Arizona may Criminalize Presence of Illegal Immigrants

PHOENIX — Over the past several years, immigration hard-liners at the Arizona Legislature persuaded their colleagues to criminalize the presence of illegal border-crossers in the state and ban soft immigration policies in police agencies — only to be thwarted by vetoes from a Democratic governor.
This year, their prospects have improved. A proposal to draw local police deeper into the fight against illegal immigration has momentum, and even opponents expect the new Republican governor to sign off on the changes.
The proposal would make Arizona the only state to criminalize the presence of illegal immigrants through an expansion of its trespassing law. It also would require police to try to determine people's immigration status when there's reasonable suspicion they are in the country illegally.
An estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants live in the state.
"The greatest threat to our neighborhoods is the illegal alien invasion," said Republican Sen. Russell Pearce of Mesa, sponsor of the proposal, explaining that some illegal immigrants who are criminals bring violence and other crimes to the United States.
Supporters say the new rules are needed because the federal government has done a lousy job of trying seal the border and crack down on immigrants in the country's interior. Opponents say such new duties would be costly and lead to racial profiling.
The proposal passed the Senate two weeks ago, and a similar bill could come to a vote of the full House as early as this week.
Paul Senseman, spokesman for Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, said the governor doesn't comment on pending legislation but generally supports pragmatic immigration laws. Her predecessor, Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, vetoed similar proposals.
Many of the state's local police bosses have long resisted suggestions that their officers conduct day-to-day immigration enforcement, saying it would distract them from investigating other crimes and sow distrust among immigrants, who might not help officers investigating crimes because they fear being sent home.
"We are not anti-immigration enforcement," said Kingman Police Chief Robert DeVries, who opposes the bill. "We are just concerned about some of the responsibilities that are being pushed on us and how it affects our ability to provide day-to-day services in our communities."
Immigrant rights advocates are especially concerned about the trespassing expansion, saying it would inevitably lead to hassles for U.S. citizens and legal immigrants who would be approached by police because of their skin color.
"Bills like this that cast a net so wide are guaranteed to trap U.S. citizens," said Jennifer Allen, director of the Border Action Network, an immigrant rights group based in southern Arizona.
Pearce said he doesn't see the trespassing expansion being used on a wide scale and said officers wouldn't be required to arrest all illegal immigrants under such a law. Pearce said officers could turn illegal immigrants over to federal authorities, as police now routinely do, or they could use the trespassing expansion to hold onto illegal immigrants who are suspects in crimes.
First-offense trespassing by an illegal immigrant would be a top-tier misdemeanor punishable by up to six months in jail. Subsequent violations would be mid-tier felonies that would carry a penalty of one-and-a-half to three years in prison.
One element of the proposal would ban what anti-immigration groups call sanctuary polices — local rules that discourage or restrict officers from questioning immigrants.
Supporters of the bill say the policies — enacted by cities — create areas of "sanctuary" for illegal immigrants. The bill would let any person file a lawsuit to challenge the polices. If a judge finds a city restricted enforcement, the city could face civil penalties of $1,000 to $5,000 for each day the policy remains in effect after the lawsuit is filed.
Democratic Rep. Kyrsten Sinema of Phoenix, an opponent of the measure, disputes that cities and counties have any written or de facto policies that make them sanctuaries. "It's just not true," Sinema said

Early morning traffic stop nets 14 illegal aliens

Maricopa County, AZ. - A Maricopa County Sheriff’s patrol deputy arrested 14 illegal aliens, nine of which were for felony human smuggling charges, around 5:00 A.M. this morning during a traffic stop southwest of the Valley near Gila Bend.
These arrests are a result of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s recent promise to ensure that all 900 of his sworn deputies receive training on the enforcement of illegal immigration laws.
The Sheriff states that the rate of arrests made by his office for human smuggling violations at this point of the year is already double what it was this time last year. This is a significant increase considering the fact that Washington just recently stripped the Sheriff’s authority to allow 100 federally trained deputies to act as Immigration and Custom’s Enforcement (ICE) agents under the 287(g) program.
“This proves that I am keeping my promise to the people of Maricopa County and will continue to press forward on the illegal immigration problem we are facing. Obviously the numbers suggest that illegal aliens are still coming into this country and we are still arresting them,” Arpaio says.
Since the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office began enforcing felony state human smuggling laws, 1,874 illegal aliens have been arrested and booked into the county jail on felony smuggling violations. The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office continues to be the only law enforcement agency to enforce all aspects of the state human smuggling law.
Information obtained by deputies during these recent arrests will be instrumental in the determination of the location for the Sheriff’s next crime suppression operation.

