Mediaboss Marketing

Texas Governor Greg Abbott had all the right optics for rallying the Republican faithful to his anti-immigrant campaign: On June 30, Sean Hannity brought his Fox TV show to Hidalgo County, on Texass southern border, for a town hall with Donald Trump.

Onstage with Trump, Abbott said were going to start arresting people, putting people behind bars, putting them in jail, not giving them the red-carpet treatment the Biden Administration has been giving them.

Abbott, who has called for continuing work on former President Donald Trumps border wall, is misusing a Texas law, intended for natural catastrophes, to invoke extraordinary powers and portray immigrants seeking safe haven as a disaster.

Resistance to Abbotts plan was readily apparent at a community town hall meeting in Hidalgo the morning of the Trump visit.

The crisis that does exist at our border is that we are constantly used as a scapegoat, deprived of necessary resources to aid our historically and systematically disenfranchised community and denied justice, said Roger Ramirez of the Laredo Immigrant Alliance.

The Youre Both Fired! banner behind the podium, along with chants of S se puede, left little doubt as to the prevailing sentiment.Abbott is trying to step into the shoes of Trump, said Laura Pea of the Texas Civil Rights Project. And we say no.

The Biden Administration, while rescinding many of Trumps repressive anti-immigrant policies, continues to expel most asylum seekers at the border. Thats a big mistake and an injustice.

Although its unclear what the impact of Abbotts antics will be, he is clearly attempting to throw a wrench into any efforts to move the Southern border in a humane direction.

What Abbott is doing is trying to cause a crisis where one hadnt existed, Robert Heyman, a policy consultant with the El Paso-based Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, tells The Progressive.

Abbott, who is up for re-election next year as well as being considered a likely presidential contender in 2024, launched Operation Lone Star in early March. He teamed up with the Texas Department of Public Safety to surge the resources and law enforcement personnel needed to confront this crisis.

The broad sweep of Abbotts plans became apparent in his May 31 disaster declaration directing state troopers to apply federal and state laws in assisting Texas counties. This includes arresting undocumented immigrants on state trespassing charges.

Abbotts declaration also commits to providing jail space for those arrested, and he has emptied a state prison, the Dolph Briscoe Unit in Dilley, so it can be used to incarcerate immigrants.

Whats more, his declaration instructs fifty-six state-licensed shelters to stop housing more than 4,000 unaccompanied children by the end of Augustor lose their licenses.

Abbotts attempt to commandeer border policya federal responsibilityalso includes diverting $250 million from state spending for border wall construction as well as collecting private donations to do the same.

He has turned to the Texas Disaster Act of 1975 to hype his anti-immigrant campaign and grant him additional powers. This law, for example, provides stiffer penalties for such offenses as trespassing in disaster counties. Even without the enhanced penalties, a trespassing conviction can land an undocumented immigrant 180 days in prison and a fine of $2,000.

Hes taking a law intended for natural disaster and he is twisting it to set his own immigration policy, Texas ACLU lawyer Kate Huddleston tells The Progressive.

Huddleston coauthored a June 24 letter to officials of the thirty-four Texas counties that Abbott wanted to participate in his disaster ploy. It warned that taking part in Abbotts unilateral efforts to set federal immigration policy and enforce federal immigration law could put them in violation the Constitution and federal law.

Texas law enforcement has continued to hand over many undocumented immigrants to Border Patrol, but Abbotts declaration allows the use of state law to jail them on minor charges. Any consideration that they might want asylum is not in the cards.

Where would the children of undocumented immigrants go if their parents are in an adult prison for trespassing?

Meanwhile, GOP stalwarts are rallying to Abbotts side. Six Republican governors are sending law enforcement officers to the border as a way to bolster Abbotts anti-immigrant campaign. In a step toward mercenaries for hire, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem enlisted the Tennessee foundation of a Republican mega-donor to cover the costs of dispatching a contingent of her states National Guard to Texas.

Local and state police, in Texas and elsewhere, have long collaborated with Border Patrol in enforcement. But Abbott wants enforcement with a Trumpian mindset.

On June 28, two days before Trumps visit to the Southern border, Abbotts office updated its list of counties that have declared a disaster and agreed to partner with the state to arrest and detain people for crimes related to the border crisis.

