1. Lawsuit win adds to '86 amnesty
2. Economy, enforcement effects flow
3. Obama faces tough policy decision
4. Riot in private prison controlled
5. AZ officials meet to discuss policy
6. ID lawmakers plan employer bill
7. CO judge halts case based on taxes
8. NJ police hurdle language, status

1.
Many who entered the United States on valid visas but fell out of legal status between 1982 and 1988 are eligible for the amnesty offered under the 1986 immigration reform law.
By Teresa Watanabe
Los Angeles Times, December 15, 2008

For two decades, Anaheim businessman Erkan Aydin has taken on a task unimaginable for most immigrants like himself: trying to convince the U.S. government that he was here illegally.

Aydin, 50, arrived in the United States from his native Turkey with a valid student visa in 1981, but fell out of legal status when he failed to enroll in school, he said.

The customer service representative has a powerful reason why he wants to be considered an illegal immigrant. It would make him eligible for the amnesty offered to 2.7 million illegal immigrants under the 1986 immigration reform law.

Thanks to a recent legal settlement, the chance to apply for amnesty is finally open to Aydin and tens of thousands of others who entered the country on a valid visa but fell out of legal status between 1982 and 1988. The settlement, approved this fall by a U.S. district court in Washington state, stems from a class-action lawsuit filed by attorney Peter Schey originally on behalf of an immigrant assistance program of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO.

"I have been born again, like a new baby," Aydin said last week in his Anaheim car dealership office. "I will start a beautiful life in this beautiful country."

The landmark reform law offered a one-time amnesty to immigrants who were in the United States unlawfully from before 1982 to about 1988.

But Congress was concerned that those who entered the country with a valid visa would argue that they fell out of legal status during that time simply to qualify for amnesty. As a result, Schey said, Congress created a rule requiring immigrants to show that their shift from legal to illegal status was "known to the government."

That rule, however, created a new problem: How to prove that the government knew about their violations?

Nigeria native Olaniyi Sofuluke, for instance, came to the United States in 1981 on a student visa to study banking and finance at Troy State University (now Troy University) in Alabama. But, lacking funds, he soon dropped out to work as a dishwasher in two Atlanta restaurants until he could earn enough for his tuition and living expenses.

That violated his visa conditions and threw him into illegal status. The university was required to send a notice to the U.S. government that Sofuluke had dropped out but was not able to provide him with a copy when he requested one five years later. So immigration officials rejected his amnesty application, saying his violations were not known to the government.

Schey, however, successfully argued that because schools were legally required to send the notices, it should be presumed that the government received them and therefore knew about the violations.

He also successfully argued that the government knew many immigrants had violated their status another way: by failing to furnish an address report every three months. The government's failure to produce the address reports showed that the immigrants had not filed them, violating the terms of their visa, he argued.

U.S. immigration officials accepted both arguments in the settlement. They have announced that immigrants whose cases involve violations known to the government may apply for amnesty between Feb. 1, 2009, and Jan. 31, 2010.
. . .
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-amnesty15-2008...

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

2.
Bad economy, job cuts forcing many into stay-or-go decision
By Leslie Berestein
The San Diego Union Tribune, December 14, 2008

Waiting with little more than a plastic bag in hand at the Tijuana bus station, Javier Torres was traveling solo among the crowds of luggage-laden families making the holiday trip to their Mexican hometowns.

But unlike most, Torres, 20, a construction worker who spent three years residing illegally in Miami, was thinking he might stick around for a year in Ensenada, where his parents live, before trying to return to the United States.

“In the past few months, I haven't had much work,” Torres said last week. He is contemplating waiting out the U.S. recession in Mexico if he can find a job. “The economy is pretty bad.”

The plunging U.S. economy and subsequent cuts in the construction, service and manufacturing industries are prompting many immigrant workers, particularly those in the United States illegally, to contemplate a life-changing decision: Do they stay and earn far less, or head home to meager opportunities?

For those who are at least thinking about it, much depends on their definition of “home.” Torres is young and unattached, so his decision is not so complicated; others, especially couples with children, face far more anxiety and soul-searching.

