California Immigration Attorney Blog

Relief may be in sight for tens of thousands of green-card eligible foreign nationals who are married or related to a US citizen or legal resident. For those who have no criminal record and have filed a petition for immigration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are no longer looking to deport you, USAtoday.com reports.

On Aug. 20, ICE Director John Morton released a statement restating the agency's goal of first seeking to remove foreign nationals who have criminal records while dismissing proceedings for removal against non-criminals. For our Los Angeles immigration attorneys, who represent clients in Southern California facing a host of immigration issues, this is a positive step for comprehensive immigration reform.

With that said, earlier this week ICE reported that 370 "convicted criminal aliens and immigration fugitives" from 10 Midwestern states were arrested in the agency's largest ever three-day multi-agency targeted enforcement effort.

Charges for those arrested spanned sex crimes against minors to armed robbery to drug trafficking. More than half taken into custody have prior convictions for serious or violent crimes and 51 were immigrant fugitives.

This effort is similar to a series of "cross check" operations that have been ongoing since December 2009 across 37 states and have netted 2,064 criminals who have re-entered the US illegally.

"The record number of arrests made during this operation is a direct result of excellent teamwork among federal agencies who share a commitment to protect public safety," said ICE Director John Morton. "ICE is focused on arresting convicted criminals who prey upon our communities, and tracking down fugitives who scoff at our nation's immigration laws. The results of this operation demonstrate ICE's commitment to those principles."

Too often, it is these law enforcement crackdowns that make the news -- as if no criminal element exists within the native population. The truth of the matter is that most immigrants are hard-working, law-abiding residents who desire nothing more than an obtainable path to citizenship.

Continue reading "California immirgrant rights advocates applaud move toward green-card relief" »

The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting that more than one-fourth of immigrants deported under a system touted as a way to remove dangerous criminal had never even been convicted of a crime.

Our Los Angeles immigration lawyers and Glendale immigration attorneys frequently report on the disinformation being used by anti-immigration opponents to justify the lack of basic immigration reform.

In California, 26 percent -- or 3,875 of 14,823 -- who were deported under the program in the last year were not criminals. The report was released this week by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.

Only 4,128 were convicted of what the program defines as the most serious crimes. Critics argue it has failed to reach the most serious criminals among the immigrant population, while only serving to instill fear of local law enforcement among immigrant communities.

The Secure Communities program requires states to forward fingerprints of people booked into jail to federal immigration officials. Agents are charged with checking the fingerprints against databases. A match results in a defendant being turned over to federal authorities.

The program is now operating in about half of California communities.

"(ICE) sweeps up all the little people along with what they say is their intention, which is to deport serious and violent criminals," San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey said.

ICE credits the program with removing a total of 34,600 immigrants and says those being identified as noncriminals could be an immigrant fugitive or have been previously deported.

Continue reading "California immigrants facing deportation under program touted as crackdown on criminals" »

The American Civil Liberties Union has sued the federal government, demanding that a system be created to determine the mental competency of detained immigrants who represent themselves, the Orange County Register reported.

Our Orange County Immigration attorneys and Costa Mesa immigration lawyers have reported on the challenges immigrants in Southern California frequently have in navigating the legal system. Just recently, our California Immigration Attorney Blog reported criminal charges involving dishonest legal services companies that preyed on immigrants in need of legal representation.

In this case, the class action lawsuit seeks to protect the rights of mentally disabled individuals held in immigration detention.

"The Constitution demands fair treatment for people with severe mental disabilities," said Ahilan Arulanantham, director of immigrants' rights and national security for the ACLU Southern California. "If someone cannot understand the proceedings against them, due process requires that they be given a lawyer to help them."

One of six plaintiffs named in the lawsuit spent five-years held in detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE released him soon after he was named in a previous lawsuit. The agency refused to address his situation directly but promised it was working on "sweeping reforms" to enhance the medical and mental health conditions of immigrant detainees.

The previous lawsuit accused the government of holding two detainees without due process and of violating federal discrimination laws designed to protect people with disabilities. Advocates claim one of the men was held in custody for 5 years without an opportunity to challenge his detention. The 29-year-old man has the mental capacity of a child and cannot tell time or remember his birthday.

Some reports indicate as many as 19,000 people detained by immigration officials could be suffering from a mental disability. And the immigration system lacks standard procedures to ensure the basic rights of detainees with mental disabilities.