Maricopa County Sheriff Press Release

Napolitano Says People From Countries Tied to Terrorism Could ‘Potentially’ Enter USA, But DHS Reports Says Thousands Already Have

Courtesy of CNSNEWS.com
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told senators it is a national security concern that people from countries with ties to terrorism could 'potentially' gain entry into the United States by crossing the country’s southern border.

But according to the Department of Homeland Security’s own reports, thousands of people from 14 “special interest” countries already have come into the United States illegally, including some across the U.S.-Mexico border. (The State Department designates some nations as "special interest" counties because of their links to terrorism.)
Napolitano testified before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Thursday. Her remarks on “special interest” persons came after Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) asked her about the ongoing violence in Mexico and the possibility of that violence spilling over into the United States.
“So, if the drug cartels succeeded, then it would be a matter of time before the violence would spill over onto our side of the border,” McCain said. “Not to mention the free, basically free, access they would have to bring drugs, as well as humans, into our country.”
“We haven’t seen spillover violence in that sense yet,” Napolitano said. “It is a risk. The ability to traffic in drugs cause their own damage to lives in the United States.
“Our ability to curtail that would be affected,” she said. “On the human trafficking side, it’s not solely illegal immigrants coming to work, but the ability of people from countries of special interest to immigrate into Central America and be ferried up to the border and over into the United States is also a concern.”
McCain responded: “Countries of special interest – people could come up through our southern border?”
“Potentially, yes,” Napolitano said.
The State Department lists four special interest countries as sponsors of terror – Cuba, Sudan, Syria and Iran. The other 10 countries of interest are: Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen.
A prototype of a tower for a virtual fence along the U.S.-Mexico border at a test facility in Playas, N.M. According to the DHS’s 2008 Yearbook of Immigration Studies, from the Office of Immigration Statistics, a total of 791,568 people where detained by federal law enforcement agencies in fiscal year 2008 – 5,506 of those people were from those 14 “special interest” countries.
The report states that those individuals were detained “at the borders of the United States, in the interior of the country and at designated sites outside of the United States.” It does not disclose those details for each individual, however.
The specific numbers of individuals by country are labeled in the yearbook at the chapter, “Deportable Aliens Located by Region and Country of Nationality: Fiscal Year 2008.”

Afghanistan – 29
Algeria – 41             
Cuba – 3,896
Iran – 98
Iraq – 118
Lebanon – 188
Liberia – 98
Libya – 11
Nigeria – 299
Pakistan – 494
Saudi Arabia – 71
Somalia – 66
Sudan – 46
Syria – 71
Yemen -- 78
In accordance with federal law, any individual arrested by U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) are then turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is responsible for detention and deportation.
Aside from the number of individuals and their country of origin, the DHS does not release any further information about the individuals, including whether they were found to have links with terrorist groups. CNSNews.com is seeking further information about illegal aliens in U.S. custody from 2007 to 2009 from the 14 countries of special interest, through the Freedom of Information Act.
According to an August 2009 report on checkpoints and border security by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), 530 illegal aliens from countries of special interest were “encountered” at CBP checkpoints in fiscal year 2008.