Demographers and border officials say they do not know how many illegal immigrants have gone back to their native countries. But it is clear that fewer are heading north.

Border Patrol apprehensions along the Southwest border were down in fiscal year 2008 to their lowest point since 1980, indicating a sharp decrease in northbound traffic that the agency credits largely to increased enforcement, spokesman Lloyd Easterling said.

Meanwhile, studies point to what is at the very least a leveling-off in the growth of the nation's undocumented population after years of increases.

Even if the outbound flow is just a trickle, the dire financial circumstances that many immigrant laborers are finding themselves in are prompting them to talk about leaving.

“Some of us are thinking about going home for Christmas and not coming back,” said Jesús Cruz, 30, a San Diego day laborer who said he would be happy to leave for his parents' home in Oaxaca this month, if he had it his way.

Standing under the shade of a tree at midday outside a Home Depot in Mission Valley recently, Cruz was facing another day without work, having waited since early morning. Sometimes he gets hired only one day a week, and jobs that once paid $15 an hour now pay as little as $8.

But for Cruz, leaving is not so easy. After arriving four years ago, he fell in love with a woman born in Zacatecas and raised in San Diego, and he settled down. They have a 2-year-old son.

“I feel like I have one foot here, and one there,” Cruz said. The couple struggle to pay their $720 monthly rent. “I tell my wife, 'There is no work here; let's go to Mexico.' But she says: 'No. What are we going to do in Mexico?' ”

In addition to the economic squeeze, Cruz is also feeling the stress of stricter immigration enforcement. He was once employed at a lumberyard, but lost his job two years ago when the housing market went bust. He estimates that since then he has filled out at least 20 job applications, but “everyone wants a good Social Security number.”

Cruz and his wife, who is in the process of obtaining legal residency, make do on rice, beans, an occasional sandwich and watered-down soup. She works as a house cleaner, and given his minimal income, they have at times had to rely on church handouts. Cruz, who came to the United States with the intent of earning good money, is becoming increasingly frustrated.

“It's very difficult to live this way,” he said.

A move back to Mexico might bring someone like Cruz closer to the comfort of family and familiar customs, but experts say returning immigrants still would face economic uncertainty, especially in a weak economy such as Mexico's.
. . .
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20081214-9999-1n14home.html

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

3.
Obama faces test over immigration
By Steven Stanek
The National (U.A.E.), December 14, 2008

Washington -- While many Americans are turning to Barack Obama to engineer a massive economic recovery and draw up a new strategy for two foreign wars, others will look to the president-elect to fulfil a promise he made during his campaign: to take on the contentious issue of immigration reform.

From his protracted primary battle with Hillary Clinton to the presidential race with John McCain, Mr Obama assured audiences he would work to solve a policy riddle that has puzzled politicians for nearly three decades.

“I think it’s time for a president who won’t walk away from something as important as comprehensive [immigration] reform just because it becomes politically unpopular,” Mr Obama said in July, during a speech to the National Council of La Raza, a leading Hispanic civil rights group. “I will make it a top priority in my first year as the president of the United States of America.”

At the centre of Mr Obama’s approach is a plan to grant citizenship – sometimes called “amnesty” – to America’s 12 million illegal immigrants, many of whom work low-skilled, low-wage jobs and live on the fringes of society. He has also vowed to shore up America’s porous borders, across which 500,000 new illegals stream each year, a matter of mounting public concern since the September 11 attacks.

Some see signs that Mr Obama, himself the son of an immigrant, will make good. They view his recent cabinet appointment of Janet Napolitano, the governor of Arizona and an expert on immigration, as an indication he is serious about reform. Ms Napolitano has been tapped to head the department of homeland security, established in 2001 to secure the borders.

Still, many of Mr Obama’s lofty promises came before the collapse of the US economy, which sent the job market into a tailspin and focused people’s attention on their own wallets. Now, some are left wondering how – or if – Mr Obama will be able to fulfil his pledge to address immigration, particularly when most Americans see his plan to grant amnesty as a challenge to their own economic prospects.

