Salvadoran general can be deported for torture, immigration board finds

An immigration appeals court has upheld the deportation of a former defense minister of El Salvador who was in power in the 1980s when U.S.-backed security forces there committed numerous human rights abuses, including the kidnaping and murders of four American churchwomen.

The unprecedented ruling against retired Gen. Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova, 77, a one-time U.S. ally who retired to Florida in 1989, is expected to open legal doors for the deportation of a second Salvadoran general and other former foreign officials who condoned or failed to prevent – but did not directly participate in — human rights abuses in their countries.

The case against Vides Casanova and Gen. Guillermo Garcia was originally brought by three Salvadoran refugees, including two longtime residents of the District, who were detained and tortured by security forces in their homeland in the 1980s. One, Juan Romagoza, is a doctor who until 2008 ran the Clinica del Pueblo, a nonprofit health center in Northwest. The other, Carlos Mauricio, is a teacher and psychologist in D.C. who heads an anti-torture group.

“I was lucky to survive, but many others didn’t, and this ruling represents some relief for them too,” Romagoza, 65, said in a telephone interview Friday from El Salvador. “It is a very important step for justice, because it says that not only those who carried out these crimes, but also those who knew or ordered them and then washed their hands are responsible.”

A civil suit filed in 1999 by Romagoza, Mauricio and Neris Gonzalez, a former church worker, led to a trial in Florida, in which a jury ordered a $54.6 million verdict against the generals. In 2006, a federal appeals court upheld the verdict, although in a separate trial, a jury cleared both generals of responsibility for the murders of the four U.S. churchwomen, who were kidnaped by Salvadoran security forces in 1980.

Both former officials were allowed to remain in the United States, but in 2009, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement brought charges of immigration fraud against them for assisting in the torture of Romagoza and a second detainee, Daniel Alvarado. In 2012, an immigration judge in Florida ruled that Gen. Vides Casanova, a legal U.S. resident, could be deported. That decision was upheld on Wednesday, but he still has the right to appeal in federal court. The case against Gen. Garcia is still pending.

According to Patty Blum, one of a team of lawyers at the Center for Justice and Accountability in San Francisco that supported the prosecution, the ruling published Wednesday by the Board of Immigration Appeals in Florida is “very significant, because for the first time it connects the concept of command responsibility to the ability to remove human rights abusers from the United States.”

Blum said the original civil case brought by Romagoza, Mauricio and Gonzalez was “a real stimulant” to the immigration prosecution against them, and that many of the same witnesses testified at the civil and immigration hearings. The immigration case was developed by the Human Rights Crimes Violators and War Crimes Unit at ICE, which pursues suspects from numerous countries who live in the United States.

In its ruling, the appeals board described in detail the torture endured by Romagoza, a doctor who was working at a church clinic in 1980 when it was attacked by soldiers and police. He was detained and kept in national guard custody for three weeks. The decision said he was beaten, shot, given electric shocks, sexually assaulted and hung from a ceiling. It described similar treatment of Alvarado, a student activist who was falsely accused but later cleared of killing a U.S. military adviser.

The appeals board stated that these acts were not “isolated or random” abuses at the hands of “rogue subordinates,” but that Gen. Vides Casanova, who headed the national guard and then served as defense minister from 1983 to 1989, “knowingly shielded subordinates” from punishment and “promoted a culture of tolerance for human rights abuses” in the security forces.

In the early 1980s, the United States supported the government of El Salvador as the country was spiraling into civil war against leftist guerrillas. But the regime was later found to have committed mass abuses against civilians, including massacres and torture, and human rights groups have spent years denouncing and investigating these cases.

In the case of the four churchwomen, who were kidnaped, killed and buried by members of the national guard, the Florida immigration board found that Vides Casanova knew the guardsmen then under his command had confessed to the crimes, but that he failed to investigate them and obstructed U.S. government efforts to investigate.

The U.S. ambassador to El Salvador at the time, the late Robert E. White, fought tenaciously to seek justice in the churchwomen’s case, and he later testified at the Florida trial of Vides Casanova. Another former U.S. ambassador, Edwin G. Corr, testified in his defense.

In Washington Friday, news of the immigration board’s ruling was met with elation by longtime collegaues of Romagoza, a longtime leader of the region’s large Salvadoran immigrant community who headed the Clinica del Pueblo from 1988 to 2008. He returned to his homeland after retiring from the clinic several years ago.

“Juan has always been inspiring in his fight for justice, and it is exciting to see it come to full fruition now,” said Alicia Wilson, who succeeded him as executive director of the clinic in Columbia Heights. “With this case, he has left a legacy that makes us feel there is a chance for our country not to be a refuge for those responsible for torture.”

Mauricio, 62, who teaches in the District and heads a nonprofit group called the Stop Impunity Project, recounted the day in 1983 when a group of armed men, dressed in civilian clothes, burst into a class he was teaching at the National University of El Salvador and took him to a detention center run by the national police. He was tortured and interrogated for two weeks and then released.

