Groups push for federal immigration reform

By Megan Rawlins

Michael Tsui grew up in San Francisco. The youngest child of a single mother, he went to public schools, worked hard, did well and, at 21 years old, he’s now a computer-engineering student at San Jose State University.

The young man looks, sounds and acts like any other American college student working towards graduation and worrying about job prospects. Except Tsui isn’t worried he won’t find a job in his chosen field and location; he’s worried that he can’t work legally and might be deported.

Tsui is an undocumented immigrant, brought here from Hong Kong at the age of five by his mother along with two older siblings on tourist visas. His tourist visa was transferred to a student visa, but when that expired, Tsui entered the nebulous and shadowy world of the undocumented.

And he is the kind of person that civil liberties and immigrant rights groups are trying to help with their campaign to reform federal immigration laws, which was launched last week in San Francisco.

There are an estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, the vast majority of whom come from or through Mexico, feeding the stereotype of the Spanish-speaking field worker. But, according to the Urban Institute, approximately 65,000 undocumented students graduate high school every year only to face gargantuan obstacles to continue their education.

As a SJSU student, Tsui is one of the lucky 5 to 10 percent who make it to college.
Like many immigrants, Tsui’s mother brought him and his two older siblings here to have a better life, access to education and opportunity. A single mother, she felt she wouldn’t be able to manage in Hong Kong with three children.

Tsui reverently described the sacrifices she and his siblings made, working long hours after school in whatever jobs were available so the family could stay in its Sunset District house.
The United States is the only home Tsui’s ever known, but no matter how hard he works or how well he does in school, he won’t be able to legally find a job upon graduation. The current system doesn’t make room for a bright, motivated, young man who wants to give back to the society that offered him so much.

His hope – and that of the 1.8 million undocumented children currently in our education system – rests on the Dream Act, legislation first proposed in 2001, which legalizes the status of undocumented immigrants upon the completion of higher education.

The Dream Act is somewhat contentious among immigration reform advocates, said Bill Ong Hing, a law professor at the University of California, Davis. Some see it as something that should be relatively easy to pass with bipartisan support and should thus be pushed through Congress as quickly as possible. Others, he explained, are afraid that if reform isn’t addressed as a whole, it won’t be adequately addressed at all.

Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, based in Washington D.C., doesn’t think most reform advocates will push to pass them separately.
“They’re not likely to do it piecemeal,” he said. “If they have a partial amnesty, then you take away of the most media-genic elements of the amnesty. You don’t want as your poster-boy the 30 year-old man who has committed two crimes. You want to think of the 18-year-old valedictorian. If you take him out of the equation, then amnesty for everyone else will be less likely.”

Amnesty is the hot-button issue for those concerned with the push for reform. “Giving people legal status doesn’t change the concern most people have,” Camarota argued. “It only encourages more lawbreaking by rewarding those who have already broken the law. It still increases the supply of unskilled workers, pushing wages down for all unskilled workers.

“The only people it benefits are the illegal immigrants,” he continued, “and if that’s someone’s main concern, then it does do that.”

Immigration reform advocates might be able to unify behind a path to legalization, but they are by no means on the same page regarding other aspects of reform. The Dream Act is only one contention among others, including a compromise on which relatives of immigrants can bring to the U.S. for speeding up the backlog of family members currently awaiting entry, a process that is optimistically estimated to take three to five years. (Under current law, citizens can bring spouses, parents, children and siblings to the U.S. Green card holders can bring spouses and unmarried children.)

Hing refuses to compromise on the family options – he said the changes would exclude siblings – but is willing to slow down the processing of the backlog to keep them. Family is extremely important to the Asian community, he said. “More than 80 percent of immigrants from Asia come through their family.

“Latino groups were more willing to give up [this] option,” he continued, “but they are now less likely. I think they’ve realized they are going to want to bring their families too.”

There are many facets to comprehensive immigration reform beyond the discussion of amnesty or family members and the backlog. But these, in conjunction with border enforcement, seem to remain the focus of Congress during preliminary discussions, inhibiting the comprehensiveness that is argued for.

