Mediaboss Marketing

This week'sOpinion article by Representatives Goodlatte and Labrador begins: One of the most important aspects of immigration reform is bolstering enforcement of existing immigration law. I and other immigration reformers agree with that statement, as far as it goes. The article then tries to make the case for legislation being marked up in the House Judiciary Committee, the Davis-Oliver Act. This proposed legislation doubles down on the enforcement-only strategy for immigration control first tried in California in Proposition 187 and enacted at the federal level twenty years ago. Lest we Republicans forget, the result of the first experiment was twenty years of Democrat dominance of state politics in California, and of the second was 11 million undocumented immigrants, two-thirds of whom have lived in the United States for at least 10 years.

Representatives Goodlatte and Labrador acknowledge at the outset that most unlawful immigrants come to the U.S. seeking a better life for themselves and their families. Their bill, however, does not deal with the reality created by the 1996 enforcement bill signed by President Clinton: for those who wish to immigrate legally, most paths to legal status were closed off, even if they were desirable immigrants who worked hard, payed taxes and supported U.S. citizen families. The authors of the 1996 closed off loopholes that were actually important safety valves in the immigration system. From the 1950s to 1996, for example, the law recognized that long-term illegal residents who had US family members that would suffer hardship if they were deported should be given legal status. The 1996 massively restricted the discretion of immigration officers and judges. The end result is millions of people in the United States who pay taxes and have families here, but who have no way to get legal because of the 1996 law.

Communities around the heartland are now getting a crash course in the consequences of the 1996 law. In Granger, Indiana, a woman who voted for Trump saw her husband detained and removed from the United States by ICE. Provisions of the 1996 law prevented her familys lawyers from getting her petition on his behalf considered. In Beaver, West Virginia, three men one married to a local woman and in the country for 20 years were detained for removal. By the time these detentions take place, it is likely too late for US citizen relatives to do anything for their loved ones.

The Davis-Oliver Act does nothing to try to help sort out the situation of these US families, or of other immigrants like those brought by their parents to the US at a young age, now grown up in the US but without status. Congress could address our outdated system to provide a path to legal status for people like medical students, servicemembers, and entrepreneurs brought here illegally through no fault of their own.

The House Judiciary Committees bill tries to ratchet up the failed promise of the 1996 Act: if only taxpayers spend even more money, allow even more incarceration, and permit assault-rifle-wielding federal officers in their communities, that people from other countries who share our values and have contributed to our country will no longer want to stay here. The Davis-Oliver Act would add 12,000 officers to the federal payroll and mandate arming them with assault rifles, nearly doubling the size of the largest armed police force in the federal government. It would increase detention mandates and enrich the private prison industry with further taxpayer millions. It would mandate that states and localities spend their resources to do the federal governments job, violating the Tenth Amendment more extremely than the Brady gun control bill that was struck down by the Supreme Court. It would also criminalize all immigration violations, a provision rejected by the Senate in 2005.

DHS Secretary Kelly recently stated that DHS has already substantially reduced illegal immigration merely by executing the laws Congress has already enacted. ICE has all the legal tools it needs to round up criminals, as well as immigrants whose only violation was to come seeking to become American. The real tools Congress needs to provide are paths back to legal status for those given no options by our outdated immigration system. Congress needs to provide that path to the majority of hardworking, honest immigrants who just want the chance to continue contributing economically to our country. Enforcement resources can then be focused on real dangers to our communities.

William A. Stock is an attorney and president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Here is the original post:
Our immigration mess needs real solutions not militarized enforcement - Fox News

The question of sanctuary cities is a topic charged with emotion as the controversy has come to a head with the U.S. Justice Department demanding the cooperation of local law enforcement agencies in enforcing federal immigration laws. Sanctuary cities are those local jurisdictions that have taken a formal stand in refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities under any circumstances.

They are constitutionally correct in that the federal government cannot compel them to enforce federal laws but the federal government does have the discretion to withhold federal funds, particularly in the form of law enforcement-related grants, to these self-proclaimed sanctuaries.

The argument, from a federal perspective, is not only about enforcing immigration laws but public safety by deporting those with violent histories who are illegally in the United States. No doubt, local law enforcement resources are limited and they should not be expected to do the job of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials in ascertaining the immigration status of its residents but when it comes to public safety, they should do what they legally can do to cooperate with ICE.

However, the debate over sanctuary cities is misplaced and ignores the broader question of the need to fix our broken immigration system. Sanctuary cities are only a symptom of a much broader problem brought about by current immigration policies.

No doubt, we need to have secure borders and have rational immigration laws that are uniformly and strictly enforced. I believe that there should be zero tolerance for illegal immigration but I also know that immigration laws have either been completely ignored or selectively enforced for decades. For example, in November 2016, PEW Research published a study that estimated that one out of twenty workers, or 140,000, in the State of Colorado are here illegally.

