of disturbing revelations in recent months – including the mistaken detention of US Citizens in Los Angeles and elsewhere, and the deportation of the wife of a US citizen protesting an unfair foreclosure – have underscored the Department of Homeland Security’s continued failure to repair the deeply troubled program. The tragic scandal at Miramonte School earlier this year – during which parents said they were afraid to work with LA Sheriffs due to S-Comm – further highlights the program’s detrimental impact on public safety.

About the TRUST Act: Passed by both the California Assembly (47-26) and the Senate Public Safety Committee (5-2) in 2011, the bill originally sought to modify California’s agreement with the federal government over S-Comm to curb the program’s well-documented abuses. However, in a stunning display of bad faith, ICE shredded all state agreements last year but claimed states still needed to send fingerprints. ICE’s surprise maneuver spurred a months-long process of consultation with groups across the state, resulting in the focus on ICE’s burdensome “hold” requests.

How detainers work: ICE “holds” or detainers are optional requests, frequently triggered by S-Comm, that ICE sends to local jails to ask them to place detained community members into extended incarceration so that the individual can be picked up for deportation. Local jails bear the brunt of the costs of responding to ICE holds, including the additional length of time individuals are held beyond the point they would be released if not for the immigration hold. ICE holds have come under increased scrutiny in recent months with revelations that they have led to the needless prolonged detention of immigrant domestic violence survivors, street vendors arrested only for selling food without a permit, and even U.S. citizens, trapped in local jails for the sole purpose of feeding an out of control deportation machine.

###

By Omar Calimbas, Housing Rights Attorney at Asian Law Caucus

The Obama Administration’s comprehensive housing plan and the $25 billion mortgage servicing settlement agreement between 49 state attorneys general, the U.S. Dept. of Justice, HUD and the nation’s top five servicers (Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citi, JP Morgan Chase, and Ally/GMAC) were announced this past February. These two represent the latest large-scale responses toAmerica’s foreclosure crisis. The President’s plan and the national settlement share several objectives, including the following: more refinancing to help non-delinquent yet underwater homeowners capture today’s historically low interest rates; more loan modifications, especially with principal reductions; and establishing new standards to prevent servicing abuses that ran rife in the industry and continue to do so today.

As usual, the persisting question is the actual availability of these solutions to everyone. This article will strive to touch upon some pieces of the national strategy that appear to be promising, both in general and with respect to Asian Pacific American homeowners and renters, as well as mention some of the missing pieces.

Crisis Hurting Some Communities More Than Others

For many distressed homeowners in Asian Pacific American communities, foreclosure fatigue will be difficult to overcome. The Administration’s housing plan and the national settlement come at the heels of ongoing programs such as the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), which has been heavily criticized for its limited success. According to the California Reinvestment Coalition (CRC), HAMP has been particularly challenging for communities of color. Canceled trial loan modifications, unsuccessful applications, and lower decreases in debt burdens were reported by CRC as disproportionately affecting minority borrowers.

A study of the foreclosure impact on Southeast Asians in the Central Valley of California reveals the heightened need to build capacity to address their housing issues. With one of the highest concentrations of Southeast Asians in the country, the Central Valley contains several cities that have been hit hardest by foreclosures nationally. According to the National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development (CAPACD) and the Southeast Asia Resource Action Center, the general income and education levels of Southeast Asian communities, coupled with language and cultural barriers, expose them to subprime and adjustable rate loans. These types of high risk loans make Southeast Asians more vulnerable to foreclosure. Moreover, Southeast Asian renter households represent a higher proportion than renters in the general population. As a result, Southeast Asian communities tend to be more at risk of eviction from foreclosed properties.

Notable Aspects of Obama’s Plan and the Settlement

Notwithstanding consumer disappointment with government efforts, there are some items in both the Administration’s proposal and the $25 billion national settlement that are noteworthy:

Principal reduction. Long-touted by housing advocates and economists as an efficient tool in preventing foreclosures, principal reductions (or loan forgiveness) find its way into the Administration’s plan through tripling existing incentives to lenders. The increased incentives would also be available to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The settlement would credit lenders for write-downs, which would be applied towards the $20 billion relief owed to consumers. Lenders have three years to complete this obligation.