The list of participating counties is now down to twenty-eightsix fewer than a month before. Among those dropped are Hidalgo and neighboring hot spot counties in the lower Rio Grande Valley.

Hidalgo County Judge Richard Cortez, the countys top administrator, spelled out his concerns in a June 1 release that says: In speaking to local law enforcement, they have not reported levels of criminal activity that would require a disaster declaration. He also urges comprehensive immigration reform and reopening ports of entry at the Southern border.

Resistance to Abbott has been spearheaded by La Unin del Pueblo Entero. Founded by Csar Chvez and Dolores Huerta, LUPE organizes immigrant communities. It is pushing for such basic infrastructure spending as paved roads and street lighting.

We want the world to see us as ambassadors of the border because we want to change the narrative of people seeing us as criminals, LUPE organizer Raquel Chavez tells The Progressive.

The plight of immigrants, she adds, must be seen through a humane lens, which dispels the image of the United States as a nation filled with hate.

Jos, a forty-eight-year-old undocumented immigrant from Mexico living near the border, echoes these concerns.

The governor should stop playing with peoples lives, says Jos, who has lived in the United States for three decades. At the end of the day, we are the ones affected by his decisions and what he is doing does not benefit us.

In early June, grassroots opposition to Abbotts agenda crystallized with A Proclamation by the People of the Ro Grande Valley. Denouncing Abbotts disastrous leadership, the document describes him as a governor who shames and blames Black, brown and working-class communities who have struggled to work, feed their families, and secure healthcare during the pandemic.

Abbottpure and simplewants to treat asylum seekers as criminals. His approach is in stark contrast to the efforts of many localities and states to break ties with the draconian practices of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol.

Abbotts brand of zero tolerancearresting immigrants whenever possiblewould likely result in a new round of family separations. Where would the children of undocumented immigrants go if their parents are in an adult prison for trespassing?

I am assuming Governor Abbott wants to be the next Arpaio, says South Texas Human Rights Center Director Eduardo Canales, referring to the reign of former Sheriff Joe Apaio in the Phoenix area known for his anti-immigrant policies.

As Abbotts plans take shape, the bigger police presence at the border has already taken a toll.

Were working with different organizations trying to bring resources down here in Laredo, says Ilse Mendez Fraga, an organizer with Laredo Immigrant Alliance.We dont have a lot of lawyers to help out with immigration.

Even though the thirty-four-year-old Mendez is now protected by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, and her four children are U.S. citizens, she avoids highways and a nearby park, where Border Patrol agents are frequently found.

Since Trump, since Abbott, I dont feel safe, says Mendez.

See original here:
Governor Abbott's Zero Tolerance on Immigration - Progressive.org - Progressive.org

As Congress debates the merits of President Joe Bidens American Jobs Plan, senior care experts are laying the groundwork for why home-based care provisions should be included in it and why even more needs to be done after.

Specifically, that home-based care provision is $400 billion to fund home- and community-based services. That influx of cash would theoretically help build out a more steadfast caregiver workforce in the U.S.

As the provision is weighed, the advocacy organization LeadingAge has released a report on six strategies it has developed alongside its research partners to improve long-term care. Those strategies include increased compensation for direct care professionals, more training, extending the caregiver pipeline and more.

Care workers like nursing assistants, personal care aides and home health aides are the heart of aging services, Katie Smith Sloan, the president and CEO of LeadingAge, said in a press release. The COVID pandemic shed new light on how valuable these professionals are, but also made clear that America does not have the infrastructure for aging services that we need. This vision sets out a path toward the sustainable, reimagined workforce of professional caregivers that our nation needs to ensure better care for millions of older Americans.

Washington, D.C.-based LeadingAge represents nonprofit home-based care agencies and other aging services providers. Researchers from LeadingAge Long-Term Services and Supports (LTSS) Center at UMass Boston aided the effort to design the strategies published in the report.

In addition to the three previously noted strategies, the others in the report are facilitating career advancement, preparing universal workers and reforming the LTSS financing system.

