The Immigrant’s Journal Our leaders who stood for Unity & Justice
FREE
Protecting God’s Children From Distant Lands
www.cawnyc.com
Vol. 111
26 Court Street, Suite 701, Brooklyn, NY 11242 Tel: 718-243-9431 Fax: 718-222-3153 Email: immjournal @aol.com
Bill in Congress Could Legalize 325,000 Unauthorized Immigrants BY NICOLE NAREA, VOX
Editorial credit: David A. Litman / Shutterstock.com
A
bipartisan bill, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, introduced in the House of Representatives recently, could give legal status and a path to citizenship to hundreds of thousands of unauthorized immigrants working in agriculture. The legislation, the product of months of discussions, represents a rare moment of bipartisan agreement on one of the most contentious topics of the Trump administration, ultimately attracting 20 Republican cosponsors, according to a spokesperson for Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), who helped lead the negotiations. The bill could legalize up to about 325,000 immigrants currently working in agriculture who do not have legal status.
BY MELISSA CRUZ
T It’s still only a fraction of the 12 million unauthorized immigrants estimated to be living in the US and the more than 2 million who would be legalized under the “Dream and Promise Act” that passed the House in June. But it’s the biggest legalization effort supported by Republicans in recent memory.
Republicans are usually reluctant to back any kind of legalization of unauthorized immigrants — immigration restrictionist groups have lambasted the bill as a means of securing “cheap foreign labor” at the expense of American workers — but the lawmakers represent discontinued on page 2
DiNapoli: Jackson Heights Economy Energized by Immigrants and Small Businesses
T
he Jackson Heights area in Queens, is one of New York City’s most diverse communities with one of the highest concentrations of immigrants, many running their own businesses and making major contributions to the booming local economy, according to a report released by New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. “Jackson Heights’ diverse and dynamic immigrant community is the driving force behind the local economy that has seen growth in the number of businesses, jobs and household income,” DiNapoli said. “Despite the neighborhood’s economic success,
Changes on Fee Waivers to Affect Citizenship
DiNapoli
some challenges remain. The Jackson Heights area is living proof of the positive economic and cultural benefits immigration brings to our communities.” Immigrants represented 60 percent of the area’s population in 2017, much higher than the citywide (37 percent) and national (14 percent) shares. Immigrants
also made up more than three-quarters of employed residents, the second highest share among New York City’s 55 Census-defined neighborhoods. Since the end of the recession, there has been a significant increase in the number of businesses in the Jackson Heights area. In 2018, there were 3,300 businesses, 660 more than in 2009. Many are small retail shops and restaurants that reflect the neighborhood’s diversity. Nearly three-quarters had fewer than five employees, and 88 percent had fewer than 10 employees. l For the full report, visit www.cawnyc.com
More Surveillance Technology to Spy On Immigrants ... page 3
he cost of filing an application for citizenship—usually a hefty $725—has long been a barrier for some immigrants. Now, a change to the naturalization process may leave even more people priced out of becoming a U.S. citizen. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently announced a new policy that will change how the agency determines eligibility for a waiver of its application fees. It is set to go into effect December 2. The policy will narrow the fee waiver eligibility for those applying for citizenship, green cards in certain categories, work permits, and other immigration benefits. Currently, USCIS has a straightforward way of determining eligibility for a fee waiver. If an applicant receives a meanstested benefit—such as Medicaid or supplemental food assistance—then they automatically qualify for a fee waiver. As of 2017, approximately 40% of all citizenship applicants requested this fee waiver; most did so by showing they received a means-tested benefit. The new policy will eliminate the means-tested benefit from the eligibility criteria. Under the change, people may only request a fee waiver if they can prove their annual household income is at or below 150% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines or if they can demonstrate financial hardship by some other means. The two remaining alternatives are more difficult to prove. They require substantial documentation and often the help of an attorney. Sifting through this documentation would likely be more timeconsuming for an already overburdened USCIS, creating even greater backlogs. continued on page 2
IMMIGRATION MATTERS Citizenship/from page 1
2
Victims of Criminal Activity: U Nonimmigrant Status