Affordable housing. Unique to the White House plan is the dedication of funds towards housing for low-income families. CAPACD noted in particular the $1 billion in mandatory funding in 2013 for the Housing Trust Fund as a solid move towards the creation and preservation of affordable housing.

Due process and fair business practices. Pres. Obama is calling for a homeowner’s bill of rights to govern the mortgage industry, which would simplify and harmonize disclosure standards, servicing standards, establish a grievance procedure, and minimize conflicts of interests that have exposed consumers to servicing abuses. Now that the newly-established Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has a director, Richard Cordray, who would be responsible for promulgating and enforcing these rules, we expect some movement on this front in the near future. Analogous terms in the mortgage settlement provide a host of standards that would apply to servicers to prevent such abuses as robo-signing and dual tracking (pursuing a loan modification and foreclosure at the same time), while requiring a single point of contact for borrowers and oversight of the whole process.

Protecting Renters. Obama’s proposal intends to extend HAMP to protect homes that are rented out. In large, dense metropolitan areas like San Francisco and Manhattan, many low income families are renters of single family homes or secondary units on those properties. While it is unclear to what extent HAMP may help renters stay in their homes, it is theoretically a step in the right direction to the extent that it acknowledges the myriad forms of affordable housing.

What’s Left Out?

First, the mortgage settlement agreement doesn’t cover Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These two combined own or guarantee over 60% of mortgages nationwide. Because no solution to the foreclosure crisis could leave out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from the equation, a broad swath of elected officials and non-profit organizations continue to push the GSEs to reform. The Asian Law Caucus has joined one coalition led by the CRC to demand that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac formalize policies to allow principal reductions, preclude dual-tracking and offer long-term leases to occupants residing in foreclosed properties.

Secondly, solving the housing crisis must not overlook patterns of racial discrimination in the industry, whether it’s with loan origination, servicing or modifications. Yet there is an alarming dearth of statistics on the demographics of the crisis. Most of the studies have been based in large part on grass-roots surveys with community-based organizations and housing counselors. CRC has been advocating for much-needed change here, both in having the mortgage settlement and existing federal law require proper collection of the demographics. A prime example would be the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), which was enacted to collect industry data in order to ensure housing needs were adequately met with all communities, needs to be enhanced to provide for the collection and public reporting on loan modifications. Additionally, HMDA needs to disaggregate data on Asian Pacific American communities. It is clear that, given the sheer magnitude of the foreclosure crisis, any response must address the enhancement of the HMDA to prevent loan modification discrimination practices.

 First-in-the-nation proposal seeks to rebuild community trust in local police, Damaged by disgraced “S-Comm” deportation program

February 23, 2012 – As hundreds of day laborers and advocates from across the country marched in Los Angeles Wednesday evening to protest the devastating impact of the so-called “Secure” Communities or S-Comm deportation program, Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-SF) publicly unveiled the details of a bill to reform California’s participation in the troubled program. Retired Sacramento Police Chief Arturo Venegas, Jr also attended the rally and expressed strong support for the new TRUST Act.

The announcement came in the wake of troubling revelations earlier this month that S-Comm made parents of Miramonte students in Los Angeles too fearful of deportation to contact law enforcement authorities to report their own children’s abuse,

The new incarnation of the TRUST Act, which captured national attention last year, seeks to restore community trust in law enforcement and ease S-Comm’s unfair burden on local governments, who are pressured to hold for extra time even survivors of domestic violence for deportation. The bill:

·       Sets a clear, minimum standard for local governments not to detain people for deportation unless the individual has a serious or violent felony conviction. These convictions are defined according to existing, clearly established state law.

·       Guards against profiling and wrongful detention of citizens and crime victims. Jurisdictions that do choose to detain people with serious convictions for deportation will develop common-sense plans to make sure others aren’t swept up.