“We never found justice in El Salvador, but we had unbreakable faith that we would find it in this country,” Mauricio said Friday. “The military saw all its opponents as enemies and they targeted us to be eliminated. There were so few who survived, but at least those of us who did were able to recount the history that the others could not.”

Source Article from http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/c/34656/f/636635/s/445e1de6/sc/8/l/0L0Swashingtonpost0N0Clocal0Csalvadoran0Egeneral0Ecan0Ebe0Edeported0Efor0Etorture0Eimmigration0Eboard0Efinds0C20A150C0A30C130Cade3ec2c0Ec98c0E11e40Ea1990E6cb5e63819d20Istory0Bhtml0Dwprss0Frss0Inational/story01.htm
Salvadoran general can be deported for torture, immigration board finds
http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/c/34656/f/636635/s/445e1de6/sc/8/l/0L0Swashingtonpost0N0Clocal0Csalvadoran0Egeneral0Ecan0Ebe0Edeported0Efor0Etorture0Eimmigration0Eboard0Efinds0C20A150C0A30C130Cade3ec2c0Ec98c0E11e40Ea1990E6cb5e63819d20Istory0Bhtml0Dwprss0Frss0Inational/story01.htm
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Salvadoran general can be deported from U.S. for aiding torture

An immigration appeals panel has upheld the deportation of a former defense minister of El Salvador who was in power in the 1980s, when U.S.-backed security forces there committed numerous human rights abuses, including the kidnapping and murders of four American churchwomen.

The unprecedented ruling against retired Gen. Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova, 77, a one-time U.S. ally who retired to Florida in 1989, is expected to open legal doors for the deportation of a second Salvadoran general and other former foreign officials who condoned or failed to prevent — but did not directly participate in — human rights abuses in their countries.

The case against Vides Casanova and Gen. Jose Guillermo Garcia was originally brought by three Salvadoran refugees, including two longtime residents of the District, who were detained and tortured by security forces in their homeland in the 1980s. One, Juan Romagoza, is a doctor who until 2008 ran the Clinica del Pueblo, a nonprofit health center in Northwest Washington. The other, Carlos Mauricio, is a teacher and psychologist in the District who heads an anti-torture group.

“I was lucky to survive, but many others didn’t, and this ruling represents some relief for them, too,” Romagoza, 65, said in a telephone interview Friday from El Salvador. “It is a very important step for justice, because it says that not only those who carried out these crimes but also those who knew or ordered them and then washed their hands are responsible.”

A civil suit filed in 1999 by Romagoza, Mauricio and Neris Gonzalez, a former church worker, led to a trial in Florida in which a jury ordered a $54.6 million verdict against the generals. In 2006, a federal appeals court upheld the verdict, although in a separate trial, a jury cleared both men of responsibility for the murders of the four U.S. churchwomen, who were kidnapped by Salvadoran security forces in 1980.

Both former officials were allowed to remain in the United States, but in 2009, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) brought charges of immigration fraud against them for assisting in the torture of Romagoza and a second detainee, Daniel Alvarado. In 2012, an immigration judge in Florida ruled that Vides Casanova, a legal U.S. resident, could be deported. That decision was upheld Wednesday, but he has the right to appeal in federal court. The case against Garcia is pending.

According to Patty Blum, one of a team of lawyers at the Center for Justice and Accountability in San Francisco that supported the prosecution, the ruling published Wednesday by the Board of Immigration Appeals is “very significant, because for the first time it connects the concept of command responsibility to the ability to remove human rights abusers from the United States.”

Blum said that the original civil case brought by Romagoza, Mauricio and Gonzalez was “a real stimulant” to the immigration prosecution against them and that many of the same witnesses testified at the civil and immigration hearings. The immigration case was developed by the Human Rights Crimes Violators and War Crimes Unit at ICE, which pursues suspects from numerous countries who live in the United States.

In its ruling, the appeals board described in detail the torture endured by Romagoza, who was working at a church clinic in 1980 when it was attacked by soldiers and police. He was detained and kept in national guard custody for three weeks. The decision said he was beaten, shot, given electric shocks, sexually assaulted and hung from a ceiling. It described similar treatment of Alvarado, a student activist who was falsely accused and later cleared of killing a U.S. military adviser.

The appeals board stated that these acts were not “isolated or random” abuses at the hands of “rogue subordinates,” but that Vides Casanova, who headed the national guard and then served as defense minister from 1983 to 1989, “knowingly shielded subordinates” from punishment and “promoted a culture of tolerance for human rights abuses” in the security forces.

In the early 1980s, the United States supported the government of El Salvador as the country was spiraling into civil war against leftist guerrillas. But the regime was later found to have committed mass abuses against civilians, including massacres and torture, and human rights groups have spent years denouncing and investigating these cases.

In the case of the four churchwomen, who were kidnapped, killed and buried by members of the national guard, the immigration appeals panel found that Vides Casanova knew the guardsmen then under his command had confessed to the crimes but that he failed to investigate them and obstructed U.S. government efforts to investigate.

The U.S. ambassador to El Salvador at the time, Robert E. White, fought tenaciously to seek justice in the churchwomen’s case, and he later testified at the Florida trial of Vides Casanova. Another former U.S. ambassador, Edwin G. Corr, testified in his defense.