A post-election poll conducted on Nov 5 and Nov 6 by Zogby International showed that 57 per cent of voters believe offering amnesty to illegal immigrants would harm American workers and put a strain on the nation’s resources.

The poll, commissioned by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a Washington-based lobbying group that opposes amnesty and supports tighter control of immigration, reinforces a widespread sentiment that illegal workers steal jobs from ordinary Americans, drive wages lower and drain social services.

Such views conflict with those of many special-interest groups, who contend that foreign labourers take on jobs that Americans themselves are unwilling to. The majority views are also at odds with the interests of businesses that benefit from cheap labour.

Still, after employers cut 533,000 jobs in November, the biggest one-month job loss in 34 years, a spooked American public is perhaps even less likely to want to hear arguments for amnesty.

Opponents are already lining up for a fight.

“We are going to be extremely vocal if we see, at a time when hundreds of thousands or millions of Americans are losing their jobs, the administration pushing legislation that is going to dramatically increase labour competition and cost,” said Dan Stein, FAIR’s president.

“We want to make it a political liability for them. It is up to us to make it too hot to handle.”

In fact, because the issue is so “hot”, some believe Mr Obama will stay away from it all together, despite his past promises.

“It is not something that can be done quickly, cleanly or quietly,” said Bryan Griffith, a spokesman for the Center for Immigration Studies, a non-partisan Washington-based think tank that opposes amnesty.

“It seems to be an American tradition that only second term presidents take up immigration [because] they don’t have to worry about another election.”

That plan, however, did not work for George W Bush, who had two massive immigration bills rejected by Congress in his second term. And many may not be willing to wait until after the next election.
. . .
http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081215/FOREIGN/825938504/1014/SPORT

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

4.
Riot, hostage situation ends at West Texas prison
The Associated Press, December 13, 2008

Pecos, TX (AP) -- An uprising at a privately run prison in West Texas ended Saturday morning after two hostages were released, authorities said.

Outside law enforcement officers returned control of the Reeves County Detention Center back to prison personnel about 6:30 a.m., said Patricia Dieschler, a state Department of Public Safety dispatcher.

Responding law enforcement officers were not injured, Dieschler said. Prison officials declined to comment Saturday.

Federal inmates at the prison took two prison employees hostage when the disturbance erupted Friday. Prison officials did not release the names of the two employees, who are recreation specialists at the prison. The hostages were released late Friday night.

The inmates, who include immigration detainees, were asking for better medical treatment, DPS Trooper John Barton told the Pecos Enterprise.
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/13/AR200812...

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

5.
Official: Local Police Can Help Confront Illegal Immigration
The Associated Press, December 13, 2008

Arizona taxpayers shouldn't expect local and state police to cure all the state's immigration ills, but local police can assist federal agents in confronting the problem, the head of the Department of Public Safety said Tuesday.

Roger Vanderpool said he hopes a meeting here of about 150 law enforcement officials will open up discussions about what local authorities can do to address a problem long considered the domain of the federal government.

``We can't just keep pointing fingers at each other as a law enforcement community and say, 'It's the other guy's problem, ' `` Vanderpool said. ``It's a problem for the state of Arizona.''

Gov. Janet Napolitano ordered the state Department of Public Safety to hold the Flagstaff meeting. She maintains the state ought to do more to confront illegal immigration, but still shouldn't let the federal government off the hook.

Illegal immigration has become a key and divisive issue in the state, the busiest illegal entry point on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Once considered a black hole that few elected officials wished to enter, illegal immigration is also gaining more prominence in Arizona politics. It began last year when voters easily approved a law that denies some government benefits to illegal immigrants in Arizona.

It continued this year when the Legislature considered two dozen proposals aimed at confronting the problem and is likely to generate political heat through next year's gubernatorial election.

On Tuesday, 16 Republican and Democratic state lawmakers asked to attend the 21/2-hour meeting in Flagstaff but were turned away. Vanderpool said the meeting was closed to the public and the media because of the sensitive nature of the issue.
. . .
http://ktar.com/?sid=61757&nid=416

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

6.
N. Idaho lawmakers plan immigration legislation
The Associated Press, December 14, 2008

Coeur D'Alene, ID (AP) -- Two northern Idaho lawmakers say they will introduce legislation that would penalize employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

Sen. Mike Jorgenson, R-Hayden Lake, and Rep. Phil Hart, R-Athol, said they will try to pass the proposed law that has been rejected the last two years.