“To advance public safety, the TRUST Act will create a desperately needed “bright line” between local police and the scandal-plagued Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE). We need to rebuild community trust in law enforcement, which S-Comm has profoundly shaken,” said Asm. Ammiano in a statement from Sacramento. Further remarks from Asm. Ammiano are available at http://ndlon.org/en/blog-2/by-issue/1047-la-ammiano

Now amended, the bill will be heard in the Senate later this year.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted on behalf of the National Security and Civil Rights Program at the Asian Law Caucus

Request for Stories: How have the “Iran Sanctions” Affected You or Your Family?

All information will be kept Confidential

The Asian Law Caucus, in collaboration with the Iranian American Bar Association (“IABA”), the National Iranian American Council (“NIAC”), and the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans (“PAAIA”), is documenting and collecting personal stories of Iranian Americans whose business, personal, family, or charitable affairs have been impacted by the Iranian Transactions Regulations (“Iran Sanctions”), or who would like to make a statement about their thoughts on the Sanctions.

We are gathering these stories for the purpose of an upcoming report on the impact the Iran Sanctions have had on Iranian-Americans and other people living in theUnited States.

All your information will be treated confidentially. We will not disseminate or share any personally identifying information without your written consent.

Please call the Asian Law Caucus at (415) 848-7711, or email Tina Sinha at christinas@asianlawcaucus.org.

To download a copy of ALC’s Know Your Rights guide to the Iran Sanctions, please visit http://www.asianlawcaucus.org/alc/publications/iranian-sanctions/. The report is available in both English and Farsi.

For further information about our work, please visit www.asianlawcaucus.org.

—

As ICE shreds state contracts, Ammiano bill to protect California from failed S-Comm program moves forward

Sacramento – As the controversy surrounding the “Secure” Communities or S-Comm deportation program reaches a national boiling point, Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D – SF) announced today that after a 4-month process of consultation with community leaders and legal experts, the TRUST Act (AB 1081) will be re-tooled in early January and then continue to move through the State Senate.

“Regardless of the Obama Administration’s blatant on-going deception about S-Comm, every day Californians are being unfairly deported leading to tragic consequences for communities both here and across the country.  Now more than ever we need to restore trust and I urge that our state leaders take a more active role on this critical issue as we continue to work towards suspending this damaging program. Together we need to do what is right for California,” said Assemblymember Ammiano.

AB 1081 passed the Assembly (47-26) and the Senate Public Safety Committee (5-2) earlier this year before the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) stunned the public and legislators by shredding all S-Comm agreements on August 5. DHS and ICE then declared by fiat the program would be “mandatory” without any mechanism for local oversight. ICE provided no sound legal basis for the move, which California leaders slammed as “an affront to democratic governance” and “a stunning display of bad faith.”

The bill’s goal is to reform California’s participation in the troubled S-Comm program, which has come under fire from law enforcement leaders and civil rights advocates for deporting large numbers of innocent community members, including victims of domestic violence and street vendors arrested for nothing more than selling food without a permit. Originally, the bill would have ensured Californians were protected from the program by amending the state’s Memorandum of Agreement with ICE that the agency has now unilaterally shredded.

“The bad faith move to take away state’s role in the process and conscript local police into the federal scheme is just one more legally dubious maneuver by ICE. We’re exploring every legal option available to hold the agency accountable and continue to protect California residents,” said Angela Chan of the Asian Law Caucus.

Chan and a team of attorneys are currently conducting a new, in-depth analysis, to be released in the coming days, of internal ICE documents unearthed earlier this year through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The new analysis will provide documented proof that ICE repeatedly conveyed to state officials that California’s approval was required for fingerprints to be shared with ICE under S-Comm. A preview of the analysis is available by contacting Chan.

The recent doubling down by the White House in defense of the program has only inflamed nationwide opposition with walk outs and peaceful civil disobedience occurring at S-Comm hearings across the country and localities passing new legislation in protest of the program and to protect the community policing initiatives which S-Comm threatens.  Just yesterday, in a decision with national implications, Cook County, IL (where Chicago is located) voted to refuse to comply with ICE requests to hold immigrants needlessly in jail unless the county receives full reimbursement from the Federal Government.

