A delegation from the House of Representatives is in Birmingham, Alabama today. Their visit will include an ad hoc field hearing to examine the impact of Alabama’s harsh new “papers please” immigration law, HB56. The day is expected to culminate in an event at Birmingham’s historic 16th Street Baptist Church where a statewide campaign to repeal the law is being launched.

Ironically or intentionally chosen, the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama was bombed on Sunday, September 15, 1963. The explosion at the African-American church, which killed four girls, marked a turning point in the U.S. 1960s civil rights movement and contributed to support for passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

All people in the vicinity need to show support for the repeal of the HB56 law, an ugly wound of bigotry and oppression in the South. Today, Alabamians are speaking out against hate and shame. All U.S. citizens need to call for repeal of this law. If allowed to stand, it can have a cascade-effect by providing a basis for future anti-immigration laws in the South. All Americans need to call your elected officials, write letters to your local newspapers and pray to our loving God, beseeching the repeal of this law. Congress needs to stimulate the economy, build revenue, share burden among the capable and facilitate a positive response to a dwindling American economy. Oppressing the vulnerable is not an appropriate response to losses that they have not caused.

ALABAMA CONGRESSIONAL VISIT – NOV. 21, 2011

Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (IL – D) is leading the delegation, which is expected to include:

• Rep. Joe Baca of California; Secretary of the Congressional Black Caucus
• Yvette D. Clarke of New York
• Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Charlie Gonzalez of Texas
• Rep. Al Green of Texas
• Congressional Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Raul Grijalva of Arizona
• Congressional Hispanic Caucus Immigration Task Force Chair Luis V. Gutierrez of Illinois
• Immigration Subcommittee Ranking Democrat Zoe Lofgren of California
• Rep. Grace Napolitano of California
• Rep. Terri A. Sewell of Alabama
• Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas.

Preliminary Schedule for November 21, 2011.

All events are in Birmingham and all times local (CT).

2:00 p.m. Press Conference for Members of the Congressional Delegation

Location: Birmingham City Council Chambers – Birmingham City Hall, 710 20th Street North

3:00-5:00 p.m. Ad Hoc Hearing: The impact of HB56 on families, businesses, agriculture, law enforcement and civil society.

Location: Birmingham City Council Chambers

ALABAMA CITIZENS: SHOW UP!!!!

7:00 p.m. Members of the Congressional Delegation will participate in the launch of the “One Family One Alabama Campaign to Repeal HB56”

Hosted by the Alabama Coalition for Immigrant Justice (ACIJ)

Location: Historic 16th Street Baptist Church (1530 Sixth Ave. North)

Every weeknight, my Sisters and I eat dinner as a community. Depending upon the happenings of the day and the energy levels of those present, dinner talk can range from the outrageously hilarious to an unparalleled banality.

One evening this week, the dinner talk resulted in a serendipitous, albeit sad insight for me. Somewhere between the peas and carrots and the sugar cookies, one of my animal-loving Sisters noted that on the prior day she had seen a small deer on our grounds. Her eyes lit up as she spoke fondly of the wonder of its beauty. Another Sister postulated that the deer come out of their wooded surroundings when they are hungry due to nature’s barrenness at this time of year. Then the acceptability of deer-hunting was raised. One Sister authoritatively responded that this was a positive activity because the population had “grown too large” and it “needed thinning out.” To my surprise, the animal lover chimed in, “yeah, they have no predators anymore. There are too many of them now.” Then I heard, “Soon there will be more of them than us,” as if that would be an unthinkable predicament.

The dinner talk droned on like white noise as I contemplated if it were ever acceptable to insert predatory behavior where there is none. Is it okay to thin out a growing population merely to ensure that there are more of us than they? Why couldn’t we make room for something so beautiful?

It occurred to me that Mary, when nine months pregnant, traveled with Joseph to Bethlehem because of a Roman requirement that all people register in their own towns. En route, Mary went into labor. Perceiving there would be less for them, those in the comfortable, safe shelter of the inn refused to make room. Consequently, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was born in the filth and squalor of a barn because the mighty needed to put a growing nation in its place and the common man would not make room when he felt crowded. Despite an auspicious birth, Jesus was initially adored and met with awe. Yet, when He and His followers grew, they would kill them too.

My mind drifted toward Alabama, which for a few years was my home. Alabama has no immigration courts or DHS presence for detaining or deporting unauthorized immigrants. Until recently, the immigrants accepted the jobs that citizens will not work, lived harmoniously and became good neighbors. They were welcome, beautiful gifts and their population grew because they had few predators. Then the national economic crisis, punctuated by the BP Oil Spill, quickly increased the number of needy people and depleted resources. Suddenly, as with the deer, it became acceptable to thin out those who were different than the majority.  Once again, men in comfort and power would perceive a lack of room.

