1. AZ co. sheriff defends positions
2. VA co. panel stirs controversy
3. Few agencies track immigrant crime
4. NY advocates press for suffrage
5. Muslims seek to forge 'American Islam'
6. Kidnappers target AZ illegals

1.
Challenges to a Sheriff, Both Popular and Reviled
By Randal C. Archibold
The New York Times, September 28, 2008

Phoenix -- Joe Arpaio, a cherished figure in the movement against illegal immigration, is running for a fifth term as the Maricopa County sheriff. But a referendum on his contentious approach to law enforcement — and the growing challenges to it — is already under way in the public arena.

Sheriff Arpaio has raised more than $500,000, and he is mobbed by well-wishers at campaign events, at which he signs autographs and poses for photographs. A poll last month showed him with a comfortable lead over his challenger.

“It’s exciting, taking on an issue that’s really worldwide,” said Sheriff Arpaio, 76, whose deputies, often in the glare of television cameras, have been instructed to pick up illegal immigrants across the county, the nation’s fourth largest and among the fastest growing.

The question is whether Sheriff Arpaio, one of America’s most colorful law enforcement officials, has overstepped his bounds.

A federal lawsuit by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund accuses the sheriff’s department of racial profiling and detaining legal residents and American citizens for long periods while their status is checked. The Government Accountability Office, a watchdog arm of Congress, is re-evaluating a program under which federal officials trained the deputies here and elsewhere in immigration enforcement.

And the mayor of Phoenix, Phil Gordon, has asked the Justice Department to investigate the tactics employed by Sheriff Arpaio, who first gained national attention years ago for forcing inmates to wear pink underwear, housing them in tents and feeding them food of a green hue.

“The sheriff always did his pink underwear and other publicity stunts,” Mr. Gordon said in an interview, in which he expressed regret over not speaking out sooner. “While they were funny, they weren’t breaking the Constitution and they weren’t endangering lives.”

Mr. Gordon said he acted in April after meeting privately at a church with Hispanic constituents who complained that Sheriff Arpaio, in routine patrols and crime sweeps that included the arrest of large numbers of illegal immigrants, had sown a fear of all law enforcement officials, raising concerns that crimes were going unreported.

In addition, the mayor said, a Hispanic aide, who has since joined the racial profiling lawsuit, complained to him of a sheriff’s deputy singling her out to produce a Social Security card while other, non-Hispanic motorists stopped along with her for driving in a restricted area only had to show their licenses.

In the face of all this, Sheriff Arpaio, his voice a laconic baritone this side of John Wayne, remains unbowed.

“I don’t get any kicks because we locked up 30 guys, especially those coming here for jobs,” Sheriff Arpaio said. “What overrides the compassion, I took an oath of office to enforce that law. That’s the difference. What right does an official have to say, I will not defend the Constitution?”

For the better part of two years, it has not been uncommon for people in Maricopa County stopped for traffic infractions to be asked about their immigration status, particularly if they speak only Spanish and wear certain clothing, including jeans and shirts that officials consider characteristic of south of the border.

Most sheriff’s deputies “can make a quick recognition on somebody’s accent, how they’re dressed,” said Bruce Sands, chief of enforcement for the sheriff’s department, where deputies have received training from Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The sheriff’s department says the crackdown has rid the county of hundreds of illegal immigrants, including many with felony offenses, and Sheriff Arpaio defends factoring in speech and dress as in line with the training of federal immigration agents; an ICE spokesman would say only that “we use a number of factors” to make such determinations.
. . .
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/us/28sheriff.html

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

2.
Topic of Immigration Displays a Knack for Migrating Into Other Areas
By Kristen Mack
The Washington Post, September 28, 2008; PW03

Even the routine has become politicized in Prince William County.

The recent appointment of a vocal critic of illegal immigration to a panel that will craft the county's human services policy has become a conversation about the crackdown, intolerance and freedom of speech.