Filing fees may be out of reach for many people, including low-income immigrants, the elderly, and families that file more than one application at a time. With limited ways to get a fee waiver, some people may be deterred from applying for immigration benefits—including citizenship—at all. The policy change is one of many attacks the Trump administration has made against legal immigration. It comes just two weeks after the Trump administration’s public charge rule got struck down in several federal courts. The rule would have made it easier for the government to deny a Geen Card to immigrants it deemed likely to receive certain public benefits in the future, including non-cash benefits like Medicaid or food stamps. The widely condemned rule , and its counterpart for immigrant visa applicants, was also seen as a “wealth test” for those wanting to live in the United States. This latest policy change creates more obstacles for people navigating our immigration system. Our process should encourage people to become U.S. citizens, not turn them away with high fees and inflexible criteria.l
T
he U nonimmigrant status (U visa) is set aside for victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and are helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity. Congress created the U nonimmigrant visa with the passage of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act (including the Battered Immigrant Women’s Protection Act) in October 2000. The legislation was intended to strengthen the ability of law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute cases of domestic violence, sexual assault, trafficking of aliens and other crimes, while also protecting victims of crimes who have suffered substantial mental or physical abuse due to the crime and are willing to help law enforcement authorities in the investigation or prosecution of the criminal activity. The legislation also helps law enforcement agencies to better serve victims of crimes. U Nonimmigrant Eligibility You may be eligible for a U nonimmigrant visa if: nYou are the victim of qualifying criminal activity.
nYou have suffered substantial physical or mental abuse as a result of having been a victim of criminal activity. nYou have information about the criminal activity. If you are under the age of 16 or unable to provide information due to a disability, a parent, guardian, or next friend may possess the information about the crime on your behalf. nYou were helpful, are helpful, or are likely to be helpful to law enforcement in the investigation or prosecution of the crime. If you are under the age of 16 or unable to provide information due to a disability, a parent, guardian, or next friend may assist law enforcement on your behalf. nThe crime occurred in the United States or violated U.S. laws. nYou are admissible to the United States. If you are not admissible, you may apply for a waiver.
immigrant status with the Vermont Service Center. nFollow all instructions that are sent from the Vermont Service Center, which will include having your fingerprints taken at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate. nIf your petition is approved, you must consular process to enter the United States, which will include an interview with a consular officer at the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.
You may also apply (petition) for U nonimmigrant status if you are outside the United States. To do this, you must: nFile all the necessary forms for U non-
Source: www.uscis.gov
Bill in Congress/from page 1
passed the House in July with significant bipartisan support before it was ultimately blocked in the Senate in September. “It wasn’t easy and the legislation still needs to be signed into law, but the Farm Workforce Modernization Act is a big step in the right direction for a bipartisan solution that can provide the needed certainty in our agriculture communities,” Panetta said in a statement. It’s unclear whether other Republicans might proffer an alternative to the compromise bill or whether it might be haunted by a previous failed proposal brought by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA). He had introduced a version of temporary agricultural worker visa reform back in 2018, but most Democrats viewed that bill as a nonstarter. If a significant bipartisan majority passes the bill in the House, it might push Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to bring the bill to the floor for a vote. But even then, it will still need Trump’s backing, unless lawmakers can secure a veto-proof majority. “Unless there is another place for Republicans to land, it’s going to be very attractive to dozens of House Republicans to vote for this bill,” Bier said. “Right now, there isn’t an alternative. They’ll either vote with the farmers or against them.” l
tricts where agriculture is a major indus try.
GREEN CARD SLAVERY?
Don’t put up with ABUSE anymore! Whether married or not, whether your spouse is a U.S. citizen or Green Card Holder, we can get a Green Card for you and your children PLUS a divorce.
