The New York Times
Published: October 11, 2009
All last week the people of Phoenix witnessed public outbursts by their sheriff, Joe Arpaio, as he railed against the Department of Homeland Security for supposedly trying to limit his ability to enforce federal immigration laws. He vowed to keep scouring Maricopa County for people whose clothing, accents and behavior betrayed them as likely illegal immigrants. He said he had already nabbed more than 32,000 people that way, and announced his next immigrant sweep for Oct. 16.
The spectacle raises two critical questions that the Obama administration is in danger of getting wrong.
One is the specific question of whether the federal government should keep Sheriff Arpaio in its 287(g) program, which deputizes local law enforcement to act as immigration agents in street patrols and in jails. The answer is absolutely not. Sheriff Arpaio has a long, ugly record of abusing and humiliating inmates. His scandal-ridden desert jails have lost accreditation and are notorious places of cruelty and injury. His indiscriminate neighborhood raids use minor infractions like broken taillights as pretexts for mass immigration arrests.
To the broader question of whether federal immigration enforcement should be outsourced en masse in the first place, the answer again is no.
It was only days ago that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano unveiled a plan to repair the rotting immigration detention system. The Bush administration had outsourced the job to state, local and private jailers, with terrible results: inadequate supervision, appalling conditions, injuries and deaths.
Ms. Napolitano wants to centralize federal control over the system that handles detainees. But she insists on continuing to outsource and expand the flawed machinery that catches them, including 287(g) and a system of jailhouse fingerprint checks called Secure Communities, which increase the likelihood that local enforcers will abuse their authority and undermine the law.
Rather than broadening the reach of law enforcement, using local police can cause immigrant crime victims to fear the police and divert the police from fighting crime. It leads to racial profiling, to Latino citizens and legal residents being asked for their papers. Responsible sheriffs and police chiefs across the country have looked at 287(g) and said no thanks.
Programs like 287(g) rest on the dishonest premise that illegal immigrants are a vast criminal threat. But only a small percentage are dangerous felons. The vast majority are those whom President Obama has vowed to help get right with the law, by paying fines and earning citizenship. Treating the majority of illegal immigrants as potential Americans, not a criminal horde, is the right response to the problem.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
O'Brien: Nobel prizes remind us why immigration matters
By Chris O'Brien
Mercury News Columnist
Posted: 10/06/2009
Updated: 10/08/2009
If you're looking for reasons to puff out your chest and take pride in being American, then take note that the first six Nobel Prize winners announced this week are U.S. citizens.
Here's something else you should know: Four of those winners were born outside the U.S.
That dynamic neatly summarizes the current state of our innovation economy. We are increasingly dependent on brainpower from overseas that migrates here to drive the research and discoveries we need to power economic growth.
Silicon Valley has been a bigger beneficiary of this influx of brains and talent than perhaps any other region in the U.S. And that means we have more to lose when the debate about immigration turns to demagoguery.
However you feel about the H-1B visas that our tech companies hunger for, or the swarms of bodies crossing our borders to pick our crops, these hot-button topics obscure the reality: We need these immigrants to renew our economy and to prosper. Our demonization of them is shameful.
Instead, we should celebrate the presence of people like Elizabeth Blackburn, professor at the University of California-San Francisco. Blackburn was born in Australia and moved to the U.S. in 1975. On Monday, she and two other researchers learned they would receive the Nobel Prize for medicine and split the $1.4 million it brings.
That money should more than make up for the 5 percent pay cut and furlough Blackburn (and most other University of California employees) received courtesy of the sad, sickly state of California. I wonder how many other Nobel winners took pay cuts just before receiving the award?
When Blackburn came here in the 1970s, it was clear that the U.S. was the undisputed center of the universe when it came to research. But that advantage is slipping away, as Blackburn noted that she sees exciting work being done in many other regions. Given the growing options for new researchers, erecting barriers to them coming to and staying in the U.S. seems ill-advised.
"I'm a big proponent that the flow of intellectual ideas is crucial," Blackburn said. "To have borders for it seems counterproductive."
Such walls hurt our country and our economy far in excess of whatever benefits they produce. We need to recognize the enormous contributions immigrants are making to the innovation economy.
