Please visit our YouTube and Facebook pages.

1. Obama, Congress face battle
2. ICE mission to expand
3. Sen. bill hits REAL ID
4. CA court backs LAPD
5. Suit helps illegal parents

1.
Uphill road ahead for overhauling immigration law
By William Douglas
The McClatchy Newspapers, June 18, 2009

President Barack Obama, Democratic congressional leaders and advocates of revamping the nation's immigration laws say that developing a comprehensive immigration bill this year is a top priority, despite an already full legislative plate that includes a Supreme Court confirmation hearing, overhauling America's health care system, addressing climate change and conducting two wars.

They got a reality check on the potential bumps ahead when the White House recently postponed a bipartisan meeting on immigration that had been set for Wednesday - the second cancellation this month - because of "scheduling conflicts," administration officials told invited guests.

Still, supporters of an immigration overhaul think that Obama will succeed where other presidents have failed and will push through a comprehensive plan that will allow illegal immigrants to come out the shadows and provide them a path to citizenship.

"While we are disappointed by this delay, it in no way lessens the importance of passing a comprehensive immigration reform package this year," said Rep. Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y., the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. "The American public wants solutions to our broken immigration system, and we are confident the president will keep his word by enacting reform this year."

Others aren't so sure. Opponents of immigration restructuring and some Republican leaders think that the debate will fade before it begins, crushed under the weight of more pressing issues and the still-contentious question about what to do with nearly 12 million illegal immigrants, half from Mexico, who are already in the United States.

"It's a very difficult issue," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "With everything on their plate, I see no chance that it happens, unless there's some sort of bipartisan proposal that were to come forward. That's the only way where there's a reasonable chance that it could be enacted this year."

Obama promised Hispanic voters during the presidential campaign that he would address immigration in his first year in office, a vow that helped him win 67 percent of the Hispanic vote to Republican presidential candidate John McCain's 31 percent.

For now, though, immigration legislation is a work in progress, with Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, taking the lead on the issue from an ailing Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who helped craft previous immigration measures.
. . .
http://www.kansascity.com/444/story/1258755.html

********
********

2.
U.S. to Let Immigration Agents Make Drug Arrests
By Spencer S. Hsu
The Washington Post, June 17, 2009

The Obama administration is preparing to give more U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents authority to make drug arrests to assist Mexico's bloody battle with drug cartels, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. told senators today.
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/17/AR200906...

********
********

3.
New bill would roll back parts of REAL ID
The SecureID News,June 16, 2009

A bill has been submitted in the U.S. Senate that would roll back portions of the REAL ID Act of 2005.

The PASS ID Act will not require that breeder documents, birth certificates and Social Security numbers, be verified before a license is issued, according to an Associated Press report.
. . .
Other group’s aren’t as excited about the legislation. The Center for Immigration Studies says the proposed legislation would roll back key aspects of the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations, including authenticating identity documents, says Janice Kephart, a member of the 9/11 Commission and director of national security policy at the center.

“The PASS ID Act would repeal the driver’s license provisions of the REAL ID Act of 2005, legislation aimed at ensuring that all states meet minimum driver’s license security standards in order to enhance national security and driver safety, combat drug running, and better safeguard against identity theft and fraud,” Kephart states in a article. “While no state is required to comply, the 30 or so states that are choosing to actively meet REAL ID minimum standards are helping make America less vulnerable. PASS ID supporters are painting REAL ID as a poorly drafted law that is not supported by the 9/11 Commission recommendations as well as an affront to privacy and states’ rights. The reality is that REAL ID balances liberty and security by protecting legitimate applicants from fraud; states from bad drivers, criminals, and government waste; and federal interests in commercial airport and critical infrastructure security.”
. . .
http://www.secureidnews.com/2009/06/16/new-bill-would-roll-back-parts-of...

********
********

4.
Court backs LAPD immigration policy
By Bob Egelko
The San Francisco Chronicle, June 18, 2009

A city can prohibit its police from stopping or arresting people to find out if they are illegal immigrants, a state appeals court ruled Wednesday in a Los Angeles case with implications for San Francisco's sanctuary ordinance.

A taxpayer represented by the conservative group Judicial Watch challenged a 30-year-old Los Angeles Police Department rule barring officers from either arresting anyone for entering the United States illegally or taking any action solely to determine someone's immigration status.

The suit claimed the policy conflicts with a 1996 federal law that requires state and local governments to let their employees share information about someone's immigration status with federal authorities. If a city bars police from obtaining immigration information from people they arrest, Judicial Watch argued, it frustrates the purpose of the law.

But the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles upheld a judge's decision that found no conflict between the local policy and the federal law. The restriction on police conduct during arrests "has no effect on the voluntary flow of immigration information" between local officers and federal authorities, the court said.

Los Angeles police can ask immigration-related questions of people they arrest for other reasons and can relay the information to federal agents, Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling. He said the Constitution prohibits the federal government from requiring state and local governments to enforce immigration law but allows voluntary local enforcement under federal supervision.

San Francisco's 1989 sanctuary ordinance includes a virtually identical provision, barring city employees from arresting, stopping or questioning people based solely on their national origin or immigration status. The ordinance also forbids the use of city money to help enforce federal immigration law, except as required by U.S. or state law.

The policy is being tested by Judicial Watch in a separate suit accusing San Francisco of violating a state law that requires police to notify federal authorities if a suspect in a drug case appears to be a noncitizen. The law applies to legal residents, who can be deported for committing serious crimes, as well as to illegal immigrants.
. . .
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/18/BAJ1189DJU.DTL

********
********

5.
More than 100 kids sue over parents' deportations
By Laura Wides Munoz
The Associated Press, June 17, 2009

Miami (AP) -- Ronald Soza celebrated his 10th birthday Wednesday with cake and a serenade by more than 100 other children and their parents.

His own family: absent. His mother was recently deported back to Nicaragua. His father rarely ventures out in public in fear of a similar fate. Now Soza and the other children — all U.S. citizens whose parents face deportation — are demanding a say in the immigration debate.

They are suing President Barack Obama, asking a court to halt the deportations of their parents until Congress overhauls U.S. immigration laws.
. . .
Nora Sandigo, the head of the Fraternity, originally brought the case on behalf of the children against the Bush administration. She refiled it in January in Miami and a hearing is scheduled for August.

Sandigo said she is frustrated that the Obama administration hasn't done more to address immigration reform.

"Today these children's voices are not heard," Sandigo said as dozens of youngsters squirmed and twirled their flags on a rug before her, "but tomorrow these U.S. citizens will be voting."

Perhaps not literally, but many of the more than 100 children who gathered Wednesday are already in their teens and will be voting age by the next presidential election.

Also on Wednesday, religious leaders and supporters gathered in Washington for a prayer vigil in advance of Obama's proposed meeting on immigration next week with congressional leaders.

Sandigo says many of the children's parents came to the U.S. before 1996 immigration changes made it more difficult for them to become legal residents. When they came, they had a valid expectation that if they stayed out of trouble for seven years, they could eventually become legal residents, she has argued.

Immigration experts say the case has a tough road in the courts because Congress explicitly made the law retroactive.

And the plight of the children is not grounds for their parents to remain in the U.S., said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which seeks to limit immigration.

"These are deportable aliens, and they get whatever due process Congress grants them and nothing more," Krikorian said.

"There are going to be times when you're going to want to make exceptions in certain cases, but today the law is so riddled with exceptions that now is not the time."
. . .
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gmo3_fsf06CMjvNsLNzsPX...