Chris Newman, Legal Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network added, “The need for the TRUST Act is greater now more than ever. Californians are stronger and more united in our determination to keep our communities safe, prevent the destruction of civil liberties, and end the dragnet separation of families.”

###

Documents Show Broad Deception and Disagreement Within Federal Agencies on Opt Out; Raise New Questions About ICE’s Mandatory Stance

New York, August 18, 2011- In the wake of protests and civil disobedience in Chicago yesterday and across the country criticizing the Obama administration’s Secure Communities program, immigrant advocates called on the government to turn over remaining documents about the program sought in a Freedom of Information lawsuit and to halt the controversial program.

A batch of unredacted documents released by court order this week, which federal district court Judge Shira A. Scheindlin called “embarrassing,” included acknowledgement by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attorneys that they would have to “rewrite” memos on whether the program is mandatory for states and localities and revealed schisms between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on the right of states and localities to opt out of the program.  In her order, Judge Scheindlin chided the agencies for going “out of their way to mislead the public about Secure Communities,” and pointedly stated that the “purpose of the [Freedom of Information Act] is to shed light on the operation of government, not shield it from embarrassment.”

The judge has not yet ruled on whether the government must release other documents relating to the legal authority to make Secure Communities mandatory.  Strikingly, the government continues to attempt to withhold documents that shed light on that policy.  ICE will be back in court today arguing it should be able to keep secret documents relating to the agency’s purported legal basis to impose S-Comm on unwilling states like Massachusetts, Illinois and New York.

The documents are being sought in a Freedom of Information lawsuit brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Immigration Justice Clinic of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law with the law firm of Mayer Brown LLP on behalf of the National Day Laborer Organization Network.

One previously redacted email chain of over 100 pages shows the director of Secure Communities, David Venturella, dodging questions from Margo Schlanger, an important official from the Department of Homeland Security Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (OCRCL). When ordering release of this document, Judge Scheindlin observed that the exchange showed “clearly obfuscating” and “non-responsive” answers from ICE in response to a request for clarification from OCRCL about Secure Communities policy.  DHS000196-000317.

Another email chain from July 2010 discussing a draft response to Representative Zoe Lofgren’s letter requesting clarification on the agency’s opt-out policy indicates that the FBI was considering an opt-out option.  The FBI had concerns that if no opt-out was allowed, states might consider not sending fingerprints to the FBI for other purposes.  The email notes that “moving away from the mandatory stance” would require “S1” (Secretary Napolitano) and AG approval. ICE FOIA 10-2674.0002039.

The back-and-forth and deception was clearly frustrating to ICE officials.  In an angry email dated August 6, 2010, a Secure Communities employee comments: “We never address whether or not it is mandatory – the answer is written to sound like it is but doesn’t state it.  It’s very convoluted – or is that the point?  I’m all about shades of grey but this really is a black and white question…Is it mandatory?  Yes or No.  Ok, so not such an easy question to answer.”  ICE FOIA 10-2674.0011165-ICE FOIA 10-2674.11171.

Commenting on the documents, Sunita Patel, staff attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights said, “The previously redacted portions of these documents—now public for the first time—reveal the extent of ICE’s deceit and political game-playing in its communications with states and localities.  Perhaps more disconcerting, though, is the confusion and flip-flopping within the agency about their own policies and plans for deployment of such a high-impact and unprecedented program.”

Added Bridget Kessler, an attorney with the Cardozo Immigration Justice Clinic, “These newly unredacted documents signal that the fight is not over yet.  ICE’s purportedly ‘mandatory’ S-Comm policy appears to lack a sound legal basis, and is certainly misguided and confused as a matter of policy.  Massachusetts, New York and Illinois should continue to push the federal government to honor their rejection of S-Comm.”

Sarahi Uribe, national organizer for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network said, “Even as they moved full-speed-ahead with deploying this program across the nation, at times top-level agency officials didn’t seem to fully understand—or disagreed about—how the program would work.  Everywhere around the country people are resisting—there have been walkouts and arrests during S-Comm hearings, rallies, and thousands of petition signatures delivered to President Obama.  The time has come.  It’s time to halt S-Comm.”