The American Civil Liberties Union supports a pathway to legalization to help the undocumented emerge from the shadows, but Julia Marumi Mass, a lawyer with the ACLU, insisted it needs to include a discussion of privacy, fairness and civil rights. There shouldn’t be a national ID program or employer verification, she said, as it would just lead to discrimination against those who either look or sound foreign. Immigrants shouldn’t feel criminalized for not being “American enough.”

Camarota’s research indicates that one of every seven new hires goes through E-Verify, the current system to verify the legal status of employees and, according to the ACLU’s Mass, the first step towards a national ID.

Camarota said he doesn’t think the program is discriminatory. He pointed to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld an Arizona law requiring the implementation of E-Verify in order to receive a business license. “One of the most liberal courts in the country said it was a functioning, non-discriminatory system,” he said.

Yet getting into such practical details of what immigration reform might look like has been tough to do given the visceral vitriol that characterizes the debate, with most nativists and conservatives wanting to simply deport all the “illegals,” period. But entering the country without the proper documents is a civil offense, not a criminal offense.

There is nothing criminal about being undocumented, and yet many undocumented immigrants spend months if not years in detention centers across the nation. Fair access to the court system to challenge deportation orders and unfair treatment is being denied many immigrants, according to Mass.

“There needs to be more access to the courts to address the unnecessary and unconstitutional prolonged detainment of immigrants who do not present a threat,” she said.

There also needs to be a serious discussion about the perils of a temporary workers program, says Katie Joaquin, a member of Filipinos for Affirmative Action. It creates fear and abuse and keeps workers indebted to employers. She compared these programs to the Bracero program from the 1940s to ‘60s during which time workers were often underpaid, deceived and exploited

Comprehensive reform, she argued, should not include temporary worker programs, nor employer sanctions, but instead should include a path to legalization that doesn’t include prohibitive obstacles, that includes a system to unify families and addresses the root causes of immigration.

“We need to end unequal U.S. trade agreements so people don’t need to choose between coming here to work and staying and watching their family fall into poverty,” Joaquin said.

Hing has written along these lines that the U.S. needs to bail out Mexico. “You can grant total blanket amnesty and militarize the border, but they will still come,” he said. “You have to address the root problem; you have to help Mexico. Obama and Biden talked about this during the campaign, but they aren’t pushing for it in Congress.”

None of these advocates were willing to accuse Obama of breaking a campaign promise, but they were all disappointed in recent comments he made while in Mexico that essentially pushed the discussion into 2010.

“Now, I've got a lot on my plate,” Obama said, “and it's very important for us to sequence these big initiatives in a way where they don't all just crash at the same time...when we come back next year, that we should be in a position to start acting [on immigration reform]."

Immigration reform should be as much of a priority as health care and the economy, Hing said. One can’t be fully extricated from the others. And, he added, 2010 is an election year. He said he worries that if action isn’t taken before the Easter recess, when congressional representatives start seriously campaigning, then “people will be less and less willing to touch the issue.”

If serious discussions don’t begin until the beginning of 2010, Hing said there’s very little chance action will be taken prior to Easter, and then reform will likely have to wait until 2011. On this point, Camarota agreed. “Unemployment is over 20 percent for Americans and legal immigrants without a high school education,” he said. “It’s very hard in that situation to argue for legalizing illegals. It’s extraordinarily unlikely they’re going to get any amnesty through Congress in an election year.”

Local and national immigration advocacy groups are ramping up action to get reform back on the agenda for 2010, including a national week of action, town halls and phone- and text-in days.

Comments (11)

Brittancus:

If another AMNESTY sneaks past Americans, then their must be at least a ten year moratorium of the 20 million plus Path to Citizenship recipients. The consequence for these millions getting immediate access to government welfare, would be financial ruin to our national wilting economy. Nor will a new amnesty end there, because millions more in every impoverished niche around the world, will come--expecting a welcome? Only if we enforce the border with engagement by the National Guard, who are armed and ready to stop drug smugglers, terrorists and a host of other criminal enterprises, will US citizens feel safe. We desperately need strong immigration laws such as E-Verification. Do not let politicians undermine the "Rule of Law" and our very Constitution pandering to the profiteering special interest lobbyists, while jobless American workers numbers grow. My health care experience was mainly in England, Germany and 15 months in Australia and prior to the mass European immigration invasion was positively first class. FIRST CLASS AND EXEMPLARY! THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS RATIONING?

