Congressional Hispanic Caucus

In an appeal to the executive branch, members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus asked for a stay of enforcement of the Secure Communities Program on Thursday backing several state and local governmental attempts of rejection.

Previously voluntary, the Department of Homeland Security now mandates state and local government obedience in upholding the policy.  Although the program was enacted in 2008 attempting to deport “convicted serious criminals”, Secure Communities has consequently imprisoned many undocumented immigrants without a criminal charge. 

The FBI screens fingerprint data for criminal background information that is then forwarded to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE.  Under Secure Communities, detainees are printed at local jails for immigration checking. 

On Wednesday, the Illinois state government addressed its participation in the program, pushing for cessation of its contract.  Similarly, California is proposing legislature for modification on its agreement concerning Secure Communities under the threat of permanent withdrawal.  It is unclear whether the federal government will secede to the demands of both states. However, the state’s objection to the program will not cease scans of Illinois data, according to federal officials.

According to The Los Angeles Times, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn demanded that ICE officials recognize the limits of the state’s withdrawal.  He said, “No new counties in Illinois can be activated, and those counties that were previously activated for their information to pass through ISP to ICE, must be deactivated and removed from the Secure Communities program."

Meanwhile, Congressional pressure for analysis into the programs constituents continues to rise.  Last week, U.S. Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) called the ICE and Homeland Security’s efforts purposefully beguiling to local and state governments and Congress petitioning for investigation.

Regardless, the Department of Homeland Security declared nationwide implementation of Secure Communities by 2013 despite the attempts of opposition.  They claim the program is “information sharing between two federal agencies” and does not require local or state approval.

Previously, San Francisco and Santa Clara counties have been unsuccessful in their efforts to back out of the program.  

Source: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/05/hispanic-caucus-calls-on-obama-to-freeze-controversial-immigration-enforcement-program-.html

Trial Run of Iris Scanner Identification System at U.S.-Mexico Border

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security implemented a preliminary two-week test of iris-scanning electronics at the U.S.-Mexico border patrol station in McAllen, Texas last winter.

Prior to administering the test, DHS clientele had not appealed for utilization of the identification technical alloy as an increased security development.

The dry run was simply a procedure of “operational feasibility” according to DHS spokeswoman Amy Kudwa.  Stationing the scanners would require advances in database software that have yet to be discovered.

The privacy impact assessment for the Iris and Face Technology Demonstration and Evaluation, claims the DHS Science and Technology committee supported the trial run with financial backing from the US-VISIT program and the national programs and protection board.  The names of the three corporations supplying the DHS with the equipment were withheld.

Immigration was the subject of the exhibition; the scanners assisted in classifying and handling illegal aliens.

High-resolution images of the irises are the foundation for identity recognition used in the technology.  The picture of the individual’s eye is then processed and documented.  However, the DHS claims all information obtained during the McAllen study was in disconnect of any federal storage system and was stored in a separate and secure database.

The risk of civil liberties violations is heightened as the Federal government continues to prospect new technologies in enhancing border surveillance at the Mexico perimeter.  The McAllen study and other surveillance projects have come under fire from the American Civil Liberties Union and other committees concerned with privacy.

California’s neighboring margin and it’s proximity to Mexico continues to motivate the DHS to push the limit line in an effort to tighten it’s hold on the number of crossers.

This border defense operative follows the recent collapse of the SBInet program.  The “virtual fence” outlining the southern tip of the nation pulled on Congress’ purse strings and utilized machinery ill-suited for the terrain and environmental landscape. 

California’s neighboring margin and it’s proximity to Mexico continues to motivate the DHS to push the limit line in an effort to tighten it’s hold on the number of crossers.

Source: DHS Testing Iris Scanners At U.S. Border TECHWEB September 13, 2010 Monday 1:30 PM GMT

S.B. 1070

ARIZONA-- April 23, 2010 Senate Bill 1070 was signed by Governor Jan Brewer. It’s been a little over a year, and it seems the controversy surrounding the bill is slowly deteriorating. It seems, however, the action preceding the passing is still highly active. Has it helped immigration laws or is it causing racial profiling and stereotyping? The answers are still mixed throughout all levels of society.

Obviously Governor Brewer’s stance is highly defended. It’s reported that “over 3.7 million dollars in donations have been collected”[1] by her office. There are, however, citizens and organizations trying to counter her actions, including the U.S. Department of Justice. The U.S. government sued Arizona’s law, resulting in a countersuit by Arizona in February 2011. In the countersuit, “Arizona claims that the federal government has violated the U.S. Constitution by failing to enforce immigration laws”[2]. Naturally, it would seem Arizona may have used extreme measures to get some type of response from the government. Well, Arizona received the attention they sought, but it may not be the attention they needed.

The aftermath of the bill has been well documented on the federal and state level but what about the citizens effected? Jorge-Mario Cabrera, a communications and public relations Director remembers the day the bill was passed: “By mid-day, thousands of young people had walked out of their school sanctums towards Arizona's State Capitol Building”[3].  He fears citizens of Arizona will be in a “battlefield where loved ones, their parents in particular, could be criminalized, displaced, uprooted with the stroke of a demagogue's pen”. The effects of S.B. 1070 have been showcased throughout national and local news and is effectively sending a ripple effect throughout the country. Other states are using it as a model to follow; “copycat laws” are in production in states like Utah, Georgia and Florida. It seems states may be acting without hesitation because of the lack of federal aid for immigration issues. Can the government solve the problems or will states attempt to come up with more short term solutions? 