The report states:
“Checkpoints also help screen for individuals who may have ties to terrorism. CBP reported that in fiscal year 2008, there were three individuals encountered by the Border Patrol at southwest border checkpoints who were identified as persons linked to terrorism.
“In addition, the Border Patrol reported that in fiscal year 2008 checkpoints
encountered 530 aliens from special interest countries, which are countries the Department of State has determined to represent a potential terrorist threat to the United States.
“While people from these countries may not have any ties to illegal or terrorist activities, Border Patrol agents detain aliens from special interest countries if they are in the United States illegally and Border Patrol agents report these encounters to the local
Sector Intelligence Agent, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Joint Terrorism Task Force, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Office of Investigations, and the CBP National Targeting Center.
“For example, according to a Border Patrol official in the El Paso sector, a checkpoint stopped a vehicle and questioned its three Iranian occupants, determining that one of those occupants was in the United States illegally. The individual was detained and turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for further questioning.”
As reported earlier by CNSNews.com, the federal government, including DHS, have extensive information about the drug and human trafficking over the U.S. border with Mexico.
The entire U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long, according to the International Boundary and Water Commission. While 697 of those miles are now under “effective control,” according to the Border Patrol, 1,257 miles are not under “effective control.”
Each year, the Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC) produces “drug market analyses” for each of 32 regions of the country that the NDIC describes as “high intensity drug trafficking areas.” Five of these areas sit along the U.S.-Mexico border. These include the California border region, Arizona, New Mexico, West Texas and South Texas.
The latest reports, released in March and April of 2009, use candid language in portraying the U.S.-Mexican frontier as wide open to drug smuggling and even vulnerable to penetration by potential terrorists.
The California-Mexico border, the NDIC said, was “easily breached” on both foot and in vehicles.
“The vast border area presents innumerable remote crossing points that traffickers exploit to smuggle illicit drugs, primarily marijuana, into the country from Mexico,” said the NDIC. “These areas are easily breached by traffickers on foot, in private vehicles, or in all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) as they smuggle drugs between POEs [ports of entry], particularly the mountainous areas in eastern San Diego County and the desert and sand dune areas in Imperial County.”
Arizona’s border was judged to be open not only to drug smugglers but also aliens with “extensive criminal records” and from “special interest countries,” which are defined as “countries that could export individuals who could bring harm to the United States through terrorism.”
“Some criminal organizations smuggle aliens and gang members into the United States,” said NDIC’s report on Arizona. “These particular individuals typically have extensive criminal records and pose a threat, not only to the Arizona HIDTA [High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area] region but also to communities throughout the United States. Alien smuggling organizations reportedly also smuggle aliens from countries other than Mexico, including special-interest countries.”
“Special-interest countries are those designated by the intelligence community as countries that could export individuals who could bring harm to the United States through terrorism,” said the NDIC report.

Number of Illegal Immigrants Rises in Southeast

When the Olympic Games came to Atlanta in 1996, a building boom transformed the landscape of downtown and brought with it an influx of Latino immigrants both legal and illegal.

In the years since, the number of illegal immigrants living in Georgia has skyrocketed, more than doubling to 480,000 from January 2000 to January 2009, according to a new federal report. That gave Georgia the greatest percentage increase among the 10 U.S. states with the biggest illegal immigrant populations during those years. Many in metro Atlanta say the explanation for the boom is simple.  It was because of the jobs.
For years, Chamblee, Georgia was the last stop for three bus companies carrying immigrants from the border city of Brownsville, Texas.  With cheap housing, easy transportation and an abundance of work, the immigrants put down roots and were quick to tell family and friends back home of the opportunities in the Atlanta area.
The large immigrant populations in Georgia and North Carolina are largely Mexican and undocumented,  a senior demographer at the Pew Hispanic Center.

As recently as the 1980s, Southeastern states, with the exception of Florida, had very few immigrants, legal or illegal, Passel said. California, which is still home to about 24 percent of the country's illegal immigrants, used to account for about 40 percent. Five other states,Texas, New York, Florida, Illinois and New Jersey shared another 40 percent, he said.
But a recession in California in the early 1990s, and a ready supply of low-skilled jobs in other regions prompted immigrants to look elsewhere, especially the Southeast.
Nationwide,  illegal immigrant population grew 27 percent during the above mentioned study period, though the numbers fell in the last two years. The population was 11.8 million in January 2007. It fell to 11.6 million in January 2008 and dropped to 10.8 million in January 2009. That coincides with the downturn in the U.S. economy, and demographers say the drop is likely to be temporary.

Once the economy rebounds, construction will pick up, as will the service industry, and illegal immigrants will return for those jobs.

Demographers expect the Southeast to bounce back faster than states like California, Nevada and Arizona. And they don't expect hostile attitudes or get-tough laws to keep illegal immigrants from coming back to Georgia.
"The only way you're going to get the illegal immigrant population in Georgia to go down or nationwide is to legalize them or get rid of the jobs," said Dowell Myers, a specialist in demographic trends at the University of Southern California.

This Week In Immigration News Feb. 26,2010

 The Washington Independant -

To reduce the state debt in California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.) wants to make a drastic cut in public assistance for legal immigrants. The cut would mostly affect new immigrants, who are not yet eligible for welfare, by eliminating access to essential medical care and basic food and cash assistance. Thirty-seven thousand people will lose aid from the California Food Assistance Program; 24,000 people will lose assistance provided by CalWORKs, which provides families with cash, childcare and job-training; and 48,570 legal immigrants will lose their access to heathcare (through Medi-Cal).