In Washington on Friday, news of the immigration board’s ruling was met with elation by colleagues of Romagoza, a longtime leader of the region’s large Salvadoran immigrant community who headed the Clinica del Pueblo from 1988 to 2008. He returned to his homeland after retiring from the clinic.

“Juan has always been inspiring in his fight for justice, and it is exciting to see it come to full fruition now,” said Alicia Wilson, who succeeded him as executive director of the clinic in Columbia Heights. “With this case, he has left a legacy that makes us feel there is a chance for our country not to be a refuge for those responsible for torture.”

Mauricio, 62, who teaches in the District and heads a nonprofit group called the Stop Impunity Project, recounted the day in 1983 when a group of armed men, dressed in civilian clothes, burst into a class he was teaching at the National University of El Salvador and took him to a detention center run by the national police. He was tortured and interrogated for two weeks and then released.

“We never found justice in El Salvador, but we had unbreakable faith that we would find it in this country,” Mauricio said Friday. “The military saw all its opponents as enemies and they targeted us to be eliminated. There were so few who survived, but at least those of us who did were able to recount the history that the others could not.”

Source Article from http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/c/34656/f/636635/s/445e1de6/sc/8/l/0L0Swashingtonpost0N0Clocal0Csalvadoran0Egeneral0Ecan0Ebe0Edeported0Efor0Etorture0Eimmigration0Eboard0Efinds0C20A150C0A30C130Cade3ec2c0Ec98c0E11e40Ea1990E6cb5e63819d20Istory0Bhtml0Dwprss0Frss0Inational/story01.htm
Salvadoran general can be deported from U.S. for aiding torture
http://feeds.washingtonpost.com/c/34656/f/636635/s/445e1de6/sc/8/l/0L0Swashingtonpost0N0Clocal0Csalvadoran0Egeneral0Ecan0Ebe0Edeported0Efor0Etorture0Eimmigration0Eboard0Efinds0C20A150C0A30C130Cade3ec2c0Ec98c0E11e40Ea1990E6cb5e63819d20Istory0Bhtml0Dwprss0Frss0Inational/story01.htm
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Birthright Citizenship: The New Immigration Scam

Immigration policy – and in particular what to do about the 11 million people in the U.S. illegally – is the new litmus test for the GOP. The arguments over “amnesty” and border security are stale, but the passions are not.

Scott Walker is only the latest candidate to stumble over the immigration tripwire. Though previously supportive of providing a path to citizenship for undocumented residents, now the Wisconsin governor is talking up border security. Advice to candidates: maybe it’s time for some new policy ideas, like demanding an end to our so-called “birthright citizenship.”

Among developed nations, only the U.S. and Canada still offer automatic citizenship to children born on their soil. Not a single European country follows the practice. We take this right for granted, but the evidence is that this entitlement encourages a booming birth tourism business (which undermines our immigration objectives) and virtually guarantees that the number of people in the country illegally will continue to grow. 

Related: Obama’s Immigration Setback Is a Gift to the GOP

Federal agents recently raided 37 sites in southern California, which appear to have provided thousands of Chinese women the chance to give birth to babies on U.S. soil in exchange for fees of up to $60,000. Enticements included not only the opportunity to acquire automatic citizenship for their children – a package of free schooling, food, health and retirement benefits potentially worth millions of dollars – but also more mundane attractions like nannies, trips to Disneyland and fancy restaurants.

The New York Times notes that affidavits filed by law enforcement authorities “quote Chinese government sources as reporting that Chinese nationals had 10,000 babies in the United States in 2012, up from 4,200 in 2008.”

For prosperous Chinese or residents of unstable countries like Russia, an American passport represents an invaluable safety net. Some estimate that as many as 40,000 children from all over the world are born under such circumstances in the U.S. each year. Over time, with family members climbing aboard, the total allowed into the country multiples.

Once those babies turn 21, and if they are in the country, they can sponsor other family members to enter the U.S. Under our law, which promotes family unification, parents, siblings and minor children of a U.S. citizen are welcome. According to a report from John Feere of the Center for Immigration Studies, admitting family members account for most of the nation’s growth in immigration levels. Of the 1,130,818 immigrants who were granted legal permanent residency in 2009, a total of 747,413 (or, 66 percent) were family-sponsored immigrants.

Related: A GOP Minority Is Holding the Party Hostage Over Immigration

The commercial exploitation of our laws is repugnant and should be targeted. But the entire notion that any baby born on U.S. soil should become a citizen should be challenged as well. The lure of U.S. citizenship is incalculable, and has long encouraged illegal immigration. In a phone interview, Feere estimates that some 300,000 to 400,000 babies are born each year to people living in the country illegally. Pew puts the figure at 340,000. This obviously causes substantial growth in the undocumented population, which most would like to limit.

Critics of the “amnesty” being offered to millions of undocumented persons by President Obama say that the offer will only encourage more illegal entrants – and entice even more families to have babies in the U.S.  Obama’s plan provides protection against deportation for three years, and singles out the undocumented parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents who have lived in the country for at least five years.

