Department of Justice
Immigrants Deserve Basic Miranda-Like Warnings When Arrested
As anyone who has watched an episode of Law and Order knows, police officers must give certain warnings to anyone placed under arrest, including that they have the right to an attorney and that the statements they make can be used against them in court. In the 1966 decision Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court explained that providing these warnings prior to police questioning ensures that criminal suspects are aware of their rights and therefore are better protected against the intimidation inherent in police interrogations. Read More
New Report Shows That Border Benchmarks Already Have Been Met
As the components of what should be included in an immigration reform bill take shape, border security, along with enforcement, is proving to be a key part of the framework. Eight senators released a bipartisan proposal earlier this week that included a path to citizenship for the 11 million unauthorized immigrants currently living in the United States. The catch is that implementation of this provision is “contingent upon our success in securing our borders and addressing visa overstays.” The day after the senators presented their framework, President Obama laid out his vision of what should be included in immigration reform legislation during a speech to labor leaders in Nevada. The president called for a clear path to citizenship that’s not contingent on securing the border, but he said the nation needs to stay focused on immigration enforcement. “That means continuing to strengthen security at our borders,” Obama said during his speech. “It means cracking down more forcefully on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers.” Read More
Using Administrative Tools to Improve Immigration Court
Even as the push for legislative reform to our immigration system begins anew, it’s important that every tool to fix our outdated immigration system be employed, including administrative reform. While rarely discussed, attention must be paid to immigration court reform. Immigration courts lack many of the hallmarks of due process that Americans have come to expect, including the right to appointed counsel if you cannot afford one, independent judges, and a discovery process where the government must turn over the evidence it has regarding the person’s deportability. While true immigration reform should include overhauling the immigration courts, there is much that can be done to improve their processes immediately through administrative action. Read More
Immigrant Workers Likely to Play Big Role in Post-Sandy Reconstruction
Hurricane Sandy may be gone, but the monumental task of reconstruction remains. In New Jersey and New York in particular, thousands of workers will be needed to rebuild or restore roads, homes, and office buildings damaged or destroyed by the storm. If history is any guide, many of those workers will be immigrants, and many of those immigrants will be unauthorized. Ironically, as they play an outsized role in reconstruction after a natural disaster, immigrant workers will be especially vulnerable to abuse and exploitation by unscrupulous employers. As a result, federal and state officials must be vigilant in ensuring that labor laws are vigorously enforced to protect all workers involved in post-Sandy reconstruction efforts. Read More
Supreme Court to Consider Reach of Padilla v. Kentucky
In its landmark decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court confirmed that criminal defense attorneys have a constitutional obligation to advise their clients if pleading guilty to a particular offense could lead to deportation. On Thursday,* the Justices will consider a follow-up question of critical importance for many immigrants placed in removal proceedings on account of bad legal advice: whether the ruling applies to cases that became final before the decision was issued. Read More
Supreme Court Case Highlights Cruel Intersection of Immigration and Drug Laws
Tomorrow morning, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a complicated immigration case involving how courts should determine whether a crime qualifies as an “aggravated felony.” Once the legal clutter is set aside, however, the case provides a clear example of how our nation’s immigration laws often fail to account for the most basic considerations of fairness and proportionality. If the Justices rule in the government’s favor, a lawful permanent resident with two U.S. citizen children could be deported from the country—and permanently barred from returning—for possessing less than $30 worth of marijuana. Read More
Author of Torture Memos Challenges Legality of DACA
As a high-ranking Justice Department attorney after 9/11, John Yoo authored an infamous legal memo arguing that the President, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, possessed irrevocable authority to order the torture of alleged “enemy combatants.” Although the memos were subsequently revoked, Yoo has remained an ardent defender of presidential power—except, it appears, when it comes to the exercise of prosecutorial discretion for undocumented immigrants. Read More
Courts Weigh Issuance of Law Licenses to Undocumented Attorneys
The highest courts of Florida and California are considering a legal question of great importance to many DREAMers: whether the lack of valid immigration status prevents states from issuing law licenses to applicants who are otherwise qualified to become attorneys. To some, the answer may seem obvious—that immigrants should not be permitted to practice law in a country where their presence violates the law. But as with most issues concerning immigration, the answer is more complex than may initially appear. Read More
Is America Falling Behind in the Skilled Worker Race?
CNN July 19, 2012 The search for skills has been a daunting task for U.S. companies trying to find the right person to fill well paying and highly skilled jobs. A high-skilled workforce is an essential input to economic growth in the fast-growing knowledge economy, and specialized skills –… Read More
Sheriff Joe Arpaio to Stand Trial on Racial Profiling Charges
Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio may finally face the music this week in a federal trial in Phoenix. The renowned anti-immigrant media glutton and self-proclaimed “America’s Toughest Sheriff” stands accused of discrimination and harassment charges in a class action lawsuit involving the ACLU and MALDEF. Arpaio has a long history of abuse and discrimination in the name of immigration enforcement—from a segregated tent city to unlawful stops and forcing inmates to wear pink underwear. In fact, Arpaio is also the subject of a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice earlier this year alleging that Arpaio and his officers targeted Latino drivers during traffic stops and neighborhood sweeps and used ethnic slurs against Latino inmates in county jails. Read More
All gifts are matched dollar for dollar
No one should face the immigration system alone