Of all the states that should be using E-Verify, is the illegal immigrant sanctuary state of California. Illegal immigration attributed to the near bankruptcy of California and many of the bordering territories.

We are still conveying many entitlement programs to illegal aliens and their families, with extorted taxes including health care. Free health care given in the hospitals and passed onto taxpayers. We have always been the recipients of business welfare and likely always will be? Pariah businesses that hire illegals, never pay anything to their support. THATS THE TAXPAYERS YOKE TO BARE! . GET RAW ANSWERS AT NUMBERSUSA Contact those in WASHINGTON! NO MORE AMNESTIES. USE ATTRITION TO DEPORT THEM THROUGH E-VERIFY, 287 G, NO MATCH SOCIAL SECURITY LETTERS AND LIGHTENING ICE RAIDS. CONTACT YOUR POLITICIAN 202-224-3121 AND DEMAND NO WEAKENING OF CURRENT 1986 (IRCA), also Simpson-Mazzoli Act (Pub.L. 99-603, 100 Stat. 3359,LAWS? We already have the laws, that become saturated with corruption. The legislation made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants (immigrants who do not possess lawful work authorization), required employers to attest to their employees' immigration status. It also granted amnesty to certain illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously. From its inception it was full of fraud leading to 5 million illegal aliens instead of 3.5 receiving green cards.

Posted by Brittancus | August 25, 2009 05:55 PM

mega:

fuck u americans and ur broken system

Posted by mega | August 26, 2009 02:13 AM

Sean:

Brittancus wrote:
> The consequence for these millions getting immediate access to government welfare, would be financial ruin to our national wilting economy.

Do you have the data that shows ALL 20 or so million will go on welfare? This is a myth; although I support 'rule of law', immigrants, both legal and illegal, contribute more to economy than they take out. Read the latest unbiased government reports on this topic, not the special interest reports.

Additionally, rule of law must be applied equally for all immigrants and US employers. Don't turn a blind eye to the illegal activities and illegal business practices and then blaming the illegals for ALL of this mess. And it is a mess. I am a legal immigrant and I can tell you that the legal immigration is very difficult and although I don't support illegal immigration, I can understand why people do it. Family reunion and jobs are obviously important reasons. It took me almost 16 years to get my US citizenship; the INS/USCIS 'lost' my files twice and I had to resubmit everything twice for both my green card and citizenship; that set me back by 6 years! Do you know how difficult it is to replace original documents that INS/USCIS lost? There is so much red tape in the system that people can't wait all their lives. That's one point. The second point is that there is no legal way for the existing illegals to immigrate. If you know immigration laws, you know that there are 4 categories of legal immigration to the US; the illegals can't use any of these 4 categories, but still need immigrate; hence they do so illegally. Let's make a category for them so that they can arrive legally; even if temporary.

Another point I like to make is that our immigration system is a racist system. It treats immigrants differently; and I don't mean by numbers; obviously China and India are well represented in the US and some quotas need to be in place in proportion to immigrants' home country and their represented numbers in the US; we all get that. But to treat a Haitian or Cuban who reaches our shores differently than an Iraqi, Peruvian or yes, Mexican is racist. Do we want a racist system? Do we want the current broken system? The current system is not serving anyone's interest except the big business interest who is quietly making money on illegals at the expense of illegals, our laws and our citizens. Let's deal with the realities. This is an emotionally charged topic, but if we rationalize the discussion and dissect the realities, we realize that we can't afford not to fix the system. Immigration reform has to happen this year. Enough talk; Let's act. Now.

Posted by Sean | August 26, 2009 11:07 AM

Posted by Sean | August 26, 2009 11:09 AM

Posted by Sean | August 26, 2009 11:10 AM

Ali:

Student visas don't just "expire". They're usually valid as long as the holder is in school and doesn't violate the terms of the visa, such as by doing unauthorized work or not attending school. So, what did this "student" do to lose his visa?

If Mr. Tsui did indeed have a student visa, then he likely blew his legal status all on his own. I've known a number of foreign students who were able to transition from student to permanent resident by finding employers to sponsor them. But THEY followed the rules concerning their student visas.