Professional caregivers provide support to 20 million older adults, but many more are needed as the number of older Americans surges, Robyn Stone, the SVP of research at LeadingAge and co-director of the LeadingAge LTSS Center at UMass Boston, said in the press release. Filling these openings with qualified caregivers depends on our ability to professionalize the direct caregiver workforce.

Direct care workers are not treated or compensated as professionals, the report argues. Taking these six steps would create a direct care workforce that is professionalized.

In order to expand the pipeline of caregivers, two things need to happen, according to LeadingAge: nontraditional workers need to be recruited into the field and immigration policies need to be altered to increase the amount of foreign workers available.

Nontraditional workers are individuals that historically would not be thought of as direct care workers, such as high school students, displaced workers from other fields and retirees who still want to work.

Immigrants already make up a significant percentage of caregivers in the U.S., but considering the need, immigration reform needs to take place, the report suggests. Oftentimes, immigrants who may be undocumented are fearful of backlash if they enter the field.

Enhancing education and training for professional caregivers has also been a need for a long time. When caregivers are trained in a more specific way, they enjoy their jobs more and provide better patient outcomes.

Training and education leads to better patient and caregiver satisfaction, both of which should be goals for any agency.

LeadingAge also believes that caregivers should be able to view their profession as more of a career than just a job. Allowing them to become condition-specific specialists or take on more advanced roles as they get more experienced is a way to do that.

Ideally, that would come with increased compensation as well, which is another one of the pillars of LeadingAges vision for the future of LTSS.

And while specificity is a way to create careers, creating universal workers is another way to mitigate the shortage. More caregivers being able to work in nursing homes, assisted living communities and home- and community-based settings would create a workforce thats ready for the future of health care in the country, according to the report.

Finally, LeadingAge believes that reform to the financing system in LTSS is due.

Relying only on Medicaid is not a feasible path forward, and thus, alternate funding sources should be explored. Workers in the state of Washington, for example, will soon be paying a small tax that ensures they will be able to pay for adequate senior care when and if they do need it.

See the article here:
6 Ways to Combat the Workforce Crisis in Home-Based Care - Home Health Care News

June is National Immigrant Heritage month in the United States and Voces de la Frontera is supporting actions that will stand out and make voices of immigrants heard and are ready to fight and march in the name of comprehensive reform. Sunday, June 20 saw the kickoff to a march that will continue for nine days, building up to a statewide rally at the Capitol in Madison on Monday, June 28.

They 90+ mile march from Milwaukee to Madison is meant to pressure the Biden administration and Democrats in Congress to pass a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented immigrants, many of them essential workers, in the United States.

The march honors Fathers Day, the date when it began. Eduardo Perea Hernandez, son of essential workers in Milwaukee who will be marching all nine days, said, My parents have worked hard for 30 years to provide for me and my three siblings. My father works in construction and has helped build critical infrastructure all over the state.Congress passing citizenship for all would mean that my family would feel safe, and allow my parents to gain access to healthcare, earn dignified wages and the ability to retire eventually.

Their sacrifices have allowed my older sister and I to graduate from college, and also allowed me to earn a master's degree. My family, and the 11 million immigrants who are undocumented, deserve to live with peace, tranquility and dignity. We need President Biden and Congress to pass citizenship for all now.

This marks the most ambitious march to date organized by Voces de la Frontera, who are responsible for providing record turnouts in Milwaukee, particularly for the May Day march and the Day without Latinx rallies. Guadalupe Romero, immigrant essential worker in the food service industry, said: Ive been contributing to this economy for 31 years as an essential worker, and for those 31 years Ive been living in fear. As the mother of six children, Ive felt afraid every time I drive them to school or to the doctorall because I dont have access to a driver's license. Im an essential worker and Im necessary to this nation. Immigrant essential workers have been fighting for our dignity for decades, and our time is now.

LEARN MORE

The Biden administration spoke of a path to citizenship as a campaign promise. The proposal, unveiled by Democrats on Capitol Hill, offers an eight-year path to citizenship for most of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, and eliminates restrictions on family-based immigration and expands worker visas.