In response, they enacted Alabama Law HB56. As written, the law requires that farmers verify citizenship of their fruit pickers; schools ensure the citizenship of a child’s parent in order to register the child for school; and religious organization risk criminal penalties for charitable acts toward undocumented poor persons. The law kills noble dreams and righteous outcomes. Again, I wondered, when did it become acceptable to insert predatory behavior where there is none?  Is there a shortage of room or is it a shortage of compassion?

Whether it is deer, unauthorized immigrants or even God, man has invariably responded to threats to his comfort level by insertion of predatory behavior and destruction of the perceived competition in order to remain among the most powerful.

However, the only thing man is called to kill is violence and oppression. As Rabbi Heschel once said, “We teach children how to measure and how to weigh. We fail to teach them how to revere, how to sense wonder and awe.”  If we learn to sense the awe in our neighbors, we will see God in each other. And then we will conform our behavior to meet that reality.

The English Language Unity Act of 2011 (H.R. 997), introduced by Rep. Steve King (R-IO), has been dormant on Capitol Hill since its introduction in March. This bill would recognize English as the official language of the United States and mandates that the United States only naturalize immigrants who speak English. The disheartening immigration rhetoric raised in the Republican presidential primary has combined with the political resolve of people trying to promote an English-only agenda while distracting voters from the key issues during this election year.

After the recent remarks from all four Republican contenders in support of this type of legislation, Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) stated, “I support efforts to make English the official language and may consider bringing up the issue in the House Judiciary Committee down the road.” This goes against the long-standing American values and tradition of accepting immigrants of all backgrounds.

The political reality is that a minority of lawmakers in Congress are politically maneuvering themselves to highlight the president’s opposition to such a law in an election year. President Obama’s opposition was made clear in his vote against an English-only amendment to a comprehensive immigration reform bill in 2007.

Much of this is simply rooted in racism as the Hispanic population in our country continues to rise. Data showthat second-generation Hispanic immigrants, by a vast 88 percent majority, speak English fluently.

We must find pride in being one of the most diverse nations in the world and should not try to diminish or limit that principle. For 235 years, our nation has experienced waves of diverse immigrants who have spoken a variety of languages. Whether they are European or Asian, German or Hispanic, our tradition of welcoming immigrants of all language backgrounds must be preserved in order to build a more perfect union.

On April 26, 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral arguments on Arizona’s anti-immigration law S.B. 1070, and a ruling is expected before the end of the term in June.

NETWORK, along with approximately 50 other civil rights, faith, and community organizations filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court urging the affirmance of the injunction issued by the lower court. (We are also taking part in a prayer vigil before the Supreme Court during the week. Photo shows NETWORK’s Sr. Mary Ellen Lacy leading a prayer.)

Although purportedly targeting “unlawfully present” immigrants, S.B. 1070 will dramatically harm the lives of U.S. citizens, Lawful Permanent Residents (“LPRs”), and other individuals across a spectrum of immigration statuses—such as asylum seekers and victims of violent crimes—in ways that run counter to the federal immigration scheme. Underlying S.B. 1070 are two fallacies. The first is that each person fits into one of two categories—those who are “lawfully present” and those who are not. The second is that Arizona law enforcement officers can readily distinguish between these categories by simply reviewing a certain set of federally mandated documents, or by calling the federal government on the telephone….

Excerpted from the amicus brief. See entire amicus brief here.

NETWORK believes that individual state-authored or Supreme Court-tweaked legislation is not the ideal; nor is it representative of the separation of powers and the checks and balances mandated by the first articles in the U.S. Constitution.

NETWORK maintains that the manner in which we treat immigrants is one of national significance, and we call upon Congress to adopt federally mandated legislation that is just, compassionate and wise.

On Wednesday, I lobbied White House officials as a member of the Interfaith Immigration Coalition. We asked the administration to utilize its considerable executive powers to facilitate some kind of categorical relief for the Dreamer. And we presented our arguments for realization of the Dream as members of a large interfaith coalition that can claim solidarity in our view regarding the need for acceptance and freedom for the Dreamers of this generation.

Forty to fifty years ago, Reverend Martin Luther King fought for a similar Dream, with similar faith support. He dreamed that, one day, little black children and little white children would join hands as brothers and sisters. Inequality, as a matter of law, would be abolished.

Today, the Dream lives… but it will never be fully realized until we reach out to join hands with the brown children and the yellow children too…until all children join hands freely.

I work on healthcare, nutrition, safety net, etc., with many interfaith activist coalitions. Different religious values and beliefs make for different points of view and political thoughts. Birth control… war…. gay persons’ rights… so much prevents us from coming to full agreement. Some subjects can’t even be raised. But on this topic of justice for the Dreamer, we all, without reservation, agree.