The groups said they will continue to litigate this case to obtain the full information about S-Comm that the public is entitled to.

Visit CCR’s NDLON v. ICE case page or the joint website, UncovertheTruth.org, for an index of the newly released documents, the text of the FOIA request,  the lawsuit filed in the Southern District of New York and all other relevant documents.

The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change. Visit www.ccrjustice.org.

The mission of the National Day Laborer Organization Network is to improve the lives of day laborers in the U.S. by unifying and strengthening its member organizations to be more strategic and effective in their efforts to develop leadership, mobilize day laborers in order to protect and expand their civil, labor and human rights. Visit www.ndlon.org.

The Immigration Justice Clinic of the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law was founded in 2008 to provide quality pro bono legal representation to indigent immigrants facing deportation. Under the supervision of experienced practitioners, law students in the Clinic represent individuals facing deportation and community-based organizations in public advocacy, media and litigation projects. Visit www.cardozo.yu.edu.

National Leaders, Experts, and Victims of S-Comm Conclude Program Should Be Ended

08.16.2011 –  Today, the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, along with Northern California organizations Asian Law Caucus and Immigrant Legal Resource Center, made public an authoritative report condemning the so-called “Secure” Communities or S-Comm deportation program and recommending its termination.

The release comes on the heels of a major protest in Los Angeles yesterday against the program, which is facing significant opposition nationwide for undermining public safety and operating without transparency or local oversight.  Meanwhile, a Northern California Community Forum on S-Comm, planned for August 27th in Oakland, will bring together community organizations and political officials from throughout the region to discuss how to end S-Comm in California.

The report includes expert testimony from San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey, University of San Francisco law professor Bill Ong Hill, former District Attorney of New York Robert Morgenthau, heads of law enforcement, and victims of S-Comm like Isaura in Los Angeles whose 911 call for help resulted in her deportation proceedings.

The report recommends that the program be terminated, that the current Office of Inspector General investigation of S-Comm be expanded to other, related programs, that the Department of Justice begin its own investigation into the mysterious role of the FBI in Secure Communities, and that states not be compelled to share biometric data with ICE.

The following statement can be attributed to the National Community Advisory Commission:

“This report confirms what immigrant communities have long known. The program called Secure Communities results in the opposite. Entangling local police in immigration enforcement is not just bad policy as the experts testify. Conscripting local police into immigration enforcement has provoked a massive civil rights crisis our country now faces. The only suitable approach is to end Secure Communities.”

The Commission includes:

American Friends Service Committee, Project Voice New England, Asian Law Caucus, CASA de Maryland, CENTRO de Igualdad y Derechos, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition, Detention Watch Network, Grassroots Leadership, Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, National Day Laborer Organizing Network, National Immigrant Justice Center, National Immigration Law Center, National Immigration Project of the National Lawyer’s Guild, Northern Manhattan Coalition for Immigrant Rights, Rights Working Group, Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations, We-Count!

The report is available at http://altopolimigra.com/s-comm-shadow-report/

Background on S-Comm is available at www.uncoverthetruth.org and in a press brief at http://ndlon.org/pdf/scommbrief.pdf

August 5, 2011 – Amid a growing chorus of national criticism of the flawed “Secure” Communities or S-Comm program, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) earlier today unilaterally canceled memorandums of agreement with 39 states over the program (including California) and announced that those states would still be forced to participate in the program without any sort of local oversight or accountability. S-Comm has faced significant opposition for undermining public safety and operating without transparency or local oversight.