Some 4 to 5 million immigrants fall under that umbrella, people who had children once inside the country — children who automatically became U.S. citizens. Advocates of immigration reform need to convince opponents that they will reduce the number of undocumented persons entering the country. While many preach border security, it would be more powerful to make illegal residency less attractive. Revoking the birthright citizenship would be a good start.

Immigration advocates argue that automatic citizenship is protected by the 14th amendment of the Constitution, which states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” Others say the history of that amendment suggests otherwise; the debate hasn’t stopped legislators from attempting to limit the practice.

Related: Obama’s Action Gives Illegal Immigrants Billions in Tax Credits

The first such attempt was in 1993, at the hands of none other than immigrant advocate Harry Reid, whose bill would have restricted automatic citizenship to the children of U.S. citizens and legal resident aliens. Today, Louisiana Senator David Vitter is set to propose an amendment restricting the automatic citizenship provision to babies born to a U.S. citizen or a person who is a permanent resident or serving in the military. This would seem a reasonable change in the current law. 

Like so many policy debates, the issue of birthright citizenship may eventually land in the lap of the Supreme Court. Feere says that while there have been rulings that grant citizenship to the children of permanent resident aliens, there has been no decision on the children of temporary aliens – such as people visiting legally on a student visa – or on babies born to illegal immigrants.

Astonishingly, the government, which Feere describes as being on “automatic pilot” on this issue, even gives passports to children born to foreign diplomats here – clearly people not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. When he followed up with the Social Security Administration on this question, he was told they knew the practice was inappropriate, but were not sure how to monitor it. Sigh.

Top Reads from The Fiscal Times:

Source Article from http://news.yahoo.com/birthright-citizenship-immigration-scam-094500225.html
Birthright Citizenship: The New Immigration Scam
http://news.yahoo.com/birthright-citizenship-immigration-scam-094500225.html
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Immigration officials see danger as local cooperation wanes

NEW YORK (AP) — Diminished local cooperation is putting federal immigration officers in dangerous situations as they track down foreign-born criminals, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials say.

They say that more of their officers are out on the streets, eating up resources, because cities and states have passed legislation that limits many of the detention requests issued by immigration authorities.

For years, ICE has issued the detainers to local and state law enforcement agencies, asking them to hold immigrants for up to 48 hours after they were scheduled for release from jail. Most detainees are then either taken into federal custody to face an immigration judge or be deported.

But more than 300 counties and cities, plus California, Connecticut, Illinois, Rhode Island and the District of Columbia, have chosen to release immigrants, claiming too many people who have committed low-level offenses or no crime at all were being deported and unnecessarily separated from their families. Courts have said that honoring detainers without probable cause could result in a civil rights offense.

ICE insists that its priorities have changed and it is only focused on foreign-born criminals who are a threat to society. It deported nearly 316,000 people in fiscal year 2014.

In the first eight months of 2014, immigration officers filed roughly 105,000 requests for local enforcement agencies to hold immigrants, but local agencies declined 8,800 of the requests, according to data provided by immigration authorities.

Officers now face more danger because they can’t just pick up foreign-born criminals in a safe environment like the Rikers Island jail, said Christopher Shanahan, field office director for Enforcement and Removal Operations in New York.

“We are in a situation in which we have to provide more men, more workers, more manpower in the streets, where it is more dangerous to take custody of somebody,” said Shanahan. “On the street, when you go into a house, a place of employment, when you are arresting somebody, you don’t know if they have weapons, you don’t know the surroundings.”

Last week, an Associated Press reporter and photographer accompanied officers as they conducted a series of early-morning arrests in the Bronx and Manhattan, part of a nationally-coordinated operation that netted 2,059 people.

A half-dozen ICE officers met at 5:30 a.m. in the parking lot of a Bronx coffee shop, put on black bulletproof vests and reviewed the three people they would try to arrest that morning. After driving quickly to each location in unmarked cars with sirens blaring, they made two arrests: a Mexican man and a Dominican man accused of illegally re-entering into the country, which is considered a high priority for ICE.

The Mexican man had been arrested 10 times by local police for driving without a license and then deported. The man, who was not identified per Department of Homeland Security policy, re-entered the U.S. illegally and then was accused of menacing a neighbor with a machete. ICE said it had issued a detainer for the man that was not honored by the city.

Mayor Bill de Blasio signed the legislation that limited cooperation with ICE in November. The law bars cooperation with detainers unless there’s a federal warrant and the person is on the terrorist watch list or committed a serious crime in the past five years.

From October 2013 through September 2014, the New York City Police Department received 2,635 immigration detainers. Of those, it held 196 individuals. The city says no ICE detainers have been honored this year.

New York City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, who proposed the limitations, said ICE officials for years “cast a dragnet at Rikers Island” that resulted in unnecessary deportations.

“In addition to being unfair, ICE’s policies were an offense to the rule of law and yet another symptom of our broken immigration system,” Mark-Viverito said in a statement.

In California, only immigrants illegally in the United States who have been convicted of a serious offense are eligible for the 48-hour hold.

