Dia de Oracion en Texas para SB1070 y Familias Inmigrantes

El Miercoles 25 de Abril, la Corte Suprema escuchara los argumentos sobre la dura ley anti-inmigrante de Arizona. El tribunal dictaminara sobre si esta ley es o no constitucional. Pero la gente de Fe, sabemos que lo que es inmoral no puede ser legal.

Esta ley ha separado a padres y madres de sus hijos y ha creado desconfianza y odio en las comunidades. Miles de Tejanos se uniran a millones de personas en todo el pais que oraran para que la Corte Suprema actue con sabiduria y compasion por las familias. Tambien oraremos por la sanacion de las familias y las comunidades que estan sufriendo en Arizona.

Se unira su congregacion
a este dia de oracion en todo el estado?
domingo, 22 de abril

Descargue el folleto aquí:

Day of Prayer for Immi Families Spanish

Texas Day of Prayer for SB1070 and Immigrant Families

On Wednesday, April 25, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on Arizona’s harsh anti-immigrant law.
The court will rule on whether or not the law is constitutional. But people of faith know that what is immoral cannot be legal.

This law has separated mothers and fathers from their children and created distrust and hate in neighborhoods. Thousands of Texans will join millions around the country to pray that the Supreme Court acts with wisdom and compassion. We also pray for healing in the families and neighborhoods who are suffering in Arizona.

Will your congregation join
the statewide day of prayer?
Sunday, April 22

Download the flyer here:
Day of Prayer for Immi Families English

DFW Defense Committee Aims to Educate Church and Community Leaders on Prosecutorial Discretion

(Dallas, TX) – An “Informational Forum on Prosecutorial Discretion” for church and community leaders will be held on Saturday, April 21, 2012 at the University of Texas at Arlington’s Texas Hall from 1:00-4:00pm. The forum will provide information that can help immigrant families in deportation cases. The event is expected to draw over 2,000 leaders from the Metroplex.

In response to the public’s need for more information about this little known process, Pastor Lynn Godsey, President of the Hispanic Evangelical Alliance of the Metroplex (AHEM for its Spanish initials), initiated the DFW Defense Team to inform faith-based and community leaders on how to assist families who may qualify for prosecutorial discretion in immigration detention cases. Co-charing the Defense Team is the statewide alliance RITA (Reform Immigration for Texas Alliance). RITA has helped to connect church and community leaders with non-profit agencies accredited by the Board of Immigration Appeals and with immigration attorneys.

Last summer, John Morton, Director of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a memorandum stating that the agency would begin to clear low-priority deportation cases from the system so that officials can focus on those individuals who actually pose a threat to our communities and national security. Known as the Morton Memorandum, the document identifies the factors agents must consider when applying “prosecutorial discretion” in cases of individuals caught in the deportation system. For example, immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children, and those with strong ties to family and community may have the opportunity to benefit from this discretion.

However, officials have failed to apply the Morton Memorandum universally or with a clear understanding about who can actually benefit.

DFW Defense Team Co-Chairs: Alianza Hispana Evangelica del Metroplex (AHEM) & Reform Immigration for Texas Alliance (RITA)

DFW Defense Team Members (Partial List): Baptist Immigration Center of McKinney, Baptist Immigration Center of Plano, Catholic Charities of Dallas, Cedillo-Pereira & Cedillo, P.L.L.C., Coalicion de Lideres Evangelicos de Texas (CLET), Dallas Peace Center, Embry Human Rights, SMU, Esperanza para America, ISAAC Project, Christian Life Commission, Jesucristo Es Mi Refugio (JEMIR), Law Office of Paul Zoltan, NDT/Reino Unido, Proyecto Inmigrante, ICS, Proyecto Inmigrante ICS, Pueblo Sin Fronteras, Southeast USA World Vision International, State Representative Rafael Anchia, State Representative Roberto Alonzo

Happy International Women’s Day: 10 Facts About Immigrant Women

Immigrant Women: Stewards of the 21st Century Family from New America Media on Vimeo.