Lawmakers in the last session rejected a bill that would have required employers to verify workers' immigration status. But Hart said that some lawmakers who voted against the bill have either been voted out of office or have changed their minds.

If the proposed law passes, companies that violate it could have their business licenses suspended or revoked.

"The state's only recourse to curb illegal immigration is enforcement through employers," Jorgenson said. "We're just going to pick up where we left off and put some teeth in it."

One of the opponents of the bill in the last session was dairy farmer John Vander Woude, a Republican representing Nampa. But he lost his re-election bid this year.
. . .
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/6420ap_id_illegal_immigration.html

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

7.
Weld judge halts arrests in immigration cases
By Howard Pankratz
The Denver Post (CO), December 12, 2008

Arrests in what Weld County officials claim is the largest identity theft case they've investigated have been halted by a judge who believes they may be based on an improper search warrant.

After obtaining the search warrant, the Weld County District Attorney's Office, the Weld County Sheriff's Department and the Greeley Police Department in mid-October seized 1,338 tax files from Amalia's Translation and Tax Service in Greeley.

At the time, investigators claimed many people using the tax service were using false names and Social Security numbers in a massive identity theft scam.

Authorities traced about $2.6 million in payments to illegal immigrants using phony Social Security numbers who used the tax service, said Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck.

As of Nov. 13, 26 arrest warrants had been issued and 11 people arrested as a result of the investigation, Buck said.

But Weld County District Judge James Hartmann has raised serious questions about the search warrant that authorized seizure of the tax files.

Hartmann has issued a show-cause order directing the Weld County district attorney to show why Hartmann — or any state court — has jurisdiction to issue a search warrant for federal tax files.

Hartmann said he believes the filing of a federal tax return and the receipt of a federal tax refund may be matters that fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States government, not a state court.

Federal tax return information in the possession of a tax preparer, Hartmann said, falls within the confidentiality mandates of federal statute.
. . .
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_11219567

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

8.
Cops strive to leap language hurdles
By Michelle Sahn
The Asbury Park Press (NJ), December 15, 2008

Long Branch -- Detective Michael Verdadeiro often stops in a local shop simply for a cup of coffee, but there are mornings when he also gets crime tips and questions from members of the local Portuguese-speaking community.

Some days, as Detective Juan H. Vasquez rides down city streets in his police car, Spanish-speaking immigrants flag him down to offer information or ask questions. Sometimes it's related to police work. Other times, they ask about other legal issues, like landlord-tenant disputes.

Verdadeiro is trilingual, and Vasquez is bilingual. The men know many residents and business owners in the community, and police say their language skills and networking abilities help the department combat the problem of immigrants who are reluctant to report crimes.

Earlier this year in Long Branch, a Spanish-speaking man flagged down a police officer and told him he had just been robbed at gunpoint on Morris Avenue.

Police said they spotted three fleeing suspects, and they caught two of them, but when police returned to the spot where they had left the victim, he was gone.

The two defendants — a 17-year-old boy and 20-year-old man from Neptune — have been charged with weapons possession because police recovered a handgun and hollow-point bullets during the investigation, but they have not been charged with the robbery because the victim never followed up with police and all attempts to find him were unsuccessful.

That reluctance to come forward or follow through with investigations is not unique to Long Branch.

Last year, after a native of Mexico was murdered in Asbury Park, community leaders spoke with police about crime issues, including the vulnerability of immigrants who are targeted by robbers because they know Latino workers are often paid in cash.

City police soon teamed up with the Monmouth County Sheriff's Office to get quick translation help with calls made directly to city headquarters. Those translation services — through AT&T Language Line — were already provided for 911 calls, with Spanish being the county's most widely translated language, followed by Chinese.
. . .
http://www.app.com/article/20081215/NEWS01/812150329/1004/NEWS01