According to statistics from the National Science Foundation released in February, foreign-born science and engineering students in 2003 earned one-third of all Ph.D.s awarded in the U.S. And the study noted that "those who do decide to finish advanced study in the United States overwhelmingly choose to stay in the country after earning their advanced degrees."
Thank goodness. In addition to Blackburn, the other foreign-born Nobel winners over the past two days included:
Charles Kao, who was born in Shanghai, and has both U.K. and U.S. citizenship.
William Boyle, of Bell Laboratories, was born in Nova Scotia and holds dual U.S. and Canadian citizenship.
Jack Szostak, of Harvard Medical School, was born in London, grew up in Canada and is now a U.S. citizen.
We should be particularly proud that these people did not go to Russia or Germany, but came here. Our nation remains as dependent today as on the day of its founding on the ideas and imagination brought by fresh waves of newcomers arriving on our shores.
How strange that a nation founded by immigrants so easily forgets their value.
Mercury News Columnist
Posted: 10/06/2009
Updated: 10/08/2009
If you're looking for reasons to puff out your chest and take pride in being American, then take note that the first six Nobel Prize winners announced this week are U.S. citizens.
Here's something else you should know: Four of those winners were born outside the U.S.
That dynamic neatly summarizes the current state of our innovation economy. We are increasingly dependent on brainpower from overseas that migrates here to drive the research and discoveries we need to power economic growth.
Silicon Valley has been a bigger beneficiary of this influx of brains and talent than perhaps any other region in the U.S. And that means we have more to lose when the debate about immigration turns to demagoguery.
However you feel about the H-1B visas that our tech companies hunger for, or the swarms of bodies crossing our borders to pick our crops, these hot-button topics obscure the reality: We need these immigrants to renew our economy and to prosper. Our demonization of them is shameful.
Instead, we should celebrate the presence of people like Elizabeth Blackburn, professor at the University of California-San Francisco. Blackburn was born in Australia and moved to the U.S. in 1975. On Monday, she and two other researchers learned they would receive the Nobel Prize for medicine and split the $1.4 million it brings.
That money should more than make up for the 5 percent pay cut and furlough Blackburn (and most other University of California employees) received courtesy of the sad, sickly state of California. I wonder how many other Nobel winners took pay cuts just before receiving the award?
When Blackburn came here in the 1970s, it was clear that the U.S. was the undisputed center of the universe when it came to research. But that advantage is slipping away, as Blackburn noted that she sees exciting work being done in many other regions. Given the growing options for new researchers, erecting barriers to them coming to and staying in the U.S. seems ill-advised.
"I'm a big proponent that the flow of intellectual ideas is crucial," Blackburn said. "To have borders for it seems counterproductive."
Such walls hurt our country and our economy far in excess of whatever benefits they produce. We need to recognize the enormous contributions immigrants are making to the innovation economy.
According to statistics from the National Science Foundation released in February, foreign-born science and engineering students in 2003 earned one-third of all Ph.D.s awarded in the U.S. And the study noted that "those who do decide to finish advanced study in the United States overwhelmingly choose to stay in the country after earning their advanced degrees."
Thank goodness. In addition to Blackburn, the other foreign-born Nobel winners over the past two days included:
Charles Kao, who was born in Shanghai, and has both U.K. and U.S. citizenship.
William Boyle, of Bell Laboratories, was born in Nova Scotia and holds dual U.S. and Canadian citizenship.
Jack Szostak, of Harvard Medical School, was born in London, grew up in Canada and is now a U.S. citizen.
We should be particularly proud that these people did not go to Russia or Germany, but came here. Our nation remains as dependent today as on the day of its founding on the ideas and imagination brought by fresh waves of newcomers arriving on our shores.
How strange that a nation founded by immigrants so easily forgets their value.
FY 2010 Refugee Admission
FY 2010 Refugee Admission Numbers
Presidential Determination No. 2009–32 of September 30, 2009: Fiscal Year 2010 Refugee Admissions Numbers And Authorizations of In-country Refugee Status Pursuant To Sections 207 And 101(A)(42), Respectively, of the Immigration And Nationality Act, And Determination Pursuant To Section 2(B)(2) of the Migration And Refugee Assistance Act, As Amended. Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009.