Robert L. Duecaster, a lawyer and leader of Help Save Manassas, was approved to sit on the strategic goals task force by a split vote of the Board of County Supervisors.

Normally, appointments take place with little notice or discussion. The board makes hundreds of appointments each year, with up to 700 residents serving on boards, committees and commissions at a given time. Yet a group of residents spoke against Duecaster's appointment before the vote and later demanded board members publicly explain their decision.

Supervisor W.S. Covington III was the only one to take them up on their request. Covington addressed the appointment without mentioning Duecaster by name or his vote in favor of the nomination.

"I am very disquieted over the recent public discourse over whether or not a citizen is qualified to serve as an appointee of this body on behalf of Prince William County based solely upon a transcript of words, whether written or spoken," Covington (R-Brentsville) said at last week's board meeting before giving a brief history lesson on freedom of speech.

"A forum in which to discuss ideas, however radically perceived by opposing viewpoints, is also guaranteed by our U.S. Constitution."

When people with opposing viewpoints come to the table for dialogue, change takes place, he said, adding that it is not in his "purview to quash that potential growth."

The board's eight appointments to the task force also include former supervisor Hilda M. Barg, who gained the moniker "human services supervisor," and Supervisor Martin E. Nohe's wife, Kris Nohe, who is a court-appointed special advocate for children.

Some residents have suggested that guidelines be established to determine qualifications to serve, rather than deferring to the judgment of supervisors.

In a later interview, Covington said he regretted that Duecaster's nomination process had become personalized.

"He wouldn't have been my choice, but I don't think anyone proved he was so outrageous that he shouldn't have served on an advisory committee," Covington said. "I've never seen my vote as being supportive of his agenda or ideas."

Duecaster has referred to illegal immigrants as the "scourge that's plaguing neighborhoods" and an "invasion of this country."
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/26/AR200809...

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

3.
Lack of data for tracking illegal immigrant crimes
The KTAR News (Phoenix), September 27, 2008

You've heard it from pundits and read it online: Illegal immigrants are clogging our legal system. They may come with the dreams of work and a better life, but they bring increased crime and strife.

But it's anyone's guess how many illegal immigrants enter the justice system, and how much it costs taxpayers. Neither the state nor the federal courts formally keep track.

``The data (are) terrible, and lead to entirely different conclusions,'' said Steven Camarota, of the Center for Immigration Studies, which supports tighter immigration controls. ``No one has made it a priority. No one has ever wanted to know.''

Federal policies targeting illegal immigration also skew the picture. Although the number of people arrested in the Tucson Sector for illegal immigration has actually declined in recent years, the push is on to prosecute more illegal-entry cases, most recently through ``Operation Streamline,'' which aims to prosecute 100 illegal immigrants a day.

The emphasis on illegal immigration has overwhelmed Tucson's federal prosecutors to the point that they have declined to take on a number of serious drug-offense cases in recent years. To keep up, the U.S. Attorney's Office recently hired 22 more prosecutors and has converted a courtroom into a makeshift holding area for illegal immigrants waiting to see judges.

Illegal immigration made up half the felony sentencings in federal court here last year, but no one can say - beyond estimates - how many other federal crimes are tied to illegal immigrants.

It's a similar scene at Pima County Superior Court. Officials there agree that cases involving illegal immigrants put an extra burden on judges and attorneys - but no one knows how big a burden.

Estimates of the share of Pima County criminal cases involving illegal immigrants range from 3.5 percent to 11 percent.

Financial estimates are only slightly more specific. At a minimum, taxpayers spend about $80 million per year on cases involving illegal immigration that are processed through Pima County and the federal court in Tucson. But that doesn't include the cost of lawyers to represent and prosecute illegal border crossers charged with more serious federal crimes.

And it doesn't sort out those non-citizens in the court system who are here legally.

Still, Pima County Attorney Barbara LaWall is confident that the effect is small.