In this case, the defendant was in the process of obtaining permanent residency when he was arrested for throwing a rock during a fight between two gangs in 2004. His family said he is not a member of either gang. He pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon and spent a year in jail before being turned over for deportation proceedings. A month later, a judge closed the case against him after declaring he had no clue about the proceedings.

He spent the next five years lost in the system.

Continue reading "Lawsuit seeks to protect the rights of California immigrants with mental disabilities" »

The National Ledger is among the media outlets reporting the potential influx of immigrants into California and Texas as a result of Arizona's tough new immigration law.

Our Mission Viejo immigration lawyers and Costa Mesa immigration attorneys are monitoring the fallout of the Arizona law, which allows law enforcement to request identification from anyone suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. Violators can face detention and deportation.

The first sign that immigrant families may be leaving Arizona in large numbers is the drop in Arizona school enrollment among Hispanic students. While some argue enrollment is anecdotal, it followed a similar pattern after passage of an Arizona law in 2007. That law, which included sanctions against employers who hired illegal workers, resulted in about 100,000 immigrant workers leaving the state.

Thaindian News reports California, New Mexico and Texas are likely to see the largest uptick in immigrant families.

These same states have often been critical of the Arizona measure. As we reported on our California Immigration Attorney Blog, both Los Angeles County and the City of Los Angeles have passed boycotts of Arizona businesses in protest of the new law.

FOX News reports the data is unclear when it comes to gauging the exodus of Hispanics from Arizona. However, one Phoenix principal reported that 95 students have left the school system since the law was signed in late April.

The Arizona Republic reported another area school system was anticipating as many as 300 students would leave the district over the summer because of the new law.

Continue reading "Arizona law could lead to influx of Hispanic immigrants into California" »

A case brought by the Obama Administration before California's 9th Circuit Court, seeking to deport a middle-class Nevada couple, has infuriated California immigrant rights advocates, who are pushing the administration to live up to its promise to legalize hard-working, law-abiding citizens.

One judge criticized the government's case as "horrific," while another labeled it the "most senseless result possible" and a third called it "an extraordinarily bad use of government resources," according to a recent article in the Los Angeles Times.

While President Obama promised to "target enforcement efforts at criminals and bad-actor employees," critics contend the government is toughening immigration enforcement against hardworking people who pose no threat to the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security said it would indefinitely suspend action against the couple, Ulises Martinez-Silver and Saturnina Martinez, a carpenter and clerk, respectively. The couple were brought to the United States from Mexico as children, and now have American children of their own, ages 12 and 8. Neither has a criminal record.

Immigrant rights activists and California immigration attorneys say the case is illustrative of the fact that deportation levels continue to climb as the government pursues cases against students, nannies, janitors and other law-abiding immigrants.

A review by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University shows that the proportion of criminal immigrants in detention has increased from 27 percent in 2009 to 43 percent in 2010. However, the report found only a small number of serious criminals were included in that figure, while most were arrested for minor offenses, including traffic violations and disorderly conduct.

A memo from the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement reveals that the agency's goal is to deport 400,000 people this year, up from 349,000 in 2008 and 197,000 in 2005.

Continue reading "California court cites case of immigrant couple as abuse of government authority " »

A California Appeals Court denied a motion to vacate a defendant's guilty plea to a robbery charge, after the immigrant claimed he did not understand he would face deportation if convicted of a felony.

Frequently, our Los Angeles immigration attorneys and criminal defense lawyers work together to defend immigrants facing criminal charges in Southern California. Being convicted of a felony can impact an immigrant's rights to remain in the United States and frequently leads to a deportation order.

In this case, People V. Marquez, the U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service ordered the defendant to appear in May 2007 for removal proceedings, based on his 2003 conviction. In December 2007, following final review, he was ordered deported to Nicaragua.

In August 2009, he filed a motion to set aside the 2003 conviction, claiming his defense attorney and the trial court failed to adequately counsel him on the deportation consequences of entering a plea. The appeal was filed via a writ of coram nobis, which is generally used to bring factual errors to the court's attention. However, the court found no basis for factual error existed and the defendant was not entitled to relief under a habeas corpus petition.

Habeas corpus allows for relief from unlawful detention, however the court has previously ruled a defendant in custody while awaiting deportation for a criminal conviction is no longer under the custody of the State of California and is therefore not eligible for habeas corpus relief.