Undocumented immigrants are being left out of the healthcare debate, but a new study shows that even legal immigrants — those who are eligible for government healthcare programs — face challenges that prevent them from receiving adequate care. The study, sponsored by New Yorkers For Accessible Health Coverage and the New York Immigration Coalition, shows that many immigrants are misinformed about two major issues: by receiving public health insurance benefits, they may be considered a “public charge” (which would disqualify them from adjusting their status to lawful permanent resident); and that enrolling in public insurance would affect their ability to sponsor relatives for admission to the United States. Still, others aren’t enrolled because cultural and linguistic barriers prevent them from understanding or applying to be part of the insurance system.


The Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify system, which serves to check a potential employee’s eligibility to work in the U.S., works less than half the time to accurately flag unauthorized workers, according to a research report by Westat, a research company based in Maryland under contract to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. E-Verify inaccurately reads unauthorized workers as authorized 54 percent of the time, according to the study. The system is voluntarily used by more than 180,000 employers currently at more than 675,000 work sites and applies only to new hires. “This is a wake-up call to anyone who thinks E-Verify is an effective remedy to stop the hiring of illegal immigrants,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who is writing an immigration bill.

Senate Republicans have raised concerns about the jobs bill because it does not require that an employee be a legal resident or citizen, nor does it require use of the E-Verify system. GOP members say the bill does not prevent businesses from trying to gain tax credits by hiring illegal immigrants. Read more about E-Verify, and why the GOP fears undocumented workers, here.

The Economic Policy Institute released a report showing that immigrants who are U.S. citizens are more likely to receive higher wages and experience lower levels of poverty than non-citizens. Surprisingly, the study also found that in 2007, adult U.S. citizen immigrants had a median family income of $57,823, higher than the median family income of native-born citizens ($56,000.) Non-citizen immigrants’ median family income was $38,600. The report suggested that this may be attributed to assimilation and the likelihood of naturalized citizens having attained higher levels of education than non-citizens.

 The Dept. of Homeland Security reports that the illegal population fell significantly between 2008 and 2009, by almost 1 million people (experts agree the main causes are a weak economy and tougher immigration enforcement.) But opinion differs on what those numbers actually mean. Most immigration experts agree that the number of new illegal immigrants entering the country has declined, but some disagree over whether the number of immigrants leaving has increased.

A new report by the anti-immigration think-tank, Center for Immigration Studies, tells Republican leaders to give up on the Latino vote. The center suggests that only after reducing Hispanic immigration into the country can that voting block begin assimilating and becoming Republican. The Immigration Impact writes in an article, “In other words, the CIS report offers not only a grim view of Republican political prospects, but a stereotypical and insulting portrayal of Latino voters who are perceived as too poor and ignorant to vote Republican, and who should therefore be ignored by Republican political strategists until they grow out of their Democratic phase….Apparently, an immigrant has not really become fully part of American society until he or she fervently supports a Republican Party that officially looks down upon immigrants.”

Canada - Stronger federal action urged on illegal immigration

ELGIN -- Elgin Police Chief Lisa Womack urged federal lawmakers Thursday to take action soon on addressing illegal immigration, citing a failure to do so for what has become the public's "misunderstanding" of local law enforcement's role.

Speaking during a teleconference as part of a four-person panel of former and current local law enforcement officials, Womack described Elgin's issues concerning illegal immigration as "very similar" to those found in border states. She said it stemmed from the federal government's inability thus far to come up with a comprehensive plan for immigration reform.
"There's a clear misunderstanding on the local level from my community as to what the local role is in enforcement of immigration laws," Womack said. "In my community, a portion of them believe 'illegal is illegal' and that police need to deal with it, and if the federal government won't, then the local police should."
"We all know that is absolutely not an accurate statement," she continued. "Immigration law and immigration enforcement is a federal law enforcement agency matter."
Also featured at the forum -- hosted by the California-based Law Enforcement Engagement Initiative -- were El Paso County, Texas, Sheriff Richard Wiles; Yakima, Wash., Police Chief Sam Granato; and former Sacramento, Calif., police chief and current LEEI Project Director Arturo Venegas.
Venegas said immigration law enforcement has burdened local police departments over the last several years at a time when many are struggling with limited resources.
"We do not ask the federal government to handle the calls for service in our local community," he said. "And we for sure as heck do not have the resources to handle, in essence, the federal responsibility in immigration."
Womack said only people arrested for criminal acts have had their residency status checked, and that anything more would only help to stoke an air of distrust between officers and some within the communities they are trying to police.
"We want to have a safe and secure community," she said. "Those that are here in our community violating the laws regardless of their residency status is what we focus on -- that is the line that we draw in order that we can maintain that trust with our community so that we can have criminal activity being appropriately reported."