So the mere fact that all religions represented in this large, interfaith coalition agree on this subject must tell us all something. It is so right, so clear, that there can be no just opposition.

I believe it is God saying that it is time for the truth to be unearthed, …right here, …right now. We believe that the innocent child who was brought over by an adult should not suffer one more day. All available measures to assist them should be fully implemented. I think that the present administration believes this as well. But faith without works is dead.

We know, as faithful people, that we belong to each other. And once we truly believe that we belong to one another, our responsibility to treat each other with respect and dignity comes alive. A valid belief should always create a will to effect change.

So our faith communities serve the undocumented and documented immigrant populations in the streets. Daily, in some form or another, we serve the hungry, the homeless and the cold immigrant. We see their pain. And we know their suffering is created by the laws that allow treatment that is unequal, unaccepting and racist. So, we work in our congregations and on Capitol Hill to revolutionize the hearts of people.

In the meanwhile, as Martin Luther King further reminds us: the habits, if not the hearts of people, have been and are being altered by legislative acts, judicial decisions and executive orders. We will not be misled by those who would argue that justice for the Dreamer cannot be achieved through force of law. (adapted from Strength to Love)

Laws and executive orders that provide for justice and the common good enable human beings to live as God intended for them to live.

The administration has publicly professed belief in justice for the Dreamer. I think everyone in that room believed in this. But faith without works is dead. So we must ask ourselves, can we make our work reflect our stated belief? A great man once said, ‘YES WE CAN’.

He was right.

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

The inscription on the State of Liberty reflects the American tradition of welcoming the immigrant. Throughout our history, we have assured the American Dream can be attained by anyone willing to work hard and contribute to the common good.

However, our current immigration system is not a working one. Years-, sometimes decades-long waits in our current immigration system delay opportunities for immigrants to provide priceless innovations to our society.  Dr. Adriana Kugler, Chief Economist for the Department of Labor, released a report last month detailing how immigrants build stronger communities, one neighborhood at a time. Some of the highlights cited included how immigrants strengthen our country in various areas.

Immigrants promote American business.

• Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business.
• Immigrants represent 16.7% of all new business owners.
• Immigrants started 25% of the U.S. public venture- backed companies between 1990 and 2005.

Immigrants promote jobs for all Americans.

• Generally, evidence for the U.S. finds that immigrants tend to generate little displacement of domestic workers. This is because they tend to choose different occupations and have different skills.
• Domestic workers benefit overall from immigration. The rise in immigration between 1990 and 2004 increased the earnings of those with more than a high school degree by 0.7% by 2004 and is expected to increase them by 1.8% over the longer term.
• These companies directly employ an estimated 220,000 people inside the U.S. across many different sectors.
• 40% of U.S. publicly traded venture-backed companies operated in high tech manufacturing (including Intel, Google, Yahoo, and eBay) were started by immigrants and they hire more than half of workers in this sector.

Immigrants are an important component in essential sectors of our economy.

• While immigrants represent 15% of the population, immigrants represent 24% of U.S. scientists and 47% of U.S. engineers with bachelor or doctoral degrees.

Immigrants promote the common good by addressing our debt.

• According to the CBO, the fiscal impact of immigrants as a whole is positive as the tax revenues generated by immigrants exceed the cost of the government services they use.
• The IRS estimates that about 60% of undocumented immigrants pay taxes and that between 1996-2003 they paid almost $50 billion in federal taxes, including payroll and social security taxes.
• The CBO also estimates that spending by states for undocumented immigrants accounted for less than5% of total state and local spending for education, healthcare and law enforcement.

You can view the complete report with charts and additional information here.

On June 15, 2012, Janet Napolitano announced that undocumented youth who were less than 31 years old on that date and had come to the United States before they were 16 years old may be eligible to apply for deferred deportation and work authorization. They must also meet other criteria, including length of residence and education requirements, and there are criminal background limitations.

As of August 15, 2012, if they meet all delineated qualifying criteria, they may file a request with a specified USCIS office for deferred action for a period of two years, subject to renewal.  If deferred action is granted, the individual would then be eligible for work authorization.  While data varies, it is safe to say that about 1.5 million undocumented young people seem to qualify for this life enhancing administrative action.

NETWORK reinforces its support for this bold and long awaited Administrative relief.  Unfortunately, this relief does not provide a path to citizenship and is not available to all childhood arrivals.  As such, NETWORK continues to lobby for DREAM ACT and, ultimately, comprehensive Immigration Reform.

For list of specific qualifying criteria, deadlines and forms, see www.uscis.gov/childhoodarrivals

Take note of the following process issues and specifics at the above site.

