Friday, May 27, 2011

Georgian Farmers Blame Labor Shortage on State's New Immigration Law

Georgia recently passed an Arizona-like bill that goes into effect on July 1. Among other things, Georgia House Bill 87 requires private employers to use an employment eligibility verification system and provides authority for law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws and investigate the immigration status of Georgia residents.

As reported recently in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, migrant farm workers are choosing not to settle in Georgia because of HB 87. This has created a severe labor shortage among fruit and vegetable growers and potentially puts millions of dollars of crops in jeopardy.

Prospects for resolving the shortage look grim. Farmers say they are unable to recruit Georgia residents to work in their fields, because "it is temporary, hot and physically demanding." The president of the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association said his farm is struggling against the worker shortage even after boosting pay to attract more migrant workers.

As states continue to pass piecemeal immigration laws, the labor shortage in Georgia will undoubtedly repeat itself throughout the rest of the United States. Georgia's struggle to save its crops exposes the country's dependence on migrant workers and calls for a guest worker program, both for the sake of our economy and the protection of immigrant workers.

Read more here in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Denver Immigration Court Overloaded

An article in Sunday's Denver Post documents the overwhelming caseload at the Immigration Court in Denver, Colorado. According to the article, two of Denver's immigration judges have as many as 2,400 pending cases each at any given time.

Judge Dana Leigh Marks, president of the National Associate of Immigration Judges, is quoted as saying that the necessarily rushed nature of the proceedings with such an inundation of cases is akin to trying death penalty cases in a traffic court setting.

With the enactment of Secure Communities and other programs designed to sweep more and more people into removal proceedings, the court's caseload seems likely to get worse. In the midst of the current budget struggles, it is difficult to envision Congress passing funding for more immigration judges and court staff to ensure due process and meaningful hearings in immigration court.

To read the article in the Denver Post, click here.

Thursday, May 19, 2011

United States Citizenship & Immigration Service Extends Temporary Protected Status to Haiti

On May 17, 2011 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) extended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to Haitians who qualified and applied during the designated time and who received TPS from the government. This move is a welcome and much needed recognition of the tens of thousands of human beings present in the United States who remain in need of protection from return to Haiti, a country still suffering from the earthquake that occurred more than a year ago. The extension is valid from July 23, 2011 until January 22, 2013.

Additionally, DHS has re-designated Haiti for Temporary Protected Status, allowing Haitian Nationals who were not covered by the initial designation but whom were continually present in the United States since January 12, 2011 to make a filing for TPS now. This measure allows people who entered the United States during the year following the earthquake to apply for TPS.

http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=35422

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

The "A" Word

After previous failures to get any traction on comprehensive immigration reform or the DREAM Act, President Obama has again ramped up his efforts to call for reform. The outlines of the President's proposed plan are nothing new. He emphasized the need to pore further resources into securing the borders and prosecuting business owners who willfully employ undocumented workers. At the same time, those illegally in the country could begin a legalization process after they (1) admit to having broken the law, (2) pay taxes and a fine, (3) learn English, and (4) undergo background checks to ensure that they have no serious criminal history.

For opponents of reform, the broad outline of the plan will be immediately deemed as unacceptable because it amounts to an amnesty. With so much of the political debate centered on whether or not a given plan is an amnesty, it is probably worth looking at what the word amnesty means.

According to dictionary.com, the definition of "amnesty" is (1) a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction; (2) an act of forgiveness for past offenses, especially to a class of persons as a whole; or (3) a forgetting or overlooking of any past offense.

The relevant definition word “pardon” is defined as (1) a release from the penalty of an offense; a remission of penalty, as by a governor; or (2) forgiveness of a serious offense or offender.

Would requiring offenders to (1) admit to having broken the law, (2) pay taxes and a fine, (3) learn English, and (4) undergo background checks to ensure no serious criminal history before they could start a legalization process really be an amnesty? Such requirements seem more akin a mass guilty plea and sanction (a presumably substantial fine and English classes) than a "release from the penalty of an offense" or a "forgetting or overlooking of any past offense."

When a person pleads guilty to DUI, he admits to having broken the law and then is required to pay court costs and fines and often agrees to take classes. DUI and other criminal offenders are not seen as having been granted amnesty.

A reform program should be envisioned as a mass guilty plea with serious sanctions attached. It would be to American society's benefit that fines will be paid, those who do not know English will be required to learn it, and 10 or so million people will no longer be living in the shadows.