Milwaukee Alderman Jose Perez, who marched alongside immigrant essential workers on Sunday, said, We need our elected representatives in Washington and President Biden to prioritize comprehensive immigration reform. Its been 35 years since Congress has passed any comprehensive immigration legislation, and our community has waited too long and sacrificed too much. We can only build back better if we do it together, and that means all of usDreamers, TPS holders, their families, electeds. Weve heard enough excuses. Its time for Congress to act.

Read the original here:
March for Immigration Reform Has Begun - Shepherd Express

As Christians we hold fast to the wisdom our scripture puts before us. Leviticus 19:33-34 states: When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

We hold this as a foundational moral truth to our call to seek justice for our immigrant neighbors.

We are happy to celebrate Immigrant Heritage Month this June. Since 2014, this month has encouraged us to share the stories of our manifold cultural roots and appreciate the ways in which diversity enriches our country and our local communities.

While this month is a time to celebrate and rejoice, it also marks two anniversaries that remind us of the ways in which our immigration system needs reform. June 15 marked nine years since the creation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. DACA offers two-year renewable residency permits to approximately 700,000 undocumented young adults brought to the United States as children, also known as Dreamers.

Despite the fact that DACA protects young people who had no choice in coming here and know no other home but America, President Trump abruptly terminated the program in 2017. June 18 marked one year since the Supreme Court ruled that his termination of DACA was unlawful, but the program remains vulnerable to continued legal challenges.

The anniversaries of June 15 and June 18 highlight why we must pass the bipartisan DREAM Act to help the two million Dreamers currently working and attending school in the United States. The DREAM Act would allow Dreamers to become American citizens so long as they do not have a criminal record and have obtained a high school diploma/GED.

Citizenship for Dreamers makes common sense: they pay taxes, create jobs, and even serve in our military, yet they receive none of the benefits and stability that U.S. citizenship provides. Even as they live in fear of deportation every day, Dreamers are integral members of their communities who add tremendous value to our country and economy.

The DREAM Act is one of the few immigration bills that has strong bipartisan support. According to recent surveys, 75 percent of American voters agree that Dreamers should be allowed to remain in the United States while they work and/or attend school and that they deserve a pathway to citizenship.

Our current immigration system is one that facilitates the separation of families and embeds the fear of deportation into young undocumented immigrants. Passing the DREAM Act will promote the mission of Immigrant Heritage Month and help steer our immigration system in the right direction.

While we celebrate the many diversities of the American people, let us also take action and invite Dreamers into our celebration. The DREAM Act is one piece of legislation that cannot wait any longer, as it stands to protect a deserving group of young people while also helping our nations economy as we recover from the pandemic.

Here in Maine this would have a positive impact on our significant immigrant population, and in fact to all Mainers. In Maine alone, we are 16,000 workers short in the hospitality industry. To give young people a path to citizenship provides access and stability for young immigrants to fully participate as members of our society.

These are the reasons we need senators on both sides of the aisle to come together and bring the DREAM Act to fruition. Let us remember that we were all once aliens in the land, and that we are called to treat the stranger as our neighbor and to love them as ourselves.

Special to the Press Herald

Invalid username/password.

Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

Previous

Go here to read the rest:
Maine Voices: Citizenship for Dreamers is an overdue immigration reform - Press Herald

It may be hard to imagine, but prior to 1986 it was not illegal for an employer to hire an undocumented worker. All of that changed with the enactment of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA). In addition to requiring employers to verify the work eligibility for all employees, IRCA's antidiscrimination provisions prohibit an employer from discriminating in hiring or firing on the basis of an individual's citizenship status or national origin.

The pre-employment process is wide open with traps for an employer to inadvertently run afoul of antidiscrimination provisions under IRCA. One issue that is particularly tricky, and perhaps not given enough attention, is what an employer is and is not allowed to request from a foreign national candidate seeking employment. On one hand, it is impossible to properly assess eligibility for applicable nonimmigrant work authorization options without knowing the individuals complete immigration history. On the other hand, an employer needs to be mindful of not stumbling into a citizenship status or national origin discrimination claim. How does an employer properly walk this fine line?

I. Antidiscrimination Provisions

We must first understand the antidiscrimination provisions under IRCA. Section 274B(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) reads that it is an unfair immigration-related employment practice for an employer to discriminate against any individual with respect to hiring, recruiting, or discharging the individual because of his/her citizenship status or national origin. Citizenship status includes an individuals immigration status.