• Individuals must demonstrate through “verifiable documentation” that they meet the outlined criteria and make their request to the USCIS on three established forms which can be found on the above website.  When completing the forms, applicants should review the detailed instructions for each form to ensure compliance with requirements.
• In addition, applicants wanting to be notified by e-mail or text message that their forms have been accepted should also submit Form G-1145, E-Notification of Application/Petitioner Acceptance.
• There is a $465 fee, which covers the cost of a biometric check, the background check for applicants and checking each application on a case-by-case basis for fraud.   This fee requirement should quiet the GOP complaints of increased cost to the USA for implementing the program.  A receipt will be issued to those who submit the proper payment with the forms.
• The forms and documentation are to be mailed to a specific USCIS office for each geographical area that can be located on the USCIS website.
• If, upon initial review the packet is deemed complete, the individual will receive a letter informing him/her to report for biometric testing.  A background check will follow.  This does not mean that the individual has been approved. Rather, it means that the packet of information has been accepted as complete.
• If all continues to go well, the packet will be reviewed and the individual will be notified of the decision within “several months” according to one high ranking USCIS official.

Do You Need a Lawyer?  In the early stages of this roll out, criminal history, prior deportation orders and arrests are causes for pause.

• The forms and process can be completed without an attorney and no attorney has special connections that will hasten someone’s chances of receiving deferred action.  If an attorney makes such a promise, he/she should not be paid and the USCIS hotline should be notified of any promises related to outcomes. This is a case by case review and nothing is certain until the process is completed.
• While the process is clear on the website, there are many nuances.  If an applicant has any criminal background or has ever been arrested or taken into custody, consult a reputable immigration attorney.
• Although USCIS states that family information on the applications will not be shared with ICE, it does note that information may be shared with other national and law enforcement agencies for perceived criminal activity, possibility of fraud or even leniency.  Immigrant applicants should consult a reputable attorney if these facts exist in their history or family.
• Avoid notaries who tell you repeated deportations or misdemeanors are not important or they “know someone who can help you.”
• The means by which the criminal history piece will be practically applied is not proven yet.  All reviews are on a case by case basis and, if a criminal issue is to be reported, the immigrant should seek a pre submission review by a known immigration attorney.

In the presidential debate last Wednesday there was absolutely zero conversation about U.S. immigration policy. Lucky for me, I had the opportunity to attend a conversation and short film about immigration and deportation in the hours before the debate. The presentation featured Lundy Khoy, a Cambodian woman who was born in a Thai refugee camp and moved to the U.S. when she was one year old. She received her green card around five years old, and her younger siblings are U.S. citizens.

Lundy lived in the United States her whole life, and when she was a teenager she did what many teenagers do: she made a mistake. She was arrested and charged with possession with the intent to distribute because her boyfriend had given her some pills to hold on to. Her lawyer advised that she plead guilty. Lundy’s sentence was three months, and she was on probation for four years after that.

Lundy made a mistake and had to pay the consequences. What she didn’t know then, and what I didn’t know until last Wednesday, was that green card holders can face deportation if they are found guilty of criminal charges brought against them. It doesn’t always happen right away, and it can take years before the process is completed and travel documents required for deportation go through. Lundy, now twelve years after her conviction, will be deported to a country that she has never even been to. The most frightening thing for me is that apparently this isn’t uncommon and deportations keep increasing, particularly for Southeast Asians living in America.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, provides temporary (two-year) deferral of deportation from the U.S. as well as work authorization for people who came to the U.S. before their sixteenth birthday. There is a long list of eligibility criteria, and people like Lundy are not eligible. Kids make mistakes. It happens, and I know that there are plenty of people out there who wouldn’t want to be judged by some of the things they said or did at nineteen years old. I know I wouldn’t, and I’m only twenty-two. It doesn’t make sense to me how the United States and Immigration and Customs Enforcement can look back to a silly mistake that someone made as a kid and turn their world upside-down twelve years later.

DACA, for the most part, is a beneficial, much-needed policy. DACA supporters were momentarily reassured when Mitt Romney said he would honor the Obama Administration policy should he take office in January. In the days since, Romney’s campaign has clarified that although they would not revoke the exemptions already paid for prior to January 20, there would be no new visas issued after he takes office.

What does this mean? Currently in the United States, there are 1.4 million people eligible for DACA. To date, only about 200 people have been approved. Based on this rate, it is estimated that 100,000 people would receive their visas and work papers before Inauguration Day. That’s only one in every fourteen people eligible.Clearly, the election will have a major impact on U. S. immigration policy.

No matter what is decided on November 6, it is clear that DACA does not serve as a solution to the inconsistent and unfair immigration policy of the United States. What we need to do is establish realistic, compassionate, and comprehensive immigration reform that does not simply use a checklist to determine what is just.

You can read more about Lundy’s story in the Washington Post here.