The magnet for illegal immigration is the ability to find work in the United States. The best way to stop illegal immigration is less about building a wall than simply by mandating an E-Verify system on all employers, with stiff penalties for those who violate the law, to remove the incentive to come to the United States illegally to find work.

Today, only businesses with federal contracts are required to verify the legal status of their workers. Immigration reform must include an effective and efficient federally-mandated E-Verify system for all employers.

In fact, given that illegal crossings on our southern border have dropped to record low numbers, the majority of illegal immigration is now from visa overstays. This is when someone has a visa to come to the United States temporarily (i.e. a tourist visa) but never leaves.

There are no tracking and enforcement mechanisms in place when a visa holder is in the country beyond the expiration of their visa. Reforming our immigration system must include tracking visa overstays to make sure that they leave the country when their visas expire.

However, to get to a system of zero tolerance for illegal immigration will require a recognition that we have had immigrants who have lived illegally in the United States for most of their adult lives and that most have not violated laws other than immigration-related ones.

I believe that before we move to a system that strictly enforces the immigration changes that we agree to, we must be realistic in recognizing the need for a transitional period for those who have been residing in the United States illegally and give them a limited window of opportunity to come out of the shadows, undergo a criminal background check, pay a fine for having violated our immigration laws, and then be allowed to remain in the United States with a legal status that removes the fear of deportation and allows them to freely live and work in this country.

Unlike the adults who came illegally, who knowingly broke U.S immigration laws, there are many young people living in the United States who were taken to this country, illegally, when they were children.

They grew up here, went to school here, and often know of no other country besides the United States. They should also be allowed to remain in the United States but have a clear path to citizenship based on military service, work history, or through their education.

Sanctuary cites are only a symptom of a greater problem that requires fixing our broken immigration system and I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, to get the job done.

U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman represents Aurora and the 6th Congressional District.

Link:
COFFMAN: Sanctuary cities and the need for immigration reform - Aurora Sentinel

May 18, 2017 by Kristen De Pea and Matthew La Corte

Congress has proven unable to fix our outdated and ineffective immigration system for decades. As the issue of immigration becomes increasingly divisive in this country, it is paramount that Congress prioritizes its repair.

Instead of focusing on some of the largest and most controversial aspects of immigration policylike building a border wallfocusing on narrow, pragmatic, and incremental immigration reforms that transcend partisan politicking is a good first step to reform.

To this end, the Niskanen Center authored a list of 20 smaller changes toimprove the way our country manages immigration policy. All lawmakers can find at least one reform to champion. The 20 reforms outlined in this paper provide a blueprint for a productive start to that process. We explore pragmatic fixes to legal immigration processes, simplifications of our humanitarian immigration system, and improvements to the cost effectiveness ofvarious immigration channels.

Clickhereto view the report.

The rest is here:
Immigration Reform Catalog: 20 Changes To Improve U.S. ... - Niskanen Center (press release) (blog)

Brooklyn, N.Y.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark said he led a rally in support of Mexican immigrant Catalino Guerrero, who was threatened with possible deportation in March, because as a Christian he believes that "God has shared his solidarity with every human situation" through the example of Jesus.

Standing with those threatened with deportation "puts a face on people who are frequently dehumanized," he told hundreds of Catholic journalists and media professionals gathered for the annual World Communications Day sponsored by the Diocese of Brooklyn's De Sales Media Group May 17.

Tobin, a member of the Redemptorist community who was named Newark cardinal by Pope Francis last November, criticized media portrayals of immigrants that exploit "fear-based news" which highlights violent criminals.

"Fear cannot have the final word," he said.

Tobin criticized President Donald Trump and the Republicans in Congress, who he said have the power to enact an immigration reform that would provide a path for citizenship for people like Guerrero, a 59-year-old father of four and grandfather of four. He is a resident of Union City, New Jersey, and has diabetes.

"You have to believe they are inflicting cruelty on innocent people," he said. "Congress and the president could pass comprehensive immigration reform tomorrow if they wanted to. They could bring 12 million people out of the shadows if they wanted to," he said.

He acknowledged that his support for Guerrero, who entered the United States from Mexico in 1991, was made more powerful by his position as Newark's new cardinal. But he emphasized that it was a stance he took as a parish priest in Chicago and his native Detroit. Tobin challenged other church leaders and politicians to do the same. Guerrero, who has never been charged with a criminal offense other than violating immigration laws, was granted a year's reprieve from deportation.

Standing in public support of Guerrero, said Tobin, was "a symbol that communicates hope, that the church does not live in an ivory tower, that our faith has not been privatized."