Call 718-222-3155 now for a FREE consultation! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
The bill would give unauthorized farmworkers a path to citizenship The bill would give farmworkers who have worked in agriculture for at least 180 days over the past two years, the ability to apply for “Certified Agricultural Worker” status, which can be renewed in six-month or five-year increments if they continue to work in agriculture for at least 100 days a year. It also offers long-term farmworkers a path to a Green Card, which requires at least four more years of experience in the industry and a $1,000 fine. The bill streamlines the application process for the H-2A temporary visa program for seasonal agricultural workers, which admitted over 196,000 people in 2018. It allows for up to 40,000 green cards to be granted annually, either through the sponsorship of an employer or if workers maintain H-2A status for 10 years. If the bill passes the House, it could signal that a piecemeal approach to immigration reform is more feasible than a comprehensive bill like the “Gang of Eight” proposal that failed in 2013. A similarly narrow bipartisan bill that would have eliminated per-country caps on employment-based Green Cards
Resources for Victims of Human Trafficking & Other Crimes USCIS offers resources for victims of human trafficking and other crimes and the organizations that serve them. This information is designed to help answer any questions you or your family might have about obtaining T or U nonimmigrant status. l
For a FREE case evaluation, call 855768-8845 or visit www.askthelawyer.us
Read the full story at www.cawnyc.com
VISIT OUR WEBSITE WWW.CAWNYC.COM FOR MORE IMMIGRATION NEWS & UPDATES
3
WELCOME TO AMERICA
Privacy Concerns Grow as Federal Immigration Agencies Use More Surveillance Technology BY MELISSA CRUZ
F
ederal immigration officials are beginning to expand their use of surveillance technology to collect information on immigrants. As officials gather more tools in their arsenal—from DNA collection to cell phone tracking devices—the privacy concerns also grow. The Trump administration proposed a new regulation on that intensified those concerns. The proposed regulation would authorize immigration officers to begin collecting DNA samples from people currently in detention facilities around the country and those crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. This would include people in detention who have not been charged with a crime, as well as people seeking asylum at legal ports of entry along the border. Those DNA samples would then be sent to a national criminal database with the FBI. Traditionally, this database has only stored information on people who have been arrested, charged, or convicted of serious crimes. Attorney General William Barr expects the FBI will receive an additional 748,000 DNA samples from the Department of Homeland Security each year. Until this regulation—set to take effect
20 days after its publication—immigration enforcement agencies were exempt from collecting DNA samples from people in their custody. Collecting DNA from all people held by the immigration enforcement agencies was considered impractical, as it is both time-consuming and a drain on agencies’ limited resources. Expanding the scope of the FBI database to include immigrants who have not been convicted of a federal crime could also distract from its purpose, says Vera Eidelman, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. “That kind of mass collection alters the purpose of DNA collection from one of criminal investigation to basically population surveillance, which is contrary to our basic notions of a free, trusting, autonomous society.” Eidelman notes this collection could also reach far beyond people who are detained. Because biometric samples contain family connections, the data from the DNA could have implications for family members who are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents. John Sandweg, the former Acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under President Obama, also cautions against
Editorial credit: Christopher Penler / Shutterstock.com
using this technology. “In many ways, it’s unnecessary from a law enforcement perspective. I don’t understand what you’re going to get out of it.” Utilizing the FBI’s advanced biometric database is not the only new way immigration enforcement officials are gathering information on immigrants. Recently, Univision reported that ICE agents in New York City were authorized to use a powerful surveillance tool called a “stingray” to track down a 33-year-old man who had re-entered the country without authorization. The stingray is a controversial surveillance device that intercepts cell phone traffic, acts as a fake cell phone tower to connect to all phones in the area, and then pinpoints the exact location of its target. The tool was initially developed for the military and intelligence community to