Continue reading "California immigrant denied appeal of deportation for felony criminal conviction" »

A federal immigrations officer who was caught on videotape demanding sex in exchange for a green card has pleaded guilty in Supreme Court in Queens, according to the New York Times.

Wednesday's plea is stark reminder of the discrimination, harassment, intimidation and other challenges faced by our immigrant population. Our Los Angeles immigration attorneys aggressively fight for immigrant rights throughout Southern California and urge anyone who has been subject to abuse to contact us for a confidential appointment to discuss your rights.

In this case, the officer is expected to receive a prison sentence of between 18 months and 4 years. The 48-year-old man coerced oral sex from the 22-year-old wife of an American citizen. The incident occurred in December 2007, after the officer hinted he could deny her a marriage-based green card and have her relatives deported.

He summoned her to a private meeting in a parked car on Queens Boulevard, where he demanded sex; she hid a digital camera in her pocket and made an audio recording of the meeting. He then forced her to perform oral sex before allowing her to leave his vehicle.

Authorities say the officer handled 8,000 green card applications during his three years with the office of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. While the agency claimed two years ago that it was inspecting the agent's former cases, a spokesperson said this week the review would only begin now that he was convicted.

He pleaded guilty to receiving a bribe, receiving a reward for official misconduct, sexual misconduct, coercion and official misconduct. Sentencing is scheduled for July 22.

The victim has yet to receive her status as a permanent resident.

Continue reading "Immigration officer pleads guilty to coercing sex from immigration applicant" »

A major labor union and political backer of President Obama is slamming the use of deportation quotas and workplace audits being used as immigration enforcement tools by the Department of Homeland Security, according to the Washington Post.

Our Los Angeles immigration attorneys are closely monitoring the immigration debate; from California, where a candidate for governor is proposing sanctions against illegal immigraints, to the nation's capital, where protesters have taken to the National Mall to fight for immigration reform.

The Service Employees International Union wants Homeland Security "to stop these crazy irrational policies," according to Executive Vice President Eliseo Medina. Vigils are being held in Oakland, Scaramento, Los Angeles, San Franciso, San Jose, Boston, New York City and Minneapolis.

The union contends that Obama and Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano criticized the Bush Administration for factory raids and neighborhood sweeps. Yet, immigration advocates report that thousands of workers are being forced into the underground economy by electronic audits of company hiring records.

Advocates also point to recent information that U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement is changing agent performance evaluations to emphasize caseload quotas and is widening whom it targets for deportation.

The union argues that Obama had promised to target dangerous criminals for deportation and is instead increasing the pressure on hardworking service workers.

"They said they were going after criminals. They need to do that," Medina said. "But instead, they are still going after meatpackers, janitors and cooks."

Continue reading "Union slams government over deportation quotas, workplace raids in fight for immigration reform" »

A study conducted recently by professors at UCLA and USC found allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the United States would have a huge economic benefit, while deporting them has cost federal, state and local governments billions of dollars in lost tax revenue.

Yet, as the Mercury News reports, the debate has actually heated up since those reports were published. And, as our Los Angeles immigration lawyers reported recently on our California Immigration Attorney blog, promises from President Obama to tackle the issue this year will likely propel immigration back into the national spotlight now that lawmakers are turning their attention away from the contentious fight over healthcare reform.

The professors and others insist that legalizing undocumented workers would increase wages, provide more tax revenue to the government, up the consumption of consumer goods upon which the economy relies, and help create more jobs.

Detractors continue to argue that undocumented workers take jobs from legal citizens.

Inherent in the debate is how much illegal immigration costs state and local government and how much undocumented workers actually contribute to the economy through consumption of goods, gas and property taxes, rent, utilities and other expenditures that we must all pay as part of our daily lives.

Anti-immigration parties argue illegal immigrants cost California about $7 billion a year for services such as public education and emergency medical care. Immigration advocates contend illegal workers often use fake Social Security cards to obtain jobs and pay an unknown amount of taxes each year, which they will never collect in the form of retirement income. Ironically, that means illegal immigrants are actually subsidizing the Social Security system to an unknown extent.

The UCLA/USC study found that legalizing the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants employed in the U.S. would have contributed more than $1.5 trillion to the economy over the last decade.

That amounts to about $12,500 per year, per immigrant. Legalizing the estimated 3 million illegals in California could immediately increase state and local taxes by about $350 million a year.