David Marin, deputy field office director for Enforcement and Removal Operations in Los Angeles, said that of the seven counties that form the Los Angeles area of operation only two honor detainers that meet those standards.

More than one-fourth of the people arrested by ICE in the Los Angeles area last week had recently been released onto the street by local authorities despite ICE detainer requests. Fifty-nine of the 218 individuals detained by ICE during the enforcement action had been the subject of immigration detainers, said ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice.

The issue is not black-and-white, says Muzaffar Chishti, New York director of the Migration Policy Institute.

“My feeling is that, at some level, both (sides) are right”, said Chishti. “This is a classic case of where you stand on issues depends on where you sit. The concerns and the priorities of the city and police are very different from the concerns and priorities of the federal government.”

___

Associated Press writer Amy Taxin contributed to this report.

Source Article from http://news.yahoo.com/immigration-officials-laws-limiting-detainers-risk-officers-050243596.html
Immigration officials see danger as local cooperation wanes
http://news.yahoo.com/immigration-officials-laws-limiting-detainers-risk-officers-050243596.html
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Immigration: more or less?









polish food


Should we be surprised that nearly two-thirds of Scottish voters want to see immigration reduced?

That’s according to the YouGov poll for BBC Scotland, the first part of which is being published today. The survey found only 5% of the 1,100 Scottish sample want to see immigration increased.

And within the 64% for reduction, 15% of the total want to see immigration stopped altogether.

So if you listen to the rhetoric in Holyrood, then yes, you would be surprised, because there’s a cross-party consensus in favour of increasing immigration.

The agreement across parties is not quite as firm as it was when Jack McConnell seized the issue of Scotland’s demographic challenge and made the case for more immigrants.


line


Welcome to Scotland?


welcome to scotland logo

You can also read:

Scots ‘want immigration cut’ – poll

Immigration: Charting Scotland’s new arrivals in graphs

Douglas Fraser on how Scotland has long dealt with immigration

Q&A: Why does immigration matter?

How do we define immigration?


line

Some of his Labour colleagues at Westminster were sceptical about the then first minister’s initiative. But other parties at Holyrood joined the Labour-Lib Dem administration in supporting the case.

It created one of the many tense encounters between the Labour first minister and the Labour administrations in Westminster.

This was over the ‘Fresh Talent’ initiative – giving a special right to non-European Union students at Scottish universities to have a work permit for a limited period after graduation.

By the standards of the Smith Commission, such divergence now seems no big deal. Yet the initiative was ended. Universities say it has put them at a significant disadvantage in recruiting students from Asia.

And attempts to bring it back, even with the support of prominent Scottish Conservatives, are understood to be getting nowhere in Whitehall.


Stricter controls





By contrast with Holyrood, the Westminster conversation about immigration is about sounding tough. That’s where the polls are, and that’s where UKIP is. Those polls have focussed the attention of party strategists ahead of the general election.

The odd bit is that the polls in Scotland have not been that different.

So in answer to my opening question: no, we shouldn’t be surprised. The YouGov polling last week was in line with what we already knew.

With the help of the What Scotland Thinks website, recent findings have gone like this:

In May last year, Survation found 68% supporting stricter controls on immigration, and 10% against. In November, the same pollster asked if immigration has been good or bad for Scotland. Good won, but by a margin of only 44 to 40%.

The Scottish Social Attitudes survey last year found 62% saying the number of migrants to Britain should be reduced, and 9% saying there should be more.







The Holyrood government’s plans for an independent Scotland foresaw the opportunity to relax immigration controls to suit Scotland’s demographic priorities.

Asked by YouGov 13 months ago what effect that would have on levels of immigration, 40% of its sample said they would get higher, and 19% said they would get lower. So the message seems to have got through.

But that doesn’t mean it was supported. Survation found last July that, if independent, only 10% said Scotland should have more immigrants and 56% said there should be fewer.


Distinctive

The evidence is consistent that Scottish public opinion on immigration is less negative or hostile than in Britain as a whole. But not by much.

Only rarely do the comparable Britain-wide survey results reach the opposite majority conclusion to those in Scotland.

So why the mismatch between public opinion and political consensus? Perhaps it is merely a desire for a point of difference.

Perhaps it is because it is a less salient issue for Scots: having less experience of ethnic minorities in their neighbourhoods, they care less about it than other issues.

You could argue that MSPs at Holyrood are out of touch, and in an elite which finds immigration useful in providing the low-price labour to support its lifestyle.

Or you could see MSPs as leading public opinion, setting out Scotland’s distinctive attitude to foreigners and incomers, on an evidence base about demographic change with which few others are familiar.

That version of Scotland’s outlook on the world may not be based on public opinion. But it’s a positive story to tell.

Source Article from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-31813407
Immigration: more or less?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-31813407
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Scots 'want immigration cut' – poll








welcome to scotland logo


Almost two-thirds of Scots think immigration should be reduced, a poll commissioned by the BBC has suggested.

It suggests that Scots are almost as negative about immigration as the population in the rest of Britain.

The poll found that 49% wanted to see less immigration, exactly the same proportion as across Britain, and 15% said it should be stopped altogether.