S.B. 1070: http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

 

---

[1] http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/1158b7a51ef74cf4afdf4aef0b1f79d7/AZ--Defending-SB1070/

[2] http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/04/13/35764.htm

[3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jorgemario-cabrera/arizon-sb1070-immigration-reform_b_850309.html

Some History of Mexican Immigration by Raquel Hernandez

Some History of Mexican Immigration

One of the most prominent immigrant groups in the United States are Mexicans.  When you think of an immigrant, you immediately think of a person with dark skin, dark hair, and a short in stature…Oh come on, let’s say it, you think of a Mexican.  No, you are not being biased; you are only being influenced by what you see.  Mexicans are present everywhere, whether they have legal documents or not.  In fact, Mexicans constitute the majority of Latinos living in the United States and they continue to be one of the largest groups moving to the United States nowadays.  According to Evelyn H. Cruz and Sean Carpenter in their essay “We Want You When We Need You, Otherwise Get Out: The Historical Struggle of Mexican Immigrants to Obtain Lawful Permanent Residency in The United States,” Mexicans have a very unique immigration history given that Mexico borders the United States and given that several states that now belong to the United States used to be Mexican territory.  

                In the same essay, Cruz and Carpenter explain that after the Mexican-American war, the United States and Mexico signed the Treaty of Hidalgo in 1848, and under this treaty, Mexicans residing in the Mexican lands surrendered to the United States were given the option to remain and become United States citizens, remain in the United States but continue to carry the Mexican citizenship, or to go down to Mexico. When these people didn’t choose either option within a year of the treaty, they were automatically given the status of U.S. Citizens.  Then in 1853 during the Gadsden Purchase, where additional land in the Southwest was negotiated, a similar provision was included.  For many years, the doors between the two countries were open allowing migration to the United States side of the border.  Some Mexicans established themselves in this side of the border without having to think about their immigration status.  Others used to come temporarily to work in the agricultural and mining industries, and then returned to the Mexican side. 

                During many years there were no means to establish lawful admission to the United States; therefore, Mexicans kept coming and going as they had families on both sides of the border making the southern part of the United States and the northern part of Mexico a union.  Since there were no signs that indicated where each country started or any border enforcements that prevented them from going from one country to the other, Mexicans felt free to cross whenever they wanted.  The authors state:  “[T]he U.S. - Mexico treaties not only created lawful Mexican immigrants, they created a large newly minted American citizenry of Mexican descent.”  

It wasn’t until 1910 that the first fence between Nogales, Arizona and Nogales, Mexico was erected, and that was the point where illegal immigration from Mexico started to become a concern to the United States.

Reference: Evelyn Haydee Cruz. SSRN Working Paper Series. Rochester: Mar 2011.

Feature Story on Immigration by Raquel Hernandez

               
My name is Raquel Hernandez, and I am an immigrant.
                Many people come from around the world to the United States looking for a better life, but many times what they find is not even near what they had expected. In my small town in Mexico, people who plan to come to this country, either legally or illegally, plan to stay for only two years, find a job, send money to their families to build a house, and save money to return home with a truck and with enough money to start up a small business.  HOWEVER, this is only “The Mexican Dream” that very few manage to accomplish.  From the people I know, I can say that the majority of them who have migrated to the United States start by baby sitting or cleaning houses.  If they are lucky to migrate with legal papers, they end up in a factory, in a restaurant, in the fields, or in construction.  Most of them don’t take the time to go to school and learn English. 
                My parents were living in this country when I was born.  When I was only eight months old, they moved back to Mexico and that’s where I grew up until the age of 19. Upon being unable to continue my education in Mexico due to a financial crisis that my father was having, my parents and I decided that it would be best that I returned to the United States to study English for two straight years, go back to Mexico to find a job in a touristic place and hopefully catch up with my education.  However, it has been 11 years since I came here, and I am barely finishing my B.A. degree.

Even though I didn’t have to swim to cross the river or walk for days through the dessert, I have gone through many sacrifices. I arrived at my godparents’ home, whom I only knew from their sporadic visits to Mexico. Relatives took me to Palomar College to register for ESL classes (English as a Second Language), but in order to contribute to the expenses of the home where I was graciously being hosted and to provide for my parents, I had to look for a job.  After 15 days of my arrival, I had a full-time job in a factory in the second shift and a few days later I was attending school in the morning. 

It took me a year and a half of saving money to buy an old car, but in the mean time since I didn’t have my own transportation or a parent to take me to school, I had to buy a used bike and a used helmet with my first earnings; on rainy days, I used to get home completely wet.  For work, I had to walk all the way to my cousin’s house to ride with her since we both worked in the same factory.  The shift ended at 1:30 in the morning, so I used to get home around 2 AM.  My bed was a sofa in the living room.  My godparents had to get up at 4:20 AM to go to work, and on weekends, they let me borrow their son’s bedroom; so they would wake me up from the sofa to send me to the bedroom after their son had left for work. This was my routine until I had to leave the house.

The house where I was staying belonged to my godfather’s mother-in-law, and when they got in a fight, he decided to leave the house, and because I am his relative, I had to leave the house as well.  Having nowhere to go other than my car, my boyfriend proposed to me getting married before we had planned.  I called my father to ask for his permission (my mother at that time had passed away already), he approved my decision and the next day after work, I got married wearing a stained shirt and stainless steel-toe boots that I used for work. Thank God, my husband has been a great support for me and I have been able to continue to attend school, work, and lately my internship.   

My story proves that even when an immigrant person has legal documents, the change is never easy. One of the things I regret the most about migrating to another country is that I left my parents behind and I couldn’t spend more time with my mother during her illness.  People who don’t have legal papers cannot even be with their family members in their deathbed because if they leave the country, they are afraid that they may not be able to make it alive in their next attempt to cross to the country that has offered them a better way of living.