Today marks the 101st International Women’s Day and a chance to reflect on the contributions of immigrant women in the U.S. Women make up the majority of all immigrants regardless of status, and they contribute more than you might know to U.S. families and economy. But they also face greater dangers at home and at work than you may realize.

Read more from the Center for American Progress‘ fact sheet on immigrant women:

1. The face of today’s immigration is more female than male. In 2010, 55 percent of all people obtaining a green card were women. Of these women 60 percent were already married, while the other 40 percent were single, widowed, or divorced. Women comprised 47 percent of all refugee arrivals and 53 percent of all people who naturalized to become a citizen.

2. This trend is decades in the making. Until the 1960s immigrant men outnumbered immigrant women. But after the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, which shifted the United States largely to a system of family-based admissions, more women began to arrive. By the 1970s the number of female immigrants caught up and surpassed their male counterparts. In 2010 there were 96 immigrant men arriving for every 100 immigrant women.

3. Immigrants live in families at a greater rate than native-born Americans. Among undocumented immigrants living in the United States today, 45 percent live in families comprised of couples and children. The percentage of legal immigrants living in families is 34 percent, but only 21 percent for native-born Americans.

4. Immigrant women embrace citizenship and encourage integration. According to 2009 public opinion research by New America Media, immigrant women from a broad range of countries are overwhelmingly the drivers of naturalization in their families, with 58 percent of respondents stating that they felt the strongest in their family about becoming an American citizen. Overall, 84 percent of the women surveyed want to become citizens, with a whopping 90 percent of female immigrants from Latin American and Arab nations indicating their desire to naturalize.

5. Immigrant women (like most) make enormous sacrifices for their families. New America Media found that only 13 percent of immigrant women work as professionals in the United States, even though 32 percent of them worked as such in their home country. The study concludes, “Women may well be putting devotion to the wellbeing of their families ahead of personal pride in choosing the journey to America.”

6. Immigrant female business owners outpace their American-born counterparts. In 2010, immigrant women comprised 40 percent of all immigrant business owners and 20 percent of women business owners in general. These women are now more likely to own their own business than American-born women (9 percent to 6.5 percent, respectively.)

But not all the news is rosy

7. Immigration enforcement is taking its toll on immigrant families. Rising deportations of undocumented immigrants are separating children from their parents. A 2011 report from the Applied Research Center found that more than 5,000 children living in foster care had parents who had been detained or deported from the United States. They estimate that another 15,000 children will end up in foster care in the next five years because of immigration enforcement.

8. Immigrant women workers are vulnerable to abuse at work. Immigrant women make up close to the entire population of domestic workers in major cities such as New York, with one study by Domestic Workers United finding that 33 percent of domestic workers in New York City experienced some form of physical or verbal abuse, often because of their race or immigration status.

9. They are also vulnerable to abuse at home. Domestic abuse affects immigrant and American-born women alike, but immigrant women suffer from particular vulnerabilities, particularly from abusive partners who use the woman’s immigration status to keep them from leaving an abusive marriage or relationship.

10. Human trafficking is another form of abuse endured by immigrant women and children. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that each year 50,000 people are trafficked into our nation. U.S. officials can grant up to 5,000 so-called “T” Visas to help free immigrant women forced into, among other things, the sex trade, but studies find that barely any are being granted. In 2010, for example, only 447 T Visas were approved.

Today’s Big Immigration News is Really A Small Change

(EL PASO, Texas) —Washington announced that it would be introducing a new process for certain  as they file for family unity waivers in the U.S.

And the headlines today painted the story of a huge shift in federal immigration policy.

But today’s rule change is actually minor and too limited in scope. The fact is, it’s just not enough in the face of a badly broken immigration system.

The government is changing a rule that has long been criticized for separating families and creating barriers to legal immigration — the 3- and 10-year bar rules. Going forward, some spouses and children of U.S. citizens who are in the green card application can wait out the long, bureaucratic process in the U.S., rather than traveling back to their home countries.