Lines drawn over census results

(CNN) -- President Obama recently encouraged Americans to "take about 10 minutes to answer 10 questions" and fill out their 2010 census form.
This year's questionnaire is one of the shortest in history, but the results of the survey have long-term effects.
The census, taken every 10 years, is used to determine how to allocate more than $400 billion in federal funds and seats House of Representatives and determine the boundaries of representatives' districts.
"There is no representative democracy without it. It's the scientific, nonpartisan, apolitical starting point of what eventually becomes a quite partisan, political process," said Kenneth Prewitt, a professor at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs and the former director of the United States Census Bureau.
The House is made up of 435 congressional seats that represent relatively equal slices of the population. When data from the census show a shift in population, seats in the House get reassigned. Some states might pick up a seat or two, while others are forced to combine two districts into one.
The process of apportioning seats is straightforward, but redistricting is much more complicated. Districts are supposed to be redrawn to reflect population changes and to make sure there is equal representation in the House.



House of Representatives
State legislators and governors typically draw the districts, but some states rely on restricting committees. Districts can affect the balance of power in the House and representation in the state legislature.
"People try to do things that are to their political advantage if they happen to be in power because maybe the next time the census comes out, the other party will be in power," said William Frey, a demographer and senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
Lawmakers have been accused of carving district lines around the constituents that will give their party an advantage and secure political gains.
The process is known as gerrymandering, a term coined after Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry. Elected in 1810, he signed an obscure redistricting bill that enabled greater and perhaps disproportionate Republican representation in the Massachusetts legislature.
Critics say gerrymandering gives those in power an unfair advantage and can dilute the power of minority groups.
The Supreme Court in 2006 took up a case looking at a redistricting plan promoted by then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas.
After the 2000 census, a state court redrew the Texas map with input from state lawmakers. But after Republicans gained control of the legislature in 2002, DeLay promoted a second redistricting proposal for congressional boundaries.
The Texas legislature adopted the plan in 2003 after three contentious special sessions called by Republican Gov. Rick Perry. The legislative plan led to the 2004 ouster of four Democratic incumbents from Congress and sparked a bitter partisan battle.
The court ruled that the redistricting plan unfairly weakened the voting strength of Latinos in two congressional districts and tossed out a portion of the congressional map, but found the overall redistricting plan engineered by state Republicans acceptable.
Prewitt said the redrawing of lines to the benefit of one party or the neglect of other is just a part of the political process.
"The production of the statistics has got to be nonpolitical ... but the use of the statistics can be as political as the country wants it to be," he said.
"I expect people to try to take advantage of situations to advance their political goals, interests, values -- so it's healthy. Now, do I think overtime creating districts so incumbents are always re-elected is the healthiest way to have a democracy? No," Prewitt said, adding that it's up to the voters to decide whether they want to throw someone out of office.
The more pressing issue for Prewitt is making sure everyone is counted because he said those who aren't counted will be treated unfairly in the political process and in the allocation of economic benefits.
With more than 300 million people in the United States, it can be difficult to make sure than everyone is counted. Frey said calculating the homeless population and the population of those who do not speak English can be particularly challenging.
Illegal immigrants, for example, sometimes opt not to turn in census forms for fear of legal ramifications. Those fears, however, are unwarranted because the information is confidential.
"The challenge that they have is a cost challenge," said Frey. The Census Bureau has to follow up with those who don't send in their forms with additional forms, telephone calls and even in-person visits -- and that adds up, he said.
This year's census is projected to cost more than $14 billion. Prewitt said it's comparatively easy to count the first 75 to 85 percent, but the last 2 to 3 percent is "really, really tough going."
As the census gets underway, Prewitt said trying to count everyone, as mandated by the Constitution, should be the top concern.
"I'm much more concerned about trying to have a fair census than I am about some drawing of odd lines after the census is over," he said.