track down terrorists. But increasingly, it is being used by federal law enforcement and local police. This is the second time that journalists have raised the alarm about ICE using the tool. Per the agency’s internal rules, ICE agents cannot use a stingray during the course of civil immigration enforcement. They can, however, use the cell phone simulator to assist with criminal cases. Because this case involved an immigrant who had re-entered the United States after being deported—a criminal violation—ICE could use the stingray. Privacy experts warn that ICE’s use of this device is “fundamentally immigration enforcement” and only “couched in the language of criminal law enforcement” for the purpose of tracking someone for deportation. This is especially concerning since New York City declared itself a “sanctuary city” in 2014, in order to limit the city’s cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. These controversial surveillance technologies purposefully mix immigration enforcement with criminal law enforcement. They don’t make communities safer and have the potential to infringe on people’s rights, immigrant and nativeborn alike.l
VISIT OUR WEBSITE WWW.CAWNYC.COM FOR MORE IMMIGRATION NEWS & UPDATES
IMMIGRATION MATTERS
4
Investigation Demanded as Medical Care for Detained Immigrant Children Worsens BY KATY MURDZA
B
order Patrol agents placed a detained 9-year-old girl with a kidney disease at high risk of a urinary tract infection by not allowing her to shower or change her underwear for five days. Agents also denied a 3year-old medical care after she vomited 10 times in an hour. Agents failed to schedule a doctor’s appointment for a 2year-old with diarrhea so severe his desperate mother had to change his diaper every 15 minutes. Other Border Patrol agents told a family that no detained children will see a doctor unless they have a fever. Now, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—Border Patrol’s parent agency—is being held accountable for these and other accounts of inadequate medical care for children held in its custody. The American Immigration Council and American Immigration Lawyers Association filed an administrative complaint on Wednesday with the FBI and two oversight branches of the Department of Homeland Security calling attention to these incidents. The complaint includes excerpts from firsthand accounts of 200 asylum-seeking mothers about the inadequate care
they received while held in CBP facilities. Each mother was later transferred with her child from CBP custody to the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, Texas, where their statements were collected. Taken together, the testimonies show the consistent denial of medical care and unsafe conditions at CBP facilities: •67% of mothers stated that their child was not seen at all by a medical provider while in CBP custody, beyond a check for lice. •58% of the women who requested medical care for their child reported that they received no medical attention. •48% reported being detained with their child for longer than three days, in violation of CBP’s own guidelines. Parents frequently report sleeping on cement floors for days with 24-hour light
and noise. They often say their children’s health deteriorated in CBP custody without access to medical care, while they were forced to remain cold and wet with only thin mylar blankets. CBP has repeatedly failed to follow even the very low standards that currently regulate its detention conditions. The 1997 Flores Settlement Agreement requires that any facility holding children be “safe and sanitary,” but 22 years later, the government routinely violates its terms. In 2017, Federal Judge Dolly Gee determined that the government was violating the agreement by failing to provide children adequate food, water, and basic hygiene items. In August 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld this decision. In July 2019, DHS’ Office of the
Inspector General issued a management alert about “dangerous overcrowding” in the Rio Grande Valley Processing centers. The report revealed inadequate access to showers, changes of clothing, and hot meals; 31% of the children in the inspected facilities were there longer than 72 hours. The consequence of being held in these substandard conditions can be devastating for children. At least seven immigrant children have died in government custody since last year. According to Dr. Julie Linton, Co-chair of the Immigrant Health Special Interest Group at the American Academy of Pediatrics: “Children are not like adults. They get sick more quickly and each hour of delay can be associated with serious complications, especially in cases of infectious diseases. Delays can lead to death.” As the complaint demands, CBP must improve conditions and medical care in processing facilities. CBP agents who interact with children need to have child welfare experience. They should be trained to screen for medical issues and refer children to medical experts. Finally, all children should be released as quickly as possible, with an absolute maximum of 72 hours in CBP custody.l
VISIT OUR WEBSITE WWW.CAWNYC.COM FOR MORE IMMIGRATION NEWS & UPDATES