Whereas, deporting 360,000 Mexican immigrants, as the U.S. did last year, actually cost the U.S. economy an estimated $4.5 billion.

Continue reading "Deporting 360,000 illegal immigrants cost the U.S. economy $4.5 billion in 2009, study finds" »

Despite the growing rhetoric among California politicians, immigration reform was cited as a top concern by fewer than half of California voters who responded to a recent poll, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

Jobs and the economy were of primary concern to voters. And our Anaheim immigration attorneys understand good jobs and financial security are of primary importance to immigrant families in Southern California as well.

The state budget deficit, education and health care were also of major concern to the majority of California voters. Taxes, illegal immigration and water were listed as top concerns by less than half of respondents to the poll, which sampled 503 registered voters and was conducted Marcy 9 to 15.

A similar poll in 2006 found just 39 percent were worried about jobs and the economy, compared to 60 percent today. Four years ago, the poll didn't even ask about the state budget deficit because there wasn't one. Forty-five percent of respondents listed education as a top priority four years ago, compared to 60 percent now.

However, responses largely fell along party lines; Republicans are overwhelmingly more worried about illegal immigration and taxes, while Democrats were much more concerned about health care and education.

The poll found only 37 percent of voters felt immigration was a critical issue, or about 1 in 3 respondents. However, only 27 percent of Democrats and 30 percent of nonpartisan voters felt immigration was a top concern, compared to 58 percent or Republicans.

Continue reading "Few California voters list immigration as a critical issue" »

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide if mothers and fathers may be treated differently in determining whether a child can claim American citizenship, the New York Times reported.

As Los Angeles immigration attorneys, we are monitoring this case closely; few claims to U.S. citizenship have been as strong as being the child of a U.S. citizen. But, as debate over immigration continues to grow, so do the efforts being made by immigration foes to erect obstacles to citizenship.

This case involves Ruben Flores-Villar, who was born in Tijuana, Mexico but was raised by his father and mother in San Diego. His mother is Mexican and his parents were not married.

In attempting to avoid deportation, Mr. Flores-Villar claimed American citzenship. However, the 9th District Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected that claim under a law that outlined different requirements for mothers and fathers whose children were born abroad and out of wedlock to a partner who was not a U.S. citizen.

The law permitted fathers to transmit citizenship only if the father had lived in the United States for 10 years before the child's birth and for at least five years after the age of 14. Mothers are only required to have lived in the United States for a year before a child's birth.

Mr. Flores-Villar's father was only 16 when his son was born -- making it impossible to fulfill the 5-year residency requirement past the age of 14. He argues that the different treatment for men and women violated equal-protection principals.

In 2001, the Supreme Court upheld a law that posed different requirements in a similar situation; a divided court ruled that American fathers of children born out of wedlock abroad had to obtain a court order establishing paternity or swear under oath to obtain citizenship for a child. Mothers were not subjected to the same requirement.

Changes to the U.S. immigration law in 1986 reduced the residency time of fathers to 5 years, only two of which must be after age 14. However, Flores-Villar was subjected to the law as it stood at his birth and has been fighting for his legal rights since being threatened with deportation in 2006.

Continue reading "California immigration officials monitor pending Supreme Court decision regarding U.S. birth fathers" »

60-year old George Boley Sr. was arrested on January 15th in Buffalo, New York, after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials figured out that the ex-Liberian had been a notorious figure in that country's civil war.

According to USCIS allegations, Boley had committed numerous war crimes in Liberia's recent civil war. Yet somehow, he entered the United States without documentation. He is currently being held at a federal detention facility on an array of charges -- he stands accused of gross civil and human rights violations. His case is scheduled for March 16th.

No doubt when undocumented foreign nationals living in the United States read about cases like Boley Sr.'s, their hearts sink a little bit. Prejudice against undocumented immigrants already abounds in the media. To be classified as in any way associated with a human-rights-violating warlord is unfair and damaging.

The good news is that undocumented immigrants can also point to happier success stories. For instance, we just blogged about an Oregon woman named Marion Pringle, who got her U.S. citizenship on her 104th birthday. We need to see more of these heartwarming stories in the press -- as opposed to dispiriting accounts like the case of George Boley Sr. -- to spread the message that undocumented foreign nationals are a diverse group.