``The illegals we see are only an itty-bitty, tiny fraction of the illegals who are in Pima County and Arizona,'' LaWall said.

``Their presence here has a huge impact, but they are not driving the crime rate,'' she said. ``Ninety-seven percent of the folks we prosecute are homegrown criminals.''

It's clear that illegal immigrants do affect our court system, but getting an accurate count of cases is nearly impossible.
. . .
http://ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=965591

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

4.
A New Push to Let Non-Citizens Vote
By Larry Tung
The Gotham Gazette (NYC), September 29, 2008

Earlier this month, dozens of protesters, many wearing facemasks emblazoned with the word "Voiceless," gathered on the steps of City Hall. Organized by the New York Coalition to Expand Voting Rights, they demanded that non-citizens who are legal residents be allowed to vote in municipal elections. They said they deserve political representation because they are law-abiding New Yorkers.

This is hardly a new subject in the New York City public debate. For many years, pro-immigrant groups here have called for allowing non-citizens to vote but to no avail. Now, with candidates prepared for the 2009 mayoral and City Council elections, the campaign for non-citizen voting right has gotten a new burst of energy and is making a comeback. This time, the advocates are hopeful.

"There are going to be big elections in New York City in 2009, so we are latching on this big event to bring more attention to this issue," said David Andersson, the rally's main organizer. "It is a fantastic time for us." He added that many City Council members will have to leave office at the end of next year, and if non-=citizen voting is not a reality by then, he hopes to garner more support from the new members.

Abut half a dozen candidates running for City Council, have expressed support for the bill, including Julissa Ferreras of District 21 in Queens, Mark Levine of District 7 in Manhattan, Brad Lander of District 39 in Brooklyn, Ydanis Rodriguez of District 10 in Manhattan and Daniel Dromm of District 25 in Queens.

"I believe anyone who pays taxes should be able to vote," said Dromm, a Democrat. "That's the principal our country was founded on. It's a basic civil right. Voter participation is the basis for our democracy."

Taxation without Representation

According to the coalition, New York City is now home to more than 1.3 million immigrants of voting age who are not yet citizens. The organizers said these city residents have no political representation but remain subject to all the laws that citizens must observe, pay taxes and make substantial contributions to New York's economic and cultural life.

The coalition also cited the old "No taxation without representation" rationale. "Why should immigrants pay taxes when they have no say in how their hard-earned money is spent?" read one of the signs held by protestors. According to a 2007 report by Fiscal Policy Institute, immigrants are responsible for $229 billion in economic output in New York State and account for 22.4 percent of the state's gross domestic product, a share slightly larger than their percentage of the population.

Similar bills that would allow non-citizens to vote in local elections have been introduced in Washington D.C. and San Francisco. Many states, including California, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Colorado, also are reviewing legislation that would allow long-term residents to vote.

Passing a Bill

The subject was officially brought into the public debate in 2005 when Brooklyn City Councilmember Charles Barron and nine other members introduced a bill to allow all legal residents who have lived in New York City for at least six months to vote in local and municipal elections. The bill, the Voting Rights Restoration Act or Intro 628, fell through at the end of that year.

In 2006, Barron, along with 13 other City Council members reintroduced the bill, also known as Intro 245. It is still pending in the Committee of Governmental Operations.

"They used to have legal residents who are non-citizens voting many years ago when immigrants were predominantly white," said Barron, an outspoken advocate for the African American community. "And when the complexions of the immigrants change, the policy change."

Noting legal residents can fight and die in wars for the country but cannot vote in local elections, Barron added, "I think it is racist that they can't vote. I think it is unjust that they can give up their life and they can pay taxes, but they cannot have a say in major quality-of-life issues."

A spokesperson for City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said she does not support allowing non-citizens to vote.