Church leaders who stand with immigrants are following the example of Francis, he said, noting that the pope's first official trip as pope was to the isolated Italian island of Lampedusa, a temporary home for refugees. The waters near the island are where thousands of immigrants from Africa have died in efforts to reach Europe. The island has become a symbol of the world refugee crisis which Francis has frequently addressed.

[Peter Feuerherd is a correspondent for NCR's Field Hospital series on parish life and is a professor of journalism at St. John's University, New York.]

More here:
Cardinal Tobin calls for immigration reform | National Catholic ... - National Catholic Reporter

Catholic Church By David Gibson | May 17, 2017

Catalino Guerrero, 59, greets Cardinal Joseph Tobin of the Catholic Archdiocese of Newark during the Faith in New Jersey program at Bethany Baptist Church on May 4, 2017, in Newark, N.J. Photo courtesy of NJ Advance Media/Aristide Economopoulos

NEW YORK (RNS) As the nations capital buzzed about President Trumps latest tweets and political fate, a Catholic cardinal who is one of the hierarchys most visible champions of undocumented immigrants blasted Republicans for ignoring immigration reform and inflicting cruelty on innocent people.

Now think about it, especially right now, with apparent one-party rule in our government: Congress and the president could pass comprehensive immigration reform tomorrow if they wanted to, Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark told an audience of journalists meeting in Brooklyn on Wednesday (May 17). They could bring nearly 12 million people out of the shadows if they wanted to.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin discusses immigration in Brooklyn, N.Y., on May 17, 2017. Photo by Ian West courtesy of DeSales Media/Diocese of Brooklyn

Because after all and lets be serious this isnt about border security. This is about being attentive to the reality of people who are already in our communities, most of whom are functioning even in their marginal shadow existence and making contributions to their communities, said Tobin at aconference sponsored by the Diocese of Brooklyn to mark the Catholic Churchs annual World Communications Day.

A person unbound by Christian charity, he added, would say that you really have to believe in inflicting cruelty on innocent people to choose to support the policies (on immigration) weve seen in recent months while possessing the power to change the law.

Last October, Pope Francis stunned church observers and Tobin himself when he named Tobin, then archbishop of Indianapolis, a cardinal. Francis next transferred Tobin to Newark, a much larger archdiocese in terms of population but one that had never had a cardinal.

READ: New Jerseys first cardinal evokes Pope Francis as he takes helm

The moves wereviewed as putting a churchman who is very much in the pastoral mold of Francis himself in a more prominent and influential role.

Tobin has always made it a priority to help the marginalized, and in 2015 he clashed with then-Indiana Gov. Mike Pence now Donald Trumps vice president over Pences effort to stop the settlement of Syrian refugees in the U.S. Tobin ignored Pences order and continued to resettle refugees who had gone through a rigorous screening process.

Cardinal Joseph Tobin processes into Sacred Heart Cathedral on Jan. 6, 2017, in Newark, N.J., for his installation Mass as the new archbishop of Newark. RNS photo by Tom Gallagher

Tobins move to the New York media marketplusTrumps harsh rhetoric on immigrants have combined to give the cardinals statements and actions even greater resonance.

That was demonstrated in March when Tobin joined an interfaith delegation accompanying Catalino Guerrero, a 59-year-old Mexican native who had lived and worked in the U.S. for much of his life after entering illegally as a young man, to a hearing to determine if Guerrero would be deported.

Guerrero, who is ill, was eventually granted an extension.

Tobin said Wednesday that one purpose of that effort was to put a face on people who are frequently dehumanized or simply viewed indifferently, if at all, by the rest of society.

Racism today is not a bunch of people riding on horses dressed in bedsheets, burning crosses and annoying people, he said. Racism, he said, is just not seeing. Or, if you see, you dont understand.

But Tobin said the other purpose of the demonstration on Guerreros behalf was to put a face on us and the call to solidarity that is, on the witness of people of faith.

When I accompanied Mr. Guerrero to his deportation hearing, its impossible to deny that I brought with me the trappings of the office [that] Pope Francis sprang on me last fall, Tobin said.

Whatever those trappings are, he continued, delivering an implicit challenge to his peers in the church, it doesnt change the nature of grace. What if every cardinal accompanied an undocumented person who crossed our paths to the deportation hearing? What if everybishop did? Every pastor? Every mayor?

Of course, he said, these arent the people in our society who have been vested with real power to make a positive difference in our countrys immigration policy. Those would be the members of our Congress and our president.

David Gibson is a national reporter for RNS and an award-winning religion journalist, author and filmmaker. He has written several books on Catholic topics. His latest book is on biblical artifacts: "Finding Jesus: Faith. Fact. Forgery," which was also the basis of a popular CNN series.

The rest is here:
New Jersey cardinal blasts GOP for ignoring immigration reform ... - Religion News Service