The system currently requires U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents to wade through a potentially dangerous bureaucratic nightmare to obtain lawful permanent resident status for their spouse or child.

First, applicants must file a visa petition and wait for an initial interview appointment. This requires the spouse or child of the sponsoring U.S. citizen to travel to a U.S. consulate in their home country to be interviewed.

The departure triggers a 3-or-10 year “bar” to re-entry to the U.S. for those applicants who are undocumented and who have been living in the U.S. for more than 6 months.

Families can apply to waive this bar, but their spouse or child must continue to wait in their home country. A decision on the waiver application can take up to a year. Meanwhile, families are separated and spouses and children are forced to wait in potentially dangerous situations until a waiver decision is made.

Imagine sending your loved one alone to a country ripped by violence, poverty or war as you wait for the government to act.

“This is definitely a big change for families who are facing the process, and it could save lives” said Adriana Cadena, statewide coordinator for the Reform Immigration for Texas Alliance. “But it doesn’t solve the problem or do anything for the millions of immigrant families living in the shadows.”

The new rules will likely save lives and resources and will keep a limited number of families together. But the rule change is small, limited and it is just not enough.

First of all, the change does not apply to the families of legal permanent residents, a large segment of the immigrant population. According to DHS, more than 1 million LPR’s were approved in 2010 alone.

True immigration reform that is compassionate and rational is the only way to deal with the immigration problem in the U.S.

Today’s announcement marks and important change. But the only true solution is an overhaul that removes such irrational barriers to legal immigration and deals humanely and sensibly with the millions of undocumented immigrants currently working in the U.S.

Why Don’t They Just Come Legally? Facts About Immigration And The 3- and 10-Year Bars

UPDATE: Want to print the infographic? By popular demand, you can download a PDF of the above graphic on on legal immigration by clicking here.

We have all heard it before: “Why don’t immigrants just come the legal way?” “Immigrants come to the U.S. and never even try to become citizens.” “Illegal is illegal.”

We have also heard time and time again that the immigration system is broken. But what does that really mean?

In a nutshell, it means the barriers to authorized immigration are so great, that it is nearly impossible to “do it the legal way.”

One of the reasons so many undocumented immigrants live for years in the U.S. without status are the 3- and 10-year bars, which prevent immigrants from being in the U.S. during their green card application process if they had previously been in the country without authorization.

—

The following article is re-posted in full from the Immigration Policy Center, a leading source of research and facts about U.S. immigration. You can also download it as a printable document by clicking here.

So Close and Yet So Far: How the Three- and Ten-Year Bars Keep Families Apart

Most Americans take it for granted that marriage to a U.S. citizen and other family relationships entitle an immigrant to a green card, but there are barriers that often prevent or delay these family members from becoming lawful permanent residents, even if they are already in the United States.  Among these barriers are the “three- and ten-year bars,” provisions of the law which prohibit applicants from returning to the United States if they were previously in the U.S. illegally. Thousands of people who qualify for green cards based on their relationships to U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident relatives leave the U.S. to obtain their green card are caught in a Catch-22—under current law they must leave the country to apply for their green card abroad, but as soon as they leave, they are immediately barred from re-entering the U.S. for three or ten years.

The Secretary of Homeland Security may waive the bar to admission if extreme hardship to a spouse or parent can be established.  But there are no waivers available for others, even if it would mean hardship for U.S. citizen children.  Unfortunately, current policies and interpretations of these provisions have made it difficult—and sometimes impossible—for many deserving applicants to obtain a waiver, especially if they initially entered the country illegally.  Under current DHS policy, applicants must apply for the waiver from abroad, sometimes waiting months or years in another country before they learn whether the waiver has been granted and whether they will be permitted to return to their loved ones in the United States.