Background: ICE’s maneuver follows decisions by the Governors of New York, Massachusetts, and Illinois to end or suspend participation in the program earlier this year, and comes just days before an “Advisory committee” – which advocates had deemed “wholly inadequate” – was to begin a series of hearings on the program. Meanwhile, California’s TRUST Act (AB 1081-Ammiano), which would limit the state’s participation in the flawed program and allow counties to tailor participation based on local needs, passed the State Assembly (47-26) in May and the Senate Public Safety Committee (5-2) in July.  Below are statements by Assemblymember Ammiano, author of the TRUST Act, and a coalition of leading civil rights and community groups:

Assemblymember Tom Ammiano (D-CA 13): “ICE’s outrageous announcement is an affront to both public safety and the most basic principles of democratic governance and transparency. If the Administration truly had the authority to force this dysfunctional program down the throats of every local government, why would they waste thousands of hours signing binding contracts with state officials across the country?”

Ammiano continued: “S-Comm has torn more than 40,000 Californians from their families, 70% of whom were presumed innocent or brought in for crimes as minor as selling food without a permit. Immigrants want to live in safe communities, but the program is shattering trust between immigrant victims and witnesses of crime and police. It’s far past time to pull the plug on this disastrous program, and I will continue to push for California to take a leadership role in advancing real solutions.”

The following statement is released on behalf of the Asian Law Caucus, the ACLU of California, the California Immigrant Policy Center, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, and PICO California:

“Today’s announcement is a shocking display of bad faith on the part of an agency that continues to overstep its bounds and trample on basic constitutional precepts in the process. US District Judge Shira Scheindlin’s strong condemnation of ICE’s deception in her ruling last month bears repeating: “There is ample evidence that ICE and DHS have gone out of their way to mislead the public about its ‘Secure Communities’ program.

We call on California Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris to exercise leadership at this critical time, and launch a thorough review of ICE’s repeated misrepresentations and deception.

The fact is, neither the federal government nor states like Arizona and Alabama can force our local police to act as immigration agents, especially when public safety is grievously harmed. Today’s attempt to tie the hands of states who are seeking to uphold signed agreements does nothing to fix our broken immigration system, and everything to make matters worse. In fact, it confirms that the Department of Homeland Security’s much celebrated “reforms” to S-Comm and “Advisory committee” are nothing more than window-dressing.”

Additional background information: Internal ICE documents show state Memorandums are required

Internal ICE documents uncovered from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit reveal a drastically different position from today’s announcement.  In August 2010, then S-Comm Assistant Director Venturella further clarified to Barbara Leen, Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee and staffer for Senator Feinstein, in a meeting with aides from offices within the California Congressional Delegation that S-Comm requires a state MOA because the State Identification Bureau possesses and controls how fingerprint data is used

From document ICE FOIA 10-2674.0013231:

“Ms. Leen said she has received conflicting information that suggested the local jurisdictions would have to enter into an agreement with ICE under SC, but based upon the information being provided, it appears that the agreement is with the state. Mr. Venturella confirmed that the formal agreement is with the state because they own the data systems at the state level and control what is submitted to federal authorities. Further, state and local law enforcement agencies are “users” of the system so any requests related to how information is used is made by the state.”

Press Release from Asian Law Caucus, ACLU of CA, CIPC, CHIRLA, NDLON, PICO California, and Asm. Tom Ammiano.  Posted by Angela Chan, Staff Attorney, Asian Law Caucus.

 San Francisco – Civil rights groups are applauding Mayor Ed Lee’s decision to immediately begin implementation of a city law, passed in November 2009, that restores due process for immigrant youth in San Francisco’s juvenile justice system and ensures that innocent youth are not torn from their families for deportation.  However, at the same time, the groups are expressing disappointment that the Mayor will only be implementing the policy for accompanied youth (i.e., youth who have immediate family here) and not for unaccompanied youth.  The groups urge him to fully implement the duly-enacting, common-sense law so that all innocent youth receive protections.

The due process policy is a city law passed by a supermajority of the Board of Supervisors in November 2009. The law ensures that all immigrant youth receive their day in court for any alleged charges and that only youth who are found to have committed a felony are reported to ICE for deportation.

Implementation of the broadly-supported law, endorsed by over 70 organizations, had been stalled until today due to former Mayor Newsom’s refusal to enact the law.  Under Newsom’s direction, Juvenile Probation reported over 160 youth to ICE at the point of arrest, prior to the youth receiving due process, based only on a juvenile probation officer’s “reasonable suspicion” that a youth is undocumented.  The problematic past policy tore innocent youth from their families and spread fear among immigrant residents of coming forward to cooperate with police.   