This is in contrast to politicians at Holyrood who tend to agree that Scotland needs more skilled migrants.

In the YouGov/BBC poll just 5% said immigration should be increased – only slightly more than in England.

Some 27% of Scots said immigration was good for the country compared to 22% across Britain.

The poll suggested that 64% of people in Scotland wanted immigration reduced or stopped completely. The figure for Britain as a whole was 70%.

It found that women in Scotland were more likely to want immigration cut (69%) than men (60%).

Older people were much more likely to be against immigration, with 76% of over 60s in favour of a reduction as opposed to 43% of 18 to 24 year olds.


line








line

The poll, conducted by YouGov between 4 and 6 March, asked 1,100 Scottish adults a range of questions on the subject of immigration.

The questions matched those asked in a Britain-wide survey conducted in February 2014.

In Scotland, those with a higher income were more likely to welcome immigration, and men were more positive than women.

Demographics suggest Scotland’s population is ageing and, despite immigration-driven population growth over the past decade, the political consensus in Holyrood is in favour of more migrants of working age coming in to take on jobs and set up businesses which can grow the economy.

Despite the rise over the past decade Scotland still has a small immigrant population relative to England, especially London.


line








line

Average net migration to Scotland – the difference between people moving here and people leaving – is approximately 10,000 per year. For the UK as a whole it is about 300,000.

In 2010 Prime Minister David Cameron pledged to reduce net immigration in the UK to bring it under 100,000.

But last year, former First Minister Alex Salmond promised to increase net migration in Scotland.

Questions remain about whether the people of Scotland share the views of their elected representatives.


line


Welcome to Scotland?

You can also read:

Douglas Fraser’s blog: Immigration: more or less?

Immigration: Charting Scotland’s new arrivals in graphs

Douglas Fraser on how Scotland has long dealt with immigration

Q&A: Why does immigration matter?

How do we define immigration?


line

Responding to the poll’s findings, Dr Marina Shapira of the school of applied sciences at Stirling University said negative attitudes towards immigration were not generally expressed as strongly in Scotland as they are elsewhere in Britain.

She added: “But we shouldn’t underestimate the power of politics in the UK level and the power of the media at the UK level and the things that people hear every day.

“They are exposed not just to Scottish politicians, they are exposed to politicians on the level of the UK. They have common economic space and common political space and for that reason people probably people don’t see themselves that much isolated from the factors that are being told to the rest of the population in Britain.

“We shouldn’t overestimate the huge power of the voice coming from the south in Britain and people also listening to that voice too.”

Humza Yousaf, the Scottish government’s minister for international development and external affairs, said Scotland needed skilled migrants because of the ageing population and that politicians needed to address public concerns about immigration.

The SNP MSP said politicians needed to help the debate rather than engaging in “kneejerk, populist” reactions. Mr Yousaf highlighted research on the economic benefits of migrants.

“When you look at immigration you have to be willing to break it down,” he said.

“I think if you ask most Scottish people and most people around the UK ‘do they want to see high-skilled migration to fill gaps?’ then the majority do not want to see that reduced.

“And studies have shown that, and so the Scottish government and politicians across the UK have a job to shape opinion on immigration and tone down the rhetoric, not inflame the rhetoric.”


‘Front line’

David Coburn, the head of UKIP in Scotland and an MEP, accused politicians north of the border of failing to address people’s concerns about immigration.

He said attitudes in Scotland were only slightly different because of geography.

“England is on the front line, the south coast is on the front line, the east coast is on the frontline,” he said.

“Scotland is further away. Therefore it has not impacted quite as much yet, but the attitudes are just the same.”

Mr Coburn added: “There is no real difference in attitudes between the Scots and English. The guy in the pebble-dash house in Birmingham has the same problems as the guy in the pebble-dash house in Glasgow.

“They have got the same problem with rates, with paying their bills, with the NHS.”

Source Article from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31800374
Scots 'want immigration cut' – poll
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31800374
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Immigration officials: laws limiting detainers risk officers

NEW YORK (AP) — Diminished local cooperation is putting federal immigration officers in dangerous situations as they track down foreign-born criminals, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials say.

They say that more of their officers are out on the streets, eating up resources, because cities and states have passed legislation that limits many of the detention requests issued by immigration authorities.

For years, ICE issued the detainers to local and state law enforcement agencies, asking them to hold immigrants for up to 48 hours after they were scheduled for release from jail. Most detainees were then either taken into federal custody to face an immigration judge or be deported.

But more than 300 counties and cities, plus California, Connecticut, Illinois, Rhode Island and the District of Columbia, have chosen to release immigrants, claiming too many people who have committed low-level offenses or no crime at all were being deported and unnecessarily separated from their families. Courts have said that honoring detainers without probable cause could result in a civil rights offense.

ICE insists that its priorities have changed and it is only focused on foreign-born criminals who are a threat to society. It deported nearly 316,000 people in fiscal year 2014.

In the first eight months of 2014, immigration officers filed roughly 105,000 requests for local enforcement agencies to hold immigrants but local agencies declined 8,800 of the requests, according to data provided by immigration authorities.