In other words, immigrants who have a chance to legalize their status are not able to do so because of a combination of overly punitive immigration laws and the rigid interpretations of those laws currently followed by DHS and Department of State. Immigrants have to choose between leaving the country and taking the risk they might not be able to return, or remaining in the country illegally.  Where waivers are available, many of the immigrants most likely to be able to show extreme hardship are afraid to leave the country precisely because of that hardship.  For example, a wife with a disabled husband must choose between departing the United States to get right with the law or taking care of her U.S. citizen husband.

Many have argued that the process need not be so complicated or unforgiving and that changes in existing policy could allow for the consideration of waivers before the applicant departs the United States.  In order to understand how this issue affects the immigration debate, this IPC Fact Check provides background on the three- and ten-year bar issue.

What Are the Three- and Ten-Year Bars?

Sections 212(a)(9)(i) and 212 (a)(9)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) impose re-entry bars on immigrants who are present in the U.S. illegally for a period of time, leave the U.S., and want to re-enter lawfully.  An immigrant who enters the United States without inspection (illegally), or who overstays a period of admission by more than 180 days, but less than one year, and who then departs the U. S. voluntarily, is barred from being re-admitted or re-entering the United States for three years.  If an immigrant is in the country illegally for more than one year, a ten year bar to admission applies.

Who Must Leave the U.S. for a Green Card and Why?

U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may petition for green cards for certain family members.  Sometimes the immigrant family members are outside of the U.S. when the petition is filed and when the visa becomes available, and sometimes those family members are already residing within the U.S. while they wait for their petition to be adjudicated and their visa to become available.  Those in the U.S. may be here legally on a visa, or they may have come on a visa but that visa expired, or they may have entered the U.S. without proper documentation.

If the applicant for a family-based green card is the spouse, parent, or child under age 21 of a U.S. citizen (immediate relatives) AND if the applicant entered the U.S. with a valid visa (such as a visitor or student visa), that applicant may, in most cases, get their green cards in the U.S. through a process called “adjustment of status.”

However, all other people applying through the family-based system must go abroad and apply for their visa at a U.S. consulate in a procedure known as “consular processing.”    The adult children and siblings of U.S. citizens, as well as the spouses and children of legal permanent residents, must leave the country to get their green cards, whether they initially entered on a legal visa or not.

Are Waivers of the Three- and Ten-year Bars Available?

A waiver of the three- or ten-year bar is available only where extreme hardship to an applicant’s citizen or permanent resident spouse or parent can be established.  Hardship to the immigrant himself is not a factor, and hardship to the immigrant’s children is not a factor (even if the children are U.S. citizens).

The current system for processing and adjudicating these waiver requests requires immigrants to leave the U.S. and receive a formal determination of inadmissibility by a U.S. consular officer before a waiver application can even be submitted. Then the immigrants must apply for waivers of the three- or ten-year bar from outside the United States. In Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, one of the busiest consulates handling green card applications and waivers, there is currently a two to three month wait between submitting an application to the State Department and receiving a waiver interview with a USCIS representative.  Approximately half of those applications can be decided immediately while the rest are sent to the United States for further review; the waiting time for that review can vary significantly, but averages at least another twelve months.  Of course, not all waivers are granted, and those immigrants may not reunite with their family members for years. An appeal of a denied waiver can take up to 28 months or longer before the Administrative Appeals Offices adjudicates the appeal. This means longer periods of separation for family members.

What is wrong with the waiver process?

The current process is filled with inefficiencies and uncertainties.  It prevents a portion of the unauthorized population from getting legal status.  It breaks up families—often for a prolonged period of time.  It also exposes thousands of people to violence and danger because most waivers are filed in Ciudad Juarez (approximately 75% of the 22,000 I-601 waivers filed in 2009 were processed through Ciudad Juarez), a consulate located along the U.S.-Mexico border.  The city is wracked by drug violence, and the Department of State has issued travel advisories urging citizens to avoid Ciudad Juarez.

Other critical weaknesses in the system include:

• Requiring adjudication of the I-601 waiver only AFTER departure from the United States.  The three- and ten-year bars to admissibility take effect only after an individual has left the United States.  But USCIS officers may not consider waiver applications while an individual is in the U.S.—even if available evidence clearly establishes that departure from the United States will, in fact, make a waiver application necessary.