Presidential Determination No. 2009–32 of September 30, 2009: Fiscal Year 2010 Refugee Admissions Numbers And Authorizations of In-country Refugee Status Pursuant To Sections 207 And 101(A)(42), Respectively, of the Immigration And Nationality Act, And Determination Pursuant To Section 2(B)(2) of the Migration And Refugee Assistance Act, As Amended. Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 13, 2009.
American nightmare
County retiree, war vet told he's not U.S. citizen
By John Wilkens
Union-Tribune Staff Writer
October 9, 2009
SAN MARCOS — Bob Gould always thought he was an American.
Born in Canada 62 years ago, he immigrated to San Diego with his parents when he was 6. His parents eventually became citizens, and he remembers going with them later to the federal building to file his own naturalization paperwork.
Gould went to American schools, fought with the American Army in Vietnam, voted in American elections, did American jury duty, paid American taxes.
But after he retired from his county government job this year and applied for Social Security benefits, he learned that as far as the government is concerned, he's not an American.
In practical terms, that means he can't get his money — about $1,500 a month. In emotional terms, that's hard to calculate.
“I've lived basically my whole life thinking I was a citizen,” said Gould, who now lives in San Marcos. “To be told otherwise is upsetting. Just really, really frustrating. It makes me angry.”
He and his wife, Carol, have spent $2,500 trying to get things straightened out. They've tracked down official records, including his parents' naturalization file, which lists him as their child. They've found his military discharge form, which identifies him as a U.S. citizen.
They've stood in long lines at government offices, filled out documents, met with immigration authorities.
And now they wait.
Immigration is one of the nation's touchiest subjects, and the officials handling it are among the biggest sticklers for rules.
Officials involved in reviewing Gould's case said they can't comment publicly because of confidentiality rules. Privately, several said they expect the matter to be resolved in his favor.
Gould is optimistic about his chances. “It's just going to take a while,” he said.
He said he decided to speak out so he could warn others.
“There are people out there who are probably in the same boat I'm in,” Gould said. “If you are foreign-born, even if you think you are an American citizen, you need to check.”
Disputed citizenship cases are extremely rare, said Lowell Kepke, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration's regional office in San Francisco. He urged anyone with questions about their eligibility to consult the agency's Web site, www.ssa.gov . (In the search box, type in “SSA Handbook 1725.”)
Gould's parents — his dad was a carpenter, his mom a secretary — went through the naturalization process in 1958. Apparently they could have arranged for Gould and his younger sister, Katie, to be recognized as “derivative” citizens, but that didn't happen.
Gould would have been 11 years old at the time, and he vaguely remembers discussing citizenship with his parents. He said he didn't know then whether he might want to move back to Canada as an adult.
“So I guess they left it for later,” he said.
“Later” came in 1966, after Gould was drafted into the Army and went to boot camp at Ford Ord. The soldiers were divided into two groups — U.S. natives in one, foreign-born in the other. Gould said most of those in his group didn't speak English, and he wanted to show that he should be with the others.
The next time he came home to San Diego, he said, he went with his parents to the federal building. He remembers filling out a citizenship form and paying a fee. He said the clerk told him he didn't need a swearing-in ceremony because he had already sworn his allegiance during his Army induction.
“And that's the last I ever thought about it,” Gould said.
His sister went through the same process in 1966. She had a swearing-in and wound up with a “Certificate of Citizenship.” It lists her date of citizenship as being the same day in 1958 that her parents were naturalized.
If Gould ever received a certificate like that, he doesn't have it now. If his parents, now both deceased, received it while he was serving in Vietnam, he hasn't been able to find it among their papers.
Bob and Carol Gould were married in 1969. They settled in a San Marcos neighborhood near Woodland Park and raised two children — Travis and Natalie, now in their 30s and living on their own.
Both parents had government jobs. Bob spent 32 years with the county's vehicle-fleet department, eventually becoming a regional manager. Carol worked 23 years for the city attorney and city manager in Oceanside.
Late last year, as the couple eyed retirement, Gould applied for his Social Security benefits. He had been receiving statements showing that the agency had been withdrawing money from his paychecks since 1964.
In response to Gould's application, Social Security officials sent him a letter saying he was entitled to benefits starting in April. But in the next paragraph, the letter said, “We can't pay you until we have proof of your lawful residency in the United States.”
Trying to find that proof has taken its toll.