Juvenile Probation Department (JPD)’s prior policy of reporting youth for life-altering deportation at arrest went well above and beyond any obligations under federal law.  As a cadre of legal scholars, including University of San Francisco Law Professor Bill Ong Hing, have repeatedly made clear, there is no requirement imposed on city officials under federal law to ask about immigration status or to report individuals suspected of being undocumented. 

Read the rest of this entry »

NOTE: Originally published on Asian Pacific Americans for Progress on April 7, 2011.

This article has been re-posted with the permission of the authors.

By Karin Wang, Vice-President, Programs & Communications, Asian Pacific American Legal Center

On March 28, 2011, the New York Times picked up a story that ran a few days earlier in the Pasadena Star-News, a local Southern California newspaper, about the discovery of a home in the Los Angeles area catering to Chinese “maternity tourists.”  In doing so, it touched off the latest round of debate on the 100+ year legal principle that confers U.S. citizenship on anyone born in the United States.  Two days later, a subsequent investigation by the same Star-News reporter concluded that incidents of “maternity tourism” are isolated and the numbers of births are very low.  But by then, the media had picked up the story and it took on a life of its own.

Lost in the frenzy of reporters and bloggers trying to weigh in on this issue was a more important reason for March 28 being a notable date in the history of “birthright” citizenship:  More than 100 years ago, on March 28, 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, holding that children born in the United States, even to parents not eligible to become citizens, were nonetheless citizens themselves under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The 14^th Amendment states that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” Adopted after the Civil War, it was intended to prevent states from deciding on their own, particularly with regard to the children of freed slaves.  In Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court confirmed that this right extended to the children of non-citizens as well.

Born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants who were barred under the Chinese Exclusion Act from ever becoming U.S. citizens, Wong was denied re-entry to the United States after a trip to China, on the grounds that the son of a Chinese national could never be a U.S. citizen.  Wong sued the federal government, resulting in the Supreme Court’s seminal decision that for 113 years has shaped the uniquely diverse character of our nation, by giving root to countless immigrant communities from all races and ethnicities.

For Chinese Americans and in fact all Asian Americans, Wong Kim Ark’s courage has subsequently and significantly led to the growth and integration of a community that a century ago lived in dwindling isolation and segregation under the Chinese Exclusion Act.  By confirming the U.S. citizenship of children born in the United State to immigrant parents, the Wong Kim Arkdecision allowed Asian migrants to slowly gain a toehold in American society, creating generations of Asian Americans who know no other home than the United States and who have fully integrated into American society and culture, as scientists, doctors, entrepreneurs, lawyers, teachers, artists.  In fact, through immigration and births, Asian Americans have emerged as the fastest-growing community over the past decade, jumping 34 percent in California and at least 43 percent nationally.

In context of the rapid growth and integration of the Asian American community, it’s clear that the “maternity tourism” case in Southern California represents an aberration in the Chinese immigrant experience.  The New York Times reported that in 2008 (the most recently available data), out of approximately 4.3 million total births, only 7,462 were to foreign residents overall – a tiny 0.17% of the births in that year – and births to “maternity tourists” would comprise an even smaller subset of that tiny number.  Those who clamor to abolish the long-standing right of constitutional citizenship would eliminate a fundamental principle cherished by all Americans, in order to punish a few individuals.  Such a sweeping reform would be an outsized response to a non-issue.

So, while the sensationalized story of “maternity tourism” grabs headlines, the more important story of the 14^th Amendment is in how it laid the foundation for our extraordinarily diverse nation, by granting citizenship to the children of freed slaves and immigrants from around the globe.  While challenges to birthright citizenship will likely continue, all Americans should celebrate Wong Kim Ark’s courage and defend his legacy of guaranteeing the constitutional right to citizenship.

For more information re the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, a member of Asian American Center for Advancing Justice, visit us at: www.apalc.org or www.facebook.com/APALC.