• Processing delays even in the best of circumstances.  Approximately 49% of waivers are adjudicated and granted within seven days at Ciudad Juarez.  The rest have to remain in Mexico for up to 12 months or until the waiver is approved.  Overseas processing is enormously complicated and bureaucratic.  An applicant must first meet with a consular officer from the Department of State (DOS), be told that a waiver is required, wait for the case to be referred, obtain and wait for the appointment with USCIS, wait for the adjudication, and then get a new appointment with DOS if the adjudication is granted.  Current wait times for the initial appointment with USCIS are 2 to 3 months, meaning that even under the best of circumstances, an applicant will have to be outside the U.S. for at least 3 months.

• Uneven application of the extreme hardship standard.   Extreme hardship in the waiver context is determined by an analysis of the totality of the circumstances affecting the U.S. citizen or permanent resident relative who filed the petition.  Over the years, case law has led to a series of generally considered factors, including family ties, age, health, financial impact and country conditions.  Because the standard is subjective, it is open to a wide range of interpretations, making it difficult for applicants to know what materials or arguments should be submitted. This can extend the process significantly if you don’t “get it right” the first time the waiver is submitted.

• Inefficiency and high costs.  Posting additional U.S. officers overseas to adjudicate cases and shuttling applications for waivers between agencies costs the government money and time.   The State Department currently charges USCIS $131 simply to receive and transfer each application for a waiver to USCIS.

What can be done?

• Repeal three- and ten-year bars.  Congress can repeal the portions of the INA that created the bars in 1996, and this would eliminate the catch-22 inherent in obtaining a green card.

• Allow applicants who entered as minors to adjust status within the U.S.  Immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors were often brought by their parents, due to no fault of their own.  They may never have visited the country of their birth, have no support networks there, and may not even speak the language.  These applicants should not be forced to return to a country they do not know and face the possibility of separation from their family members.

• Adjudicate hardship waivers in the U.S.  It is possible to create a process that would minimize the length of time an immigrant would have to spend outside the U.S. and minimize the risk of being barred from re-entry.  Hardship waivers could be processed in the U.S.  Once the I-130 petition for a green card has been approved, the applicant could submit a hardship waiver application for pre-adjudication.  USCIS could review, request additional evidence, and issue a recommended approval that would be transmitted to DOS for final adjudication.  That way, when the immigrant leaves the U.S. to go to the consulate, he would already know whether the hardship waiver has been conditionally approved.

• Expand guidance on the extreme hardship standard.   USCIS is already engaged in a review of the extreme hardship standard based on complaints that it is not consistently applied.  The agency should share the results of that review and solicit public feedback and comment and should then establish clear guidelines for making extreme hardship decisions.  Centralizing all waiver adjudications within the U.S. could have the added benefit of ensuring greater quality control and a more consistent standard, especially if waiver adjudications were consolidated into a special unit within USCIS.

Conclusion

Critics of the three- and ten-year bar find the penalties themselves unnecessarily harsh, but the existence of a waiver for spouses and children means that many families can be re-united.  The real issue involves the ease with which waivers can be processed.  While there may be disputes about how far the agency can go to address the impractical and harsh consequences of the three-and-ten-year bar, numerous legal experts believe that the agency has the authority to determine waiver requests while the applicant is still within the United States.  Taking this action promotes both family unity and government efficiency.

Revisiting current interpretations of laws like the three- and ten-year bars will not change the need for comprehensive immigration reform, but it will allow more people who are already eligible to obtain a green card the chance to do so without undermining existing laws.

BREAKING: Feds Say Sheriff Joe Violated Latinos’ Civil Rights

Today, the U.S. Department of Justice released the results of a three-year investigation into Maricopa Sheriff Joe Arpaio‘s department, saying the department has a deeply rooted culture of bias and discrimination and routinely violates Latinos civil rights.

Read the statement from the U.S. Department of Justice here.