Green card? Gould never had one. Passport? “I'm not a traveler,” he said. “The only time I've been overseas is when they sent me to Vietnam. I had an M-16. I didn't need a passport.”
Carol Gould said her husband hasn't been sleeping or eating well. He gets anxious when he talks about being caught in bureaucratic limbo.
The Goulds know from their own careers how governments work. Rules are rules. “I don't have the one piece of paper that says I'm a citizen, but I have all this other paperwork that supports that I am a citizen,” he said. “Doesn't anyone have common sense?”
Carol Gould's first fear was that her husband would be deported to Canada. Various officials have told her that won't happen, but the uncertainty persists. “It's been awful,” she said.
If everything works out, Bob Gould will get his benefits retroactive to April 1 — April Fool's Day.
“I find that kind of ironic,” he said.
By John Wilkens
Union-Tribune Staff Writer
October 9, 2009
SAN MARCOS — Bob Gould always thought he was an American.
Born in Canada 62 years ago, he immigrated to San Diego with his parents when he was 6. His parents eventually became citizens, and he remembers going with them later to the federal building to file his own naturalization paperwork.
Gould went to American schools, fought with the American Army in Vietnam, voted in American elections, did American jury duty, paid American taxes.
But after he retired from his county government job this year and applied for Social Security benefits, he learned that as far as the government is concerned, he's not an American.
In practical terms, that means he can't get his money — about $1,500 a month. In emotional terms, that's hard to calculate.
“I've lived basically my whole life thinking I was a citizen,” said Gould, who now lives in San Marcos. “To be told otherwise is upsetting. Just really, really frustrating. It makes me angry.”
He and his wife, Carol, have spent $2,500 trying to get things straightened out. They've tracked down official records, including his parents' naturalization file, which lists him as their child. They've found his military discharge form, which identifies him as a U.S. citizen.
They've stood in long lines at government offices, filled out documents, met with immigration authorities.
And now they wait.
Immigration is one of the nation's touchiest subjects, and the officials handling it are among the biggest sticklers for rules.
Officials involved in reviewing Gould's case said they can't comment publicly because of confidentiality rules. Privately, several said they expect the matter to be resolved in his favor.
Gould is optimistic about his chances. “It's just going to take a while,” he said.
He said he decided to speak out so he could warn others.
“There are people out there who are probably in the same boat I'm in,” Gould said. “If you are foreign-born, even if you think you are an American citizen, you need to check.”
Disputed citizenship cases are extremely rare, said Lowell Kepke, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration's regional office in San Francisco. He urged anyone with questions about their eligibility to consult the agency's Web site, www.ssa.gov . (In the search box, type in “SSA Handbook 1725.”)
Gould's parents — his dad was a carpenter, his mom a secretary — went through the naturalization process in 1958. Apparently they could have arranged for Gould and his younger sister, Katie, to be recognized as “derivative” citizens, but that didn't happen.
Gould would have been 11 years old at the time, and he vaguely remembers discussing citizenship with his parents. He said he didn't know then whether he might want to move back to Canada as an adult.
“So I guess they left it for later,” he said.
“Later” came in 1966, after Gould was drafted into the Army and went to boot camp at Ford Ord. The soldiers were divided into two groups — U.S. natives in one, foreign-born in the other. Gould said most of those in his group didn't speak English, and he wanted to show that he should be with the others.
The next time he came home to San Diego, he said, he went with his parents to the federal building. He remembers filling out a citizenship form and paying a fee. He said the clerk told him he didn't need a swearing-in ceremony because he had already sworn his allegiance during his Army induction.
“And that's the last I ever thought about it,” Gould said.
His sister went through the same process in 1966. She had a swearing-in and wound up with a “Certificate of Citizenship.” It lists her date of citizenship as being the same day in 1958 that her parents were naturalized.
If Gould ever received a certificate like that, he doesn't have it now. If his parents, now both deceased, received it while he was serving in Vietnam, he hasn't been able to find it among their papers.
Bob and Carol Gould were married in 1969. They settled in a San Marcos neighborhood near Woodland Park and raised two children — Travis and Natalie, now in their 30s and living on their own.
Both parents had government jobs. Bob spent 32 years with the county's vehicle-fleet department, eventually becoming a regional manager. Carol worked 23 years for the city attorney and city manager in Oceanside.