Barron said this will make it hard to get the bill through City Council. "It is very difficult when the speaker doesn't support something," said Barron. "She would tell her chair that she appoints to not even have a hearing on it. And then she can kill it in the committee by getting that committee to not vote on it or vote favorably for it. .... So we got a little struggle ahead of us, but we are used to that kind of struggle."
. . .
Meanwhile, a report released this month by Dr. Stanley Renshon for the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that supports immigration control, cites statistics that it say show that, even when non-citizens can register and vote, they don't. The report also emphasizes the importance of the process of naturalization because its standard five-year wait allows the immigrants to immerse themselves in the language and culture, and develop attachment to the country.

"Each of the five elements of the naturalization process -- residency, good character, language facility, civics knowledge, and affirmation - are essential elements," wrote Renshon. "Naturalization as a requirement of citizenship and voting is not so much a series of hurdles to surmount, but an essential part of becoming American."
. . .
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/immigrants/20080929/11/2662/

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

5.
Changing Ramadan Rituals
American Muslims Shifting Focus From Food to Community
By Michelle Boorstein
The Washington Post, September 27, 2008; B09

Growing up in southern Egypt, Mohamed Sayed ended Ramadan's daily fast with lots of friends and relatives sharing a big feast, sitting around the television, drinking sweet tea and eating dates "like Thanksgiving multiplied by 30."

Now 28 and living in Alexandria, Sayed is less traditional. For Ramadan, which began Sept. 2 and ends Thursday, he combines his iftars -- the end of his daily fast -- with his book club, "success strategies" meetings for young professionals and even a casual dinner at T.G.I. Friday's with a few friends.

"It's not just about the food," Sayed said, "it's also about being part of the community."

The ninth month of the Islamic calendar, Ramadan is the time when Muslims believe the Koran was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. Islam calls for Muslims to abstain from food, drink and sex from dawn to dusk, sharpen their self-discipline and focus on becoming closer to God.

Sayed's experience illustrates how the iftar is changing for many American Muslims. Traditionally observed daily with big family or neighborhood meals after sunset, some in smaller Muslim communities are celebrating the holiday just a few times a week.

Others, particularly since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, have used the holiday for activism, organizing iftars around Islam-related films or lectures or interfaith events. These changes represent soul-searching by some Muslims about how to create an American Islam, a trend pushed in particular by progressive Muslims seeking gender equity and more engagement with other faiths.

Ramadan remains important to American Muslims, the majority of whom were born outside the country. Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars, or foundations, of Islam and is "very important" to more than three-quarters of American Muslims, according to a Pew Research Center poll released last year.
. . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/26/AR200809...

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

6.
Fake Kidnapping Scheme Hits Illegal Immigrants in Arizona
The Associated Press, September 28, 2008

Phoenix (AP) -- Illegal immigrants in Arizona are increasingly being singled out by a so-called virtual kidnapping extortion scheme in which criminals falsely claim to have caught their loved ones as they tried to sneak across the border with Mexico, federal officials say.

The extortionists typically strike during the three- to four-day journey from Mexico through the remote desert when family members are cut off from one another. Relatives are told their loved ones will be maimed or killed unless they pay thousands of dollars in ransom.

One family paid $7,000 before calling the authorities.

The schemes started in Arizona five years ago and have escalated to an average of one case a week, officials say.

“It’s just an extension of what happens in Mexico,” said Armando Garcia, assistant special agent in charge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Arizona. Investigators say the extortionists may buy the names and phone numbers of their victims from smugglers or may pose as middle men who promise to connect illegal immigrants with smugglers in Mexican border towns.

Once a ransom is paid, the criminals will often ask for more money and sometimes even demand that families cover the cost of their cellphones.

Officials say the extortionists speak English well and use cellphones with a Phoenix area code, even though they may be making the calls from Mexico, where the extortion money is often sent.

The schemes have also been reported in San Diego. Immigration agents there investigate two to three cases a year, said Lauren Mack, a spokeswoman for the local Immigration and Customs Enforcement office.
. . .
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/us/28virtual.html