However, the INAs antidiscrimination provisions for citizenship discrimination only apply to protected individuals under the law, which includes (1) U.S. citizens and nationals; (2) lawful permanent residents (green card); (3) refugees; and (4) asylees. These citizenship discrimination provisions therefore do not apply to foreign nationals in nonimmigrant status.

While nonimmigrants are not a protected class of individuals for citizenship discrimination, employers still need to be mindful that nonimmigrants could claim national origin discrimination if they believe the decision not to hire them was based on country of origin, accent or appearance. National origin discrimination applies to treating individuals differently because of place of birth, country of origin, ancestry, native language, accent or because they look foreign.

II. How Should Employers Juggle These Considerations?

An employer is not required to hire a foreign national who requires sponsorship for non-immigrant work authorization. But how does an employer inquire about work authorization status without worrying about engaging in citizenship or national origin discrimination?

Thankfully, the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) provides some cover and helpful guidance on what initial inquiries are allowed. OSC confirms that employers may ask these three questions during the pre-employment process:

It is important to note that these three questions are an all or nothing proposition. If you ask one, you need to ask all three.

The responses to these three questions may elucidate information that the individual is a foreign national who will require sponsorship. In fact, in many cases, even without these three questions, a foreign national candidate will be very up front with their immigration status and volunteer information about their sponsorship needs. An employers next consideration is how to proceed with this knowledge. Is it safe to request documentation regarding their immigration history or should that be deferred until after the offer of employment has been officially accepted?

There is no explicit right or wrong answer to that question. Some employers may choose to not ask any related work authorization questions during the pre-employment process, while others will only ask the three questions above provided by the OSC. Still others are comfortable with requesting immigration history information from a foreign national in nonimmigrant status.

Interestingly, since nonimmigrants are not protected under INA antidiscrimination provisions, requesting certain documentation and or deciding not to hire a nonimmigrant based on the sponsorship requirement would not violate antidiscrimination provisions. The OSC confirms this by writing:

Accordingly, an employer that asks all of its job applicants whether they will require sponsorship now or in the future and refuses to hire those who require sponsorship would likely not violate 8 U.S.C. 1324b. Similarly, an employer that asks questions designed to prefer certain classes of nonimmigrant visa holders (e.g. STEM OPT students) over other classes of nonimmigrant visa holders is unlikely to violate the INAs prohibition against citizenship status discrimination.

Therefore, if the individual volunteers information about their nonimmigrant status or the initial three questions approved by the OSC trigger a confirmation that an individual is a foreign national nonimmigrant who requires sponsorship (e.g. H-1B), an employer may request documentation relating to the individuals H-1B eligibility without violating citizenship status discrimination provisions. They may wish to do so before making an offer, while other employers defer this analysis until after the offer and risk the scenario of having to rescind the offer.

While those in nonimmigrant status are not a protected class under citizenship discrimination provisions, an employer still needs to be careful about those in a protected class or engaging in national origin discrimination.

For example, OSC cautions against requesting certain documentation and engaging in citizenship discrimination against a protected class of individual. It writes:

However, asking job applicants detailed questions about their immigration or citizenship status may deter individuals who are protected from citizenship discrimination, such as refugees and asylees, from applying due to a misunderstanding about their eligibility for the position. Therefore, we caution employers against asking detailed questions pertaining to status that may lead to such confusion.

Again, while nonimmigrants are not a protected class under citizenship discrimination, national origin discrimination is still a concern. OSC confirms that all work-authorized individuals are protected from national origin discrimination under the antidiscrimination provision. Accordingly, individuals who believe that they were not hired based on national originfor example, their country of origin, accent or appearancemay allege discrimination on this basis.

III. No Really How Should Employers Juggle These Considerations?

These can be slippery concepts and trying to forge a policy to cover every scenario can feel overwhelming. There are some simple steps to consider:

Read the original here:
Avoiding Citizenship and National Origin DiscriminationThe Tricky Analysis Surrounding What Employers May Request from Foreign National Candidates...