Officers now face more danger because they can’t just pick up foreign-born criminals in a safe environment like Rikers Island, said Christopher Shanahan, field office director for Enforcement and Removal Operations in New York.

“We are in a situation in which we have to provide more men, more workers, more manpower in the streets, where it is more dangerous to take custody of somebody,” said Shanahan. “On the street, when you go into a house, a place of employment, when you are arresting somebody, you don’t know if they have weapons, you don’t know the surroundings.”

Last week, an Associated Press reporter and photographer accompanied officers as they conducted a series of early-morning arrests in the Bronx and Manhattan, part of a nationally-coordinated operation that netted 2,059 people.

A half-dozen ICE officers met at 5:30 a.m. in the parking lot of a Bronx coffee shop, put on black bulletproof vests and reviewed the three people they would try to arrest that morning. After driving quickly to each location in unmarked cars with sirens blaring, they made two arrests: a Mexican man and a Dominican man accused of illegally re-entering into the country, which is considered a high priority for ICE.

The Mexican man had been arrested 10 times by local police for driving without a license and then deported. The man, who was not identified per the Department of Homeland Security’s privacy policy, re-entered the U.S. illegally and then was accused of menacing a neighbor with a machete. ICE said it had issued a detainer for the man that was not honored by the city.

Mayor Bill de Blasio signed the legislation that limited cooperation with ICE in November. The new law bars cooperation with detainers unless there’s a federal warrant and the person is on the terrorist watch list or committed a serious crime in the past five years.

From October 2013 through September 2014, the New York City Police Department received 2,635 immigration detainers. Of those, it held 196 individuals. The city says no ICE detainers have been honored this year.

New York City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, who proposed the limitations, said ICE officials for years “cast a dragnet at Rikers Island” that resulted in unnecessary deportations.

“In addition to being unfair, ICE’s policies were an offense to the rule of law and yet another symptom of our broken immigration system,” Mark-Viverito said in a statement.

In California, only immigrants illegally in the United States who have been convicted of a serious offense are eligible for the 48-hour hold.

David Marin, deputy field office director for Enforcement and Removal Operations in Los Angeles, said that of the seven counties that form the Los Angeles area of operation only two honor detainers that meet those standards.

More than one-fourth of the people arrested by ICE in the Los Angeles area last week had recently been released onto the street by local authorities despite ICE detainer requests. Fifty-nine of the 218 individuals detained by ICE during the enforcement action had been the subject of immigration detainers, said ICE spokesperson Virginia Kice.

The issue is not black-and-white, says Muzaffar Chishti, New York director of the Migration Policy Institute.

“My feeling is that, at some level, both (sides) are right”, said Chishti. “This is a classic case of where you stand on issues depends on where you sit. The concerns and the priorities of the city and police are very different from the concerns and priorities of the federal government.”

________________

Associated Press writer Amy Taxin contributed to this report.

Source Article from http://news.yahoo.com/immigration-officials-laws-limiting-detainers-risk-officers-050243596.html
Immigration officials: laws limiting detainers risk officers
http://news.yahoo.com/immigration-officials-laws-limiting-detainers-risk-officers-050243596.html
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Mexico, others dismayed by delay for Obama immigration measures

Mexico and Central America, the regions whose citizens would most benefit from President Obama’s executive actions on immigration, reacted with dismay and confusion to this week’s court-ordered delay of the measures.

The governments of Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras said they profoundly regretted the court decision that, at least temporarily, blocks efforts by millions of Mexicans and Central Americans to remain in the United States legally.

A federal judge in Texas issued the injunction Monday, putting on hold a program Obama announced in November that would defer deportation for millions of immigrants. It came two days before U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services was to start accepting applications for the program.

Mexico said derailing the legalization of immigrants ultimately hurts the United States too.

“We reiterate that [Obama’s executive-action] programs mean just migratory relief for millions of families and could make possible contributions by Mexican migrants to the U.S. economy and society,” the Mexican Foreign Relations Ministry said in a statement.

“The Foreign Ministry calls on the Mexican community to remain informed about the development of the judicial-review process through official sources,” the statement said, cautioning Mexican nationals against possible fraudulent efforts by unscrupulous immigration brokers.

Guatemala also told its citizens to pay close attention to the developments on whether the immigration relief will become a reality. 

Many Mexicans and Central Americans had already gathered their proof-of-residence documents and other papers to apply for the measures that would allow them to stay in the U.S. legally and obtain official work permits.

Mexican nationals make up the largest single group of immigrants living illegally in the U.S. and stand to benefit the most. Central Americans, primarily from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador, fed the surge of young migrants, including many unaccompanied children, who swamped the southern border of the United States last summer.

They were fleeing rampant gang violence and endemic poverty while availing themselves of what many thought was a new leniency for entering the U.S. However, they will not benefit from Obama’s executive actions because they have not been in the United States long enough.

The presidents of Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador are scheduled to meet with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden next week, and they probably will talk about immigration. The government of El Salvador called on Washington to resolve the issue quickly.

“We respect the internal judicial decisions” of the U.S., the government said, but “call for a swift search for measures that promote migratory stability for all migrants who obey U.S. law.”