Navigating the U.S. Immigration System is not easy -- even if you speak the language fluently and you qualify for a visa. The paperwork alone can daunt the most persistent applicants. The application process can make you feel like a rat in a maze. And the long wait times and clogged courts can make you question whether coming to this country is even a worthwhile endeavor, if this is the kind of government service that you'll come to enjoy.

Continue reading "Liberian Civil War Leader Faces Possible Deportation" »

Nabil Sadoun, a former resident of Dallas and member of CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) skipped his deportation hearing this week, and forcing Judge Anthony Rogers of the Executive Office for Immigration Review to order him deported.

According to Sadoun's lawyer, the native Jordanian had returned to his home country after running into problems with his green card.

The government claimed that Sadoun had been involved with both the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, which the State Department has classified as terrorist organizations. Sadoun also allegedly gave money to the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, which was at one time the biggest Islamic charity group in the U.S. until officials discovered that the charity had been siphoning money to groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. (The government alleged that Sadoun lied when he denied connections to Hamas on his 1993 visa application.)

Judge Rogers acknowledged that Sadoun had made strongly anti-Israel comments, but he noted that the comments were protected by the First Amendment and thus had no bearing on the deportation.

In the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, immigrants from Arab and Islamic nations endured increased difficulties securing visas to the United States. Especially in the first few years following the 9/11 attacks, strict protocols put in place significantly deterred many in the Arab and Islamic world from visiting or becoming permanent residents.

Continue reading "High-Profile Dallas Islamic Leader Deported Due to Ties To Terrorist Organizations " »

A ruling out of Boston Federal Immigration Court regarding the immigration status of President Obama's aunt, Zeituni Onyango, could set off political shockwaves. Ms. Onyango, the President's father's half-sister, faces deportation from the U.S. pursuant to a 2004 court order. Her battles with U.S. immigration briefly became fodder for national news in the days running up to the 2008 presidential election.

Judge Leonard Shapiro is scheduled to rule on her status shortly. Will she be deported to her native Kenya? Or will she be allowed to stay in the United States due to medical issues or other grounds?

The White House has so far been loathe to get involved in the politics of Ms. Onyango's immigration battle. President Obama does not want to be seen as conferring any favors on his relatives, as that could be politically toxic. Nevertheless, some Democratic political insiders have fretted that, no matter what happens, Ms. Onyango's immigration plight will revive talk of the President's "exotic" background and could steal yet more focus from his already shaken national agenda.

A spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice's Executive Office for Immigration Review indicated that Judge Shapiro might rule on the case from the bench, "but there's no guarantee." This will be Ms. Onyango's second bid for asylum in the U.S. She suffers from Guillain-Barre syndrome, an autoimmune disease that has left her partially paralyzed and made her wheelchair-bound.

Regardless of the verdict, this immigration law decision will no doubt lead to not insignificant political reverberations for the President and his party.

On Tuesday, a special American Bar Association Commission on Immigration released a report slamming agency policies and indicting the US immigration system as a whole as being riddled with "pervasive and widespread" problems.

The ABA Commission singled out six arenas in desperate need of policy reform:

• Department Of Homeland Security (DHS)
• Board of Immigration Appeals
• Circuit Court Judicial Review
• Immigration Courts
• Legal Representation for Immigrants
• Immigration System as a whole

The chairwoman of the Commission was quoted as saying that the courts are "reaching crisis populations." 12 million illegal aliens live in the United States; yet to deal with all deportation and asylum hearings, the government has dedicated only 57 immigration courts and assigned 231 judges. Considering the "exploding caseload" -- which threatens to overwhelm the immigration system, according to the ABA commission report -- those are paltry numbers, indeed.

The report chastened the Department of Homeland Security for its draconian deportation tactics, including:

• using minor infractions as pretense to deport people


• ignoring permanent resident eligibility when making deportation decisions


• detaining aliens improperly and far from their homes

Over 50% of illegal immigrants do not have legal representation, according to be ABA report. On this point, the president of the American Bar Association, Caroline Lamm, had harsh words for Department of Homeland security: "DHS's policies have failed to ensure due process for noncitizens... there is a serious lack of adequate representation."

Will the scathing ABA report do anything to change policies or force DHS to examine its courses of action? Speculation abounds. The American Bar Association plans to respond to the report next week. The Commission has suggested 60 key reforms, among which, some of the key ones appear to be:

• Extending filing deadlines


• Hiring more immigration judges


• Remaking fundamental aspects of the immigration law system