Posted by Ali | August 26, 2009 01:04 PM

"The American Civil Liberties Union supports a pathway to legalization to help the undocumented emerge from the shadows, but Julia Marumi Mass, a lawyer with the ACLU, insisted it needs to include a discussion of privacy, fairness and civil rights."
-------------
Such hypocrisy! Fairness? How "fair" is it that illegal aliens lie, cheat, and jump the line to get an advantage over legal immigrants? How fair is it that U.S. taxpayers end up subsidizing their healthcare and educations? As for "civil rights", these belong by definition to CITIZENS of a country. Illegal aliens are not only not citizens, they're not even legal residents of the U.S. As a citizen of this country, I'm tired of seeing MY rights abridged by the presence of illegal aliens. Illegal aliens are counted in the Census which is used to apportion Congressional seats, resulting in illegal-alien heavy seats gaining representation in Congress over those that aren't--and we citizens of those states losing OUR voice. It's also used for the federal budget, resulting in illegal alien-heavy states getting money for services while again other states go without.

Posted by Ali | August 26, 2009 01:11 PM

Sean, there's a reason that it's difficult to immigrate to this country. There are literally billions of people who would like to move here, many of them uneducated and unskilled. Our immigration laws are set up to protect AMERICANS, not to make it easy for immigrants to come here. And that's as it should be.

As for our "racist" immigration laws, you're right, but not in the way you think. Our laws, by emphasizing family reunification, have actually resulted in most legal immigration (now over 1 million immigrants per year) coming from Latin America or Asia. Mexico alone has accounted for 15-20% of all legal immigration for the past two decades. If anything, we should cut back on the immigration from BOTH Latin America and the Carribean.

Posted by Ali | August 26, 2009 01:18 PM

As for a civil offense, well, illegal entry is a FELONY with possible jail time. It's usually pursued as a misdemeanor, however, because it's quicker and easier to remove illegal aliens. Furthermore, illegal aliens (and legal immigrants) who are deported and re-enter illegally or who ignore a deportation order are also committing felonies. We have 600,000 such illegal alien fugitives that ICE is pursuing. 600,000 people who manipulated due process as a means to continue their illegal activity.

Posted by Ali | August 26, 2009 01:23 PM

Alex:

All - have fun with this read:
If you were to stop on a street corner anywhere in America and knowingly hire an illegal immigrant to do your laundry or clean your basement, you would be breaking the law.

But for years, the federal government has been paying immigration detainees $1 a day to perform menial work in the nation’s public and private detention centers.

Source: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6345312.html

Posted by Alex | August 26, 2009 08:03 PM

Here is another good read:

Document Shredding: One Way to Reduce Paperwork Backlog at INS
March 28, 2003

If you or anyone you know may have submitted some sort of immigration related filing with the Laguna Niguel, California office of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (now Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services) in the past year or two, the documents filed may have ended up in the paper shredder, and not by mistake. According to a federal indictment handed down in recent weeks, at least two officials working at the facility were responsible for ordering the shredding of up to 90,000 documents, including applications and supporting documentation for all types of immigration benefits, including family based visa petitions and political asylum, as well as actual Employment Authorization Documents, birth certificates and passports.

According to the indictment, the shredding activity took place between February and April 2002, and the individuals charged were not actual employees of the INS, but instead worked for JHM Research and Development of Maryland, a company hired by the INS to more efficiently receipt-in and perform initial processing on volumes of incoming immigration filings. The two individuals charged were assigned to the INS’ California Service Center, one of 4 regional service centers in the U.S. that processes a wide spectrum of immigration related filings for individuals residing in the western part of the U.S., most notably the entire state of California.

Apparently, the indicted officials ordered lower level employees to shred the documentation to create the appearance of success in attacking the workload and reducing the prevailing backlog - thereby creating a means to take credit for a job well done without actually doing any work. And once the backlog was reduced to zero, according to the charges, the officials kept in place their new procedures in order to maintain the seemingly wonderful status quo they had created.

Source: http://www.usavisacounsel.com/article-60.htm

Posted by Alex | August 26, 2009 08:10 PM

Groups push for federal immigration reform

Comments (11)

Post a comment