Late last year, as the couple eyed retirement, Gould applied for his Social Security benefits. He had been receiving statements showing that the agency had been withdrawing money from his paychecks since 1964.
In response to Gould's application, Social Security officials sent him a letter saying he was entitled to benefits starting in April. But in the next paragraph, the letter said, “We can't pay you until we have proof of your lawful residency in the United States.”
Trying to find that proof has taken its toll.
Green card? Gould never had one. Passport? “I'm not a traveler,” he said. “The only time I've been overseas is when they sent me to Vietnam. I had an M-16. I didn't need a passport.”
Carol Gould said her husband hasn't been sleeping or eating well. He gets anxious when he talks about being caught in bureaucratic limbo.
The Goulds know from their own careers how governments work. Rules are rules. “I don't have the one piece of paper that says I'm a citizen, but I have all this other paperwork that supports that I am a citizen,” he said. “Doesn't anyone have common sense?”
Carol Gould's first fear was that her husband would be deported to Canada. Various officials have told her that won't happen, but the uncertainty persists. “It's been awful,” she said.
If everything works out, Bob Gould will get his benefits retroactive to April 1 — April Fool's Day.
“I find that kind of ironic,” he said.
At Angel Island, the Walls Do Talk
By Christina Talcott
Washington Post Staff Writer
October 11, 2009
I am distressed that we Chinese are in this wooden building . . ./
I should regret my taking the risks of coming in the first place.
Carved on the walls at the Immigration Station on Angel Island are hundreds of poems like this one, etched into the wood by Chinese immigrants waiting for permission to enter the United States between 1910 and 1940. Thanks to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, some were detained there for months on end.
Though it's sometimes called the "Ellis Island of the West," the Angel Island Immigration Station was less welcome mat and more barbed-wire fence. Recent arrivals on America's western shores were processed there, and although some were quickly sent on to friends and family on the mainland, others, primarily from China, were put through serial interviews and physical exams and held until they were either allowed to enter San Francisco or were deported. The Exclusion Act was sparked by popular belief that immigrants were taking jobs from native-born Americans, and it was meant to curtail their numbers.
But they continued to come, not only from China but also from Japan, Russia, South Asia, Korea, Africa, even Portugal. When ships landed in California, arrivals were sent to Angel Island, about 350,000 of them over 30 years.
The larger, woodsy neighbor of the infamous fortified Alcatraz, Angel Island is part of the California state park system, with hiking and biking trails, wildlife, tram and Segway tours, a campground and stunning views of San Francisco, about three miles away, and the town of Tiburon, just a half-mile offshore. The immigration station's barracks, a two-story yellow and white building that stood empty for decades, was slated for demolition in 1970 when a park ranger named Alexander Weiss discovered the writing on the walls.
Last spring, after a three-year renovation project, it reopened to the public. On a tour, ranger Casey Lee explained the island's history while pointing out various carvings throughout the building. It was dark inside the wooden barracks, despite the rare San Francisco sun outdoors. Some carvings were faintly visible under up to seven layers of paint. In addition to writing, there were pictures of birds, trees, a horse and rider, even elaborate altars carved into the walls.
The dorm rooms have been restored to their appearance in the early 1900s. In the women's dorm, fold-up metal bunk beds are stacked three high in long rows. It looks as though the occupants have just stepped out for a moment: Laundry hangs on makeshift clotheslines, chopsticks and mah-jongg tiles rest on a bed, open suitcases and chamber pots are tucked beneath the bunks. Along the wall are more suitcases, holding objects that people from different countries would have brought. One representing China, Lee explained, was donated by a woman whose mother came through Angel Island. This was her suitcase, her papers, her clothes.
Two of the men's dorm rooms are similarly adorned, with hats and boots and jackets strung on lines. But Room 105, where many Chinese men were held, is the jewel of the station. The lighting is soft. The walls have been lacquered. It is here that the poems are most easily visible, even though some are only fragments and there are doubtless more still hidden from view. Around the room, panels translate the poems into English, and visitors can listen to recordings of them being read in both languages.
There are prayers, messages, pleas and political slogans. But mostly there are poems. In 1999, the collected, translated poems were published in "Island: Poetry and History of Chinese Immigrants on Angel Island, 1910-1940" (University of Washington Press).