Sergio Alcocer, the Mexican foreign ministry’s deputy secretary of state for North America, told local newspapers that the court’s decision was a bump in the road and that it probably would be resolved favorably for Obama and his immigration policies.

The Mexican government has generally been careful not to appear to be interfering in U.S. immigration policy to avoid spoiling advances. Still, Mexico has been ramping up its consular presence across the U.S. — there are now 50 nationwide — with the hope of assisting Mexican nationals in availing themselves of new immigration benefits.

Twitter: @TracyKWilkinson

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times

Source Article from http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-mexico-obama-immigration-20150219-story.html?track=rss
Mexico, others dismayed by delay for Obama immigration measures
http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-mexico-obama-immigration-20150219-story.html?track=rss
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Foster Expands Family-Based Immigration Practice Due to Executive Action

HOUSTON–(BUSINESS WIRE)–

Foster LLP, a leading immigration law firm delivering the full spectrum of U.S. and global immigration solutions, announces the expansion of its family-based immigration practice to accommodate the increased demand for immigration legal services resulting from President Barack Obama’s executive action. As part of the executive action, the president announced the expansion of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and the new Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA).

“In light of the recent presidential executive actions, our team is ramping up its efforts to provide immigration representation to increasing numbers of families and individuals,” said José R. Pérez, a Texas Immigration and Nationality Law Board Certified attorney and partner, Foster. “While a federal judge has temporarily halted the expansion of DACA and DAPA, families still need assistance and Foster is expanding to help meet their immigration needs. We will continue directly reaching out to our communities to ensure that we are providing our services where they are needed most.”

Pérez, a 27-year veteran immigration law practitioner, is leading the firm’s family practice expansion. The practice is highly experienced in handling the full range of family-based immigration matters, complex litigation cases and difficult naturalization issues. His team includes attorneys, Andrea Penedo and Alexandra Vickery; highly experienced litigator and Texas Board Certified Immigration and Nationality Law senior attorney, Olsa Alikaj-Cano; and litigator, John Lasseigne. Attorneys, James Larsen and Jeff Thomas, have recently joined the firm’s Austin office and serve as part of the expanded Foster team preparing to meet the additional demand for DACA and DAPA representation.

“Foster’s continued growth allows us to assemble the very best team of experts to meet the emerging need for immigration legal services in our communities, and to help qualifying individuals apply for DACA and DAPA, as well as potential relief in court,” said Alikaj-Cano.

About Foster LLP

Foster LLP is a leading immigration law firm delivering the full spectrum of U.S. and global immigration solutions. Renowned for responsive, individualized service, Foster works on behalf of the largest employers worldwide, as well as top emerging and midmarket companies, investors, and individuals and families. Through experience, leadership and technology, Foster’s team solves the most complex immigration problems, while never forgetting that behind every case are people and their families.

Learn more at www.FosterGlobal.com.

Contact:
for Foster LLP
Matt Maurel, 512-329-5670 ext. 109
matt@anthonybarnum.com

Source Article from http://finance.yahoo.com/news/foster-expands-family-based-immigration-155600366.html
Foster Expands Family-Based Immigration Practice Due to Executive Action
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/foster-expands-family-based-immigration-155600366.html
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results

Immigration stalemate: The economic toll

The ongoing stalemate over U.S. immigration policy is getting costly.


Congressional Republicans continued on Tuesday to debate a potential funding cut for the Homeland Security Department to block President Barack Obama’s executive order deferring the deportation of millions of unauthorized immigrants.


If they follow through with the threat, the shutdown could sideline some 30,000 administrators and other workers. Most workers would be exempt, as another 200,000 fall into essential categories such as Border Patrol, Secret Service and Transportation Security Administration. Those workers would remain on the job but without pay until the funding standoff is resolved.


Obama warned Monday that the payroll suspension would be felt hardest in regions covered by border patrol, port inspection and airport security agents.


“It will have a direct impact on your economy, and it will have a direct impact on America’s national security because their hard work helps to keep us safe,” Obama said.


Got a question about business or the economy? Send it to CNBC Explains


The president’s order to defer deportations was put on hold last week by a federal judge, who sided with officials from Texas and 25 other states that took the White House to court. The administration is appealing the ruling but has suspended plans to allow undocumented immigrants to apply for legal status.


The loud, ongoing legal and political debate unfolding over immigration reform often overlooks one very important impact from letting more foreigners come to live and work in the U.S.


Read MoreImmigration stalemate: The economic toll


Many researchers believe it’s good for the economy.


The economic case for a major immigration overhaul is that with an expanded workforce, the economy will grow more rapidly and the government will collect more in taxes, lowering the federal deficit.


And because immigrants tend to be younger, on average, than the general U.S. population, the influx of new workers would help offset the economic burden of the rising cost of caring for an aging population.


Source Article from http://www.cnbc.com/id/102451878?__source=yahoonews&par=yahoonews
Immigration stalemate: The economic toll
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102451878?__source=yahoonews&par=yahoonews
http://news.search.yahoo.com/news/rss?p=immigration
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results
immigration – Yahoo News Search Results