The poems are either well-known verses that the detainees knew by heart or original compositions describing their experiences. Some are heartbreaking in their longing for home or freedom ("I suffered misery on the ship and sadness in the wooden building"); others decry the United States government ("I thoroughly hate the barbarians because they do not respect justice") or thieving cellmates ("That bastard son of a turtle . . . ").
Long before blogging or Twitter, even in the absence of pen and paper, despite the worst of circumstances, people found a way to express themselves.
This is a message to those who live here not to worry excessively.
Instead, you must cast your idle worries to the flowing stream.
Experiencing a little ordeal is not hardship.
Napoleon was once a prisoner on an island.
Washington Post Staff Writer
October 11, 2009
I am distressed that we Chinese are in this wooden building . . ./
I should regret my taking the risks of coming in the first place.
Carved on the walls at the Immigration Station on Angel Island are hundreds of poems like this one, etched into the wood by Chinese immigrants waiting for permission to enter the United States between 1910 and 1940. Thanks to the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, some were detained there for months on end.
Though it's sometimes called the "Ellis Island of the West," the Angel Island Immigration Station was less welcome mat and more barbed-wire fence. Recent arrivals on America's western shores were processed there, and although some were quickly sent on to friends and family on the mainland, others, primarily from China, were put through serial interviews and physical exams and held until they were either allowed to enter San Francisco or were deported. The Exclusion Act was sparked by popular belief that immigrants were taking jobs from native-born Americans, and it was meant to curtail their numbers.
But they continued to come, not only from China but also from Japan, Russia, South Asia, Korea, Africa, even Portugal. When ships landed in California, arrivals were sent to Angel Island, about 350,000 of them over 30 years.
The larger, woodsy neighbor of the infamous fortified Alcatraz, Angel Island is part of the California state park system, with hiking and biking trails, wildlife, tram and Segway tours, a campground and stunning views of San Francisco, about three miles away, and the town of Tiburon, just a half-mile offshore. The immigration station's barracks, a two-story yellow and white building that stood empty for decades, was slated for demolition in 1970 when a park ranger named Alexander Weiss discovered the writing on the walls.
Last spring, after a three-year renovation project, it reopened to the public. On a tour, ranger Casey Lee explained the island's history while pointing out various carvings throughout the building. It was dark inside the wooden barracks, despite the rare San Francisco sun outdoors. Some carvings were faintly visible under up to seven layers of paint. In addition to writing, there were pictures of birds, trees, a horse and rider, even elaborate altars carved into the walls.
The dorm rooms have been restored to their appearance in the early 1900s. In the women's dorm, fold-up metal bunk beds are stacked three high in long rows. It looks as though the occupants have just stepped out for a moment: Laundry hangs on makeshift clotheslines, chopsticks and mah-jongg tiles rest on a bed, open suitcases and chamber pots are tucked beneath the bunks. Along the wall are more suitcases, holding objects that people from different countries would have brought. One representing China, Lee explained, was donated by a woman whose mother came through Angel Island. This was her suitcase, her papers, her clothes.
Two of the men's dorm rooms are similarly adorned, with hats and boots and jackets strung on lines. But Room 105, where many Chinese men were held, is the jewel of the station. The lighting is soft. The walls have been lacquered. It is here that the poems are most easily visible, even though some are only fragments and there are doubtless more still hidden from view. Around the room, panels translate the poems into English, and visitors can listen to recordings of them being read in both languages.
There are prayers, messages, pleas and political slogans. But mostly there are poems. In 1999, the collected, translated poems were published in "Island: Poetry and History of Chinese Immigrants on Angel Island, 1910-1940" (University of Washington Press).
The poems are either well-known verses that the detainees knew by heart or original compositions describing their experiences. Some are heartbreaking in their longing for home or freedom ("I suffered misery on the ship and sadness in the wooden building"); others decry the United States government ("I thoroughly hate the barbarians because they do not respect justice") or thieving cellmates ("That bastard son of a turtle . . . ").
Long before blogging or Twitter, even in the absence of pen and paper, despite the worst of circumstances, people found a way to express themselves.
This is a message to those who live here not to worry excessively.
Instead, you must cast your idle worries to the flowing stream.
Experiencing a little ordeal is not hardship.
Napoleon was once a prisoner on an island.
Federal officials vow to continue immigration enforcement
Federal immigration officials are revamping the nation's immigrant detention system, but warn that immigration law enforcement will continue.
By Alfonso Chardy
The Miami Herald
Octover 7, 2009
In response to widespread criticism from immigrant advocates, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced steps Tuesday to improve conditions of detainees and allow them easier access to attorneys.
But Napolitano stood firm on the Obama administration's efforts to continue strict enforcement of the nation's immigration laws.
``We accept that we are going to continue to have and increase, potentially, the number of detainees,'' Napolitano said.
But in her mixed message of humane treatment and tough enforcement, Napolitano made it clear she intends to reform detention operations from what she described as a patchwork of privately-run and government-run facilities with different standards in different locations.
Cheryl Little, executive director of Miami-based Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, welcomed Napolitano's initiatives but urged Homeland Security officials to move more rapidly in reforming the system and freeing immigrants, especially those seeking asylum or with serious illnesses.
``We give them credit for recognizing that the current system is fundamentally flawed and attempting to improve it,'' Little said. ``However, the devil is in the details and there's an urgent need for more immediate relief. Far too many immigrants who are neither dangerous nor likely to flee are currently in detention and should be fairly considered for release.''
For decades, Little has monitored detention practices in Florida and has testified in Congress about conditions in immigrant detention facilities, including Krome in west Miami-Dade. She recently met with Napolitano and John Morton, the assistant secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Napolitano did not say asylum seekers or sick detainees would be freed as a rule, but said asylum seekers will be housed in facilities ``commensurate with their needs'' such as ``converted hotels or residential facilities.''
Morton, in answer to a question from El Nuevo Herald, said one option under consideration is electronic ankle bracelets for asylum seekers. ``Ankle bracelets are one of the many different forms of alternative to detention that is very much on the table,'' Morton said.
He also said detention facilities should be located in major urban areas, so detainees can more easily contact attorneys. In the past, some detainees have been removed to remote facilities, leaving their attorneys and families scrambling to make arrangements to see them or unaware of their whereabouts.
Napolitano said federal immigration authorities will establish an online locator system to help families and lawyers quickly find detainees.
By Alfonso Chardy
The Miami Herald
Octover 7, 2009
In response to widespread criticism from immigrant advocates, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced steps Tuesday to improve conditions of detainees and allow them easier access to attorneys.
But Napolitano stood firm on the Obama administration's efforts to continue strict enforcement of the nation's immigration laws.
``We accept that we are going to continue to have and increase, potentially, the number of detainees,'' Napolitano said.
But in her mixed message of humane treatment and tough enforcement, Napolitano made it clear she intends to reform detention operations from what she described as a patchwork of privately-run and government-run facilities with different standards in different locations.
Cheryl Little, executive director of Miami-based Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, welcomed Napolitano's initiatives but urged Homeland Security officials to move more rapidly in reforming the system and freeing immigrants, especially those seeking asylum or with serious illnesses.
``We give them credit for recognizing that the current system is fundamentally flawed and attempting to improve it,'' Little said. ``However, the devil is in the details and there's an urgent need for more immediate relief. Far too many immigrants who are neither dangerous nor likely to flee are currently in detention and should be fairly considered for release.''
For decades, Little has monitored detention practices in Florida and has testified in Congress about conditions in immigrant detention facilities, including Krome in west Miami-Dade. She recently met with Napolitano and John Morton, the assistant secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Napolitano did not say asylum seekers or sick detainees would be freed as a rule, but said asylum seekers will be housed in facilities ``commensurate with their needs'' such as ``converted hotels or residential facilities.''
Morton, in answer to a question from El Nuevo Herald, said one option under consideration is electronic ankle bracelets for asylum seekers. ``Ankle bracelets are one of the many different forms of alternative to detention that is very much on the table,'' Morton said.
He also said detention facilities should be located in major urban areas, so detainees can more easily contact attorneys. In the past, some detainees have been removed to remote facilities, leaving their attorneys and families scrambling to make arrangements to see them or unaware of their whereabouts.
Napolitano said federal immigration authorities will establish an online locator system to help families and lawyers quickly find detainees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
